House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2019, with 34% of the vote.
Infrastructure March 20th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, since the start of 2017 our government has announced many drinking water and waste water treatment projects.
As a result of the bilateral agreement signed with Quebec last summer, I have announced 12 different projects in 10 municipalities in the Lower St. Lawrence worth more than $20 million.
Can the Minister of Infrastructure provide us with details of the program?
Formaldehyde Emissions February 16th, 2017
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for his kind words. During the 16 years that I worked for the federal government, I had the opportunity to work in the regulatory field in various departments, such as the Department of Health and the Department of Justice. I worked on developing regulations.
Obviously, when I began looking into this issue, I made sure to find out everything I possibly could about formaldehyde emissions. I wanted to draft a motion that would hold together, one that made sense, so that it would get the support of as many members of the House as possible.
The goal is clear. It is to protect the health of Canadians and recognize the work that the industry has done to meet the highest standards. I thank my colleague. Obviously there is the matter of terminology, but I think that we agree on the meaning of the motion. I am therefore going to leave it at that.
Formaldehyde Emissions February 16th, 2017
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague across the way for raising this question. Obviously, that is my goal. As I said, I hope that we can adopt Canadian regulations that will limit formaldehyde emissions in order to protect the health of Canadians.
We currently have one hour to debate this motion, which will eventually be put to a vote. What I would like is to get the support of all my colleagues in the House and also of the opposition side, of the Conservatives and the NDP. That is my objective and I really hope that we can all come to an agreement.
Formaldehyde Emissions February 16th, 2017
moved:
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) adopt regulations on formaldehyde emissions for composite wood products intended for indoor use that are sold, provided, or supplied for sale in Canada; and (b) ensure that these regulations are similar to US Environmental Protection Agency regulations enforcing the formaldehyde emissions standards in the US Toxic Substances Control Act Title VI in order to protect the health of Canadians who use these products.
Madam Speaker, I hope the debate we have here this evening, or late this afternoon, will allow us to have objective discussions that are perhaps a little less animated than what we saw in the dying minutes of the past hour.
Again, I am very pleased to rise today in the House to move Motion No.102 on a subject that is very important to me. The purpose of the motion is to ensure that we adopt Canadian regulations on formaldehyde emissions.
Formaldehyde is a toxic substance that originates, for example, in composite wood products that are used indoors and causes serious health problems.
I am the father of four young boys. Obviously my children's health, and the health of my family, is important to me. I must admit that, sometimes, I tend to go a little overboard when it comes to protecting my children's health. For example, I ask them to make sure they carefully wash the fruits and vegetables they eat. I sometimes even do it myself to help them. I also ask them to wash their hands really thoroughly. I turn off the WiFi every night before they go to bed.
Obviously, for their protection, I make sure they live in a safe environment. We own a home and, over the years, I have done renovations by installing floating flooring, a new kitchen, and new cabinets. Then, on a visit to a composite wood panel manufacturing facility during the election campaign, I learned that some foreign manufacturers use formaldehyde-based resins.
I was shocked because I thought that formaldehyde had been banned from all wood composite products. I thought that Canada had regulations to limit, reduce, or eliminate formaldehyde emissions. I was therefore extremely shocked to learn that Canada does not have any regulations or concrete measures in place to eliminate formaldehyde emissions.
When I did some digging to find out more about what kind of protection was in place and how to avoid formaldehyde emissions, I came across an article about Hurricane Katrina. I learned that the 2005 hurricane had some major consequences. People in Louisiana were evacuated, then relocated and housed in mobile homes. In the weeks following relocation, as they were settling into those mobile homes, people started getting sick. They were having respiratory problems.
Finally, after all kinds of tests, it came to light that those mobile homes were made with wood composites that contained formaldehyde. All kinds of legal action ensued in pursuit of compensation from the manufacturers that produced those products and built those mobile homes. In 2012, the disputes were settled.
In 2015, the American program60 Minutes investigated the matter and found that foreign manufacturers of composite wood panels were selling lots of formaldehyde-containing composite products to the U.S., such as floating floors. Therefore, 60 Minutes investigated further and found that no measures were in place to regulate formaldehyde emissions and that Americans were getting sick from exposure to formaldehyde emissions.
Obviously, the reaction of Americans was very negative. After the show aired, the U.S. government introduced very strict regulations in order to eliminate formaldehyde from composite wood products.
We are in the House today to ensure that Canada, which does not have such regulations or concrete measures to limit formaldehyde emissions, can adopt similar regulations. That is why I moved Motion No. 102. We will debate the elements of this motion.
As I was saying earlier, the objective of Motion No. 102 is to introduce Canadian regulations on formaldehyde emissions for composite wood products for indoor use that are sold, provided, or supplied for sale in Canada. These regulations should be similar to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations enforcing the formaldehyde emission standards in the Toxic Substances Control Act, Title VI, through a certification process to establish levels of formaldehyde in composite wood products.
It is important to note that U.S. regulations introduced last year will go into force in December 2017. That is an important factor to be considered in our debate. I will repeat that the U.S. regulations will go into effect in December 2017, which is in the months to come.
Once again, formaldehyde is a colourless gas that infiltrates the air in two different ways. It can enter the air through gas emissions from construction materials or household products, or from the combustion of these products. The effects of formaldehyde on health are known, have been studied for many years, and are well documented by Health Canada.
High concentrations of formaldehyde can cause irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat; cause breathing problems; and worsen asthma symptoms in children and infants. They can even cause cancer. That is why this gas was declared toxic in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.
Formaldehyde is found in many construction materials made using composite panels. Composite panels are made using recycled wood residue, and these consumer products are becoming increasingly common in the everyday lives of Canadians.
These panels have many uses, including in the manufacture of furniture, desks, bookcases, kitchen cabinets, flooring, and toys. Formaldehyde comes primarily from the resin that is used as an adhesive in the manufacture of these composite wood panels and hardwood plywood.
As my colleagues may already be aware, Health Canada has developed general guidelines regarding indoor air quality in homes. Those guidelines set out maximum levels for two kinds of formaldehyde exposure: short-term and long-term exposure.
These guidelines also provide information regarding the known health effects of indoor air contaminants, sources of indoor air contaminants, the recommended exposure limits, and recommendations to reduce exposure to pollutants.
Although there is a formaldehyde emission standard for composite wood panels and hardwood plywood, CAN/CSA-0160, it is a voluntary standard. That is very important to remember. It is a voluntary standard. Manufacturers are under no obligation to abide by it like they would be if it were a regulation arising from legislation.
It is vital that we protect Canadians from the harmful effects of formaldehyde emissions from composite wood panels and hardwood plywood. As a result, the motion we are debating today is crucial and resolves problems that are not addressed in Canadian regulations. If this regulation is not adopted, the situation that I explained earlier could get worse when the American regulations take effect in December 2017.
The motion seeks to protect the health of Canadians who buy or use these products and ensure that Canadian consumers have access to high quality building materials.
The Canadian regulations must be consistent with the American ones. Here is why. On December 12, 2016, the United States published the final version of its national regulations on formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products in order to protect the American citizens that purchase them. Once again, the health effects of this toxic gas are known and have been studied.
Any American or foreign manufacturer of composite wood wishing to sell or supply products to American consumers will have until December 12, 2017, to comply with the certification program and the new U.S. environmental requirements. Through these regulations, the United States has clearly indicated to manufacturers of composite panels that the health of Americans comes first.
Since the majority of Canadian manufacturers of composite panels have already made investments to ensure that their facilities meet the new U.S. standards, they will be able to continue exporting their products to the United States. Their operations will not be affected.
However, some foreign manufacturers of composite panels, who have not made the necessary investments in their operations to meet the new U.S. standards, will try to liquidate their products in countries that do not have such strict standards, such as Canada.
If that happens, the use of those composite panels, which have very high formaldehyde emissions, could obviously have serious effects on the health of Canadians who buy or use these products.
Canada needs to have a certification process that is similar to that of the United States in order to protect Canadian consumers by guaranteeing that the products they buy meet the highest standards of protection from formaldehyde emissions.
As I said, I am the father of four young boys, and their health is very important to me. Had I known that the products I bought in recent years contained formaldehyde, I would obviously have decided to buy something else.
As I said earlier, when I found out that Canada has no real measures to protect Canadians from the harmful effects of formaldehyde in the air, I decided to do something. That is why I came up with this motion and put it before the House. It is my duty as a father to safeguard the health of my children and my family.
If Canada does not adopt measures to protect Canadians from the health effects of formaldehyde, companies that manufacture composite panels that do not comply with U.S. standards could target the Canadian market to dump their products.
We must fix this problem and adopt regulations that are similar to American regulations, which are particularly strict. Once in place, those Canadian regulations will protect the health of Canadians.
By basing our standards on the American standards, Canadian regulations will limit the emission of formaldehyde, ensure that imported products meet the new Canadians standards, ensure correct labelling, ensure that all products are tested, and lastly, implement a certification process that will be done by accredited entities.
The composite panel manufacturing sector consists of 13 plants in Canada that are located in six different provinces. Seventy percent of its output is exported to the United States. This is an important economic sector that generates revenues of $3.4 billion.
Like many others who share my objective, I am very proud to have a plant in my riding that has adopted the highest standards when it comes to protecting the people of our region and all Canadians.
To summarize, I want to commend Canadian composite panel manufacturers on their leadership; they have made the investments needed to conform to the highest standards and limit Canadians' exposure to formaldehyde emissions.
Once again, I am pleased to present and table this motion in the House to help keep Canadians safe.
Carleton-sur-Mer February 8th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, Carleton-sur-Mer, a community in my riding, is hitting a special milestone in 2017.
Carleton-sur-Mer is celebrating its 250th anniversary this year. Two hundred and fifty years ago, Acadian families settled in this magnificent area of eastern Quebec nestled between the ocean and the mountains. Over the years, those men and women, along with other newcomers, built and shaped this community, which has always been known for its vitality.
With its beautiful landscapes, high quality of life, and residents and businesses that care about their town’s development, Carleton-sur-Mer serves as an example for any community that wants to grow and develop while protecting its natural assets. I want to take this opportunity in the House to wish all Carleton-sur-Mer residents and visitors a wonderful year filled with joy, happiness, pride, and community-building activities.
Happy anniversary, Carleton-sur-Mer.
Indigenous Affairs February 3rd, 2017
Mr. Speaker, the indigenous and northern affairs committee has heard that settling outstanding claims is an important part of our work toward reconciliation and to correct past wrongs. I am proud that our government has made it a priority to settle these claims through negotiation rather than litigation.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs update the House on the agreement signed between our government and the Siksika regarding the Castle Mountain claim?
Shooting in Quebec City January 30th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, terror struck at the Centre culturel islamique de Québec in Sainte-Foy last night.
The Muslim community's place of worship, a sanctuary and meeting place, was the scene of a shooting that took several people's lives and injured many. Lives were lost and families wrenched apart.
We strongly condemn this horrible crime. Our thoughts are with the victims, their families, their loved ones, the Muslim community, and everyone affected by this terrible tragedy.
As we come to terms with this senseless act, let us remember that we are all Canadians. Let us remember that we are united and strengthened by diversity no matter where we come from, the colour of our skin, or our religion. Canadian Muslims are woven into the fabric of our nation. Terrible acts like what happened yesterday have no place in our communities, our cities, or our country.
Today, more than ever, it is our duty to demonstrate openness and tolerance to all of our fellow citizens.
Consumer Protection December 13th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, consumers in my riding and across Quebec and Canada want to be properly protected.
Yesterday, the Minister of Finance announced that he was going to ask the Commissioner of the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada to engage with stakeholders and his provincial and territorial counterparts in order to examine and assess best practices in consumer protection.
Could the minister explain to the House the reason for that decision?
Listuguj Haven House December 7th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Haven House, which celebrates its 25th anniversary. Since 1999, Haven House has provided a safe place for women and families in the Mi'kmaq community of Listuguj. Domestic violence against women and children is not a new phenomenon, but it is one that requires commitment and dedication to prevent and ultimately eliminate. Helping victims of domestic violence with shelters, counselling, and health services, like those provided by Haven House, is critical and essential to a community's well-being.
As a husband and father to four young boys, I certainly appreciate and understand how important the community services provided by Haven House are, because they offer hope, comfort, and security to the people who use them.
As we are in the midst of 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, I want to commend the remarkable work of the Haven House team, namely Françoise Gédéon, Carmel Vicaire, Blanche Martin, and Sheila Swasson.
I thank them for their dedication and commitment to their community.
Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 2 December 5th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative member’s presentation was an interesting one. He contrasted the previous government with the Liberal government. I can assure the House that the contrast is obvious with our Liberal government, since it is a government that is here for the regions. The member also spoke about the debt, in reference to what my colleague said earlier.
I would like to hear more from the member on how the Canada child benefit has improved the lives of 9 out of 10 families, on the fact that it has lifted 300,000 children out of poverty, with all of these new measures being tax free. I would like to hear his thoughts on how the Canada child benefit is making it easier for families to break the debt cycle.