- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Shefford
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 66%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $81,135.43
- Government Page
Mr. Speaker, I am having a hard time getting a clear picture. We are currently looking at Bill C‑47 and the member is talking about clause 510. His party seems to want to delete it as an anti-monarchy gesture, but he seems to be in favour of this clause. I am having a hard time wrapping my head around the proposal being made on this monarchy issue.
Again, I see that there is a divide and a disconnect between the Liberal and Conservative members, who talk about the monarchy, and us, who simply want to abolish it. When we talk about the monarchy it is to say that it is archaic and costs the government money. To us, the issue of seniors calling for an increase in old age security is a priority. Also, we are short on housing and we need EI reform to take care of people who lose their job in a period of economic uncertainty. Again, I am feeling the difference between Quebec and the rest of Canada.
175 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I find it very troubling, as my colleague from Mirabel said so well earlier, to hear and see the Conservatives manoeuvring to block the business of the House. What fascinates me even more is the misinformation being conveyed by the members of that party. It is still quite fascinating.
I was just doing some research on my phone. I did not find the price, but I gather that the member has not gone grocery shopping for a long time, since he said that bread cost $1.30 four years ago.
What is really extraordinary is that when the Conservatives come to power they are going to fix everything. They have magic solutions for the labour shortage and inflation. It is as though they could fix everything by waving a magic wand. I would like to know their abracadabra formula.
Lastly, it is funny, but in Quebec seniors do not talk to me about the carbon tax. They talk about real support that the government could provide, such as an increase in old age security or a review of the guaranteed income supplement. I do not see a lot of seniors in Quebec stopping me on the street to talk about about the carbon tax.
206 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, my colleague made a quick reference to the carbon tax in his speech. However, what farmers have been asking for is the supply management bill, which is critical. That is the real way to help them. That is what Quebec's farmers are asking for.
My colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot asked a question earlier about why certain members filibustered in committee and delayed work on this important bill.
Now, to really help farmers and agricultural producers, would it not be a good time to work hand in hand to help the bill move through the final stages so that supply management is protected as quickly as possible?
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, yet again, I hear the Liberals touting the grocery rebate as proof that they are finally going to help people out of their current financial difficulties. Would my colleague not agree with every seniors group in Quebec when they say that it is hard to argue with a good thing, but that what they really need is an increase in old age security for all seniors starting at age 65?
The inequality between the two classes of seniors unfairly created by the Liberals must stop. The government should agree to extend the 10% increase to seniors aged 65 to 74 as well. There is also the guaranteed income supplement. The government could also have provided an enhanced tax credit for experienced workers. There are other options that could have helped seniors over a much longer term.
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, today is International Workers' Day.
My colleague just spoke about an issue that affects women, namely child care. Employment insurance is another issue that disproportionately affects women.
On this International Workers' Day, would my colleague acknowledge that, in the last budget, money should have been invested in a truly comprehensive reform of EI in order to address these shortcomings that penalize women?
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I was fascinated by my colleague's speech. He seemed sincere in his belief that a one-time cheque to help pay for groceries, in a time of high inflation, would really help people like seniors who are in a precarious financial situation deal with both rising rent and grocery costs. He said it was to help them get out of that difficult situation.
Quite frankly, anyone who talks about a one-time grocery rebate to help seniors with all the expenses related to inflation is playing a game of smoke and mirrors and engaging in some magical thinking.
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to remind the member for Winnipeg North that my colleague and I were being sarcastic when we said that everything is just fine and dandy. That is my first point.
My second is that my colleague spoke about employment insurance. I will be more brief than I was earlier, I promise. Employment insurance is vital. The current government is all about fake feminism. By not investing enough in health transfers, it is harming the community groups that work to prevent domestic violence. By failing to invest in EI reform, it is harming women, who are penalized more by the current EI system. That is also true for those who go on maternity leave. The government is all about fake feminism. These investments are being called for.
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, to hear my Liberal colleagues today, I really get the impression that everything is just fine and dandy.
I thank my colleague for his speech, but there were many things that piqued my attention. I could ask tons of questions, but I will try to be brief.
An annual income of $85,000 for a family is good, but my colleague said that his government was helping seniors. What is it doing for seniors whose annual income is $20,000? Does he really think it is possible to live with dignity on that amount?
I just reread a press release by FADOQ because I too have been consulting the people back home. In fact, I organized a conference on seniors' health. FADOQ says that the only thing for seniors in this budget is the one-time help for groceries, a single cheque that seniors will receive once. That is not going to help in the long term. FADOQ is critical of the fact that the guaranteed income supplement was not increased.
As far as old age security is concerned, I would remind my colleague that, currently, every senior under 75 is still not getting help from their government, and those 75 and older got an increase of only 10%. Those 75 and under got absolutely nothing.
My colleague just spoke about nuclear energy. I cannot believe how much greenwashing there is in this budget. As I said, I could go on at length about that, but his government is putting the same spin on its approach to seniors.
260 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, in his speech, my Conservative colleague talked about seniors in relation to the carbon tax.
I have a suggestion for my colleague. What the seniors in my riding, in Quebec, are asking me for and what they talk to me about is a little more direct assistance to help them get through this crisis. They want an increase in old age security for all seniors to address the inequality between people aged 75 and over and those under 75. This would be a first step towards recognizing that seniors are affected by the inflation crisis.
This budget contains nothing except a one-time cheque to help them with groceries. That cheque will be used up in no time.
I wonder if he could talk more about the importance of providing much more direct assistance to seniors, specifically by increasing old age security.
144 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, whom I recently worked with on issues of violence against women.
I would like to come back to that, because I know that she is very interested in feminism. How is it possible that a government that claims to be feminist is not providing better support to women who are victims of domestic violence by increasing health transfers to shore up our social services system, particularly in Quebec? How is it possible that a government that claims to be feminist is not keeping its promise to reform EI? We know that the people having the most issues with EI right now are women who, for a variety of reasons, have difficulty qualifying for the program.
My colleague also talked about the issue of mothers, pregnant women.
I would like to hear my colleague talk about these two critical issues, namely increased health transfers and EI reform. That is feminism.
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/19/23 5:32:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I am always fascinated to see how populist and simplistic the Conservative rhetoric is. He makes it sound as though cancelling the carbon tax would completely resolve the problem of inflation.
I think that the Conservatives are simplifying things too much and that they are proposing solutions that are far too simplistic. At the same time, the more the government spends with the help of the NDP, the more it fuels inflation. I sometimes feel as though the Liberals are just hoping that this is all going to sort itself out and that they will not have to do anything. That is the case in the budget. What balance is there?
I am thinking, in particular, of much more practical measures that could be put in place to deal with the labour shortage, for example. That would help the economy. We made specific proposals in that regard.
I am always fascinated by the Conservatives' rhetoric on lavish spending and by their economic plan, which is far too simplistic. That was more of a comment than a question. I do not think that we are going to solve anything by suggesting that the government cancel the carbon tax.
206 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/19/23 4:35:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I have been hearing from the people of Shefford, especially from community groups. They are wondering about the details of this much-touted dental care program. They are finding that there is a lack of information. I am also getting questions about how it will fit in with what is already in place in Quebec.
In short, I am seeing a lot of question marks and possible complications ahead. Let us keep things simple. We already have a dental care program in Quebec. The government needs to respond to the Quebec National Assembly's request and give Quebec the money it is due so it can continue to improve its projects and its health care system.
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/19/23 4:32:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, when I mentioned the importance of setting the record straight, I was referring to the type of comments the member just made.
I would tell the member to refer to the press release from FADOQ. Yes, FADOQ acknowledges the one-time grocery rebate. Who could be against apple pie? Everyone is in favour of apple pie. FADOQ says that it is indeed a good measure.
However, FADOQ goes on to say that the Liberal government could have done more, that it could have increased the guaranteed income supplement, that it broke its promise to bring in a tax credit for experienced workers, and that it could have taken this opportunity to increase old age security by 10%. I listen to seniors who say that there were not enough measures in this budget.
As for dental care, that is Quebec's responsibility. The National Assembly of Quebec is calling for Quebec to get the money to run the dental program itself. That is what the National Assembly of Quebec is asking for. As far as the environment is concerned, how can we really talk about public health when the government keeps funding the oil companies that emit greenhouse gases? That is greenwashing, as the member said.
There is greenwashing, but the member is also playing fast and loose with information on seniors. A one-time cheque does not help seniors in the long term.
235 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/19/23 4:21:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is never easy to rise after my colleague from La Prairie. I listened intently to his speech.
As the critic for seniors, I could not turn down the opportunity to talk about their situation in the House and, more importantly, to respond to a budget that cares nothing about them. I could not turn down the opportunity to set the record straight. The Bloc Québécois proposed a number of measures and made clear requests to the Minister of Finance.
I will focus on three points here. First, the budget does not provide for an adequate increase in health transfers. Second, it says nothing about EI reform. Finally, while the government continues to claim it has been generous to seniors, there are no new specific and ongoing measures for seniors in this budget.
I would like to start by pointing out that the government is not increasing the health transfers to any significant degree. The jurisdictional interference also continues. This issue is important, and it is a major public concern, especially among seniors' groups. FADOQ representatives even turned out for a conference I recently organized on the financial situation of seniors. They came to call attention to the urgent need for the federal government to make its contribution and increase health transfers to 35%, with no strings attached. They clearly understood that this jurisdiction belongs to Quebec, not the federal government.
Moving on to the second part of my presentation, the budget makes no provision for any major EI reform before 2030, despite the government's promises. The government also refuses to write off the EI fund's pandemic-related debt. As a result, premiums will have to increase and benefits will have to decrease for the fund to achieve a $24‑billion surplus by 2030. How great it would have been to have a little money left over to reform federal services.
As the status of women critic, I consider this to be a major reform from a feminist perspective. We know that 60% of workers are not eligible for employment insurance, and that is concerning. It is primarily women who work in unstable jobs, who do not work full time because they have to do invisible work at home with their families and who have difficulty accumulating the hours required to be eligible for EI.
I would like to point out that on Tuesday, April 4, groups in Quebec, including AFEAS, campaigned for a national invisible work day that would be held every year on the first Tuesday in April. This kind of day is needed to encourage real reflection on this issue, which also affects family caregivers and volunteers. How can we do more to recognize what these people do? My thoughts go out to them and I thank them, especially those who are being honoured this week as part of National Volunteer Week. I salute them.
I am now coming to my third point, and I will devote the rest of my speech to the lack of measures for seniors and their precarious financial situation. I actually held a conference on that issue back home in Granby on February 21, with seniors' groups from all over Quebec. I want to talk about some of the issues that were raised during that day of reflection.
First, I want to point out that while wages are rising, old age security is not increasing as much or as quickly. Currently, if someone is 75 years old and receives nothing but old age security and the guaranteed income supplement, their annual income is $20,574.24. Given today's inflation, who can really live on that? That level of income puts them below the official federal poverty line, as determined by the market basket measure, or MBM. In response to this statistic, the symposium participants that day said that the federal government needs to increase old age security benefits.
Add inflation to that, and old age security is not enough to live on; it is not a replacement for working income. As for income replacement in retirement through public pension plans, right now, a person earning the average wage in Quebec will have an income replacement rate of only 41%. The Quebec pension plan replaces about 25% of the average wage.
As for old age security, it barely replaces 15% of the average wage. Sadly, since wages are rising faster than the consumer price index—by about one percentage point per year—this federal program will in future contribute less in terms of replacing working income in retirement. The federal government must do better.
Finally, we must also revise the indexation method for old age security. The Association québécoise de défense des droits des aînés, or AQDR, agrees, and does not believe that it is adequate. Furthermore, the AQDR also believes that old age security is not increasing fast enough to replace employment income, which is rising faster than public plan replacement rates. Everyone is talking about wage increases right now.
Seniors are finding it very difficult to save, especially older women who, over the course of their lives, have greater difficulty setting aside money and saving to retire in dignity.
The old age security pension, or OAS, and the guaranteed income supplement, or GIS, are insufficient to meet the needs of seniors. Let us not forget that, in July 2022, the annual income of an individual under the age of 75 receiving only their pension and the GIS would fall below the official poverty line in Canada, based on the market basket measure, or MBM. That is significant in an inflationary context.
This index, which is calculated by Statistics Canada, seeks to establish the cost of a basket of goods for a modest basic standard of living. We are not talking about trips down south or luxury items; we are talking about basic needs.
In 2022, MBM thresholds were between $20,796 and $22,382 for singles, depending on the region in which they lived. The solution, therefore, is simple: Income levels for all seniors aged 65 and older need to be increased.
That day, we also talked about the implementation of a tax credit for experienced workers in the context of the labour shortage, a tax credit for working seniors who want to stay on the job or for seniors who decide to go back to work.
That day, we also talked about health transfer increases. I just wanted to point that out. The federal government needs to significantly increase health transfers so that the Quebec and provincial governments can make major investments in their health care systems.
Another item that was discussed that day and that should be noted is the fact that inflation is seriously eroding seniors' purchasing power. It would have been a good idea for the Liberal government to at least support those who cannot afford to be patient.
FADOQ expected Ottawa to walk the talk when it came to increasing the guaranteed income supplement. Let us not forget that those who receive the GIS are some of the most disadvantaged members of our society. FADOQ believes that the government could have taken these additional measures. Another example would be to make the Canada caregiver credit refundable.
Given the ongoing labour shortage, the FADOQ network also suggested that a tax credit to encourage seniors to keep working would be a great idea. The timing is perfect. Even though it was another thing the federal government had promised, this tax credit was not announced in the last budget.
To continue on the theme of the budget, the grocery rebate is actually a one-time payment through the GST tax credit. Although it is a decent measure, the Bloc Québécois hoped that low-income families and individuals would get better government support during this inflation crisis. For 2023, the amount remains a one-time payment. It does nothing to solve the longer-term problem.
My last point is that, despite everything, the long-term financial outlook remains the same. The ratio of the federal public debt relative to the GDP will continue its downward trend. Ottawa plans to completely pay off its debt within 30 to 40 years. The federal budget confirms the Parliamentary Budget Officer's long-term forecasts. Beyond the short term, the federal financial situation will keep improving. Over the long term, the financial situation of the provinces and Quebec will keep deteriorating. The money is in Ottawa, but the needs, in areas like health and education, are in Quebec.
In the short term, we must also deal with the global economic downturn, high interest rates worldwide and inflation that is still too high.
In conclusion, I could also have spoken about the lack of support for the next generation of farmers and the greenwashing that the budget also contains. It maintains the fossil fuel subsidies, subsidizing oil companies, as my colleague from La Prairie mentioned. The budget talks about hydrogen, meaning dirty hydrogen, about carbon capture and about small nuclear reactors, even though experts have condemned these measures. As I said, it is greenwashing. These are not measures that will help us seriously kick-start the shift we need to make to fight climate change.
In short, the spending in this budget is unwise and insufficient for those who are truly in need.
That is why, in closing, I will proudly say that I will soon be introducing a bill to abolish the injustice created by the 10% increase in old age security only for those 75 and over. We must ensure that all seniors, when they turn 65, can receive this little additional boost, but especially a boost in the long term and not a one-time cheque or, as the government has done all too often, a little pre-election cheque that looks good. With this bill, we want to increase the threshold to the point where seniors can work without their GIS being clawed back. This is about common sense and dignity for seniors. Even the economic sector is calling for this. Let us all work together.
There are also the demands from the National Assembly. We must meet people's needs. We must work together to improve the current situation, which, as we know, is not easy for everyone, especially the seniors who really need to be listened to and heard a little more.
1752 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:21:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her speech. We have just returned from a week of work at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, where we looked at the state and situation of human trafficking. I know we are committed to addressing the sexual exploitation of women.
However, I was listening to her speech today and I am going to have to disagree with it, to object to what she said. I heard a lot of greenwashing. She talked at length about green energy but, essentially, the $21 billion set out in the budget is going to go to oil companies, small nuclear plants, oil extraction, dirty hydrogen and carbon capture. I am not alone in saying this. Environmental experts are saying that carbon capture is greenwashing.
I would like to hear my colleague's opinion on this. Frankly, they may have good intentions, but unfortunately, I feel like this government does not walk the talk when it comes to the environment.
168 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 5:01:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.
Clearly, we are not going to agree on certain things, such as Bill C‑11 and all the disinformation around it. No, Bill C‑11 will not infringe on freedom of expression. However, we do agree on the issue of security, and I am very interested in hearing her talk about that. For example, it is deplorable that there is still no independent inquiry on Chinese interference, which is quite serious. We might have expected an announcement about some action being taken on this issue. Concerning arms trafficking, there are no measures to strengthen the control of gun smuggling across the border. That is very worrisome.
I would like my colleague to talk about that.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 4:01:12 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. She slipped in a brief comment about the grocery rebate. She talked about an extra $225 on average, but an extra $225 on what, exactly?
This is a one-time cheque to help with groceries. Obviously, seniors cannot be against this measure, but will a one-time rebate of $225 really address the unanimous request from seniors' groups?
They are calling for measures to improve their financial situation in the long term, which means recurring assistance, not just one-time cheques that will only help them at a specific time.
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
