- 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
- May/21/24 9:39:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am somewhat troubled—actually I am extremely troubled—by this determination to completely disregard all the social programs that exist in Quebec and the provinces, suggesting that Canada is going to swoop in and save the poor provinces by implementing a dental care plan, when Quebec has one that is governed by the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec and not by private insurance.
I would like to ask my hon. colleague the following question. Instead of interfering, would her party be willing to substantially increase health transfers, if it forms the next government? This federal government is starving Quebec and the provinces when it comes to health care. Then it invents and proposes all sorts of programs from coast to coast to coast that do not meet the needs—
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:16:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, October 30 to November 3 is national unemployed workers week, organized by the Mouvement autonome et solidaire des sans-emploi.
I commend this initiative, which rallies unemployed workers' rights groups from several regions of Quebec to remind the Liberal government of its many broken promises to reform the employment insurance system.
The new Minister of Employment recently said that he wants a resilient program. If so, there is only option: a complete overhaul of the unfair employment insurance system as it currently exists.
The Bloc Québécois has been calling for such a reform, and its tireless efforts in this direction will continue. In these uncertain economic times, the need for reform is clearer than ever. Reform is not just necessary, it is urgent.
In a spirit of solidarity, I wish everyone a good national unemployed workers week.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 3:01:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, at the rate the government is going, the trees will grow back before workers get help.
Nothing changes. Every time there is a crisis, six out of 10 workers are abandoned by employment insurance. Somehow, the federal government is surprised every time.
We would not urgently need more flexible measures today if the government had reformed EI as promised. History is repeating itself because of its broken promises.
When will it announce emergency measures for all workers affected by the fires, including those who fall through the cracks?
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 11:48:40 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my NDP colleague, for whom I have a great deal of respect. However, I have serious concerns.
The NDP is proud of the dental care program. Whether it is their program or the Liberals' program, I have no idea, but one thing is certain: Dental care does not fall under federal jurisdiction. If a province or Quebec decides to bring in a plan to satisfy a public need, then that is up to them.
In its Sherbrooke declaration, the NDP always said that nothing that falls under Quebec's jurisdiction should be done without negotiation, without consultation, and that the principle of opting out with full compensation should be respected.
That is already a contradiction. This is not a federal program. Meanwhile, there is no NDP support in its agreement for a federal program that workers have been pushing for, namely employment insurance. Why did the NDP leave EI reform out of its confidence agreement?
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/3/23 11:37:25 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, employment insurance delays are longer than ever. Currently, one-quarter of EI applications take extra time to process, and more than half of those take over 50 days. That means people with no income are waiting 50 days.
Officials even advised people without jobs to use food banks or get their partner to support them. The kicker is that, while all this is going on, the minister has been cutting her employees' hours of work.
When will she do something about this fiasco?
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear colleague for her question, and I would like to acknowledge her very moving speech.
The employment insurance system discriminates against women in several ways.
First, it is often women who work in non-standard jobs. Because of the current EI rules surrounding eligibility criteria, it is very difficult to qualify for employment insurance when you work in a non-standard job.
Second, pregnant women who lose their jobs while on maternity leave or upon return from maternity leave are no longer eligible for EI. That is another way that EI rules discriminate against women.
Women won a court battle, yet the government has not even corrected this. What a disgrace.
116 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/31/22 2:55:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, if there were to be a recession with the same employment insurance program we have today, six out of 10 workers would be left behind.
We saw a similar scenario play out during the pandemic. The government had to create CERB because it realized that it could not abandon the 60% of people who lost their jobs.
If there is a recession, there is a risk of repeating the same scenario. That would be embarrassing, given that we saw it coming this time.
Will EI reform be added to the economic update?
94 words
- 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
- Oct/17/22 2:54:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, because of the pandemic, the EI fund is short $26 billion, but it is not the contributors' responsibility to pay off that debt by themselves. Neither workers nor businesses are responsible for the pandemic and its fallout. The Canada Employment Insurance Commission itself is concerned about the burden the government is putting on contributors.
Will the government take on the EI debt that has accrued since March 2020 instead of passing on the full cost of the pandemic to workers and businesses?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 2:57:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the Conservatives are saying and what the Prime Minister said when he was in opposition, employment insurance is not a payroll tax.
However, any cunning opposition party can turn the situation to its advantage as long as there are people who contribute to EI without being entitled to collect it. Such opposition parties have also been able to take advantage of the fact that no government, be it Liberal or Conservative, has taken action in the past 25 years.
When will the minister finally reform the program to make sure it does not leave 60% of people who lose their jobs out in the cold? We want to know when.
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 11:00:37 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, all week long, both in question period and during Government Orders, members have been comparing EI premiums to a payroll tax.
On one side of the House, the Conservatives are saying the rates are terrible and have to be cancelled. On the other, the Liberals say rates have gone down by 30¢, or something like that, since they came to power.
They are both wrong.
For starters, employment insurance premiums are not a payroll tax. They are a safeguard. They are contributions to an insurance plan for people who lose their jobs. The Conservatives are hardly ones to talk: They were the first to pillage the EI fund.
The current government is not one to talk either, because it is failing workers. Those contributions everyone is fighting over are not even available to 40% of people.
Imagine my private insurance company telling me it can insure my house, but only two of the rooms, not the other three rooms. It makes no sense. Either we have a proper safety net or we do not. This is a premium to protect workers.
Why did the government fail workers by putting an end to these emergency measures?
198 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/21/22 2:59:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the minister was given the mandate of overhauling employment insurance this summer and she did not do it. On Sunday, the temporary measures will come to an end, and the minister will leave 60% of workers to fend for themselves. On Sunday, she will put them back into the same old program and 60% will not have access to it. The system must be overhauled.
In the meantime, could the minister at least extend the temporary measures? No one should suffer because she failed to do her job.
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, my colleague is right. There have been no reforms, just the opposite of reforms really and the gutting of employment insurance.
The government has hollowed out a social safety net program, reducing it to a mere insurance program that is essentially funded by workers and employers. The government even pillaged the fund to erase deficits and make cuts.
Reforming employment insurance means fixing what was done and making sure it will never be done again. Most importantly, it means guaranteeing stronger, more equitable rights for everyone.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
