House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was conservatives.

Last in Parliament October 2015, as NDP MP for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier (Québec)

Lost her last election, in 2015, with 22% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Business of Supply April 1st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party is trying to tell the NDP what issues are important to Canadians and how we should be doing our jobs.

Throughout this debate, instead of talking about the issue at hand, the Conservatives have gone off track, taking their time. They are praising our military, but they are completely out of touch with the debate. My colleagues in the other parties do not seem to see a problem with the abuse of Canadians' trust and taxpayers' dollars. That does not seem to be an issue or a priority.

Can my NDP colleague elaborate on why we in the NDP feel that the abuse of trust and the waste of public funds for the benefit of the Prime Minister's friends is an important issue to Canadians?

Business of Supply April 1st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech by the member opposite. He does not seem to have grasped the crux of the motion or the issue. He boasted about the work of our troops, our Canadian Forces. No one on this side of the House will contradict him. I am from a military family. Both my parents are still serving in the armed forces. My grandfather is a veteran of the Korean war. Therefore, I know very well all the sacrifices made when someone chooses to serve their country as a member of the military.

That is not the issue here. We are talking about the abuse of public resources by the Prime Minister and this government in connection with travel for the Conservative Party's friends. That is what I want the member to comment on.

We are not really interested today in hearing their views about the military. We know what our troops are doing, the courage they demonstrate and the sacrifices they make for our country. What I want the member to do now is to explain to me and to all Canadians why the Prime Minister uses public resources and funds to fly his friends and backers all over the country. That is the issue. We are not interested in their other side comments. I really want to hear what the member has to say about the motion moved today.

Business of Supply April 1st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, it sounds as if the member thinks that the louder he is, the better his point is, but it is not.

Right now, the offices are there to serve Canadians. Those people are not doing partisan activities. I see the work that is being done and I have no qualms about standing up for the work those people do. Their work is in no way partisan.

Whether we have MPs in a place or not, there is no reason not to go talk to Canadians, to see what their concerns are and to try to stand up for them properly. I know that is different from what the Liberals and Conservatives are used to doing. They assume that they know what is best for Canadians. However, we in the NDP want to know what is best for them and we will go on the ground to find out.

Business of Supply April 1st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about two things. First, I can see that the Conservatives are trying to sidetrack debate by accusing the NDP of certain things, but Elections Canada has already cleared the party of those allegations. I would like to point that out to the member.

Second, the people who sent me here did not elect me to represent oil and gas industry lobbyists. They sent me here to represent their interests. Many of my constituents are concerned about this issue, and they are very pleased to hear the questions that the NDP is putting to the government and the concerns being raised about obvious abuses in the oil industry.

I believe that I do my job quite well and that I represent my constituents quite well. I have no issues on that front. No one in my riding has come to me to say that Keystone XL is an excellent idea and that it will create a lot of jobs in the area. No one has said that. My constituents feel they are very well represented, but I thank the member for his concern, all the same.

However, we should be focusing on today's debate. That is what is important right now. I would like to see the Prime Minister appear before the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to explain his use of the Challengers. If my leader has to appear, the Prime Minister should have to respond to questions as well.

It is unfortunate that I cannot hear my colleague's thoughts on that.

Business of Supply April 1st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I would appreciate the indulgence of all members, because I have a touch of the flu. I may need a few breaks.

I am pleased to join the debate on the motion before us today. Considering the commotion it is causing in the House, we seem to have touched a sensitive spot that needs to be explored. I am pleased to have the opportunity to do so. It can be hard to have to speak following my colleague from Timmins—James Bay, who is always so eloquent and who was able to present various examples of abuse of power by the other two parties, but I will do my best. He already gave all the best quotations, but it would be worth hearing them in both languages. This is an important moment for my colleagues from Quebec.

Even though I have the opportunity to rise in the House to discuss the motion before us, I am disappointed because the motion speaks to something so obvious and so logical that I do not understand why we are even talking about it today.

When the Conservatives were in opposition, they complained about this type of abuse of public trust and public money. Still today they are trying to pass themselves off as great defenders of the use of public money. They ask Canadians to trust them with their money and to give them the responsibility to run the country. They say that they will not be like the Liberals, they will not betray Canadians and they will use the money wisely. If the Conservative Party had truly adhered to that principle, we would not be here today talking about this and instead might be discussing things that Canadians are interested in and concerned about.

My colleague was talking about the cuts to veterans' services. CFB Valcartier is in my riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier. That base sent an incredible number of soldiers to the front lines in Afghanistan. I have had the opportunity to welcome a number of them home since being elected. Every time, it is an unsettling and difficult experience for me. I am 28 and I see people younger than I am returning from Afghanistan, where they experienced things I cannot even begin to imagine. They need help from our government, but our government tells them that it has to balance the budget by 2015, in time for the election. The government tells them that they will have to wait a while because it does not have a social contract with them. That is a matter for another speech. It is terrible to say such a thing. It is even worse to try to use such a defence to create a legal precedent.

I am straying somewhat from what we are debating, but I am using this example to illustrate the Conservatives' bad faith towards those truly in need. There have been more than 10 cases of suicide among soldiers who needed help. According to the DND ombudsman's most recent report, we need 15% to 20% more mental health care professionals.

Just recently, we heard that our francophone soldiers in Afghanistan had to obtain psychological services from the U.S. forces. DND did not even have the decency to provide them with services in their official language. We are told that it is not possible to deploy psychologists and other professionals. That shows a poor understanding of national defence. That is the argument that I heard and I could not believe it.

The U.S. can deploy psychologists and provide essential services to their troops. DND says that there was a problem, that it was not an ideal solution and that there might be a cultural or language shock, but that it would eventually resolve this situation when it has the time to consider it.

Such terrible things are being said. Then the government tells us that it supports our troops, but that we all have to tighten our belts. It says that everyone has funding problems and that everyone has to make sacrifices. Everyone has to tighten their belts, except for the Prime Minister's cronies. That is another class of Canadians, the pampered elite. Personally, I do not get to pay the equivalent of economy class for flights worth $11,000. That never happens. I cannot afford that kind of luxury even with all the Aeroplan points I collect because I travel a lot.

It is a whole different story for people who raise over $3 million for the Prime Minister's election campaigns. Those people can travel on the Challenger. They are spoiled and can go wherever they want at very affordable prices. I should spend more time talking to the Prime Minister so that maybe I too can enjoy these privileges. I would like to experience that luxury sometime. I find the whole thing mind-boggling. There are no other words to describe how I feel about this situation.

I am going to follow my colleague's example and give some quotations. I find them delightful. Here is one that we have not heard yet today. I will start with the Prime Minister. At the time, he was an entrepreneur. He has worked hard in his life, and he understands the issues facing the middle class, people who do not have very much money. At the time, he and his wife owned a small business. He said:

My wife, Laureen, and I ran our own small businesses. We had to pay our own health care premiums. We had to purchase our own supplemental health care coverage, like most people in the country. We cannot afford to fly to clinics in the United States to get health care when things go wrong and we certainly cannot afford to get on Challenger jets to do it.

He said that on October 1, 2005. Much has changed since then. Apparently, the Prime Minister can now afford to travel all over the country for various reasons. If I am not mistaken, he travels to many different places, not only in Canada but also abroad. That is a problem. In the quote that I just read, the Prime Minister was trying to show Canadians that he truly understands the problems of the middle class and that he is there to listen to them and to ensure that their money is spent wisely. However, now that the Conservatives have a majority, it is too late to go back. We are stuck with them until the next election. We are stuck with people who regularly betray our trust.

I feel shortchanged, and so do the voters in my riding. People voted for the Conservatives because they hoped to see something new. The Conservatives played the game right, and many people put their trust in them. I can understand that. Unfortunately, people very quickly became disillusioned.

It is rare to see people looking forward to another election. People are realizing that a lot of money is being spent and a lot of time and energy is being wasted. People want their elected officials, their members of Parliament, to work for them, to represent them in the House and to be genuinely deserving of their trust. When I visit my riding now, people ask me when the next election will be so that they can toss this government out. The Conservatives have told them so many half-truths and have regularly shaken their confidence.

Voters do not want an election so they can bring back the Liberals. On the contrary, my constituents want something new. They have not heard any policies from the current third party. I am still waiting. I would like to be able to debate policy, since that is my job. I was sent here by taxpayers and Canadian citizens to debate issues, present ideas and try to put forward solutions to make Canada a better country. I am still waiting for proposals from the Liberals to give me a little something to debate. I imagine that we will see something in 2015, which is still a ways away.

Regardless, people are looking forward to a change and to getting the government they deserve: a New Democrat government that will defend their interests and ensure that the taxes it collects—because taxes will have to be collected, as they are now—will be used properly to provide services to the public. Furthermore, a New Democrat government will not use public funds to help Conservative friends and backers live in the lap of luxury. That is completely unacceptable. We saw that under the Liberals, and it is still going on under the Conservatives. In 2015 it will be time for a change, time to elect a New Democrat government.

Business of Supply April 1st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I first wish to congratulate my hon. colleague on his eloquent speech.

As entertaining as his quotations were, I find the current state of affairs quite unfortunate. People spent years criticizing the Liberals when they were in power. Some Liberals are even making a lot of noise. I have a new seat in the House, and I had forgotten how loud it can get in this part of the House.

People have been having strong reactions; they feel as though they are being attacked. There seems to be a culture of corruption and an abuse of Canadians' trust.

My colleague already mentioned this in his speech, but I wonder if he could elaborate. Could he comment on how the NDP would respect the trust that Canadians have placed in us to represent them, as well as the trust they will place in us in 2015, when Canadians vote in a new government to replace both corrupt parties?

Search and Rescue March 31st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, the government's half-answers are not enough. The acquisition of a new fleet of search and rescue planes has been a fiasco under both the Liberals and the Conservatives. All of these delays have driven up costs and forced search and rescue teams to work with aging and failing equipment.

It does not make sense to ignore the six years of research done by the Department of National Defence. We want clear answers.

When will we finally get a new fleet of search and rescue planes?

Petitions March 28th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present two petitions today on the same topic. The petitioners want to draw the attention of the House of Commons to the high number of attacks every year on bus drivers who serve the public.

They are also calling on the House of Commons to amend the Criminal Code to create an offence for attacks committed against bus drivers while they are working and to set harsher penalties for the attackers. People from across the province are urging the government to act quickly.

National Defence March 28th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, under the Conservatives, national defence headquarters keeps growing, but the number of people working on bases with cadets keeps shrinking. It is more tail, less teeth. The rear admiral in charge explained these layoffs saying that he needed to renew, update, and refresh.

Does the minister really think the people who help cadets and who are now losing their jobs are going to find this refreshing?

National Defence March 28th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives like to use the army and soldiers in their photo ops, but do not seem to be bragging too much about the major cuts made to the Royal Canadian Army Cadets program.

Out of a total of 800 employees in charge of running the administrative program, no fewer than 400 will be laid off, even though 53,000 young people currently belong to the cadets.

How can the Minister of National Defence justify such a draconian cut to such a beneficial program for our young people? How does he hope to provide the same services to those young people with half the employees?