Debates of April 28th, 2009

Opposition Motion—Harmonization of QST with GST

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the tax system in place on reserves is different. There is no sales tax. We know that. It creates a challenge because certain products that should be sold only to residents on the reserve are in fact sold more widely, which deprives the state of certain revenues.

My colleague raises a very good point. The motion before us today deals only with Quebec and the recognition of Quebec. That is what this motion is all about. I remember a very moving ceremony that took place in this House just a few months ago and during which everyone was saying that the time had come to right the wrongs of the past. There was an apology for the residential school system, and so on. There are issues, like this one, that need to be dealt with by this House with regard to first nations.

My colleague's riding in northern and central British Columbia is home to very large first nations communities. If he did us the honour of bringing forward a motion in that regard, he could count on my support.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member will know that in the existing agreement between Quebec and the Government of Canada there are still some differences. There are still two taxes, there are some differences in the basis on which the tax is applied; the calculation of the credits; who collects, Quebec versus the CRA; and there are also some issues with regard to a tax on a tax.

Does the member consider those to be matters that can be resolved? Does he believe that if there is no movement on these issues the compensation would not be appropriate?

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is worth reminding the hon. member that the first province to sign the agreement to harmonize taxes was Quebec, in the early 1990s. The example of a tax on a tax is the kind of issue that is dealt with through real harmonization and that is easy to compensate on the tax side. That is precisely what should be provided. However, this does not mean that the federal government can impose anything. I gave the example of diapers and books, which are currently not taxed in Quebec. We will never let the federal government lecture us and tell us that, from now on, diapers and books must be taxed. This harmonization is not done to better tax families, because that would be despicable. However, harmonizing in the best interests of the general economy may be a very good thing.

I have always said that Quebec was the first province to harmonize its taxes. In fact, the federal government recognized that this was indeed the case. If the minister wants to find other criteria and excuses to ease his conscience for all those years when Quebec was not compensated, fine. However, we are convinced that the $2.6 billion that are owed to Quebec should be paid, and that is why we support the Bloc's motion.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I really enjoy listening to the hon. member for Outremont, first because he speaks very well, and also because he really understands what is going on on the other side, since he himself was a minister in the Quebec National Assembly. The fact that a person was a minister in Quebec City does not automatically mean that he or she understands these things. Indeed, some current cabinet ministers are former members of the Quebec National Assembly, but they have already forgotten that. Day in and day out, rather than defend Quebec's interests, they give us the impression that they want to keep the flag on the hood of their limousine, as Jean Chrétien put it so well. He was the only person who could use both official languages at the same time.

When we look at the government opposite, we get the impression that the good old method used regarding this issue consists in setting criteria for Quebec and, once it meets them, in pushing them back, or in setting new ones. Quebec is required to meet these criteria, but it can never do that, because the government keeps changing them. It is like a dog chasing its tail. It can never catch it. That is obvious with the Conservatives. However, I also find the comments made in this House by two Liberal members very disturbing, and I would like to hear what the hon. member for Outremont has to say about them.

For example, the hon. member sitting nearby said that Quebec must be prepared to make some concessions. This is like announcing right now that other criteria will be set in the future.

[The Deputy Speaker, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Outremont has only 30 seconds to respond.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, even though my parents named my Thomas, and thus made me the one who doubts, the doubt expressed today by the member is totally justified. If the past is any indication, I do believe that the Liberals are preparing a safety hatch so they do not have to really support what they say they are supporting today. That would be consistent with their past behaviour. For our part, we will be consistent with ours, and we will not change our position.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Joliette. I take this opportunity to say to the voters from La Pointe-de-l'Île that their member of Parliament is in fine form.

I am proud to be here today to speak in favour of the motion. I will read it and after that, I will explain why I am so happy.

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should negotiate in good faith with the Government of Quebec to resolve the dispute dating back over ten years regarding the harmonization of the QST with the GST in the early 1990s and agree to provide $2.6 billion in compensation to Quebec for this harmonization,—

Up to now, that compensation has been refused.

—and that Quebec continue to administer these harmonized taxes.

The motion must be defended by the Bloc in this House because until now a motion adopted unanimously by the Quebec National Assembly has been rejected by the government. Is it because Quebec is demanding too much? Is it because Quebec is requesting special treatment? No. Quebec only wants to be treated the same way as all other provinces, since the government has changed its mind.

Let us go through the history. First, I will read the unanimous motion passed by Quebec's National Assembly. I repeat, the Bloc Québécois is supporting here the unanimous motion passed by Quebec's National Assembly, which reads as follows:

WHEREAS Québec was the first province to harmonize with the Federal goods and services tax (GST) in the early 1990s;

Quebec was the first province to harmonize with the federal government.

WHEREAS since then, three Atlantic provinces have harmonized with the GST in 1997 and have received compensation for this from the Federal Government totalling close to 1 billion dollars;

WHEREAS the Government of Ontario announced that it would harmonize its sales tax with the GST beginning on 1 July 2010;

WHEREAS the Federal Government will grant a 4.3 billion dollar compensation to Ontario for this harmonization, an amount that is justified in the Canada-Ontario memorandum of understanding particularly owing to the desire to stimulate economic growth and job creation, and the Federal Government will administer this new provincial tax free of charge on behalf of Ontario;

Let me stress that the maritime provinces and Ontario have been compensated.

WHEREAS the Ontario sales tax will be very similar to the Québec sales tax (QST) since certain goods, such as books—

It is the same thing in Ontario.

—will not be subject to the provincial tax and that input tax refunds in Ontario may be identical to those agreed to by Québec—

Inputs are the materials that factories buy to produce their goods.

—for an 8-year period;

WHEREAS Ontario is the fourth province to receive compensation from the Federal Government as part of the harmonization of the provincial and federal sales taxes, while Québec [Quebec says so] has not received any compensation to this day even though it was the first province to harmonize its sales tax;

We read that, and we do not understand. Why did Quebec not receive anything?

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the National Assembly ask the Federal Government to treat Québec justly and equitably, by granting compensation that is comparable to that offered to Ontario for the harmonization of its sales tax with the GST, which would represent an amount of 2.6 billion dollars for Québec.

An amount of $2.6 billion is not exactly pocket change.

Why is it that, so far anyway, the Government of Canada, through its finance minister, has denied Quebec's request? It is hard to understand. After Quebec became the first province to harmonize its sales tax with the GST and the Maritimes negotiated for their three provinces up to $1 billion in compensation, the federal government, a Liberal government at the time, told Quebec that the harmonization costs to these provinces exceeded 5% and they would be compensated, but that Quebec's costs were lower than 5%. Quebec agreed with these terms. However, when the Conservative minister approached Ontario, either directly or through someone else, those terms were dropped. They no longer exist. That is how Ontario was offered $4.6 billion to harmonize its sales tax, with the federal government administering the tax collection at no cost to the province. The federal government is not charging them anything for collecting the provincial sales tax.

My problem is not with the minister being generous with Ontario, but rather with him changing the rules. This means that Ontario stands to receive a substantial amount. The same should be true of Quebec. What was the minister's response to Quebec's request? He started by flatly denying it, arguing that the taxes were not perfectly harmonized. The Quebec minister wrote him back, saying that the necessary changes would be made. After running out of reasons for denying Quebec's request, what did the minister say? He said they would see what they could do, but that the tax would have to be collected by the Government of Canada. Nothing could be more unacceptable to Quebec, which has been recognized as a nation by the Conservative government, than being denied the fundamental right to collect its own taxes.

I strongly wish that this motion is passed by Parliament so that the government negotiate in good faith with the Government of Quebec and pay proper compensation, in all fairness.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her excellent speech. The Bloc is always glad to have her here with us because she is one of our pioneers, one of the most senior members of the Bloc Québécois, and she always does exceptional work.

I would like to ask her a simple question because I know that she has a long history of involvement in the sovereignist movement. If we were sovereign and had the authority to legislate and collect all of our own taxes, would we no longer get trapped over and over in this federal institution?

The Conservatives woed us somewhat by recognizing us as a nation a while ago. Now they want to interfere with our taxation authority. In the past, the Liberals did as the member explained in her speech.

How would Quebec sovereignty be a more effective way not only to collect all of our taxes, but also to stimulate our economy and promote our social development?

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has asked a very good question.

Briefly, I would point out that the word “sovereignty” includes the word “sovereign”. Being sovereign means that one makes all of one's own decisions.

This is what I want to say: when Quebec is sovereign, it will collect its own taxes as it sees fit and spend the money as it wishes. It will also support the province's development in ways it feels are best.

Right now, it does not always seem as though Quebec is reaching its full potential. On the contrary, there is still so much to do. That is why we are working toward achieving sovereignty, but in the meantime, we are working on development and on urging the Government of Canada to negotiate with the Government of Quebec.

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have another question for the member who just spoke.

We now have a Canadian government which says that the way the harmonization was done was not to its liking and announces that until it has collected all the money and distributed it in Quebec, if it wants to, it does not intend to give Quebec the $2.6 billion it owes it. That amount is growing daily. It would unfortunately have been the same thing under a Liberal government.

In an article published in The Gazette 10 days ago, the Minister of Finance said: “Quebec will collect when we collect”.

Considering that sort of blackmail, should we not be worried that if Quebec yielded to the Conservatives and let them collect the money, they could very well decide to take that blackmail further by refusing even to give us our fair share?

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is an important question that, in a sense, we do not dare ask.

For me, it is unthinkable that the federal government would not give Quebec its $2.6 billion under the pretext—and I use the word advisedly— that the Quebec government would not want to let it collect the tax.

That would be absurd. The federal government said that it is collecting the tax for Ontario free of charge. Quebec would be collecting its own tax, but Canada is insisting on collecting it if it is going to pay compensation. That is absurd, unfair and ridiculous.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely pleased to take part in this debate. Once again I feel that the Bloc Québécois and its members are playing their role masterfully in defending without compromise the interests and values of the Quebec nation. I will read today's motion again for the benefit of those who are watching us:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should negotiate in good faith with the Government of Quebec to resolve the dispute dating back over ten years regarding the harmonization of the QST with the GST in the early 1990s and agree to provide $2.6 billion in compensation to Quebec for this harmonization, and that Quebec continue to administer these harmonized taxes.

This motion is simply aimed at giving Quebec its due since it was the first province to harmonize its sales tax with the GST. I remember clearly the debates that went on at that time. Harmonizing its sales tax with the GST was not easy for Quebec. When the federal government eliminated the manufacturing sales tax and introduced the goods and services tax, that gave rise to an extremely important debate in Canada and in Quebec. People were wondering about the possible harmful effects of this tax since it is an indirect tax that is applied in the same fashion regardless of income, as is the case with any consumption tax. So there was an extremely important debate and the federal government amended its plan to ensure, through a tax credit, that families would not be penalized by the introduction of the GST, which is a value added tax.

In this context, in the early 1990s, the Government of Quebec, a Liberal government, decided to follow suit. The debate on QST and GST harmonization was not easy in Quebec. In hindsight, I must admit, the premier at the time, Robert Bourassa, showed a great deal of courage by raising and beginning this debate. Harmonizing the QST and the GST was not an easy thing to do.

One might have expected the federal government to strongly emphasize Quebec's leadership in promoting economic efficiency. We agree that two sales taxes of this kind should be harmonized as much as possible. Clearly, as we can imagine, certain choices involve greater flexibility. For instance, in Quebec, there is no sales tax on books and on culture, although the federal government continues to tax culture and books with the GST. In that case, one would have expected the federal government to harmonize its tax with the Quebec tax.

Therefore we might have expected the federal government not only to harmonize its tax with Quebec when it comes to GST on books, but also to emphasize Quebec's leadership in terms of economic efficiency. Clearly, it will be much simpler when Quebec becomes a sovereign country. Then there will be only one sales tax, which we will administer based on our values and our preferences. In the meantime, we must try to make the most of the situation. It is unfortunate that members from Quebec who belong to the other parties of this House are not defending the interests and values of Quebeckers. However, I am not worried. In the next election, which will be held soon, the people of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean will solve the problem of the Conservative members who are totally ineffective when it comes to defending Quebec's interests.

I will get back to the QST and GST, which were harmonized in 1990. When three of the Atlantic provinces decided to harmonize their own sales taxes with the GST, the federal government offered compensation of approximately $1 billion. Up to that point, there had been no compensation for provinces that harmonized their taxes. When the federal government decided to compensate the Atlantic provinces for harmonizing their tax with the GST, it would have been quite normal for the government at that time, which was Liberal, and finance minister Paul Martin, to compensate Quebec.

But, no. I will read the very revealing answer given then by Mr. Martin to my colleague Yvan Loubier:

Mr. Speaker, there is a formula to compensate provinces that will lose more than 5% of their sales tax revenues. This is not the case for Ontario, British Columbia, or Alberta. It is not currently the case for Quebec either, and it was not in 1990 when it signed the harmonization agreement.

First of all, the then finance minister, Paul Martin, and the Liberal Party, acknowledged that Quebec's sales tax had been harmonized. I shudder with indignation. Their excuse was that Quebec was not entitled to compensation because it was not losing 5% of its revenues by harmonizing its sales tax with the GST. Such was the excuse of the Liberal federal government in 1996.

Now that the Conservative government and the current Minister of Finance have agreed to compensate Ontario for harmonizing its tax with the GST, the government has come up with a new excuse. The 5%, which was the Liberals' excuse for not compensating Quebec in 1996, is no longer the norm. Now, the excuse is that the federal government does not collect this tax.

Yesterday, the Minister of Finance told us that he was not setting any preconditions for negotiating with Quebec. Yet we can read the article he published in La Presse.

I want to take this opportunity to tell the Conservatives from Quebec who say that this should not be negotiated in the public arena that the positions of the Conservative federal finance minister have been made public. Everyone who bought La Presse that day could read the finance minister's conditions.

The article that ran in La Presse clearly states that, in the finance minister's opinion, there is no harmonization of Quebec's sales tax with the federal GST unless the federal government collects the tax. That is a condition, and it appears in the article published in La Presse.

Contrary to what the finance minister said yesterday, there is a precondition, which is a fabrication. As my colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île said earlier, the government came up with a new criterion to make sure that Quebec would not be entitled to compensation.

Now to get back to the present Minister of Finance. I will read an excerpt from the Conservative budget of 2006.

Harmonized value-added taxes are now in place in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick—and Quebec administers a provincial value-added tax, as well as collecting the goods and services tax on behalf of the federal government.

At that time, in 2006, the Minister of Finance did not seem much bothered by this, nor the Conservative government, nor the Quebec Conservatives either.

But separate provincial retail sales taxes continue to be collected in five provinces.... Provincial retail sales taxes also substantially increase the effective tax rate—.

He names the five provinces and Quebec is not one of them. This means that, in 2006, the Conservative Minister of Finance, the Quebec Conservative members, the Conservative government, the Conservative Prime Minister, considered that Quebec was not among the provinces that had not harmonized their taxes—because it had. In the meantime, an agreement has been signed with Ontario. By harmonizing its tax, Ontario does not lose 5% of its revenue. So now a new pretext had to be invented in order to not compensate Quebec. That pretext was the collection by the federal government of the harmonized sales tax, whether GST or QST. That is totally unacceptable for Quebec.

The Quebec National Assembly has said so. And even if it had not, even if we do not consider the key issue in the debate, there is a certain inconsistency here, just from the administrative point of view. Imagine, in a period of economic crisis, wanting to change the whole system of collecting the QST and the GST just to please the Conservative Prime Minister and his Conservative members. Imagine the costs that represents, both for the Quebec state, and for the federal state, along with all Quebec businesses. It is suicidal! The Conservative position deserves to be defeated, while our motion deserves to be adopted.

[Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the speech by my colleague.

When harmonizing the federal and provincial taxes, you generally try to tax the same products. However, it was striking for me to hear the member talk about books. We know that this category of products is taxed at the federal level, but is not taxed by Quebec. The member of the Bloc Québécois has quite an approach. In his view, the whole of Canada must adjust to the desires of the Bloc Québécois. He does not have the national vision which would require the tax to be the same everywhere.

Moreover, he spoke of recession and economic hardship. I am the minister of National Revenue. Does my colleague know how much Quebec taxpayers are paying for the federal government to administer the GST, the QST and income taxes while Quebec does the same? The Government of Quebec spends $445 million a year to administer this tax by itself, while the federal government already has the structure to do it. I am not saying that Quebec must let us administer it, but people need to know exactly how much it costs.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yes I am a nationalist, but for the Quebec nation, not the Canadian nation. Where I fault the Conservative members from Quebec is that they have no nationalist feelings for Quebec.

The hon. member, and Minister of National Revenue, implies that the Ontario sales tax and the GST are 100% harmonized, and this is not the case. In Ontario, there is no tax on children's clothing or footwear, but there is GST. As for child car seats and booster seats, it is the same: no sales tax but GST. Worse yet, there is no Ontario provincial tax on books but GST applies. It is not a serious matter that not everything is harmonized in Ontario, but it is serious in Quebec.

I think that the minister ought to understand that nobody would dream of changing the way GST and QST are collected by Quebec; it works fine and has done for 19 years. Nobody but the incompetent, the careless, the irresponsible.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have asked this question of another party earlier and I would like to pose it to the Bloc as well. I think it is important to be addressed.

The whole aspect of harmonizing taxes is to create efficiencies as well as fairness and tax equity or tax justice, but right now there are some differences in the existing regime in Quebec. There are still two taxes, not one, which is contemplated under harmonization. They are applied against slightly different bases. There are some exceptions in terms of what is taxable. There are some problems with regard to tax credits, which would also create some inefficiencies if we had two systems. There is the difference in terms of the collector, whether it would be the province of Quebec or the CRA. Finally, there is also the issue of applying a tax on a tax, which is another area that causes some grief to some businesses and certainly to Canadians and in terms of the economics of having a harmonized tax.

My question to the member is this. Are these particular items open to negotiation and discussion in order to forward the discussion with regard to compensation?

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, harmonization of the tax does not mean there must be only one tax, and what is more, one tax collected by the federal government.

That said, it is true that there are certain areas in which harmonization could proceed further. When Ms. Jérôme-Forget was the minister, she wrote this to the federal Conservative Minister of Finance. The Government of Quebec is therefore prepared to negotiate in good faith to advance this harmonization. Ms. Jérôme-Forget wrote as follows in her letter:

The principal difference between the QST and the GST concerns tax rebates on the inputs of large businesses for certain goods, a measure which would cost Quebec approximately $500 million annually, or a little less than 5% of the revenue generated by the QST.

I wish to hereby inform you that the Government of Quebec would agree to make the necessary adjustments to its QST in order to respond to your concern for a more complete harmonization, in exchange for a fair and equitable compensation of $2.6 billion.

That is what is stipulated in the motion and that is what the House of Commons needs to adopt.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to respond to today’s motion saying that the federal government should negotiate in good faith with the Government of Quebec over tax harmonization. I am happy to reiterate the position of the Conservative government. I say reiterate because I have said it many times in the House. However, the Bloc members seem to need to have things repeated over and over. They pretend to be deaf. They never want to listen to reason, especially when it runs counter to their option, their goal, their obsession. Today, though, they are giving us an opportunity to reiterate our position. I want to take advantage of this chance to explain the differences between the Bloc Québécois, the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party when it comes to the Government of Quebec.

If Quebec decides to harmonize completely, as Ontario and the Atlantic provinces have done, it will be treated equitably. We will show good faith, as we have always said. Our position has not changed on that and will not change.

As a Quebec nationalist, I joined the Conservative Party because it is the only federal party that respects the jurisdictions of Quebec and the other provinces while trying to make Canada better.

The Liberal Party, on the other hand, has the opposite ideology. Since Trudeau especially, it has tried to reduce the powers of the provinces and primarily the powers of the Government of Quebec. According to Liberal Party ideology, we need a strong, domineering central government. That was the position of Trudeau, Chrétien, and the hon. member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, and it is certainly the firm position of the current leader of the Liberal Party.

Since he first started writing, he has always aligned himself with that band of Liberal intellectuals who think they know better than Quebeckers themselves what is good for them. The current leader of the Liberal Party of Canada speaks of Trudeau as the “Prince”. Those are his words, not mine. The current Liberal leader wants to imitate Trudeau’s approach to Quebec. He wants to dominate Quebec and centralize everything in Ottawa. I am sure, though, that he will try to hide his true intentions, just as he already did in regard to UNESCO and some other matters, including his approach to Quebec nationalists. We are starting to get to know the Liberal leader and his tactics. He seems to think that nothing has changed since the Trudeau years. He seems to think that Canada has not changed in the 30 years since he left the country. Maybe when the leader of the Liberal Party was young, very young, before leaving the country therefore, politicians could get away with saying one thing—

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. With respect to the minister, there is a specific motion before us. We have a rule, and according to the Standing Orders and Marleau and Montpetit, being relevant to the debate before the House is extremely important to make sure that the debate is productive. I can cite the sections if necessary.

The member has spent some time talking about the ideology of another party and other matters not directly related to the issue before the House. I would indicate that the member should be relevant to the debate.

[The Acting Speaker, Barry Devolin]

I am not sure that the member's point of order is in order. The Chair often grants great latitude to members to speak about matters before the House in the ways in which they do.

With that, the Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what is important here is that Quebeckers will quickly understand that the centralizing and domineering vision of the Liberal Party does not suit them. I would like to reassure Quebeckers who are listening to us now that the Conservative Party will not let them down. We do not want to practise domineering and centralizing federalism and, at the same time, we are not going to dig everywhere to uncover any possible trifle to prove that the country does not work, as the Bloc Québécois is trying to do every day in this House.

The Bloc's motion today asking the Conservative government to negotiate in good faith is a farce. Why? Because the Bloc Québécois itself acts in bad faith on this matter. It does not want things to work. It wants us to do one thing—

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the minister is still not on topic. He is off on some other road. There is a motion being debated, and he is talking about all the other parties, the Bloc Québécois, the Liberal Party, but not about the harmonization of taxes, which is the topic for today. I would very much like to hear him on this topic since he represents the governing party and we want to know his position.

[The Acting Speaker, Barry Devolin]

As I said a couple of minutes ago, the Chair is in the habit of granting great latitude to members when they are addressing the House. I will encourage all members, including the minister, to stick to the topic before the House today. It is not the habit of the Chair to interpret that narrowly but to interpret it broadly.

On the same point of order, the hon. member for Shefford.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like you to listen carefully to what he says. He has been speechifying for a few minutes already, theoretically about the motion at hand, but I have not heard him say one word about the harmonization of taxes. I would like you to pay close attention to what the minister is about to say and to make sure that he really deals with the topic at hand today.

[The Acting Speaker, Barry Devolin]

I appreciate the offers of assistance from the hon. members of the chamber, but I would like to give the minister an opportunity to get to his point.

With that, the hon. Minister of Public Works.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleague to pay more attention. I talked about harmonization.