- Jun/7/22 5:39:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative motion calls for action to tackle money laundering and yet, at the same time, the Conservatives also want more investments in cryptoassets, which facilitate money laundering. I am talking about Bill C-249. I am also thinking of one of the leadership candidates who is very much in favour of cryptocurrency.
How does the member reconcile that?
61 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/7/22 5:23:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, while our public finances have posted huge deficits and SMEs have been forced out of business because of the pandemic, we have seen oil companies, multinationals and corporations making massive profits and, unfortunately, doing very little to pay their fair share of taxes.
Since targeted measures will eventually have to be put in place to help people with affordability, does my colleague not find it shameful that oil companies heavily financed by the state and big Canadian banks are not paying their fair share because the government is not fighting tax havens and is therefore complicit in their use?
101 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/7/22 4:52:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague obviously has good intentions.
There might be a little problem with the approach, however. Would my colleague agree that a program should be created with the surplus to help workers whose livelihoods are at risk because of the rising cost of diesel and gas? I am talking about farmers, truckers, taxi drivers and everyone who is struggling to make ends meet right now. Does he think the surplus could go directly to the workers who need help?
If not, could he explain how he would ensure that removing the GST from diesel and gas would truly benefit consumers?
102 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/7/22 4:23:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague across the way. Basically, he is saying what we are also thinking, which is that the opposition motion is a bogus solution for real problems. I understood that he was objecting to one aspect of the motion, which would be to temporarily stop charging the GST on gas and fuel, since it is unclear whether that money would go to consumers.
However, would my colleague agree that the surplus the government is currently reaping from higher gas prices could be used to provide relief to those hit hardest by inflation? These include low-income earners, seniors, agricultural workers, taxi drivers, truck drivers, and so on. Support programs could be put in place for these people.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 5:40:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent and well-articulated speech. I enjoyed it.
After listening to the speeches earlier today, I want to remind members that there is one people in Canada that is particularly susceptible to discrimination, the people my grandparents called French-Canadians in Lower Canada, now known as Quebec. We were discriminated against because of our language. There was even a time when some institutions did not think that we were smart enough to work for Hydro-Québec or hold senior civil engineering positions.
As my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville pointed out earlier, the big unions, which were early proponents of equality of opportunity, responded to this sentiment. That is why women, members of visible minorities and other minorities are prioritized when they are equally qualified. Quebec has made a lot of progress in this arena, and this principle is now a given.
Does my colleague think that the government is going too far and that it should simply apply this old philosophy in universities, which are looking for qualifications?
183 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 5:07:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Waterloo for her speech. I also thank her for making an effort to actually discuss. She did not simply try to look for the underlying intent of the Bloc Québécois's opposition day, as if opposition days were named as such because other parties simply needed to oppose them rather than try to participate in what my colleague called the ethics of discussion earlier.
That being said, I imagine my colleague heard my colleague from Mirabel's speech this morning, as she is taking part in the debate this afternoon. He explained how difficult it is to go out and find good people, even if you want to look around the globe, given the many pitfalls you have to overcome, such as the ability to pay these individuals.
Is my colleague aware that Quebec has equal access employment programs? Despite my young age, those equal access employment programs have been in place throughout my teaching career. Does she understand that Quebec has a recruitment problem that is not necessarily related to the criteria she wants to apply all across Canada?
191 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 4:22:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to build on what he was saying, because I am tremendously interested in the notion that the ethics of conviction are somewhat inappropriate in the field of research.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 2:02:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today, May 19, we are celebrating World Family Doctor Day.
I want to congratulate them all for the essential work they do at the heart of our health care system. Family doctors are the closest to patients, with whom they build personalized and lasting relationships focused on prevention. It takes a special person with a lot of empathy and compassion to play this role at the crossroads of medical science. They are on the front line and they deserve to be commended for the crucial role they play, especially after years of dealing with the pandemic and having to constantly adapt to new data with unending dedication.
We need more of them, of course. To get there, the least we can do is start by sincerely thanking them. I thank family doctors from the bottom of my heart.
140 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 12:27:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Vancouver Kingsway for his speech. I serve with him on the Standing Committee on Health, and what he said about the science is absolutely correct.
It is clear that vaccination still protects against developing the serious form of the disease, which is why we must protect our health care systems. That is the main thing.
However, does he not think that the government should eventually, for the sake of the tourism industry, present a progressive plan to lift the measures, even though we know full well that we are not in the endemic phase since the planet is not vaccinated?
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 12:11:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, since I have been in the House, I have often seen the Conservatives add something to the wording of their motion that makes it so that that only they will vote in favour of it, since it includes inaccurate information.
It says here that, “Canada's international allies have moved to lift COVID-19 restrictions”, when one of the worst infection hot spots on the planet has been our neighbour to the south, with whom we share one of the longest borders in the world and who has not lifted restrictions at all.
I would like to hear my colleague's comments about that being added to the motion when the Conservatives are looking for everyone's support.
123 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:54:28 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech.
We agree with several aspects of his analysis. However, when talking about a pandemic that caused many deaths, we must be responsible. Both sides must avoid politicizing—in the least noble sense of the word—a debate like this one.
I sat with my colleague on the Standing Committee on Health. Earlier, he said that we should go back to the way things were before the pandemic, but I would like to qualify that statement. We know that the world's population is far from fully vaccinated. As long as vaccination rates are low and people are travelling, there is the potential for a variant that could completely compromise the benefits of vaccines, particularly in terms of the possibility of developing a severe form of the illness. I am sure my colleague agrees with me on this. In any case, I hope he will mention that.
The tourism industry's GDP has dropped 50%. This is serious. We have been asking, but the government has yet to table a plan to lift the health measures to give some predictability to the tourism and airline industries and to the travelling public. How does my colleague explain that?
210 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, what is disappointing this evening is the sad spectacle put on by the Liberals and the Conservatives.
The Bloc Québécois will always oppose muzzling opposition parties and taking away their powers. Yesterday, the delay tactics had consequences not just for the House, but for committees as well. A committee on medical assistance in dying was scheduled to discuss two fundamental matters yesterday: the protection of people with disabilities and the issue of mental illness as the sole underlying condition for medical assistance in dying. Witnesses were waiting. We upended all that and had to make people wait, when this committee does not meet very often as it is.
At present, a minister is telling us that what the Conservatives did was appalling. The Liberals themselves, when they were in opposition, used the same tactic and will continue to use it. Neither party is all that credible. At some point, common sense must prevail, and we must act according to our cherished principles of the exercise of parliamentary democracy.
What we are hearing from the minister and from the official opposition will do nothing to convince the people watching that this place is not a circus. Then, they act surprised that people are cynical about the work that we do here in the House. The Bloc Québécois feels that Bill C‑14 offers barely half of what we were asking for. That is another story, but we need to stop acting like this is the place for theatrics.
I would like to see more dignified behaviour here. Instead of telling the Conservatives that what they are saying is appalling, it would be better to tell them that it is more important we keep working. There is no problem with working until midnight. However, members' ability to do so should not be taken away.
We must denounce what the Conservatives did because, if we have a repeat of yesterday's nonsense, the people watching us will wonder what the heck is going on. However, this pretext is being used here to muzzle us. I would like to call for more respect for parliamentary democracy. Otherwise, democracy will rise from the streets.
371 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/17/22 4:52:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the Liberals talk about the fight against global warming since 2015, but they bought a pipeline and are still subsidizing the fossil fuel industry.
Oil companies are currently raking in billions of dollars in profit while consumers pay over $2 a litre at the pump.
Is he not ashamed?
56 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 1:40:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am finding it difficult to understand my colleague's logic.
She said that creating this committee would exacerbate reprehensible actions in the area of human rights.
Is she not giving in to bullying?
36 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 12:08:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sure my colleague heard the government's argument that there is no need for such a committee because that work could be done by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.
We know that the totalitarianism and foreign policy of the People's Republic of China are creating issues in many different areas. Take, for example, Huawei, the crackdown in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and what happened at the Winnipeg lab.
In short, this committee could examine many issues and then hand over what they discover to the standing committees for a more in-depth study.
In order to get everyone on board today, does my colleague not think that it would be wiser to put a time limit on this committee's mandate and have it disband on a specific date? There seems to be some concern that this committee would become permanent.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/22 5:03:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have been listening to the debates since this morning, and we are perpetuating the fact that we discuss form, opportunity and relevance rather than substance.
One thing is clear to me today. When a political institution—Parliament—institutionalizes a denomination, such as prayer in a particular denomination, we should not talk about it. No one here wants to debate it. We introduced a unanimous consent motion. We were told no.
Why were we told no?
No one wants to discuss it. We say we will talk about it another day, perhaps. However, now is the time to discuss it. We understood our colleagues' objections. Do they want to discuss the substance or not?
Why make a discussion on the separation of church and state taboo? How does that contribute to diversity of voices and respect for it?
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/22 3:37:00 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, according to Bill C-8, the health transfer escalator will be 3% until 2027. That is one of the reasons why the Bloc Québécois is against this bill. Quebec and the provinces stand united in demanding that the government cover system costs and increase the health transfer escalator to 6%. All the experts have told us that the system has become more vulnerable than ever and that we need to restore the strength of our health care networks to recover from the pandemic.
Can my colleague tell us whether she agrees with the Liberals’ measure, which seeks to maintain the Harper government's action to reduce the health transfer escalator to 3%?
119 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 5:36:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right.
In the House, it is even harder to make sure we have quorum because some people are attending virtually. I know I cannot talk about who is here. At times over the past few days, I have wanted to do a quorum call, but I was told that some people might be attending virtually.
That said, this is definitely something we need to pay attention to. At some point, we will have to stop sitting virtually because we have work to do and we have to find way to get it done without closure motions.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 5:34:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is another example of just how low my colleague will go. It is more partisan thinking.
I thought my speech was very clear. I said it was despicable to include medical assistance in dying in the closure motion when we have been asking the government to give the committee more time, to recall the committee and reconstitute it as soon as possible for weeks, months even. I did so the day after the election. They dragged their feet and now, with the clock ticking, they have decided to include it in a closure motion.
It is clear now that they did not understand what I said. They did not understand the speech. Some things are just not done. If they had left that out, if they had decided to talk about it, and if the Conservatives had said “no”, we could've had this same debate on one issue. Maybe the cat would be out of the bag, which is not currently the case. Some people can vote against this motion for reasons other than the ones I am talking about.
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 5:33:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think that I was quite specific. I think the onus is on NDP members to tell us why they have suddenly reversed course.
I listed how they voted since 2011. How is it that they have always voted against these kinds of measures that restrict the powers of parliamentarians?
Now, they have a little deal with the government and they are drawn in by the taste and smell of power. All of a sudden, they decide that it is okay to trample on the rights of parliamentarians. That is what the NDP stands for.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
