- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $115,195.70
- Government Page
- Jun/15/23 2:56:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and cabinet have never taken responsibility for their many acts committed in bad faith.
For example, the Minister of Public Safety alone has misled the House no less than seven times. He even misled a judge by backdating documents. He should have been fired for that, but he is still here. The Liberals have also never showed empathy or compassion for the victims of Paul Bernardo.
The Prime Minister is in Ottawa. Can he rise today and tell us whether he is going to fire his public safety minister?
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/14/23 3:03:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, CBC is reporting that the Minister of Public Safety's staff found out Paul Bernardo was going to be transferred to a medium-security institution three months before it happened.
However, neither the deputy minister nor senior officials knew about it. No one other than the minister's staff knew about it.
Can the minister tell us which staff member made the mistake and whether they have been fired?
71 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, indeed, Carey Price did not know that the whole story behind the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights' Polytechnique discount code. I believe that if Carey Price had been aware of it, he would not have endorsed it in this way.
The fact remains that the principle is quite clear. Setting aside the promotional aspect, which was inappropriate, Carey Price's message essentially was to flag the story about amendments G-4 and G-46, which were in fact changed. That shows that there was truth in what Carey Price said.
As far as Bill C‑21 is concerned, we are against it. However, we proposed some amendments and supported others, just as we would for any other bill. Still, in the end, we cannot support the bill as a whole. It is a bit like a budget. There are things in a budget that we can support, but if there are too many things that do not suit us, we will vote against it.
We have never been against gun control in Canada. We are already one of the best-controlled societies in the world with the rules in place. As I said earlier, we have permits, we are monitored and that is great. We are not asking for less. It is just that sometimes, things are done in a way outside of what should be done to ensure general public safety.
235 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I want to come back to my colleague’s question. What disinformation have we spread?
When the G-4 and G-46 amendments were presented in November, everyone wondered what that was about. First, Carey Price posted great social media posts to ask why he was being attacked.
Everyone, even the NDP, had to work very hard in the corners. The Bloc Québécois said that this was not going to work. Where is the disinformation? Were some models of guns on that list common hunting rifles used by hunters and indigenous peoples? The answer is yes. That is why the amendments were withdrawn.
Now they have come up with another way of reworking it. They will ask a committee to draw up a new list of firearms, in the end. That is how they will wash their hands of any responsibility. Where is the disinformation? They have directly attacked hunters and indigenous peoples.
160 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about Bill C-21, which was tabled by the Liberal government in May 2022. When Bill C‑21 was tabled, the Prime Minister stated that its purpose was to stop gun crime before it starts. Canadians now realize that the purpose of the bill was never to improve public safety, and the proof is in the details.
Since the Prime Minister came to power, his party has said one thing and done another. Violent crime is on the rise, street gangs do not fear law enforcement due to the Liberals' revolving-door justice system, and Canadians have reason to be afraid.
The Conservatives never supported this bill because we knew that it was more about Liberal ideology than the safety of Canadians. We knew that it was about confiscating the property of hunters and law-abiding Canadians, because it is not the first time the Liberals have tried to do that. With Bill C‑21, the Liberals also added amendments without allowing for debate in the House. It was not until Carey Price spoke out against them publicly that the Liberals cancelled their decision.
It is now clear that they did not learn anything from that public humiliation, because they are proposing to create an advisory committee that will do their dirty work for them. At the end of that exercise, hunters, sport shooters and law-abiding Canadians will have their property confiscated by this government. Step by step, amendment by amendment, the Liberals will achieve their end goal, and that is why they must be voted out.
The “red flag” measure in the bill has been rejected by law enforcement and victims' groups like PolyRemembers. This just makes the stench of Liberal hypocrisy even more blatant.
The government always does the same thing. It claims to have solutions and solemnly promises that it will fix everything, but, as we can see from Bill C‑21, it does the opposite. Regulating people whose weapons are already very well regulated will do nothing to improve public safety.
The “red flag” measure is also being implemented. It is a rule that could potentially have been useful. I thought that the “red flag” measure would apply to cases where a gun owner who has mental health problems is reported, for example. The problem is that, the way the measure was designed, it is the victims who bear the burden of proof.
This week, we mark Victims and Survivors of Crime Week. We should think about the victims a bit more often. Victims bear the burden of filing a complaint with the court. That makes no sense. It has been denounced by groups like PolyRemembers and many other victims' groups, as well as by the police. Initially, doctors' groups supported the idea but, after taking a closer look, they ultimately said that it made no sense.
I was at committee when the vote took place. The Bloc Québécois agreed with us on it. We listened to the same presentations from victims' groups. The Conservatives and the Bloc members voted against the “red flag” amendment. We do not know why the Liberals dug in their heels, with the support of their NDP buddies.
When discussing public safety, we should always put victims and potential victims first. What we understand from the philosophy behind Bill C‑21 is that law-abiding citizens are being controlled and victims are not even being listened to, even though they are the main people involved. I look at it from every angle, but I still cannot understand.
Why is the government, with the support of the NDP, still taking a path that defies all logic? Who is it trying to please and, above all, to what end?
Ultimately, what we all want, or should want, is to protect public safety and Canadians. Think about what has been done in recent years. Think about the rules that were put in place under Bill C-5, which was implemented last fall. It is a disaster. Even our friends in the Bloc said that they should not have supported the Liberal government with that bill and that changes needed to be made.
Bill C‑75 was passed a few years ago. At the time, the Conservatives once again pointed out that the legislation was shoddy, particularly with respect to bail. Today, the government sees that it did a bad job drafting the legislation and that it is no good.
Every time, the government accuses the Conservatives of wanting to be hard on criminals.
Meanwhile, it develops and passes legislation that gives criminals a lot of latitude. Ultimately, criminals make a mockery of the justice system—and again, the victims pay the price. The victims do not understand.
As proof, since the government took power in 2015 and implemented all these changes, there has been a 32% increase in violent crimes. That is quite clear.
We can see the signs. Criminals are not afraid. Criminals are making a mockery of the justice system. They are making a mockery of law enforcement. Unfortunately, the police must enforce the law and the courts must apply the law as it is passed here in the House. Their hands are tied. Criminals see that and scoff at the whole thing.
A few weeks ago, I introduced Bill C-325, which will be debated when we return in two weeks. My bill addresses three things. The first is conditional release. I recently learned that some prisoners accused of serious and violent crimes, drug trafficking crimes or other crimes who are granted conditional release face no consequences when they fail to comply with the conditions. The police arrive, they see a criminal who is not complying with their conditions and all they can do is submit a report to the parole officer. I learned that, in 2014, one of our former colleagues had introduced a private member’s bill to address that. Unfortunately an election was called. My bill seeks to change the law to bring in consequences for breaching conditions of release.
The second element of my bill provides that parole officers must report to authorities when one of their “clients” is not complying with their conditions. In such cases, the parole officer must report to the police so there can be an arrest. We are talking about violent offenders.
The third element of my bill seeks to correct the problem that was created by Bill C-5, namely allowing violent criminals to serve a sentence in the community, watching Netflix at home. People saw what happened last fall. This makes no sense. It does not work. One of the components of Bill C-325 amends the Criminal Code to put an end to these situations that show the public how criminals are laughing at the justice system. That is not how we should be living in Canada. I will discuss my bill in greater detail in two weeks.
I will come back to Bill C-21. Me, I am a gun owner. When the Liberals accused us of being in the pay of the gun lobby, I felt personally targeted, since I am a gun owner myself. I have my licences. I have everything required. I am not a criminal. I passed my tests. Moreover, Quebec has the Act to protect persons with regard to activities involving firearms, the former Bill 9, which contains additional measures to ensure compliance. Membership in a gun club is mandatory. People must go there to shoot at least once a year to abide by the law in Quebec.
Therefore, when we look at all the rules in place that people must obey, I do not see why we should suddenly feel like criminals. Bill C‑21 is directly aimed at people like me. I began shooting at the age of 17 in the Canadian Armed Forces. I have always obeyed the law. I have always done what I was asked to do. Daily checks are conducted in the RCMP system to ensure that law-abiding people with registered licences obey the law. That is what is done.
Why am I now being targeted by people saying I am a criminal and in the pay of lobbies when I have my licences and obey the law?
1402 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/8/23 3:04:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, every time a criminal uses a firearm in the commission of a crime, it costs society half a million dollars. A study published by Yanick Charette, a criminology professor at Laval University, states that the most expensive crime is homicide, costing an average of $10 million per murder committed with an illegal firearm. Instead of addressing the source of this problem, the great Liberal-NPD-Bloc Québécois coalition would rather spend billions more on buying up legally owned guns from harmless hunters.
When are we going to stop the partisan games and actually work for public safety?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 2:12:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the mayor of Baie‑Saint‑Paul, Michaël Pilote, had to declare a state of emergency because of the devastation caused by heavy rainfall. However, that was not all. Two firefighters who went to the rescue of people trapped by the flooding in Saint-Urbain were carried away by floodwaters. They are still missing. Our thoughts are with the family and friends of these two heroes.
It is with great humility that I wish to honour the sacrifices of first responders. They put their heart and soul into helping their fellow citizens. They give everything they have to help those in danger.
Members of the Paramedic Association of Canada are in Ottawa to meet with their MPs, tell them about the challenges they face every day and show them how dedicated they are to the well-being of Canadians.
Firefighters, police officers and paramedics deserve our respect. All Canadians have a place in their heart for these first responders because they recognize how important first responders are and how difficult their job is. No one appreciates them better than those who have needed their services in the past.
We hope that the two firefighters who were swept away will be found safe and sound. Let us remain hopeful.
215 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/30/22 2:48:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is the problem. The Prime Minister is trying to tell Canadians that people have assault weapons when what we are talking about are rifles and shotguns, old guns with wooden stocks that people use to shoot ducks or squirrels. These are not assault weapons. That is why the Prime Minister needs to see pictures from the list of all the firearms the Liberals are going to ban. He says he is not attacking hunters, but he is attacking hunters by trying to ban all the guns used for hunting and protecting wildlife in Canada.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 2:49:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Laval police have just launched a major investigation into violent crime. About 150 officers are being assigned to this investigation, including personnel from the Sûreté du Québec, the RCMP and other police forces.
Everyone is working together to fight gun violence, except the Prime Minister. His soft-on-crime strategy has resulted in a 32% increase in violent crime across the country.
Does the Prime Minister realize that he is contradicting all police forces when he says, for example, that when a member of organized crime discharges an illegal firearm, it is not a serious crime?
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/22/22 3:02:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, according to the mayor of Laval, most of the criminal activity in his city is linked to illegal firearms and organized crime.
He says that better border control is needed to stop illegal weapons from being smuggled in. However, in the Prime Minister's fantasy world, the solution is to take guns away from hunters and relax penalties for criminals.
When will he put the safety of Canadians first, instead of coddling criminals?
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/17/22 3:04:19 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the violent crime rate in Canada was 1,070 per 100,000 inhabitants.
After seven long years under this Liberal government, the rate has increased by 32%. Things will only get worse when Bill C-5, which is backed by the NDP and even the Bloc Québécois, abolishes minimum sentences for illegally importing firearms. What message are we sending to people who live in at-risk communities? We are simply telling them good luck.
Can the Prime Minister do the right thing and scrap this bill?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/9/22 2:52:09 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, there was another shooting in the east end of Montreal last night. A woman from Rivière-des-Prairies who was sitting on her balcony went inside to hide out of fear of being shot.
The Prime Minister's proposed Bill C‑5 would get rid of mandatory minimum sentences like the one for discharging a firearm with intent.
The Prime Minister is telling us that Bill C‑5 has nothing to do with serious crimes. Is discharging a firearm with intent not a serious crime?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/2/22 2:36:33 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, since the government wants to tackle real problems, let us talk about illegal arms trafficking, which is a scourge in Canada. Instead of attacking the source of the problem, the Prime Minister is attacking law-abiding citizens.
Police forces have repeatedly said that the guilty parties are street gangs and organized crime, which operate in different parts of Canada and use transit points such as the Akwesasne Reserve. It is no secret that this spot on the Canada-U.S. border is the busiest in Canada.
Why has the Prime Minister not yet met with the chief of the Akwesasne reserve to discuss the problem of illegal firearms on our streets and work with him to find solutions?
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/22 2:51:04 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to play both sides.
We are talking about Bill C-5 and he is talking about Bill C-21, but what is clear is that Quebecker Anie Samson told the committee that “a criminal who uses an illegal firearm, regardless of their [ethnic] origin, is still a criminal. It would be incomprehensible to let criminals use firearms to kill, rob or threaten people without worrying about having to face the same consequences as other criminals”.
The Prime Minister, with the complicity of the NDP and the Bloc Québécois, would rather play petty politics than keep Canadian communities safe.
Does the Prime Minister realize the negative impact that Bill C-5 will have?
129 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/18/22 2:40:39 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, a criminal is a criminal, no matter their race. Does the Prime Minister know that 90% of victims in 2021 belonged to the same communities as the perpetrators?
Black, white or indigenous, it does not matter. The unlawful use of a firearm must be punished.
Why not stop Bill C‑5? Why eliminate minimum sentences for gun crimes?
61 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/17/22 2:31:32 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, the minister is deliberately conflating two different matters. We are talking about Bill C‑5, which would change the law so that the offences of using a firearm during a robbery, discharging a firearm with intent or being in possession of an unlawful firearm will no longer carry a minimum sentence.
Street gangs are making fools of us all. This is sheer hypocrisy. Can the minister talk about Bill C‑5 and stop talking about the other gun problem?
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/17/22 2:30:29 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Mr. Speaker, we are seeing more and more shootings by street gangs. There were three in Laval last week.
The Quebec association of police chiefs does not support Bill C‑5, and for good reasons. In addition, the Montreal police service reports that there has been an incident involving a firearm every two days since the beginning of 2022.
Does this mean that the Prime Minister follows expert advice only when it suits him?
76 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
