SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Claude DeBellefeuille

  • Member of Parliament
  • Whip of the Bloc Québécois Member of the Board of Internal Economy
  • Bloc Québécois
  • Salaberry—Suroît
  • Quebec
  • Voting Attendance: 68%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $109,425.78

  • Government Page
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/5/22 12:47:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-32 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, which is very interesting. Food drives are held in Quebec at this time of year. People collect food to help food banks and other organizations that provide food assistance. Previously, it was believed that a certain category of people needed help and went to food banks. Now, even working people need help and support as pressure and inflation are having a significant impact, especially on families. That is why we know that communities need groups and organizations that are really in touch with their needs and provide the services they require. However, community groups need government support in order to provide services, but also to grow, to expand their reach and to withstand the pressure. That requires more funding. Quebec's independent community organizations are asking for more funding from the Quebec government, which also must make difficult choices because it lacks the means to answer their call. Once again, one of the solutions is to give the provinces and Quebec what they are asking for, larger health transfers.
178 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 11:06:04 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I really appreciated my colleague's speech. It was rigorous and well researched. We can see that he knows his constituents and his community. It is always moving to see members who have such a good understanding of the needs of their community. My question is quite simple. The federal government is known to have dabbled in social programs in the past. For example, it funded a program for the homeless for a few years. Then it changed the rules of the game and disengaged. Who got stuck with the full bill and less funding? It is the provinces. Is my colleague not concerned that by becoming involved in a major program without the provinces' agreement, the federal government is meeting a need but that the provinces will not be able to cover the cost down the road and will have to pay the political price?
148 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 10:51:12 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I think that my colleague believes that it is important for children under 12 to have dental care. However, on the issue of priorities in health and social services, can he tell us who he thinks is best placed to determine, in each province, the health care and social services that need to be offered to the least fortunate populations and the population as a whole? What jurisdiction should deal with and handle this issue?
77 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:33:01 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for my colleague. As someone pointed out, I think he is on his fourth speech of the day. I want to commend him for all of the energy and passion he still has at this rather late hour. I know that he is a diligent, hard-working MP who loves his community and who believes in its vitality. Does he not truly believe that it would have been better for the federal government to hold a round of negotiations with his province so that it could be heard and so that the government could establish a program that they both agreed on, rather than imposing a measure that the provinces and some professional associations do not really support?
127 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:21:17 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, I apologize if I offended my colleague. I hope it was clear that, physically, I was not talking about her, but about other members who were speaking very loudly in the House. I found their lack of respect very disturbing and insulting. I certainly was not talking about her. I know that she is a conscientious member, that she listens to me and is interested in what I have to say. In answer to her question, I just want to tell her that I think every province and territory, including Nunavut, should describe its needs, set up its system and demand the federal funding it needs to make sure all the children who live there get the services they need. We really think the solution is federal transfers to the provinces and territories so each community can make decisions based on its own needs and its own priorities. I think that if Nunavut had the resources, it could set up everything it needs. What Nunavut needs is the financial resources to do it. I hope the federal government will give Nunavut what it needs.
186 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:19:18 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question. He is right when he says that we both agree that these needs exist. We agree that children throughout Quebec and the other provinces need dental care. We agree that people who are more disadvantaged, less fortunate, those who have a harder life, need support for housing. However, we disagree on the means being used. We do not think it is a good idea to pass such a significant bill that addresses such an important need so quickly. We think it is a bad idea not to take the time to first consult the provinces, since this falls under their jurisdiction, not to mention the experts, associations and dentists before passing this bill. It would have been better to hold consultations with the aim of achieving the desired result, which is to improve the oral health of children under the age of 12.
155 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:10:57 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, maybe it is because I am speaking in French that those who speak only in English are less interested. I wonder. The idea is that we have to wonder about the money that will be spent when we propose a measure that is fundamentally good. Will the money meet our public health objectives? In Quebec, we already have a body with the expertise to measure outcomes, and that is Quebec public health. There are researchers and scientists whose jobs it is to do this. I agree that there are dental care needs, but I am not sure that Bill C‑31 will achieve the hoped-for objectives. This came about quickly without any real exploration of the idea and without any way to measure the outcomes. From what I understand, people will have to file an application, register with the Canada Revenue Agency and submit a receipt that could potentially get lost. Some people will not have access to the Internet. As a member of Parliament, I expect to receive phone calls in my riding. I expect to be told that a claim was filed but the cheque never came, that the receipt was lost, or that an overpayment was made and now needs to be paid back. If the Minister of Health's objective truly is for children to have access to dental care, why did he not hand over the money set aside for Quebec so that Quebec could improve its own program? In Quebec, children under 10 years of age who are having problems with their teeth can simply use their health insurance card. They go to the dentist, show their card, and the costs are automatically covered. With this measure, we are introducing a more complex administrative process to allow parents to claim the costs for their children. It is not clear how many services will be covered and how this will be measured. I have many questions, which is why I am not so thrilled about this gag order. We all have a lot of questions, and normally these things are debated in committee and we can look into each aspect of a bill more thoroughly. When I was young, dental hygienists would come to my elementary school and show us how to brush our teeth. We know that oral hygiene is also a lifelong habit. The idea is to also invest in prevention. Our Quebec system is stretched to the limit. Since arriving here, the Bloc Québécois has kept repeating in the House that Quebec needs health transfers to improve all its health and social services programs as well as the safety net for its entire population. On another note, now that we have raised the issue of dental care, I am wondering about how quickly this is happening. Usually, consultations are held. When a measure is proposed, criteria are identified to assess whether the objectives are being met. Experts are consulted. At this point, I have the feeling that this step was skipped, and that the government only wanted to quickly seal the deal with the NDP so it could say that it fulfilled its commitment. We have until 2025, here is the cheque and that is done. I feel that this is a botched bill and that we did not have the time required to consult with civil society, scientists and experts. Regarding part 2 of the bill, which deals with housing, we cannot object to the most disadvantaged people receiving a $500 cheque. I would like to point out that in Quebec, we have had a great program since the 1990s called Allocation-Logement that provides a monthly benefit. For example, a single low-income person over the age of 50 who earns less than $20,800 can receive up to $170 per month to help with their housing costs. This is a significant program that enables low-income, disadvantaged or vulnerable people to make a budget. They know they will not receive a one-time single cheque, but they will get a certain amount each month to help them cover their rent. I am a health care professional, even though I am on unpaid leave while I do my job here in Parliament. I think it really would have been better for the government to transfer the money to Quebec's Allocation-logement program to enhance and improve it, rather than writing cheques to people who apply for this benefit. It would have been easier for those this measure is intended to help. In order to get the $500 provided for in Bill C-31, people need to apply for it. They also need to prove that they are spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That is a lot of work for the person applying and for those who have to review their application. We know that the federal government's services to the public are a real mess right now. I am not criticizing public servants; they are overworked. There is a labour shortage and the system is not working right now. The government wants to add to that, and I am worried that the people who need this $500 will not get it. I think that, if we really want to change things and make people's lives better in terms of things like dental care or housing, we need ongoing core measures, measures that will be around for a long time. People need to be able to understand that there is a beginning and that they can count on government help every month. In essence, the government's job is to create wealth and better redistribute it to the people who need it most. I feel that we could have used more time to debate this bill. Its substance is good, but the execution is flawed. Unfortunately, I am afraid it was not created for the right reasons. I believe this bill has a partisan, ideological purpose, one that is not necessarily intended to serve the community.
1011 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:08:07 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, I know you have had a busy day. It is an honour to have you with us this evening and to see you in the chair until perhaps late into the night. I am pleased to participate in the debate on Bill C‑31. As everyone knows, this bill will make a benefit available to certain families with children, depending on their income, to pay for dental care services. It will also make a $500 lump sum housing benefit available to families who spend more than 30% of their income on rent. I am not going to do a deep dive into this bill's strengths and weaknesses because I think the members for Mirabel and Berthier—Maskinongé have eloquently made its flaws and weaknesses clear to us all. I want to talk about my experience as a health care professional, my knowledge of the Quebec health care system, its strengths and the improvements that could be made in the area of oral health. Beyond dental care, it is about the importance of oral health. It is about providing this care to as many people as possible who need it, especially to those who have limited resources and cannot afford the rather high costs involved in going to the dentist. In my profession, when investments are made in a program or measure, it is important to immediately consider how the results will be evaluated. It is important to look at how continuous improvement is being measured. Is there any evidence that the money invested is achieving the desired goals? Mr. Speaker, could those gentlemen speak more—
272 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:04:52 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. We learn something new every day and I just learned that she used to be a dental hygienist. She knows what she is talking about. I have a more specific question for her. Since she was a practitioner and professional in the field, she knows that implementing a universal dental care program takes a lot of time, including to negotiate with the provinces. We know that reaching an agreement with the various professional associations in the provinces is complicated. In light of this, can my colleague explain to me why the government and the opposition party supporting it are in such a rush to bring in this program when they know full well that it will likely make more people unhappy than happy?
132 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border