Luc Desilets

[Affordable Housing and Groceries Act, December 11th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I have a question for my colleague.

Many of us in the House believe that the GST rebate for rental property builders will not really have any impact on the availability and affordability of housing. If the results are questionable, how does my colleague explain the government proposing that this be spread over seven or even 12 years for the final reimbursement, until December 31, 2035, to be exact? I would like his opinion on that.

[Affordable Housing and Groceries Act, December 11th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I hope my colleagues in the House are having a good start to their week.

The Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-56, which would refund the GST to builders. What bothers me, however, is that Bill C-56 extends over seven years, so that means the rebate will be spread over seven years. In 2023, it is hard to foresee what is going to happen in a month or six months.

How can we be sure that a bill like this will be effective when it is going to extend over seven years and plenty of questions remain about the criteria for housing affordability and the desired potential reduction in rent?

I would like my colleague to comment on that.

[Veterans Affairs, December 6th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are deliberately rejecting Quebec.

There was a call for tenders for the monument. Quebec won, so the Prime Minister vetoed that decision. Quebec was therefore swept aside.

In the Boeing versus Bombardier matter, the Liberals did not take any chances: They refused to issue a call for tenders. Quebec had no chance of winning because the Liberals had rejected it in advance. However, it still comes out to the same thing. In both cases, the Liberals went to great lengths to exclude Quebec so we would miss out on a federal contract. Why?

[Veterans Affairs, December 6th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, we now know that it was the Prime Minister who interfered in the public art competition for the monument commemorating the Afghanistan mission. We know that it was the Prime Minister who pulled some strings to overturn the decision so the Daoust team, the Quebec team, would lose. Yesterday, the House of Commons spoke. On the Bloc's initiative, the House denounced the government's about-face and its failure to play by its own rules.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge the House's anger and reverse his decision to cast aside Quebec's winning team?

[Committees of the House, December 5th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I have two quick questions for my colleague.

First, does she believe that the Prime Minister's Office is in a better position to evaluate works of art?

Second, is there not a very simple solution for getting out of the whole mess surrounding this monument that does not exist yet, but is already being called a monument to controversy? Could the government not simply respect the jury's choice?

That is all.

[Committees of the House, December 5th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to listen to my colleague. I have a lot of respect for her.

My question is quite simple. According to Leger's conclusions, there is nothing usable in the survey that the government conducted. It is nothing but hot air. Does my colleague believe those conclusions?

[Committees of the House, December 5th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I sincerely congratulate my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles on his speech. He made some points I did not bring up in my speech. It was very interesting. I see the Liberals are still trying to defend the indefensible.

I would like my colleague's thoughts on this. What we have here is a monumental gaffe, no pun intended. The Liberal government is turning this monument into a monument to shame, to controversy. I am not the one saying that.

Would my colleague agree that it is not too late for the government to reverse course and give the Daoust team the contract?

[Committees of the House, December 5th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I still do not understand why the Liberal Party continues to employ this communication strategy. They are referring to a survey that is completely bogus. Are the Liberals telling us that Leger is not credible? I do not understand.

I simply wanted to have my colleague's opinion on the following issue. We asked the former veterans affairs minister and the former heritage minister to appear. We learned at our last committee meeting that they refused to appear. How does my colleague react to that refusal?

[Committees of the House, December 5th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I have trouble believing that our Liberal colleague endorses non-compliance with the law. The process was clear; the government established it. We have nothing to say about the process, which was fine.

However, the government did not respect the rules. On a whim, it decided to grant the contract to a team that had not won. The government fancies itself a jury of artists.

That is what my colleague is endorsing. He is endorsing a survey that was completely demolished by the biggest polling company in Canada. My colleague is endorsing the fact that the government made a political decision that goes against everything that may exist in the field of art. Once again he is using the promotion of veterans as a pretext. I find that sad.

[Committees of the House, December 5th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, with all due respect for my colleague, he has 20 minutes in the House. He is not talking about the subject of the debate, namely, the commemorative monument. Can he at least tell us a little about his position? Is he okay with the survey? Is he okay with the position of the two ministers? Should his government—