44th Parl. 1st Sess.
January 30, 2024 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, my colleague talked a lot about the economy in his speech.
I think he will agree with me that small and medium-sized businesses are a key component of the Quebec and Canadian economies, and that they are extremely important. The pandemic has been hard on them. The government offered them a loan, which was coupled with a subsidy if they were able to repay the loan. It was called the Canada emergency business account, or CEBA. The repayment date was a few days ago, in early January.
I have been talking to entrepreneurs back home. Some of them are wondering whether they should close their businesses because they have not been able to reach a payment agreement with the government. The post-pandemic economic recovery we had hoped for has not materialized. In my mind, it is logical to think that the government would help these people, who contribute to the Canadian economy.
I would like to hear more from the member. Does he think this would have been a good measure for entrepreneurs, who are also facing the rising cost of living?
186 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, every Conservative MP is claiming that their party will be forming the next government. Sooner or later, they are going to have to take a position and offer up some clear proposals.
Considering all the shouting back and forth lately, the Bloc Québécois is pretty much only the adult in the room. We therefore intend to keep our feet on the ground.
The Government of Quebec is asking the Liberal government for $470 million to pay the costs associated with taking in asylum seekers. The Government of Quebec requested this $470 million quite a while ago now. No one on the Conservative side has told me what they would do in the Liberals' place.
If Conservative MPs are a government-in-waiting, they should have an opinion on the matter. What is it? Would they give the Government of Quebec $470 million to cover this cost?
I want to know what they would do, because, so far, they have not put any proposals on the table. All they do is engage in partisan attacks.
183 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/30/24 12:17:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to join my voice to that of my colleagues who have thanked our colleague from LaSalle—Émard—Verdun for his exceptional work in the House of Commons since he arrived eight years ago. We were both elected to the House at the same time, in 2015.
At the time, I thought I would be the one appointed minister of justice. Unfortunately, that did not happen. I engaged many times with the ministers of justice who followed. I too must say that the member from LaSalle—Émard—Verdun did excellent work as minister of justice. Of course, we did not always agree.
There was some talk about dreams earlier. I tried to convince the member that Canada would be much happier with a respectful neighbour, a wonderful, independent Quebec that would work with him on many fronts, but the member from LaSalle—Émard—Verdun never conceded on that point—and he certainly did not agree with me when I spoke to him about judicial appointments that I felt were overdue. These were not disputes, just minor differences of opinion.
What struck me most about the member for LaSalle—Émard—Verdun is that his respectfulness never faltered, despite any differences of opinion we may have had. His words were always measured and kind. The member for LaSalle—Émard—Verdun is someone I consider a “gentleman”; there are a few of them here. I truly enjoyed my discussions with him about all aspects of our work, whether about matters we agreed on—and there were many—or the few issues where our opinions diverged.
I can only congratulate the Fasken law firm for persuading the member for LaSalle—Émard—Verdun to join them. It is a distinguished firm.
I was listening to my colleague just now who asked why the Prime Minister had not appointed him Minister of Justice sooner. Personally, I wonder why the Prime Minister was unable to hold on to him.
349 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I do not find it embarrassing at all. Since 2015, we have had a national government that has recognized it has a tangible role to play in housing. That role has continued to grow under this administration to the degree in which we are seeing historic funding and programming to support housing.
However, it is not just the federal government. The provinces also play a critical role, and the Bloc needs to recognize that even the Province of Quebec has non-profit housing supported by federal dollars, but there are also many other things that it and other jurisdictions, whether municipalities, provinces, territories or indigenous communities, can do. It takes a team approach, not just the federal government throwing a whole lot of money at it. That means there has to be a strategy and ongoing discussions, and homes are getting done. A great example of that is getting rid of the GST for purpose-built rentals. We have seen some provinces adopt that very same policy at the provincial level to ensure more purpose-built rentals will be built.
182 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Mirabel, whose remarks are always intelligent, relevant and even amusing, although I would not want to put any pressure on him for his 10-minute speech.
I read Bill C‑59 and looked in vain for any substance. I looked for any tangible measures that would help Quebec and Canada to deal with the problems we are facing right now, but I could not find anything. In fact, I am rather discouraged because Canada is currently facing various crises.
There is the language crisis in Quebec. We have often mentioned the fact that the French language is in the process of disappearing. There is only one solution to this problem, and it is an independent Quebec. We will get there. We think that the stars are aligned for the election of a separatist government in Quebec within three years. That means there could be a referendum within five years. We could be saying “so long, pals”. We will not be here anymore. Most members of the House will be happy not to have the Bloc Québécois underfoot anymore. They find us annoying. They wonder what the Bloc members want. They complain that we do not even want to form government, that we just want to defend the interests of Quebeckers, that we are revolutionaries, that we are so annoying, that we are nothing but trouble. If all goes well, in five or six years' time, we will not be around anymore to fix the language crisis.
Then there is the climate crisis. We saw all the forest fires and floods last summer, yet Bill C-59 grants $30 billion in direct and indirect assistance to the oil industry. Why are my Conservative friends always complaining? I would like to remind my friends that, in 2022, the five largest oil companies collectively made $200 billion in profits. Now the government is giving them $30 billion for carbon sequestration, despite the fact that no one can say whether that technology really works. It is investing $30 billion in that.
There is the housing crisis as well, obviously. How can we not mention that? Canada needs to build 3.5 million housing units by 2030. That is a colossal project. One would think that a bill like Bill C‑59 would have some meaningful measures. One would think the government would have come up with a plan to address this crisis. Too bad there is no plan. All the government is going to do is change the name of the department. It is just a propaganda operation. The government is just going to change the name of the department. That is the only thing Bill C-59 has to offer.
I toured Quebec over the last few months. I wanted to see what was happening on the ground. The figures that CMHC has given us on vacancy rates are insane. We know that homelessness in Quebec has doubled since 2018. My colleague was talking about spending earlier. He said that this government has spent more on housing since 2015 than any other previous government. If that is true, then why did homelessness in Quebec double over the same period? I do not think this spending has worked. Quebec needs to build 200,000 housing units a year. Do my colleagues know how many were built last year? Only 39,000 were built, and there was a 7% reduction in housing starts across Canada.
Let us be serious. If the Liberals' strategy were working, we would know. Someone would have said so at some point. Someone would have said, “Wow! Well done!” We are not the only ones criticizing the government on this point. There are organizations, people in the field working with struggling Canadians, and they see it. The only thing I heard on my tour of Quebec was that the $82‑billion federal strategy is not working. In life, it is important to have the humility to say that we tried something and failed. Now we need to use that money differently. We need to invest it in social housing and truly affordable housing. Why are we still spending millions of dollars to build apartments in Montreal that cost $2,000 a month?
No one can afford to rent the units offered under the national housing strategy right now. We just need to stop and think about what we do next.
I also learned something else. The government is not investing enough, but that is not all. Earlier, I spoke about the 10,000 people experiencing homelessness. There is a federal program called Reaching Home that assists organizations and people experiencing homelessness. Not content with knowing that we are getting nowhere and that people all over Quebec will die this winter and are already dying because the federal government has underinvested in housing for the past 30 years, the government is going to reduce that program's budget by 3%. Three per cent may not seem like much, but how can the government even think of doing such a thing at a time when homelessness in Quebec has doubled? Half of these people are in Montreal.
One thing struck me during my tour of Quebec. We used to see homeless people in Quebec City, Montreal and major Canadian cities like Toronto and Vancouver. My colleague was saying earlier how dire the situation is in Edmonton. Right now, however, we are seeing something we have never seen before: tent cities in small towns across Quebec.
I visited the Lower St. Lawrence, where cities have sprung up in places they have never been seen before. There are homeless people on street corners and living in tent cities next to the town hall. There are seniors sleeping in tents. How can we allow such a thing to happen? There are tent cities in Saint‑Jérôme and Longueuil as well. Granby has decided to do something about the situation and set up a shelter. How can something like this be allowed to happen in a G7 country? How can we institutionalize tent cities and allow people to sleep there in wintertime when it is -30 degrees out?
I do not know how that can be allowed. I feel like we are going in the wrong direction. I feel like we have been saying that for years. Naively, I always believed that, in a democracy, people work together to find solutions. Naively, I believed that if the government realized something was not working, it would be willing to try a better solution suggested by someone else. I thought a government was supposed to work for people in need, not pose for photo ops. Ultimately, we have been talking about this for four years. I am not the only one. Many people in the House are concerned about housing and homelessness. Unfortunately, the system is stuck.
There is one basic issue to consider when it comes to homelessness. Obviously, we have to prevent people from freezing to death, but what is the ultimate problem? In the past, there used to be a continuum of services for people experiencing homelessness. Quebec, for one, understood that. There were 24-7 emergency shelters where people could sleep and eat a good meal. There were also shelters where people could stay for up to 90 days, to take the time to reintegrate into society, overcome drug addiction, rejoin the workforce and get back in touch with family. There used to be 90-day shelters. It worked because, at the end of the 90 days, people had access to social housing. They could return to work and get their life back on track. Today, in Quebec, these resources are overwhelmed. Since there is no social housing anymore, people end up staying in the shelters for longer, anywhere from six to nine months, so no new people can get in. We have work to do on a lot of fronts, but we especially need to build housing units.
I have criticized the national housing strategy a lot, and we will continue to do so. I am writing a report on my tour of Quebec, which I will present around February or March. We will make very specific recommendations. All I hope is that someone across the aisle will hear us. During my tour, I was often asked why I, a member of the opposition, was touring Quebec. I was asked why the minister himself was not sitting down with people in Saguenay, Saint‑Jérôme, Rouyn‑Noranda and Gaspé. People wanted to know why the minister and the government were not coming to see how difficult things are on the ground. Instead, it was I, a member of the opposition, who went. My colleagues can be sure that the findings from my report will help us make progress on this issue.
We have solutions that we are going to put forward.
1525 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for that very fiery and timely speech. I always enjoy his contributions to the House.
I know he supported Bill C‑13, a piece of legislation of great importance to Canada and Quebec. It was the first time a government recognized the decline of French in Canada. He also knows that a strong Quebec makes for a strong Canada. It goes both ways. A strong Canada makes for a strong Quebec. I hope Quebec will always be part of our wonderful Canadian family.
Before 2015, the government invested $2.2 billion in French in Canada. That amount is now $4.1 billion. It is almost twice as much. My colleague must be impressed by that. Maybe he should talk about the importance of French in Canada as a whole.
I would like him to comment on that.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, whom I like very much. Indeed, French is in jeopardy across Canada. It is rather sad to see how tough this has become. Maybe $4 billion will help, but I would like to throw a question back to my colleague.
How is it that the government is going to invest $700 million over the next five years for anglophone communities in Quebec? If there is a community that is not in jeopardy, it is the anglophone community, not only in Quebec, but across Canada and North America.
Why spend $700 million to save a community that is not at risk and never will be?
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his passion for fighting homelessness, for standing up for people and for getting housing that is not just for the super rich, but social housing and truly affordable housing. He is very familiar with the file. It is always interesting to hear him talk about it.
In Canada, we do not have a lot of social or co-op housing. It makes up roughly 3% to 4% of the entire housing stock. In Finland, it is 10%. In Denmark, it is 20%. I think there are examples we can use.
I would like my colleague to talk about Conservative Party leader's position. It seems that his solution to the housing problem is to insult the mayors in Quebec. I would like to know what the member thinks about the Conservative leader's attitude and his lack of real solutions.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague. I did not mention it in my speech, but I too, like many Quebeckers, was truly insulted by the Conservative leader's remarks. Together, Montreal and Quebec City make up roughly half of Quebec's population. The mayor of Montreal and the mayor of Quebec City are therefore two elected representatives of half of Quebec. As a solution, or as an approach to these elected officials, the Leader of the Opposition of this country insults them. He says they are incompetent.
How can anyone think that this man, once in power, would have any solutions? At some point, he will have to sit down with decision-makers from other levels of government to find solutions to this crisis. I do not see how he could possibly find any solutions.
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to wish you a happy new year. I know it is a little late, but people say that it is like RRSPs: We have the first 60 days of the year to offer our best wishes. I wish all my colleagues a very happy new year.
I find it fascinating that we are starting this new session with a debate on the economic statement. It is curious, because during the holidays, the Conservative leader was very interested in budget issues; he spoke of them often. Since we are starting off nice and slow and we seem to have a pretty good atmosphere, I thought I would tell a joke. What is the difference between Quebeckers and the leader of the official opposition? Well, they are both in the wrong country. At some point, we Quebeckers will need to get our independence. The Conservative leader is living in a conspiracy theory. We heard him over the break. The glasses have come off. All he needs now is the orange tan and the blonde hair.
The dictionary says that a conspiracy is someone who thinks there is a secret agreement against someone or something. The Conservative leader toured Quebec saying that the Bloc Québécois supports 100% of the Liberals' economic policies. The Conservative leader's tone, the unpleasant, disrespectful tone he had over the holidays, which he has here in the House, and his gratuitous attacks on everyone that have no basis in fact, clearly show us that the Conservatives' best strategy is to say that offence is the best defence. Why? There is one party in the House that supports each and every Liberal policy. I am not talking about the NDP, whose members are Liberals by definition. I am talking about the Conservatives. It is even worse for Quebec Conservatives.
A Conservative member from Quebec is basically just a Liberal. Both parties have a fetish for oil. Some people have a foot fetish, while others, like the Conservatives and the Liberals, have an oil fetish. Bill C‑59 gives oil companies $18 billion in subsidies, or what the Liberals are referring to as tax credits and clean investments. How do they define “clean”? For them, clean means building nuclear reactors paid for with Quebeckers' tax dollars—both the Liberals and the Conservatives are compulsive taxers—so that we stop cleaning up the oil sands with gas and so that we can export gas. I hope that the Conservatives and Liberals get cleaner than that when they shower. It is all the same.
The carbon tax does not apply in Quebec. They sounded so foolish that they stopped saying it. There is a reason why they are against the carbon tax in the other provinces. If there is no more carbon tax, then emissions will rise, and they will be able to impose more taxes on Quebeckers and give more subsidies to oil companies with Quebeckers' tax dollars. Those are their equalization payments. The Quebec Conservatives, like the Liberals, are people who live only for western Canada and dirty oil.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the OECD, has said that the storage tax credit is an illusion. It has no role to play in any structured solution to global warming. Bill C‑59 provides $12.5 billion in carbon storage investments. Who is in agreement about these subsidies? The Liberals and the Conservatives are. The Conservatives have supported the Liberals' economic policies at every turn.
That is interference in Quebec's affairs. It is funny, though. Trampling all over Quebec, meddling in its affairs and engaging in interference are practically Liberal hallmarks. The Liberals have a lot of experience in this regard and, as the bill shows, unique expertise too. They tell us that they are going to put together a department of municipal affairs, an undertaking that has failed before. To listen to the Liberals, it would almost seem that no stop sign or speed bump could possibly be installed in any residential neighbourhood without the federal government's help. Complicating existing structures, picking more fights and adding more phases to negotiations, only to build no housing and make no progress, is classic Liberal behaviour. As the member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert aptly said, it is what Liberals do.
We thought the Conservatives were different, but no. Unfortunately, the Leader of the Opposition may have had a little too much time on his hands during the holidays. What did he do? He managed to outdo the Liberals when it comes to meddling. He went to Longueuil, Montreal and Quebec City to insult the mayors and demonstrate his total lack of knowledge of how the system works. Quebec municipalities receive their funding from Quebec City and the transfers go to Quebec City. This king of meddling, the Conservative king of meddling, is the guy who, when he was a minister, built nothing but housing slabs—no deliverables, no construction. The Leader of the Opposition could not even recognize a two-by-four in a hardware store. Who supports the Liberals' economic policies? The Conservatives do.
Here is something surprising. When half of Quebec was being insulted during the holiday season, where were the Quebec Conservatives? Were they off buying turkeys by the dozen and attending tons of New Year's Eve parties? They were absolutely nowhere to be seen.
Let us move on to the Liberal policy on asylum seekers. Ottawa owes Quebec $470 million. Why is that? Quebec welcomed 65,000 asylum seekers in 2023, or 45% of all asylum seekers, even though we represent only 22% of the Canadian population. We welcome them with open arms, as best we can, with all the resources at our disposal. When Quebec asks to be compensated for its contribution, the Liberals reply that they are not an ATM, as if Quebeckers do not pay taxes to Ottawa.
How many Conservatives from Quebec rose to defend the Premier of Quebec when he made this request? Not a single one, because the Quebec Conservatives are red from head to toe. They could almost run for the NDP; there would be no difference.
That is what is happening in the House. Only one party is worthy of Quebeckers' trust. We see that on the ground; we feel it. Only one party is consistent, only one party stays true, only one party does not spend its time flip-flopping, sloganeering and campaigning two years ahead of an election: the Bloc Québécois.
The Bloc Québécois is the only party that will always stand up for seniors and demand an OAS raise for everyone over 65 so as to put an end to the two classes of seniors the Liberals created.
Only one party is demanding an end to fossil fuel subsidies. Not even the NDP is calling for that; only the Bloc Québécois is.
Only one party called for the CEBA repayment deadline to be extended to keep small and medium-sized businesses afloat. That was us. Even the Conservatives did not join our efforts to save businesses and innovators, the people who make up the industrial and commercial fabric of our cities, our towns and our regions.
Only one party is calling for a media fund. The Conservatives want to shut down the media, and the Liberals are staying mum.
Only one party is calling for an emergency homelessness fund. The only thing the Conservatives want to do about homelessness is speed up global warming so that the winters are not so hard on the homeless. Only one party is doing that. As the member for Longueuil—Saint‑Hubert says, only one party is calling for an affordable housing acquisition fund for our non-profit organizations in Quebec.
Bearing all that in mind, who really supports the Liberals' economic policies in the House? The Conservative members from Quebec do. Quebeckers will remember that.
Quebeckers can see that and they are smart. We appeal to Quebeckers' intelligence, and that is to our credit. We will continue to do so. We will continue to be trustworthy. When the election comes, Quebeckers will understand that we have been steadfast and consistent, and that we have worked for them.
Should a day come when Quebeckers grow tired of making agonizing choices about which bad party they should vote into power in Ottawa, there is a solution: We can vote for independence, pack up and leave, and let the other provinces and territories resolve their issues as a family.
1448 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I really enjoyed my colleague's speech, especially when we consider the expression “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. He spent most of his speech making completely valid attacks against the Conservatives. Just before I ask my question, since we are joking around here, I want to say “hello, bonjour” to you, Mr. Speaker, and wish you a happy new year. I am saying that because we are all Quebeckers and we, on this side of the House, also speak for Quebeckers.
I wanted to point out a few contradictions. When he was the environment minister for the Parti Québécois government, the leader of the Bloc Québécois approved oil exploration off Anticosti Island. He also approved other things that I believe go against the principles that the Bloc Québécois is advocating for today.
Why did the members of the Bloc Québécois vote against our budget? By so doing, they voted against the investments in housing that we made for Quebec.
185 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat surprised that the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle is happy to hear me say that the Conservatives are as bad as the Liberals. Apparently, they take compliments any way they can.
I did my Ph.D. in Ontario. I am bilingual. In Quebec, we greet people in French. I think that is one of our selling points, something that makes us valuable. I understand that the member is very comfortable with the fact that her government will be pouring $800 million of public money, including Quebeckers' money, into English-speaking organizations to defend English in Quebec over the next few years. She may have political reasons for doing so. I think it is appalling.
I will conclude by saying that I am very proud that Quebec's CO2 emissions trading system was implemented by our leader when he was the environment minister, and I think history will remember that.
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
[Member spoke in Inuktitut ]
[English]
Mr. Speaker, what I just said in Inuktitut is that I am always so happy to rise and speak in Inuktitut in the House.
As we all know, most MPs here are settlers or are ancestors of settlers, Quebec included. I wonder if the member has, or if anyone in his party has, consulted with the indigenous peoples in Quebec, the Cree and the Innu, who most likely would wish to stay in Canada as opposed to what the member shared in his intervention.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think that the member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert did a good job earlier explaining what might happen if there were a referendum. If one is called, there will be a national conversation in Quebec. Thank goodness it will be far away from this Parliament.
48 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/30/24 2:03:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it came as a shock to everyone in the riding of Trois‑Rivières when my friend, Guy Rousseau, executive director of the Société Saint‑Jean‑Baptiste de la Mauricie, announced his retirement.
Guy Rousseau has been a fixture in Trois‑Rivières for 40 years. He served the Conseil central de Trois‑Rivières for a decade, first as a union representative, then as president. He was on the front lines of every battle. It was quite a journey for a liberation theologian.
Guy devoted all of his skill and energy to promoting Quebec culture and the French language. Nary a borrowed word or anglicism was tolerated in his presence, nor in his absence, for that matter.
In 2015, Guy was awarded the Rosaire-Morin prize for individuals whose writings and actions have made a significant contribution to enhancing Quebec's national conscience and championing Quebec's interests.
Guy Rousseau has organized national holiday celebrations in Mauricie and is a tireless advocate for Quebec independence. He leaves a lasting legacy in Trois‑Rivières.
On behalf of myself and of everyone in Trois‑Rivières, I thank him for his years of service to the community.
214 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, obviously, as an anglophone and member from Ontario, I cannot speak for the Bloc Québécois, but I know that Quebec, the Quebec nation, understands the importance of the environment and the importance of industrial investments in the green economy.
We are proud to do that. We are proud to do that with the support of all members who understand the importance of Canada's industrial economy.
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/30/24 2:25:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister said that “immigration levels are based on our capacity to welcome and integrate newcomers.” Unfortunately, that is entirely untrue.
As early as 2022, his public service warned him that if he raised his immigration targets, he would worsen the housing crisis and other things. The Prime Minister went ahead and did it anyway. Now he has to fix a situation caused by his poor judgment.
On November 1, the Prime Minister promised to review his immigration targets as early as 2024 on the basis of intake capacity and after speaking with Quebec.
Will he keep his word?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/30/24 2:26:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we can welcome newcomers and build housing at the same time. That is why we negotiated a $1.8-billion contribution agreement with la belle province to build 23,000 housing units and 8,000 affordable housing units.
We are going to continue to work with our partners in Quebec to welcome newcomers who contribute essential skills to our economy and build houses at the same time.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/30/24 2:27:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member across the way seems to forget that we have a unique agreement with Quebec, the Canada-Quebec accord, which transfers more than $700 million a year to Quebec precisely to manage its levels.
Quebec is almost exclusively responsible for choosing who comes to Quebec. We will work with Quebec to ensure that this is consistent with its integration capacity.
I have a question for the member across the way. He seems to want to reduce immigration. Where would he like to make these cuts?
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/30/24 2:39:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, since 2021, the federal government has been withholding the money it owes Quebec for taking in asylum seekers. It has been so long that the bill has reached $470 million.
Yesterday, at last, the government announced in the newspapers that there would be some good news today. It is 2:40 p.m., and there is still nothing. Yesterday, in his first question of 2024, the minister talked about playing politics at the expense of immigrants. Do they know what it means to play politics at the expense of immigrants? It means withholding for years the money needed to provide them with services.
Where is the money?
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
