Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was region.

Last in Parliament November 2005, as Bloc MP for Jonquière—Alma (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2006, with 39% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Supply February 22nd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, just before oral question period, I was addressing an opposition motion from the Conservative Party concerning the accountability of foundations, which must be improved, and the need for the Auditor General to be in charge of the external audit of these foundations.

If I may, I would like to briefly congratulate the hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier on his presentation. My remarks followed his presentation. In my remarks, I even referred to a number of things he mentioned. It is important to review this, since there was a relatively long hiatus between the two parts of my remarks.

I also related my experience of collaborating with the Government of Quebec with respect to general auditing. It was in connection with the management of a large, $240 million fund, which I had the opportunity to run and which could be likened to some of the funds run by the federal government. Under the Quebec system, this fund was audited by the Auditor General. This was interesting because, from the time this fund was established, the Auditor General was involved, not in the accountability process, since we were just starting up, but in the start-up process per se. In fact, the Auditor General wanted to make sure that all the criteria for the selection of projects were consistent with the business plan that had been developed on the basis of stated concerns, and respected particularly those who stood to benefit. So, I gave an overview of my experience.

Now, I would like to remind the House of certain facts and the reason we are debating this motion today. If we look at the Canada Foundation for Innovation, which has received $3.6 billion, the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, with $2.5 billion, Canada Health Infoway, with $1.2 billion, Genome Canada, with $300 million, we cannot say that these are not important foundations, certainly with respect to their funding. I cannot understand how such institutions can be overlooked by the Auditor General.

This motion calls for a review of this method, this way of doing things. I do not want to dwell on this subject, since we have heard a great deal on it already. Nonetheless, having the Auditor General involved in it permits some transparency and accounting. In addition, it avoids something we have already seen in this House, neither less than a scandal, such as the sponsorship scandal.

I draw the House's attention to another phenomenon, that of transfer payments of $9.1 billion for these foundations. Last year, there was a $9.1 billion surplus, which the Minister of Finance underestimated. Another possible surplus of $8.9 billion is expected. We are talking about $25 billion. We cannot help but be affected by this, all the more so because, of all the funds allocated to these foundations, some $7.7 billion has yet to be spent.

During my first intervention, I noted that my constituents are affected to some extent by these unspent amounts. At least, we believe they have not been, ill advisedly. This is cause for reflection, because at present, my region of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean is experiencing a serious economic crisis, particularly in relation to the softwood lumber crisis and the mad cow crisis. Jobs have been lost as well due to plant closures, which is extremely significant not only for this riding but also for the region. Six hundred jobs were lost at the Port Alfred mill. Alcan has also closed its smelter. It has not laid off any workers, but this still means 600 fewer jobs for the region and for the next generation of workers. Again last week, 200 jobs were lost, at Wal-Mart.

When we see this money and the government's attitude, we cannot remain unaffected. There is a regional consensus to create an investment fund so as to enable the local economy and local stakeholders to take rapid action to save plants in difficulty and support one time projects.

When we see this attitude, these billions of dollars just lying in those accounts, we cannot remain unaffected. That is why I am asking the House, all my colleagues, to reflect and support this bill so that there is, in fact, better control and better use of such funds, and so that everyone can benefit from them, be they in the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean or here in the capital.

Supply February 22nd, 2005

Madam Speaker, first, I want to congratulate the hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier on his excellent presentation. Our new colleague, who is our deputy finance critic, has a lot of expertise, particularly since he recently took part in a prebudget tour and came to the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region. He explained a number of issues about which people in my riding may have wondered. I was very pleased and proud to see him, and also the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, who also took part in the tour.

Today's issue was a source of great concern to our voters, including in my riding. Many economic development areas are currently affected in my riding of Jonquière—Alma and in the whole Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region. When we talk about these foundations and the fact that they are not audited by the Auditor General, people are entitled to be concerned. It is to their credit. Indeed, considering the astronomical amounts of money, the billions of dollars involved, we have every right to be concerned. We also have every right to think that it is important that these foundations be audited.

I am fortunate to sit on the Public Accounts Committee and to be able to check what the government does and how it spends its money. However, I want to focus on the Auditor General's mandate and her importance to the parliamentary process and healthy public management. I am very proud of the work the Auditor General can do. She clarifies a lot for us.

I call on all hon. members to join me in supporting this motion. This motion will help improve accountability and also ensure that the Auditor General can conduct this external audit.

At some point, we should perhaps the question the significance of having these types of foundations outside the government reporting environment.

Early in my career, I had the opportunity to be the director general of a major fund for the Government of Quebec. It had been created in the spirit of the Quebec youth summit. I was in charge of a $240 million fund to help young people in Quebec. I should point out that the Auditor General was involved in the activities. From the moment the fund was established, the Auditor General became involved in the process, even when the fund was being set up, to ensure, for the good of all young Quebeckers, that it responded to their needs and expectations properly.

Indeed, it is not always easy to work with someone as important as an auditor. Sometimes it can disrupt the department or the employees, but I believe it is always with the idea of having better accountability.

I also want to draw your attention to the objective of achieving results. It is essential to establish funds the way the government did with the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Allow me to come back to this because I have already expressed my opposition to it. When funds are outside the government reporting environment, and existing agencies are given certain flexibility in using them, it is important to ensure their original purpose and the reasons they serve the public are respected. In my experience, I was lucky to have the important cooperation of the Auditor General.

Wal-Mart February 14th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, Wal-Mart management ran a message in today's newspapers, in which it claims recent events have been very trying for it and accuses the public of taking sides. But do they not say in retail that the customer is always right?

There are labour laws in Quebec that are good for everyone, and Wal-Mart must comply with them. The past century was marked by a number of major battles to gain the right to unionize, but the management of this multinational seems oblivious of that fact, with its 19th century behaviour.

Today there are plenty of dissatisfied customers. All of the members of the Bloc Québécois call upon Wal-Mart management, if it wants to spare itself any more trying times in coming weeks, to reconsider its decision to close the Jonquière store, to negotiate with its associates, and to stop its union-busting tactics.

If returning to these 19th century tactics is what it takes to provide the customer with the lowest price, then Quebec customers are not buying, thank you.

Wal-Mart February 10th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the multinational Wal-Mart announced the closure of its Jonquière store. I was extremely saddened and upset at the news.

A company like Wal-Mart cannot challenge the fundamental right to form a union. It has acted in bad faith, claiming an agreement with the workers was impossible. The people of my region do not deserve such shabby treatment from the firm's management, which, visibly engaged in global expansion, thinks it can do anything it pleases.

Two hundred jobs lost in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean is a huge number. These workers have my sympathy for losing their jobs so abruptly and at a particularly bad time, moreover, because the La Baie plant of Abitibi Consolidated also shut down for good just a few weeks ago. That put some 650 people out of work

I heartily condemn this action by Wal-Mart, a very poor corporate citizen. I call upon my colleagues and the general public to challenge such actions.

Tourism Industry December 10th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, first, I would remind the minister that this matter has been under consideration for one month already and that my colleague, the hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, has already questioned the minister about this.

Does the minister understand that our tourism industry needs to start planning for its next season now and that it needs to know immediately whether or not this program will be extended? I remind the minister that 181 additional jobs are at stake and this is a major issue for our region.

Tourism Industry December 10th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region has benefited from the program to extend the tourist season since 2002. To date, this program has been very promising for the 35 participating businesses. The spinoffs for our region are almost $4 million. But these businesses need this program to be extended for another two years.

Can the minister, who has seen the overall results of this program, assure our businesses in the tourism industry that he will extend this program, which, unfortunately, expires today?

International Trade December 3rd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the Agropur cooperative has announced the closing of its dairy plant in Saint-Alexandre-de-Kamouraska, thus putting 50 employees out of work. Agropur explains that this closing has been caused by a WTO decision whereby the dairy can no longer produce milk for export.

Since the federal government has taken note of the WTO decision, is it prepared to do its part in getting the dairy plant going again?

Supply December 2nd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I understand the secretary of state's question. However, I would propose something even more simple. The minister and secretary of state should come with me, this afternoon or at least whenever their schedules permit, to go explain things to producers currently at the convention who are waiting for this government to introduce an assistance package or at least some concrete measures. He should come with us.

Supply December 2nd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, this makes me smile a little since the minister, once again, is trying to get away with not meeting with producers. I would remind him that, yesterday evening, after the House adjourned, I and ten Bloc Quebecois colleagues went to support the producers.

Unfortunately, we learned of the minister's response only over the course of the evening. It is a shame because I would have simply invited the minister to accompany us. We would have made room for him on the plane so he could meet with them.

There have been programs and plans, but ineffective plans. There is a problem. We cannot turn a deaf ear to producers unable to send their cattle to the slaughterhouses. We need a floor price. When will the minister work with his provincial counterparts to set a Canada-wide floor price? When will he improve his assistance package, as producers are demanding?

He is telling us that things are so good, there are no problems.

Supply December 2nd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, it is with pride that I speak in this House, but also with some anger, an anger that is equal only to the government's actions.

When I am talking about pride, it is because I represent a region, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, which has a high concentration of producers. I can tell you that I share and understand their disarray. Indeed, I had the chance to work on a farm for six years, the Aly Blackburn farm, in Métabetchouan. The owners are Claire and Yvon Blackburn. They are very nice people. They work very hard, day in and day out, as all milk producers in Quebec do.

I had the chance to really appreciate, to really understand the efforts they are making to put bread, butter and fresh quality products on our tables. Yesterday, following the parliamentary sitting, I took the opportunity, with my colleagues, to go and support them in Quebec City, in their negotiations with the minister and the Government of Quebec. It was a short return trip, but this had a lot of meaning and they appreciated it. One thing they did not appreciate was the absence of the minister, who, using all sorts of excuses, declined the invitation. When I am talking about anger, this is what I am referring to.

Right now, their fight is the fight of a whole generation. They are fighting to save not only their farms and their jobs, but also the jobs of their children, of a whole generation, mine and my children's.

They are fighting now for the very survival of farming. The problems farmers are facing are driving them to bankruptcy, which means nothing less than the end of farming. The minister across the way does not seem to be sensitive to that. The problems are very real though.

The Government of Quebec is currently negotiating. It is not easy for that government, but it showed up yesterday. I met the minister who was there at the meeting with farmers and deigned to speak with them. She is currently involved in very intense negotiations. At least you have to welcome that because, somewhere, there is a minister in Quebec courageous enough to go to them, talk with them, and negotiate with them.

I would like to remind the minister how important farming is in Quebec. Some 44,000 farmers work day after day to provide us with fresh products. They contribute to the Quebec economy to the tune of $5 billion. It is therefore a very important industry.

Moreover, in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, farming is one of the six major exporters. It is key to our economy.

By not being there today, the minister is simply showing a total lack of respect for the 44,000 farmers who work day after day for our sake. His absence says a lot about the Liberal government's insensitivity.

On Monday, I went to a demonstration. I am not sure I should call it that. Politicians were invited to a field. Farmers dug a hole and are threatening to kill no less than 600 head of cattle in it, 600 cows. I cannot condone such an act but I do understand that they are desperate, close to bankruptcy and need help to overcome their problems. You can feel their despair when they talk and tell their story.

I went there to hear their message and convey it back to the House. This is what I am doing today, what I did last week, what I have been doing for the last 18 months while this government does not care, is incapable of hearing us and providing some concrete solutions.

I am taking this threat seriously. In 1974, they did something similar. They used cattle to make the government react. I am telling the minister right now that he will have to share responsibility should the situation end up with a carnage, as producers are threatening to do if no solution is found to this conflict.

The minister has the power to take concrete action, to make improvements and to implement solutions, but he does not do so. I do not understand why. The Liberals form a minority government and they could make some gains by providing concrete help to producers, but they do not. The minister stays put in Ottawa, under the pretext that he must absolutely listen to us all day long.

My colleagues offered to give him a ride to the airport. It is a one hour flight each way, plus one hour for discussions. The whole thing would have taken three hours. The minister could easily have showed up in Quebec City, out of respect for these people.

I also remind the minister, who seems to be ignoring the whole issue, that a producer from my region was paid 7¢ for a 2,000 pound cow.

When people buy meat, whether it is ground beef or whatever, they are all paying what they were paying one, two or three years ago. In fact, they are paying more, because of inflation. But these producers are getting 7¢ for a 2,000 pound cow. Members opposite cannot claim that there is no problem right now. Come on.

Animal health practices should have been regionalized a long time ago. Had this been done, the mad cow issue would be limited to Alberta, where it originated. The other provinces and regions would have been able to continue to export their products as usual. Moreover, we could have generated money, we could have continued to make profits to help Alberta, which has had its share of crises. Instead, the ban was imposed on cattle across the country, with the result that the whole Canadian industry is suffering.

Producers have made another very interesting request, which I submit to the minister once again, which is to set a floor price. Quebec's Minister of Agriculture has asked for this minister's cooperation to convince her provincial counterparts to work with them on setting a floor price. What was done? Her request was left unanswered. In Quebec, we at least have a minister who is trying hard and willing to work on this issue. I do hope that, by the end of the day, some solutions will have been provided. That is what I wish for everyone, for all our producers and farmers, who are waiting for the government to take action and specific measures.

We also need to improve the assistance program. I am told that millions of dollars were invested. True, some programs were set up, but they are ineffective. They are so ineffective that-- I remind the minister-- a farmer was paid 7¢ for a cull cow. Worse yet, some producers did not even get 7¢, but had to pay to send their cows to the slaughterhouse. We have a problem here. The government can cover its ears all it wants and refuse to hear about it, but we have a problem and something must be done. It has a duty to act.

I urge the government to stop shirking its responsibilities. I urge the minister once again to take a plane--the mode of transportation does not matter--and go to meet the farmers. I would like him to show some respect for the 40,000 producers who work hard day in and day out. They need us. I urge Parliament to support this proposal so that we can all work together to find a solution and finally resolve this situation.