- Member of Parliament
- Member of the panel of chairs for the legislative committees
- Bloc Québécois
- Thérèse-De Blainville
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 68%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $122,743.44
- Government Page
- Jun/20/23 3:01:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, obviously, the forestry producers are worried, as are the workers. The seasonal workers in the forestry sectors are all at a standstill with no prospect of returning to work. They are worried because all the hours they are losing today will not count toward the EI threshold at the end of the season. The government is being flexible in the short term, and we applaud that. Will the government extend the qualifying period to 104 weeks to prevent these missing hours from putting our workers in a precarious position in the fall?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/16/23 1:50:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this is entertaining. It is like when people in Quebec bicker about who is the king of poutine or who created it.
What is not so funny is that everyone here is going to argue that the best health care system is public, universal and free. Everyone is going to say we do not want a two-tiered health care system, like the American system.
However, the problem here is that after describing the situation with health care they then urge Canada to save it. Quebec has health legislation. The problem for the Bloc is that the NDP puts Canada first.
We feel a sense of belonging to Quebec. To guarantee a public health care system, we must ensure that the federal government commits to funding it as part of its spending power.
135 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/9/23 11:47:15 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I still cannot believe what I just heard during my colleague's speech.
The NDP's Quebec lieutenant has a duty to defend the interests of Quebeckers. However, the interests of Quebeckers are also shaped by the fact that they are a minority. Quebec is making use of the only constitutional provision available to protect its right to live in French, to protect its right to social harmony and to its identity as a people, and to preserve the nation. These are laws passed by the National Assembly.
I find it hard to fathom how anyone could have a tepid stance on these issues and not fundamentally recognize the right of Quebec and the provinces to use the notwithstanding clause in order to protect what is dearest to them: preserving their laws and the right of elected officials to decide by and for themselves instead of leave this issue up to the courts.
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the Bloc believes that the government must ensure that every citizen has a decent social safety net. That safety net is currently torn and we have to fix it. We will support the bill, but allow me to share some of my reservations. These are the same reservations that I shared here in the House at second reading of this bill, as well as in the committee of which I am a member.
We are all concerned about the convoluted way in which the government went about this. We fear that the minister is taking absolutely all the power by deciding on every single detail of the benefit by regulation. We are concerned that parliamentarians are being called to vote on a bill that presents good intentions, that is a major step forward, but is nonetheless a blank page. We are especially concerned that the regulations are being developed without any transparency and that at the end of the day, the benefit will not satisfy the need, which, let us not forget, is to lift persons with disabilities out of poverty.
Yes, we will support the bill because there is an urgent need for action. People with disabilities are in a precarious position, and we need to help them. Do not forget that people with disabilities also face additional costs related to their disability, such as home adaptations, food delivery, and medication. Being disabled costs more. On top of that, there is the pandemic and inflation, which have further impoverished this segment of the population.
Here is an example from the Journal de Québec:
...Paul Awad, a 57-year-old man struggling to make ends meet and get the basic services he needs to live with dignity. The livable income in Sherbrooke, the city where he lives, is $26,299 per year. With his [income] of approximately $1,200 a month, he often has nothing left at the end of the month. “I want to be free of the stress of having to choose between food and rent every month. I want to live a dignified life on my own terms,” he says.
This benefit is of vital importance to him. Mr. Awad is one of many people with disabilities in the same situation.
That is why it is important to the Bloc Québécois to support creating this benefit. We believe the government's job is to redistribute wealth to level the playing field by creating a proper social safety net. However, as I said earlier, we have concerns. For one thing, we do not know a thing about what the government actually plans to put in the benefit.
Let us not forget that, in June 2021, during the 43rd Parliament, the government passed Bill C‑35, which was essentially an empty shell. One election later, the government was back at it with Bill C‑22, which is an exact copy of its predecessor and another blank slate.
For example, we have no information about the eligibility criteria. There is very little information about the amounts. Who is eligible? The government is failing to provide a clear definition of who will qualify for the benefit. People with motor, sensory or mental disabilities? People with a debilitating disease or permanent or temporary disability? All types of disability? We have no idea.
As for eligibility criteria, we have no idea how people with disabilities are supposed to apply. Will the government set up the simple, efficient process that many groups have asked for? There are no details about this.
We also have no idea how the federal government plans to coordinate with the provinces. Even the officials who appeared before the committee had a hard time explaining how the provinces handle this. What we do know is that no two provinces do the same thing. There is clearly a lot of work to do on that.
In her public statements and in committee, the minister has given a few hints about her intentions. For example, she said that the benefit would be similar to the guaranteed income supplement, that it would align with the provincial programs and that the process would be simple.
Those are fine words, but there is nothing in the bill to that effect. Basically, what she is telling us is to trust her and to vote for a blank page. That is a very worrisome and rather unheard of approach.
That brings me to another concern, which is the government's lack of consistency. Because the creation of this benefit is so important, we believe that it should go through the proper legislative process.
However, the government decided to call all the shots by doing everything through regulation. It is justifying its decision by saying that this is an urgent matter, but the Prime Minister did not seem to think it was too urgent when he decided to trigger an election in 2021 and let former Bill C-35 die on the Order Paper. We could have easily passed this law a year sooner, as advocacy groups wanted us to do. The government's argument does not hold water.
The right thing to do would have been to consult the groups, reorient the form and content of the bill, and submit it to parliamentarians. The other details could have been worked out later in the regulations. That is how the government would have proceeded if it had the least amount of respect for the work of parliamentarians.
Under the circumstances, in committee, I asked that the regulations, once drafted, at least be sent back to the House to be voted on. The governing party rejected my proposal. I think that is outrageous.
Under the circumstances, the Bloc Québécois will be on guard and closely monitor the development of this benefit. Certain things are non-negotiable. First, we are asking that the benefit meet the needs expressed by the advocacy groups. It will need to substantially improve the financial situation of persons with disabilities. We cannot accept a half measure that has no impact. We are also asking that during the development of its regulations, the government invite every relevant stakeholder to the table and that the process be open and transparent.
In committee, we received dozens of witnesses who all had important information to contribute to the debate. We need to listen to them. That is not to mention the hundreds of written submissions and briefs we were sent.
Let me share an example. As of January 2023, Quebec has introduced a basic income program, increasing the social assistance benefit for people with severe disabilities by 40%, as well as allowing for additional income.
Since there will be a virtually exemplary safety net, even if it is not perfect yet, how can we ensure that Quebec's superior social safety net does not get dragged down by the new benefit? How can we ensure that no one loses out on the benefits they are entitled to with the guaranteed income supplement? That is our concern.
That said, I think the majority of groups have said this is an urgent matter. People with disabilities need this support. We encourage everyone to move quickly on this and, most importantly, we ask that parliamentarians be updated on the progress and reality of this work.
1233 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I see that some colleagues are laughing. It is true that it can be rather funny to listen to the parliamentary secretary. He is presenting this as a dental care plan when it is not a dental care plan or program in the least. It is a cheque that will be sent to people without any real proof as to whether the children went to the dentist.
The only thing I want to know is whether there will be two logos on the cheque, the maple leaf and the NDP logo, because it is not a dental care program. It is a subsidy that is being distributed unequally among the provinces.
By the way, we are not against national programs. We are in favour of national programs that have to do with Canada but that the government is not taking care of. That is the reality.
The Bloc Québécois is against discrimination, against interference in Quebec's jurisdiction, against people not having access to the dental care program, but getting cheques anyway in a discriminatory way.
This is my question for the parliamentary secretary: Was it a kick in the teeth to have to make a presentation like that?
205 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will ask the member a brief question.
What I am having trouble understanding is that the government is trying to pass a flawed bill that in no way takes into account what Quebec is doing with its social safety net and to help people, while the federal government neglects its social safety net, employment insurance and programs for seniors and workers.
Is that the right solution for helping people in need?
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/22 2:02:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to highlight Quebec's disability awareness week, which is being held from June 1 to 7. The theme this year is “Give 100%”.
In Quebec, more than one million people have a significant, persistent disability. People with disabilities represent 16% of the population aged 15 and over. These people can and want to give 100% of themselves to society. Whether at school, at work, in the arts, in culture, or elsewhere, there is room for people with disabilities, and they must have the opportunity to develop their full potential. This is why it is important to give them all the tools they need, in order to offer them an accessible and inclusive environment.
I applaud all the organizations, such as Quebec's Regroupement pour la concertation des personnes handicapées, that have been working for years to build a more inclusive world.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 2:42:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Ottawa must also give Quebec the power to manage temporary foreign workers.
Each year, the federal government creates delays by forcing every business to produce labour market studies that already exist. Quebec already produces them for all of its economic sectors. Quebec could simply apply them to temporary foreign workers by integrating them into its labour strategy. It is as easy as that.
When will the federal government stop burdening our businesses and transfer the management of temporary foreign workers to Quebec?
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I apologize, Madam Speaker. You often have to call me to order.
I was saying that, in my life, I have often had to negotiate. When people advocated for maintaining the status quo during the negotiation of an agreement, I was able to tell the difference between fact and fiction. To me, when the status quo represents a setback, that makes it difficult to reach an agreement. Resisting and fighting for workers and the people of Quebec means being able to distinguish between a real status quo and a false one.
What are my colleague's thoughts on that?
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the member who moved this motion if, in his opinion, Quebec's political weight is guaranteed.
I am just saying that Quebec's weight has steadily declined over time, and that decline is likely to accelerate. In 1947, Quebec held 28% of the seats, in 1976, 24.6%, in 1999, 24.9%, and in 2015, it held 23.1%.
Even by maintaining the status quo, if we can call it that—it is not because Quebec's representation, Quebec's political weight, continues to decline—does this bill guarantee our specificity in Quebec and our uniqueness?
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 11:32:47 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, and I have a really simple question for him.
This Bloc Québécois motion and the bill that will accompany it are about doing something major for Quebec. It is not about recognition based on demographics alone, because the demographic situation could change. For example, in terms of demographics, the two provinces with the highest aging populations are Ontario and Quebec, a fact that is not even taken into account in health care funding, by the way.
It is more a question of political weight. Quebec has been recognized as a distinct society and as a nation.
Do Quebec's political weight and representation in the House deserve to be maintained or even increased?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/21/22 7:21:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. friend for his passionate, fascinating and informative speech.
Yesterday I mentioned the Maple Spring, a big social crisis that occurred in Quebec. I was wondering whether the Emergencies Act, which we will be voting on today, would have applied to Quebec. Indeed, the act states that it will be enforced throughout Canada, regardless of what the provinces and Quebec think of it.
There is a big elephant in the room. The Prime Minister made a thinly veiled threat about this being a confidence vote. Shortly after that, in the media, the NDP leader gave his unequivocal support to this motion.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/16/21 2:16:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, with the holidays approaching, here is my wish list for the coming year.
For workers who do not have access to employment insurance because of outdated eligibility rules, I wish for rapid and comprehensive reforms.
For workers who are sick, I wish for 50 weeks of benefits now so they can take care of themselves with dignity.
For federally regulated workers whose employers bring in scabs during strikes, I wish for anti-scab legislation right away.
For workers on the verge of bankruptcy, I wish for the means to protect their nest egg immediately.
For health care workers, I wish for the immediate and unconditional increase of health transfers to 35% of health care costs.
Lastly, for Quebeckers, who have the right to make all their own decisions themselves, I wish for our own country once and for all.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
