Xavier Barsalou-Duval

[Committees of the House, November 7th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I have trouble understanding why my colleague opposite is so indignant. I have witnessed him expressing his indignation again and again, day after day, for nearly a month now.

The Bloc Québécois offered the government a way out so that we could move forward and end the standoff. We sent it a proposal that would benefit Quebeckers and maybe even Canadians. We asked it to boost retirement benefits for people aged 65 to 74 and to pass our supply management bill, but the government balked. Now it is accusing us of not giving it a free pass, when it is the government that has no desire to work with us.

I am hard pressed to understand the government's indignation and unwillingness to resolve the situation. Perhaps it is because, ultimately, this impasse suits them. I would like my colleague to talk to us about this. When there is a standoff in Parliament, there are no confidence votes and, in any event, there is no legislative agenda. Perhaps the government likes it that way. Is that possible?

[Privilege, November 7th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois would also like to have the opportunity to carefully review the member's concerns before speaking to the matter.

[Committees of the House, November 7th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, although my colleague's speech was definitely interesting, it had nothing to do with what we are debating. I will therefore ask him a question about the positions taken by his colleagues who actually talked about the subject we are debating.

I am concerned to hear members of the government say that it is ridiculous, that there is filibustering in the House and that it prevents them from addressing important matters. I agree on the filibustering, but there is something I do not agree with. The subject of this debate on the adoption of a committee report is especially important. Credit card fees are a very important subject, and I am very happy that someone took the initiative to set aside the usual filibustering to talk about them.

I would like to know why the members across the aisle are angry that we decided to talk about credit card fees, which are extremely high for small merchants and are detrimental to our economy.

[Privilege, November 1st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her speech in support of transparency and information sharing. I think it is important and commendable and something we should see from every government. That got me thinking. If the Conservative Party comes to power, can we assume that it will be committed to greater transparency and better government accountability? We know that during the Harper years, things were tough in that regard.

[International Trade, November 1st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, after 500 days of filibustering, we have to wonder whether Peter Boehm and Peter Harder are part of a Liberal anti-supply-management movement, along with John Manley.

Comparing our farmers to the deadliest lobby in the United States is insulting. Comparing the protection of our human-scale agriculture sector to totalitarianism is outrageous beyond words. All of this comes from a key figure in the government of Jean Chrétien, who arguably had quite an influence on the Liberal Party.

Will the Liberals unequivocally condemn John Manley's comments and call on the Senate to pass Bill C‑282?

[International Trade, November 1st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow will mark 500 days since the House adopted Bill C‑282, which seeks to protect supply management in trade agreements. People are wondering why two Liberal-appointed senators, Peter Boehm and Peter Harder, are filibustering so hard.

We may have gotten a clue yesterday, when former Liberal minister John Manley, a prominent member of Jean Chrétien's government, compared our farmers to the NRA gun lobby. He said that we should ignore them and that passing Bill C‑282 would turn Canada into North Korea.

Did he basically say aloud what the Liberals are thinking?

[Petitions, October 30th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House to officially table petition e‑4845, which was certified pursuant to Standing Order 36.

The petition has been signed by 1,315 people and was initiated by Alexandre Bélisle, the mayor of Verchères, as well as all the municipal councillors, who are here today on Parliament Hill.

The petition calls on the House of Commons to bring this matter to the attention of the Government of Canada and the ministers concerned so that the necessary funds to rehabilitate the Verchères harbour are provided. The Municipality of Verchères has been expressing its interest in acquiring this harbour from Fisheries and Oceans Canada for 25 years. However, nothing has changed, and residents are getting impatient.

As a result of Ottawa's negligence, the Verchères harbour fell into such disrepair that it actually had to be closed for safety reasons. I therefore expect a swift response from the government on this issue, which is of the utmost importance to the people of Verchères.

[Committees of the House, October 30th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been consultations among the parties, and I think that, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to allow me to present a petition that I was planning to table today in the presence of certain elected officials from my riding who are here on Parliament Hill.

[Member for Montarville, October 30th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to a distinguished member of the House who was first elected in Verchères in 1993 at the age of 28, in his very first election under the Bloc Québécois banner.

He was re-elected without interruption until he made the leap to the National Assembly in 2005, where he notably served as public safety minister from 2012 to 2014. After taking a short break from politics in 2018, he returned to his first love and ran under the Bloc Québécois banner in the 2019 election. No doubt members have gathered that I am talking about the current member for Montarville. Known for his relentless drive, strong work ethic and complete devotion to his constituents, he has always been held in high esteem by his colleagues.

He took everyone by surprise when he announced that he would not seek another term in the next election. We will no doubt miss having him on the Hill, but we are delighted to know that he will remain a proud supporter of Quebec independence.

I congratulate the member for Montarville on his 30 years of service. I thank him for all he has done.

[Privilege, October 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I think you are doing a great job.

The one comment I would make in response to my colleague's speech also applies, in my opinion, to the speeches of other Conservative members who have made similar remarks about the motion under discussion today.

First, I want to say that, yes, we want to see the documents. We would appreciate that. I do not think anyone could reasonably object to transparency, especially given the assumption that the funds were improperly managed.

However, I am a little disappointed. Allow me to explain. The Conservatives are good at slogans. We see that during question period and again at this moment. They keep repeating the words “green slush fund”. I do not know how this slogan translates into French, but I have some questions, because in 2019, the Bloc Québécois raised the fact that a lot of money had been diverted from this fund into oil. We wanted to explore the matter further, but the Conservatives were not interested at the time.

I would like to know why the Conservatives are unwilling to investigate when money is diverted for the benefit of oil. I am talking about the same fund.