44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 7, 2024 10:00AM
- May/7/24 10:16:58 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP sent a letter inviting the Quebec Minister of Health and Vincent Marissal, a Québec solidaire member, to explain the benefits of pharmacare.
I am not sure if the leader of the NDP is aware, but we already have pharmacare in Quebec. Furthermore, I know that the riding office of my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie is in the same building as the Québec solidaire member for Gouin.
Could he not have spoken with him so they could explain to the leader of the NDP that Quebec already has pharmacare?
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:22:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am certainly not ashamed to say that I think the member will be sharing her time with me.
21 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there is nothing new in Bill C-69. It is merely an extension of the budget, so it continues to indulge the oil and gas sector and maintains this government's predatory federalism without any consideration for Quebec.
My colleague from Manicouagan said earlier that we will be voting against the budget. I want to emphasize that. We will be voting against Bill C-69 because the atmosphere in the House has been going downhill for some time. The Conservatives are trying to lump us in with the Liberals in a very populist way. I saw it again this morning on social media, where the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles tried to associate us and the Liberals with pedophiles, telling people to call our constituency offices. I find this shocking, coming from a party that talks so much about law and order. Instead, we should be talking about law and order and bullying. That is the Conservative agenda, but we will let them play that game. My leader often says that no one should ever wrestle with a pig because they will both get dirty and the pig likes it. We will not be doing that.
I was talking about indulging the oil industry. There is nothing new here. With Bill C-69, Canada is behaving like a unitary state and confirming its role as an oil monarchy.
Before moving on to the truly problematic part, which is to say the power grab that is the consumer-driven banking act, I would simply like to point out that on more than one occasion, the Prime Minister has said that people do not care about jurisdictions. However, a Leger survey shows that 84% of Quebeckers want Ottawa to respect jurisdictions. Accordingly, the federal government is missing a wonderful opportunity to act with the banking act.
This legislation will federalize the entire financial sector and strip Quebec of its powers in this area. Rather than adopting a collaborative approach in Bill C-69, Ottawa wants to unilaterally lay down the rules that apply to banking services, an area of shared jurisdiction. As is the Liberal government's wont, it will give the big financial institutions in Toronto a significant leg up on their counterparts in Quebec, such as the caisse populaire. Under the proposal, the provinces will be excluded from consumer protection or privacy protection once the financial institutions interact with their clients through a technological platform.
To impose this framework, the federal government will need to act in three stages. It must determine the standard, task a federal agency with maintaining a registry of institutions conforming to this standard and designate a federal agency to serve as regulator, which involves verifying the compliance of the institutions on the registry. It is on this third point that there is a major issue jurisdictional interference. By acting in this manner, the federal government is interfering directly with civil law by regulating institutions coming under Quebec jurisdiction and by subjecting them to federal legislation.
This is evidence of what we have been seeing for a while now, namely the government's desire to behave like a unitary state, as though the federation did not exist, as though Quebec did not have its own powers. This is what we have seen with pharmacare. This is what we have seen with dental insurance. This is what we have seen with multiple instances of interference in Quebec's and the provinces' jurisdiction. It is Groundhog Day for interference.
The same is true of energy. I said right from the get-go that Canada is confirming its status as an oil monarchy. It is also confirming its very cozy relationship with the oil and gas sector. What do we see in Bill C‑69? We see yet another subsidy for the oil companies in the form of the infamous investment tax credit for so-called clean hydrogen.
As we know, the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources is no longer interested in talking about hydrogen colours. Previously, there was green hydrogen, made from hydroelectricity, grey hydrogen, made from gas, and another one between the two, called blue hydrogen. The latter is made from gas, but it comes with carbon capture and storage strategies that are as yet unproven. The Minister of Energy and Natural Resources prefers not to talk in these terms anymore.
In Bill C-69, we again see a tailor-made program that would allot tax credits between 15% and 40% for hydrogen production. It is no secret that this is mainly for the gas sector. I went to Berlin with the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and we took part in a meeting with Siemens, a major corporation that told us that the idea of producing green hydrogen from gas was destined to fail. The Siemens people said that the state would need to take on risk, the risk of higher prices. As we are seeing with Bill C‑69, the state will have to heavily subsidize the rollout of gas-produced hydrogen. There is also, however, a technological risk, according to Siemens, because the technology needed for this venture is not ready, and it will again take a massive infusion of public money to get there—
880 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, thank you.
I was saying that the tax credit for green hydrogen is a pipe dream, according to a number of analysts who specialize in this area. Members may recall that the government announced its intention to end fossil fuel subsidies in 2023, yet in 2023 alone, it gave $18 billion to the oil and gas sector. The government also said that a definition of inefficient subsidies was forthcoming, but to my knowledge, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change is still unable to provide us with this definition.
Over the past four years, as we know all too well, $65 billion of our money, and a significant chunk of the money that comes from Quebec, has been given to the greedy fossil fuel industry. Moreover, if we extrapolate the cost of the measures contained in this budget up to 2035, this greedy industry will end up with a cool $83 billion.
I am a member of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, which met yesterday to study the appropriations. We saw almost nothing for one of Quebec's most promising sectors, the forestry sector. We have been hit hard by forest fires in recent years, but there was almost nothing to support small forestry businesses that will have to deal with situations that are, all in all, quite disruptive.
In closing, I would be remiss if I failed to mention clean electricity and the fact that the federal government wants to meddle in Hydro-Québec's rates. Ottawa is trying to meddle in Hydro-Québec's rates by saying that if it wants the 15% tax credit, it will have to pass this money on in the form of a rate cut, when we know full well that the rates are set by a board in Quebec and that this is therefore completely out of the question. Moreover, Ottawa says that a certain proportion of the people working on Hydro-Québec projects will have to be Red Seal certified tradespeople.
That means that if Hydro-Québec wants the tax credit, it will have to let the federal government select the employees needed to build Hydro-Québec's new infrastructure. This is completely ridiculous, and I do not see why Hydro-Québec should put up with these requirements.
For all these reasons, we will be voting against Bill C-69, and I hope it is clear to my Conservative friends that the Bloc Québécois is not in a marriage of convenience with the Liberals. Practically no one in Quebec is buying this narrative, as far as I can tell. Maybe they should pipe down and stop spinning this line.
460 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:47:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I did not fully understand my colleague's question. I apologize.
I can simply say that Hydro‑Québec has never received support from the federal government to pay for its facilities, unlike the oil and gas companies who, for the past 25 years, have benefited from generous tax credits and completely unbridled support from the federal government.
As I said in my speech, these large oil and gas corporations are possibly the greediest players in Quebec society. In addition to polluting our lives and tarnishing our record on greenhouse gas emissions, they are making record profits while we continue to pay for them. This should concern my colleague far more than Hydro‑Québec.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:49:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague is completely right and he answered his own question.
How can anyone ignore the wishes expressed by the Quebec National Assembly concerning pharmacare?
I heard my colleagues in the NDP say that the unions were on board. I would like to point out to my NDP colleagues that many unions belong to OUI Québec, a sovereignty group. I do not know whether my colleagues are willing to respect the unions' wishes on that issue and support Quebec independence.
I would be glad to hear an answer on this subject.
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:50:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do not know what my colleague is referring to, but there is one thing we will never support, and that is Conservative common sense. We will never support populism and overly simplistic thinking.
What I am seeing on social media right now is certain people posting half-truths in the hope that the staff at our riding offices will be flooded with calls from all sorts of cuckoo conspiracy theorists.
In my view, the Conservative Party is making this atmosphere of unbridled polarization even worse. We will never support that. That is for sure.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 12:52:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, basically, it is very simple.
What I can tell the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles is that, if people in my riding office receive any threats, I will hold him personally responsible.
36 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/7/24 4:49:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to know that Quebeckers are suffering because of with the costly Conservative-Liberal coalition that panders to the Canadian oil monarchy.
Some $47 million is being spent on the Governor General every year. What do the Conservatives do? They sing God Save the King. By 2035, it is going to cost us a collective $83 billion to prop up the greedy oil industry. That cost is $18 billion for 2023 alone. In the last four years, $65 billion has gone to rich oil and gas tycoons. The Conservatives are being taken for fools. They applaud. They want more.
It is pretty simple: What is costing the people of Quebec so dearly is voting Conservative.
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
