- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Rivière-du-Nord
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 68%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $105,330.31
- Government Page
- May/4/23 2:59:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the minister is the one who told us that the monarchy is not a priority and that the Bloc Québécois should change the subject.
Why is the Prime Minister trying to make it sound like the coronation is the most popular media event since the Quebec cult TV series La petite vie? His government is the one that decided to issue and give away 30,000 coronation medals. His government is the one that is about to land in London with 20 or so representatives, not counting staffers, for yet another eye-wateringly expensive event.
If the monarchy is not a priority for the government, can the minister explain the reason for this circus?
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 2:58:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, from listening to the Prime Minister, one would think that everyone is going to be glued to their television sets this weekend watching the latest soap, the coronation of Charles III. According to the Prime Minister, “Canadians are looking forward to celebrating the Coronation of His Majesty King Charles III”.
I do not know who he is talking about, but it is certainly not Quebeckers. It would have been a little more accurate if he had said that Canadians are looking forward to getting rid of the monarchy. It is not too late to get it right.
What is the government waiting for? When will it free us from this outdated, undemocratic institution?
119 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 3:05:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are two days away from the coronation of Charles III and the Liberal convention, and Liberal MPs are starting to be heard. They are telling us that the oath to the King is outdated and it is time to make it optional.
Members of the House should be loyal only to the public. There should not be two loyalties: one to the Crown and one to the citizens. There should be only one loyalty, and that is to the people.
People no longer want oaths to the King, nor God Save the King. The time has come for change. This is a good opportunity.
Why not finally cut ties with the British monarchy once and for all?
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 2:56:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, he said a word that is not usually part of his vocabulary, the word “democracy”. I will say no more, but if people could read my mind, they would get it.
The Prime Minister of New Zealand would like his country to become a republic. The ambassador of Australia in London is saying the same thing. England is about to get rid of its King before we do, but no matter. However, a majority of Canadians, the population of Quebec and Canada, want to cut ties with the Crown.
In the House, apart from the Bloc Québécois, no one is saying a word. It seems like everyone is a monarchist. Does this government truly think it knows better than the population of Quebec, Canada, New Zealand, Australia—
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 2:55:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Canadian Heritage told us the monarchy is not a priority for the government. It is so far down the list of priorities that the Liberals put recognition of King Charles III in the budget. It is so far down the list of priorities that the Prime Minister will be leaving his party's convention to attend the coronation of the King of Canada, his King. He could have sent someone in his stead, like a minister, but prostrating himself before the King is his priority.
Sometimes I think this is just embarrassing. Is it not time to get rid of the monarchy?
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/1/23 2:58:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a proponent of the status quo. If people say they want nothing to do with the King, the Prime Minister replies that there are other more important files.
He should simply admit that the Liberals are monarchists and then have an honest debate, as we do with the Conservatives. Instead, he tells those who reject the monarchy that it is not a priority and that he has better things to do.
If the monarchy is not a priority, why is the Prime Minister going to the coronation of Canada's King instead of going to his own party's convention?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/1/23 2:57:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there have been few opportunities in recent history to debate the possibility of cutting ties between Canada, including Quebec, and the British monarchy. The patriation of the Constitution, the death of Elizabeth II and the accession of Charles III are rare examples.
According to Angus Reid, a majority of Canadians, not just Quebeckers, believe the time has come to get rid of an outdated, backward-looking institution that is incompatible with the fundamental principle of democracy, namely that we are all equal.
When is the government going to finally get rid of the monarchy?
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/23 2:18:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the National Assembly abolished the oath to the King. The Quebec government announced yesterday that it would not send a delegation to the coronation of Charles III.
Why? It is because Quebec could not care less about the monarchy and because it is an outdated symbol of submission that Quebeckers want no part of, and not just in Quebec, elsewhere too. An Angus Reid poll on the weekend revealed that a majority of Canadians do not want Charles III.
The majority thinks that the monarchy is outdated. The majority agrees with the Bloc Québécois's motion to break ties with the monarchy: no Charles III on our currency, no God Save the King and no oath to the King. It is simple; the majority, here, believe that this undemocratic symbol is no longer relevant.
If the Prime Minister goes to Westminster for the coronation of Charles III, I think it might be a good opportunity, between two Queen songs on the piano, to tell him that the monarchy here, in Quebec and Canada, is no longer relevant.
188 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague across the way to tell us more about the Royal Style and Titles Act, which the budget plans to amend.
Over the weekend, a survey showed that over 60% of Canadians want to cut ties with the British monarchy. We also saw a news report informing us that the King of England is living in luxury off a tax-exempt fortune of over $3 billion.
Meanwhile, here at home, the budget has next to nothing for seniors or housing. Health transfers are practically non-existent, or are whittled down to the bare bones.
Can my colleague tell me how to explain to our constituents why the budget is focusing so much attention on the King of England while totally ignoring our problems at home?
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 4:41:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
It may be that seven out of 10 countries are run by constitutional monarchies, but that number is of no importance, in my opinion. It does not matter to me if the other seven out of 10 countries are right or wrong, nor does it matter if nine or 10 countries are right or wrong. What bothers me is that we are here to represent peoples and nations that operate within a federation that is itself subject to a foreign monarch. I cannot stand that.
That is what the Bloc Québécois wants to abolish, regardless of how things are done elsewhere. We are capable of governing ourselves, and I am sure all Canadians can do that. I guarantee that Quebeckers can. We can get along well enough to manage all kinds of issues. The one thing we do not need is a foreign monarch's stamp of approval on our laws.
164 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 4:39:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
I would point out to him that we are here to play a game that is not really a game. We have to play by the rules, which is what all members of the Bloc Québécois do. We have done just that since the Bloc Québécois was founded. Yes, we once went to the Governor General's office to request that the Harper government be replaced.
As we all know, these are the rules of the game. I have sworn allegiance here to the rules that govern us, and I do not intend to break them. I will continue to abide by them, but when I am asked whether I prefer to have a monarch or an elected head of state, I will instantly say that I want an elected head of state. That is the answer I want to give to my colleague.
161 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 4:29:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will share my time with the member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.
It always surprises me when the people who are elected to govern tell us, the opposition members, that it is a shame we do not tell them what to do. They should know what to do. For one thing, they could give us transfers for health care and seniors. There are all kinds of things we could talk about, but I think that if they do not know these things already, we have a serious problem.
That said, I want to start by confessing that I am a romantic. I spent my youth of princes, knights, kings and other champions who raced to the aid of princesses held captive by evil characters in the out-of-reach towers of magnificent castles.
I have also done some travelling, and I have marvelled at some grand castles. I will also admit that I was delighted to visit the Schönbrunn Palace in Vienna, the famous Princess Sisi's summer residence. Attending the Christmas concert at the Orangery was an absolute thrill. Being emperor of Austria would have suited me well. As I said, I am a romantic.
I also dreamed of valiant knights from Quebec, who came to the rescue of our great and glorious nation, ensuring its survival and vitality. I dreamed of epic battles where the greatest orators faced off against one another to convince their political opponents not to give up and not to give in to a challenge that initially might seem too daunting, too difficult to face.
Other people before us have met these challenges, and they met them successfully. We have seen examples around the globe of colonies cutting ties with monarchies. However, we are not there yet. The Bloc Québécois is using this opportunity today to propose that we do away with this archaic British institution to which we bow, day after day. We propose that we trade our dependence on the monarch for a simple but noble dependence on democracy, on the will of the people. This is by no means a personal attack on the current King of England, Charles III, or his predecessor, Queen Elizabeth II. I am merely proposing that we make a full, unambiguous and unreserved commitment to our fellow citizens. How about it?
Do we not all believe in the virtues of equality among citizens? Do we not all believe in the sovereignty of the people, in their right to decide their future, their institutions, the laws that govern them, in the inalienable sovereignty of the people?
Do we not also believe in the separation of church and state? No, it is true that this Parliament has already decided to continue saying a Christian prayer before each sitting of Parliament, before pleading before this same Parliament for equality between religions and faiths, and apologizing for having ostracized, even persecuted them in the past. Let us move on.
Of course we should address the housing problem, balancing the budget, controlling our borders, gun trafficking, the challenges that come with immigration, which we in fact need so much, funding to give all our seniors a decent life, other issues of national and international interest, and so on.
We also need to address this government's troubling reluctance to transfer the necessary funding so that Quebec and the provinces can fund health care services, where costs are increasing while the federal government seems to think it is a joke.
Should we not also be concerned about our position and the state of our institutions? Are we really incapable of managing the nation's affairs and democracy at the same time?
Each one of our challenges needs to be met full on, but none should prevent us from dealing with our institutions. How can we ignore this huge stain on our democracy and claim to serve democratically? Could we not set our sights higher this time and do something honourable that makes Quebeckers and Canadians proud?
When you ask people if they would like to get rid of this subordination to the British monarchy, many answer that they would. In fact, 71% of Quebeckers and 51% of Canadians answer yes. Moreover, 56% of Canadians and 75% of Quebeckers want their elected officials to stop swearing allegiance to the British sovereign.
Certain members of the royal family themselves have dared to question their belonging to this outdated and overly restrictive regime. Is it not time for this Parliament to join the 21st century, the third millennium?
It is outrageous that tens of millions of dollars are spent every year to maintain this useless and outdated body of protocol. Could this money not be better spent? Are we so wealthy that we no longer need to watch our spending?
Without going into the sometimes scandalous details, we know that the office of the Governor General alone spends more than $55 million a year. Let us set aside the issue of cost and ask ourselves what the monarchy has done for us since its conquest of our territory. My colleague put this question to my colleague opposite earlier and she was unable to answer or to name a single benefit that we gain from the monarchy.
There was the infamous bloody war against the rebellion of our patriot ancestors, the deportation of 80% of the Acadian population, the forced annexation of the Métis territories and the hanging of their leader, Louis Riel. What can one say about the ban on speaking French in the predominantly English provinces for more than a 100 years or about the ratification of the agreement on the repatriation of the Canadian Constitution? That agreement was ratified in secret in a hotel kitchen while the Quebec premier was away.
Over the past century, many states have decided to cut ties with the British monarchy. Is it not time that Canada did the same?
Of course, Quebec can always dream of freeing itself from the Canadian yoke. Of course, a referendum, a solemn declaration or other mechanism developed for Quebec sovereignty could also break that rather embarrassing, expensive and restrictive tie. However, could we not think today about a more effective, more cohesive and less embarrassing federation?
Every member of the House had to swear allegiance and loyalty to the British Crown before they could take their seat here and fulfill the mandate given to them by their constituents.
Like everyone else, I swore the oath by thinking of the interpretation we must make of it, that is, that the occupants of the British throne are not its true recipients, but rather that it is sworn to the institutions that govern us. Therefore, is it not high time we honoured our real allegiances? Is there anyone here who would be prepared to ignore the interests and values of the constituents who elected them in favour of the interests and values of the king or the queen? I am not prepared to do that, for my part.
Today, the Bloc Québécois proposes to free us from the monarchy and, thus, from this flawed oath. That would allow us to fully assume, unapologetically and unfettered, our rightful elected mandate to represent our constituents, who are relying on us, our allegiance to their ideals, our courage and our loyalty. Let us be worthy of that trust.
1239 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
