- Member of Parliament
- Deputy House leader of the Bloc Québécois
- Bloc Québécois
- Saint-Jean
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $109,900.56
- Government Page
- Jun/6/24 11:53:56 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the problem is that we never should have reached this point. It was said earlier. Minister Navdeep Bains was informed, and he did nothing. He did not request an audit. Shutting down SDTC is the nuclear option.
It might have been better to do things differently. We know this type of program is the product of the government's obvious desire to create a fiscal imbalance, stop funding the provinces and keep their money in an effort to prove that the federal government is the one that gets things done. The federal government is the one that creates agencies, gives funding and grants subsidies.
Quebec, however, had Transition énergétique Québec, which, incidentally, operated in partnership with SDTC. It could manage such a fund. Since Quebec is a leader in developing sustainable technologies, I put the suggestion out there.
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 2:35:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, no one is pulling the wool over our eyes. They have not decided to overtake the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie because they had an epiphany about the fact that French is under threat in Quebec, Canada and around the world. No, they signed up because there is nothing more important to a Liberal than another Liberal. A friend is a friend. They signed up because they have to save their friend, the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell. After that, we will never see them again.
It might be a good idea for this government to start working as hard in the interest of the French language as it does in the interest of the Liberals.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/24 11:53:52 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, historically speaking, most of the armed forces' civilian employees in Quebec have been women.
They are rightfully asking why the federal government discriminates against them. For example, they are rightfully asking why a financial assistant in Bagotville gets paid $10 less an hour than an assistant doing the same job in Ottawa. The striking workers are rightfully demanding equal treatment across all bases. At a time when the armed forces are struggling to recruit, they should be demonstrating that they respect their employees.
The striking workers are returning to the table. They are ready. They will be tabling a counter-offer at 3:30 pm. Will the defence department finally listen to them?
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/24 11:52:32 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, for 117 days, the federal government has been ignoring its civilian employees at Quebec's military bases, who are on strike. The government cannot ignore them anymore, because their representatives from Saint‑Jean, Bagotville and Valcartier are here today.
They are here to ask why Quebeckers have the lowest salaries in Canada, why Quebeckers are treated like second-class workers and why the Liberals have been ignoring them for 117 days now.
Will the government standardize the pay scale and stop discriminating against Quebec defence employees?
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/24 11:32:29 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, until recently, the only questions the Conservatives asked in French during question period were about the carbon tax. For months, that was all they talked about. Finally, they had an epiphany and realized that it does not apply to Quebec, which goes to show they could understand the concept easily enough once it was explained to them over and over again. They figured they had to find something else to hammer away on during question period. They came up with federal interference in Quebec's jurisdictions, and they have been getting some good mileage out of that for the past few days.
Now, I hear the Conservative leader talking about housing. He says he is going to tell the cities what to do, but without encroaching on their areas of jurisdiction. However, when any cities disagree with him, he is quick to insult the mayors. Basically, he insults them respectfully. There was a time when Harper promised to eliminate the spending power in order to respect jurisdictions. The only way to truly respect jurisdictions is to make unconditional transfers.
Will the leader of the official opposition commit to making unconditional housing transfers to Quebec if he ever takes power?
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/11/24 3:32:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in its initial version, the bill would have been a huge encroachment on Quebec’s jurisdictions.
The Bloc Québécois gave them the benefit of the doubt and thought it might have been a mistake. We therefore proposed amendments to make adjustments and achieve a certain level of asymmetry in the bill. However, we soon realized that it was not a mistake, because the Liberals blocked our proposals to make the bill more fair to Quebec.
Is this simply a prelude to the budget and a teaser of intrusive budgetary measures we are seeing?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/11/24 2:39:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, their discussions are going so well that the Government of Quebec is thinking of holding a referendum on immigration.
The truth is that Quebec is so fed up with having the government laugh in its face that it is thinking of reaching out to the people. Considering the federal government's incompetence when it comes to managing its responsibilities, we all know that things would work a lot better if Quebec had full powers.
Is the minister going to respond to Minister Fréchette's highly reasonable requests, or would he rather wait for Quebec's entire population to vote on the federal government's immigration incompetence?
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/11/24 2:38:51 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, immigration minister Christine Fréchette reiterated the Quebec government's modest demands.
There is nothing spectacular or over-the-top about them. The minister is not asking for full powers over immigration; she is asking for the bare minimum. What she is asking for is a fair distribution of asylum seekers among the provinces, reimbursement of the costs associated with taking in asylum seekers, and adequate funding for French integration classes. I do not think that is too much to ask for.
Is the government going to agree to Quebec's requests, or are we about to end up with another of the squabbles the Liberals are so fond of?
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 12:00:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, all day, and indeed every day for months now, the Conservatives have been blaming the carbon tax for everything. If the culture sector is in trouble, it is because of the carbon tax. If people ask for MAID, it is because of the carbon tax. If people are lining up at food banks, it is because of the carbon tax. It reminds me of Plume Latraverse, who sang “it's El Niño's fault again”. Simply replace the words “El Niño” with “the carbon tax” and, voila, it is the Conservative platform.
I would like to hear my colleague's comments on the food bank issue. What we are hearing in Quebec is that the cost of food is higher primarily because of climate change. That is what people are telling us. Farmers are struggling because of drought or excessive rainfall. I would like to hear my colleague's comments about the cost of food going up because of climate change and the fact that the Conservatives are still denying the existence of climate change.
187 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/19/24 3:03:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, just to clarify, no one is against family reunification. We are simply against Ottawa imposing its irresponsible federal policies on Quebec.
If the minister had wanted to, he could have negotiated compromises. Let us look at his record. He is forcibly increasing Quebec's immigration targets. He is largely responsible for the record increase in temporary immigration. He is also responsible for the disproportionate number of asylum seekers that Quebec is taking in, rather than spreading them out among the provinces.
In all three categories, Ottawa is unilaterally increasing immigration to Quebec, with no regard for our integration capacity and no additional funding.
Is this intentional, or has Ottawa lost all control?
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/19/24 3:02:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's decision to unilaterally increase Quebec's immigration targets represents a historic loss of sovereignty for the Quebec state. When Quebec sets its threshold at 50,000, it means 50,000, not 60,000 or 70,000.
If the minister wanted to increase family reunification after the thresholds were set, he should have worked with Quebec. For example, he could have suggested finally doing something to help Quebec with asylum seekers, but no, he never co-operated. He tried to force Quebec to increase its targets whether it wanted to or not.
When can we expect a collaboration instead of condescension?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/18/24 2:56:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to let him know that I have read it.
The federal government has no lessons to give Quebec on successful immigration. The federal government is the one responsible for plunging immigrants into the worst housing crisis in recent history. The federal government is the one responsible for the lack of services that asylum seekers too often face. It is the federal government's fault that these people do not have the right to work to meet their basic needs.
No, we will not accept the federal government's decision to unilaterally increase the immigration targets set by Quebec.
Will the minister respect Quebec's choices?
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/18/24 2:55:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebec sets its own immigration targets, as even the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship has repeatedly said. That is why it is all the more unacceptable that the minister ordered his officials, two weeks ago, to exceed the threshold set by Quebec.
This is a serious precedent. Going forward, the federal government will no longer interpret Quebec's immigration target as a decision, but as a suggestion. This amounts to imposing on Quebec federal immigration policies inspired by the Century Initiative, which directly contravenes the spirit of the Canada-Quebec accord.
Will the minister backtrack, return to the table and talk to Quebec?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, someone I hold in high regard, for his speech.
Like my colleague from Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, I would like him to discuss the issue of opting out with full compensation, but from another angle.
Based on what he said at the start of his speech, the key to Quebec's success is that no other government told the province how to set up its early childhood education program. Quebec had enough time to implement it properly. We agree with that.
We do not want another government telling us what to do in the future. I would like the member to tell us why the Conservatives voted against the Bloc Québécois amendments presented in committee in order to include in Bill C-35 a right allowing Quebec to opt out with full compensation.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/29/24 4:14:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his speech. I would like to come back to what my colleague from Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou said about Quebec's specificity and respect for jurisdictions.
She said that, although the bill does not recognize Quebec's specificity, respect its knowledge or require the government to give Quebec the right to opt out with full compensation, there is a five-year agreement between the two governments.
Given that the right to opt out with full compensation is not specifically included in the bill, I do not see that as a permanent thing. To me, that sends the same message that, in five years, the government could decide to start imposing conditions.
Does my colleague agree that the government's failure to include in the bill the right to opt out with full compensation basically sends the message that, as soon as the five-year agreement is up, the government will want to interfere in an area that is under Quebec's exclusive jurisdiction?
174 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/29/24 2:26:42 p.m.
- Watch
I will say it again, Mr. Speaker: Quebec knows what is good for Quebec.
We know that French is not only our official language, but it is also our common language and we need to protect it. We know that gender equality is non-negotiable, just like we know that the best way to protect religion is for the state not to have any. That is what Bill 21 is all about. There is a general consensus on that in Quebec.
Will the Liberals, who say they do not like to bicker, commit to not going against the will of Quebeckers on Bill 21?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/29/24 2:25:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec Court of Appeal has just handed down its ruling on the state secularism law, Bill 21. There is a fair bit of consensus in Quebec on this legislation. Quebeckers want a clear separation of church and state, which is what the law guarantees.
Now that the Quebec Court of Appeal has rendered its decision, it is clear that the next step will be the Supreme Court. We saw it with Bill 101, and we will see it again with Bill 21.
What we are asking Ottawa is simple: Can it stay out of it, either directly or indirectly, because Quebec knows what is good for Quebec?
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/15/24 12:17:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, a few weeks ago, I attended the funeral of a friend's mother who had decided to avail herself of MAID. In her farewell speech to her mother, my friend said the following: Mom, when you told us about your decision, I did not agree because it was going to deprive me of a mother, but I had no choice but to respect your decision, because it was yours to make.
I thought it was a testament to her generosity of spirit.
In his speech, the member for Timmins—James Bay talked about respect. Since he is so knowledgeable on the subject, I would like to ask him a question that I did not have the opportunity to ask earlier. Although it is not necessarily the subject we are debating today, I would like to know why he decided to vote against the amendment to allow Quebec to offer advance requests. The purpose of this amendment was to allow the Government of Quebec to proceed with the safeguards we have in place, and this request did not require a specific provision for Quebec in the Criminal Code. The purpose was to ensure that all provinces could use the program if they wanted to. I would like to hear why the member for Timmins—James Bay—
220 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/8/24 1:52:32 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the provinces certainly do have a role to play in immigration, especially Quebec, because of the language issue. The problem is that despite the role Quebec already has, the system is clearly not working, since Quebec's minister of immigration, francization and integration is so fed up that she is threatening to hold a referendum to repatriate all immigration powers. This comes from a party that is not really known for wanting to talk about referendums. On the contrary, it campaigned on the fact that it would never speak of holding a referendum on Quebec's independence.
Now that party has reached the point where it has to talk about having a referendum because this is not working. Even though there are powers for Quebec, Ottawa is clearly turning a deaf ear, and this is the result. Theoretically, the provinces and Quebec have powers, but in reality, if the government decides to do as it pleases, which apparently it is perfectly capable of doing, then we end up in the situation we are in. Everyone is shouting that the threshold has been exceeded, that the government is managing immigration irresponsibly and that newcomers are the ones paying the price.
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/8/24 11:16:54 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his speech.
When the Bloc Québécois raised the issue of Quebec's intake and integration capacity, we were accused of being armchair quarterbacks. Even if we let that slide, there is still a recent survey that found that most Canadians and Quebeckers believe that Canada is unable to integrate newcomers properly and that its intake capacity is insufficient. I hope that the minister will not call the Canadians and Quebeckers who answered the survey names.
I would like to hear what the minister has to say about the public calls for Canada to review its process, because right now it is not working. Can he respond to the substance of this question?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
