House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was quebec.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Bloc MP for Berthier—Maskinongé (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 29% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act May 5th, 2009

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question following his excellent speech here in the House.

One of the things that the Bloc Québécois wanted to see in this bill was a better system for classifying organizations according to their missions and goals. Why did some members of the committees and some departmental officials say no to that? What impact does this lack of classification have? For example, what is the impact of that policy on an economic organization, which is not the same as a volunteer or charity organization?

Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act May 5th, 2009

Madam Speaker, I have a question for the member.

As he said in his speech, he met various witnesses during the study of the bill. I will ask two questions. First, some would want to impose more controls on the role of directors of not-for-profit organizations. Does the member think that the people who will sit on the boards of the new not-for-profit organizations will be better informed of their roles and responsibilities because of the new structures?

My second question relates to the eligibility for charitable organization numbers which has been creating a problem for a few years. Many charities or advocacy groups, for example, would like to get charitable organization numbers and be able to issue tax receipts. That has been more difficult for some years now. Was the issue raised during the study of the bill? Does my colleague believe that the fact that there is absolutely no classification of not-for-profit organizations will allow the government to issue more of those charitable organization numbers?

Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act May 5th, 2009

Madam Speaker, I had asked the hon. member a question about Bill C-4. How will this bill provide clear, additional protection for the directors of these not-for-profit corporations against possible lawsuits that could be filed against them in the course of their activities as volunteer directors?

Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention May 4th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Saint-Jean on his excellent speech. As other members of the House will have noticed, he is very familiar with this file. Personally, I have one concern about this issue.

Members have talked about the impact of climate change—we have seen the ice melt and the consequences of failing to invest in the Kyoto protocol—and the importance of working with the Inuit on this file. I also have a problem with militarizing the Arctic, which will involve huge sums of money. Enormous amounts of money. Military spending has gone up since the Conservatives have been in power. This government tends to spend heavily on the military. And this would mean spending vast amounts of money. Money spent on this kind of thing does not help unfortunate people who lose their jobs, nor does it help to create social programs.

I would like my colleague to comment on that. What can we really do to avoid increasing military spending in the Arctic?

Business of Supply April 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is completely off topic. He should read about the impact that bill will have on minimum sentences. We are against minimum sentences, for very good reason. In the United States, minimum sentences have little impact on crime. Of course we are against trafficking in women. Our positions are much clearer. The bill mentions conditional release. We are against the excessive use of conditional release.

I would like the member to stick to the subject at hand. He is going off topic because he does not know what to say about harmonizing the sales tax. He no longer knows how to respond. He is going off topic to make gratuitous political propaganda. When a Conservative member from Quebec does not know what to say, he goes off topic. They are going to campaign and vote three or four times against the will of the National Assembly of Quebec. They are going to play petty politics like they did—

Business of Supply April 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for Shefford for his excellent question. What is the Conservative Party waiting for to compensate Quebec for harmonizing the taxes? I do not know.

Currently, there seems to be a total lack of political will to be fair and equitable in managing public money. The will is not there anymore. This was made clear with the last budget, which was totally to the detriment of all Quebeckers. We have nothing against investing in the automotive sector, but there should be greater political will to invest more in the forestry and manufacturing sectors to help those who find themselves without a job.

We have asked that the two week waiting period simply be waived for the unemployed and those who lose their jobs. What did we get from this Conservative government? A stone wall.

The Conservative government is basically managing public money in a partisan manner. It is probably attempting to hold on to power with votes from Ontario, realizing that Quebeckers know better and are against this right wing ideology of non-intervention and hypocrisy—to say the least—of the Conservative government. It is trying to woe Ontario. Eventually, it will be swept out of Ontario as well and go back to funding western oil companies. Conservative members from Quebec—

Business of Supply April 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, it is with great interest that I rise to address today's motion. First, I wish to inform the Chair that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Trois-Rivières.

The motion being debated today is very important to Quebec, because it condemns the stubbornness of this Conservative government—and we just saw a minister provide a prime example of that—in its refusal to provide Quebec with fair and just compensation for having harmonized its sales tax with the GST.

I want to congratulate my colleague, the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, for presenting this motion to the House, and all Bloc Québécois members who are here again today, doggedly fighting for Quebec's interests and needs.

It is hard to understand the Conservative Party which, once again, seems to want to vote against this motion, which is presented by the Bloc Québécois and which follows a unanimous vote in the Quebec National Assembly. It is members from Quebec who are opposed to positions adopted unanimously by the Quebec National Assembly regarding the harmonization of the Quebec sales tax with the GST. That motion was adopted by the National Assembly but, once again, the elected Conservative members from Quebec are rising to oppose Quebec's will. It is shameful.

They did the same thing with the manufacturing and forestry sectors. They keep going in the same direction. Fortunately, Quebeckers are not stupid. They are educated, they follow politics, and they know who is protecting their interests and who is not. Today, we can see—once again—that the Conservative Party across the floor is going against Quebeckers' interests.

With this motion, we are simply asking the federal government to act fairly towards Quebec, by compensating it for having harmonized its sales tax with the GST, in the same way that Ontario was given $4.3 billion and that the maritime provinces were compensated before that. It is quite simple.

The government is telling us once again, in this House, that it does not understand Quebeckers' position and that this claim is not justified. Come on. Quebeckers can do the math. They know when they are treated unfairly, as was the case with the last Conservative budget. Ontario is getting $2.7 billion, while the rest of Canada—whose forestry and manufacturing sectors account for many more jobs—is getting a measly $150 million. We are not stupid. As regards this motion specifically, I want to thank the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party for their support. I also want to point out to Conservative members that the federal government's refusal goes against a clear and unanimous position of the Quebec National Assembly. I invite Conservative members to reflect on that. They are voting against Quebec's will.

Indeed, on March 31, the Quebec National Assembly unanimously passed a motion asking the federal government to treat Quebec fairly and justly by providing it with $2.6 billion in compensation, for having harmonized its sales tax with the GST.

Could it be that the National Assembly does not understand these issues? Could it be that Conservative members from Quebec are the only ones who understand major issues? Is this what we are being told? Come on.

Quebec wants an amount that compares proportionally with the one that Ontario is getting. It is very simple.

Where does the Bloc stand on this issue? We condemn the fact that the Conservative government has given Ontario $4.3 billion in compensation for harmonizing its sales tax with the GST. We can see the Conservative member leaving.

In the early 1990s, Quebec was the first province to harmonize its tax with the federal tax, and it still has not gotten a single cent. But that is not all. Not only will Ontario get roughly $4.3 billion in compensation, but the maritime provinces received nearly $1 billion in 1997 for harmonizing their sales tax.

Quebec, which had already harmonized its tax, got nothing. The whole dispute between the Government of Quebec and the federal government about harmonizing the QST with the GST shows that the Liberal and Conservative governments have acted in bad faith on this issue. The Liberals, who were in power previously, also did nothing.

I believe it is important to remember certain facts. This will be edifying for the Conservative members from Quebec. In July 1992, Quebec finished harmonizing its sales tax with the federal tax, but never received any compensation. In addition to harmonizing its tax, Quebec negotiated an arrangement with Ottawa whereby Quebec administered the GST in the province and turned over the revenues to the federal government.

In return for this service, the Government of Quebec received financial compensation. As I said earlier, in 1997 the provinces of Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia reached an agreement with Ottawa to receive $1 billion in compensation over four years to harmonize their sales tax.

At the time, the Liberal federal government, which was criticized by the Conservatives, argued that Quebec, like Ontario and British Columbia, would not be entitled to compensation because the transition to this new system would not cause Quebec's sales tax revenues to drop by more than 5%.

Now—and this is in direct contradiction to the rule the Liberals made to compensate the maritime provinces—we learn that the Ontario government will get more money with the new tax than with the old formula.

The government is doing everything it can for Ontario. Members from Quebec should stand up and vote in favour of the motion.

Clearly, when the federal government is agreeing to pay Ontario $4.3 billion in compensation for harmonizing its sales tax with the federal tax, then Quebec, which was the first province to harmonize its sales tax with the GST in 1991, has every right to ask for fair compensation.

How can the Conservative members from Quebec vote against this measure? I do not understand whom these members are defending. So far, the Conservative government is refusing to listen and is making excuses. It is stalling so that it does not have to say yes to legitimate requests from Quebec and its National Assembly.

It is especially disappointing to see ministers and members from Quebec oppose Quebec's request. Despite Quebec's repeated requests, the Minister of Finance has come up with even more conditions. First came the seduction, when they supposedly recognized the Quebec nation; now it is time for the let-down.

Not only does the Minister of Finance want a single tax to be collected, but now he is asking Quebec to turn over management of the GST and the QST to the federal government. What a great way to recognize a nation's legitimacy. Well done, Conservative members.

But Quebeckers will not fall for it. They understand what is going on. Nobody in Quebec wants the Government of Quebec to turn over responsibility for the tax to the federal government. We are a nation, and we can take care of our own taxes. We should have sovereignty over all of our taxes.

As a nation, Quebec has the right to collect and administer sales taxes within the province. Instead of spending 85% of the Canadian Heritage money currently earmarked for Quebec on funding federalist propaganda activities and Canada Day celebrations, and instead of implementing policies that penalize Quebeckers, the Conservatives should compensate Quebec for having harmonized its tax and help our forestry and manufacturing industries and our unemployed workers.

The federal government's position on this and many other issues proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Liberals and the Conservatives are cut from the same cloth: Quebec always loses out. The Bloc Québécois is the only party in Ottawa that truly stands up for the interests of Quebeckers.

Business of Supply April 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her excellent speech. The Bloc is always glad to have her here with us because she is one of our pioneers, one of the most senior members of the Bloc Québécois, and she always does exceptional work.

I would like to ask her a simple question because I know that she has a long history of involvement in the sovereignist movement. If we were sovereign and had the authority to legislate and collect all of our own taxes, would we no longer get trapped over and over in this federal institution?

The Conservatives woed us somewhat by recognizing us as a nation a while ago. Now they want to interfere with our taxation authority. In the past, the Liberals did as the member explained in her speech.

How would Quebec sovereignty be a more effective way not only to collect all of our taxes, but also to stimulate our economy and promote our social development?

Business of Supply April 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for supporting this motion by the Bloc. I have a question for him.

In his remarks, the hon. member explained clearly why the sovereignist movement is so strong in Quebec. We sometimes get beaten by the federal government, and sometimes we are charmed. The Conservatives recognized Quebec as a nation. They started with seduction tactics in Quebec, but it all ended up in a great disappointment and a policy of deception.

Does my colleague believe that the Conservative Party and the Liberals, who could later on form a government, will change their position on harmonization of the GST and QST, and grant real compensation to Quebeckers? Or is this just another way to win over Quebeckers, as the Conservatives did in the past, by telling them they are now ready to be more receptive to Quebec and offer the $2.4 billion in compensation that is being requested?

Business of Supply April 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank our colleague for her support of the motion, which is important for Quebec.

I would like to ask the member a question concerning the history of the Liberal Party. The Quebec sales tax and the GST were harmonized in the early 90s, when the Liberals were in power. In 1997, the Liberal government offered $1 billion to the maritime provinces for the losses incurred when they harmonized the taxes. After that, the Quebec government asked the Liberal government for compensation but that government refused, saying that the harmonization did not reduced the revenues produced by the tax by more than 5%.

What has changed since then? Eventually, if one day you get to power, would the Liberal Party be ready to review its position and consult Quebec to reach an agreement with it—as the member said in her speech—to give it compensation of $2.7 billion or $4 billion ?