House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was quebec.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Bloc MP for Laval Centre (Québec)

Won her last election, in 2000, with 43% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Leader Of The Bloc Quebecois November 21st, 1995

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Bloc Quebecois members were the first to learn, directly from their leader, that he had decided to run for office as successor to Jacques Parizeau as leader of the Parti Quebecois. In our hearts, sadness was followed by pride and confidence that this extraordinary man will help the Quebec people achieve their legitimate ambitions with respect to their destiny.

We are all aware of the great qualities of this man and we know he will muster the creativity and the energies of all the people, in order to meet the many challenges that we, Quebecers, will have to face.

We are proud of the work we did with him. His decision sets a milestone in our common struggle for Quebec because our leader and the Bloc Quebecois are engaged in the same struggle, the struggle of the Quebec people.

Department Of Human Resources Development Act November 20th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, now that the Quebec referendum is over, the Liberal government is finally tabling the most important piece of its legislative agenda, that is Bill C-96. We had to put up with years of Liberal dickering and federal pussy footing to arrive at this result: at last, this government is showing its true colours.

The government can try its best by including so-called "technical" details in its bill, by saying that it merely seeks to "establish" a legal entity, and that it "streamlines" federal bureaucracy to meet the concerns of those involved. However, nothing can hide this obvious will to increase federal involvement in fields of provincial jurisdiction.

On October 5, in response to questions from the official opposition, the Minister of Human Resources Development deemed appropriate to say that the Bloc Quebecois obviously had "not taken the time to read the bill".

Whether the minister agrees or not, the fact is that the Bloc Quebecois, the Quebec government, the Société québécoise du développement de la main-d'oeuvre, the socio-economic partners in Quebec, including those representing management, union and social sectors, not to mention the Quebec minister of state responsible for joint action, have all read the same document and come to the same conclusion: Bill C-96 strengthens the centralizing views of the federal government and increases its involvement in the employment and social program sectors, including manpower training. This shows a complete disregard for the consensus reached in Quebec on the need to have all necessary powers, so that the Quebec government, in co-operation with its socio-economic partners, can channel its energy and its resources where they are needed most, based on the actual and increasing needs of its population.

On October 4, Louise Harel denounced, in a press release, the federal attempt to set up a parallel structure to get involved in the manpower training sector:

"Like its labour market partners, the Quebec government denounces Ottawa's intentions to set up its own parallel manpower structures in Quebec. This federal initiative amounts to a flat rejection of the unanimous Quebec consensus, repeatedly expressed, both under the previous administration and under the current one, on the need for Quebec to regain control over all labour adjustment measures, including the related budgets".

Let there be no mistake. This bill is a screen allowing the Liberal government to hide its real intentions. This makes it the cornerstone of federal interventionism for the Liberal government, which is now determined to ignore Quebec and overlook the provinces' wishes. This is a great example of the importance and role the federal government wants to give the provinces in tomorrow's Canada.

Bill C-96 mirrors the Canadian constitution: encroachments, overlap, duplication, and waste. Bill C-96 clearly shows that the federal government has no intention of respecting provincial jurisdiction. How can we not denounce this attitude?

This is not the federal government's first encroachment on provincial jurisdiction. After taking over unemployment insurance in the 1940s, it consolidated its hegemony in the labour sector by creating employment centres and manpower training programs. Fifty years later, we are forced to recognize that the federal government has no intention of withdrawing from that sector.

Bill C-96 undermines Quebec's efforts to set up a single framework for labour initiatives, thus confirming the official opposition's worst fears. The minister is trying to take advantage of his reform to give himself more powers at the expense of the provinces. Bill C-96 gives the government the powers it needs to bypass the provinces in concluding agreements with local organizations.

The federal government will then be able to go after municipalities and offer them responsibilities contracted directly with the Department of Human Resources Development. This would allow the minister to delegate powers to the new employment commission or any other entity, thereby bypassing provincial governments and administrations. Quebec's fears and concerns are justified, since the minister can impose his own standards on these entities by delegating these powers, without, of course, the agreement of the Canadian Parliament or the provinces. This is the Canadian version of decentralization.

This bill, if passed, will provide the necessary legislative framework to allow the minister to implement his much talked-about UI reform, which is the second piece of the federal puzzle. Several clauses of Bill C-96 grant huge discretionary powers to the head of the department, which, in the opinion of the official opposition, promotes greater federal interference and invasion of the provincial jurisdiction over social matters, and manpower in particular.

For instance, clause 6 of the bill states that the "powers, duties and functions of the Minister extend to and include all matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction-not by law assigned to any other Minister, department, board or agency of the Government of Canada, and are to be exercised with the objective of enhancing employment, encouraging equality and promoting social security".

It is clear that, with Bill C-96, the powers, duties and functions assigned to the minister are larger, because his thrust area is no longer specified in the act. One can wonder about the deeper motives of the legislator.

As for clause 7, it could hardly be vaguer. It states that "In exercising the powers or performing the duties or functions assigned to him under this or any other act of Parliament, the minister may- cooperate with provincial authorities with a view to the coordination of efforts made or proposed for preserving and improving human resources development".

Nowhere does it say that the minister has to cooperate with the provinces. The minister is not required to respect provincial jurisdictions.

However, clauses 20 and 21 are even more worrisome. Clause 20 provides that:

-the Minister may enter into agreements with a province- agencies of provinces, financial institutions and such other persons or bodies as the Minister considers appropriate.

This covers a vast range. As for clause 21, it provides that:

The Minister may authorize the Minister of Labour, the Commission or any other person-to exercise any power or perform any duty or function of the Minister.

It is obvious to the official opposition that, through these legislative provisions, the minister is getting the powers necessary to delegate, to whoever he considers appropriate, the management of his department's policies and programs. From now on, the minister will have the power to contract out, at his full discretion and with full impunity.

In this instance, the minister will have the power to enter into agreements with local or regional organizations, such as municipalities, and thus completely ignore the provinces.

The federal strategy taking shape with this bill will inescapably generate a clash between the already well established manpower network and that of the federal government, with the numerous programs and grants of all kinds that the government will provide throughout Quebec. That strategy is already being used by the federal government. The establishment of this superdepartment, along with the discretionary powers given to the minister, will only reinforce the centralizing position of the federal government.

Unfortunately, by acting in this way and rejecting Quebec's efforts and desire to be effective in the manpower sector, the federal government clearly shows a lack of integrity. By establishing national standards in that field, the government carries on its tradition of interfering in fields which are not under its jurisdiction.

Quebec and its dynamic forces denounce the federal will to further interfere in an area where the programs and initiatives must be defined by the Quebec government, based on the real needs of its population.

Right Of Veto November 3rd, 1995

Mr. Speaker, the people of Quebec regard as important the questions that we, as the official opposition, ask in this House.

Could the Deputy Prime Minister explain how the Prime Minister can refuse to clarify what he really meant with respect to the right of veto, when the minister responsible, one of the brightest members of cabinet, admits to not knowing what the Prime Minister was talking about?

Right Of Veto November 3rd, 1995

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

The day before yesterday, the Prime Minister stated in this House, and I quote: "I said it would be a veto for the people of Quebec". When questioned about the meaning of this statement, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs suggested that we ask the Prime Minister himself for clarifications, because he was unable to tell us what the Prime Minister meant.

Could the Deputy Prime Minister clarify for us what the Prime Minister was referring to when he spoke of a veto for the people of Quebec?

Quebec Premier November 1st, 1995

Mr. Speaker, we were very moved yesterday when we heard the news of Mr. Parizeau's resignation. All Quebecers recognize of his outstanding contribution to the building of a modern Quebec.

As an adviser to several Premiers, he took part in the development of a number of projects of which we are particularly proud. From the nationalization of electric utilities to the creation of the Quebec Pension Plan and the Caisse de dépôt et de placement,Mr. Parizeau forged the tools that are indispensable to Quebec society.

His outstanding contribution to our economic development was particularly apparent in the stock savings plan, the solidarity fund and, more recently, the regional development funds. He was known as an innovator and a man who held strong convictions.

On behalf of all Quebecers, Mr. Parizeau, I want to say a heartfelt thank you.

Canada Council September 29th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, does the minister at least recognize that once again francophones are the ones bearing the brunt of federal cuts? Is this not another way for the federal government to minimize and trivialize our identity as Quebecers?

Canada Council September 29th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The Canada Council has decided to go ahead with the implementation of its new development plan, despite the opposition expressed by the Quebec cultural community. As a result, there are no longer two linguistic sectors and francophones are left with no contact.

Does the minister recognize that, since Quebec's distinct culture will no longer be a factor, this decision means that requests for financial support made by francophone organizations will be like drops in the ocean?

Quebec Sovereignty September 22nd, 1995

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the yes side laid out the foundations for the sovereign country Quebecers are being called upon to build for themselves. Echoing the many demands expressed during the commissions on the future of Quebec, the aim of the sovereignty team plan is to breathe a new dynamism into Quebec society once it possesses all of the powers vested in a sovereign people.

"Our Hearts in Our Work" is a second quiet revolution. Because a sovereign Quebec will be able to use all of the means available to sovereign states, it will find original solutions to the numerous problems facing us.

Choosing the no side means choosing immobility. We are sure that Quebecers will say no to immobility and yes to change.

Quebec Referendum September 19th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister stated that he may or may not recognize the Quebec referendum depending on its results. If the No side wins, the answer is clear, but if the Yes side wins, he would consider holding a federal referendum. This new concept involving various levels of democracy is shocking and must be denounced by anyone who believes in democracy.

Mrs. Lysianne Gagnon was quoted in La Presse as saying that Mr. Parizeau has reason to be proud because he kept his promises; he had promised to ask a clear question and that is what he did.

It is obvious that the Prime Minister is out of touch with reality in Quebec. Even Quebec federalists recognize the validity of the referendum results. But such faulty reasoning is hardly surprising coming from the very man who masterminded the 1982 show of force and killed the Meech Lake accord.

Petitions June 22nd, 1995

Madam Speaker, it is with confidence that I table today a petition signed by some 1,600 voters, mostly of Armenian origin.

The petitioners request that now, eighty years after the genocide of the Armenian people, the Government of Canada, like the legislative assemblies of Quebec and Ontario, officially condemn the atrocities committed against their people early in this century. On their behalf, I therefore ask Parliament to show leadership in defending democratic principles and human rights.