House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was quebec.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Bloc MP for Montcalm (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 30% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Budget March 29th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, my question does not come with as long a preamble as my colleague's question, but here it is.

While it is true that there is money in the budget for research and innovation, for the knowledge economy, for assistance to business, and for the learning bonds, all these investments are geared to people who are typically well-to-do or rich.

I would like to know what is in the budget for employment insurance and the guaranteed income supplement. If it is called that, it means it is for people who are not rich. I would like to hear the hon. member's comments.

The Acadians March 9th, 2004

Madam Speaker, it is with great pride that I speak today to Motion No.382 put forward by my colleague from Verchères—Les-Patriotes, which was amended and now reads as follows:

That a humble Address be presented to Her Excellency praying that, following the steps already taken by the Société Nationale de l'Acadie, she will intercede with Her Majesty to cause the British Crown to recognize officially the wrongs done to the Acadian people in its name between 1755 and 1763.

First, let us recall the historical event of 1755. In the 19th century, American writer William Faulkner said, “The past is not dead. In fact, it's not even past”. Henri Lacordaire, a member of the Académie française said, “History is the memory of immortalized centuries... A man without history is in his grave; a people that has not written its history has not yet been born”.

What a past. If the Acadian people had not yet been born, they certainly were during the painful exodus when children, women and men obeyed the official order of Lawrence, who forced them to leave their land, homes and belongings for an unknown and foreign destination.

We can just hear John Winslow reading the deportation edict in a small church in the village of Grand-Pré, on September 5, 1755:

I have received from His Excellency, Governor Lawrence, the instructions of the King. It is by these orders that you are assembled in order to hear the final resolution of His Majesty concerning the French inhabitants of this province of Nova Scotia... It is ordered that your lands and tenements, cattle of all kinds and livestock of all sorts, be forfeited to the British Crown, along with all other effects, saving your money and household goods and you, yourselves, be removed from this Province. The peremptory orders of His Majesty are that all the inhabitants of this district be deported.

Even though the British Crown did not intend to physically eliminate these people, it must be kept in mind that entire families disappeared from the surface of the earth.

With Antoine Bernard, a professor at the University of Montreal, a question remains. The author says that:

At the heart of this tragedy there will always remain a dark area, a dark area that the most perceptive lens cannot definitively explore: the area of responsibility. Must we accuse only Lawrence of this wrongdoing? Or must we see behind him “the instructions of His Majesty”, which Winslow referred to in his proclamation in September 1755? Did Winslow, Murray and Lawrence, who were guiding them, lie by using the name of old George II to commit their vile attack?

Moreover, we may ask whether the historian Robert Rumilly is accurately reporting the events in his book entitled Histoire des Acadiens , when he says this about Lawrence:

The enforcer of the deportation of the Acadians is thus officially approved, commended and promoted. The British government is endorsing, if it did not formally order, the action taken by its top officials in America.

In the newspaper Le Devoir , we can read how outraged François Baby, a professor at Laval University, is when he writes that:

—As a soldier in Acadia and the Quebec region, Monckton indeed committed some unacceptable and extremely cruel acts that undoubtedly equate with crimes of genocide, crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity as we define them today.

The tragedy of the Acadians has, for two centuries, provided poets with a source of inspiration, while also being studied closely by historians. Who does not remember the immortal Evangeline by Longfellow, a 19th century American author? It is a very beautiful poem whose heroine, Evangeline, searches all her life for her fiancé, Gabriel, and finally finds him just as he is about to depart this life. This poem is a concrete illustration of what the Acadians lived through: the separation of families, illness, death, absence, exile, uncertainty of all kinds, a very minimal well-being.

Some would call the poem romantic while others see an undeniable honesty of the heart. As Yves Cazaux writes in L'Acadie, histoire des Acadiens :

The 1844 poem screams out the truth of the most painful history ever, without weakness, without convention or invention, only reality.

Today, on the eve of the 250th anniversary of that fateful day of September 5, 1755, is there a glimmer of hope in this dark sky? With the royal proclamation of December 10, 2003, which makes July 28 the Day of Commemoration of the Great Upheaval, as of September 5, 2004, we might believe there is.

After more than 240 years, it has finally been officially recognized in the history of Canada that an unspeakable tragedy truly did take place, and that it is not an invention or the imaginings of a people seeking attention, as the text of the proclamation confirms:

—the deportation of the Acadian people, commonly known as the Great Upheaval, continued until 1763 and had tragic consequences, including the deaths of many thousands of Acadians from disease, in shipwrecks, in their places of refuge and in prison camps in Nova Scotia and England as well as in the British colonies in America—

It is a step forward, we must admit, and it is a good beginning, but there is still a long road ahead before all Acadians feel placated about the wrongs done to their ancestors between 1755 and 1763.

The main problem with this royal proclamation, is that only the Acadians of Canada are formally addressed by this solemn gesture, because, unfortunately, it is not the British Crown that recognizes the wrongs of the Great Upheaval in this royal proclamation, but only the Crown of Canada. And so what does that mean for the Acadians who were deported all through the Americas and to Europe, and who live in those places now? Are they not entitled to recognition, too?

I also want to state that, in my opinion, it is quite strange for the Canadian government to recognize injustices for which it bears no responsibility. That responsibility, morally anyway, belongs to the authority in whose name those injustices were committed and which, incidentally, still exists today. I am referring to the British crown.

The matter, therefore, remains unresolved. When can the Acadian people hope to see the real wrongdoer, the British crown, officially recognize the harm done by the deportation?

Will the British crown restore, two centuries later, our pride in our origins? Will it attempt to bandage the wound carved into our collective Acadian history? Will the British heed the example of the many other countries that have recognized their past mistakes?

In this day and age, the world is experiencing a vast movement to rehabilitate the historic memory of those peoples who have suffered. We need only think of the Maori, Japanese-Canadians, the victims of apartheid, the children of Duplessis or the Vatican's apologies to the Jewish people, in particular.

Since we are living in an age of reconciliation among peoples and apologies for the wrongs done over the course of history, can we hope that the British crown, and not just the Canadian crown, will do as much with regard to the Acadian people?

The royal proclamation of last December 10 raises another issue and University of Ottawa professor Joseph-Yvon Thériault commented on this in an article in the Le Devoir of January 15 as follows:

Where does Canadian recognition of the Acadian deportation fit in as a memorial process? There is no doubt, as Donald J. Savoie has said, that the deportation of the Acadians is an example of the phenomenon we today call “ethnic cleansing”, and its integration into Canadian hearts and minds can serve to prevent such things from happening again. The way this recognition is being achieved, however, is making it into a commonplace event.

It would be a dangerous thing to trivialize a tragedy like the deportation of the Acadian nation between 1755 and 1763, by trying to rush things, as was done with the royal proclamation, concocted hurriedly and secretively by a few members of the previous cabinet who felt they were walking a tightrope and wanted to leave this testimonial of openness for posterity, after having fought it tooth and claw until then. The goal: to try to convince the Acadians that they had finally obtained justice and consequently that all's well that ends well, when that is definitely not the case.

The British Crown is duty bound to recognize officially the wrongs done to the Acadian people in its name. This is why we hope that Her Majesty will graciously accept the invitation extended to her by the Canadian government to come and read the proclamation. We believe that the ideal time for an event of such import would be either the 250th anniversary of the deportation of the Acadians, in 2005, or the 400th anniversary of the founding of Acadia in 2004.

Great Britain cannot continue to refuse to acknowledge this terrible tragedy as still more centuries pass, when this event left such a wound in the flesh of a community of peace-loving and hard-working people, a wound inflicted on it by those who had authority over it at the time.

Will Her Majesty dare to acknowledge the flagrant wrongs done to the Acadian people from 1755 on? Parliamentarians here have the power to ensure that the wishes of the Acadians can at last be fulfilled. This unique opportunity must not be let slip. We must vote in favour of the motion by my colleague from Verchères—Les-Patriotes.

Like Bona Arsenault, we believe:

Their past was a tragedy, and its acknowledgement today is the consolation they have been waiting for for nigh on 250 years. Is that enough?

All aboard for Acadia in 2005.

Île Dupas February 20th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, on January 4 in my riding of Berthier—Montcalm, the municipality of La Visitation-de-l'Île-Dupas launched the tricentennial celebrations of Île Dupas.

The festivities began with a mass celebrated by Bishop Gérard Drainville, who grew up on the island.

A period ball held on February 14 was a huge success. I invite the public to take part in the various activities that will be held throughout the year.

I want to congratulate the founding families who built this beautiful village on the banks of the St. Lawrence.

I also want to highlight the excellent work of a dynamic team, including the tricentennial committee chair, Victor Drainville, as well as the contributions made by the mayor, Maurice Désy and the entire municipal council.

It was a pleasure to personally take part in this event, and I wish them great success throughout the year.

Government Contracts February 17th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, everyone agrees that spending $270,000 for 10 copies of the same report is excessive. The government said yesterday that it would accept criticism.

We want more. We want the names of those ministers.

Government Contracts February 17th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General reports that 10 ministers spent $27,000 each for the same study.

We want the Prime Minister to identify these 10 ministers, who have caught the Groupaction disease and think it is normal to pay $27,000 10 times for a copy of one report.

Agriculture October 31st, 2003

Mr. Speaker, in September the Quebec assistance program left out the cull cow producers, and the federal government has not yet announced its assistance plan.

Will the minister acknowledge that financial distress is financial distress, regardless of the type of animal operation concerned, and announcement of a program that will compensate all producers affected by the crisis is urgently needed?

Agriculture October 31st, 2003

Mr. Speaker, on the occasion of the huge demonstration by beef producers at the National Assembly, the Quebec minister of agriculture made the following statement, “The new program, as set up by the federal government, is not what the Quebec industry hoped to see”.

Can the minister confirm that the assistance program will be flexible enough to compensate all producers affected by the mad cow crisis?

Congregation of Sisters of Sainte Anne October 8th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the House to a decisive event in the history of the municipality of Saint-Jacques de Montcalm.

It was 150 years ago, on August 23, 1853, that Mother Marie-Anne and her 27 followers arrived in Saint-Jacques de Montcalm, after a long and perilous two-day voyage from Vaudreuil, where the Congregation of the Sisters of Sainte Anne had been founded in 1850 by Esther Blondin, who later took the name Marie-Anne. This exceptional woman was beatified by Pope John Paul II on April 29, 2001.

A dinner in honour of the anniversary of the arrival of the Sisters of Sainte Anne was held on September 6. More than 400 people attended this event to commemorating the congregation's 150 years of history.

The Saint-Jacques boarding school, founded in 1853, eventually grew into the Collège Esther-Blondin in 1996, a private secondary school offering an international education to girls and boys, at last fulfilling Mother Marie-Anne's dream of coeducational schools for poor rural children.

In recognition of this great religious figure—

Public Safety, 2002 October 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Terrebonne—Blainville for her question. As mayor, I probably would not have made that decision. Mayors are very close to the people, maybe closer than MPs are. Let us say that, in a municipality, we can meet people all the time; we live with them.

With what I know, I would have been against this bill. I would have never dared put it on the table. There was no justification for it. It was not good for the people in terms of their freedom, and their safety was not threatened. Judging by the War Measures Act, the safety of the people was not threatened at all.

Public Safety, 2002 October 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, to respond to my colleague, I have been around a while and I remember the war measures in 1970. I was living in Montreal then and it was not pleasant to walk in the city's streets. I believe that, at that time, the government took on some rights it did not have in implementing war measures without a valid reason.

If we look at everything that happened with the war measures, bombs were placed by RCMP officers. In this bill, the RCMP has many powers. It seems to me that it has already a lot and perhaps some should be taken away.

Members of Parliament should all decide together what we want in the future.