The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15
House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was quebec.

Last in Parliament June 2013, as Liberal MP for Bourassa (Québec)

Won his last election, in 2011, with 41% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Libya June 14th, 2011

Madam Speaker, this is an important debate today, not just in form but in substance. What is just as important in the motion and the amendments is the word solidarity. Today is an important day. We must not forget the horrors of the Holocaust. We have a responsibility, as citizens of the world, to ensure such horrors never reoccur. Dictators must be fought. Canada has always taken a stand when it was time to intervene. We have all due regard for the sovereignty of countries, but there comes a time when civilians must be protected and we must act.

Every time I see things like what is happening in Libya—I asked a question this morning about this—I think of General Dallaire and what happened in Rwanda. We do not want history to be forever repeating itself. We have a responsibility, therefore, as parliamentarians and as a country to intervene and demonstrate our solidarity with the people of Libya, who are suffering terribly.

We could talk about what is happening in Syria, in the Middle East, or elsewhere in Africa and in other countries. Every case is unique, but the basic principle is the same. I was proud to serve as a Liberal minister, and I have sat on both sides of the House. Canada must always take a stand when civilians need protection. That is why we supported Canada’s participation in the Afghan mission from the outset. That is why we support this motion today, although not blindly. We have to be specific, and that is why we support UN Security Council resolutions 1970 and 1973.

Every time we have had this kind of debate in the House, the Liberal Party has replied ready, aye, ready, whether as the government or the official opposition, as it is today. Regardless of who our leader was, we have always been there to protect people. It is important to us that this motion be based on protecting civilians from an imminent threat and imposing a no-fly zone.

We do not believe that troops should be put on the ground. We have already established an air mission. We are providing support. We belong to NATO and the UN. If Canada had won a seat on the UN Security Council, it might have been able to play a more significant role. Today, as parliamentarians, we must show, with civility, just how much Canada must play a leading role and participate actively in this mission.

What is happening in Libya is serious. We saw the Jasmine Revolution this spring in the Maghreb, in the Middle East. We saw our Tunisian brothers and sisters take the future into their own hands and play a major role in fighting dictators. We saw the exact same thing in Egypt.

However, I do not believe that we should take a piecemeal approach. As far as I am concerned, Canada's foreign policy should not be dictated by a military operation. The military is both necessary and important because it is the strong arm of our democracy, but policies must be determined by Foreign Affairs. That is why we have always provided constructive criticism about certain aspects of the Afghan mission. When it comes to Libya, a piecemeal approach will not work. We need a diplomatic and humanitarian strategy so that the Libyan people can take the future into their own hands. We have an international responsibility, along with other countries, to support the people and civilians who are suffering.

That is why we completely agree. We have said so from the beginning. We have called for the imposition of a no-fly zone since the start of the violence.

I think that we must do much more. I agree with my colleagues who have said that, obviously, the Libyan people must take their future into their own hands. We need to be there to support governance and to give them tools to establish their own democracy. There is no room for ethnocentrism. We must not impose our own values and our way of life. There are universal democratic and humanitarian values. We have always said that we must not give people fish; we must teach them to fish. We must give them the tools they need. It will cost money. In its strategy, the government must not say that it will send planes and that this will just be a military operation. We will have to ensure that we give these people development tools so that they can take charge of their own transition.

That is our role, that is how we do things, how we see things as Canadians. Regardless of the government, I believe that the only way this has a chance of being successful is if we are there to provide support. We are not there to replace. We are there to support. If we want to help the Libyan people, the first thing we must do is support these military missions and play a role. I have a hard time saying that in three and a half months, we will withdraw. We do not know what will happen in three and a half months. Hopefully things will go well during that period, but what is important is for Parliament to hold a new debate if, after three and a half months, there are still problems. I think we have to be realistic.

This is not peacemaking. This is peacekeeping. We can always interpret chapter 7 or chapter 8 on humanitarian missions, if necessary, but we do not want to relive what happened in Rwanda. We need to give this a chance.

In terms of diplomacy, there is also a geopolitical reality to consider, since it is not just Libya. Libya has borders. Tunisia and Egypt are also in turmoil. Their reality, what they are learning, must also be considered. The people there are taking control of their own destiny and a new reality is emerging, since the dictators will be judged or have been arrested.

That is why we must ensure that, in each mission, the most important things are the three D's: diplomacy, development and defence. We have already talked about this. Our mission should be based around this notion, in order to make sure it can work.

Canada has a role to play. Realistically speaking, Canada has certain capabilities. We have always been quite strong, for I recall some of our concrete actions, and not just in Afghanistan. There was also Haiti. We have made important contributions in several countries. Canada has a role to play in governance, in assistance, in support for governance and in terms of development tools for democracy, but we also have an important role to play in the International Criminal Court. We cannot allow these crimes to go unpunished. We need to ensure that Gadhafi pays for what he has done.

I hear people talking about a regime change versus just protecting civilians. There is a fine line. The most important thing is stopping the horrors that are taking place right now. It is completely deplorable and unacceptable that rape is being used as a weapon of war, as in Congo. It has even been said that Gadhafi gives his soldiers Viagra. It is completely unacceptable. We must ensure that these actions do not go unpunished.

We will have a role to play in the transition. We will have a role to play in terms of the International Court. I see my colleague, one of our greatest former justice ministers, who played a key role in the creation of the International Criminal Court.

We must ensure during the transition, if we want to give these people a chance, that crimes do not go unpunished. We must absolutely play a role in that regard.

We are going to work constructively and co-operatively with all parliamentarians in order to fully play our role.

I guess we are not seen everything that is going on in the field. A lot of stuff is happening there. I hope we put partisanship aside and that, as Canadians, we will play our role of citizens of the world. We cannot just allow dictators like that do what they do without taking our own responsibility.

The global village is there now. There are no more boundaries, no more frontiers, and we have a role to play. The Canadian way is the triple D, as I said. It is diplomacy, development and defence, and we just cannot go at the menu a la carte saying that we will do one and then the other. If we had that way of doing things, people would not be on side.

We need to send a clear message. I was very pleased to hear my colleagues from the official opposition also say that we are there for the citizens, the civilians, to ensure they are protected. That is our role. Whether we are a member of the Security Council or not, we have a role to play as a country.

Those were the few words I wanted to say on behalf of my constituents in Bourassa. I wanted to give my opinion on a situation that, unfortunately, is a reality in a number of countries. Obviously, we will address them one at a time. It is important to add that the Liberal Party of Canada stands in solidarity—the word “solidarity” is important here—with all parliamentarians to protect people and ensure that dictators like Gadhafi can never be in this position again.

The diplomatic reality is such that we do not always understand how things happen on the ground, but the primary objective is to ensure that we can protect the civilians, protect the people and make the world a better place. It is our responsibility, in our Canadian democracy, to play this role. I thank the government and all parliamentarians for playing this role today. This is an important debate for Canada.

Canada Post Corporation June 14th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, those are fine words, but the reality is that the Canada Post strike is now 11 days old. Today, 15,000 people in Toronto and Montreal are on strike. In addition, Air Canada began striking at midnight. Travel season is upon us. This will have a major impact on the economy, but a negotiated settlement is the preferred solution.

Will the minister take responsibility and require the parties to sit down and negotiate in good faith to come to an agreement? Canadians and Quebeckers need it.

Libya June 14th, 2011

Madam Speaker, first, I want to congratulate the Government of Canada on the Libyan mission. It is about time that the national transitional council was recognized as the legitimate government. Better late than never.

But, I am a bit concerned by the fact that we are taking such a piecemeal approach to this. Every time I see a situation like the one in Libya, I think about General Roméo Dallaire and Rwanda. Canada is a citizen of the world and must be involved in helping civilians. I would like my NDP colleague to speak more about the overall situation in the Maghreb, which includes Egypt as well as Libya. How can we avoid taking a piecemeal approach to these countries, given that the entire Jasmine Revolution will be affected?

Second, Canada is unfortunately often lacking in terms of foreign policy. A military operation should not dictate how things are done. In a democracy, the military carries out foreign affairs decisions. Does the member think that Canada should be playing a more active role in diplomacy?

Flooding in Montérégie June 13th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity here today to commend the extraordinary generosity shown by Quebeckers this weekend during the cleanup, dubbed “La Grande Corvée”, of the flood zone in Montérégie.

Over 3,000 volunteers worked together to ease the suffering of the men, women and children who have been enduring the wrath of nature for over 50 days now.

I would also like to congratulate the event's organizers, led by my good friend Michel Fecteau, the man behind SOS Richelieu, and his team. They did an excellent job. Bravo to you, Michel, and to your entire team.

I would remind everyone that another big cleanup is planned for June 18 and 19. For more information, please visit www.sosrichelieu.com.

Albert Jacquard once said “From now on, the solidarity needed most of all is that of everyone on earth”.

The magnificent solidarity shown by the people of Quebec deserves to be applauded by all members of Parliament.

Flooding in Montérégie June 6th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, while we are tossing these kind words around, the people in the Montérégie region have been up to their necks in water for the past 50 days. While we are tossing these kind words around, the Prime Minister is showing as much empathy as someone having a tooth pulled without anaesthetic.

Why does the Prime Minister not want to make an exception for Quebec, which is asking that the army play a role in the cleanup?

In 1998, Jean Chrétien called Lucien Bouchard to see what was needed. People want help from the army. What has happened to them is not their fault. Instead of being attacked, they want people to come help them clean up. What are they waiting for?

Speech from the Throne June 3rd, 2011

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on having been re-elected. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the constituents of Bourassa who have given me a sixth mandate here in the House. It is truly a privilege to be here as a parliamentarian.

Now, here is the problem, and we have seen it before. There are plenty of fine ideas. This is a cut and paste version of what we were hearing for months before, but I would like to speak in more concrete terms. If the government is here for the people, there are people from the Montérégie area who would like to see their parked cars again, but with the flooding, their cars are gone. They have the feeling that the government has deserted them.

Would the parliamentary secretary agree that the Prime Minister should go to the Montérégie area himself? Will the army be given a new mandate to help clean up and to work to improve the lives of these people in the Montérégie area? What does he think?

Business of Supply March 25th, 2011

Madam Speaker, if the Bloc has been saying something for 20 years—and that is true—then the other side has been doing the same since the age of dinosaurs. So, they do not have any lessons to learn. However, I find it sad that the hon. member, whom I know well, given that we have been sitting across from each other since 1990, says that he is the only one who is speaking for Quebec. The Quebec members of the Liberal Party, myself included, also defend the interests of Quebec. I recognize the legitimacy of the Bloc but it is not a question of preventing the Conservatives from winning. We want to see no more of the Conservative Party. I therefore ask Quebeckers to vote for a real alternative government: the Liberal Party of Canada.

Petitions March 25th, 2011

Madam Speaker, there are some important moments in the life of a parliamentarian. One of those moments is probably having the opportunity to present such an important petition, but it is important to understand where it comes from.

There is a wonderful woman whom all of the political parties know. She has gathered over 430,000 signatures for all of the parties. It is now our turn to tell her how proud we are of her. I am presenting nearly 30,000 signatures collected by Marie-Hélène Dubé. She believes, and rightfully so, that we must change the employment insurance system to increase the maximum number of weeks of sickness benefits from 15 to 50.

I would like to acknowledge her, thank her and express our affection for her. All of the parties stand firmly with her.

Points of Order March 25th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, we are hearing all kinds of comments. We have heard the word “coalition” many times. The Conservatives are laying it on thickly today. I would like to table a very short, but very important, document. It is dated September 9, 2004.

It read:

Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson,

Excellency,

As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons fail to support some part of the government’s program. We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority. Your attention to this matter is appreciated.

It was signed, “Sincerely, [the Prime Minister],” who was then the leader of the opposition of the Conservative Party, and by the member of Parliament for Laurier—Sainte-Marie, the leader of the Bloc Québécois, and the member of Parliament for Toronto—Danforth, the leader of the New Democratic Party. Their coalition.

I ask the majority of the members, who form this House, unanimous consent to table this document, so everybody can know that the Conservatives wanted to sleep with them. What is going on?

Ethics March 25th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, we could always table the letter sent to the Governor General by the absent Prime Minister who wanted to get in bed with the other parties to replace the government. We will rise on a point of order later.

We now learn that the leader of the government in the other place has also admitted to meeting with Carson for a coffee. In fact, we know that he often worked in her office.

Coincidentally, the plan that would have made a fortune for Carson's favourite former escort on the backs of the first nations is being reviewed in the other place.

Did Carson really do so much for the Prime Minister and the Conservatives that he deserves all this access and privilege?