Julie Vignola

[Public Services and Procurement, October 7th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government launched the national shipbuilding strategy 10 years ago to replace its outdated icebreakers, but it left the Davie shipyard out completely.

Now, 10 years later, it has realized its mistake. The icebreakers are only fit for the scrap heap. After snubbing the largest shipbuilder in Canada, the government has been unable to replace the icebreakers. It is searching abroad for a used ship when it could have built a new one in Lévis.

Will the government admit that it would have been easier to give the Davie shipyard its fair share of the contracts?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 6th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

I found it deplorable to hear her cast blame on already maligned systems that are making do with what they have.

There was some misinformation about the actions taken. It is not true that Quebec waited for the military's report before taking action. Quebec set up training and called on workers before the infamous report was released.

That said, China experienced its first wave back in October. We all saw the measures they took in November and December. Questions were being asked in the House at the end of January about what could be implemented at that time. We cannot turn back the clock, but we can avoid repeating past mistakes.

If this situation were to happen again, when and how should the government take preventive action?

I would like to remind members that Quebec's and the provinces' health budgets are still $23 billion to $51 billion short every year, and not temporarily.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 6th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat that according to my colleague, the Prime Minister said that he remained unapologetic for doing everything for our seniors.

However, did they really do everything? There is an annual $23-billion shortfall in health transfers that Quebec and the provinces have unanimously asked the government to make up. Based on constitutional agreements, the annual shortfall is actually $51 billion. In July, the old age pension decreased by between $4 and $5, and last week, it was increased by a few measly cents.

Therefore, I am asking my colleague to tell us who is mistreating our seniors by refusing to respect health transfers and financially starving our seniors with increases that are minimal and reductions that are significant for them.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 6th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her brilliant speech.

I would like to hear her thoughts on how the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government just replied to her, claiming that the opposition parties are continually opposing and blocking the government. However, it was the Liberal Party that imposed a gag order, thereby preventing the opposition parties from making any amendments that would have improved certain bills.

I would like to hear my colleague's opinion on that.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 6th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith for his wonderful speech. I agree with him on many points, and I have a specific question for him.

A number of the points he raised fall under Quebec's and Canadian provinces' jurisdictions. Health transfers are of particular concern to me. The Liberal government boasted about paying $40 billion a year in health transfers, but in accordance with the constitutional agreement, health care costs would be around $91 billion, which represents a shortfall of $51 billion.

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the importance of respecting provincial jurisdictions and on equitable transfers.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, the assistance programs are designed in such a way that farmers practically have to be on the brink of bankruptcy before they can apply.

Does my colleague have any suggestions for improving these programs and ensuring that farmers both young and old can benefit from the help they sorely need, especially after watching their crops rot in the field this year?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's speech accurately described the realities that we have been seeing first-hand for over six months now.

At the beginning of her speech, she talked about seniors and how they have been treated.

The government literally created two classes of seniors by giving extra money to seniors aged 75 and over, while the majority of seniors, those between the ages of 65 and 75, are not getting anything.

What does she have to say about that? I would like to hear her comments.

[Proceedings on the bill entitled An Act relating to economic recovery in response to COVID-19, September 29th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

Earlier, I was saying that the prorogation was a bad idea for democracy. Closure is also a bad idea for democracy.

This is not about going on and on about a bill for 25, 30 or 40 weeks. It is simply a matter of making proposals so that the government and the opposition parties can come to a consensus.

I have been here for two days and for two days I have been hearing the government say that we should work together. We want to do that, but the Liberals are imposing a gag order. That is not democratic, period.

[Proceedings on the bill entitled An Act relating to economic recovery in response to COVID-19, September 29th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

Was it a bad idea to prorogue Parliament during a crisis like the one we are experiencing? Indeed, it was. It was a bad idea not only for our farmers, who need our support, but also for the public and for democracy as a whole.

We have the right and the duty to speak on behalf of our constituents, not for ourselves or our party, but for everyone.

[Proceedings on the bill entitled An Act relating to economic recovery in response to COVID-19, September 29th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

People with disabilities are, indeed, too often forgotten. We can help them, and temporary measures may not be enough. We will have to take time to think and dig into these questions so that we can meet these people's needs, instead of simply doing what we think is best.