Sylvie Boucher

[Ethics, April 11th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, from Bombardier and the Aga Khan to Chinese billionaires, it is clear that the Prime Minister likes padding his friends' pockets.

It turns out that the director of Canada: The Story of Us is John English, the elder Trudeau's biographer. The series will also be used in university settings, which will certainly be good for Mr. English's bank account.

Did the Prime Minister use $675 million in public funds to indirectly line the pockets of another friend of his?

[Ethics, April 7th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, when Liberal patronage becomes standard operating procedure, one wonders if there is any end in sight.

We recently found out that the Minister of Health's former adviser, Peter Cleary, is now working for Santis Health, which lobbies the minister.

Does the minister see the conflict of interest here, and can she assure the House that neither she nor her employees have met with Peter Cleary?

[Ethics, April 5th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's arrogance is killing me.

In Canada, like in other places around the world, the Prime Minister has no problem giving taxpayers' money to his billionaire friends, while simultaneously eliminating the public transit tax credit. Yesterday we learned that the Aga Khan was financially compensated by the state during the leader of the Liberal Party's personal vacation. Once again, Canadian taxpayers are paying for his arrogance and poor judgment.

When will the Prime Minister walk his talk and treat the middle class—

[Official Languages, April 4th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the Juno awards gala was held on Sunday evening to recognize the efforts of Canadian artists who stand out in the music industry and who shine a light on our beautiful Canadian culture.

I congratulate all the winners and I thank the Minister of Canadian Heritage for her impassioned, heartfelt, and emotional speech, which she delivered in French, the language of Molière.

That is what I would have liked to say in the House today, but I cannot.

The Minister of Official Languages did not bother to speak French, but then again that part of her title was eliminated. A minister from Quebec who boasts about defending both of our country's official languages fell short of her duties and obligations. What a missed opportunity. Defending French takes more than hiding behind fine words. Every time she speaks publicly, she has to do so in both official languages—

[Act respecting the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Criminal Acts, April 4th, 2017]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-343, An Act to establish the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Criminal Acts and to amend certain Acts.

Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce my bill, the act respecting the federal ombudsman for victims of criminal acts. The responsibilities of the ombudsman for victims of criminal acts have evolved since the position was created in 2007, so this bill would make the position equal to that of the correctional investigator in terms of independence and accountable directly to Parliament.

It will henceforth be independent from the Department of Justice to ensure that the rights of victims of criminal acts, as laid out in the four pillars of the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, are fully respected. Under this bill, the position of the ombudsman for victims of criminal acts will no longer be defined as a program, thus ensuring its long-term existence.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Presence in Gallery, April 3rd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would like my friend from Louis-Hébert to apologize for saying that we did nothing for the Quebec City region when we were in power. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just read any newspaper to see that we did a lot more than the Liberals are doing today.

[National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, March 24th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I am not opposed to setting up this type of committee. What I am opposed to is the Prime Minister having the last word. The committee needs to be independent and made up of parliamentarians with a certain degree of knowledge.

I completely understand, but some things still have me worried. Imagine for a second that Stephen Harper had had control over such a committee. How would the Liberals have reacted? They would have publicly ranted and raved.

Today, I, the member for Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix, am the one ranting and raving. I have had enough of a Prime Minister who thinks himself lord and master of the House of Commons. The House of Commons does not belong to him. It belongs to Canadians.

[National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, March 24th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I want this committee to be independent so that we have that kind of protection. This committee must consist of people who are knowledgeable about public safety.

As the official languages critic, even though I would be capable, I could not sit on such a committee because I know nothing about this subject. I do not want the committee to be the puppet of the Prime Minister, who wants to be lord and master and thumbs his nose at his own MPs.

He wants control of the committee, but he should not have it. He is the Prime Minister of Canadians—he is not lord of his domain. We must have an independent committee to examine national security issues, but we do not want it to be the puppet of the Liberal Party. I will never accept that.

[National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, March 24th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind my colleague that the party currently in power is the Liberal Party. Personally, I have nothing against such a committee per se. What bothers me is that it has become the Prime Minister's puppet. That is unacceptable. Since it will deal with public safety, the committee must be independent. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety should not be the ones to lead such a committee.

If the government does not change its approach, I will be forced to vote against the creation of this committee, since it will become just another arm of the Liberal Party. Enough is enough; this is not a dictatorship. It is appalling that the Prime Minister wants to usurp all the power.

This committee must be independent and made up of resource people and parliamentarians who have solid, relevant knowledge of defence and public safety matters. It should not be influenced by the Prime Minister of Canada. No, thank you. Enough is enough.

[Standing Orders of the House of Commons, March 24th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the leader over there keeps saying that these proposed changes are designed to help MPs achieve work-life balance, but here is what is really driving the changes: the Prime Minister wants to sit just one out of five days, one whole, entire hour per week.

The Prime Minister has been in the House since 2008, so can he explain to taxpayers who work five days a week why his full-time job should turn into a part-time job for the same pay?