44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 18, 2023 10:00AM
- Apr/18/23 2:17:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what is more noble than giving freely? What is more noble than a person with means being kind enough to use that strength to lift up their entire community? That is what more than two million Quebeckers do every day when they volunteer.
On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I want to use this 49th National Volunteer Week to thank them. Since this year's theme is “Let's volunteer in unison”, let us all stand up and applaud those who help our seniors and children every day. Let us applaud the volunteers working in our community organizations, our health care centres, our learning centres. These often modest but always generous people use their light to make others shine.
This week, let us flip the script. Let us make our volunteers the stars and shine a spotlight on the essential role they play in Quebec society as a whole.
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 2:27:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, friendship really matters. There is an old saying in Quebec that a friend is a friend.
I am not going to ask questions that the Prime Minister is not going to answer. I will assume that he knew that the Green family contributed to the Trudeau Foundation before going on vacation with them. I will move on to the ethical point.
Can he tell the House, Quebeckers and Canadians the cost of the accommodation where he stayed, and whether he personally paid, out of his own pocket, for the stay?
92 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 3:52:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to pick up on the point raised by my colleague from Outremont. I thought her question was very interesting, but we did not get an answer. We are talking about responsible government, yet we have heard the leader of the Conservative Party say that he would cut $1 billion from CBC/Radio-Canada's $1.2‑billion budget. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about that, since she herself was a journalist.
Is it responsible for a government to cut $1 billion from a $1.2‑billion budget for an institution like CBC/Radio-Canada, which exists to report the news and has broadcasting stations and newsrooms all over Quebec and the rest of Canada?
I think that it is important that Canadians and Quebeckers know exactly what the Conservative Party wants to do with CBC/Radio-Canada's funding, and I would like an answer.
158 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to the merits of Bill C-239, an act to amend the Act to enable certain tax payments to be made to the provinces and to authorize agreements with the provinces for the collection of taxes. I am going focus on the second half of the title.
The truth is that the Conservative Party of Canada is the only party that truly respects provincial and territorial jurisdictions. In fact, in early 2019, during question period in the House, I asked why the Prime Minister was stubbornly saying no to a single tax return in Quebec. One of my colleagues had tabled a motion in the interest of Canadians, and Quebeckers in particular. That motion read as follows:
That, given:
(a) the House has great respect for provincial jurisdiction and trust in provincial institutions;
(b) the people of Quebec are burdened with completing and submitting two tax returns, one federal and one provincial;
I should add that this is the only province in Canada that is required to file two tax returns.
(c) the House believes in cutting red tape and reducing unnecessary paperwork to improve the everyday lives of families; therefore,
the House call on the government to work with the Government of Quebec to implement a single tax return in Quebec, as adopted unanimously in the motion of the National Assembly of Quebec on May 15, 2018.
We Conservatives work together in the interest of all Canadians. The arguments presented in this motion are still just as valid. It is about respecting the provinces and also the intention to improve the quality of life of Quebeckers and the Canadian people.
Our leader, at the time, said that “no public service jobs will be eliminated” and that “we need public servants to ensure that our federal laws are upheld” and enforced. He said that “we can also make more effective use of the people who work for the federal government.”
Again in 2021, the Conservative Party of Canada supported the single tax return and also campaigned on it. The sponsor of Bill C‑239, the member for La Prairie, was inspired by our commitment, which goes back a few years, and the clear desire expressed by the National Assembly of Quebec. We listen to the intentions and will of the National Assembly of Quebec.
CRA workers, among others, have expressed concerns about their jobs. I heard the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons say that public servants did a good job during the pandemic. That is true, but all public servants in every department did a good job, not just CRA employees working in Quebec.
Out of respect for public servants, we must protect their jobs. That can be done when there is good will. That is a concern for us, the members of the Conservative Party of Canada. I would remind the House that the federal public service has been negotiating with the Liberal government for more than a year, and that there will be a public service strike this evening at one minute past midnight if an agreement is not reached. When people say that public servants should be treated well and that we should find jobs for them, we should come to an agreement with them because they did a good job during the pandemic. They are right. There were shortcomings and problems, but I believe that we must respect our federal public servants.
We still have a labour shortage. We are in the midst of an economic crisis and, on top of that, a labour crisis. Instead of handing out outrageous contracts, this government could show some faith in its own employees.
I recognize that there are certainly situations where expertise is needed to perform certain tasks, and that contracting out may be required. However, in many cases, Canadian public servants have filed complaints because, among other things, the contractors were doing the same work as the public servants, so the excuse of the need for expertise to justify these contracts does not hold water.
Earlier this year, federal public sector unions expressed concern about this issue. The president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada said, “[This] results in higher costs and lower quality services for Canadians, less transparency, less accountability and the loss of institutional knowledge and skills”.
As the sponsor of the bill said, on the one hand, there is a shortage of workers and, on the other hand, we are paying two people to do the same job. I agree with him. It is a bit ridiculous.
It is ridiculous and outrageous that the Liberal government spent $11.8 billion on subcontracts in 2021. It is now 2023, and I am sure the situation has not gotten any better. All I have to say is “McKinsey.” I will leave it at that. I think people who are listening still understand that while the abuse and waste continue, so does the preferential treatment for Liberal friends.
The Conservative Party is the only party that can implement this, because history has shown that the current Liberal government does not necessarily respect the majority of the House. Many private members' bills that were supported by a majority of the House have still not been implemented by this government. That is a lack of respect for democracy. That is the Liberal government. Meanwhile, Canadians would have benefited from all of those bills that parliamentarians had a chance to introduce because of the lottery system for private members' bills. I will come back to that another time.
The Conservatives support a united Canada and are in favour of a fairer and simpler tax system for all Canadians. We want to simplify the lives of Quebeckers, who are the only ones who have to file two tax returns. Today is April 18, my daughter Anne-Frédérique's birthday. I want to take this opportunity to wish her a happy birthday, but I also want to say that, on April 18, Quebeckers and Canadians across the country have to complete their tax returns. In Quebec, they have to file two returns. Does the Liberal government not trust Quebeckers? I am not sure. Why, in 2023, are Quebeckers still required to file two income tax returns?
In closing, I simply want to say that in this chamber only the Conservative Party of Canada can establish a single tax return to improve Quebeckers' quality of life.
I would have liked to take questions. Unfortunately, in accordance with procedure, there are none.
1118 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I really appreciated the speech our Conservative colleague just gave. I respect the fact that he supports the bill despite being a federalist, and I thank him for it.
As my colleagues know, we are a separatist party. Consequently, taxation power is a crucial issue for us, because it is central to and inherent in the very principle of political sovereignty. It will come as no surprise to anyone when I say that, in our opinion, it is high time we broke the shackles that bind us to Ottawa, this foreign entity that drains our financial resources and imposes its centralizing vision on us. As members know, in Canada, we are condemned to paying considerable sums of money to a state where our political weight is constantly declining. It is time to take control of our own destiny.
Bill C‑239, introduced by my Bloc Québécois colleague from La Prairie, does not free us from the obligation to pay our share to the foreign state that is Ottawa or from the obligation to remit billions of dollars for priorities that we do not share. However, it would make it possible for Quebec to manage its own taxes with a single income tax return adapted to our realities and our needs. Ottawa, however, is digging in its heels and putting forward spurious arguments to continue controlling our finances.
The purported fear of job losses that we hear from the Liberals and the NDP is just a hollow excuse to justify their desire to control our revenues. The fact is, there are many other challenges facing the public service, including the Phoenix payroll fiasco, which has caused so much confusion in the management of public servants' salaries. Delays in processing applications and calls were commonplace long before the pandemic. This highlights the shortcomings of an outdated system. There have been many long and very frustrating delays.
It is time for Quebec to take back control of its taxation system to ensure that our distinct choices and unique characteristics are respected. The provincial income tax, created in 1954 by Maurice Duplessis, made history. In the year 2023, we must once again make our own history by demanding our own single tax return. Quebec deserves a tax system adapted to its reality and managed by its own democratic institutions. It is time we charted our own course towards a better future for our nation. It is time we implemented a single income tax return in Quebec, because it would bring us numerous indisputable benefits.
For nearly three decades now, Revenu Québec has successfully collected the Quebec sales tax as well as the federal goods and services tax. Why should it be denied the responsibility of also collecting federal income tax on behalf of Quebeckers? There is no reason why it should not be entrusted with this responsibility.
It is unfortunate that Ottawa has repeatedly rejected this proposal, meaning that Quebeckers are the only taxpayers in Canada who have to file two separate tax returns. It is now tax season. I would like to remind those who are watching that the deadline for filing a tax return is April 30. This situation creates considerable costs for citizens and businesses, not to mention the complications that arise from having to communicate with two separate organizations. We must abolish this administrative inconsistency and adopt a single income tax return in Quebec. It would make life much easier for taxpayers, but there are also other benefits to a single tax return.
According to the Research Institute on Self-Determination of Peoples and National Independence, or the IRAI for short, this measure would save us a whopping $425 million. What is more, it would give Quebec direct access to foreign tax information, which means it could crack down on tax havens in a proactive, professional and concerted way, rather than having to simply copy the federal laws in that regard, which are a prime example of hollow, flawed legislation.
It is important to note that there is a consensus on this bill in Quebec. The Quebec National Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution in favour of this measure on May 15, 2018. It was proposed by the MNA for La Prairie at the time, who is now the member for La Prairie in another Parliament here with me.
The Legault government formally made this request during a meeting with the Prime Minister of Canada on January 17, 2019. It is time for Ottawa to acknowledge the will of Quebeckers that has been so clearly expressed. There is a clear desire to transfer the amounts saved through this measure so that Quebec, through Revenu Québec, can assume full responsibility for the single tax return.
We must put an end to this absurd situation where Quebeckers are the only ones who have to file two tax returns, with all the costs and complications that this entails. A single tax return in Quebec is a logical measure that will benefit taxpayers, the economy and the province's fiscal autonomy.
Let us act wisely. We must pass this for the benefit of all. I mentioned consensus, but it is not just the consensus of elected officials. The idea is backed by Quebec's business community, including chambers of commerce, independent businesses, the Quebec Employers Council and the Quebec CPA Order.
Look at what workers say, too. In 2016, the Syndicat de la fonction publique et parapublique du Québec, the union that represents workers in Quebec's public and parapublic sectors, launched a campaign in favour of a single tax return administered by Revenu Québec. The campaign has the support of the Bloc Québécois, of course, but also the Coalition Avenir Québec, the Parti Québécois and Québec Solidaire. Revenu Québec has the necessary expertise to implement a single tax return.
Quebec currently already collects more information from income tax returns than Ottawa does. Quebec already collects most of the critical information for managing its social programs, which is data that Ottawa does not have. I want to clarify that when we talk about a single tax return, it would of course be based in Quebec City. To hear the members across the way talk, they seem to be picturing a single tax return based in Ottawa. That is not what we mean.
I would like to add a quick word about the fact that concerns about job losses are unfounded, because expertise is transferable and so are jobs. We have always said that we want to transfer all the powers and responsibilities to Quebec. We want all of it to be transferred. It is the Liberal government that should stop using the threat of job losses at the tax centres.
In closing, a single tax return, received and collected by our only legitimate national capital, would be the best solution for everyone, including taxpayers, businesses and workers. It is time to rethink the way resources are allocated and to promote a decentralized approach to ensure greater efficiency and fairness in the tax system.
1205 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to speak on this issue.
I would like to begin by congratulating the sponsor of this bill, the hon. member for La Prairie, who led the fight for the single tax return in the Quebec National Assembly a few years ago and is now leading it here. It is an important fight.
It is a bit surreal to think that we are at this point today, wondering whether people should file one tax return or two. This is not rocket science; it makes absolutely no sense. Besides, as the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot mentioned, people in Quebec are the only ones who file two tax returns. It is too much paperwork, just a lot of paperwork. It is a problem.
People across Canada have no idea what this is like. They do not know what it is like to have to file two tax returns and fill out lines 287 and 544 two or three times when the issues and restrictions are not the same. It is complicated, and not everyone can afford accountants.
We saw what happened with a very important issue recently. Under Bill C-31, those who earn less than $20,000 a year and pay more than 30% of their income for housing are supposed to get $500, but many people could not find the form and did not know they were entitled to this $500. It is odd that we are talking about this, but there are plenty of people in Quebec who have run into these problems.
There is a problem here. There is already too much red tape, too much paperwork. We cannot understand why our Liberal friends and their NDP lackeys insist on saying no to such a measure. Perhaps it is because it comes from Quebec, because it would give Quebec more power and because it might make Quebeckers realize that, basically, they no longer need Ottawa. We already know that. We can say so, because that is why we are here. We are here because we believe that we no longer need Ottawa on many fronts. Ottawa always enjoys attacking Quebec. Yes, there are fine words, always lots of fine words.
Let us talk about language, for example. I always want to talk about it because what we hear from the other side is always somewhat hypocritical. I have listened to the Liberals talk ever since I became an MP. They keep saying that they will pass legislation on the issue of language, that French is in decline and that they will address this by introducing a bill with teeth that will halt the decline of French. It is fascinating to hear.
Today, I am going to make a solemn declaration: The only way to halt the decline of French in Quebec is for Quebec to become independent. There is no other way to do it. We could quibble about Bill C‑13. Even Quebec's Bill 96, which is a good law and will result in some progress, will not resolve the problem in a tangible way. That is what I want to talk about. The Liberals are hypocrites when they say that they want to work on this issue. Behind the scenes, in committee, the government directs its members, its West Island bullies, to sabotage its own amendments and its own bill because the Liberals are allergic to anything that comes from Quebec and to anything that could give more power to Quebec. That is what is at stake, and that is what we are talking about. It is fascinating.
I saw them, the West Island ministers, when they went to Montreal to protest against Bill 96. It is not enough for them to play the hypocrites in the House and not introduce the measures we need. Now they are working to sabotage legislation that might offer a slight improvement in the decline of French. It is fascinating. We keep seeing this double standard where things that are allowed across Canada and not allowed in Quebec.
We also see what is happening in immigration, where there is another problem. Quebec needs more control over our immigration levels in order to ensure that we can integrate newcomers. What are we seeing instead? The government dreams of a Canada with a population of 100 million, where 500,000 people are welcomed every year. Quebec is letting in 50,000 people right now, and we cannot integrate them. For whatever reason, good or bad, we cannot integrate the people arriving in Quebec. It is a major problem. In fact, it is the major problem, and we cannot cope.
We need to create an ecosystem in Quebec to ensure that we are able to integrate the people who are arriving from all over. We want to welcome these people. We need them to help us out with the labour shortage, for example. We need people who come from all over and bring their amazing knowledge and culture with them. They will make a positive contribution to our Quebec, the nation we love. We said that we needed more power. Mr. Legault got elected by saying that he would get that power from Ottawa. What was the answer he was given?
The answer was no. It seems that any request that comes from Quebec is seen as dangerous. The federal government decides that there must be something behind it and that Quebeckers are bound to take advantage to do bad things. The federal government is scared of us.
We are talking about a savings of $425 million. How can the federal government say no to that? How can it say no to $425 million when needs are growing? According to the study my colleague mentioned earlier, we are missing out on $425 million in savings.
There is a housing crisis. We talked about it earlier, but it is worth mentioning time and again. In the 250-page budget, how many pages are dedicated to housing? One and a half pages. Canada needs 3.5 million housing units over the next 10 years. The housing crisis is the greatest challenge of our time, alongside the language crisis and the climate crisis. The budget contains 250 pages of numbers, statistics and measures, but only one and a half pages on the housing crisis. Unbelievable.
This budget is basically a slap in the face to every person who does not have adequate housing in Canada. It is basically a slap in the face to the 250,000 people in Quebec alone who are in dire need of housing.
Then there is climate change. The government is sending billions of dollars to billionaires. It is appalling. It is utterly outrageous. That is what these geniuses came up with when they sat down to talk about taxes and dream up measures.
I am currently touring Quebec to talk about the housing crisis. In Trois‑Rivières, a woman who has been the victim of domestic violence is sleeping in a car with her two children. The budget does nothing for her. There is no mention of her in the budget. In Longueuil, 17 people are living in a three-bedroom apartment. There is no mention of those 17 people in the budget. The government is not addressing this problem.
Here is what we are talking about. This measure would not only eliminate paperwork and red tape, but it would also save money. It would help the less fortunate.
Health is another file with urgent needs. Quebec asked for $6 billion. How much did it get? I am tired of talking about health transfers, but I do not know how else to communicate. Maybe we could sing about it. My colleague from Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix could sing about it. I could get up on the desk and do a little dance to convey how inadequate the health transfers are. People are dying in Quebec's emergency rooms.
Quebec asked for $6 billion. How much did it get? Did it get $4.5 billion, $3.2 billion or $2.8 billion? No. It did not even get $1 billion. The government is not doing anything to help fix the problem. There is no support.
There are all kinds of good reasons to tackle this problem. Things are dire. It is a surreal issue. We must fix this. This is an issue that is unique to Quebec. I will state right away that it is true that Quebec wants more powers. We do not want just a single tax return, we want all the powers. We want Quebec's independence.
1477 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, today, the Bloc Québécois is defending a bill that all Quebeckers have been waiting for. I think I am right in saying that. We have examples. Some say that the single tax return is a separatist thing, that separatists are secretly gathering power, little by little, and that they need to be stopped. Unfortunately for the people saying these things, such is not the case.
On May 15, 2018, I moved a motion in the Quebec National Assembly that was unanimously adopted. Sitting opposite me was Philippe Couillard, who supported my motion. I think we can all agree that he is about as much of a separatist as I am a Cirque du Soleil contortionist, yet even he voted in favour of the motion.
He did it because it makes sense. It is the right thing to do. It is the smart thing to do. It is efficient and will save us money. For all of these reasons, 75% of Quebeckers are saying that they want a single tax return because they are tired of filing two. Quebeckers also only want one tax collector, and they want it to be Quebec because we trust the Government of Quebec. All of the Quebec statistics show that the Government of Quebec is the best representative of Quebeckers. I am not the one saying that. It is Quebeckers. The question is simple. What do we do with that information? Will the government listen to Quebeckers, yes or no?
The time and money savings are obvious. The Research Institute on Self-Determination of Peoples and National Independence has done scientific research on this. Research exists. Research has been done on this specific issue, not on something that may be close to the issue. We are talking about $425 million in ongoing savings. That is nothing to sneeze at, at a time when governments keep running deficits.
We do not have any money to waste, and now we have an opportunity to save $425 million. Why pass it up? That is the question.
Some will say they are afraid to put these good people out of a job. That would be too bad, because they are skilled and we would hate to see them lose their jobs. We like them. They are our public servants. Of course they are skilled. They are so skilled that we can find a use for them elsewhere in the federal public service.
We are talking about 3,000 people who do the same task that someone else is already doing. The NDP says that we must not put people out of work. After the orange tax comes the orange calculator, but maybe it is too hard to press the buttons. These are 3,000 jobs we are paying for anyway, for work that others are already doing. Ever heard of efficiency? There must not be very many business leaders in the NDP.
I think everyone can understand something so basic. We know the Liberals are against it, because anything that gives Quebec more power makes them nervous. They get antsy. It no longer makes any sense. They do not like it. I do not know why, but they do not like giving powers to Quebec. They are saying that we are already paying for 3,000 jobs, so is there enough room in the public service?
Passport offices are understaffed. People have to line up to get their passports like we used to line up for concert tickets. Do passport offices not need staff? Do immigration offices not need staff?
The immigration department is so understaffed that files are being assigned to people who have not worked there in 15 years. At the Canada Revenue Agency, files are on hold. Does it not need staff? Employment insurance must not need people either, nor the rest of the public service, because the government is giving more than $1 billion to McKinsey and its ilk for subcontracting. Are the Liberals going to tell me that no one can use 3,000 highly competent and skilled workers? Do I look that gullible?
That is the reality. Quebeckers, and consequently Canadians, have an opportunity to make their public service more efficient. The bill's opponents are engaging in idle partisanship but cannot produce a single argument against the incontrovertible logic of the single tax return. I have never heard anything in the House to make anyone have doubts about passing a bill that would be good for the economy and the intelligent management of the public service.
765 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
