Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 30 of 114
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-06-05 15:03 [p.20265]
Mr. Speaker, aluminium is not just about producers. There are almost 1,400 businesses, mostly SMEs, in the processing sector throughout Quebec that may not be able to absorb a 10% American tariff in the medium term. The government said that it would be there for workers. If that is the case, it needs to act now and not wait until workers have lost their jobs.
What does the government intend to do? What is its plan for aluminium processors?
View Louis Plamondon Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, last Sunday on NBC, the Prime Minister said that he was ready to show some flexibility on supply management.
With last week's news that he had hired an adviser who is in favour of abolishing supply management, dairy producers are extremely worried. I have two questions for the minister.
What does showing flexibility on supply management mean, exactly?
Can the government confirm that an adviser who is in favour of abolishing supply management was hired?
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-06-05 15:41 [p.20270]
Mr. Speaker, fighting against the spruce budworm, a pest causing major problems for our forestry industry, is a good thing. The problem is that the funding announced in the last budget and in the budget implementation bill, if I am not mistaken, is exclusively for the Maritimes, even though the area affected by this pest in Quebec is bigger than the entire province of New Brunswick.
Why is all the help going to the Maritimes? Could this be a gift for the Irvings?
Where is Quebec in all this and in the budget?
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-06-05 20:15 [p.20307]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons for sharing his time with me and giving me this opportunity to speak on behalf of the Groupe parlementaire québécois.
Unfortunatley, Bill C-74 is another mammoth bill that is being debated under another time allocation motion.
The government is blaming the opposition for opposing this bill, claiming that this is what forced it to use time allocation. However, blaming the opposition for doing its job as the opposition is like blaming the Canada Revenue Agency for collecting taxes from people or blaming meteorologists for forecasting rain.
Of course we oppose bad policies. Would the government have me believe that it did not expect us to ask questions and that it did not fully expect us to oppose certain aspects of this bill?
This is ridiculous. Here we are with only 10 minutes to discuss an immense omnibus bill that is 560 pages long.
I will therefore try to be as brief as possible and get right to the point: this budget does not address the needs of Quebeckers; it is as simple as that.
As I said at second reading, there is not much for Quebeckers in this budget, apart from a handful of minor measures that will give the minister a chance to strut all over Canada just before the election. Targeted announcements pay off in swing ridings during elections, as we know. We are seeing that right now in the Chicoutimi by-election. Journalist David Akin said that in his entire career, he had never seen so much money and so many announcements being lavished on a single riding.
They are desperate to win this by-election at any cost. They have some nerve. Our Liberal colleagues are lucky that they do not have to pay for their own gas. Otherwise, they would think twice before taking a limousine hundreds of kilometres to make a $10,000 announcement.
In Bill C-74, we see a $75-million gift to the Irvings to fight the spruce budworm. This is a perfect example. The spruce budworm is also a problem in Quebec. In fact, the infested area in Quebec is bigger than the entire province of New Brunswick, yet Quebec is not getting a single cent. Every penny is going to help the Irvings. That sums this budget up perfectly. This is not a budget for Quebec. It is, first and foremost, a budget for the Liberal Party. It is clear that this old party will never change.
Do not get me wrong, it is not all negative. For example, the Canada workers benefit is interesting. It will help out low-income workers. The small business tax cut from 10.5% to 9% is another good measure.
As hon. members know, Quebec's economy relies heavily on small business owners. Quebec is known for its creativity. With our good ideas we are able to develop businesses that can penetrate markets all around the world. Lowering the small business tax rate will give our businesses the boost they need to create our flagships of tomorrow.
However, the context in which this was announced raised some eyebrows. The Minister of Finance was criticized from all sides for the tax reform he announced last summer. Then out of nowhere he announced the tax cut in order to save face for the government, but at the end of the day it is still a good measure and the tax reform was largely abandoned.
The government kept the proposal to restrict the use of passive income, but it diluted the proposal so much that the reform will not do much. Instead of going after our farmers and small businesses, the government could have gone after the massive problems with its tax reform. I should also mention that there is nothing in the budget to address tax havens.
According to the Conference Board of Canada, we lose at least $9 billion a year in revenue to tax havens.
It is not complicated. If we recovered just a fraction of this amount, we would have some serious breathing room to balance our budget. Bay Street would obviously be angry, which would not fly with the current government, but it would be fair to the people and businesses here that pay their taxes.
The government should be closing loopholes instead of creating more tax havens by signing information sharing agreements with countries that do not have tax return obligations.
Once again, Quebec is demanding that it be able to collect all taxes, but the Prime Minister thumbed his nose at Quebec's unanimous motion, showing his arrogance yet again.
I do not think that any party in power in Quebec would turn its nose up at billions of dollars hidden in tax havens, unlike the Liberals, who are creating more loopholes. The same goes for Netflix, an American multinational corporation.
Quebec and Canadian companies that provide a similar service must charge sales tax, but the government is doing everything it can to exempt Netflix and other U.S. giants from this requirement. That is completely unfair. It is offering a competitive advantage to foreign businesses to the detriment of our own. That must change.
Speaking of handouts to foreign businesses, let us talk about the environment and Trans Mountain. The government just gave a $4.5-billion gift to a U.S. company to develop a pipeline that British Columbia opposes.
The 2015 Liberal platform had this to say about environmental projects:
Canadians must be able to trust that government...will respect the rights of those most affected [by these resource-based projects]...While governments grant permits for resource development, only communities can grant permission.
The government just reversed its position. This budget is more of the same on the environment: a lot of talk and not too many concrete measures. It is simply disappointing.
Quebec is asking for help with the electrification of transportation, but there is nothing for that in the budget. This corner of the House has asked for this funding several times.
Time is running out so I will start to wrap up. This budget is above all for Liberals. It sprinkles around some tax breaks in order to win elections. The government still has not resolved the problem of health transfers that are below the acceptable minimum threshold. While the Liberal Party is playing Monopoly with our money, Quebec is confronted with real problems every year because of a significant increase in health care costs.
I would like the government to start listening instead of always being so arrogant, as we saw with the single tax return and the migrant crisis. On our side, we are going to continue tirelessly defending the interests of our people, Quebeckers.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-06-05 20:23 [p.20308]
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. It is good to use concrete examples and to apply them in a budgetary context.
I thank my colleague from Laurentides—Labelle as well as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services for their visit in my riding yesterday to see the community of Manawan. It was an opportunity for us to cut the ribbon on some lovely new housing for the Atikamekw of Manawan First Nation. There was a good financial contribution from the federal government for these housing units. I welcome this good news.
At the same time, my colleagues were able to see all the needs. The crown has committed to providing the same service level to indigenous communities across the country as is provided to other Canadians. We were able to see that it is not the case. There are still huge housing needs. The timing is good since, in previous budgets, important announcements were made regarding indigenous infrastructure. The money has barely been spent if at all. We must therefore make sure that amounts which were announced for infrastructure are indeed allocated, in order to improve indigenous peoples' quality of life in Canada.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-06-05 20:26 [p.20308]
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I would like to correct one thing. Quebec does not import oil from Saudi Arabia. Our imports vary each year, but come primarily from the United States as well as England and Norway, as far as I know. We have also imported a great deal of oil from the west since the reversal of Enbridge pipeline 9B. That is the situation.
Like the Conservatives, we condemn the purchase by the federal government with public money of Trans Mountain and the Enbridge line. We believe that it is a bad decision. That is all we agree on, however. We are more supportive of a greener economy and decisions that lessen our dependence on fossil fuels. With respect to the international community, we support the COP21 Paris Agreement. According to our analysis, which is consistent with scientific studies, in order to comply with this agreement we must stop all new development of the oil sands, which, I would remind members, is extremely polluting. Furthermore, new pipelines are used not just to move existing oil at a good price, but also to extract more. This will prevent us from honouring the commitments we made in Paris.
We prefer to develop other energy sources and to start by reducing energy consumption in the 21st century. This works out well because Quebec has everything it needs to develop its renewable energy and is a world leader in the area. Economic development choices, however, are more focused on the oil sands than on the economy of the future. For that reason we rise in the House to defend the environment.
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
BQ (QC)
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
2018-06-04 15:02 [p.20133]
Mr. Speaker, we all know that G7 protests are inevitable, but we hope that they will be peaceful.
We also all know that vandalism could occur, but the government has not made any plans in that regard. The government expects residents and businesses to get their insurance to cover the cost of any damage. Canadians should not have to foot the bill for G7-related property damage. They should not have to pay deductibles or premium increases.
Will the government immediately commit to compensating any victims of G7-related vandalism?
View Simon Marcil Profile
BQ (QC)
View Simon Marcil Profile
2018-06-04 15:04 [p.20133]
Mr. Speaker, Global Affairs Canada has told farmers not to spread manure during the G7. Once again, Ottawa does not understand the regions.
Here is how it works. Farmers have only until June 15 to finish planting their crops, but they have to spread manure before planting. These farms produce the food that the ministers from the big city will find on their expensive menus at the G7. That is what happens when events take place in rural areas. The scenery is beautiful, but people are hard at work.
Does the government realize that its directive is unrealistic?
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-06-01 12:02 [p.20073]
Mr. Speaker, to make the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion happen, the government is assuming all the risk and paying for everything. If the bill contravenes any provincial laws, Ottawa pays. If Ottawa does not have the jurisdiction required to force this project down Canadians' throats, Ottawa pays. If the project proponent falls behind, Ottawa pays. If the proponent backs out altogether, Ottawa pays again and buys the pipeline. Basically, private enterprise pockets the profits, and the government piggy bank assumes all the risk.
Can the minister tell us how much this venture is going to cost Quebeckers?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2018-06-01 12:03 [p.20074]
Madam Speaker, we all know that bees play a key role in biodiversity, but bee populations are currently being decimated by commonly used insecticides called neonicotinoids. In fact, 233 scientists from around the world are urging countries to ban neonicotinoids. Just yesterday, the government decided to allow the continued use of imidacloprid, the most common neonicotinoid. Now it has decided to launch consultations. Rather than take action, the government is going to hold consultations, but 233 researchers and 34 different countries have already weighed in. Is that not a consultation?
When will the government listen to scientists instead of chemical companies?
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-06-01 12:55 [p.20087]
Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie on his speech.
Sustainable development is not an easy thing to achieve in our oil-driven country. Sustainable development means linking economic growth to environmental considerations.
I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the Liberals' vision of sustainable development, which I think the Prime Minister has made clear. He said that to help the environment, the Liberals plan to build more pipelines and further develop the oil sands, generating revenue that they will use to set environmental standards and fight climate change.
Does my colleague think this reasoning holds water?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2018-05-31 13:59 [p.19978]
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals were elected on a promise to put an end to the Harper era and the golden age of the oil industry. However, they are doing much worse by nationalizing the Trans Mountain pipeline with our money just to overrule British Columbia, which is against the pipeline. It is a dangerous precedent because Quebec has its own sword of Damocles, energy east.
We came very to close to being in the same boat as British Columbia and having a pipeline forced on us. The public was right to rally to stop the project. However, now that Ottawa is nationalizing pipelines and imposing them on the provinces, the energy east supporters are coming out of the woodwork. They are calling on Ottawa to do the same thing that it did in British Columbia, in other words take action without considering how Quebeckers feel about it.
We have to be just as concerned about the Liberals as we were about the Conservatives, and today we must still consider energy east as a real threat.
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
BQ (QC)
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
2018-05-31 15:06 [p.19991]
Mr. Speaker, on April 26, The Canadian Press reported that Ottawa was late in delivering its promised plan for triaging asylum seekers. On April 18, the minister had promised that the plan would be released within a few days. Then, the government said it would be out in a few weeks. Now it says it will be a few months.
Does the minister realize that while he plays around, killing time, asylum seekers continue to pour in every day through Roxham Road?
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
BQ (QC)
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
2018-05-31 15:07 [p.19991]
That's just it, Mr. Speaker. The government is talking and waiting, but meanwhile things are simply not working.
The government is saying that the triage plan is being held up by the election in Ontario. What will the Liberals' excuse be once the election is over? Will asylum seekers stop coming through Quebec because there is an election in Ontario? When the election is over, will the Liberals blame the delay on the Saint-Jean holiday, the construction holiday, the election in Quebec, or the Christmas holidays? What will their excuse be?
We need a triage plan now. Is that so hard to understand?
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-05-31 16:33 [p.20003]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague to speak about his reaction to the budget implementation bill, as it concerns the demands of Quebeckers.
The forestry industry needs help, for example, with the spruce budworm. The budget and this bill mention around $75 million to fight this pest. However, when we take a close look at this document, we see that most of this money is going to the Maritimes. Is this a gift to the Irving family from the Liberals? We have to wonder. There is not one cent for Quebec even though the infestation has affected an area in Quebec that is larger than all of New Brunswick. That says a lot.
One thing Quebec has been calling for for a long time is to increase transfers for health care, social services, and education. That is what Quebeckers want, and that is what the provincial government and all the members of Quebec's National Assembly want. However, once again, no money was set aside for that in the last budget. I am also reminded of Davie shipyard, which employs hundreds of workers near my colleague's riding. The announcements about Davie are still vague. It may get a few crumbs later, but we are talking about a multi-billion-dollar project to renew the Canadian fleet over the next few years. That work is again mostly concentrated in Nova Scotia, in the Maritimes, even though there are 40 or so Liberal MPs from Quebec. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this subject.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-05-31 17:19 [p.20010]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague if he agrees with me about one of the major shortcomings in this bill, with its many hundreds of pages, and in the previous one. I am talking about strengthening tools to better combat the use of tax havens.
Fraudsters are doing things that are against the law, and not enough investigations are being carried out or charges being laid. The big problem is the legal use of tax havens. Because of two regulations in section 5907 of the Income Tax Regulations, multinationals and big corporations can transfer their money to tax havens to dodge their tax obligations and pay no tax in Canada.
My colleague talks about the cost of living going up because of rising taxes. Meanwhile, those who have the means to contribute more use tax havens to avoid doing so. There is nothing about this in the last budget or the budget implementation bill.
Shouldn't the Liberal government be doing something about it?
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
2018-05-30 15:12 [p.19891]
Mr. Speaker, am I dreaming, or did the government just shove a pipeline down our throats? That is a most bitter Kinder Surprise, indeed.
Who did the Minister of Finance consult before deciding to use $4.5 billion of our money to buy himself a pipeline? That is utterly ridiculous.
Where in its platform did the Liberal government say it would nationalize a dirty oil pipeline? What is next? Nationalize Enbridge? Nationalize energy east?
The government needs to do the right thing and backtrack on this.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2018-05-29 13:58 [p.19805]
Mr. Speaker, from now on, as climate change worsens, we can tell ourselves that we played a small part in that. We will have a $4.5-billion interest in Trans Mountain, which is going to ship the dirtiest oil in the world without our consent.
Ottawa cannot afford to maintain appropriate health transfers for Quebec patients who need them. Ottawa cannot afford transfers for post-secondary education. Ottawa cannot afford to improve an employment insurance system that negatively impacts the unemployed. However, it can afford to pay for a pipeline that costs billions of dollars. It just takes out its cheque book and, presto.
What is the next step? Will the government be talking to TransCanada and take over energy east?
Pipelines that are forced on the people and that harm the environment are not in the national interest. It is about time that the government understands that getting rid of dirty energy is in the national interest.
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
BQ (QC)
View Rhéal Fortin Profile
2018-05-28 15:02 [p.19743]
Mr. Speaker, since early 2018, more than 7,000 irregular asylum seekers entered Quebec. We thought the problem was the safe third country agreement, but now we know that the real problem is the minister. He does not have a triage plan or a plan to amend the agreement. The processing delays are never-ending, and the boss is asleep at the wheel.
Will the Prime Minister help resolve the migrant crisis by finally appointing a minister who will do the job properly?
View Louis Plamondon Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Immigration was so busy preparing for his sightseeing trip to Nigeria that he did not even know that asylum seekers in Plattsburgh were being given instructions on how to cross the border illegally.
Rather than playing tourist, can the minister ensure that the safe third country agreement applies to all of our borders?
The safe third country agreement needs to be enforced at Roxham Road and everywhere else along our border.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2018-05-25 12:00 [p.19690]
Mr. Speaker, while Her Excellency the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean parades around gilded halls eating petits fours, La Francophonie is sinking into insignificance. La Francophonie is a great institution that promotes cultural diversity and international co-operation, combats homogeneity, and develops our language. It is also the only institution, the only international organization of states, of which Quebec is a member. Transforming this institution into a lounge for Her Excellency will suffocate it. Quebec's voice will be drowned in champagne and caviar.
When will the government withdraw its support for Michaëlle Jean?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2018-05-25 12:02 [p.19690]
Mr. Speaker, Montrealers were unwittingly subjected to brainwashing experiments funded by Ottawa and the CIA as part of Project MKUltra. That is not science fiction. Those experiments really happened at the Allan Memorial Institute between 1957 and 1964. Despite denying all responsibility, the government is making all kinds of out-of-court settlements with families that launch legal action on behalf of the victims.
Rather than force families to take their cases to court, will the government publicly apologize and compensate all those hundreds of families?
View Simon Marcil Profile
BQ (QC)
View Simon Marcil Profile
2018-05-24 13:58 [p.19588]
Mr. Speaker, it would seem that the Conservatives will now be defending Quebeckers' interests. The problem is, we do not know which Quebeckers they are talking about.
Clearly, they are not talking about those in the regions, because, yesterday in the House, they voted against using our softwood lumber, and their deputy leader is against supply management.
They will not defend the Quebec City region either. It was their own maritime strategy that cost Davie close to 900 jobs. They will not defend the millions of Quebeckers who live along the river.
Their leader, whose name nobody really remembers, is nice and all when he visits us, but when he is in the Maritimes, he promises the return of the energy east pipeline.
Conservatives will definitely not defend Quebeckers' interests. At this very moment, they are sponsoring a petition to reopen the abortion debate. That bunch of Harper clones who still believe that the Earth is flat are totally fine with that. They will take Quebeckers' money and votes, but when the time comes to defend Quebeckers' jobs, they will take a break. They do not defend our rights, our people, or our environment. How then will they defend our interests?
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2018-05-24 15:02 [p.19600]
Mr. Speaker, asylum seekers arriving in Plattsburgh are given instructions on how to cross the border illegally. One pamphlet tells them how to get to Roxham Road, how much a taxi costs, who to contact in Montreal and what to expect. The minister has known all of this for weeks. What did he just tell us he did? He made a phone call. I am impressed by such vigorous action that will make all the difference.
Does he take us for fools?
View Luc Thériault Profile
BQ (QC)
View Luc Thériault Profile
2018-05-24 15:03 [p.19600]
Mr. Speaker, Ottawa is preparing to take in more asylum seekers and the Americans are preparing to send them to us, but never through legal channels. The government still refuses to suspend the safe third country agreement between Canada and the United States.
Instead of encouraging illegal entries, and instead of going off to Africa, can the minister show some backbone and go to the United States to fix the problem with the American authorities?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2018-05-23 14:05 [p.19519]
Mr. Speaker, certain parties have taken a sudden interest in defending Quebec's interests lately, but when it is time to actually do something in Parliament, they are nowhere to be found.
Quebec has the strictest environmental laws. That is why we insist that our laws take precedence when Ottawa decides to get involved in our affairs. That is exactly what I proposed in committee yesterday, but all the parties voted against my proposal because, whenever the three federalist parties have to choose between Quebec's interests and Canada's, they always choose Canada and hang Quebec out to dry.
All of the parties voted against measures that would protect Quebec if ever energy east were to resurface. They also voted against measures that would protect British Columbia from being forced to accept Trans Mountain. There is going to be a demonstration in Montreal on Sunday. I invite everyone to join me in sending a message to our elected representatives that it is up to Quebec and the provinces to decide what happens within their borders.
Results: 1 - 30 of 114 | Page: 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data