SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Member of Parliament

Luc Thériault

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of Parliament
  • Bloc Québécois
  • Montcalm
  • Quebec
  • Voting Attendance: 61%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $126,025.95

  • Government Page
Context: House Hansard - 232 - Oct/16/23
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • Oct/16/23 6:00:38 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-49 
Madam Speaker, I have already had the opportunity to speak to Bill C‑49 by saying that this attempt to remove the term “petroleum” from the names of the boards was just more smoke and mirrors from the Liberals when it comes to the environment. In Quebec, we do not need to double oil and gas production. Could my colleague explain to me why, from coast to coast to coast, there is so much need for oil and gas exploration and for production to be doubled when, in reality, we should be investing in the energy transition? Perhaps he can tell me about his part of the country.
113 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 83 - Jun/7/22
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • Jun/7/22 5:54:41 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have already asked one of her colleagues this question, but perhaps this member could answer it. I have previously spoken with several economists, including Bernard Landry, who was one of my mentors. We have already been in situations where we would have liked to eliminate the gas tax. As he explained, the problem with this approach is that there is no way of ensuring that what is being removed would not go into the pockets of the oil companies. We have no way of ensuring that that money would get to consumers. Could the member explain how she would make sure this happened, or what she would do to guarantee that the consumer was not the one left to pay again?
124 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 83 - Jun/7/22
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • 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!
  • star_border