- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Louis-Saint-Laurent
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 61%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $128,105.00
- Government Page
- Jun/13/24 12:32:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Calgary Rocky Ridge.
I am very pleased to participate in this debate, and I thank my colleagues.
We are gathered here today because Canadians have a right to know, and it is our duty, as the official opposition, to hold the government to account. We want to know the real impact that the Liberal carbon tax is having on Canadians' wallets and on the Canadian economy.
We are holding this debate today to get to the bottom of things, so that people can form an opinion based on the facts, facts that the government wanted to hide.
The government did not just want to hide this information from the public. We are holding this debate today because of what the Parliamentary Budget Officer said about his requests.
I would remind the House that, last week in committee, my colleague from Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley questioned the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
My colleague from Manitoba had a very good conversation with the PBO a few days ago in the committee.
I will summarize the exchange that took place at the Standing Committee on Finance.
My colleague said, “Mr. Giroux, in your earlier testimony, you said that you understood that the government had economic analysis on the carbon tax that it has not released. Are you saying that the government has not been transparent with the analysis it has?”
The Parliamentary Budget Officer replied, “I mentioned that the government has economic analysis on the impact of the carbon tax itself and the OBPS, the output-based pricing system. We've seen that—staff in my office—but we've been told explicitly not to disclose it and reference it.”
That last bit is important. That is what the Parliamentary Budget Officer told the committee.
My colleague from Manitoba went on, “The government has given you their analysis, but they have put a gag on you, basically, saying you can't talk about it.” The PBO replied, “That is my understanding.”
A government is muzzling the Parliamentary Budget Officer. If that is not keeping an iron grip on information to conceal matters that directly affect Canadians, I do not know what is.
That is why we deliberately moved this motion to hold this debate and force the government to do what it did not want to do. It wanted to hide information. The government even told the Parliamentary Budget Officer to shut up. That is what it said. The government told the Parliamentary Budget Officer not to reference it.
Unfortunately, this brings back very sad memories of a time long ago when one Quebec politician could tell another to shut up. Sadly, we are seeing the same thing happening again today, in 2024, under this Liberal government.
What did we find out next? This morning, just a few minutes before the House started, the government stated that it had released the documents in question. What does this partial documentation tell us? The news for Canadians is very bad. It says in black and white that the carbon tax's true impact on the economy is minus $30.5 billion until 2030.
If I were in government, I might not be very proud of these numbers either, but numbers and facts are stubborn. We Conservatives have been pushing for months to get the real numbers. We are adding even more pressure with today's debate. With a bit of theatrics, the government tabled the documents a few minutes before the House began sitting.
As the Leader of the Opposition said, painting a somewhat graphic and rather gross picture, it was as painful for them as having a tooth pulled, and for good reason, because the tooth was rotten.
Canada's gross domestic product, or GDP, will drop by $30.5 billion by 2030. That is the real effect of the Liberal carbon tax. This was not the first time the Parliamentary Budget Officer highlighted the fact that the carbon tax is going to cost Canadians a lot of money, much more than the government claimed when it said it was going to put the money back into their pockets.
It is pretty amazing. These people keep telling us that there is a price on pollution but they are putting money back into people's pockets.
That is because they collect the money, take out a little bit and put the rest back in the taxpayers' pockets. Do they think people are stupid?
In any case, I can say one thing: Canada's mayors did not find it funny. A few days ago, the Prime Minister was invited to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, or FCM. Once again, he repeated his famous line about Canadians getting more money back than they pay. Canada's mayors did not find it funny and started heckling him.
The Prime Minister responded, “Ha ha”. That was his response. His arrogance is unfortunate. It is insulting to Canadians.
On May 5, in an interview on CTV's Power Play, the Parliamentary Budget Officer had this to say:
“A vast majority of people will be worse off under a carbon pricing regime than without, and we don't expect that to change.”
In the same interview, he went on to say the following:
“The overall conclusions that the vast majority of households are worse off with the carbon pricing regime than without, that I'm confident will still remain. That is based on our own preliminary analysis but also on discussion we've had on discussions with government officials and also stakeholders.”
This is not the first time the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said that the Liberal carbon tax is having a negative impact on taxpayers' wallets. He costed the negative impact on the Canadian economy and estimates that Canada's GDP will take a $30.5-billion hit by 2030.
Earlier a minister tabled a series of documents and I asked him some questions about those documents. It reminded me that there is another document that I have been trying to table in the House for months, specifically the report presented to COP28 in December entitled “Climate Change Performance Index 2024”. It shows the results of 67 countries around the world and their actual effectiveness in the fight against climate change. Where does Canada rank after nine years under the Liberal government? On a list of 67 countries, after nine years of a Liberal government, Canada's Liberal effectiveness, as analyzed by scientists around the world, ranks 62nd out of 67 countries. Meanwhile, the Liberals are lecturing everyone else. They say that we are not nice, but they are good. They are so good that Canada ranks 62nd after nine years of this government's management. For months I have been calling for this document to be tabled. The Liberals keep refusing. That is not nice.
What did the minister say in answer to my question about that? He said that the member, referring to me, knows very well that oil development in Alberta is hurting our track record. The cat is out of the bag. That is the minister's problem. In his ideal world, there would be no more oil anywhere. I do not know what planet he is living on, but that is not the reality. Perhaps his ultimate dream is to completely shut down Canada's oil industry, but what will happen if we do that? Oil development will happen elsewhere. Shutting down Canada's industry tomorrow morning will not change much. That is the problem. We need oil.
I am a Quebecker and I keep an eye on what is happening in my province. According to HEC Montréal's numbers, last year, Quebeckers consumed 19 billion litres of oil, which represents an increase of 7%. That is not good news or bad news, it is a fact. The numbers are there. Everyone can draw their own conclusions.
If oil production in Canada were to be shut down tomorrow morning, other places would produce it. Who stands to gain if the Liberal government's dream, the minister's dream, comes true? Unfortunately, the Canadian economy does not figure heavily in the minister's dreams. The planet does not stand to gain, but Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other countries do. That is the big problem with Liberal dogmatism, in contrast to the Conservatives' pragmatism.
When the Liberals say that the carbon tax will reduce emissions, that is not true. What it will reduce is the amount of money in taxpayers' pockets. The Canadian economy will suffer because of this.
1461 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/24 11:24:49 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will say it again: inflation, taxes and mortgage rates. For nine years, this government has had no control over spending, over inflationary budgets and over deficits that feed inflation and increase interest rates. Plus, we know that they have invented new taxes. Worse, their friends in the Bloc Québécois want to drastically increase the carbon tax, which they have not denied until now.
When will these people understand that Quebeckers are sick and tired of paying taxes and, more importantly, of having additional taxes imposed on them?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/24 11:23:39 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, CAA‑Québec conducted a poll of its members about their summer vacation plans. Unfortunately, the result was brutal. According to the Journal de Québéc, “inflation, the price of gas and mortgage renewals are putting a damper on Quebeckers' vacation plans”. Those are exactly the three themes we tackle here on behalf of Canadians every day during question period and they are exactly the three themes this Liberal government keeps washing its hands of.
When will this government understand that Quebeckers and Canadians have had it with this irresponsible management?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 9:23:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent, and I am very familiar with the province of Quebec. Quebeckers do not want to experience the same tragedy that is occurring in British Columbia right now.
Will the minister stand up and say that she will never implement the pilot project in Quebec, yes or no?
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/24/24 11:22:09 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after nine years of this Liberal Prime Minister, more and more Quebeckers are going hungry. I was touring Abitibi last week, and the food bank in Rouyn-Noranda is witnessing a very disturbing trend: fully 54% of the people who use the food bank in Rouyn-Noranda have a job. These people are working and getting paid, they do have money, but they do not have enough money to feed themselves. That is what Canada has come to, after nine years of this Liberal government, with the support of the Bloc Québécois, which blindly voted for $500 billion in inflationary spending.
Is the government aware of this mess?
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/24 11:08:36 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, after nine years of this Liberal government and nine inflationary deficit budgets, this Liberal government is not worth the cost.
This is especially true considering that, unfortunately, it can rely on the Bloc Québécois's support. Yes, the Bloc Québécois voted in favour of $500 billion in budget appropriations. That means $500 billion in centralizing spending, and the Bloc Québécois said yes. It also means $500 billion in inflationary spending, and the Bloc Québécois said yes.
As a result, Quebeckers and Canadians are paying more for everything.
Yesterday, in the Quebec National Assembly, the leader of the Parti Québécois condemned the Liberal government's mismanagement of public funds. The Liberal Party's governance is so inept that it has become an argument in support of Quebec's independence. Things are not going well. I would like to remind the leader of the Parti Québécois, who forgot to mention it yesterday, that the Bloc Québécois voted for $500 billion in budgetary appropriations.
When will this Prime Minister, who is being propped up by the Bloc Québécois, stop wasting money? When will this government finally govern responsibly?
223 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/10/24 2:55:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years, this Prime Minister is not worth the cost.
Now, thanks to $500 billion in debt and out-of-control government spending, here is the daily reality facing Canadians. The cost of rent has doubled, one child in four in Canada does not have enough to eat, and two million Canadians are turning to food banks. That is the Liberal record after eight years of this Prime Minister's management.
Because the Prime Minister keeps meddling in provincial jurisdictions, the lives of Quebeckers have become worse, and so have the lives of Canadians.
Will the Prime Minister stop interfering in provincial jurisdictions and stop ruining the lives of Canadians?
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/19/24 12:53:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I notice that the member used the word “drastically”. That happens to be the word that her colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert used when he said that the government and governments should drastically increase carbon taxes.
I assume that the member and all Bloc Québécois members are quite happy that the Liberal carbon tax is going to increase by 23%. Perhaps that is not enough in their eyes, and it should go up even more.
People are having to line up at food banks. This is hurting all Canadians and Quebeckers, in every riding. There is not one riding that is more affected by this reality than any other.
Thankfully, there are volunteers who work very hard, like those I had the opportunity to meet and support this weekend. When people are out there lining up, is it a good idea to raise taxes and take even more money out of their pockets when they are already struggling? The answer is no.
If some people think it is a good idea, all they have to do is keep voting for the Bloc Québécois. They want to drastically increase carbon taxes, but we do not.
207 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in this debate on a bill introduced by my Bloc Québécois colleague.
We obviously agree with the principle that Quebec should be heard in this situation, and I will tell you why. We need to go back to last February when the Government of Quebec, through its culture minister, called on the federal government in Ottawa, the Liberal government, to listen to what it had to say and to consult about Bill C-11, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act.
I will read the letter that Minister Lacombe sent to his federal counterpart. It says, “It is essential that the distinctiveness of Quebec and the unique reality of French-speaking markets be properly considered in Bill C-11 and in its implementation by the CRTC. In that regard, I want to reiterate our requirement that the act include a mandatory, formal consultation mechanism with the Government of Quebec for that purpose.” Furthermore, Quebec “must always have its say before instructions are given to the CRTC to guide its actions under this act when those actions could affect businesses that provide services in Quebec or the Quebec market.”
That was from the letter that the Minister of Culture sent to his federal counterpart on February 4. The government's response? Radio silence. It eventually acknowledged receipt of the letter, but that is all. The government never stepped up to be proactive and hear what Quebec had to say on the matter. In fact, the National Assembly went so far as to adopt a unanimous motion calling on the House of Commons to consult Quebec in a parliamentary committee so that it might voice its demands with respect to Bill C‑11. Unfortunately, the Liberal government's response was once again complete and utter radio silence.
We Conservatives brought the voice of the National Assembly to the House of Commons not once, twice or three times, but about 15 times. We did it right here during question period all the way from February 14 to March 7. My colleague, the member for Charlesbourg—Haute‑Saint‑Charles and our political lieutenant for Quebec, and I asked the government 15 questions about why it was refusing to hear from Quebec in committee. Of course we did. When a national assembly speaks with a unified voice and a government demands to be heard, that is the very foundation of parliamentary democracy. People deserve to be listened to, all the more so when a government like the National Assembly and its 125 elected members demand to be heard. Of course they should be heard. They were not heard, however. It has been radio silence here, and nobody else has said a word either.
That is too bad. We wanted Quebec to be heard during the consideration of Bill C‑11, but that never happened. However, my colleague for Charlesbourg—Haute‑Saint‑Charles and I raised the issue in the House about 15 times during question period. We also took the debate to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage at its meeting last March 10, when I moved a motion specifically asking that Quebec be heard on this bill. Unfortunately, but predictably, the Liberal Party refused.
Quite surprisingly, even the Bloc Québécois voted against the motion we brought forward at that meeting, which asked that we reconsider the bill and hear from the Government of Quebec on the matter, because the Senate had proposed quite a lot of amendments. Strangely, the Bloc Québécois did not vote in favour of our request. That is too bad.
For these reasons, we certainly want to hear what Quebec has to say about its cultural distinctiveness, particularly in the context of Bill C-11. Speaking of which, let us keep in mind that yesterday, the government puffed out its chest and made a financial announcement that it had secured $100 million from Google. Interesting. That is exactly what the government could have gotten a year ago. That is basically what Google offered. In the end, it took a year to come up with pretty much the same proposal that Google had made.
On the radio this morning, many people were wondering whether Radio-Canada would have access to the $100 million. The answer came this morning in parliamentary committee, thanks to my colleague, the member for Lethbridge, who asked specific questions to find out where things are headed. The minister quite clearly confirmed that Radio-Canada would be among the media receiving part of this sum, which is precisely the opposite of what the Quebec government was calling for again this morning through its culture minister, Mathieu Lacombe.
Now we have a bill that has been introduced. However, the part of the conversation that cannot be ignored is the fact that we Conservatives have been asking for weeks and weeks for Quebec to be heard. The government refused to listen. We asked for this in parliamentary committee and, oddly enough, the Bloc Québécois voted against it, which was unfortunate. Now, however, the Bloc is introducing this bill.
For us, it is important that linguistic minorities be heard and that provincial governments tell us what they have to say on the matter. These things are not mutually exclusive. It goes without saying that minority language communities must be heard. That is actually part of the legislation governing the CRTC, but we still need to go a step further. We must ensure that all avenues are preserved.
New technology means that people can go anywhere. Earlier, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie said that young people no longer watch television, or at least they do not watch it like we used to do. Now they can go on Spotify or on any other global platform. Indeed, this poses some challenges. That is why we need to pay even more attention to linguistic cultural minorities in every community and every province.
I will remind members that we asked for Quebec to be heard. This is particularly important because we are talking about Quebec, which, as we know, is the home of the French fact in North America. As we know, the French language is currently vulnerable, and always will be. Now, with numbers to back it up, it is clear that French is under threat in the province of Quebec, particularly in Montreal, where more than half—or close—of the province lives. We must remain vigilant. We must wage a constant battle to ensure that Quebec does not lose ground.
An editorial in Le Devoir said that Quebec should definitely have a voice in the study of Bill C-11. I would like to quote a February 16 editorial written by Louise-Maude Rioux Soucy, who said, “The National Assembly's unanimous adoption of a motion demanding ‘that Québec be officially consulted on the directions that will be given to the CRTC’ makes perfect sense”. That is exactly what we Conservatives have been asking for in the House and in committee, and the author of the editorial confirms it by saying the following:
That is also the opinion of the Conservatives, the Legault government's objective allies in this inelegant showdown. It is up to Quebec to define its cultural orientations in order to protect its language, culture and identity. BIll C-11, like Bill C-18, which seeks to ensure the fairness and viability of the Canadian digital news market, cannot escape this imperative. Minister Lacombe is right to speak up.
That sounds a lot like what we Conservatives have been saying for weeks and weeks here in the House and in parliamentary committee.
This bill will obviously be studied in committee. It needs to be examined. There are a few items that need to be clarified. We believe that it contains a lot of vague elements and that definitions need to be incorporated. We will have the opportunity to delve deeper into the bill when it is studied in committee.
In closing, I cannot overlook the extraordinary affection that our leader, the member for Carleton, has for the francophone community and especially for Quebec. I will quote from the speech he delivered at our national convention in Quebec City. He said:
Quebeckers are fighting to preserve their language and culture.... That is why Ana and I are determined to speak French to our children and to send them to a French school. That is also why I voted in the House of Commons to recognize the Quebec nation. I will always be an ally to Quebec, the Acadian people and all francophones across the country. A less centralized government will leave room for a greater Quebec and greater Quebeckers.
It was the leader of the official opposition who said that. I also want to note that for the leader of the official opposition, the member for Carleton, Quebec is a model that should inspire English Canadians. Once again, I will quote the speech he delivered in Quebec City.
He said, “This business of deleting our past must end.” He also said, “And this is a matter on which English Canada must learn from Quebec. Quebecers—and I’m saying this in English deliberately—do not apologize for their culture, language, or history. They celebrate it. All Canadians should do the same.”
Those are the words of the future Prime Minister with whom I am very proud to serve.
1618 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 3:04:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Bloc Québécois members have once again wholeheartedly supported the Liberal Party.
Nearly 900,000 Quebeckers turned to a food bank last month. After eight years of Liberal governance, that is what happens. The Liberals want to bring in a new tax, with the enthusiastic support of the Bloc Québécois, which wants to drastically increase that tax.
The Prime Minister, who is taking a nasty beating in the polls, announced last week that he is going to give Atlantic Canadians a temporary break.
Will the Prime Minister rise here and announce that he will give all Canadians a permanent break?
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 11:44:54 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, where was the minister last year?
Almost a year ago to the day, on October 24, 2022, we voted on a Conservative motion to abolish the carbon tax on home heating.
Yesterday, the Liberals did an about-face. Boom! Now they agree on this. Even the Bloc Québécois voted with the Liberals against this motion.
The reality is that people in Atlantic Canada got a break. Can the member, who is from the Montreal area and is therefore a Quebecker, tell Quebeckers that he will also give them a break and that they will be exempt from the second Liberal carbon tax?
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 11:43:35 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal carbon tax is having an impact on Quebec. The second Liberal carbon tax is going to cost Quebeckers up to 20¢ more per litre of gas. Those are real impacts and people will have to pay for that. There will be more money for Ottawa and less money in Quebeckers' pockets. The Bloc Québécois is in favour of that. It is really costly to vote for the Bloc Québécois.
After eight years under the Liberal government, one in 10 Quebeckers are being forced to use food banks. Why do the Liberals, with the support of the Bloc Québécois, want to impose a new tax when people in Quebec are suffering?
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/23 2:18:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years of Liberal government, a growing number of Quebeckers are realizing how costly it is to vote for the Bloc Québécois. Twice, the Bloc has voted to keep the two carbon taxes. The first tax has direct impacts in Quebec and the second is going to cost up to 20¢ more a litre at the gas pumps.
That is not all. Last Monday, the RCMP commissioner appeared before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. He came to testify in the SNC-Lavalin case. Before he could utter a word, Liberal members asked to adjourn the meeting. Who voted for that adjournment with the Liberals? That was the Bloc Québécois. The Bloc member for Trois-Rivières prevented the RCMP boss from testifying when he was right there in the committee room.
How can the Bloc Québécois side with the Liberals when ethics are at stake? How can the Bloc Québécois side with the Liberals to protect the Liberal Prime Minister? Whether in terms of money or ethics, voting for the Bloc Québécois is costly.
204 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/23 1:34:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for the quality of his question, because the last time he asked me a question, his tone was a little different.
That being said, it is rather curious to note that his party's policy is to dig deep into Quebeckers' wallets, since the Bloc agrees with the second Liberal carbon tax. They had two opportunities to vote against it, but they voted in favour. Worse still, that does not go far enough for the Bloc Québécois, which wants to radically increase consumption taxes. I am sorry, but we really have to disagree with the Bloc Québécois, because voting for the Bloc Québécois is far too costly.
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/16/23 2:51:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years of this Liberal government, what has Canada witnessed? Chronic deficits and out-of-control inflationary spending. The result is a direct impact on inflation and interest rates, which are currently climbing.
According to the Institut national de la recherche scientifique, one in five Quebeckers are having a hard time repaying their debt and are at risk of losing their home.
After eight years of this Liberal government, will the government finally understand that reckless management is costly for all Quebeckers and Canadians?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/6/23 11:26:11 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years under this Liberal government, everything in Canada costs more. Thanksgiving is just two days away, but Canadians do not feel like celebrating.
Unfortunately, the Prime Minister led them down the garden path once again. Three weeks ago, the Prime Minister said that Canadians would see prices come down in time for Thanksgiving. Once again, that did not happen.
What could happen and what will happen, however, is the arrival of a second carbon tax implemented with the enthusiastic support of the Bloc Québécois.
A growing number of Quebeckers are starting to realize that voting for the Bloc will cost them. Does the Liberal government know that?
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/23 11:27:17 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, after eight years of this Liberal government, Quebeckers are struggling to get by.
Yesterday, the Journal de Montréal reported on the findings of a survey indicating that 51% of young Quebeckers are living paycheque to paycheque. No one wants to see this happen because when young people are traumatized, the very future of Canada and Quebec hangs in the balance. Quebec's young people need help in these hard times. What brilliant new idea has this Liberal government come up with, supported by the Bloc Québécois? It wants to increase taxes and create a new carbon tax. Voting for the Bloc Québécois is more costly than ever.
Could the “Liberal Bloc” tell us why, when Quebeckers and young Quebeckers are struggling to get by, it intends to impose more taxes, including a carbon tax?
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/18/23 3:44:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Monique Bégin figures among the Canadian women who had a positive impact on the course of our country's history. Not only was she a positive force in politics, but she also had a brilliant academic career and was a dedicated activist.
She was born in Rome, but her family emigrated to Canada after the Second World War. A bright student, she earned a master's degree in sociology and a doctorate in the same field from the Sorbonne. Very early on, she became involved in the feminist movement and joined the Fédération des femmes du Québec, among others.
She was an impressive woman who made her mark, and that is why the Government of Canada gave her the delicate task of being the secretary general of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Status of Women in Canada. As my ministerial colleague mentioned earlier, that important commission made 167 recommendations, which still serve as a source of inspiration today, since women are still facing many challenges 50 years later.
Ms. Bégin was elected for the first time in 1972.
Let me be clear. That was a very good election for women at that time. My colleague talked about three Quebec women. There were also people who were very involved in this election who played a major role in our democracy. I think about the Right Hon. Jeanne Sauvé.
She was the first female Speaker of the House of Commons and Governor General.
Let me also pay my respects to the Hon. Flora MacDonald, who was elected for the first time in 1972. She was the first Canadian woman, in 1979, to be the external affairs minister and the first woman in that role among G7 countries.
In Pierre Trudeau's cabinets, Ms. Bégin occupied a number of prominent roles, including Minister of Health. She was the driving force behind the creation of the child tax credit, the increasing of the guaranteed income supplement and the unanimous passing, in this very House in 1984, of the Canada Health Act, which reinforced the universality and accessibility of Canada's health system.
As a Quebecker who had a passion for politics in my teen years, I remember vividly the Hon. Monique Bégin's vigorous, sometimes even ferocious involvement in the 1980 referendum campaign. There is something else I remember from her departure in 1984 after 12 years of exemplary service in the Canadian government. A journalist with very pointed questions asked her if she had any regrets. Immediately, she replied “the UFFI file”. UFFI was a home insulation product that sadly turned out to be poison. It was also a bit of a poisonous issue for the government of the day. Ms. Bégin, with all her bluntness and candour, acknowledged that when she left.
In 1998, she was appointed an officer of the Order of Canada for having had such a positive influence on the advancement of social sciences at the national level, especially in health and education.
Last year, the Order of Canada promoted her to the rank of companion, highlighting her “made a decisive contribution to several causes, including the respect for human rights and the enhancement of the quality of life of disadvantaged and marginalized communities both in Canada and abroad.”
Many people made statements in response to the death of the Hon. Monique Bégin. The Hon. Ed Broadbent, known to many as Canada's social conscience, was quoted as follows in the Montreal Gazette:
Canada has lost an exceptional woman. Monique Bégin was a leader in the cause of gender equality, a leader in bringing universal healthcare to Canada and in general a leader in almost all aspects of concerns about inequality.
On behalf of the official opposition, I would like to offer the family of the Hon. Monique Bégin, a great parliamentarian, a great intellectual, a great advocate, and above all, a great woman, our deepest condolences.
688 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 10:42:36 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have said it before and I will say it again: Climate change is real and we need to address it. The member from the Bloc Québécois is very proud of Quebec, I am sure. I am too. However, in the past year, the Quebec nation consumed 18 billion litres of oil. It is not me saying that, it is the Hautes Études Commerciales school of business, or HEC.
That is the reality for Quebec families. Quebeckers still need oil, just like everyone else around the world. If we suddenly no longer needed it, that would be one thing, but that is not the case. Quebec needs 18 billion litres of oil. Does the member really want us to cut Quebec off from all oil? I do not think so.
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/23 12:56:17 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Mr. Speaker, there is one thing I am fully prepared to recognize, and that is the hon. member's love for Quebec and Quebeckers.
I know that he knows—as I said a few moments ago in a parliamentary committee—that Quebeckers do not exist in a vacuum, that they live on planet Earth and that, last year, according to a study by the École des hautes études commerciales de Montréal, Quebeckers consumed 18 billion litres of oil. Today's reality is that Quebeckers consumed 18 billion litres of oil last year.
I am more than willing to hear all the arguments about getting rid of oil, because it is terrible, because it is this or that. Yes, but the fact is that Quebec consumes 18 billion litres of oil. In addition, 47% of that oil comes from the United States. The last time I checked, neither Texas nor Louisiana contribute to equalization.
163 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
