Alexandre Boulerice

[Justice, February 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, in last year's budget implementation bill, the Liberals amended the Criminal Code. Companies accused of corruption can pursue out-of-court settlements, thus ensuring their continued eligibility for lucrative federal contracts.

Which company has been accused of corruption in other countries many times over? SNC-Lavalin. Which company talked to the Prime Minister's Office 14 times? SNC-Lavalin.

The Liberals are corporate puppets. Will the people ever find out just how much sway SNC-Lavalin holds over the Liberal government?

[Justice, February 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, let's not pretend that we have never seen rich corporations buy off politicians with illegal contributions. After decades of Liberal governments in Ottawa, we have been down that road before.

Whether we are talking about KPMG, Kinder Morgan or SNC-Lavalin, it is the same old story. When it comes time to lend a hand to their millionaire friends, the Liberals take their marching orders from the powerful.

If the Liberals think they have absolutely nothing to hide, why do they not ask the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to investigate and shed some light on this scandal?

[Montreal Climate Coalition, February 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, on February 23, the Montreal Climate Coalition will be celebrating its fourth anniversary. The coalition actively encourages everyone to take bold and concrete steps to become carbon neutral.

Considering the findings in the latest IPCC report, grassroots initiatives like this one are absolutely crucial. Essentially, we have 12 years to avoid irreparable damage to our ecosystems, our communities and our economy.

There is ample evidence that Quebeckers and Canadians want a greener future, a green new deal. They want to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

The City of Montreal is targeting an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

The Montreal Climate Coalition is calling for concrete, ambitious, feasible measures, a transition to clean energy and production and consumption practices that generate less carbon. The NDP shares those goals, and we will continue to fight for them leading up to the election.

[Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, February 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons for her speech.

I would like to remind the House that in December 2016, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 2334, which condemns:

...all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions...

This is a resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council, so Canada obviously needs to abide by it.

With regard to the free trade agreement, why did the Liberal government reject the NDP amendment about labelling products originating from illegal Israeli settlements in order to distinguish between companies on the territory of the State of Israel and companies on the Palestinian territory that has been illegally occupied since 1967?

[The Environment, February 6th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, it is dizzying. I get the feeling that if you looked up the word “liberal” in the dictionary, it would say, “say one thing and do another”.

People are not fooled by the Prime Minister's doublespeak. The Climate Change Performance Index was released at COP24, in Poland. Out of 60 countries, Canada ranked 54th. It is so bad.

How can the Prime Minister look our young people in the eye and tell them that he is concerned about the planet and their—

[The Environment, February 6th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, there was a debate on the environment in Outremont and the Liberal candidate decided to stay away. She did not show up.

It is not easy to defend a Prime Minister who breaks his promises. It is not easy to explain to people that his party's priority is to give billions of dollars to his oil industry friends. It is not easy to defend wasting public money on the purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline.

Are the Liberal candidates trying to hide because they know that their government's environmental policies do not cut it in Quebec?

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sherbrooke for his excellent question.

Let us remember that workers are the foundation of the NDP. We are the party of labour. We are also the party of public services. We will always take great care to respect people and provide them with the best jobs possible, and not cause them to lose their jobs. That is what is most important.

That is why we are fighting for auto sector workers. That is why we are fighting for Davie shipyard and to get back the hundreds of jobs that were lost. That is why we rise in the House to defend workers in the aluminum and forestry sectors. That is why we are in politics. Our colleagues introduce bills to protect workers' pensions so the money is not stolen as was the case with Sears workers. That is why we are here and we are proud of it.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague.

I look back fondly on the work we did together on the Special Committee on Electoral Reform, but that is a whole other story.

I think this shows the NDP's prudent and responsible approach towards thousands of people, their families and regional economies.

I really like the more specific point he raises about all the software that is widely available. Once a person completes their tax return on the computer, which they only have to do once, they can file two copies electronically, by email. Many people already do their taxes that way. My office offers a tax filing workshop to my riding's least fortunate residents. I volunteer for that workshop, along with other people and my staff. That is the method we use to help people who have trouble reading and need a hand with filing taxes.

I think that is a fairly simple example that demonstrates that the technology is more advanced than certain political claims taken from a focus group.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

It is indeed amateur hour, Mr. Speaker. I mentioned improvisation earlier but this is completely amateurish. I was really shocked to hear the Conservative member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord this morning. Following his speech, he was asked how he would ensure that there would be no job losses and what exactly these people would do for work. The member replied that these were details. We are talking about the lives of 5,000 people and decent incomes for these families and for the regions.

With those jobs comes a great deal of economic development, not to mention increased purchasing power in regions with many SMEs, including restaurants and other businesses.

We need to take a serious approach. We have to approach the task as professionally as possible, and that is exactly what the NDP has done, by holding several meetings. We have done things reasonably and diligently, as we must when we respect people. We respect workers. From the outset, we said that this was what we wanted to do.

The principle is good, attractive even, and easy to understand. However, there are significant regional and socio-economic impacts for families. We are being told that the NDP members are not listening to the people of Quebec. However, the 5,500 workers are 5,500 Quebeckers we sat with and listened to. I will claim loudly and proudly that my Quebec definitely includes the FTQ, which represents 600,000 people. It is the largest civil society organization in Quebec right now. These are people with whom we have a relationship and with whom we can sit down to see what practical solutions we can come up with. That is what we have done and what, unfortunately, other political parties, such as the Conservatives, have not.

They are so unwilling to truly commit themselves that I want to remind everyone about what happened this morning. The member for Sherbrooke said that the Conservative motion as drafted contained certain potentially interesting elements, but that it was missing one big thing. That big thing is the second component of the resolution adopted at the NDP convention, namely a guarantee that these people will not suffer or lose their jobs in the regions.

The member for Sherbrooke therefore presented a very simple amendment saying that the implementation of the single tax return must not result in a loss of employment within the public service. Shockingly, this amendment was rejected. The Conservative Party turned it down, even though the Conservative members said over and over, in all of their speeches and questions today in the House, that no jobs would be lost. When the time came to put it in writing, however, they said no. They said that it was a mere detail and that they would think about how to do this.

We cannot trust a party that spent 10 years slashing public services and cutting social programs when they were in government under Stephen Harper. We cannot trust them or tell them that the details will be taken care of later. That is not how things work.

We might one day be open to a plan for a single tax return if it did not involve job losses and if services were being provided to the public and were perhaps improved. That is what we are saying. It is not complicated.

We can find ways to make life easier for people. In many countries, tax returns are filled out in advance. People must check to make sure that their income and deductions match, since tax returns are relatively simple for a large number of people who have a set salary. A number of OECD countries operate like this, and we could consider this solution or possibility as a way to make things easier for Quebeckers and Canadians.

However, that is not on the table for right now. I think it is unfortunate that political parties are so quick to get carried away with rhetoric and theatrics. This is easy to do when members are not out there themselves, looking into these things.

It would be a good idea to put more effort and energy into fighting tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance. However, the Liberal government must first take this seriously and invest the necessary resources. Since coming to power, the Liberals have not convicted any millionaires for hiding millions in the Cayman Islands or Barbados. The Liberals have no credibility. They have signed new agreements with tax havens.

If they want to tackle tax evasion, we will support them. However, they have not yet done so. Neither did the Conservatives for 10 years. Neither of these parties have any credibility in this file.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to inform you that I will be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for Jonquière. She is very familiar with this issue and is very involved in finding practical solutions for the people of her region, for workers, but also for all Quebec taxpayers.

We are having a very interesting discussion today, because we are seeing some rather extreme and sweeping positions. It smacks of improvisation, while in the NDP, we have a clear position, but it is nuanced because it is well thought out and because we have worked on the issue. We did not just toss a balloon into the air to see whether it would fly.

Let me recap. The last federal NDP convention in Montreal was attended by 3,000 delegates from across the country. Part of the discussions and resolutions considered during the convention dealt with the single tax return. This resolution, which came from Quebec, of course, had two parts. The first was to recognize that it is somewhat incongruous for Quebeckers to be the only taxpayers in the country who have to file two tax returns, while all the others in the federation file only one. Is having a single tax return for Quebec a good idea? A vast majority of the delegates supported the resolution and its principle. It certainly would make people’s lives easier.

There is a second part to this resolution, which is that we must avoid shooting ourselves in the foot as we attempt to help each other out. We want to make this change, but we do not want to hurt people by doing so. More than 5,000 people in Quebec work for the Canada Revenue Agency. They process the tax returns not just of Quebeckers, but also of people from other provinces. They also perform other tasks related to the tax activities of taxpayers across the country.

The NDP's resolution is very clear. The NDP supports the idea of a single tax return, but that approach would need to be implemented in a way that respects workers and ensures that they keep their jobs. We are talking about good jobs and people who are working in the regions, mainly in Mauricie. My colleague from Trois-Rivières is obviously very aware of that. Some of those workers are also located in the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean area.

We adopted the resolution and then we got to work. We went and met with the representatives of the employees who work in this field day after day and year after year. We asked them if it would be possible to come up with a plan to reassign people to different tasks, to additional or different activities. When one starts looking at the details, it is more complicated than it seems for various reasons.

There is a lot of seasonal work and student jobs. There are people who process tax returns for a living but who could not necessarily be reassigned to technical or specialized tasks related to the fight against tax havens or tax evasion. The NDP supports the fight against tax evasion. We are not against it, quite the contrary. That was our pet cause in the Quebec caucus throughout 2017. However, it is not true that someone who does a certain job can be transferred to a completely different one the next day. That is rather unrealistic.

The leader of the Conservative Party is saying that it is simple and that those who are working on tax returns today can be transferred to work on tax evasion tomorrow. This is proof that the Conservatives did not do their homework, that they did not talk to people on the ground, that they did not look into what is actually possible.