House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was economic.

Last in Parliament October 2019, as Independent MP for Beauce (Québec)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 59% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Mining Industry October 31st, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reassure the hon. member and the people of Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Quebec and Canada who benefit from the research done at this centre. As I said yesterday, the government's position is clear: the centre will remain open.

Mining Industry October 30th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the member for Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour said, the government has not abandoned any industries; it is untrue to say that it has abandoned any industry. We have not abandoned the aluminum industry or the forestry industry, and we will not abandon the Aluminum Technology Centre in Chicoutimi, which is an excellent centre that provides unparalleled services to the aluminum industry in Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean, Quebec and Canada. Unlike what the member said, this centre will remain open.

The Environment October 29th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of our investments in research and development. It is too bad that the NDP chose not to support our last budget, which increased investments in that area.

Furthermore, we want to transform how the National Research Council operates in Canada. We want to turn it into a more productive research centre that focuses on science and innovation.

The Economy October 18th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to tell the House about the measure and also to thank my colleague for his work on behalf of his constituents and especially for the entrepreneurs in his region. Today, our government is following suit by introducing the Jobs and Growth Act, 2012. I would like to remind our opposition colleagues that this bill contains a measure that is very important to small entrepreneurs, who create Canada's wealth. We know that SMEs represent over 90% of Canada's businesses. Today, we are renewing the employment credit, which more than one million employers have used. It is popular and we are keeping it in place.

Small and Medium-Size Business October 2nd, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate my opposition colleague on his appointment as critic since I have been waiting since April to be asked a question about entrepreneurship. I am very pleased that, today, members are rising and asking questions about entrepreneurship.

For us, entrepreneurship is a priority, not just today but everyday. That is why we are reducing the amount of paperwork that governments impose on entrepreneurs. This will leave them with more time to concentrate on what they do best: creating jobs in Canada.

Business of Supply October 2nd, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I would remind my hon. colleague that the minister will base his decision on the Investment Canada Act. This legislation also allows the government to study an investment when there is reason to believe that it could compromise national security. This follows an amendment we made in 2009 to ensure that questions of national security would be considered and to update our legislation, taking into account what was being done in other developed countries.

The legislation before us today is therefore modern and up to date, and it will help the minister make the right decision in the interest of the Canadian economy. It will ensure net benefits for the Canadian economy, while also taking national security into account, since that is part of the legislation.

Business of Supply October 2nd, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I would like to emphasize that we take all investments into consideration. Legislation is in place and has been for some time. It has proven itself and has helped Canada grow. We will comply with the legislation that Parliament has passed.

Business of Supply October 2nd, 2012

Mr. Speaker, unlike my colleague, I believe in the free market and capitalism.

We must remember that my colleague is a member of Québec solidaire in Quebec. If my colleagues in the House are not aware, Québec solidaire is a socialist party that supports nationalizing Quebec's resources. The same goes for the NDP. The preamble of the NDP charter says that it must advocate socialist principles. The NDP wants to advocate socialist principles, sink Canada and tax Canadians. We do not support that point of view.

I hope that the member will part ways with Québec solidaire. He gave money to Québec solidaire to promote communist and socialist principles, yet he just gave me a lecture on capitalism here in the House. I have a hard time understanding that.

Business of Supply October 2nd, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today to discuss with my opposition colleagues, both Liberal and New Democrat, the motion before the House related to foreign investment in Canada.

In general, the foreign investments made in Canada by outside companies are very beneficial to the Canadian economy. Our government is open to foreign investment. The Minister of Industry currently has before him a proposed foreign investment that he is analyzing under the Investment Canada Act. I would like to remind hon. members that this legislation was passed in 1985 by Brian Mulroney's Conservative government, which wanted to promote foreign investment and support Canadian corporations so that they could invest abroad. There is reciprocity in this area: if we prevent foreign companies from investing in Canada, then Canadian companies that want to invest abroad may also be prevented from doing so.

At the time, in 1985, the Conservative government felt that these investments were important to the creation of jobs and the generation of wealth in Canada. The government abolished the Foreign Investment Review Act brought in by the Liberal government of the time, which did not believe that foreign investment was beneficial for Canada. This legislation now includes a test to ensure that foreign investment will benefit all Canadians.

In this time of global economic uncertainty outside our borders, many European countries are currently in a recession. The Americans have a enormous deficit and a giant debt. Given that Canadian entrepreneurs export their products to these markets, we must continue to support investment because it generates wealth. Production is what makes a country grow richer. We can buy only what has been first produced by entrepreneurs. We must promote production and investment—the driving force behind Canada's economy—rather than spending, as some members of the opposition think.

The economic plan that we implemented two years ago is working. Canada is experiencing economic growth. This growth is somewhat fragile because job creators, that is entrepreneurs, export their products abroad and the economic situation in other countries could impact Canada's growth.

For that reason, we must focus on creating jobs and wealth for Canadians. That is what we have done in our latest budgets, thereby showing that Canada is the best country to invest in. Canada is open for business and it invites Canadians and foreigners to invest in it to create wealth.

What is more, Canada is the best country in the G7. Canadian entrepreneurs have created more than 600,000 new jobs since the end of the last recession. Our corporate tax rate is the lowest among the G7 countries. That is important if we want to attract foreign investors who create wealth. The International Monetary Fund continues to rank Canada among the top countries in terms of economic growth and investment. Even Forbes Magazine, the famous business magazine, says that Canada is the best place to invest and to do business. All that is good news for all Canadians because it is people from the private sector who create jobs.

Unlike the opposition, we know that governments do not create jobs; entrepreneurs are the ones who create jobs and wealth. We must encourage them to do so, including by cutting corporate tax rates. When we came to power, the corporate tax rate was 22%. We have considerably reduced that rate. A lower tax rate is important because it leaves businesses with more money to develop their projects, export their products and enter new markets.

Taxing a corporation impedes the creation of wealth because it means taxing investment and production. We must concentrate on reducing taxes, contrary to what the NDP is proposing to do.

The NDP election platform contains its solution to wealth creation: tax Canadians more, and make them spend more and go into debt when they have maxed out their credit cards. It is right there in black and white.

Canadians know that when they have maxed out their credit cards, they must pay their debts. The NDP is urging Canadians to live beyond their means and urging the government to live beyond its means. The NDP wants to continue imposing taxes and encouraging debt, which will leave future generations with a poisoned gift.

We must not tax corporations and we must not impose a carbon tax of $20 billion or more. The NDP is advocating this tax, which will affect families and Canadian consumers.

I mentioned that a tax affects families, but it is important to say that taxing corporations is like taxing individuals because we know that businesses compete with one another. If corporations were made to pay a carbon tax, as the NDP would like, production costs would increase.

A business must be profitable in order to provide investors with a return on their investment. We are investors, through our pension funds invested in Canadian corporations. If a corporation has to pay an additional cost, it will pass on this cost to consumers by increasing the price of its goods or products, or to its shareholders by decreasing the return on their investment, or to the workers that the NDP wants to protect by not giving them a wage increase.

Depending on the competitive environment in which the corporation operates, the individual will always pay the corporation's taxes. It is not true that corporate taxes and personal taxes are two separate taxes. It is one and the same and people know it.

A $20 million carbon tax on corporations is a tax on individuals. At the end of the day, Canadians are all consumers, workers and investors through their pension funds. Thus, personal income tax will rise.

A company is merely a network, a cluster of contracts between suppliers, workers and customers. In a free and democratic country and in all countries, the real individuals are those who pay corporate income tax. That is why the NDP's plan must not be implemented. It would cause a great deal of harm to Canada's economic growth.

I would like to add that it is possible for a foreign investment to be made in Canada or for a company to want to buy shares in a Canadian company. We live in a free country where property rights exist. If shareholders of such a company make a basically unanimous decision to sell their shares, why would the government interfere in a private decision?

The general principle that we must remember is that, if individuals decide to sell their shares, it is because it is in their interest and thus in the interest of Canadians to do so.

When the Government of Canada uses legislation to prevent shareholders from selling their shares, the message we are sending shareholders is that, if they invest in a company, they risk being unable to sell their shares later because the government could intervene.

Rules have been established and companies must follow them. These rules are set out in the Investment Canada Act. These are the rules that the Minister of Industry must follow, and that is what he is going to do in the context of the transaction that we are now dealing with. He will analyze that transaction to ensure that there is a net benefit to Canada.

I am certain that the Minister of Industry will do his job. In the coming weeks, he will inform us of his decision. He will conduct a detailed analysis. We will respect this legislation, which has been in place since 1985 and which has allowed Canada to grow and prosper while allowing Canadians to continue creating jobs.

Telecommunications September 24th, 2012

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleague to vote in favour of this government's crime bills. They are important. She is talking about theft.