House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was transport.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Bloc MP for Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 35% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Electoral System February 17th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I must say to begin with that I acknowledge the work done originally by my colleague, the member for Peterborough, who is also the chair of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

We have had the opportunity on a number of occasions to hear from the Chief Electoral Officer. He organized one particular session on the youth vote. I have listened with interest to what my colleague, the member for Peterborough, has had to say.

I have no intention of rereading the text of the new motion presented by the hon. member for Surrey Central. No one could not be in favour of it. Who could be against virtue? We all want to go to heaven, even if we do not always act like saints here on earth. Basically, no one could be against it.

I do not want to go so far as to say this is just wishful thinking, but it is an expression of good intentions. I would point out to my colleagues from Surrey Central and Peterborough that there are already certain things in place, such as material for schools, like ballot boxes to elect class presidents and the like. I have already been involved with the secondary schools on this. A school principal called me to ask for some voting booths and cardboard ballot boxes precisely to introduce our young people to the voting process.

So, basically, this is already in place. The motion merely reinforces it, so one could not be opposed.

One of the problems, however, that I have with the motion of my colleague, the hon. member for Peterborough that is, was that when real elections, either by-elections or general elections, were held there were to be different coloured ballot boxes for young voters. That is what I was referring to just now. If the speeches were on the original motion by my colleague from Peterborough, I would have had to make some unfavourable remarks.

I want to clarify something for his benefit and our audience, who heard his remarks on the first motion. I was a member of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and I can say, on my behalf and that of my party, that I have serious concerns about having ballot boxes of a different colour for young voters.

One could wonder how secret the ballot would be. This motion also referred to a separate count. The Chief Electoral Officer would be required to publish voting results. I think that would be counterproductive. Ballot secrecy is important. In Quebec and Canada, anyone 18 years old or older has the right to cast his or her vote. This is true for my 96-year-old mother-in-law, who has been voting for decades, and also for the young person who just turned 18 and is discovering firsthand what the democratic process by which we elect representatives to speak for us is all about.

The right to vote applies to anyone 18 years old or older. I can therefore not agree with having ballot boxes of a different colour; this would mean telling young people to get in the line at the left because there is a parallel polling division for them.

My colleague, the hon. member for Peterborough, has repeated at least five or six times—he may want to check in Hansard —that this kind of measure is designed not only to promote voting but also to make the young less cynical about politics. This was also reiterated by my colleague from Surrey Centre.

I see that my hon. friend from Peterborough is nodding in agreement that this is the desired objective. I would like to tell the hon. member for Peterborough that, if we want young people not to be cynical about politics, perhaps we should ensure that politics deserves their confidence.

Mr. Speaker, do you think that with all the scandals in the air right now over the sponsorship business, that this will encourage young people to be interested in politics? Do you think this will encourage young people to trust politicians?

I have a son, 24 years old, who is watching right now. You probably know, Mr. Speaker—because I know your children are young adults—that these are young people who, without being as mad for politics as we are, watch television, listen to the radio, and read newspapers. What have they been seeing all over the media for the past two or three weeks, especially since we came back to the House on February 2? Scandals to the right and scandals to the left.

Events like this do not encourage young people to exercise their right to vote. When we meet young people they tell us that we all look the same to them, “You are all a gang of bandits. You only want to stuff your own pockets” they say. I am not dreaming this. This is what young people think about politics today.

Young people will not be encouraged to vote with day-glo coloured ballot boxes, mauve ones or ones with lights, or boxes with a joystick on them like a Playstation or Xbox.

There must be trust, and that trust must be earned. You do not go out and buy it by the kilo. A person does not go to the store to buy a kilo or a metre of trust. “Well, now, I have just bought myself 1.5 metres of trust”. Trust has to be earned.

We politicians have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. We need to be a regular presence in our communities. I do not wish to pass myself off as someone special, but I can say that I have some 8 to 10 political activities every weekend. When it comes time for an election, I do not hear anyone say “Oh, there you are, Mr. Guimond, now that the election has been called.”

Why do people have a tendency to think that politicians become visible only when it is election time? Because there are some politicians who get themselves elected on fancy promises, pie in the sky promises: Vote for me and you will see. I will solve all your problems. Vote for me and money will drop from the sky by the bucketful.

Fortunately, the public is becoming increasingly aware. Our young people are becoming increasingly aware. They no longer let themselves be swayed by fine promises. They want to see concrete actions and achievements. Félix Leclerc lived on Île d'Orléans, which is in my riding. In one of his songs about politicians, he said:

On the eve of an election, he'd call you son. The day after, of course, he had no clue what your name was.

Félix Leclerc wrote that in the 1960s because this was how politicians typically behaved. In 1960, there were fewer female politicians, but the behaviour was typical and that is what Félix Leclerc thought of politicians.

Consequently, if we want to encourage young people to vote, we have to show them that politicians are not all alike, that there are some who are less than honest, but we must avoid generalizations.

We, the members, the 301 elected representatives of this House, are one of the most important components, independent of political partisanship. We must earn society's trust and we must do what we say we will.

The current sponsorship scandal will not help young people have more trust in politics and politicians.

Electoral System February 17th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I understand that you want to take the matter under advisement, but you understand that I cannot deliver quite the same speech. I would not want this to encroach on the time allotted to me, especially since I see that you gave the member for Surrey Central more than 10 minutes. You warned him that he had only one minute left before he started reading his amendment. I do not wish to start a debate on this, but it would be essential to know your decision immediately because it is not the same speech.

I want you to know that I do not agree with the original motion that was put forward. However, I am in favour of the motion as amended, if you accept the amendment. You understand that I would not be able to deliver the same speech. A speech on a motion I disagree with is different than a speech on an amended motion that I do agree with. I would like to have your advice on this, Mr. Speaker.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply February 17th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Quebecois will vote against this motion.

Radiocommunication Act February 17th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Quebecois will vote in favour of this motion.

Charlevoix Lamb February 17th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, widely recognized by epicureans, Charlevoix lamb long ago acquired nobility status in Quebec. Considered a high-end product, Charlevoix lamb is different from other meats available on the market because of its original taste and distinctive flesh.

I recently learned that some 10 producers from Charlevoix have been selected to take part in a pilot project in Quebec to establish the first reserved designation of the type “protected geographical indication” for Charlevoix lamb.

I sincerely hope that the pilot project will open new doors for recognized Quebec producers. Like Charlevoix lamb, local products from Île d'Orléans are refined and sought after. Promoting reserved designation products will no doubt benefit both producers and consumers.

I therefore call on the federal government to take the necessary steps to harmonize its positions with that of Quebec, as recommended by the working group on reserved designations and local products. This would promote greater access to international markets for these products.

Points of Order February 16th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, as I begin, I would like to say to the hon. member for Cariboo—Chilcotin that we are in complete agreement with the point he raised, namely, that three parliamentary secretaries sit on this very important committee, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. This is a clear case of conflict of interest. I am certain, Mr. Speaker, that with your usual wisdom and judgment, you will receive the hon. member's point of order favourably.

I would add, and I direct my remarks toward the government, that this proves that all this talk of democratic reform is just a show. I am certain that the people of Quebec and of Canada have figured it out. We are talking about a very important committee, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. It is the only committee in our British parliamentary system that is chaired by a member of the official opposition. As a member of the 1993-1997 Parliament, I was chair of that committee in 1996 and 1997. The British parliamentary system recognizes that a member of the official opposition should chair this committee, precisely to shed light on any elements brought up by the Auditor General.

In the case at hand, we are discussing an issue of capital importance, such as has not been seen in this House in decades. We are talking about a scandal involving some $250 million, where $100 million was spent on companies close to the current government.

The current Prime Minister keeps telling us that he wants to enhance the role of ordinary MPs. If he and the members of his cabinet were serious about democratic reform— if it were more than words with which they are trying to buy votes in the coming election—they would have appointed Liberal backbenchers to really shed light on this sponsorship scandal, instead of naming three parliamentary secretaries who are members of the Privy Council.

It is one more piece of evidence that shows the words of this Prime Minister do not match his actions. I completely support the point of order raised by the hon. member.

Government Contracts February 12th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister had all the tools he needed at the time to act, but he preferred to keep quiet and not do anything, because he was afraid of getting his knuckles rapped again.

Will the Prime Minister admit that, by not doing anything, by keeping quiet about the sponsorship scandal, he has put his personal interest and his political career before the public interest?

Government Contracts February 12th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, to explain the Prime Minister's inaction in the sponsorship scandal, one of his close advisors stated that the current Prime Minister complained just once about Jean Chrétien's behaviour with regard to Quebec and had been punished for his attitude by being relieved of his responsibility for the regional federal spending program in Quebec.

Are we to understand from that statement by a close advisor to the Prime Minister that he refused to intervene in the sponsorship scandal because he was afraid of getting rapped on the knuckles a second time? What strong political courage.

Reinstatement of Government Bills February 10th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, members of the Bloc Quebecois will vote against this motion.

Reinstatement of Government Bills February 10th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, members of the Bloc Quebecois will vote against this motion.