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
  • Mar/21/24 2:39:59 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, if the federal government wants to say no to giving Quebec full control over immigration, then it needs to say yes to doing its own job, particularly with respect to asylum seekers. Families are trapped in inhumane situations. Some spend years worrying because the federal government is incapable of processing their claim. They have no idea whether they will have to leave the country. Worse yet, some are unable to meet their basic needs because they have absolutely no right to work without a federal work permit. Instead of stirring up fights, when will the minister do his job?
101 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/18/24 2:39:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the word of the day in Ottawa is “no”. They are saying no to sole jurisdiction for Quebec over immigration, but they are also saying no to the right to opt out with full compensation from the federal dental care program. They are saying no to the right to opt out of the federal pharmacare program with full compensation. They are saying no to advance requests for medical assistance in dying. Even in health care, where Quebec has full authority, the answer is no. Even for programs created by Quebec, the answer is no. Why not respect Quebec's expertise instead of making it harder or even impossible to receive care?
116 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/8/24 12:56:38 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Shefford for her question. I know she is very attuned to this issue as well. When we welcome around 40 students from francophone African countries and we are so happy to have them in Salaberry—Suroît because they speak French and they want to study to become nurses and contribute to our health care system, it breaks my heart to know that they get here but do not have everything they need for a successful immigration experience. Some are forced to rely on donated clothing or food banks, some need help moving house, and some have nowhere to live or are forced to share an overcrowded home. In all sincerity, I cannot imagine the government not voting for the Bloc Québécois motion. It makes sense, and it is specifically targeted to newcomers, who are human beings who need to be taken care of.
159 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/8/24 12:54:21 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my Conservative colleague for her question, because it is a great question. The federal government owes Quebec $470 million, so paying that back would be a good place to start. Quebec would then have the money and financial flexibility needed to be able to increase services. We know that integration capacity is a complicated and complex issue. We also know that, although we do not have all the solutions, funding is needed to increase services to give newcomers everything they need to have a successful immigration experience and want to stay. The people I find the most courageous are those who leave their country and their families behind, who arrive here hoping for a better life, but then face inhumane bureaucracy and endless delays in accessing services or obtaining a work permit or any other documents required to successfully integrate into our communities.
148 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/8/24 12:52:58 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question, which strikes me as quite partisan. The Bloc Québécois has raised an issue that is of concern to all the provinces, and one on which there is consensus this morning. I guess the member did not have a chance to read the Journal de Montréal, which very clearly indicated that both Quebeckers and Canadians think that Quebec and the provinces really need to sit down at the same table because everyone has a say. We often talk about two solitudes, but in this case, everyone is on the same page. Everyone agrees that we need to find the solution to successful immigration together. The people who would benefit most from that kind of democratic exercise would be immigrants themselves.
135 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/8/24 12:42:57 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to this Bloc Québécois opposition day on the important topic of successful immigration. What can I add to what has been said by the Bloc Québécois immigration critic, the member for Lac‑Saint‑Jean? Since he has a strong command of this file and detailed knowledge of the problems, I have decided to speak more specifically about successful immigration and what that means, in practical terms, for my riding. In some of the speeches that I heard this morning, members often had a tendency to talk about successful immigration by presenting statistics and numbers, but today I want to talk about people in my riding. My riding, Salaberry—Suroît, is part urban, part rural. In other words, there are two large industrial towns and several rural municipalities there. When I talk about the rural reality, I am also talking about a lack of transportation options and a lack of access to local services. I have been an MP since 2019, but I was also an MP from 2006 to 2011. Since returning to politics, I have noticed that, in my riding, the issue of immigration, the large number of newcomers, is relatively new. We did not have that before. We had a few newcomers, mostly temporary workers. Today, we are very happy to see our communities flourishing. People who come to Salaberry—Suroît contribute to the development of the region by settling there, starting a family, getting a job and sharing their culture. We are one big family. This is something relatively new for us, especially in comparison to Montreal or other major cities, such as Toronto or Vancouver. All these people coming in are shaking things up. As my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean said, there have been no discussions or conversations between the provincial and federal governments with a view to planning immigration. Successful immigration planning means determining how many people we want to welcome and knowing what our capacity is. I would like to tell my colleagues a little story. My riding includes an industrial or working-class town called Huntingdon, which is home to a huge processing plant that makes sweet potato fries. This company had to hire temporary workers to keep its plant going. Maison Russet and Les Fermes Valens sought out foreign workers but were very mindful of the quality of their integration. They know that if they welcome temporary foreign workers who want to settle in the community and they help them through the immigration process, these individuals will feel like an integral part of the community and will want to stay in Huntingdon. Because my riding is in a rural area where immigration is a relatively new phenomenon, we had a collective discusssion about the issue of French integration. Huntingdon has one high school and two elementary schools, but not many local services. Because this huge influx had not been planned or discussed, there were no classes to help the many workers employed at the plant integrate into French-speaking society. When a problem arises, my riding's trademark response is to get together and try to find solutions. We held several meetings and, in the end, it was decided that the best thing to do was to set up French integration services close to where the people were working, so they could access them without needing public transit. That is the challenge we faced. The federal government does not think about planning and has little interest in considering integration capacity, so communities are not equipped to deal with the influx. We sat down at a table and decided that, since classrooms are usually empty in the evenings, if Arthur Pigeon high school started evening classes, temporary foreign workers could go there at the end of the workday to learn French. We figured that it would take some teachers, some rooms and money to fund the whole thing. We realized that our school had not budgeted for developing a large number of French classes. Again, when we talk about successful immigration, we are mainly talking about discussions around planning immigration levels based on integration capacity. By having discussions and being innovative, we managed to find rooms and teachers and all of that. Once we had succeeded in setting up French classes thanks to our teamwork, we started thinking about what we would do about the other services these workers and their families need. I am talking about the whole issue of service delivery. Is there an early childhood centre nearby? Do people have access to transportation to get to these services? It is a complex issue because we are reacting to something that we could have planned for and examined if the government had taken this issue seriously and, above all, if the provinces had been considered major players in analyzing the issue of integration capacity. There is clearly a lack of foresight on the part of the federal government. The provinces do not have enough money to welcome immigrants, but immigrants are the primary victims of this lack of planning. That is why the Bloc Québécois believes that, in order for immigration to be successful, the federal government must stop acting like the big boss and making all the decisions without considering the provinces, without bringing them to the table. The federal government must agree to listen and find solutions. In today's motion, the Bloc Québécois is proposing a solution. The motion was amended with very specific timelines. We are waiting for the government to come up with concrete proposals to measure the quality of each province's integration capacity and therefore measure the integration capacity of Canada as a whole. I said that the primary victims of the failure to plan for integration quality or integration capacity are the immigrants themselves. I will provide some statistics. I said I would not, but I cannot help myself. How long does it take to process an application for permanent residency, say, for someone who shows up at our office and is waiting for permanent residency? Right now, it takes 11 months to obtain permanent residency. How long does it take to complete the family reunification process? It takes 34 months. How long does a refugee or asylum seeker have to wait for their work permit? When they arrive here, they do not have a work permit and they cannot work without one. The answer is, it takes too long. As a federal MP who represents a riding that wants the best for immigrants and wants them to immigrate successfully, I urge all my colleagues in the House to support the Bloc Québécois's opposition motion to revise immigration targets from 2024 onward after consulting with Quebec, the provinces and the territories, based on their own integration capacity in terms of housing, health care, education, French-language learning and transportation infrastructure, to ensure a genuinely successful and respectful immigration process for the human beings we want to welcome to Quebec.
1198 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/8/23 2:31:08 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Century Initiative is strictly about economics. On February 1, its co-founder, Dominic Barton, a former director of McKinsey, was asked if he had considered the future of French. He replied, and I quote, “the focus...was just on economics. It wasn't thinking about the social context. It was on productivity.” There is not a single word about French in the 88 pages of the initiative. Since it is not considering the future of French, what other studies on this topic did the government consult before adopting the initiative's immigration targets? Will it disclose those studies?
104 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/9/22 12:12:08 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to respond to the question of privilege raised by the member for Simcoe—Grey on May 5, 2022. In our view, it is deeply concerning. The email discussions referred to by the member do indeed amount to interference by the executive in parliamentary work that is the sole responsibility of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. There was an email chain concerning the preparation of drafting instructions for a report on a study the committee has been conducting on differential outcomes in Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada decisions. In our view, it is deeply concerning that the chair communicated with employees of the executive branch to receive guidance on how the committee report should be drafted by non-partisan analysts, who must be impartial and independent in their professional duties. However, contrary to what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons alleged last Friday on the matter, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and the Privy Council Office could in fact be trying to interfere with the work of the committee in this situation. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government said that the emails chains make it clear that the advice from the minister's office was to suggest an approach to the drafting of the report to ensure that the government's position was understood by the Liberal members on the committee. The very fact that ministers are suggesting how parliamentary committee reports should be drafted is what is troubling and disturbing. I remind members that the committee is required to be completely independent from the government and that it is meant to monitor what the department and the government are doing. It is rather ironic that the department and the Privy Council Office can give opinions on certain findings and recommendations that could cause embarrassment for the government. The House recognizes that the government must not see a draft committee report before it is approved by the committee members. That said, the committee and committee staff cannot be instructed by the federal public service, cabinet or the government. We understand how this might not be viewed as a breach of a specific privilege. However, according to Bosc and Gagnon in House of Commons Procedure and Practice, beginning at page 81, “any action which...tends to obstruct or impede the House in the performance of its functions...or is an offence against the authority or dignity of the House” may be found as a contempt of Parliament. It is up to the House itself to consider any misconduct as contempt and to deal with the situation as it sees fit. In this case, the email chains informing the immigration minister's office of the committee's work and the replies from his staff giving instructions raise concerns about the independence of the House in managing its own business. We must not forget that, initially, as the member for Simcoe—Grey mentioned in referring to Bosc and Gagnon at page 62, parliamentary privileges were considered and established “to protect the House and its Members...from the power and interference of the King and the House of Lords”. It is important to remember that the House must oppose any attempt or action by the government suggesting interference in the work of parliamentary committees, which must remain independent in accordance with their mandate. The Bloc Québécois believes that the facts raised require the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to be mandated by the House to conduct a broader study on the real or potential issues of government interference in the reports of parliamentary committees.
620 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/5/22 2:31:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I believe that we do not understand one another. When Quebec asks for authority to resolve the immigration crisis, the Prime Minister slams the door in its face, saying that Quebec is not a country and that this is Canada's job. If that is so, then Canada should do its job and get to work on the 29,000 files that have been sitting in Ottawa for years. The immigrants who submitted them were selected by Quebec, are already living in Quebec and want to settle in Quebec. Unfortunately, the machine is broken. If the government refuses to fix it and refuses to let Quebec take care of it, what then?
114 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/5/22 2:30:00 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is clear to me that there is an immigration crisis. However, when the Bloc asked the Prime Minister whether it would be a good idea for Quebec to have more control, the Prime Minister did not once talk about a solution, not once. He said, “immigration will, by and large, always be under federal control.... I realize our Bloc friend is not happy about this, but Quebec is not yet its own country”. Is it out of sheer stubbornness that the Prime Minister refuses to collaborate more effectively with Quebec's immigration department? Is that the reality?
102 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border