House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was leader.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Liberal MP for Saint-Maurice (Québec)

Won his last election, in 2000, with 54% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Foreign Affairs May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, there is an opposition day tomorrow and there is one next week. The minister will be in the House and this debate will continue and information will be given.

However, I am very pleased that members of Parliament on my side, long before the Tories, have shown interest in that file.

Foreign Affairs May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, we are replying to questions every day in the House of Commons. We are not rushing. We are studying at this time. We discussed this in the cabinet yesterday and in the caucus today. Members of the caucus will discuss this.

I invite the hon. member in his last week as leader, if he has an interest to have a caucus himself, a committee of his caucus to study the problem.

Foreign Affairs May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I replied earlier that the situation has not changed in the last six months in relation to a threat of that nature. There is not the urgency that the hon. member, who likes to create anxiety, suggests. He will fail because he has no reason to try.

Foreign Affairs May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, who told the hon. member that it will be next week that a decision will be made? We are having a debate. There might be some consultation with the Americans and it will take months before we will be in a position to be obliged to make a decision.

Foreign Affairs May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, we are not rushing. We are debating among the Liberal members and the cabinet. I am happy that the hon. member is speaking but I would just like to tell him that yes, we are very strong for multilateralism. We have always been.

In the case of Norad, it has existed for 50 years and Norad is a bilateral agreement with the Americans.

National Defence May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to point out to the hon. member that the helicopters to which he is referring are the same kind and from the same era as those used by the President of the United States to travel from the White House to Camp David.

National Defence May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, when the government decides to allocate funds, they are included in the estimates and must be approved by the House of Commons, at which time there is a discussion. The debate is not about how much it will cost, but where we stand after the changes made to this American project, which is not new but existed under President Clinton and which is evolving with each passing month. It is time for us to reflect and invite the House of Commons and Canadians to make a decision, which will be in—

National Defence May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the member may not be up to speed. However, if he had been in caucus this morning, he would have seen that the members of my party are very well informed of what is involved. Some of them have their opinions on the matter. I would remind the member that there is an opposition day that he can use, and I would invite him to learn about this for himself here in the House at that time. The ministers will be very happy to inform him, because it seems that the members opposite are a bit in the dark these days.

National Defence May 7th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member would like there to be a debate on the issue, that would be just fine with us. There are opposition days that are specifically designed to discuss this type of problem. We are in the processing of discussing it within our party and our government, and we would be very happy, if the opposition deems it important enough, to use one of their days to debate it in the House. The ball is in the member's court.

Foreign Affairs May 7th, 2003

Through Norad we are involved, Mr. Speaker. The question is, should we be involved in the next step, which is the missile element of the defence, but we have been involved in Norad for 50 years and Norad is working very well.