44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 4, 2023 02:00PM
- Oct/4/23 2:11:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, since we are celebrating Latin American Heritage Month this month, I want to acknowledge the contributions that several members of Longueuil's Latin American community have made in vital sectors for our region.
I am talking about people like Natalia Mejia, the president of Couture Porte-Bonheur, a manufacturer that is participating in the development of Quebec's textile industry by helping Quebec creators make their designs a reality.
I am also talking about Carolina Campos, a former constituency assistant, who has worked hard to promote integration and cultural sharing between Latin American and Quebec communities.
Then, there is Alvaro Cueto, Saint‑Hubert borough president. He has been involved in Longueuil's community and civic life for many years through the organization of sporting events and citizen initiatives.
Today, I am proud to rise in the House to pay tribute to these individuals and to all members of the Latin American community in my riding whose presence and involvement make a real difference for everyone in Longueuil.
173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 2:21:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are at the end of their rope. Inflation is at an all-time high, and people are struggling to make ends meet.
In my riding, food bank visits have increased by 40% to 50%. People are suffering. Quebeckers are having to find a second job to get by. Meanwhile, what does the government decide to do? It adds a carbon tax that increases everyone's cost of living. What is more, it has the Bloc's support.
Quebeckers are not buying it. The Bloc Québécois voted against repealing this tax on June 5 and claims it does not apply in Quebec. That is not true. Not only is the Bloc placing an additional burden on Quebeckers, but it also wants to add to it. The Bloc Québécois has stated loud and clear that it wants to drastically increase the carbon tax.
One thing is clear: Voting for the Bloc Québécois is costly. Soon enough, Bloc members will have the chance to vote for our motion to repeal the tax. It remains to be seen whether they will listen to their Liberal partners or to Quebeckers.
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 2:35:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, last week, Statistics Canada revealed that there are nearly 500,000 non-permanent residents in Quebec, an increase of more than 150,000 over last year.
Whether they are permanent or temporary residents, newcomers have the same needs as everyone else. They need a roof over their heads, they need to work, they need to interact with others and therefore, they need to learn our language. Children need to go to school. If they are sick, they need treatment like everyone else does.
Will the government review its targets to ensure that we can provide all these essential services for newcomers?
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 2:36:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague is well aware, immigration is a jurisdiction shared by the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec. We are working together to bring in people to address the labour shortage and to continue to help spur economic growth, while ensuring that the necessary investments are made to welcome and integrate these immigrants and teach them French.
We will always be there to work responsibly in partnership with the Government of Quebec.
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 2:52:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, a group of 25 doctors from the Montérégie region and the Eastern Townships gave a clear diagnosis: The housing crisis is jeopardizing Quebeckers' health.
The Prime Minister continues to deny Quebec the $900 million allocated for housing construction even as the housing crisis turns into a public health crisis. The guiding principle of medicine is “first, do no harm”.
When will the Prime Minister stop obstructing housing construction and give the $900 million to Quebec?
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 2:52:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, over the past few years, we have always been there to invest with Quebec in housing.
We will continue to do so because the federal government has a role to play to ensure that affordable apartments and homes are built across the country, including in Quebec. I know that the Minister of Housing is currently working in collaboration with his counterpart in Quebec on a plan that works for Quebec, which will allow more housing to be built more quickly.
Housing is the responsibility of every level of government. We encourage them to address this issue urgently and in partnership.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 2:54:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that the Bloc Québécois continues to pick a fight when there is no fight to pick. We are working hand in hand with the Government of Quebec to address this housing crisis and to invest that $900 million, and more, in the province of Quebec in partnership with the Government of Quebec.
The fact that we are working so well with Mr. Legault's government is good news for Quebeckers. Unfortunately, the Bloc Québécois is trying to make mischief and stir up trouble. That is unfortunate for Quebeckers. We will continue to let Quebeckers' principles and concerns guide everything we do.
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 3:01:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am not finished.
In Quebec, 25 doctors made a heartfelt plea: Their patients' health is getting worse because of the housing crisis. After eight years of the current government, the cost of rent has doubled. That is the Liberals' record.
Enough with the “could have, would have, should have”. When will the Prime Minister finally take this crisis seriously?
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 3:02:12 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we have worked hand in hand with the Government of Quebec for years to invest in housing. We are currently working on rolling out our $900-million investment to help with the housing crisis in Quebec.
We know that a lot of people are worried. That is why we are working in partnership with the Government of Quebec and every government across the country, hand in hand with our municipal and provincial partners. That is what we will continue to do.
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 3:16:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, at a time when fighting climate change is a priority, Canadians from coast to coast to coast are calling for concrete action concerning the development of new technology.
Can the Prime Minister tell the House what the government is doing to promote the growth of green industries not only in Canada, but also in Quebec?
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 3:17:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Laval—Les Îles for his question and his excellent work.
It just so happens that last week I had the pleasure of joining Premier Legault and the Minister of Innovation to announce the historic agreement with Northvolt. Our government is working tirelessly to attract investors to Canada so that we can create more jobs and drive economic growth across the country.
With this announcement, we are strengthening Quebec's position in the auto sector for the next 20, 30, 50 years and well beyond. It is the very first electric vehicle battery plant in Quebec. This is excellent news for Quebec and for Quebeckers.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 3:20:40 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the only thing the Prime Minister has is a second carbon tax that will apply to Quebec, with the support of the Bloc Québécois. That party wants to collect Quebeckers' money here in Ottawa with the federal government, while the leader of the Bloc Québécois is still on vacation. Why not burn some jet fuel?
Will the Prime Minister and his friend, the leader of the Bloc Québécois, cancel their travel plans and the carbon tax to protect the environment and Quebeckers' wallets?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to the previous member's speech. I never knew I was part of the government. I want to set the record straight, but I will also go a step further: We are not propping up the Liberals; we are using our leverage and bargaining power to force them to do things they never had the courage to do before.
I am pleased to rise to speak to a subject of tremendous importance to me and to all my colleagues in the NDP caucus. I am referring to the living conditions and quality of life of seniors in Montreal and across Quebec.
I congratulate and thank the member for Shefford for taking the initiative to introduce this bill, which will truly improve the lives of the people we represent and who are finding it very hard to make ends meet at the moment. Seniors are the population segment most affected by the rising cost of living because their incomes are stagnant. When someone's income is fixed or practically fixed and inflation is 7%, 8% or 10%, it shows and it hurts. We hear it a lot in our communities.
Saturday was the International Day of Older Persons. I was lucky enough to take part in a march in my riding of Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie. It was organized by the Comité d'action pour la qualité de vie des aînés de La Petite‑Patrie, a group working to improve local seniors' quality of life, and it ended in Montcalm Park. Afterwards, a number of seniors, mostly women, took to the stage to speak to elected officials from various levels of government about their reality and the fact that they face extremely difficult, impossible choices. They talked about the cost of food, housing, rent, home adaptations, health care, medication and many other things.
Seniors live on a fixed income that does not change, or barely changes, which results in poverty. If they do not have the good fortune of receiving income from a private pension plan and possibly from the defined benefit pension plan that enhances old age security, they are entitled to the guaranteed income supplement if they are poor enough. However, even then, the situation remains extremely difficult.
It is a travesty that a country as rich as ours, a G7 country where the average per capita income is so high, is abandoning these generations of Quebeckers who built modern-day Quebec, the generation of people like Lesage, Lévesque, Parizeau, Bourassa. Today, these people are sometimes stuck in long-term care facilities, in private residences that cost an arm and a leg, where there are no services and they are isolated. As a progressive and a social democrat, this breaks my heart. I do not want to live in a society that looks the other way and allows this to happen.
I want to take this opportunity to speak on behalf of the women who addressed a crowd of hundreds in La Petite‑Patrie on Saturday. I will share with the House their demands, which line up with the bill. There are seven demands and they are not very long.
First, they are calling for real home support, because that can make a big difference in a person's life, especially if they are isolated or have unfortunately lost their spouse.
There is currently more than a two-year wait to receive home care. Seniors want to age in their own homes, with their memories, and they need more help and support to do that. One thing that must be done is to ensure the quality and continuity of care, as well as to increase and protect funding, which currently accounts for an insufficient proportion of the budget envelope.
I see that as a perfectly legitimate, noble and understandable demand.
I would also like to commend the work of Dr. Réjean Hébert, who has spent years tackling the issue of home care, which is obviously related to health transfers in Quebec. We need to think about the priorities we want to set as a society to be able to take care of seniors in their own homes in order to have an impact on their quality of life.
Home care would also help relieve the pressure on hospitals. Why would a senior go to the emergency department when they could stay at home and be cared for by a nurse, social worker or personal support worker and avoid the endless lineups?
The second demand is better access to health care, again on the health theme.
Access to basic health care is still difficult, despite the fact that some services have returned to the [local community service centres]. Unfortunately, spots open up at a snail's pace, which forces seniors to travel outside their own neighbourhoods for simple blood tests. The wait for a new family doctor is very long, and it is unacceptable for a person aged 70 or more to be on a waiting list for several months [and sometimes even several years].
Again, this comes back to funding our public health care system. Access to basic services, tests or examinations can sometimes be very distressing and time-consuming for everyone. It is even more important for our seniors.
The third demand has a more human dimension. It is about being cared for with dignity. Seniors want “a doctor who takes the time to listen to their patients”. They want to be more than just a number. Health care is not a factory. Seniors are calling for the following:
To be treated with respect. Respect for the person's physical integrity. The right to end their days in dignity and respect. Better training for health care workers and first responders on proper treatment and compassion.
Once again, more training is needed. Health care workers also need to take a more humane approach where they are not always running from one patient to another, or one client to another, to use the current terminology.
There are still four more demands. The next has to do with 50,000 new social housing units.
The wait time for social housing is getting longer and longer. As a result, many seniors have to pay exorbitant amounts for rent because they are still waiting for a subsidized apartment. Access to housing should be a right, and Quebec needs to invest in buying or building new social housing units to meet the demand.
Once again, the federal government can collaborate. Today, we are paying the price for the years of disinvestment in social housing and housing co-operatives by the Liberals and the Conservatives. The situation is disastrous for everyone, including seniors.
Another demand is for an increase in old age pensions. The text reads as follows:
Senior women represent the poorest segment of Quebec's population. They should never have to choose between putting food on the table or being able to get to a doctor's appointment.
That is the reality. These are the agonizing choices that many seniors, including women, are facing right now.
This brings me to the heart of the bill before us today. For some ridiculous and absolutely inexplicable reason, the Liberals decided to increase old age security for people aged 75 and over, but they did absolutely nothing for people aged 65 to 74.
We have never seen this kind of discrimination or distinction before. People aged 65 to 74 have the same growing needs, and they are dealing with the same inflation, the same cost of living and the same housing crisis. Why would they have fewer needs than people aged 75 and over? Did the government just want to save money, so they decided that those individuals needed to find part-time work, which is a little harder for those aged 75 and over to do? To me, that is serious.
The Conservatives sought to raise the retirement age to 77, and now the Liberals are kind of playing the same game. They are telling people aged 65 and over that they need to take care of themselves because they have a little more autonomy and that the government will only take care of people aged 75 and over. I think that position is incoherent and really hard on our seniors aged 65 and over, who are suffering as a result.
Lots of people came to talk to me about this on Saturday in La Petite‑Patrie. These individuals were experiencing this injustice and they asked me how I could explain it. I could not explain it. I would like to hear the members of the Liberal party in the House explain it. The NDP feels it is totally unacceptable to create two classes of seniors in our country.
There are lots of things we can do to help seniors. We need a universal public pharmacare program. I said universal and public, not a hybrid system. A lot of people are still falling through the cracks in the Quebec system. This plan is a step in the right direction when the alternative is nothing at all, but that is not what others, including Quebec unions or the Union des consommateurs, are calling for.
Seniors also need access to dental care. I am very proud that the NDP is forcing the Liberal government to make sure that, starting early next year, people 65 and over who earn less than $70,000 a year, which includes the vast majority, will have access to dental care. The dentist will send the bill directly to the federal government. This will improve the health and finances of all our seniors in Quebec.
1627 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 6:42:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, over 1,800 times, the Prime Minister promised in the 2015 election that it would be the last election under a winner-takes-all first-past-the-post system. I probably do not need to bore anyone with the details to know that this promise was not kept. It is obvious that politics got in the way.
Why does that matter? First, it is because promises matter for Canadians across the country to have trust in our democracy, particularly promises as significant as that one. Second, it is because winner-takes-all first-past-the-post systems dramatically distort the results and the interests of Canadians. As just one example, in Ontario's last general election, the current party that now has 100% of the power at Queen's Park only earned around 17% of the popular vote. What a massive distortion that first-past-the-post continually leads to, time and time again. Quebec's most recent election is just another example.
Another reason it matters is that it has been proven, time and again, that first-past-the-post is not appropriate for Canada. In fact, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, when she spoke on this same topic last night and joined in this advocacy as she has for so many years calling for electoral reform, pointed out that eight times, since 1921, this House or various law commissions have studied the issue, found that first-past-the-post does not fit well for us and recommended we do something differently. We are going to continue this advocacy.
Here is what is in the works: Earlier this year I introduced a motion, working with Fair Vote Canada, to call for a citizens' assembly on electoral reform to take the politics out of it and to have regular Canadians come together like a jury to get expert opinion. This would be a randomized group, and it would then make recommendations back to parliamentarians. This approach is supported by 76% of Canadians.
Fair Vote Canada volunteers then went out across the country and met with MPs and spoke to them about the importance of following this intention from Canadians and supporting this motion. We were allowed up to 20 joint seconds in this place on a motion. Thanks to the work of those volunteers, MPs from the Conservative Party, the New Democratic Party and the Liberal Party joint-seconded to fill up that list. In fact, Fair Vote had to create a separate website to show all of the MPs who wanted to be known for their support. There are almost 40 now, including the parliamentary secretary who is with us here this evening.
The Liberal Party itself then had a convention earlier this year where it also endorsed the idea, through the grassroots volunteers of that party. I asked the Prime Minister shortly after, in light of all this, if his opinion has changed. At the time, it had not. His answer was kind of, “my way, or the highway”. Until we had consensus on a winner-take-all ranked ballot, he was not interested in moving ahead at the time.
The good news, though, is that while a vote on the motion I had brought forward would not happen for some time still, the member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith took it upon herself to bring this motion forward. She had drawn a much better number in our lottery system for private members' motions, and there will be a vote on it.
My question for the parliamentary secretary is this: Will there be a change in focus from his party to now support this really important motion?
614 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
