House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was quebeckers.

Last in Parliament April 2025, as Bloc MP for La Prairie (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2025, with 35% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Intergovernmental Affairs April 12th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary sounds like a broken record.

Senior officials have said that Ottawa's budget strategy is to intimidate Quebec and the provinces into going along or else being cut off. That is the gist of the budget rumours we are hearing.

Quebec needs health care transfers to be increased to 35%. Not only is Ottawa refusing to do so, but it also wants to force Quebec's long-term care homes to comply with Canadian standards and force Quebec to adopt a Canadian pharmacare program. Both of these initiatives have been unanimously rejected by the Quebec National Assembly.

Why not simply address Quebec's needs?

Intergovernmental Affairs April 12th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, a senior official has given us a glimpse into the federal government's mindset in the lead-up to the budget.

In response to a question from the CBC regarding provincial jurisdictions, the official said, and I quote, “The feds have the spending power. If we set out the terms and the money, the provinces who want to be early movers on this will come on board. Those that don't will have to reckon with their electorate.”

This is peak predatory federalism. The federal government has the money, and if we want that money, we have to do Ottawa's bidding. Why is the government taking a confrontational approach instead of working with Quebec and the provinces?

Health March 25th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the Quebec proverb says it is not enough. The Bloc Québécois is not saying it, the Quebec premier and all the provincial premiers are saying it. I will even quote them: short-term funding, while helpful, does not permit the provinces and territories to address Canadians' long-term health care needs. They need $28 billion to make up for chronic federal underfunding, coupled with annual indexing.

We are talking about $4 billion. That is seven times less than what they asked for and it is not recurring.

Does the government promise that this is a first step in a journey leading to 35% federal funding of health care costs?

Health March 25th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, today the Liberals are finally recognizing the need to increase health transfers to Quebec and the provinces. After years of effort by the Bloc Québécois, Ottawa is finally acknowledging that the federal government is underfunding health care. It is a first step.

Unfortunately, the amounts in Bill C-25 are not recurring and they are seven times lower than what Quebec and the provinces are asking for. As the ancient Chinese proverb says, even the longest journey must begin with a first step.

Will the government commit to recurring health transfer increases, up to 35% of costs?

Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act March 24th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, we spoke about proverbs earlier. As I listened to my Conservative Party colleague and my NDP colleague, it made me think of these words from Falardeau: “We always go too far for people who are going nowhere.” That neatly sums up how change scares people like them, even if it is for the better. They get scared the minute we start talking about change.

The Conservatives, who are traditionally in favour of the idea of a single tax return, introduced and debated a motion in the House in 2019. They based it on a motion that was unanimously adopted by the Quebec National Assembly on May 15, 2018. I know because I was the one who moved that motion in the National Assembly.

The Conservatives spent an entire day debating that motion. Now they are telling us that they no longer support it, because they know the Liberals do not want a single tax return. They want to kill the bill before the Liberals do. That is a great way to play politics—do the dirty work because they know someone else will do it anyway. Are we here to make life better for people, or are we here to play politics for the sole purpose of protecting our jobs?

While the Conservatives know that a single tax return would be better for everyone and for all Quebeckers, it would also be a win for the Bloc Québécois. The last thing the Conservatives want is for us to prove once again that the Bloc is useful to the public. That is the problem.

They would rather see people continue to spend money unnecessarily on two tax returns, and see public servants continue to do the same work twice. However, those public servants could be freed up to do other things. We never said they should be fired. We said that, since they are already being paid, why not use these competent individuals to do something else in the public service at a time when there is a shortage of workers? Am I the only one here who understands that? It is obvious.

According to a scientific study by the Research Institute on Self-Determination of Peoples and National Independence, known as IRAI, the public service would save $287 million. There it is in black and white, backed with evidence, and yet, it is being opposed.

A hospital like Hôpital Pierre-Le Gardeur costs $205 million to build. That is what the savings could amount to for Quebec. With that money, we could build at least one hospital a year, which would improve people's health. That is what we want to do for people.

It makes no sense to have officials doing the same work at two different locations. This does not mean that jobs in the regions will be eliminated. Those people could do other things. We know that the public service is understaffed. There is a shortage of workers. It is looking for people right now. The pandemic will not last forever.

The Conservatives just cannot understand that. They no longer know what to say and are mixing up the dates and figures. They swear that they did not see it that way. You are either for the single tax return or against it. It is like being pregnant: Either you are pregnant or you are not; there is no in-between.

Sure, we will have to sign agreements with the other countries, because we will become tax collectors. That is what the Conservatives need to understand, but are not able to. As soon as we try to do something good for Quebec, they oppose it.

Quebeckers support the fight against climate change, but they do not even understand what it is.

Quebeckers support protecting supply management, but they oppose it because they would rather sell their western beef. They voted against supply management. That is a fact.

There is a consensus in Quebec on medical assistance in dying. They wanted to block it. Nothing ever changes with the Conservatives.

This, here, is a smart bill that has been fine-tuned. We have been thinking about it for decades. We did this in 1991 with GST and QST. We managed to set up two collectors, two sales taxes with different parameters. We have done it before, and this is no different. Revenu Québec does it, and it saves us more than $190 million a year.

I see that the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie has steam coming out of his ears yet again. This happens every time we try to do something good for Quebec. He is unrecognizable and says things that make no sense. He is saying that people no longer file paper tax returns. That is obvious. Does he really think that we do not know that?

The IRAI estimates we would save $99 million for businesses and $39 million for people who file their tax returns at home. These figures took into account that people use their computers to file.

A scientific study by François Vaillancourt has shown that it takes a person in Quebec 10% more time to file their taxes because they have two returns to fill out. It does not say that it took 50% more time, but 10% more time, because we know that people are not filing paper returns. By saving that 10%, businesses would save $99 million and individuals would save $39 million, for a total of $425 million in savings for Quebec. That is what is driving us.

The National Assembly of Quebec wants this. The Premier of Quebec wants this. Business people want this. Even accountants want this. The Conservatives told the Premier of Quebec that they supported it. They told Quebeckers that they supported it. However, they just did an about-face yet again with explanations that make no sense.

At some point, we have to be here for the right reasons. For our part, we are here for the right reasons. We are in politics for our people. We respond to the aspirations of Quebec. We are here when Quebec needs something. We are here for a single tax return. We are here for climate change. We were here to prevent medical assistance in dying from being at the mercy of the religious right in the Conservative Party. We were here and we will continue to be here.

I was happy to be a Bloc member because the Bloc is the only party that truly stands up for Quebeckers. The Conservative Party is unable to look Quebeckers in the eyes and tell them that they stand up for them. I do not know how Conservative members from Quebec can look at themselves in the mirror. They are completely out of touch with the reality of Quebeckers. Quebeckers are no fools.

The same goes for the NDP. It is no better. It said it would vote in favour, but then it messed everything up by voting against in the end. As for jobs, now they are being cut because of this drive to optimize the public service. The member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie has obviously never run a company. The idea is not to fire these people. It is to find something more constructive for them to do so they can serve the public even better for the same pay. Who could be against that?

We have reached this point because the Conservative Party cannot figure out what to focus on. It is even using unions to justify its actions. That really takes the cake. The Conservatives are tying themselves in knots trying to explain an untenable position.

Before I go to bed at night, I look at myself in the mirror, I look at my constituents, I talk to them. Last weekend, people who used to vote Conservative told me they could not imagine the Conservatives being against the single tax return. I told them that if they were in the House, they would have other reasons not to vote for the Conservatives anymore.

I can say that we, the Bloc Québécois, look voters straight in the eye. I am not embarrassed to say that we will fight tooth and nail for them. We are here for that very reason, and we will be here as long as Quebec is sending money to Ottawa. That is our money, and we are going to make sure that it is managed properly, because the single tax return will pay off for Quebeckers.

That is why members will always find the Bloc Québécois in their path. We will push for this because we can do the math. The only interests we care about are Quebeckers' interests.

Points of Order March 22nd, 2021

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add to what my Conservative Party colleague was saying earlier.

I completely agree with everything he said. Over a month ago, at a meeting of the House leaders, I talked about the fact that there was just one Liberal Party MP in the House. At the peak of the pandemic, we talked about having 25 MPs in the House, and at the time, we had an agreement with the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons that the ministers who were most likely to be questioned would be physically present in the House to answer questions.

I hear my Liberal Party colleague. I agree with what he said about the virtual Parliament being an extension of Parliament. Everyone agrees. However, more and more often, parliamentary secretaries to ministers are the ones answering questions. When they are not here, the answers tend to be a little more evasive than usual, and that is saying something. If they were in the House, I think we would see better collaboration. That goes without saying. Nobody needs a dictionary to understand that.

For over a month now, the Bloc Québécois has been pointing out that the governing party has not really been present in the House. Today, as usual, there is just one Liberal Party MP, one who, unfortunately for us, never answers questions. We have to get our answers via videoconference, and, increasingly, we are getting those answers from parliamentary secretaries. We are in the middle of a pandemic here. The government should be absolutely transparent, but it does not want to answer questions. Great. Just great.

I completely agree with what my Conservative Party colleague, the esteemed House leader of the official opposition, said. The Bloc Québécois completely agrees with his point of view.

Health March 22nd, 2021

Mr. Speaker, what we need is higher health transfers. We have to help our nurses and PSWs provide better care to patients and seniors. That is what needs to happen.

Our health care workers do not need to be told what to do. They do not need the Liberals to impose Canadian standards. They do not need politicians to meet 100 days after the election, as the Conservatives are proposing. Those parties are out of touch with reality. We need higher health transfers now, during the pandemic. That is easy to understand.

Why does Ottawa not understand that?

Health March 22nd, 2021

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec will be tabling its budget on Thursday.

Unfortunately, despite the full-blown public health crisis, it will not be able to significantly boost health spending because the federal government is refusing to do its part. That makes no sense at all.

Having seen what our health care staff have gone through, and with a third, variant-driven wave a distinct possibility, the federal government cannot tell our nurses that it will wait until after the pandemic.

Will the government at least announce plans to increase health transfers?

Amir Attaran March 22nd, 2021

Mr. Speaker, there is one minority about whom hate speech always goes unpunished. I am, of course, talking about Quebeckers.

The most recent example comes from a University of Ottawa professor who thinks that Quebec is racist. He called the Premier of Quebec a white supremacist, no less, and called Quebec “the Alabama of the North”. Why not? He flat out called “pure laine” Quebeckers white supremacists.

This man is named Amir Attaran. He will not face any consequences, because Quebec-bashing is A-okay in Canada and can even be quite lucrative. I want to at least say his name because, on behalf of the people of Quebec, I at least want it on the historical record of the Parliament of Canada that Amir Attaran is an ignorant francophobe.

Criminal Code March 11th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, it is rare for the Bloc Québécois to support a closure motion. Historically, if we look at the list of events involving the Bloc Québécois since its inception, it is extremely rare.

We support the principle on compassionate grounds, because people are suffering while they wait for us to do our job. It is time for us, after so much deliberation, to take action and show compassion.

The Bloc Québécois defends the interests of Quebeckers, and we are interested in their needs only. We acknowledge that, often, the needs of Quebeckers and other Canadians coincide. In Quebec, there is a broad consensus in favour of MAID, and we have been going our own way on this issue for years. For that reason, the Bloc Québécois will support the closure motion.

The Conservatives want more time to debate the issue. Since the report stage of this bill, 67 of the 83 speeches made have been made by the Conservatives. Last week, the government asked three times to extend a sitting into the evening to continue the debate and allow the Conservatives to continue saying what they had to say. All three times, the Conservative Party refused.

The judge extended the deadline a fourth time to give Parliament the time and space it needed to adopt the bill. The judge granted a final extension until March 26, a deadline we must respect. For these reasons, the Bloc Québécois will support the closure motion.

I have a simple question for the Minister of Justice: In his opinion, why is March 26 really our last chance to adopt the bill?