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
  • Oct/16/23 1:23:05 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-49 
Mr. Speaker, the member for Thérèse-De Blainville experienced a problem. She would like to reverse her vote. She cast her vote in favour, but she is against. I would like unanimous consent to change her vote.
41 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/6/22 11:02:41 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-32 
Madam Speaker, I want to speak because I am a bit amazed by everything I am hearing from both sides of the House. I do not understand the idea of imposing closure on Bill C-32. In every speech we made, we said that the Bloc Québécois supported Bill C-32. I also heard the NDP say that it supported the bill. The government therefore has everything it needs to move Bill C-32 forward, properly and in a reasonable manner. It also has the option of having us sit later to accelerate the process. Why would it impose closure? I really do not understand. I would also like to say that I completely disagree with the allegation made by my colleague in the NDP that the Bloc Québécois is obstructing proceedings. That is not true. That is misinformation. On the contrary, we have given our support to many bills. We work seriously and thoroughly on the bills. Members can say anything they want in the House, but they should not say things that make no sense. As whip, I can say that Bloc members are thorough, that they work hard, that they contribute and that they do not obstruct proceedings to block the legislative agenda. In fact, the opposite is true. With respect to Bill C-32, I will say it again and tell the minister that we support it. The government has the support of a majority to move Bill C-32 forward properly. Why impose closure? I am sorry to say that I truly feel that closure is an abuse of power when used to pass a bill that the government already has majority support for. Compared with other minority governments, this government has managed to have a record number of bills passed. More bills have been passed under this minority government than under previous ones. I do not know what they are complaining about. It seems that the Liberals are worn out, that they are basically fed up with managing our institution, Parliament, our debates. It is true that it takes a certain amount of effort. They need to listen, negotiate and be open. I really feel that this government is worn out.
375 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/21/22 10:57:55 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-21 
Madam Speaker, it is not a question of whether we are for or against Bill C-21. We know that the bill is not perfect, but it is important. This is about how the Liberal government has managed its legislative agenda. To be frank, honest and sincere, it has been a complete disaster. I have never seen a legislative agenda managed like this. We are meeting again today and we will likely sit until late on Thursday because we do not have the right people on that side of the House to manage the legislative agenda effectively. It is not the opposition's fault. It is not the fault of the Conservatives, the Bloc Québécois or the NDP. It is the government's fault. They keep imposing closure because they are unable to manage their legislative agenda properly. The fact that we have gotten to this point, today, is serious. The government could have tabled its notice of motion on the weekend, but what we are seeing here is the government's inefficiency across all departments and in managing the legislative agenda.
187 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/6/22 12:21:26 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-19 
Madam Speaker, under the Standing Orders, the government can use time allocation, but there is a difference between using it and abusing it. Bill C-19 is not a small inconsequential bill. It is over 430 pages long and makes a lot of changes to existing legislation. We need some time to study it. We know that the Standing Committee on Finance was rushed. We had time to present amendments, which were debated. They were good amendments. Were it not for the work of the committee, the bill could have been passed without any improvements, when that is the whole point of committee work. The Standing Committee on Finance worked extremely hard. I challenge any party in the House to say that the Bloc Québécois is filibustering. We have not filibustered in committee or in the House. On the contrary, we worked hard to improve Bill C-19, which is a massive bill that amends a number of important laws. I think it should be known that we did not have time to review it properly, even if there were 80 speeches on the subject. My question is quite simple. Does the Minister of Tourism and Associate Minister of Finance not agree that we should have had more time to further improve this bill so that it would better respond to the needs of Canadians and businesses?
235 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/9/22 12:23:31 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-19 
Madam Speaker, I knew that this time allocation motion was coming, but I did not think it would be moved so soon. It is important for people to know that we have not yet even had five hours of debate on Bill C-19, which is a big bill with numerous measures. Many sectors have been calling us after seeing the budget. We need to debate this big, important bill, and five hours is not enough time. I am surprised because I think this demonstrates carelessness and contempt on the part of the government. The Liberals are saying that we have debated this long enough, and they are eager for the bill to be passed. We, too, are eager for it to pass, but debating bills is part of our job. I am therefore very surprised, and even appalled, that this motion was moved today when I was not expecting it until later. I think that is an exaggeration. I think the government is counting on its tacit agreement with the NDP to prevent meaningful and thorough debate, especially in the case of Bill C-19. This is not a small bill; it is 452 pages long and the Standing Committee on Finance has already begun its study. This is not a question, but I will say to my colleague that it is a bit discouraging to see that the leader continues to be contemptuous of the legislative work that we have to do here in the House.
249 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border