Alain Therrien

[Right to Vote at 16 Act, May 4th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I want to commend my colleague for his speech. This is an interesting bill, but I would like my colleague to elaborate on a few things.

First, it is said that someone who votes gets in the habit of voting, which means that the first vote is important.

For the vote at 16 to be effective and have an impact on voter turnout, the participation rate for those between the ages of 16 and 18 has to be higher so that these voters quickly develop this good habit and remain consistent in their voting practices.

Testing has already been conducted. I would like to know whether there are scientific studies based on these tests that can provide us with proof. If so, we would like the names of those studies so that we can see whether voter turnout was higher for those between the ages of 16 and 18 than for those between the ages of 18 and 25, for example.

[Points of Order, May 4th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

At the end of his response to the member for Pontiac's question, the Prime Minister yelled, “Shame on Quebeckers!” We checked, and that is what we heard. Naturally, I would ask that he withdraw his remarks.

[Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, May 3rd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, the federal immigration department is possibly the worst department in Canada, and that is saying something. The wait time for Quebec immigrants applying for permanent residence is 31 months. There is a backlog of 29,000 files, and some cases have been dragging on since 2009. Ottawa is where cases go to die.

That is why it is arrogant to mock Quebec for wanting to manage all of its own immigration files. Above all, it is arrogant towards the people who are waiting.

In light of its obvious incompetence, why does the federal government not let Quebec manage all of its own immigration applications?

[Public Safety, May 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, that is the proof that the Emergencies Act was not needed in the first place. There just needed to be some coordination of the work being done by each level of government and the police, the same fine work that put an end to the siege this winter.

That is exactly what this government refused to do during the blockade. Do not forget that the government spent days blaming the City of Ottawa and called the occupiers a bunch of complainers. It took many long weeks before there was any coordination. Much like Pontius Pilate, the government first washed its hands of the situation and then made the whole thing worse. All we needed was for the government to do its job.

Why was the Emergencies Act invoked?

[Public Safety, May 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, this weekend saw the return of the convoy protesting health measures. This time, the Ottawa police, the Ontario Provincial Police and the Parliamentary Protective Service worked together, from the get‑go.

When people tried to get their vehicles into the security perimeter to again block the downtown core, they were immediately stopped. There were no blunders, businesses stayed open. In short, three days later, it was already over, because everyone had done their job well.

Miraculously, the Emergencies Act was not needed. Here is the thousand-dollar question: In the end, what was the purpose of invoking the Emergencies Act this winter?

[Extension of Sitting Hours and Conduct of Extended Proceedings, May 2nd, 2022]

Madam Speaker, time and time again, this government has obstructed democracy with the help of its NDP pals. That has to be getting a little embarrassing.

They have moved an omnibus motion to run roughshod over democracy, and now here they are with a closure motion that does the same thing.

The Liberals are brazenly running roughshod over democracy, which is a big deal, and it is all because they cannot for the life of them manage the legislative calendar. They are amateurs.

During question period, we always point out how amateurish the Liberals are, and when we look at debate in the House, that is abundantly clear.

My question is simple. Are they not tired of being such amateurs?

[Public Safety, April 28th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, not one MP here wants to compromise national security, but no citizen wants their government's actions to be kept secret.

It is impossible to make these things up. In June, the Liberals took legal action against the Speaker of the House to avoid having to turn over documents. That is a big deal. Today, instead of handing them over to committee members who are already responsible for this type of thing, they want to create their own committee and collude with the NDP to make their own rules, while leaving the opposition out in the cold.

What kind of banana republic is this anyway?

[Public Safety, April 28th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, the House demanded that the government appear in committee to shed some light on the worrisome dismissal of scientists in Winnipeg. The Liberals did not comply, however, and are using their alliance with the NDP to create their own committee for just the two of them, for which they can set their own rules, produce their own report and announce their own findings.

They are doing all of this without the agreement of the two main opposition parties. That is not democratic, nor is it transparent. Does the government realize that its alliance with the NDP does not authorize it to create a parallel Parliament and set its own rules?

[Extension of Sitting Hours and Conduct of Extended Proceedings, April 28th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, medical assistance in dying is an important issue to the Bloc Québécois and to Quebec.

We have worked hard at parliamentary committee and saw that we would not have enough time to do all the work that such a sensitive topic demands. That is why the Bloc Québécois wanted to move the deadline for tabling the report to October 17. The other parties, some of which were not convinced, dragged their feet.

The government decided to include this in a motion that muzzles the opposition, when it was unnecessary to do that since Standing Order 27 allows sitting hours to be extended. It has brought out the heavy artillery, complete with a gift to the Bloc Québécois that would extend the deadline for the report on medical assistance in dying to October 17.

That is like the government asking us if we like honey and us saying yes, but then the government adds arsenic to the honey and tells us to eat up.

Why did the government choose to muzzle the opposition when it could have simply used Standing Order 27?

[Points of Order, April 28th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reserve the Bloc's right to respond at a later date.