Joël Godin

[The Environment, May 15th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we can see why the Liberals and the NDP are flip-flopping in response to the Green Party's gains in the byelection. They are electioneering. The Liberals are getting a wake-up call on the environment after three and a half years.

My question is very simple. Will the Paris Agreement targets be met?

Can the Liberals tell Canadians the truth for once and admit that they will not meet these targets?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, April 12th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Richmond Hill for his speech.

I have been the MP for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier for three and a half years now, having started at the same time as this Liberal government. I will pick up where my NDP colleague left off. He mentioned that it has been 25 years. Speaking personally, for the past three and a half years, I have been listening to the Liberals say that they are going to start a process, hold consultations, establish a council, create wide-ranging initiatives, set up a team and develop policies. They talk about 2022 and beyond.

How can we trust this government, which has been in power for three and a half years? What do I tell the seniors in my riding who want real help today?

This Liberal government has nothing concrete to offer. How can it be proud of what its Minister of Finance has introduced?

[Finance, April 1st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour is answering my questions is proof that things are out of control in the Liberal camp. When I asked the Prime Minister a question, the Minister of Finance was the one who answered. Does the Minister of Finance not have a parliamentary secretary? One does wonder what is going on.

The parliamentary secretary said that families are getting more money, but it is important to note that they are also paying twice as much tax. The government is giving with one hand and taking back twice as much with the other. Simple math: Canadian families are losing money. According to the Fraser Institute, at least 70% of Canadian families are paying more tax.

I want to close with a few words about the TrudeauMeter. According to the TrudeauMeter, as the government's term draws to a close, 32 of Trudeau's 231 election promises have not yet been started, 57 are in progress, only 40% have been achieved, or rather, postponed, and 44 have been broken. Come October 2019, I hope Canadians will remember the promises this Liberal government has not kept.

[Finance, April 1st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising in the House on April 1, but this is no April Fool's joke. I am here to ask very pertinent questions. What was unfortunate about question period was that the government was just avoiding answering questions. I am here this evening to clear things up.

On January 4, I asked the Prime Minister a question about his budget plan not working. When you incur a debt, you must have a plan to repay it. That is the basis of any economy. As a father, if I decide to borrow some money tomorrow morning and do not have a plan to repay or reduce my debt, at some point I am going to go bankrupt. I hope that this government will not be re-elected so we can protect the Canadian economy. A deficit today means higher taxes tomorrow for us, our children and our grandchildren. We have to have a vision. We cannot take a short-term view of the economy. We have to have plans and structure, and we must plan to balance budget. The Liberals said that. However, what they say and what they do are two entirely different things.

The Prime Minister will have to increase taxes to pay for his irresponsible and out-of-control spending. That is the basis of any economy, as I mentioned earlier. When will the Prime Minister unveil his plan to increase taxes? I asked that question on February 4. The Minister of Finance has tabled another budget since then. This is the fourth year of the Liberals' mandate and they still have not balanced the budget.

My question was for the Prime Minister, but the finance minister is the one who responded to it. He told me that the Liberals' plan was very clear, that they had started by cutting taxes for the middle class. All the firms mention that. I have to say that I am not talking about Morneau Shepell, because that firm has already demonstrated that when it comes to professionalism and being an economic authority, it is just borderline. I would like to remind the House that one of the shareholders was the current finance minister, who once said that Stephen Harper made a good decision. It is written in a book. The book says that Stephen Harper's Conservative government made the right decision when it raised the retirement age to 67. It is simple mathematics. It was a difficult decision, but the Conservative government at the time made that decision. The Liberals, however, have not made any decisions.

How are we supposed to believe in this government's plan for the budget and the economy when, in 2015, it promised to balance the budget by 2019? We want to know if the Liberals intend to show Canadians their plan for paying back their debt. Will they tax Canadians more to fill the nation's coffers?

[Interim Estimates, March 21st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reply to my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche that it is not a fixation. As a parliamentarian, I simply want to ensure that all rules and laws are properly enforced, and that is what we are doing. I would ask my colleague to withdraw that word.

I now invite the Minister of Immigration to set the record straight.

[Interim Estimates, March 21st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I do not interpret the Standing Orders the same way, but I will continue. I invite the member for Madawaska—Restigouche to explain himself.

[Interim Estimates, March 21st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the second member I mentioned is the member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.

[Interim Estimates, March 21st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we must respect the institution that is the Parliament of Canada.

The Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie did the honourable thing, and I thank her for her honesty.

I would encourage some of my colleagues to reconsider their votes, including the member for Pontiac, the member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, the member for Madawaska—Restigouche, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.

[Justice, February 21st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to know what happened in committee this morning. Here is my question.

On September 4, the director of public prosecutions informed SNC-Lavalin that its case was going to trial. On September 17, the former attorney general told the Prime Minister and the Clerk of the Privy Council that she would not overrule her director's decision. That should have been the end of it.

Why did the Clerk of the Privy Council, the PMO and even the Prime Minister himself hound the Attorney General of Canada to change her decision?

[Justice, February 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I suggest that my colleague listen to the question so that he can give a real answer.

This is worrisome. Yesterday the Globe and Mail published an article alleging that the Prime Minister's Office had interfered in a criminal proceeding.

What about the principle of impartiality in our justice system? What about the principles of ethics and transparency?

In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, who was then dismissed a month later.

My question is simple. What was said at that meeting?