House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was chair.

Last in Parliament April 2025, as Bloc MP for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2025, with 33% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Centre d'entraide Racine‑Lavoie March 28th, 2023

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the anniversary of an organization that has been serving Rivière-des-Mille-Îles for 50 years. I am talking about the Centre d'entraide Racine-Lavoie.

The centre supports the autonomy and development of low-income individuals and families by offering a variety of services and activities. Year after year, the Centre Racine-Lavoie offers a variety of services, including a tax clinic for people who cannot afford professional services, a community kitchen to promote healthy eating, a lunch prep workshop, an eye-care program called “Bonhomme à lunettes” that offers affordable vision care, talks on many themes, and the list goes on.

The Centre d'entraide Racine-Lavoie is much like a close-knit family that prizes the values of sharing, support and solidarity.

Congratulations to the team at the Centre d'entraide Racine-Lavoie on this milestone.

Telecommunications Act March 23rd, 2023

Mr. Speaker, my colleague knows that TikTok has been banned from all government devices.

My question is simple. Does my colleague believe that Beijing is using this platform to engage in political interference?

Telecommunications Act March 23rd, 2023

Madam Speaker, like all members of the House, I believe, experts are concerned about Chinese equipment in our critical infrastructure, especially telecommunications infrastructure.

Should the Liberal government not be very concerned about the presence of Liberal MPs in its own ranks who are a threat to national security in their own way?

Income Tax Act March 21st, 2023

Mr. Speaker, we are here this evening to debate Bill C‑241, an act to amend the Income Tax Act with regard to deduction of travel expenses for tradespersons.

Bill C‑241, which is sponsored by the member from the Ontario riding of Essex, is at third reading stage. It seeks to amend “the Income Tax Act to allow tradespersons and indentured apprentices to deduct from their income amounts expended for travelling where they were employed in a construction activity at a job site that is located at least 120 km away from their ordinary place of residence.”

From the outset, I want to say that the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this small but extremely worthwhile initiative. In my opinion, most members agree on this bill. We could settle this this evening by taking a vote by a show of hands. Honestly, I find this a bit tough from a procedural perspective. We know that everyone will vote in favour of the bill, but there is a process to follow, even though we know the outcome will be the same at the end of it.

The tax benefit being introduced by Bill C‑241 responds to a request made by Canada's Building Trades Unions, which represent more than half a million construction workers across the country. These people work in more than 60 trades and professions and generate 6% of Canada's GDP. That is significant.

As we know, in Quebec, the construction industry is an extremely important sector of activity. We are talking about investments of nearly $53 million in 2019. We are also talking about 264,600 direct jobs generated per month, on average, or one out of every 20 jobs in Quebec.

In Canada, salespeople, professionals and various other workers in different sectors can already claim a tax deduction for the cost of their travel, meals and accommodation. I believe and the Bloc believes that it stands to reason that these expenses could be claimed by skilled workers whose job sites are far from their primary residence. It is simply a question of fairness.

The scope of Bill C-241 is essentially fiscal, but it is also economic, because it addresses labour shortages and, by extension, inflation. When expenses are not covered by the employer, workers must cover them themselves. With a family to support, additional expenses for travel can obviously become quite burdensome and undermine a worker's incentive to accept certain contracts from time to time.

Inflation was 6.8% in 2022, the highest since 1982. In 1982 it was 10.9%. We need only think of the extreme volatility of gas prices. The price of a litre of gas in Quebec last June was $2.20, enough to bankrupt any family that has to travel a lot for work.

As I was saying, the tax deduction introduced by Bill C-241 is a concrete and effective measure to encourage the mobility of workers in the construction sector. It is an incentive to return to work. We believe that.

According to a recent poll by Canada's Building Trades Unions, 75% of skilled trades workers say that a tax deduction will give them access to more job opportunities.

Given the current inflation, this is the right time to bring in this tax deduction that will help alleviate the financial burden for tradespeople. This tax incentive promises to provide a solution to the labour shortage, and therefore reduce Quebeckers' and Canadians' dependence on government programs such as employment insurance.

Calculations have shown that Bill C-241 could save the federal government approximately $347 million.

I want to make it clear that we are not reinventing the wheel with Bill C‑241. Other countries, such as the United States, have had a similar tax deduction for quite some time. In short, it is a targeted, relevant and timely measure that has been proven to work on the other side of the border. It would be difficult for all parties here in the House to oppose this bill.

I made a correlation earlier between the tax deduction proposed in Bill C‑241, the job shortage and inflation. The Bloc Québécois members believe that addressing the labour shortage will help ease the inflation that is increasingly affecting and worrying our constituents.

The pandemic forced many people out of the workforce for health reasons and exacerbated the labour shortage in some sectors, including the construction trades. This shortage is hindering the economic recovery, because it results in forced closures, lost contracts, significantly reduced investment in our businesses and overworked employees.

Today's inflation stems in part from an imbalance between supply and demand: Supply is limited because of the labour shortage, but demand is stable and growing. Reducing the labour shortage in a specific sector, as Bill C‑241 seeks to do, could potentially fix the imbalance between supply and demand, in addition to reducing inflation as I was saying earlier.

Consequently, in my opinion, it was ill-advised and counterproductive of the Liberal government to try to create one million jobs in budget 2021 without including effective mechanisms to deal with the labour shortage.

The Bloc Québécois has been taking the labour shortage seriously for a long time now. During the last election campaign, we proposed plenty of solutions: recognizing experienced workers; transferring the temporary foreign workers program to Quebec; investing in research and development; investing in the digital transformation; and creating tax credits for new graduates who move to the regions for work.

In summary, the Bloc Québécois has always been an ally of tradespersons who make an essential and invaluable contribution to Quebec's economic prosperity. Bill C‑241 introduces a targeted and appropriate tax measure that will ease the financial burden of tradespersons while addressing the labour shortage and inflation.

For all of these reasons, once again, the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C‑241.

Historic Places of Canada Act March 21st, 2023

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would just like him to confirm that he did say he would like Leduc No. 1 to become a Canadian historic site.

If so, would he agree that this is not the right time for that, since we are turning towards renewable energies instead? It seems to me that this historic site designation would be rather inappropriate.

Online Streaming Act March 9th, 2023

Madam Speaker, in my life as a parliamentarian, there are things I find difficult, and one example is when either individuals or parties try to trash things that make perfect sense, simply for the sake of trashing them.

The Conservatives are clearly talking here about attacks on freedom of expression. Nothing in this bill constitutes an attack on freedom of expression. In fact, Pierre Trudel, an eminent law professor at Université de Montréal who is highly respected by all Quebeckers and Canadians, has said that this bill does not infringe on freedom of expression. The Department of Justice even studied the matter and came to the same conclusion.

What does my colleague say to that?

Business of Supply February 16th, 2023

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to hear our Liberal colleague say that it is up to the provinces to ensure the sound management and administration of the health care system.

However, what he said about members of the Bloc Québécois is rather frustrating and offensive. He said that the Bloc members were flipping out.

The Bloc Québécois is defending Quebec, and it joined the Government of Quebec in asking for $6 billion in health care transfers to meet needs. We are getting $1 billion, so that is what the Bloc is upset about.

Can my colleague explain why he said that the Bloc Québécois is flipping out?

Business of Supply February 16th, 2023

Madam Speaker, it is very nice to hear my colleague speaking French. His accent is excellent.

I would like to once again remind him that Quebec and the provinces are the ones responsible for the health care model. The Supreme Court clearly ruled in that regard in Chaoulli. It stated that a person who is waiting for surgery cannot be banned from using private health care.

What does my colleague think about that?

Department of Public Works and Government Services Act February 14th, 2023

Madam Speaker, on this Valentine's Day, I would like to celebrate a little event. My precious daughter, Sarah, who already has one son with my son-in-law, Simon, is pregnant. I just found out it is a girl, and I am so happy. Congratulations to them. They are an amazing couple.

Also, on this Valentine's Day, as I am destined not to spend my evening in better company, I will declare my love for forests, a priceless resource for all Quebeckers and Canadians to enjoy and benefit from.

The title of Bill S‑222 is an act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act. This bill is about the use of wood, and it is sponsored by former senator Diane F. Griffin of PEI. It went through first reading in the Senate on November 24, 2021, and is now at second reading in the House. It amends section 7 of the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act by adding the following after subsection 1:

In developing requirements with respect to the construction, maintenance and repair of public works, federal real property and federal immovables, the Minister shall consider any potential reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and any other environmental benefits and may allow the use of wood or any other thing — including a material, product or sustainable resource — that achieves such benefits.

In short, Bill S-222 encourages the federal government to support the forestry industry in reducing its carbon footprint. As a tireless advocate for the Quebec forestry industry, the Bloc Québécois will obviously be voting in favour of this bill.

In fact, the Bloc Québécois has proposed similar legislative measures in the past, although ours may have had more teeth. That was the case in 2010 with Bill C-429, sponsored by the former member for Manicouagan, Gérard Asselin. It was also the case in 2014 with Bill C-574, which was introduced by the member for Jonquière—Alma, Claude Patry. Unfortunately, each time, the Conservatives and the NDP voted down these bills.

If Quebec were a country—it is a nation, but a country in the making—our 900,000 square kilometres of forest would rank us sixth in the world in terms of total forested area. Economically, Quebec's forests represent 57,000 jobs, $12 billion in exports and a contribution of $6 billion per year to Quebec's GDP. Underestimating this wealth would obviously be a huge mistake.

With the decline of pulp and paper, modernizing the wood industry is obviously important and it is becoming increasingly so. The federal government has a huge opportunity right now to contribute to the revitalization of secondary and tertiary processing sectors in so-called weakened communities.

By secondary and tertiary processing, I am referring in particular to woodworking products and mass timber construction. Some of the world's leaders in the design and manufacture of wood buildings are located in Quebec. Chantiers Chibougamau and its Nordic Structures division come to mind. Although these businesses still do work in Quebec and Canada, their order books are largely filled by U.S. customers.

The Canadian government must stop dragging its feet. It needs to start encouraging the wood building industry in residential construction here.

On another note, I would remind the House that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, has recommended increasing the use of wood in non-residential construction in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help fight climate change.

Wood products can easily replace synthetic materials from the petrochemical industry that have a huge carbon footprint. Transforming wood is a more energy-efficient process that lowers emissions by one tonne of carbon dioxide per cubic metre of wood.

Once processed, wood remains a living material. On average, every single cubic metre of wood captures an additional tonne of carbon dioxide. For example, a building constructed using 80 cubic metres of wood can store 80 tonnes of carbon dioxide during its lifetime, which is equivalent to the emissions released by driving a car for a decade. Imagine the savings for an entire building stock.

The forestry sector is probably the industry that is best positioned to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and capture carbon already in the atmosphere. Meanwhile, between 2017 and 2020, Canada's oil and gas sector received $23 billion in taxpayer subsidies. For the same period, Canada's forestry sector received only $952 million. I would also like to point out that, at their last convention, the Liberals rejected a resolution calling for an end to public funding for fossil fuels. That is pretty weak.

Luckily, the Bloc Québécois will continue to fight for a dynamic forestry sector that focuses on preserving biodiversity, encourages innovation and diversification, and generates wealth.

In this regard, I would like to congratulate my friends and colleagues from Jonquière and Lac-Saint-Jean for their exemplary work on this file. Since 2019, they have undertaken numerous initiatives to bring together all the stakeholders and propose meaningful solutions.

In 2021, the Bloc Québécois developed a four-part road map to maximize forests' potential. First, the federal government could “implement a public procurement policy that would encourage the use of wood products, including establishing the carbon footprint as a criterion for awarding contracts”.

Second, the Bloc Québécois recommends “increasing budgets for basic research and to develop a value chain for the secondary and tertiary transformation of forest resources”.

Third, we suggest protecting exports of lumber from Quebec to the United States, our principal trading partner.

Fourth, we want to find ways to boost productivity tied to annual growth.

That is why my colleagues and I will vote in favour of Bill S‑222.

On this day, February 14, my wish is for the government to show the forestry sector a little love, to help keep jobs in our regions and to fight climate change. It has to stop ignoring that and instead be part of the solution.

Happy St. Valentine's day to everyone.

Business of Supply February 14th, 2023

Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberal government has introduced very few budgetary or legislative measures to try to fight inflation. We all agree on that.

Fortunately or unfortunately, the Bank of Canada has had to use the monetary tool at its disposal, that is, increasing interest rates, to try to check this inflationary spiral.

Does my colleague agree that, ultimately, increasing mortgage rates was still the right thing to do?