House of Commons photo

Track Alexandre

Your Say


Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is liberal.

NDP MP for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie (Québec)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 49% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Presence in Gallery November 22nd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, during question period, the Minister of National Revenue accused me of spreading disinformation. That is not very nice. I am therefore requesting the unanimous consent of the House to table the Auditor General's report on the Canada Revenue Agency, because I get the sense she did not read it.

Canada Revenue Agency November 22nd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, that is right. The Liberals are going to continue signing agreements with tax havens, as they did last year with the Cook Islands.

Interestingly, when the Liberals wants something to happen, there is no stopping them. An infrastructure privatization bank? Done. Legalization of cannabis? Full steam ahead.

However, families who need help paying the rent will have to wait until after the next election. The Liberals are incapable of paying public service employees. That is too complicated. They cannot even answer the telephone. People just have to wait on hold.

I would like to make a direct appeal to the Minister of Finance. When will he come down from his ivory tower and start working for ordinary Canadians?

Canada Revenue Agency November 22nd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, the question was about Phoenix.

Governing is about making choices. Let us take a closer look at the Liberals' choices.

A couple with no children gets nothing. A person who earns less than $45,000 gets nothing. Someone who takes the bus no longer gets a tax credit.

On the other hand, someone who sends their money to the Cayman Islands does not have any problems. Someone who introduces a bill that will make him richer will write a cheque. Someone who wants to see the Prime Minister will pay $1,500. Netflix does not pay any tax. KPMG clients will get a deal.

When will the Liberals stop working for their Bay Street millionaire friends?

Cannabis Act November 21st, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

However, I would like to remind him that, in their 2015 platform, the Liberals stated that arresting and prosecuting these offences is expensive for our criminal justice system, which was clogged with far too many minor, non-violent offences. We agreed and they were quite right.

However, the Liberals refused to listen to the NDP's solution, which was to decriminalize marijuana as soon as they were elected. Consequently, people continue to be arrested and charged. People have criminal records. This is going to cause problems for these people when they apply for jobs, look for housing, work abroad, and travel.

What are the Liberals going to do about pardons for people who have a criminal record because the Liberals did not do the right thing?

Ethics November 21st, 2017

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party's chief fundraiser sent money to a tax haven. This morning, the NDP asked that Stephen Bronfman appear before the Standing Committee on Finance. The Liberals refused.

The Minister of Finance failed to put his assets in a blind trust. He also introduced Bill C-27, which helped Morneau Shepell rake in millions of dollars without running this by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. He is currently under investigation.

Is that the Liberals' approach to governing?

They do nothing about tax havens and introduce bills to get richer and to make their millionaire friends richer?

Public Services and Procurement November 21st, 2017

Mr. Speaker, hello, you have reached the Canada Revenue Agency. Your call is important to us.

Seriously, if you expect to speak with a person, good luck. Half the time your call will be blocked, and more often than not, you will not get through to a person. If you actually happen to speak to someone, there is a 30% chance that you will be given the wrong information. Have a nice day.

While the Liberals allow their friends to get richer using tax havens, they are turning their backs on Canadians who could use a little help.

Is this how the Liberals deliver public services to Canadians and Quebeckers?

Cannabis Act November 21st, 2017

Madam Speaker, what contempt for indigenous peoples, civil society, and the individual communities across Canada. What contempt for the provinces.

The government says it is listening, but it is as deaf as a post. It is incapable of listening. Maybe that is why I am raising my voice, so that it might reach their ears at some point.

While the Government of Quebec is asking for more time, the Liberals have the nerve to impose time allocation to speed up the passage of Bill C-45. It makes no sense. The government wanted to usher in a new era of collaboration with the provinces and establish new federal-provincial relationships. Well, that ended just as quickly as it began, thank you very much. The government could not care less about raising awareness or training police officers. It could not care less about health and social services or the cost to the provinces. There is just a need for speed.

What is the rush? My Conservative colleague was right. July 1, 2018 is an absolutely arbitrary date and it makes no sense. The only logical reason for rushing through this is to cater to cannabis producers who have received authorizations and permits, many of whom are former Liberal ministers and organizers.

Are they not the reason why we are voting on this time allocation motion today?

National Security Act, 2017 November 20th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Windsor West for his speech.

I share many of his worries and concerns. For instance, in November 2016, the Federal Court issued a rather scathing decision on the fact that for 10 years, CSIS had been storing thousands of pieces of personal information on average, ordinary Canadians who were not even likely to be investigated and who posed no threat. The Liberal government decided not to appeal the Federal Court ruling. However, in Bill C-59, the Liberals are making legal what was ruled illegal by the Federal Court, namely storing personal information for very long periods of time on people who are not being investigated and who pose no threat to national security.

What are my colleague's thoughts on that?

National Security Act, 2017 November 20th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, given that my Liberal colleague says that people had misgivings about Bill C-51, I would like to know why the Liberal Party voted for it at the time.

As for torture, if the Liberals are against it, why did they not change the directive so that information that may have been extracted through overseas torture would no longer be accepted?

National Security Act, 2017 November 20th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. I can sense his conviction in defending Bill C-59.

I would like to ask the same question that I asked the member for Drummond. It had to do with the concerns we have about the definition of national security, which includes interference with critical infrastructure.

We think that this could be used to spy on or hinder peaceful protestors, for example, environmentalists, concerned citizens, or indigenous groups who want to oppose the construction of a pipeline.

What type of guarantee can my colleague give that this will not happen and that the bill contains the necessary provisions in that regard?