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

Employment Insurance May 28th, 2012

In any event, Mr. Chair, as pots and pans are being banged in Montreal, we can see from the questions and answers we are getting today that we are stuck with a load of empty Conservative vessels who do not use their heads. What we are seeing today is disgusting. There is no consultation with the provinces and no sensitivity to the regions; seasonal workers are left by the wayside kicking their heels.

I simply want to know something. Since they are killing the regions and killing off industry, is the minister going to do her job and start over again from zero, in order to protect seasonal workers? That is what we want to know.

Canada Pension Plan May 18th, 2012

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I have a question for you.

Justice Thomas Lederer just made a decision and has declared the election in Etobicoke Centre null and void, on a challenge by our former Liberal colleague, Borys Wrzesnewskyj.

I would like to know what the status is of the member now. Since the election has been declared null and void, does it mean there is no longer a member of Parliament for Etobicoke Centre?

Business of Supply May 18th, 2012

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

I find it rather sad today that people in the House are trying to make political hay by pointing fingers at certain political parties.

We know that recognition by the House of Commons, by Parliament, is important. I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about that. Why is it important today to pass a motion and to have the House of Commons recognize this incident?

Pensions May 18th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister to shut off his tape of talking points. We are not talking about that. Even at the time, he said that there was no report and denied the existence of any reports. Well, today, there is a report.

We are talking about taking billions of dollars from the pockets of our seniors.

In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that access to government information was a right guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and I quote, “...only where access is necessary to permit meaningful discussion on a matter of public importance...”. I think this is important enough.

Instead of playing games, when will the Conservatives table the report so that we can have a serious discussion? Is it because they are afraid that people will finally see that there was no problem with—

Pensions May 18th, 2012

Let us focus, Mr. Speaker. Let us talk about OAS.

On Tuesday the Minister of Finance explained that he had no idea how much money the budget's OAS changes would save the government, “because we do not project beyond five years”.

Today we find out there was a report, and that report has existed since 2007. The Conservatives can project beyond five years, but in a typical Conservative fashion, they will not let anyone see it. Will they release the report so that parliamentarians and Canadians can have an informed discussion about the OAS changes?

Groundwater Contamination May 17th, 2012

Madam Speaker, first I want to commend my NDP colleague on her motion, which the Liberal Party will support with much enthusiasm. We are a little fed up because this issue has been going on for a long time and a lot of money has been spent on it. But I think it is important and essential that the Government of Canada shoulder its responsibility.

I myself was a member of the government at the time when negotiations were taking place concerning the Shannon water situation. Families in Shannon were late in finding out about the situation, which took place close to CFB Valcartier.

In 1997, people learned that the water on CFB Valcartier had been contaminated with trichloroethylene—I will only say it once because it is difficult to pronounce. From now on, I will refer to it as TCE because it is easier to say.

Most certainly, we know that this solvent had been present in the groundwater for several decades. Unfortunately, a cause-and-effect link can be made between it and certain diseases, including cancer.

People were made aware of the situation on the Valcartier base in 1997 and action was taken. Unfortunately, only in 2000 were the people of Shannon, which is close to this base, informed of this problem.

Of course, in 2003, my colleague at the time, Claude Duplain, a Liberal MP, worked with the authorities in Shannon, including the mayor. Then David Pratt, the former minister of defence, offered financial restitution. The conflict was resolved in a friendly fashion with an agreement to give the municipality $19 million. Then the Conservative government also injected money to hook up the water system and such.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence said that the government was transparent and accountable and that it injected money. In my view, that is not enough.

As my colleagues know, a class action lawsuit was launched in 2007 and is now in progress. The lawsuit was recently heard, but we are still waiting for the decision.

The proceedings ended in November 2011. We are now waiting for an answer to know what will happen. I think it would be only right and proper for the Government of Canada to follow up on that. We are talking about a class action lawsuit involving 2,700 families. Of course, I feel that the government should recognize that it has some responsibility, since this happened on a military base and some concrete action has actually been taken. Concrete action can be taken, but you have to follow through with it. Following through means recognizing your responsibility. For the sake of the many viewers who are watching us today on television, we should perhaps reread the motion.

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) formally recognize the responsibility of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces with regard to the contamination of the groundwater which is the source of drinking water for multiple homes in the residential area of Canadian Forces Base Valcartier, residential areas of the municipality of Shannon, and numerous public institutions, due to the use of chlorinated solvents for several decades, including trichloroethylene (TCE); (b) take over the efforts of the Shannon Citizens Committee to monitor filtration systems in place for those dealing with the contamination of drinking water, and include the Committee in any environmental efforts undertaken; and (c) commit to (i) notify all persons employed at CFB Valcartier or who have lived in the residential quarters of the Base for the years during which the contamination took place, (ii) quickly clean up the affected sites, (iii) compensate victims of TCE contamination.

Can you imagine living in an area and not knowing that such a thing had happened and finding out later that TCE causes digestive and neurological problems and that it is associated with some cancers, including liver and brain cancer?

This is necessarily a matter of public health, a matter of responsibility. Water is a fundamental right. If mistakes were made, then the government necessarily has to be in a position to carry its share of the responsibility.

Obviously, we are perhaps always cautious, as a government, about accepting that responsibility. When we talk about compensation, what does that mean? We owe not just our own families, but also the families of the armed forces our respect. There are people who lived there who are now all over Canada or in other missions and who have these illnesses today. It can also have an impact on the family. I think we have to be transparent.

The Government of Canada took on responsibilities; it not only reached an out-of-court settlement, but invested money in infrastructure. Connections and branch lines were rebuilt, but I think we have to do more than that.

We also have to fully recognize that there was fault. We must certainly also find a way of solving the problem and ask ourselves whether this kind of problem exists elsewhere. In the environmental context, I think it is also important to follow up, to make sure we are able to inform those families, and to use this model for prevention in future.

Work has been done. Health Canada has done its homework in some respects. There is a communication and transparency problem that may have caused other problems. We are not talking about statistics; we are talking about human beings, families children, fathers, mothers and grandparents who have had to live with this.

Water was supplied to Shannon after that. It was just like the problems that happened in Walkerton. When there is a problem with the water, when people have to boil their water and they have to flush out the system to make sure there is no contamination, this is a major problem, particularly if it affects people's health, with the psychological damage that comes with it.

It is imperative that the Government of Canada recognize its responsibility in that case.

The Liberal Party of Canada will support the motion put forward by my colleague from Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier. It is not a partisan issue. It is a public health issue. It is a matter of providing help. We need to find a way to have better communication at least, not only in a corrective sense but also in a preventative sense. We have to make sure that if it is a matter of red tape between departments or if somebody tries to hide, then there should be no impunity.

However, first things first. We have to focus on the population itself. It has suffered enough.

There were some answers and we have to recognize that. It is not a matter of money. It is not about saying the money is there. It is more than that. It is about recognizing responsibility. If we have to go further, then so be it.

If we recognize responsibility, we have to accept responsibility. The role of a government is to protect the people. There were blunders, there were problems. My colleague from Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier is not the only one who has talked about this. My colleague at the time, Christiane Gagnon of the Bloc Québécois, did as well. This is an issue that affects people in the Quebec City region and it is certainly a very significant problem.

I welcome this motion. The Liberal Party of Canada will be supporting it. I have heard the parliamentary secretary respond to the same effect, and I think it would be in good form.

The government has apologized for a number of things in this House in the past, and I think it should apologize for the bad job that was done for the population of Shannon and the people who were living near CFB Valcartier.

If there has to be compensation, why get bogged down in legal action and class action suits? Just think, it has already taken from 2007 to 2011. And we are awaiting the result. I definitely think it is going to be important that the government step up to the plate. We will therefore be supporting the NDP motion.

Points of Order May 17th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, there are limits.

First of all, it is not a children's museum, it is the Museum of Science and Technology in Ottawa. Second, people here have the right to ask questions. Challenging that right because someone does not have children is unacceptable. The member should apologize immediately.

Points of Order May 11th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, is the document that we have just tabled bilingual?

Old Port of Montreal Corporation May 11th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take advantage of the presence of the Minister of Industry, who is also the minister responsible for Montreal, to ask him a question about the Old Port of Montreal Corporation.

In light of what was said yesterday by the corporation's chairman, former minister Gerry Weiner, who is also a friend of Leo Housakos, it seems a consultant has already evaluated the Old Port of Montreal Corporation. I also heard that Old Port of Montreal Corporation could likely be put under the management of the Canada Lands Company.

Can the minister confirm whether such is the case? This is a 40-acre jewel and we do not want it to be subject to real estate speculation for the building of condos. We are opposed to that.

What can the minister tell me?

National Defence May 11th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, that is all well and good but, despite the answer given by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it appears as though the costs in Libya have increased from $50 million to $350 million. Yet, three days before that mission ended, the minister said on television that the costs were still below the $60 million threshold. Luckily, the minister was not flying a plane in the air raids because I do not know where the bombs would have landed, since he is already missing his budget targets.

The question is thus very simple. Is there a pilot flying the plane? Is there a minister at the Department of National Defence? And, does he know how to count?