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: 67%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $109,425.78

  • Government Page
  • Jun/13/22 2:02:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I have the honour to rise in the House today to mark the 30th anniversary of the Table de concertation des aînés de Beauharnois‑Salaberry, a round table on seniors' issues in Beauharnois‑Salaberry. I applaud the work done by all of the partners to highlight the reality of seniors in the Beauharnois‑Salaberry RCM. Together, community organizations and the health care system fought hard to address shocking cases of elder abuse and neglect. The partners' involvement has led to all sorts of initiatives to protect seniors from financial abuse. More recently, the round table raised the awareness of elected officials and the community regarding population aging and how long-term improvements can be made to our communities when the public is involved in developing projects. The longevity of the Table de concertation des aînés de Beauharnois‑Salaberry shows just how important the community and the public believe that consultation, teamwork and community participation are in addressing social issues. We wish all of the partners a happy 30th anniversary.
183 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 4:44:32 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Terrebonne. I would like to extend my warmest thanks to all the volunteers in the riding of Salaberry—Suroît, because in Quebec we celebrate volunteerism and volunteers from April 24 to April 30. This year’s theme is “volunteering changes lives”. It is true that volunteering changes lives. It changes the lives of those who receive from volunteers, as well as the lives of those who give of their time. I would like to say a big thank you to all volunteers in the riding of Salaberry—Suroît, whatever sector they work in. There are so many sectors in which people can feel fulfilled and thrive while giving time to others in need, to young people, to all those who benefit from the generosity of others. I would like to wish all of them a happy National Volunteer Week. Of course, the budget contains things I am particularly interested in, specifically anything to do with seniors. I devoted my professional career to caring for seniors, whether in the community sector, where I managed a volunteer action centre, as a social worker in the home care support department, where I helped seniors and their families live at home longer, or as a manager in a long-term care facility. Most recently, prior to my re-election in 2019, I was in charge of housing. I managed spaces in private, non-unionized, long-term care facilities, in intermediate and family-type resources. I have dedicated my career to seniors and when I find myself in my riding, I am drawn to help them. My phone is definitely ringing these days. It has been ringing off the hook for almost a year now because seniors are angry; they are angry that they can no longer make ends meet. Facing the higher inflation rates since the pandemic, seniors have been calling and writing. They find it unreasonable that they have to go back to work in order to be able to afford rent or medication. I find this completely revolting, and we had expectations this budget would address that. The FADOQ, with 500,000 members, is the largest seniors' group in Quebec, and it has called on the government to increase old age security starting at age 65. The government, however, has not indicated that it plans to do this nor did it put it in the budget, even though the House expressed a clear desire to do so. On March 8, 2021, the House voted on a motion to increase old age security by $110 a month for those aged 65 and up, with 183 parliamentarians voting for and 147 voting against. It was government members across the way who voted against the motion, telling seniors that they still have some energy left to work and then they will get their increase at age 75. They created two classes of seniors. We are talking about three million 65-year-old seniors in Canada, seniors who worked their whole lives, who contributed to society, and who unfortunately need an increase but are not entitled to one. I hear my colleagues say that they increased the New Horizons program and that they have done this and that. That is not what seniors need. They need to receive enough money every month to cover all the expenses they have to pay to live in dignity. In Salaberry—Suroît, one in five people, or 20% of the population, is 65 or older. One of our seniors works bagging groceries. He is 68 years old and he works at my IGA in Ormstown. He made me promise to share his message with the government: “Ms. DeBellefeuille, this is crazy. I have no choice but to come bag groceries at the Ormstown IGA because I can no longer cover the cost of living, even though I worked hard my whole life”. I am here for him today because I speak on behalf of my constituents. I am their voice and I am here to make this message loud and clear: We are furious about how this government is treating seniors who worked hard their whole lives. The other issue in this budget that really speaks to me as a former public health care worker is health transfers. People often think that the Bloc Québécois's demands need not be taken seriously, but our demands are based on unanimous demands of the Quebec National Assembly, all the premiers of every Canadian province, the population as a whole and important groups. I will list some of them because a number of unions came to Parliament Hill on April 4, which is something that has not happened in quite a while. They talked and they asked for what the provincial premiers are asking for, what the Bloc is asking for and what the Quebec National Assembly is asking for. The FTQ, a major union, was there along with the CSQ, the FIQ, the CSD, the Fédération des médecins omnipraticiens du Québec, the APTS, the Fédération des médecins spécialistes du Québec, the hematologists, the oncologists and the CSN. That means a lot of people think like we do. We are seeing that the House, civil society, physicians, Quebec's health care workers, Quebec politicians and community groups feel the same way, even if the government does not. There is only one party that believes it is unreasonable to transfer the money that is in Ottawa to the National Assembly and the Quebec government so Quebec can manage it according to its priorities and expertise. I have to say that it is the managers, the professionals and those involved in the day-to-day work on the ground who have the expertise and experience in health and social services. They are the ones in touch with the needs of our constituents in every riding. I am expressing our disappointment not just with the fact that there is no money for health transfers, but also that if there ever is money one day, it will have strings attached, which is completely unacceptable. Quebec and the other provinces are capable of analyzing their own needs and putting everything required in place, including planning, organizing and providing services according to the needs of their communities. However, Quebec and the provinces do not have the means. Considering our aging population, I would say that in the next 15 years, there will not be enough money to properly plan, organize and deliver services to everyone who needs them in our public health care system. We value our public health care system, and it needs to be funded properly. This means transferring the money that is sitting in Ottawa, the money that Ottawa would like to have a say in. Ottawa wants to tell us what to do and how to do it because it lacks confidence in the provinces when it comes to properly managing the transferred funds, even in an area that falls under provincial jurisdiction. I have only two minutes left to once again explain how sad it makes me that the budget talks about increasing the maximum length of EI sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 26 weeks in the summer of 2022, allowing sick workers to fight illness. Members will recall that I introduced a bill in the previous Parliament to increase those benefits to 52 weeks, and the member for Lévis—Lotbinière has brought it back again in this Parliament. For two years, the government has insisted that it will change the number of weeks, but only to 26 weeks and only effective July 2022. That is not enough. Someone who has colon cancer will need 36 weeks to recover. That is a documented fact. I do not understand what is stopping the government from giving 52 weeks to sick workers who need it. In closing, I can say that I would have liked the budget to include confirmation of a coming into force date for Bill C‑208, on the next generation of farmers. I say that because people in my riding are asking me about it. Farmers are being reminded once again that not only has the Liberal government abandoned them, but it also does not respect the democratic will expressed in the House of Commons. It is frustrating to vote on a bill and pass it, only to see the government refuse to implement it. The House can count on me to take every opportunity to point out that this is unacceptable.
1481 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 11:12:19 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am just as concerned as my colleague by what has been happening to seniors in long-term care facilities, but we do not have the same approach to finding solutions. In Quebec, we realized what was going on, and our ombudsperson produced a report in 2021 with a number of recommendations to prevent this kind of thing from happening again if ever another pandemic strikes. Quebec realized what was going on, figured out what to do about it and is completely overhauling its health care system. I have a question for my colleague. If Quebec were to reject Canadian standards for long-term care in Quebec, does my colleague agree with his government that Quebec might not get any of that funding?
125 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/15/22 4:33:09 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would have liked my colleague, who delivered a very fine speech, to remind the House that the Bloc has also made proposals to support seniors, such as increasing the earnings ceiling for the GIS from $5,000 to $6,000 in order avoid penalizing seniors who want or have to work. Can she explain why this is so important?
62 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/15/22 4:03:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-12 
Madam Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the brilliant, fantastic and magnificent member from Thérèse-De Blainville. I am happy to be able to discuss and debate the motion concerning Bill C-12 with my colleagues, because I have devoted my life to seniors since I was 23. I spent my career serving seniors, both providing home care in local community service centres and working in long-term care homes as a social worker and health care network manager. It is therefore an honour for me to contribute to the debate we are having today. First of all, I would like to say that the Bloc Québécois agrees with Bill C‑12. There is no doubt about that. We know that this bill is very important and that it is urgent. However, we disagree with today's motion, which is disrupting the legislative process. It is important to point out that the bill has only one clause. It amends the Old Age Security Act to prevent a deplorable situation, where 183,000 vulnerable seniors had their guaranteed income supplement cut, from happening again after July 1, 2022. That is the purpose of Bill C-12. All of the opposition parties proposed legislative work to the government for this week, because we could have managed without the closure motion, which should only be used in exceptional and urgent situations. We could have finished our work properly, in accordance with the legislative process, because this bill has not garnered much opposition. On the contrary, we are pretty unanimous about it in the House. The bill is important, but let us be clear: It does nothing to change the situation of seniors whose GIS has been slashed every month for the past eight months. It changes nothing at all. When we saw the bill, we wondered why the date was set at July 1, 2022. Why not March? That way, those whose GIS is currently being cut would not have their benefits reduced. Based on the minister's announcement, we know that there will be a one-time payment. Initially, this payment was to have been made in May, but after the questions we asked the minister and with the pressure she was under, she succeeded in convincing her officials to move the one-time payment up to April 19. In my opinion, that is still unacceptable. It is two weeks earlier, and some will say that is better than nothing, but it is unacceptable that computer issues can prevent us from returning the money that was taken from vulnerable seniors before April 19. It seems to me that that could have been done by March, or even early April. This week, the minister appeared before the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, where she answered a question from my colleagues in the third opposition party. She said that it would be done by April 19 and she was proud of that. Honestly, I would not be so proud in her shoes, because that is shameful. On April 19 it will be almost 10 months that people have had their GIS benefits cut month after month. Today, in an article in the Journal de Montréal, two seniors who had their benefits cut described their situation to Canadians. Bob Petit, an 82-year-old senior, had his GIS benefits reduced by $350 a month, while Jacques Rhéault, a pensioner in Louiseville who worked hard all his life in a factory in Contrecoeur, lost his GIS benefit. These two people are the luckiest people in the world, because they have the support and assistance of a very active MP who has been championing their cause from the start. Let us keep in mind that these people’s benefits have been cut since July 2021. The hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé represents and supports them through all of the system’s bureaucratic procedures. However, regardless of how good an MP he is, we have learned that, although the Minister of Seniors appears to have a good heart and to listen to seniors, she cannot do more because of the technical and technological limitations of the tools she will be using to issue a nice cheque to each senior who was unfairly affected by the cuts. That is quite a long time. I cannot help but make connections with other people’s problems. Consider sick workers. They are entitled to just 15 weeks of employment insurance in case of illness. The Bloc would like to see that increase to 50 weeks. The minister said that that was too much, that the government was looking at 26 weeks, but that computer problems were preventing it from doing anything right now. The Department of Citizenship and Immigration is telling us that they want to accelerate the processing of work visa and permanent residence applications, but that there are computer issues. I am starting to wonder whether the government’s key departments, which are there to serve Canadians, are paralyzed by their computer systems. That makes me think there has been considerable negligence in maintaining our infrastructure. As a result, vulnerable Canadians are finding it difficult to pay their rent and buy their medications and are grappling with anxiety and stress every month. We are talking about seniors who are vulnerable and who will be affected by Bill C-12. I do not know if it is possible to paint an accurate portrait of these people. These are seniors who, very often, have worked all their lives. These people, who may not have been unionized and who did not necessarily earn a big salary, are now retired, and tired, at age 65. Tired and without much income, they are entitled to the guaranteed income supplement. For the past eight months, since July 2021, these people have received less money because the CERB was calculated as income. That is what Bill C-12 is intended to correct, to prevent other seniors from being penalized next year. Honestly, I am offended and angry to see how the government’s limitations are getting in the way of the assistance these seniors require. When questioned, the minister says that the government invested so many million dollars in this and so many million dollars in that. What seniors need is a decent monthly income so they can pay their bills, meet their responsibilities and live with dignity. Right now, seniors are calling my office saying that they feel like beggars, if I can put it that way. It is a blow to their dignity, because these are people who worked, who earned an honest living and who have felt completely forgotten and abandoned since July 2021. Members will understand why I am emotional talking about this. I live in a riding where a quarter of the population is aged 65 or over. Today, I think it is clear that the hon. member for Salaberry—Suroît is an unconditional ally of the seniors in her riding, that the Bloc Québécois is an ally of seniors, and that it will do everything it can to convince the minister to issue the one-time payment before April 19.
1236 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 2:56:49 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, a fault confessed is not half redressed when it keeps people from being able to put food on the table. These seniors have been making sacrifices for eight months. What makes my colleagues think that seniors would be reassured to hear that they still have months of hardship to go through because of an IT problem? As we saw during the pandemic, the government is capable of getting its chequebook out quickly, so it should start writing cheques. When will seniors be able to shop for groceries with dignity? What is the minister going to do to speed up the one-time payment to the most vulnerable seniors?
110 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/22 2:55:29 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight months of pressure, the government is finally admitting that cutting the guaranteed income supplement for the poorest working seniors was heartless. Now that the government has admitted that it made a mistake and that this mistake plunged seniors into poverty, there needs to be a quick solution. The deputy minister told us that IT problems are making it impossible for the government to compensate the victims faster. Seniors cannot wait until May because of a computer glitch. What is the minister going to do to pay back these senior victims faster?
95 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/9/22 3:05:09 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, seniors are suffering as a result of the cuts to the guaranteed income supplement. Some of them are going hungry, selling their possessions and even losing their homes. These people cannot wait until late spring for the federal bureaucratic machine to get moving. The Prime Minister proved with CERB that he can get cheques out quickly when he really wants to. If the Prime Minister was able to make CERB payments to millions of people within 10 days of them applying, he has the capacity to provide support to the most vulnerable seniors before the end of spring. What is stopping him from taking action?
108 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/9/22 3:03:47 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, over the past eight months, the Prime Minister has reduced guaranteed income supplement payments for seniors who legitimately collected CERB. These are not wealthy seniors. They work part-time to pay for rent, groceries and prescriptions. It took months for the Prime Minister to realize that was wrong, and he is going to make it right—but not until May—and he is still going to cut benefits every month until June. These seniors have made sacrifices for eight months. Does the Prime Minister think they deserve something better than misery until the end of spring?
100 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/8/22 3:00:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, by the time this government stops making cuts to the guaranteed income supplement for seniors, the government will have been depriving them of the basic essentials for 11 months. During those 11 months, inflation had time to reach the highest levels in 30 years. For 11 months, seniors had to leave more and more food on the shelves at the grocery store because it is too expensive. Their rent has probably gone up. For 11 months, all of their expenses went up while the government cut their benefits. Is this how seniors deserve to be treated?
104 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/8/22 2:58:51 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, for the past eight months, the government has been making cuts to the guaranteed income supplement for seniors who received CERB. We are talking about seniors who have to work part time to pay for the basics, such as their rent or medication. This morning, after eight months, the government introduced a bill to right this wrong. Do my colleagues know when this bill will come into force? It will be in June. If the situation of seniors is serious enough to give rise to a bill, why is the government continuing to make cuts until June?
100 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/21 2:56:34 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the cost of groceries has increased 7%, but the income of seniors under the age of 75 has not increased at all because the government is denying them the old age security pension increase they deserve. This basically forces seniors, whose health is often fragile, to cut back on the food they buy. I know that the finance minister understands perfectly well that freezing the pension of those under the age of 75 when prices are skyrocketing impoverishes them. Given that reality, why is the government so determined to have two classes of seniors?
96 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/21 2:55:20 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, experts expect food prices to rise by 7%. Meanwhile, Ottawa wants to cut back the guaranteed income supplement for 183,000 senior workers, many of them among the poorest seniors who received the Canada emergency response benefit. Grocery bills will be going way up, yet the government is clawing back an average of $3,500. In committee on Thursday, the Minister of Finance confirmed that she was actively seeking a solution and would have more to say in a few days. That takes us to tomorrow's economic update. Will the Minister of Finance be announcing a solution in the update?
103 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border