Intergovernmental Affairs  Mr. Speaker, we are barely one-third of the way through the parliamentary year, and the Liberals are already breaking records for refusing legitimate requests from Quebec. They have said no to the right to opt out of pharmacare, no to the right to opt out of dental care, no to a

Intergovernmental Affairs  Mr. Speaker, their “no” list is so long that it stretches all the way to the north shore. I could go on and on. Ottawa says no to transferring funds for infrastructure and housing, no to repatriating culture, no to establishing a single tax return, no to abolishing the monarchy.

Housing  Mr. Speaker, after pharmacare, dental care and medical assistance in dying, we thought that the federal government was done interfering in areas under Quebec's jurisdiction, but that is not the case. The Liberals have announced that, now, they also want to tell Quebeckers how to

Housing  Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister had the nerve to add that, if the provinces do not want to accept his conditions, “they don't have to take our [federal] money”. That is called blackmail. It is not federal money; there is no such thing as federal money. It is Quebeckers' money.

Privilege  Mr. Speaker, for the past few weeks, the federal government has been parading all over Canada, announcing programs of all kinds and budgetary envelopes in advance, disclosing bits and pieces of the budgetary measures that will be part of the budget to be tabled on April 16. On a

Constitution Act, 1867  Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois' position will come as no surprise: We will be voting in favour of this bill. First of all, I would like to salute the courage of the member for Madawaska—Restigouche, who introduced this bill. I do not know what the future holds for this bill,

Intergovernmental Relations  Mr. Speaker, for the past three weeks the Prime Minister has made pre-budget announcements in Quebec’s areas of jurisdiction, but not today. No, today, he is at the Foreign Interference Commission. That means he does not have time for domestic interference. Health, schools, housi

Intergovernmental Relations  Mr. Speaker, the government is treating us to a veritable budget striptease, one item at a time. The way things are going, we will be having a five-minute lock-up on April 16. There will be nothing left to announce. What will be left to spend after using billions of dollars to

Oath to the King  Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I want to begin by commending the member for Madawaska—Restigouche for his courage and determination in fighting to ensure that members who do not wish to do so no longer have to swear an oath to the king when they are sworn in. The

Housing  Mr. Speaker, I have an urgent message for anyone who still believes that we should ignore jurisdictions and let the federal government decide everything. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation has proven that when the federal government interferes in housing, an exclusive j

Housing  Mr. Speaker, that is nonsense. When the federal government meddles in Quebec's jurisdictions, Quebeckers always get shortchanged. Housing is a perfect example. We represent 22% of the population, yet we got 14% of the funds and only 6% of affordable housing. Not only do we neve

Housing  Mr. Speaker, when it comes to housing, Quebeckers have been cheated by this government since 2019. We represent 22% of the population, yet have received only 14% of the funding and 6% of the affordable housing. Despite all this, the housing minister is giving lessons today. He to

Housing  Mr. Speaker, they are lecturing us. It is unbelievable. This is the same government that has exacerbated the current housing crisis. It lost control of immigration and has not given Quebec money for housing. This is the same government that gave us ArriveCAN, that is incapable of

House of Commons  Mr. Speaker, the witness said earlier that he had altered two resumés, but only after contracts were awarded. Is that correct?

House of Commons  Mr. Speaker, I am sure he said that. I was there, I heard him. I do not understand why he is claiming that he did not say it. Earlier, a Conservative asked him if he had altered two resumés and he said yes, but after he was awarded contracts. Did I mishear that?