Francis Drouin

[Business of Supply, April 29th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.

Having access to vaccines is one thing, but being able to administer them is another. The provinces are currently administering about 300,000 doses per day. A quick calculation shows that they would have to administer more than 622,000 per day to meet the May long weekend deadline.

It does not add up, mathematically speaking. How did my colleague come up this deadline, which experts do not seem to support? I hope that before picking this date, he and his party consulted the provinces, for example. Did they?

[Business of Supply, April 29th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak on behalf of my constituents, but I am a bit disappointed in the motion moved by the member for Calgary Nose Hill. The motion is not based on science. The Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Liberal Party have made that clear.

I know that Canadians are sick of being inside. Today is my mother's birthday. I wish her a happy birthday, but I will not get to see her because I also have to stay home. She lives 75 kilometres away from me, but I have not seen her in months.

I believe that the member for Calgary Nose Hill missed a golden opportunity. I will pick up on what the member for Kingston and the Islands was saying. He mentioned the issue of vaccine hesitancy. What a great opportunity for every parliamentarian to show their constituents that vaccination is the quickest way for us to regain our freedom and that these vaccines are healthy, safe and effective.

I believe that all members of the House have a role to play in countering the misinformation that is out there in the world and in our country. However, the official opposition and the Conservatives are not helping to counter this misinformation.

On November 25, the member for Calgary Nose Hill told us that no Canadian would be able to be vaccinated until 2030. My colleague from Gatineau mentioned this earlier. The member's statement was obviously not based on science, and she clearly had not consulted the experts. She just threw out a number to scare Canadians. It was done for partisan purposes. She also said that 2.5 billion people would get the vaccine before Canadians. Again, this is not true.

There is also another issue. Some people, including the Conservative opposition leader, say that we need rapid tests. That is what the Leader of the Opposition says during every question period. However, the rapid tests have been delivered, and the provinces have them now. It is not for me to judge the strategy that the provinces want to adopt for using these tests. The provinces have not yet used all the rapid tests. I would point out that these tests were acquired by Public Services and Procurement Canada and delivered to the provinces several months ago, if not last year. This is another example of misinformation being passed on by the House.

I also think it is important to point out that last week, some members of Parliament spoke out against the lockdowns that some provinces had announced to protect residents. Even though these lockdowns are not popular, I think that politicians, our leaders, have a responsibility to keep their constituents safe.

The member for Calgary Nose Hill condemned the lockdown three weeks ago. Another Conservative member had to apologize after criticizing these measures. I think it is irresponsible for members of the House to criticize these measures when we know that they protect Canadians.

I want to share facts. There are facts that need to be said. We constantly hear the Conservatives say that the government of Canada wasted so much time with the Chinese to try and get the vaccine. That is simply not true.

The minister of procurement signed contracts in July and August, even before those clinical trials were completed. Normally, when drugs become available in Canada, there must be clinical trials and only when the clinical trials are done will Health Canada approve it. Then we could potentially sign a contract.

We did not do that. We took a risk. That is why we have a diversified portfolio. At that time we did not know which vaccine would be most efficient or which vaccine would work. We also knew that the supply chain may not be as stable. That is why we have a diverse vaccine portfolio.

Yes, I know that in January and February there were some issues, but the target of six million doses by end of Q1 always remained. It is true that we sometimes did not communicate the reality of the availability of vaccines to some provinces. We told them they would get six million, and they did not. They got 9.5 million vaccines. I think that is good news. It helps with planning.

However, we know that there may still continue to be some supply issues. Pfizer is a stable company that has been really helpful to Canada, and that is worth mentioning. Pfizer has been a partner, and I believe that is because of the working relationship that our Minister of Public Services and Procurement has built with it. Pfizer did not only deliver on its quarterly objectives, it even surpassed them. It is worthwhile to mention the great work it is doing to help Canada administer more vaccines.

The other issue I want to mention is that we know we are going to get 48 million to 50 million vaccines by the end of Q2. That is more than enough to vaccinate every Canadian who choses to get vaccinated by the end of June, or at the least have the first dose, and administer a second dose.

There are other facts. So far we have received just over 15 million doses. We know that Canada has administered just over 13 million vaccines. We know that we are now third of the G20 countries, in terms of administration of vaccines. We know that more than 30% of Canadians have now received a vaccine in Canada. That is great news. That is a testament to the work that is being done, collaboratively, with the provinces.

However, I have issues with the motion, again, calling on all adults to have access to a vaccine by the May long weekend. This has also been brought up by the Bloc and the NDP. This is just unattainable with the rate vaccinations are being administered. Canada is administering just over 300,000 vaccines per day on good days.

It would have been fun to debate how we could help provinces administer more vaccines during the weekend because we know those numbers tend to go down slightly. How do we promote the uptake during the weekend? That could have been a good issue to debate today, but no, we are debating a partisan issue.

The other problem I have with this motion is section (iii), which says, “the government extended the recommended interval for the second vaccine dose to four months”, as though that was a political decision.

Shame on the member for Calgary Nose Hill for even putting that in the motion. That is absolutely false. That is not how the Government of Canada operates. We rely on experts. We rely on the advice of doctors.

It is true the label on most vaccines requires x number of weeks, but that is because the clinical trial said that. Now we have access real-world data. The real-world data, for example, shows the UK adapted a one-dose strategy. It worked well, and its economy is opening.

I know that soon, in July, if the take-up of vaccines is high, we will again have the opportunity to find our freedoms. I have high hopes for the provinces. With two million more Pfizer vaccines being delivered per week in May and 2.5 million per week in June, we will be able to reach that target. I am confident that the provinces will be able to deliver that.

Now is the time to unite. We can work together. We can work with the provinces, and if they need help, we can certainly provide some resources to augment the capacity for administering vaccines.

Finally, while not many of the opposition members are talking about planning for the future, we have a minister who is already there, who has already signed a contract. In 2022, we can expect 35 million boosters for Canadians who choose to have a booster at that time. We will have 30 million more in 2023, and an option to exercise 100 million vaccines.

The Liberal government, the minister and the Prime Minister have a plan to deliver vaccines for Canadians.

[Canada Labour Code, April 28th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share with the House a few remarks about Bill C-254, which was introduced by my colleague from Beauport—Limoilou, with whom I have the good fortune of serving on the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. We are missing a committee meeting right now because we are both giving speeches here in the House.

I heard my colleague mention francophone and Quebec culture, and I also want to point out the work and accomplishments of a great Franco-Ontarian, Bob Hartley, who just won the Gagarin Cup. He is from Hawkesbury, in my community, and I want to congratulate him before I begin my speech.

Bill C-254 was introduced before our reform document on the Official Languages Act, which was released in February 2021.

That is an important consideration in determining our strategy, as a government, on the best way to protect French across the country, including Quebec, in the workplace and in our cultural and community life. Our strategy was developed following exhaustive analyses of the concerns expressed by Canadians, stakeholders, and provincial and territorial governments, as well as on the studies of parliamentary committees.

Our strategy essentially aims to strengthen our official language communities across the country, but also to protect the vitality of the French language wherever it is spoken in Canada, from coast to coast to coast.

These are not just intentions or wishful thinking, but a formal recognition of the undeniable fact that French is a minority language in North America and that it deserves to be protected by any means necessary. We have followed through by making 56 proposals, including 33 concrete legislative proposals to reform Canada's official languages regime as a whole.

These proposals include options for modernization specifically to strengthen the place and status of French across Canada, as well as to protect this language in workplaces with a strong francophone presence, including in Quebec, where French is the official language.

I am sure my colleagues have had an opportunity to scrutinize the document we released on the reform of the Official Languages Act. I would still like to highlight a few of the key measures proposed by our government to strengthen the place of French within our businesses and in service to Canadians.

Our first proposal is that the next version of our act recognize linguistic dynamics in the provinces and territories, including the official status of French in Quebec, bilingualism in New Brunswick, and all the provinces' efforts and accomplishments relating to official languages.

We then put forward no fewer than five legislative and administrative measures laying out how we will work with the provinces and territories to improve opportunities to learn both official languages, including French, of course.

Third, we proposed a suite of legislative and administrative measures to strengthen institutions in official language minority communities across the country, with a special focus on francophone communities from coast to coast to coast.

I really want to highlight the fourth proposal in our modernization document today. It relates directly and specifically to the issue of protecting French throughout Canada, including in Quebec. Our proposals include recognizing the predominant use of English in Canada and North America and the fact that, given this context, it is imperative that French receive increased protection and promotion.

We also proposed strong, concrete measures that list areas in which the federal government can take action to protect and promote French in Canada, such as broadcasting, culture and diplomacy. That is not all. Another of our proposals is to recognize the importance of the contribution of francophone immigration to the vitality of French and francophone minority communities and to legislate the government's obligations in this specific area.

This last point is so important to my community. We have to increase francophone immigration outside Quebec and attract francophones to our communities, including the one I represent. I am proud to have a welcoming francophone community, Hawkesbury, in my riding.

All of the measures identified and detailed in our modernization document will help achieve my colleague from Beauport—Limoilou's objectives, those of Bill C-254, and much more besides.

In this case, I think it is worth highlighting our proposal about official languages and federally regulated private businesses, including those established in Quebec.

Our government fully understands the key role that Quebec plays within the Canadian francophonie, and we believe that the private sector in Quebec has a role to play in protecting and promoting the French language in Quebec and in the rest of the country. Our government primarily expects federally regulated private business to play this key role.

Our reform document is crystal clear. Specifically, we are committed to specifying the federal government's power to encourage federally regulated private businesses to promote the equal status of the official languages in order to increase the use of French as a language of service and work everywhere in the country.

We propose some concrete measures to achieve this commitment. We will give workers the right to carry out their activities in French in federally regulated private businesses established in Quebec and in other regions with a strong francophone presence in the country, including in my community. We will also oblige the employer to communicate with its employees at least as much in French as in English in federally regulated private businesses established in Quebec and in other regions with a strong francophone presence.

We will vigorously prohibit discrimination against an employee solely because he or she speaks only French or does not have sufficient knowledge of a language other than French in federally regulated private businesses established in Quebec and in other regions with a strong francophone presence in the country.

The Government of Canada, its public service, its businesses and its Crown corporations must be exemplary in their implementation of the Official Languages Act across Canada, including Quebec. The issue of businesses under federal jurisdiction in Quebec and in regions with a strong francophone presence in the country is important to us, particularly to give consumers of goods and services the right to be informed and served in French.

Our reform document mentions the creation of a committee of experts to develop recommendations with respect to the implementation of these commitments, after consulting with unions, employers and relevant stakeholders on modernizing the Official Languages Act. This committee is at work and will wrap up by April 30, a few days from now. We are certain that it will submit meaningful recommendations for a modern act that will be up to the challenge of protecting French for years to come.

In addition to all these major legislative and administrative measures, it goes without saying that the Government of Canada, its public service and its Crown corporations will have to ensure an exemplary implementation of the act across Canada and Quebec.

As we study Bill C-254, we cordially invite the House to consider the broader context of modernizing the Official Languages Act and its related instruments to protect French from coast to coast to coast.

As a Franco-Ontarian, I am pleased to share my opinion and the government's opinion of Bill C-254 with you.

[Child Care, April 26th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House virtually to commend our Minister of Finance for her efforts to ensure that parents in Canada are able to fully participate in our economy.

Too often, because of a lack of resources, new mothers have to put their careers on hold to take care of their children. My mother had to go back to work after a three-month maternity leave, and I was lucky enough that my grandmother was able to care for me. However, I know that is not an option for every mother.

Budget 2021 will correct that injustice. An early child care program that will cut the cost of child care in half by next year and that will bring the average cost of child care down to $10 a day by 2025 is a policy that will transform our society.

When we invest in measures that enable everyone to participate in the development of our country, we end up with not only a feminist budget but also a more just and equal society.

On behalf of parents in Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, I want to thank the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister.

[Government Response to COVID-19 Pandemic, April 21st, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I agree with his question. I want to say that coordination is extremely important. I only hope that if provinces need more resources that they ask the federal government so that we can provide them.

[Government Response to COVID-19 Pandemic, April 21st, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I miss the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands. I look forward to seeing her in the back corner where I usually sit. We get to chat about everything else but politics.

I hear the member regarding the task force and perhaps creating a new governance structure, but with the number of vaccines that will be coming within a month and a half, I do not know if creating a new governance structure right now would be the appropriate way forward.

I will continue to push the provinces to continue to speak to our chief medical officers. In Ontario, for instance, there are 34 or 35 public health authorities. I am certainly in close contact with my province's chief medical officer to ensure that we get our fair share of vaccines and to ensure that he has the proper resources. If he needs access to the Red Cross or the military, he needs to speak up through the chain of command in his area. I will be that voice in Ottawa.

[Government Response to COVID-19 Pandemic, April 21st, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I do not know about the system in B.C., but I know that in Ontario there is a federal program and people have to wait two weeks to get dollars. In Ontario, some are pushing the premier to implement sick days, and that means not having the wait period. I encourage them.

I know the member is in the NDP, so perhaps she could speak to her NDP premier. If sick days are not available in B.C., I urge her to get inspiration from the Liberals and the NDP in Ontario to push the premier to implement sick days.

[Government Response to COVID-19 Pandemic, April 21st, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I wish to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.

It is about 10:35 p.m. as I rise to speak in this important debate. During the pandemic, we have lost many Canadians to COVID-19. Some people lost a loved one and were unable to visit them in the hospital as they would have liked.

This evening, I would like to talk about someone who served in the House for 22 years, the Hon. Don Boudria. He lost his mother yesterday, and I would like to offer him my deepest condolences. Ms. Loiselle was a constituent of mine and a wonderful woman. I know that her family is mourning her. She had a good life, and she raised a very good boy who went on to serve his community.

In March and April 2020, every member of the House experienced the same thing. We all brought thousands of Canadians home from abroad. We all worked with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He was very busy bringing home Canadians on flights as some airports completely shut down.

Members were getting calls at all hours of the day and night about repatriating all these Canadians. That is how the pandemic started for MPs. We did everything we could to bring these Canadians home. On March 13, 2020, we instructed Canadians not to travel anymore, as it was no longer safe to leave Canada.

That was a very difficult time for many MPs. It was like being hit by a tsunami that no one saw coming. The entire world went through this. Today, I want to thank all those who were involved in this operation, all those officials who worked to repatriate all the Canadians. It is already a distant memory now, in April 2021, but that is how the pandemic started for the majority of Canadians.

Today, I also want to thank all front-line workers and first responders. In my riding, the Eastern Ontario Health Unit did an excellent job of deploying rapid testing. People could be tested at a drive-through assessment centre in Casselman.

I really want to thank Dr. Paul Roumeliotis, the chief executive officer of the Eastern Ontario Health Unit. He has done an outstanding job, but it is not over yet. I know he has not slept in a year, like most of us here today.

Once people returned to Canada, the provinces implemented quarantine measures. That is when business owners and people who had lost their jobs overnight started coming to us, because they had to go into quarantine. At that point we had little information about the COVID-19 virus.

I want to thank all members for their work, but I also want to thank all of the business owners who contacted me during this period to say they needed help because they had lost their jobs and had no income. They were not eligible for employment insurance and wanted to know if there would be another program. The Canada emergency response benefit was created.

My aunt, who passed away on Saturday, was a hairdresser. Unfortunately, the vast majority of hairdressers were not eligible for employment insurance. The Canada emergency response benefit was helpful to them during the shutdown, as it provided some assistance to cover personal expenses. If they had to pay rent, they could apply for the emergency subsidy to get support.

Our government delivered for Canadians because we listen. None of this would have been possible without our Prime Minister, who did everything he could to help Canadians.

That mission did not change for our Prime Minister in 2021. It is still very real. In my opinion, it also did not change for the members who sit in the House either in person or virtually.

We are now in the midst of the third wave, and I would like to thank my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands for requesting this emergency debate.

We are still getting requests for help every day. Business owners in my riding were telling me recently that they did not know how they would survive if the Canada emergency wage subsidy was to end in June. They asked me to extend that measure.

The budget that our Minister of Finance presented on Monday confirmed that this measure will be extended until September, and I know that will help many business owners in my riding. The extension of the Canada emergency rent subsidy will also help many businesses to survive.

Our strategy for the pandemic is to build a bridge to help businesses survive and to participate in the economic recovery.

On Monday, the finance minister announced that she wanted to create a million jobs by the end of the year. That is a commendable goal because we know that, during the last recession, it took nearly 10 years, from 2008 to 2018, to create and bring back all of the jobs that were lost.

Everyone in the House has acknowledged that women have paid the price for this pandemic. I cannot repeat what my wife said when I told her that we plan to bring in $10-a-day child care. Her words were unparliamentary, but I can assure my colleagues that the message was very positive. My wife works with women entrepreneurs, first at Startup Canada Entrepreneurship Empowers Everyone and now at Global Entrepreneurship Network, where she keeps hearing every day about how child care is a hurdle for women business owners or those who want to start a business.

Earlier, I heard my colleagues ask us what we were going to do to help new businesses. I can assure them that helping families get access to $10-a-day child care alone will open a whole range of jobs in our communities in Canada.

In English we call that a game-changer. It will be a game-changer for society. I cannot say how many female entrepreneurs I have met in my riding who have told me they need some help with child care. It is a true story in rural Canada, particularly in rural Ontario, and it is also a true story in urban communities.

The other issue is rural Internet access. I know that many children who are trying to learn from home simply do not have access to good broadband. Access to a reliable Internet service should be a right in Canada. We answered that question in budget 2019, but in budget 2021, we added another billion dollars to speed up the timeline to connect every Canadian who wants a reliable, speedy connection. That means access to offered services and access to schooling, and it means being able to talk to the family members we all miss so much.

I want to finish with the procurement strategy. I have full confidence in the Minister of Public Services and Procurement. She has done a great job. We started off with an objective of six million doses by Q1, and we ended up with 9.5 million. We are going to get almost 50 million doses, with current timelines, by the end of June. That is a lot more doses to vaccinate every Canadian who chooses to have a vaccine and includes the second dose for those who choose to have one.

We are on track, we have done a good job and we will continue working with the provinces.

[Laurentian University in Sudbury, April 14th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question, but I am scratching my head because I do not know what quarrels from 1982 have to do with anything. I was not even born then. I was born in 1983. I do not see the connection to this situation or how this will help Laurentian University.

What I can say is that when the time came to create Ontario's French-language university, the federal government came through with its 50% share to ensure the long-term survival of this university, which was established in 2018. Today, Ontario's francophones have access to this university as a result of equal federal and provincial funding.

[Laurentian University in Sudbury, April 14th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I was surprised when this happened in February. Perhaps it is because of geographic proximity, but I have a lot more ties with the Cité collégiale and the University of Ottawa.

That being said, I know that there are recurring programs in the memorandum of understanding. Laurentian University is allegedly having major financial difficulties and administration problems. I think that we all read the same newspaper articles. I do not know exactly what happened, but what I can say is that it is not right for the university to seek protection under the Bankruptcy Act. I am pleased to know that the member for Sudbury is going to introduce a bill to prevent that, because it is not right.

We will have to see if it is possible to negotiate an increase in Laurentian University's share of federal funding. To date, I have not seen a funding plan. I could not say—