Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to our opposition motion today. I really want to clarify that today's topic is successful immigration. That is what we want. Our motion today is not anti-immigration, far from it. On the contrary, it seeks to bring in newcomers decently and properly, with class and dignity.
I heard a lot of things today, but no one has spoken about one aspect that I would like to remind members of. We are talking about people who are leaving their home country. It is not easy for people to leave the place where they were born. It requires huge sacrifices. The people who leave do so for good reason. They often leave their country to come here under circumstances that make it hard for them to find a job and that leave them with a low income. Often first-generation newcomers make that sacrifice for their children. That is noble and it deserves respect. They deserve to be decently received. A few minutes ago, someone pointed out that immigrants are excellent workers, dedicated people who will give body and soul and who will work hours and hours each week to improve their situation and that of their children and descendants.
That is why I want to say that it is a crime to bring them into the country and not take care of them. I am ashamed to know that there are asylum seekers living on the streets of Montreal. That does not make any sense in a G7 country. That is why we are moving this motion again today and we are asking the government, not to decide everything or to stop immigration, but to sit down with the provinces and Quebec and to respect the provinces' integration capacity.
There is even a Liberal member who had the nerve to say earlier that the provinces and Quebec are in the best position to set their integration capacity. I certainly hope so. That is what we are saying. What is wrong with working together? Why is starting a discussion a problem? We ask questions just about every day during question period. We are told that they are working hand in hand and that they have no business working together with the Bloc Québécois because they are working together with the Quebec government. How is it, then, that the Quebec government is reduced to complaining publicly about the fact that Ottawa is disrespectful and is not listening? I would appreciate it if someone could explain that to me.
I invite the parliamentary secretary to ask me a question about this. I want him to explain it to me as part of his question. They say they are working with the provinces. Why then did Quebec's premier have to write a letter that was published in the newspapers? Are people here laughing at us? Our approach is compassionate. It is about respecting people. It is about respecting integration, our institutions and our capacity as a country. Everything is working fine for the federal government. It sets the threshold at 500,000 newcomers per year and wants to reach a population of 100 million. However, the federal government is not the one taking on this responsibility.
Earlier, someone listed all the hundreds of millions of dollars and the billions of dollars that have been given for so many years under the agreement with Quebec on immigration. I should hope so, since we entered into that agreement because of the work we are doing. As we know, Canada has a revenue problem. The federal government collects half the taxes, but it does not take on half of the responsibilities. In fact, it is not even fulfilling the responsibilities that it does have.
My colleague from Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères reminded me of a very good example, namely shoreline erosion. Navigation is a federal responsibility. The federal government has been ignoring this file since the 1990s, leaving people to deal with their problems on their own. It is doing this in several sectors.
There is no foresight, no planning. The government decides that this is what it is doing and opens the floodgates. However, it has not looked into how we can integrate these people into our social systems.
I want to talk about community organizations. I see this as subcontracting on the cheap by governments, at both levels. These organizations do critically important work and are often forced to allocate half of their human resources to looking for grant programs and filling out paperwork in order to please the other levels of government. Instead, these people should be providing direct services to the disadvantaged people they serve.
I really admire these people. I admire them so much. I would also like to salute them, on the off chance some of them are listening.
Someone was saying that the Bloc Québécois saw immigration as a problem. No, immigration is not a problem. It is even a solution for a number of things, including labour. It is not the only solution, but it is one of the solutions. I have colleagues who proposed other solutions also, such as tax credits for people 65 and up.
Immigration is not a problem. The problem is the Liberal government's management. That is a seriously big problem. They do not see the costs coming. They do not plan because it is not sexy to say that now is the time to invest to be able to welcome people in five or 10 years. It is not politically expedient, so they just open the gates. What we are asking the government today, is to respect the people who actually do the work of integrating newcomers. We are calling on the government to sit down with them and talk to them.
Earlier, I started talking about the $470 million for asylum seekers. This week, Quebec was told to stop complaining because we are so lucky and they are going to give us $100 million for temporary housing. That is another topic. We do not mind getting $100 million. Still, there is a lot of debate in the House. It may look good for the government to give us $100 million. The Liberals are pros at that kind of thing. They stand up and say that they have always been there, that they have handed over $100 million, and so on. That $100 million will cover about 27.6% of the total amount that has been spent on temporary housing.
The thing is, we take in more than half the asylum seekers. They think we should be happy to get 27%. No, we are not happy. We are saying, fine, we will take it, but we need more. The other $470 million is still up in the air. We are talking federal responsibility. Do not tell me the feds give Quebec money every year for the Quebec-Canada agreement. I explained that a few minutes ago. That is a separate thing.
Why do we need to shout ourselves hoarse here for months just to get the government to give us the bare minimum? We are tired of that. Then, some members are surprised that there is group of people, which seems to be growing, who are convinced that Quebec would manage its affairs better on its own because it would control all of its tax revenue. We would not always be required to get down on our knees and beg just to get back a fraction of the half that we sent to Ottawa or to try to make do with 27%, when we should be getting more.
That is the problem. It is policies, it is predictability, it is our systems, including the education system. Quebec recently went through some very arduous strikes in the education sector. I am a teacher. I was a teacher for 25 years. If those people were willing to walk the picket line for more than 20 days, that means things are pretty bad. We have problems. Now they are being told that it is no big deal and they have to take in more people.
It is not that immigration is a problem, but we have to look at how we can take these people in. It is important to respect local authorities, sit down and work together, instead of constantly telling us they are working hand in hand. I am not even sure what they mean by “hand in hand”. If they are working hand in hand, why does the Premier of Quebec have to write letters to the media? It makes no sense.
We are urging the government to be reasonable. The government should sit down with the provinces, the territories and Quebec for a genuine conversation and ask them how best to proceed.