- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Shefford
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 66%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $81,135.43
- Government Page
- 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
- Apr/26/22 5:06:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, today I want to talk about budget 2022. I would like to thank my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé for sharing his time with me.
Budget 2022 is, ostensibly, “a plan to grow our economy and make life more affordable”. I doubt anyone will be surprised to hear me heave a sigh of exasperation. As I will show in my speech, there are still far too many who are not getting any help to make life more affordable.
Only one of our five unconditional demands was met: housing for indigenous communities. The government is planning to invest $4 billion over seven years starting in 2022-23 through Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to accelerate work on housing.
I applaud this initiative because I know it is essential to put an end to violence against indigenous women and girls. I was just at a meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, where we discussed this issue. There is no way we will be able to extricate these women from the cycle of poverty without providing them with adequate, affordable housing.
That said, the government does not understand that Canadians gave it a minority mandate, that they did not want to give it a blank cheque, and that they did not want to let it scatter money willy-nilly and in areas of jurisdiction that are none of its business.
I am forced to see the glass as half empty today and criticize what is not in the budget. In particular, I want to talk about seniors, our health care system, and economic development in areas still affected by the pandemic and recovering from the crisis. As the critic for seniors, I will begin by highlighting the complete lack of help for seniors.
We had made help for seniors one of the five prerequisites for passing this budget. To add insult to injury, in addition to not announcing anything new, they included a chart to tell seniors that they do not need any additional help. The government should tell them that while looking them straight in the eye and trying to explain why they are still being discriminated against based on their age.
For the rest of this part, I will let our seniors speak. Here are the words of those I have met over the past few weeks who are not happy: “Why do the Liberals insist on dividing us?” “I may get sick before I'm 75”; “My car will soon give out on me and I won't be able to get around. How will I maintain my independence?”
Take Michel and his wife Josée, or even France, for example. These three retirees feel penalized by the lack of federal government assistance for people between the ages of 65 and 75. They tell us that they want to enjoy life, that they have needs and that they want to help restart local economies.
An organization in my riding, SOS Dépannage, told me that there has been a sharp rise in the number of seniors relying on food assistance. Do we really want to reduce seniors to standing in line for food hampers?
Contrary to what the NDP-Liberal alliance is saying, it is not dental insurance that seniors want to talk to me about. Besides, this dental plan comes without any transfers to Quebec and it would not cover seniors until 2023.
Seniors need more money in their pockets now. It is not to invest in tax havens; rather, it is simply to be able to age with dignity. It is nice to have great teeth, but that means nothing if you cannot afford groceries at the end of the month. It is not a year from now that seniors will be hungry. They are going hungry now.
As I said, poverty does not wait until people reach the age of 75. In fact, a petition is currently being circulated calling on the government to reverse its decision to increase the pension of those aged 75 and over, known as older seniors, by 10%. Instead, petitioners are asking for an increase of $110 per month in the old age security pension beginning at age 65.
People lined up at the Tim Hortons restaurant across from my office in Granby last week. People do not want this unfair two-tier senior system. I also had some nice conversations with seniors in Drummond. The meeting was organized by the Centre‑du‑Québec branch of the Association québécoise de défense des droits des personnes retraitées et préretraitées. That was also where I heard many of these first-hand accounts.
Many people feel passionate about signing this petition, which I am sponsoring and which was initiated by Samuel Lévesque. Petition e‑3820, which can be found on the House of Commons website, aims to support the the Bloc Québécois's demand for a permanent and lasting increase in old age security benefits for everyone 65 years of age and older.
The FADOQ also said that the government broke its own election promises. There is no additional credit for home support, no tax credit for experienced workers, nothing at all. There is no increase in the old age security pension for seniors 65 and older in the budget. In fact, there is nothing. The government instead proposes the creation of a panel tasked with studying the idea of an allocation for seniors wishing to grow old at home.
Once again, if the Liberals truly wanted to help seniors stay in their homes, they would have increased health transfers.
In the second part of my speech, I will talk about another major omission in this budget: health transfers. There is no increase in transfers to 35% of costs as requested by Quebec and the provinces. “Any conversation between the federal government and the provinces and territories will focus on delivering better health care outcomes for Canadians”. That does not mean anything. There is no commitment to the unanimous request of Quebec and the provinces to increase health transfers to 35%. This request also has the support of many seniors groups.
Quebec and the provinces do not need to be told what to do by know-it-all Ottawa. There is nothing on the increase to health transfers yet the government keeps repeating and boasting about the same points.
In the third part of my speech I want to talk to my colleagues about the recovery for some sectors that are still very much affected, because the government missed some perfect opportunities.
I know that my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé cares a great deal about the agricultural sector, because this sector is also very important to Shefford's economy. There is not much in the budget for this sector, however.
When I travel around my beautiful riding of Shefford, people often bring up the agricultural sector. People wanted to see some innovative and bold measures. At the very least, the government should have considered improvements to existing programs like AgriStability and AgriInvest. My colleague has already spoken extensively about that.
The agricultural sector also wants something like the agri-green program, which would help producers and processors improve their operations and compensate them for good environmental practices. Aside from the second investment, the government is proposing other types of investments, but it is not going far enough. The Bloc Québécois is therefore disappointed with this announcement, on which it had pinned much hope. We will see what producers and processors have to say about it. For the time being, compensation is a long time coming. The government wrote that compensation for CUSMA will be included in the fall 2022 update. As my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé stated, it seems that there are further delays for those hard hit by the repercussions of the last three trade agreements signed by Canada.
The situation is dragging on. I was told about this recently at the Agristars gala. The young people I met spoke to me about farm transfers and controversial Bill C-208, which would facilitate intergenerational transfers. The government is satisfied once again with conducting consultations and creating delays. It is a major step backwards for farm transfers, even though the bill was passed in the final days of the previous Parliament, after the Liberals dithered. Now, the government is delaying its coming into force. The Bloc Québécois co-sponsored Bill C-208. It is a an extremely important issue for farm succession.
1469 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 1:54:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in his speech, my colleague put two words together that made me cringe. He said “clean oil”. We can agree that the oil from the oil sands in western Canada is anything but clean. In any case, those two words, side by side, are a good example of greenwashing.
We need to leave that behind. We have nothing against the fact that we need to invest in research and development to be able to propose much greener alternatives. Did the budget not miss the opportunity to invest in helping workers and industries in western Canada get out of the oil sector and focus on much greener industries?
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 12:04:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague. We share files pertaining to the status of women and seniors, and we often have the opportunity to talk.
Naturally, she spoke about seniors. We sometimes forget that old age security puts money back into seniors’ pockets and contributes to their purchasing power. Seniors have become significantly poorer, and were impoverished even before the pandemic.
The issue of health is just as crucial in our efforts to help seniors. My colleague accurately listed seniors’ needs and the importance of increasing health transfers to 35%, as Quebec and the provinces are calling for. That is essential; it is crucial. That is what seniors are asking for.
Health is not just a matter of jurisdiction. Quebec and the provinces have the expertise to care for their seniors, but they need the financial means. It is important to hammer this message home.
Does her party commit to supporting the request to increase health transfers to 35% in a recurrent and predictable manner?
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 10:49:35 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Vancouver Kingsway for his speech.
I find it utterly fascinating to hear the NDP and others talk about a dental program, especially now that the Liberals are saying this is their way of helping seniors.
I would like to take this a little further because the NDP voted in favour of last year's Bloc Québécois motion recognizing that seniors are disadvantaged and that old age security should be increased.
Where are the New Democrats at with that? Have they backtracked on their pledge to do more for seniors? There is nothing at all in this Liberal-NDP budget that helps seniors.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
