SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Alexandre Boulerice

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of Parliament
  • NDP
  • Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie
  • Quebec
  • Voting Attendance: 64%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $114,314.06

  • Government Page
  • Jun/6/23 7:11:05 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I do not often agree with my colleague. However, she raises an important point, which is the budget's inadequacies when it comes to housing. The NDP sees that there is a housing crisis. We want social and affordable housing. We want co-operative housing. The budget is far from perfect, and we would have done things differently. However, there is something in there that the NDP is very proud of, and that is the fact that we forced the Liberals to provide accessible dental care for the most disadvantaged and the middle class. This year, the program is going to be expanded to cover teenagers and people 65 and over who may never have been able to access dental care. If the member votes against Bill C-47, is she prepared to abandon the idea of dental care that is paid for by Canadian taxpayers with insurance from Parliament?
154 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/6/23 6:53:16 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, this budget is far from perfect. There are big gaps we are very worried about, but there are still major gains for ordinary people. It will come as no surprise to my colleague that this budget expands dental benefits for children aged 12 to 18 and for people 65 and up, as well as for everyone earning less than $70,000 a year or whose household income is less than $90,000 a year. This is the NDP's plan to make sure people can go see a dentist, a service they may never have been able to afford in their lives. Hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers will have access to this type of health care. This is not interference; it is reimbursing expenses. Nobody is telling Quebec how to run its hospitals. Nobody is opening federal dental clinics; this is just about reimbursing expenses. It will help people in a tangible way. What does my colleague think about the fact that people in his riding, seniors in his riding, will be able to go see a dentist?
180 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/6/23 6:40:07 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, in the budget implementation bill, there is something very near and dear to the hearts of NDP members and to all progressives in this country: access to dental care for the poorest, the disadvantaged and middle-class families. For the first time, people who have previously been unable to afford it will have access to dental care. I want to ask the member this: If he votes against Bill C-47, will he commit to refusing his dental care, which is paid for by his parliamentary insurance?
89 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/23 9:49:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for speaking at length about the importance of anti-scab legislation. Yes, Quebec was a leader in that regard. Thanks to an NDP government, British Columbia also has this type of legislation. We are pleased to force the Liberals to introduce a bill in that regard. They said that they would do it in 2023. I know that, in the past, the Bloc Québécois and the NDP have both introduced federal anti-scab bills. I am wondering why my colleague thinks the government is dragging its feet on this and why it has not already introduced such a bill. We have been waiting and waiting, but the longshoremen in her riding cannot wait any longer.
125 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/23 9:03:09 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, tonight we are hearing a lot about fiscal responsibility from the Conservatives. That is nothing new, and we are not surprised. However, they never seem to mention the fact that the Harper government ran deficits eight of the nine years it was in power, and it was not until the ninth year that it balanced the budget. Even then, it was because the government sold off the GM stock that it had bought during the auto crisis. If the member really wants to eliminate the deficit, what is she going to do? Is she willing to go out and collect more revenue by stopping subsidies to oil companies or taxing billionaires? If not, what public programs and services does she intend to cut?
128 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/23 8:46:17 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, the NDP obviously has a nuanced view of the budget. There are some good things in it, mainly because we forced the Liberals to include them. Take, for example, the dental care plan for seniors and teenagers and the doubling of the GST tax credit, which will help those most in need. There is also the anti-scab legislation that is coming. We are going to force the Liberals to introduce it, even though they have always voted against that type of legislation. One of the points that my colleague raised and that the NDP is also raising is that there is nothing in the budget about an EI reform, which many groups and unions in Quebec have been waiting for for many years. What would my colleague like to see in an EI reform that would meet the needs of workers in his community?
147 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/23 7:31:14 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, which focused on fiscal responsibility, a balanced budget and a zero deficit. I would simply like to remind my colleague that a deficit was posted in eight of the nine years of Stephen Harper's Conservative government. The only year that did not show a deficit was the year before the election, and that was because his previous government had sold the GM shares it purchased during the auto sector crisis. It was a bit artificial. I have two questions for my colleague. What would he cut and where would he look for the additional money to balance the budget?
109 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/18/23 1:04:53 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, there are many people in our society who are struggling with the increased cost of living. The cost of groceries and rent continues to rise, and people are struggling to survive and make ends meet. Meanwhile, the ultra-rich are lining their pockets. I am talking mainly about the CEOs of the large grocery chains who are earning $5 million, $12 million and $13 million a year. Does my colleague not find it indecent that these people are getting richer by creating hardship for others? Does he not think it would be a good idea to have a wealth tax so that these large multimillionaire families finally have to pay their fair share and so that we have a more just society?
127 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 6:01:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Repentigny for her very interesting speech on the lack of tax credits, as well as on carbon capture and hydrogen made from natural gas. However, I would like to point out a few things that the NDP insisted on and that we are quite happy to see in this budget. For instance, regarding the infamous growth fund for the energy transition, we made sure that the unions will be at the table, because there are no solutions without the workers. I see that as a win. In addition, doubling the GST tax credit to help the most disadvantaged was another one of the conditions we set. This means that more than two million Quebeckers will receive up to $460 next summer. I think it is important to emphasize this good news.
139 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 5:34:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, unfortunately, it appears that a millionaire's appetite for spending millions of dollars of ordinary people's money has no bounds, even though people are going hungry and would like to eat real food. One thing that was not in this budget but that the NDP is proposing is a wealth tax. This would ensure that wealthy families with substantial means would pay for some of the investments needed to truly make it possible for people to help those most in need and to lift people out of poverty. That is the minimum for social justice.
98 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 5:32:52 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I will quickly respond with “a promise is a promise”. We campaigned on that. We promised Quebeckers and Canadians that if they elected us to the House, we would work to make dental care accessible for the most vulnerable members of society and the middle class. That is exactly what we are doing, without interfering in Quebec's health care system. We will not tell hospitals what to do. We will not even open dental clinics. We will take the bill and pay it. That will make a significant difference in the lives of people in need, those without private insurance who cannot afford to see a dentist. I am very eager to go see Quebeckers and tell them that, thanks to the NDP, they can now have nice teeth, a beautiful smile, and pay their dental bill.
143 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 5:31:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague. All levels of government have a responsibility when it comes to housing. That is true. However, the federal government has fallen behind. It is appalling. Nothing has been done for years, and now we have a lot of catching up to do. As far as Quebec is concerned, it is a shame that it took three years of negotiations between Ottawa and Quebec to finally get the money out the door and see projects get off the ground. We are very behind. In Montreal alone, there are 24,000 people on a waiting list for social housing. Social housing is the best way to lift people out of poverty and give them a real hand up. The federal government is still not doing enough. While it is true that a housing strategy has been put in place, it has not been improved and it is not meeting the real needs of people in the community. We want to see the federal government investing more heavily in social housing.
178 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 5:21:33 p.m.
  • Watch
When we talk about investments, when we talk about expenditures, when we talk about investing in our federal public service, for example, but also in other things, such as our social programs, many people will say that this is a difficult situation, that we may not have the means to do that and that we should not make those investments because they are so costly. They will say that there are deficits, that we need to be prudent and responsible. The NDP agrees. However, it is also essential to have the political courage to put in place measures to ensure tax fairness and, consequently and ultimately, social justice. That is why, as a left-wing party and as progressives, we are concerned about being able to find the money, wherever it is, to invest in people, in our communities, in our cities and towns and in our workers. Where can this money be? It is interesting because the Canada Revenue Agency recently released a study it conducted itself on what is called the tax gap. The tax gap is an estimate of the difference between the amount of tax that should have been collected from individuals and companies, including major corporations, and what was actually collected. As we know, there are loopholes, tax avoidance and tax evasion. The federal government is still having a hard time taking drastic action on these issues. I was recently in Montreal with a group, a collective called Échec aux paradis fiscaux, that gathered in front of the Canada Revenue Agency to remind it of its own study. The Canada Revenue Agency assessed the years from 2014 to 2018. This was the first time this type of self-assessment was done on the tax gap. What we learned is that each and every year we lose between $18 billion and $23 billion in revenue that we failed to collect but is owed to us. That is huge. Imagine what we could do with that $18 billion to $23 billion a year that we miss out on. That could pay for dental care for everyone and provide universal public pharmacare to everyone. It would be extremely beneficial for us as society to have better health care and to be able to meet people's basic needs. Who are the big tax gap villains who slip through the cracks in the system? Those would be the large corporations, which are responsible for 70% of the tax gap even though they represent only 1% of all registered companies. It is not small businesses, the corner stores or the mom-and-pop shops that are finding ways to avoid paying taxes. Large and very large corporations are responsible for 70% of it. A collective called Échec aux paradis fiscaux has reiterated that there are no concrete measures. There have been no announcements or new measures put in place to recover this shortfall. Once the facts have been established, not by a group of external individuals, but by the Canada Revenue Agency itself, which reports on the money missing every year, I hope the government will listen, acknowledge the problem and take real, meaningful action. We could also talk about the CEOs, the big bosses of these companies who are seriously lining their pockets, while people are struggling to make ends meet. I have some pretty clear examples. Last year, Loblaws pocketed $1.9 billion in profits, an increase of more than 20%. That is a lot of money. People who go to the grocery store and have to do without things like meat, vegetables and really essential goods for their families are seeing Loblaws pocketing a lot of money and substantially increasing its profits. The CEO of Loblaws, Galen Weston, recently got a raise and saw his salary go from $8 million to $11.8 million a year. We are talking about $11.8 million a year for someone who is making record profits while people are struggling to pay for groceries. If that is not the definition of indecency, then I do not know what is. It is nothing short of insulting, because while the ultra-rich continue to line their pockets ordinary citizens are struggling and actually paying the price. Mr. Weston earns 431 times the average salary of his own employees. Our esteemed Mr. Weston earns $5,679 an hour, and he is not the only one in this country, or even the only one in his company, to make that kind of money. Richard Dufresne, a senior executive at Loblaws, got a raise in 2021-22, and his salary went from $1.8 million a year to $5.4 million a year. He started earning about $4 million more in one year. We are still talking about the same company. Let us keep to the major grocery chains. The annual salary of the CEO of Sobeys is $13 million, while that of the CEO of Scotiabank is $12 million. On average, the CEOs of major Canadian companies earn 191 times the salary of Canadian workers. The NDP thinks that significant tax measures must be implemented to put an end to this abuse and to stop the select few in the ruling class from lining their pockets while full-time workers are being paid minimum wage, can barely afford to pay their rent and have to use food banks. I share their anger and frustration at seeing the ultra-rich always wanting more, even though they really do not need it. Getting back to the budget, there are some good things that will improve peoples' lives. I am proud to talk about them because many originated with the NDP. The agreement that we negotiated forces the Liberal government to take the kind of action that it never wanted to take in the past. It is rather amusing to see the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance boast about the new dental benefit, because the NDP proposed the same thing just two years ago and, at that time, the Liberals thought it was a very bad idea. We had to convince them. It took some time. However, this year, children under 18 and seniors aged 65 and over will have their dental care covered. We know how important that is to people's quality of life. I also want to talk about the GST rebate, which is known as the grocery rebate. That is the new name the Liberals have given it. That was another NDP demand. Next July, people who really need it will receive several hundred dollars. Those are concrete measures, and we owe it all to the work of the NDP caucus. With the balance of power, with our bargaining position, we have been able to get help for people, and we are going to continue doing that, particularly on issues that affect pretty much everyone, like social housing, affordable housing and home ownership. We want a more just and equitable society for everyone. I think my time is up. I will be happy to take questions from my colleagues.
1197 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 5:19:53 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to speak to the budget. To begin, I want to talk about something that is not necessarily in the budget but is an area where I sincerely hope the Liberal government left itself some wiggle room. I am talking about the negotiations with the federal public service. Time is running out. The federal government has been given an ultimatum. It has until Tuesday at 9 p.m. to come to a negotiated agreement for the 155,000 men and women who work for us, for Quebeckers and Canadians, and who need a new collective agreement. Theirs expired two years ago. I think that these men and particularly these women deserve respect. They do not deserve to grow poorer with an insufficient offer at a time when the cost of living is going through the roof. This is evident when we look at the cost of groceries, housing and many other things. I simply want to reiterate that federal public servants can count on the NDP's support. I really encourage the President of the Treasury Board to give a bargaining mandate that will make it possible to come to a negotiated settlement and show respect for these workers who were there for us and continue to be there for us and who serve all Canadians.
225 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 5:18:19 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned the carbon tax. That is something that the NDP agrees with. However, his government continues to give subsidies to oil and gas companies. On one hand, the government wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but on the other hand, it is using taxpayers' money to continue supporting fossil fuels that produce huge amounts of greenhouse gases. Does he not think that is a contradictory position?
70 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 5:03:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her speech. However, there is a difference between an expenditure and an investment, especially when it comes to investments in people, particularly in our seniors, our elders, who deserve respect. We in the NDP successfully forced the Liberal government to implement an actual dental program that will cover the bills for seniors who are living in poverty and need dental care. Is the member telling us that she is going to go back to her riding and tell seniors in precarious situations and those living in poverty that she does not want them to get their teeth fixed?
106 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border