House of Commons photo

Track Alexandre

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is quebec.

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

Won his last election, in 2021, with 49% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Ethics January 27th, 2020

In recent years, Volkswagen has been caught lying about its vehicles' polluting emissions.

We know this because the company pleaded guilty in the United States in 2017. Canada waited three years before laying charges. Three years. The Liberals did not report anything to the RCMP. The company was offered a backroom deal to avoid trial.

Does this complacency have to do with the fact that Volkswagen lobbyists were invited into the offices of the environment, transport, global affairs and innovation ministers, as well as that of the Prime Minister?

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply January 27th, 2020

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Orléans for her speech, the tone of her remarks and her openness.

However, the NDP wants to see firm commitments and concrete action. There is a climate emergency and young people are asking us to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. We are not going to meet our targets for 2030. The Liberal government has agreed to the Trans Mountain expansion and is considering new projects like the Frontier project proposed by Teck Resources Ltd.

Will she undertake to eliminate subsidies for oil companies and not consider any new oil and gas projects until we are on track to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions?

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply January 27th, 2020

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Windsor for his very good question.

That would indeed help workers. They would have more income and would spend more, which would help the local economy. It could also attract investments. As we saw in the past with medicare, the cost of local drug coverage can be a very heavy burden for businesses to bear. This type of program could also attract investors to the country.

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply January 27th, 2020

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very pertinent question.

In the previous Parliament, the NDP introduced Bill C-262, which was passed by this House, to ensure that all federal laws are aligned with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This federal NDP initiative is therefore completely consistent with that objective.

The leader of the NDP has often said that the future of economic development does not lie in hydraulic fracturing. We believe that each project should be assessed individually to see whether it fits in with a real plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In this specific case, the B.C. government found that it was feasible.

All the reports from Environment and Climate Change Canada have confirmed that the federal government is going to miss the 2030 targets set by the Conservative government. In this context, it would be impossible to consider new projects at the federal level, since we cannot even meet the Conservatives' targets.

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply January 27th, 2020

Madam Speaker, the question is simple, but the answer may be complex.

We are in a minority government situation. In the past, we have been disappointed by the Liberals, who broke their promises over and over. We know this story well. We have already seen it play out many times, as everyone knows. This time, with everyone acting in good faith, I hope we will actually be able to move forward.

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply January 27th, 2020

Madam Speaker, I would like to see some action. I would like folks to get some concrete help. I urge the Liberal government to tax web giants, raise taxes on banks and go after tax havens. That will give it the money to take care of Canadians.

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply January 27th, 2020

Madam Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to respond to the Liberal government's Speech from the Throne.

I would like to begin by quoting Edmond Rostand, who would have this to say about it: That's too brief, young man! The throne speech is silent on quite a few subjects, especially subjects of interest to Quebeckers. In fact, the word “Quebec” does not appear even once. That is a singular omission on the part of a minority government that would have done well to pay more attention to Quebec's needs and interests in the throne speech. Unfortunately, it did not. The speech is long on rhetoric, hot air, good intentions and lip service and short on details, clarity and firm commitments in a number of areas except when it suits the Liberals.

For years, the Liberals have been promising money for the national housing strategy and the fight against homelessness. Unfortunately, people on the ground know that the federal government provides precious few resources and refuses to make the kind of concrete commitments that allow projects to move forward and housing co-ops and affordable and low-income housing to get built. The housing issue is of vital importance to many Canadians and Quebeckers because it is many families' biggest expense. Right now, people are struggling to find adequate housing. The Liberals have said a lot of nice things about housing over the past few years but, sadly, have done very little.

In Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, one-third of households spend more than 30% of their income on housing. In my riding, one in three families is literally at or below the poverty line. We all know that, as a rule, people should expect to spend 30% of their income on housing.

There is currently just one social housing project, unfortunately, and this project will soon come to an end. There is no plan for what comes next. How is that possible? The government has been going on for four years about how housing is a priority and how we need to build affordable and social housing. Nothing ever happens, because the federal government bickers with the Quebec government over which government should put its flag and logo on the project.

The NDP thinks that real action is needed to ensure access to affordable housing. The Liberals need to stop bickering with the Quebec government and transfer the funds. The Quebec government would then be able to implement the AccèsLogis program, through which projects could actually help people. I am sick of the bickering between Ottawa and Quebec at the expense of the poorest families, individuals and workers in my riding and across Quebec. The budget will soon be tabled, so now is the time to free up the money. This is urgent. We need this.

Also, I am not sure where the member for Winnipeg North has been for the past 25 years. He said we have been talking about pharmacare for the past four years, but I would remind him that it was in the Liberal platform of 1997. It was also part of the discussion when medicare was first introduced in this country in the 1960s. That was just a little refresher for my colleague from Winnipeg North. The Liberals are still talking about pharmacare, but we need to see whether there will ever be more than just consultations and reports. Are they ever going to actually implement anything?

Canada is the only country in the world that has a universal public health care system without a universal public pharmacare system to go with it. This is an anomaly. This means that Canadians and Quebeckers pay some of the highest prices for prescription drugs. This is slightly less problematic in Quebec, since we have a hybrid regime that is administered by the Quebec government. However, it also poses significant problems for many people who sometimes have to make really tough choices, like paying for their medication or paying for their groceries. When people do not take all their medication as prescribed, it can cause illnesses to progress more rapidly and force people back to work too soon. It can lead to other health problems and additional costs for the health care system.

The NDP believes it is high time that the Canada Health Act include a principle emphasizing the importance of a complete, free and universal pharmacare program and indicating that this is one of our society's values because we want to take care of people. That is not the case right now and people are suffering because of it. This issue is a priority for the NDP.

Many large groups in Quebec are calling for such a program because they understand the difference it could make in people's lives. Quebec's three major unions, the FTQ, the CSN and the CSQ, are calling for this program, as are many civil society groups, such as the Union des consommateurs du Québec. They are saying that it would make a difference in people's lives if we had a universal public pharmacare program managed by the provinces and the Government of Quebec, obviously.

Last year, I met with people who are directly affected by the lack of such a principle or federal program, for example, retail workers and unionized workers at Métro, Provigo and Loblaws. They work part time for a modest wage and have to contribute to their employer's drug plan. In Quebec, this supplemental health care coverage is not optional; it is mandatory. People cannot choose to opt for the public plan. They are required to contribute to the private plan. Those contributions cost many workers up to 25% of their income.

I met a young worker, about 25, who told me that for every month he works, his first week's salary goes entirely toward the drug plan offered by his employer. Public universal pharmacare would considerably change the life of someone like that. It would simplify collective bargaining for many groups. For that individual, it would mean a 25% increase in pay. That is not nothing. Not only would that worker's drug costs be covered, but his take-home pay would also get him much further ahead.

For all these reasons, we are telling the Liberal government that it is time to take action. According to the Hoskins report released a few months ago, this is a good thing that has been studied at length, and our society needs it. We at the NDP are saying that it is time to move forward and take this seriously, and we will be here to support the government if it comes up with something public and universal.

The other thing we wanted to see in the Speech from the Throne is dental care coverage. That would be another tangible way to help people in their lives.

We have a medicare system—thanks to the NDP, by the way—that is highly appreciated but that is not comprehensive because some parts of the body are not covered. That is rather bizarre. It is as though we collectively decided that our heart and arms would be insured, but that our eyes and teeth would not. There is no logic to it. Having to pay a dentist to provide care and ensure good dental hygiene also represents a considerable cost for many people.

Dental coverage would make a big difference in people's lives at a cost almost equivalent to the amount of the tax cut that the Liberal government has announced—a tax cut that will again benefit the wealthiest in our society.

They could have used that money, which amounts to a little less than one billion, or about $800 or $850 million, to provide dental care to all Quebeckers and Canadians. We, the New Democrats, would not make the same choices the Liberal government did.

We hope the government will be able to implement public pharmacare and dental care. We also hope the government will increase the federal contribution for early childhood care. Quebec needs 42,000 more ECE spots, in publicly funded day cares. We hope the federal government will be willing to give Quebec's ECE system a boost, so that families can get their children into affordable day care.

I only have a minute left, which is not enough time to talk about the climate emergency and the fact that this government is once again saying one thing and doing the opposite. We in the NDP condemn the decision to approve the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. This decision completely flies in the face of the federal government's pledges to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

We are eager to see how the government reacts to the new Frontier oil sands project. If the government is serious about setting more ambitious targets for 2030, I hope that it will take measures that are consistent and logical with that goal, which is something the entire population is calling for, especially our youth.

The Environment December 10th, 2019

Mr. Speaker, while scientists at COP25 and young people across the country insist that this is a climate crisis, the Liberals are all over the map.

The commissioner of the environment and sustainable development announced today that not only are we going to miss the Conservatives' 2030 targets, but also that the Liberals are hiding key information on their climate failure. That is unworthy of government that claims to be transparent.

Will the Minister of the Environment commit to adopting a green new deal and telling the truth to Quebeckers and Canadians?

Canadian Heritage December 9th, 2019

Mr. Speaker, workers in Alberta need new jobs in a new economy. It is time to take action.

Speaking of inaction, the Liberals dragged their heels for years, refusing to go after web giants that do not pay their fair share and that believe they are above the law. This is hurting our artists. It is hurting our creators, our businesses and our regional media.

The Minister of Canadian Heritage is just getting to know his new portfolio, but can he provide any assurance right now that, come January, he will have a clear plan for keeping his promise and taxing web giants?

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply December 6th, 2019

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the member for Beloeil—Chambly on being elected, on his first questions here today and on his speech.

Throughout the entire campaign, the Bloc Québécois presented itself as the greatest defender of Quebec's interests. That practically became their trademark. Sometimes they even made it seem they had a monopoly on defending Quebec's interests.

When the Liberal government brought down its throne speech yesterday, the Leader of the Bloc Québécois rushed to the mic to say that he would support the throne speech delivered by the Liberal Party of Canada. That is a mystery. I thought it must have included some amazing gains for Quebec. There must have been something in there in the best interests of Quebeckers that we simply missed.

Compensation for supply-managed producers was announced before. As for the suggestion that oil was not mentioned in the throne speech, I just want to say that when the Liberals talk about diversifying export markets for natural resources, they mean the Trans Mountain pipeline.

Still, there was no mention in the throne speech about setting higher greenhouse gas reduction targets for 2030, nothing for the aerospace industry or the Davie shipyard, no employment insurance reform, nothing about taxing web giants, nothing about the crisis plaguing local and regional media, no pledge to tackle tax havens and no response to any of the Quebec government's demands.

That brings me to a very simple question: How can the leader of the Bloc Québécois vote in favour of a throne speech that does not even include the word Quebec?