House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was quebec.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Bloc MP for Laurier—Sainte-Marie (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2015, with 29% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Environment December 7th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, the government reiterated that it will be speaking with only one voice in Copenhagen. However, not only does Canada's position contradict that of Quebec, it is harmful to Quebec. Its position is contrary to that of the National Assembly and Quebec's environmentalists and businesspeople. The Minister of the Environment even had the nerve to say that his position was not negotiable. And today, Canada was given the fossil award in Copenhagen.

How can the government say to us that its position on climate change is in Quebec's interest when Quebec is unanimously against it?

British Home Children December 7th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, they were between 6 months and 18 years of age. They were still children: girls filled with dreams and boys filled with energy. Little ones just starting their lives who looked to the future with innocence and genuine hope. They had their whole lives ahead of them. The life they left was perhaps not ideal—many were poor or lived in orphanages—but it was their life. Yet that life would change dramatically overnight.

From 1869 to 1948, Great Britain deported more than 150,000 children in order to populate its colonies. They were loaded by the dozen onto boats bound for Australia, New Zealand and Canada. These children had no idea what awaited them. They had been promised a better life and painted a rosy picture of what lay in store. But when they reached their destination, reality would shatter any dreams they had left.

These thousands of children, some of whom were taken away from their families, travelled across oceans. When they arrived in Canada, the British home children, as they are known today, were used as cheap labour.

Certainly, many of them were mistreated or sexually abused. That is a sad fact, but it is part of Canada's and Quebec's history, and we must acknowledge it today.

That history is also my family's history. My mother's name is Hélène Rowley, and her father was John James Rowley. Of Irish origin, he was born in 1890 in Soho, which was not the radical chic neighbourhood it is today, but one of the poor parts of London depicted in Dickens' novels.

For 10 years, my maternal grandparents lived with us. We celebrated my grandfather's birthday every year on September 6, only to learn when he was in his sixties that he had been born on June 3. Moreover, he died on September 6, 1971, which is a bit ironic.

He never talked about that part of his life. From what I have learned, many home children did not talk about it because they wanted to forget. Many did not talk about it because they were ashamed. Yet they had no reason to be ashamed. Others had reason to be ashamed, but not the victims.

The father of one of my colleagues is also a home child. She does not want to talk about it. There is a code of silence, as in the case of concentration camp survivors who refused for many years to talk about their experience, because they wanted to forget what had happened to them.

I did not know. After I was elected, I was telling my story during an interview, and I explained how my grandfather had come to live here, but I did not know about home children. The association came to see me and told me that my grandfather was more than likely a home child. There are many who do not even know it.

However, I can say that my grandfather was not mistreated. He was taken in by the Leduc family of Saint-Benoît du lac des Deux Montagnes. He had a happy childhood, then met Marie-Joseph Pilon of Rigaud. They had four children, including my mother, Hélène. He was a happy man, a warm man who did not talk about that part of his life. He had forgotten it, or wanted to.

This part of our history is not widely understood. However, British home children and their descendants now represent 12% of the population, some 4 million people. We owe it to them to remember. We must recognize the injustice, the abuse and the suffering, as well as the work these people have done and their contributions to our communities. After all these years, we have to acknowledge their true story, which is also ours.

The shame here is in the wrongdoing, not in the apology. What is shameful is the fact that we tolerated this situation for so long, for nearly a century, that we tacitly accepted this insidious form of slavery. What is shameful here is not having opened our eyes any sooner.

Now it is time to face the facts. The voice of history is loud and clear, and we must respond. We must stand up and apologize to the victims for the tragedy they experienced.

It is not hard to apologize. The Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, apologized during a ceremony in Canberra. The British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, also announced plans for an official apology on behalf of the United Kingdom.

But in Canada, where the majority of British home children were sent, the government is still refusing to recognize the evidence and apologize properly.

We will support this motion. We thank the member for moving it, but more must be done. The government must accept its responsibilities immediately and not only honour the memory of British home children, but also apologize. It is the right thing to do.

Afghanistan December 3rd, 2009

Mr. Speaker, it would have been nice if the Chief Government Whip, who was the minister at the time, reacted and answered the question.

The government thought it was a good idea to review the detainee transfer protocol in 2007 because there were problems with how the detainees were being treated before 2007. Otherwise they would obviously not have changed the protocol. If there were problems, there was a risk of torture. Yet, detainees continued to be transferred.

That being said, will the government admit that from 2006 to May 2007, it was in violation of the Geneva convention?

Afghanistan December 3rd, 2009

Mr. Speaker, the memos that were made public confirm that the Red Cross met with members of the government as early as spring 2006, to inform them that the detainees transferred to Afghan authorities were at risk of being tortured. The national defence minister's office says it was not informed of the substance of that meeting.

The current Minister of National Defence did not hold that position when this meeting was held. Accordingly, can the Chief Government Whip, who was then Minister of National Defence, tell us whether he received the memos on this meeting with the Red Cross?

The Environment December 2nd, 2009

Mr. Speaker, they are so happy that Quebec's environment minister condemned Ottawa this morning. That is complete and utter happiness.

In December 2005, the Prime Minister said: “I am ready to discuss mechanisms to enable the provinces to extend their jurisdictions on the international scene.”

How can the Prime Minister, who recognized the Quebec nation and even said he agreed with the idea of having Quebec speak with its own voice on the international scene, go to Copenhagen and present a position that is in total contradiction to Quebec's proposed approach to combatting climate change?

The Environment December 2nd, 2009

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment has told us time and time again that Canada will speak with one voice in Copenhagen. This means that the minister will be contradicting Quebec, which has adopted a real plan to combat climate change, with ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets, while Canada does not even have a plan.

Does the minister realize that by having Canada speak with one voice in Copenhagen, he will not only be contradicting Quebec, but hurting it?

Afghanistan December 1st, 2009

Mr. Speaker, earlier in question period, the Minister of National Defence refused to answer a very simple question. I will ask him once again.

Given that NATO announced today that Canadian soldiers will be leaving Kandahar in early 2010 and going to a neighbouring district, can the Minister of National Defence confirm that this redeployment will not change the July 2011 end date of the mission for all Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan?

The Environment December 1st, 2009

Mr. Speaker, with 2006 as the reference year, the government is undermining all the efforts made by Quebec since 1990 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, particularly those by the pulp and paper and aluminum industries.

Does the government realize that by using 2006 as the reference year, rather than 1990, it gives an advantages to its friends in the oil sector, who have done nothing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions since 1990?

The Environment December 1st, 2009

Mr. Speaker, according to a joint study by Le Devoir and the Pembina Institute, action taken by Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions ensures that, if the government maintains its flawed greenhouse gas reduction plan, Alberta will be able to increase its emissions without penalty.

Will the government admit that its climate change plan is tailor-made for Alberta?

Afghanistan November 30th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, there certainly is a problem. The Minister of National Defence says that he knew in 2006. But the new agreement was signed in 2007, a year and a half later. However, the Geneva convention prohibits handing over detainees if they risk being tortured. The minister himself admitted that the government knew this and acted a year and a half later.

Why did the government continue to transfer Afghan detainees until 2007, despite a flawed agreement, for one and a half years, thus violating the Geneva convention? We are not making anything up. This is what the government itself has said.