House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was federal.

Last in Parliament April 1997, as Bloc MP for Rosemont (Québec)

Won his last election, in 1993, with 62% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Supply February 10th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a slight exaggeration. We had an experienced and highly respected person, the hon. member for Ottawa-Vanier, chair the public accounts committee for years. He worked tirelessly, given the powers he had. The same powers that the committee now has. And what results did we see?

For years, Liberals on the public accounts committee wanted to know everything and to have the same powers as others. And what did they do with the powers they had? They were unable to get the information they wanted or to force ministers or senior officials to testify. Mr. Speaker, the public accounts committee has a great deal less power than the Auditor General and you misled the public by saying otherwise-

Supply February 10th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I apologize for mistaking the President of the Privy Council for the President of the Treasury Board. I can understand why the Prime Minister did not give the responsibility of Treasury Board to the hon. member.

Supply February 10th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the President of the Treasury Board and I am filled with dismay. This is the President of the Treasury Board speaking, the man in charge of preparing the government's expenditure budget. That is incredible. I can see that a minister would consider that $200,000 or so is not too much to pay to go and deliver a speech, that there is no fat to cut in the federal administration, that nobody here is spending too much.

While you are at it, why produce government brochures in only fourteen colours? That is not enough. Why not twenty-two? That is incredible. I suppose that the President of the Treasury Board also considers that there is nothing wrong with building an embassy in Japan on a lot worth over $1 billion. That is normal I suppose. To have three embassies in Brussels, one for NATO, one for Belgium and one for the European Economic Community, with three ambassador's residences and three reception halls, one each, that is normal too, I suppose.

Now, he is telling us that, to solve the problem, we will refocus the activity of the federal and provincial governments. What has the government done in that area these past few years? Quite simply, the federal government has been pulling out. In that area as in health and post-secondary education, it is pulling out but keeping the tax money. That is incredible. Now the buzz word is refocussing, before that it was harmonizing.

Apparently the federal government will pull out from a number of areas, but it will continue to raise taxes, of course. That is how the federal deficit first got enormous. Then we saw the public finance crisis gradually spread to all the provinces. It is obvious that the federal government has been passing the buck to the provinces for years. As the minister just announced, instead of dealing with the problem from this end, by streamlining and restructuring the federal administration, he will keep passing the buck without making tax transfers. Is that what we are to understand?

Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements And Federal Post-Secondary Education And Health Contributions Act February 8th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I have a question concerning the speech made by the member for Calgary West. What would be the fiscal capability of the western provinces if the federal government did not pay $2 million to $3 million for the wheat?

Social Security System February 3rd, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to add that, were the minister and his government to decide to act immediately to remedy those faults, they would have my support and I think that all my constituents would agree with me entirely.

Social Security System February 3rd, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Glengarry-Prescott-Russell for his speech. I noticed that he too had found in the present system many faults that make it absolutely absurd from the recipients' point of view. So, how do you expect the public to understand what the hon. member was talking about?

Here is my question: Is the hon. member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell aware that he is no longer in the opposition, that he is a government member and that his government could act now rather than spend another nine months consulting?

Social Security System February 3rd, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the member for Vancouver Centre. The Liberal Party had nine years in opposition to consult and we received this little red book. What does the member think the Liberal government can do in nine months? It is not time for a decision.

Pre-Budget Consultations February 1st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate greatly the interest shown by my colleague from Don Valley West for the Quebec model. I would like to elaborate a bit on what he said particularly on development strategies.

Because Quebec has a strategy in certain sectors, our colleague from Don Valley West says: "Listen, if a development strategy is good for Quebec, would it not be good for Canada as a whole?"

In some cases, I say yes. For example, for years we have had a proposal for a high-speed train between Quebec City and Windsor. We are anxious for the government to move on that because these technologies are important for the future and would benefit both Quebec and Ontario.

In other sectors, it is unfortunately not the case. That is not unfortunate, in a way, since the sectors we choose cannot always be the same. A good example is nuclear energy. The federal government has spent on nuclear energy hundreds of millions of dollars which have essentially benefitted Ontario.

Quebec has enough hydroelectricity for years to come and it has never really been interested in investing in nuclear energy. But, through the federal government, Quebec taxpayers have been forced to spend on nuclear research those hundreds of millions of dollars which now essentially benefit Ontario, which moreover competes with us on the New York market.

Then I say: "Listen, if it is true in an international context-in any case, Quebec like the rest of Canada is increasingly becoming an economic region of North America-we can no longer implement projects for Canada, with economic and competitive implications, without taking into consideration the whole of North America".

It is obvious that a region like Montreal is in direct competition as much with Boston and New York as with Toronto and other cities and can therefore also probably conclude joint ventures with them. The political structure is losing importance on the international scene. We must each invest in projects, in sectors that are important for our future.

We can have joint projects with Ontario because we have mutual interests. But we have diverging interests in other sectors, where both Quebec and Ontario will have to find other partners in the world.

Foreign Affairs January 25th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, we are very happy to take part in this debate on Bosnia, but the minister of defence will agree that the financial aspects will be dealt with in a few weeks, maybe as early as next week, when the budget comes down. For the time being we have to limit ourselves to our commitment to peace in the world, and especially in Bosnia.

Does the minister not think that considering a unilateral withdrawal of our troops, like the Prime Minister did, when those same troops under the United Nations mandate were responsible for disarming the Bosnian people, is rather unrealistic? Can we honestly say, after having disarmed the Bosnians, that we are seriously considering a unilateral withdrawal?

I understand how difficult the situation is and how difficult it is to find a solution. Nevertheless, we already acted in a certain way, particularly toward the Bosnian people, and the minister will admit that it is rather difficult, indeed impossible, to withdraw now and leave the Bosnian people at the mercy of the Serbs.

Foreign Affairs January 25th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to understand the comments made by my colleague from Saanich-Gulf Islands, particularly when he says that the people involved in this conflict share the same ethnicity, while we know they have followed quite different historical paths over the last 500 years. It is precisely the federal state imposed upon them at some point which has collapsed in the new international context. Their situation has been widely aknowledged by the United Nations which recognized Bosnia's independence; and the search for some form of agreement is at the heart of the peace efforts. Withdrawal at this juncture in the crisis would quite simply result in the virtual elimination of the Bosnians. I cannot understand the member's reasoning. I wish he would try to explain it to me.