Rhéal Fortin

Mr. Speaker, obviously, Quebeckers are ill-served by this government. Ottawa gave $225 million to help British Columbia when it had a similar problem in the past. This year, it allocated $25 million to the Maritimes but is giving Quebec absolutely nothing. Ottawa is doing nothing for forested areas the size of a province that are being ravaged by the infestation. It is doing nothing for forests that are becoming unusable and driving their owners into ruin.How can this government justify helping the other provinces with Quebeckers' money while completely ignoring Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, after sending his Minister of Health to intimidate the Government of Quebec by threatening to impose fines, the Prime Minister is now trying to give the Quebec government a lesson in morality. Canadians are tired of governments that point the finger and accuse each another. That takes some nerve. Rather than acting like a pyromaniac firefighter, could the Prime Minister stop taking sick people in Quebec hostage, restore the health transfers with no strings attached, and forget this bright idea to impose a fine on sick people in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, the Fédération des maisons d'hébergement pour femmes is concerned that the Jordan decision will allow murderers to go free. There is even talk of stays of proceedings in rape cases.Public safety is at risk and, perhaps worse still, the bond of trust between the justice system and Canadians has been broken. This government and its gross and dangerous negligence are to blame. We know that there is a meeting at the end of the month. The Liberals do not need to tell us again.What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to the 14 vacant positions in Quebec? It is urgent.

Mr. Speaker, how many times do we have to say it? Health care is not a federal responsibility. That should not be hard to understand.It took the Liberals less than a year to start squabbling with Quebec over jurisdiction again. This time, it is at the expense of Quebec patients. That is appalling. Will the Liberal government stop its arrogant power-tripping immediately and let Quebec run the health system for which it alone is responsible?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, we attempted to better protect young girls in Canada by fast-tracking the passage of Bill C-38, a government bill to combat pimping. We would have preferred Bill C-452, but the Prime Minister went back on his vote. In collusion with the Conservatives, the Liberals said no to our motion. They said no to making life hard for pimps. The Liberals and the Conservatives would rather preserve the status quo than protect our young girls. How can the government justify refusing to pass its own bill?

Madam Speaker, the government has cut health transfers. Naturally, this has a direct effect on the sick. The government has abandoned our cheese producers and it refuses to provide loan guarantees for the forestry industry, which is facing a new softwood lumber crisis. It is not going to increase regular EI benefits.Does this government and the Liberal Minister of National Revenue realize that the refusal to take action, this lax attitude, and complacency towards KPMG and tax havens have a direct effect on our sick, our workers, and our unemployed?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health's statements are preposterous. She has announced that a 3% increase in transfers is quite enough, as though there were no such thing as population aging. To hell with the federal-provincial negotiations. They are obviously bogus.What is worse is that she wants to split the block transfer into 13 individual agreements in order to tell Quebec what to do in the area of health, even though Ottawa knows absolutely nothing about it. We have stopped counting the fires that the minister has set with a single statement.Can the Minister of Finance, who oversees the health transfer, rein in his pyromaniac colleague?

Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: “no comment”.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-452 was passed unanimously and received royal assent in June 2015. This bill included consecutive sentences and reversed the burden of proof. It was a strong and tangible gesture to take action against pimps. However, the Liberals backtracked and introduced Bill C-38, a truncated version of Bill C-452, which itself has been gathering dust since February 2017. It has yet to be debated.Did the Prime Minister really want to take action against sexual exploitation or was this just another show?

Mr. Speaker, more than five years since the Isle of Man fraud was discovered, the government has still not laid criminal charges against KPMG. Instead, they were awarded contracts totalling 92 million of our dollars. In a similar case, in the United States, KPMG was threatened with being declared a criminal organization, it was fined half a million dollars, its tax department was closed and nine executives were criminally prosecuted, with two of them sent to prison.Will this government stop awarding contracts to KPMG and will it prosecute this company, which shows the rich how to cheat on their taxes?

Make no mistake, Mr. Speaker: nobody wants ancillary fees for health care services.Today we learned that the Minister of Health's plan for abolishing ancillary fees involves taking sick people in Quebec hostage by cutting transfer payments by an additional $160 million.The minister can say she is protecting the health care system all she wants, but she is actually victimizing sick people in Quebec. Enough is enough. Will the minister immediately and unconditionally restore the health transfers that she is planning to cut in the next budget?

Mr. Speaker, not only have the Liberals decided to legalize cannabis, but they have also decided that Quebec, the provinces, the Senate, the opposition, and everyone else should bend to their will. This is one heck of a power trip.The National Assembly is not interested in letting every family, every household, grow four pot plants. Our elected representatives have spoken: we do not want that. Quebec wants to do this its own way in its own good time.What part of that does the Prime Minister not understand?

Mr. Speaker, a Liberal crony is a Liberal crony.A $1,500 cocktail party with the Prime Minister for Chinese bankers, another with the Minister of Finance for Bay Street elite—such is the life of the rich and famous. It is no wonder everyone is so cynical.Everyone knows what the solution is. It is as simple as restoring per-vote public subsidies to political parties and lowering contribution limits.When are the Liberals going to do something about this, or would that not suit them?

Mr. Speaker, “It is such a shame that we have to demonstrate to ask the law and order government to obey the law. It is ridiculous. We are losing the types of jobs that we need in this country.” That is exactly what the current Prime Minister said in 2012, when he was standing side by side with the Aveos workers. I could not have put it better myself. The law is clear and it guarantees jobs at home in Quebec, in Canada. The two rulings against Air Canada are clear, and it is just as clear that Air Canada has complied with neither one.Is the Prime Minister prepared to enforce law and order in Canada?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health would have us believe that she is helping sick people, but she announced plans to take $160 million away from them and put it in her government's coffers. She has declared war on Quebec's health care system.Does the Minister of Health really think that cutting transfers to Quebeckers, demanding that they hand over $160 million, and attacking Quebec's National Assembly is going to help sick people in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, it is always “we will, we will, we will”.The Prime Minister has known for over a year now that SNC-Lavalin risks losing all government contracts if there is no remediation agreement. His inaction has cost SNC-Lavalin $1.6 billion over the past few months. Funds belonging to the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, the nest egg of Quebeckers, are at stake. His inaction could cost Quebec thousands of jobs and a head office. Why has the Prime Minister turned his back on the workers at SNC-Lavalin?

Mr. Speaker, the recent incidents involving runaways from a Laval group home have drawn attention to the plight of vulnerable young girls who are under the control of pimps and have emphasized the urgent need for action. Bill C-452 was unanimously passed by the House, passed by the Senate and given royal assent by the Governor General, but it is still waiting for a government order to come into force. Nevertheless, it is considered an essential tool for protecting our young people from sexual exploitation. What is the government waiting for? When will it sign this order and immediately give effect to this bill to combat child prostitution?

Mr. Speaker, since this government took office in 2015, it has been dragging its feet and refusing to crack down on pimps. Bill C-452, which would require pimps to serve consecutive prison sentences for their crimes, received royal assent three years ago. Prevention and intervention are not enough. Punitive measures and deterrents are needed to protect our young people, but no, it seems this government would rather protect their abusers.After three years of dilly-dallying, will the Prime Minister finally decide to sign the order to bring Bill C-452 into force?

Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?

Mr. Speaker, I think we have the wrong record.Legalizing cannabis is one thing, but making a pot plant as common as a tomato plant is another. The Quebec government has chosen to prohibit growing pot in gardens: it does not believe that this helps prevent young people from accessing marijuana. That is its legitimate choice, and it is consistent with this government’s goal of preventing young people from accessing cannabis.Why, then, is it disrespecting Quebec’s choices within its jurisdiction?

Mr. Speaker, there are so many Liberals involved in the sale of cannabis that even Lucie Charlebois, the Liberal minister responsible for the file in Quebec, has said that the federal Liberals who are investing in pot should take a good hard look at themselves.It is pretty bad when the Quebec Liberal Party is lecturing the Liberal Party of Canada about ethics. When will this government take its responsibilities seriously and work in the interests of Canadians rather than in the interests of its cronies?

Mr. Speaker, everyone wants the white-collar criminals who were running SNC-Lavalin to be held accountable and brought to justice. That is unanimous.However, what we in the Bloc Québécois do not want is to lose another head office and thousands of jobs in Quebec. When I put it like that, it sounds simple enough. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister keeps digging himself in deeper and deeper in this matter, desperately trying to blame someone, anyone, for his fiasco. Can he guarantee that the workers at SNC-Lavalin will not be the ones to suffer because of the many mistakes he has made in this matter?

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 10, my colleague from Joliette asked a question about the Isle of Man tax avoidance scheme involving KPMG clients. In response, the Minister of National Revenue stated, “...there is no amnesty...” I have a simple question. Since there was no amnesty, what penalties is the CRA imposing, and when will criminal charges be laid?

Mr. Speaker, it took closed doors for the Minister of Health to be transparent. It seems that Ottawa is refusing to increase health transfers because the Minister of Finance does not see any political advantage to doing so.When it comes to helping the sick, there are no ribbon-cutting ceremonies or Canadian flag cheques in the mail. It does not please the Minister of Finance. That is pretty weak.Can the Minister of Finance get serious and stop holding the sick hostage because they do not score enough political points for his taste?

Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, “Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally.” He added, “My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent.” The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, the Muskrat Falls hydro project in Labrador has become a total fiasco that has already cost taxpayers $6.5 billion. The work site is literally a disaster. However, the Prime Minister and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador are talking about lifting the cap on federal funding. It could cost as much as $15 billion, and no one can guarantee that it will not go up more than that.Does the Prime Minister plan to throw more of Quebec taxpayers' money down the bottomless pit of Muskrat Falls, a project that will hurt Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, SNC-Lavalin just lost $1.6 billion. In real terms, this amount represents jobs lost in Quebec. What is the opposition talking about? It is talking about the Prime Minister and his bad relationship with the former minister of justice. What is the opposition talking about? It is talking about the Prime Minister and his bad relationships. What is the Prime Minister talking about? He is talking about who he can blame for his fiasco. The real issue is getting lost. Without a remediation agreement, Quebec will lose a head office and thousands of jobs.When will the Minister of Justice sign a remediation agreement with SNC-Lavalin?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has decided go after Quebec's health care system. The threat is clear: either Quebec bans private clinics or Ottawa will cut transfers.Can the minister explain the twisted logic that led her to believe that cutting transfers would be a good way to meet the needs of Quebeckers who need health care right now?

Mr. Speaker, I believe you will find the unanimous consent of the House for me to move the following motion: Given the scale of the #metoo campaign, launched by male and female victims of sexual assault and harassment, that the House call on the Senate to consider the victims and promptly adopt Bill C-337, the judicial accountability through sexual assault law training act.

Mr. Speaker, this morning we learned that KPMG accountants and senior officials from the Canada Revenue Agency have been getting together to toast the health of Canadians.KPMG and the CRA are as thick as thieves. The firm recruited a senior advisor from among experienced public servants, and KPMG and the CRA even came to an agreement that granted amnesty to profiteers who hid $130 million in tax havens. Does the Minister of National Revenue think that this close relationship between her employees and these tax haven dealers is appropriate?

Mr. Speaker, last week, the government shared its plan for combatting ISIS.Although we are pleased with the Prime Minister's intentions on the humanitarian aid front, his plan falls short, and here is why: without a direct military contribution, the humanitarian aid that we are planning to provide may never reach the people hardest hit by the conflict.Is the government prepared to reconsider its plan? Too many lives are at stake to turn this into a partisan issue.

Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, while all of Quebec was mourning the victims of the Quebec City shooting, the Washington Post published an article written by J.J. McCullough that constituted an unprecedented attack on Quebec's international reputation. An excerpt from the article reads: “And now, [Canadians] have good reason to observe that the province [of Quebec] seems to produce an awful lot of lunatics prone to public massacres”.Will the Prime Minister rise now, with all the dignity of his office, and unequivocally condemn this attack on the Quebec nation?

Mr. Speaker, Netflix announced a training program for French Canadian cultural artisans. That is a pittance and does nothing to stop the hemorrhaging that cost TVA 68 jobs just last week. The web giants are not collecting taxes, paying taxes or providing funding for French-language content. We are not asking for anything special. We just want the rules that apply to Quebec companies to also apply to foreign multinationals. As the saying goes, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.When will the government force them to pay their fair share of taxes?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' record for this session shows only one priority: cannabis. When Quebec asks for more time to do things properly, Ottawa does not care. When the Quebec National Assembly states its opposition to the limit of four pot plants per family, the Prime Minister makes fun of Quebec's elected officials. When Quebec wants to go at its own pace, Ottawa tells us to take a hike.Will the Prime Minister finally understand that cannabis is not a priority for anybody but him and his friends, the big Liberal cannabis producers?

Mr. Speaker, the number of mistakes that keep piling up in the management of the SNC-Lavalin crisis is unbelievable. What an utter disaster. Compared to this, Trans Mountain almost seems well managed. While the Prime Minister digs himself into a deeper hole, the jobs of thousands of workers in Quebec are in jeopardy.Will the government take action within the parameters of the law to protect SNC-Lavalin's head office in Montreal and the thousands of jobs connected with it, or will I continue to make the Prime Minister yawn?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a very bad decision to resolve the dispute between Alberta and British Columbia. In so doing, he essentially threw social licence, indigenous rights, and the provinces' power to decide what happens in their territory out the window. From now on, Ottawa makes all the decisions. Enough of this co-operative federalism malarkey, we all know that Ottawa knows best. British Columbia was no more interested in Kinder Morgan than Quebec was in energy east.Is that so hard to understand?

The process is not working that well, Mr. Speaker.The recreational marijuana industry is still embryonic, but already it reeks of cronyism and patronage. When industry players turn up at cocktail fundraisers a year before the bill is introduced and hire former ministers, senators, and party directors, we can be forgiven for thinking they might have certain expectations.Will the government let Quebec and the provinces select their own authorized producers so they can take what is really starting to look, and not for the first time, like a conflict of interest and nip it in the bud?

Mr. Speaker, as far as the Jordan decision is concerned, the Chief Justice of the Quebec Superior Court was clear: it is time for Ottawa to get moving.We know that the Liberals are preoccupied with legalizing marijuana and with ethical matters, but in the meantime, criminals are being released because their trials are taking too long. This is no time to be arguing over the number of judges. Whether we need 14 judges or six, it is time to take action.Does the minister realize that her procrastination is jeopardizing public safety?

Mr. Speaker, it is the same old broken record.Ottawa is not honouring its commitments on health transfers. It is not complicated. Year after year, Ottawa does less and less. Now, the Minister of Health is threatening to further undermine Quebec's health network at the expense of Quebeckers.The Minister of Finance can take immediate action.Will he commit to restoring the 6% health transfer escalator in tomorrow's economic statement?

Mr. Speaker, KPMG allowed Canadian multimillionaires to violate the Income Tax Act with impunity thanks to an agreement with the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA. This is no joke; as far as CRA is concerned, KPMG and its clients are above the law. It is not surprising that the Liberals voted against our motion to combat tax havens.The Prime Minister said last spring that if the agreement was flawed, it would be reassessed.My question is simple and is for the Prime Minister. Does he think that the agreement is flawed or that tax evasion is fine for the Liberals?

Mr. Speaker, in 1988, the federal government appeased the Air Canada workers who were worried about its privatization by including a requirement in the legislation for the company to keep maintenance centres in Montreal, Mississauga and Winnipeg. For years now, Air Canada has been breaking the law with impunity, and the government has let the company get away with it.Now the Minister of Transport is introducing a bill to relieve Air Canada of that obligation. How can the minister break his promise to the Aveos workers and turn his back on Quebec's aerospace industry? Is that the Liberal government's idea of law and order?

Mr. Speaker, in 2014, the Supreme Court confirmed the banks' obligation to comply with Quebec's Consumer Protection Act.What is the Liberal government doing? It is rewriting the law to get around the Supreme Court decision and reduce the banks' obligations to Quebeckers. This attack on Quebec society takes away people's right to challenge the big banks' abusive practices.When are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec going to stand up and stop being accomplices in this money grab?

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec health minister has made a devastating discovery: the federal government imposes more conditions on assisting sick people in Quebec than it does on selling its armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. Yes, this was revealed by a Liberal health minister.This would be yet another good reason why Quebec should become independent if our sick were not paying the price.Will the minister change her approach and restore the amount of the health transfers to 6%, as the Government of Quebec is asking?

That's just it, Mr. Speaker. The government is talking and waiting, but meanwhile things are simply not working. The government is saying that the triage plan is being held up by the election in Ontario. What will the Liberals' excuse be once the election is over? Will asylum seekers stop coming through Quebec because there is an election in Ontario? When the election is over, will the Liberals blame the delay on the Saint-Jean holiday, the construction holiday, the election in Quebec, or the Christmas holidays? What will their excuse be?We need a triage plan now. Is that so hard to understand?

Mr. Speaker, we simply cannot trust the Liberals to do anything but get caught with their hands in the cookie jar.We wondered why they voted against the Bloc Québécois motion to combat tax havens. We now know it was because that is where they hide their money. The Liberal Party is the tax-evasion party, and yet the Liberals still claim to be standing up for the middle class.Will this government finally take action and go after people who use tax havens to evade taxes, even if those people include friends, family members, or colleagues?

Mr. Speaker, on January 28, 2017, the Prime Minister was taking action too. He sent out a tweet that said, “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith.” Since then, Quebec has had its hands full. Could the Prime Minister at least edit his tweet to say “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, be aware that 90% of you will be denied asylum”?

Mr. Speaker, an Angus Reid poll released last week clearly shows that meeting Quebec's demands, such as the single tax return, does not pay off in English Canada. In fact, we have every reason to believe that meeting any of Quebec's demands would cost points in the rest of Canada. This means that the Liberals are going to deny Quebeckers the opportunity of filing a single tax return just to win votes in English Canada.Are we to understand that the Liberals have picked a side and are obviously not siding with Quebeckers?

Mr. Speaker, I have to wonder if the earpieces on the other side of the aisle are working, because the answers have nothing to do with the questions.

Mr. Speaker, Bell Helicopter is losing jobs, CAE is losing jobs, Bombardier is losing jobs, and Aveos has lost jobs.The existing law on Air Canada is the best guarantee of keeping airplane maintenance in Canada now and in the future. However, this law was violated and the government has never intervened.Since when has the minister been able to flout laws or change them to please the offenders?When will the government demand that the Attorney General intervene on behalf of unionized Aveos workers to force Air Canada to comply with the law and its obligations to Canadians—

Mr. Speaker, there has been a deluge of gag orders in the House: Air Canada, medical assistance in dying, and budget implementation. Now the government is pushing ahead with democratic reform, all the while rejecting democracy. The government represents 39% of voters, but is giving itself full powers, while at the same time depriving two parties of the right to vote in committee. Consulting Canadians is also out of the question; six Liberals suffice.I would remind the Prime Minister that we form a legislative assembly here, not a king's court. We are elected to represent our constituents, not to reign over them.When will the Prime Minister finally show some respect for the parliamentary system?

Mr. Speaker, health care costs are rising year after year in Quebec. What does Ottawa do? It threatens to cut transfer payments if Quebec does not give in to Ottawa's demands, as though sick people in Quebec needed that, as though patients in our hospitals wanted to get into a tug-of-war with the Prime Minister. Instead of threatening to undermine our health care system, will the Minister of Finance commit to restoring the 6% health transfer escalator tomorrow?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health would have us believe that she is helping sick people, but she announced plans to take $160 million away from them and put it in her government's coffers. She has declared war on Quebec's health care system.Does the Minister of Health really think that cutting transfers to Quebeckers, demanding that they hand over $160 million, and attacking Quebec's National Assembly is going to help sick people in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, in a letter addressed to Premier Philippe Couillard on August 21, 2015, our Prime Minister wrote, “Unlike Mr. Harper, I do not intend to deal with this issue unilaterally.” He added, “My party is aware of the challenges that increasing health care costs...represent.” The Liberals have managed to do worse than the Harper government. It is Harper with conditions.How can the Prime Minister justify breaking the promise he made to the Premier of Quebec and make unilateral cuts that affect the sick in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, imagine a situation where a taxpayer who was unable to make his mortgage payments went to the bank and was given a payment holiday and a generous increase on his line of credit. That would never happen. However, that is what the government is doing with Newfoundland and Labrador, which has defaulted on its $266-million loan. The Liberals are extending deadlines and adding $2.9 billion to the previous $6.4-billion loan guarantee for Muskrat Falls.Will this government finally stop using Quebeckers' money to fund unfair competition against Hydro-Québec?

Mr. Speaker, on April 26, the Canadian Press reported that Ottawa was late in delivering its promised plan for triaging asylum seekers. On April 18, the minister had promised that the plan would be released within a few days. Then, the government said it would be out in a few weeks. Now it says it will be a few months.Does the minister realize that while he plays around, killing time, asylum seekers continue to pour in every day through Roxham Road?

Mr. Speaker, seasonal workers are on the verge of falling into the infamous black hole, a period of no employment insurance benefits. However, there is nothing for these workers in the budget.We have sick people waiting in hospital hallways and students going into debt to learn, but this budget abandons them as well, since it does not contain any transfer increases. The same goes for leading-edge businesses in Quebec: the budget offers nothing for them. In spite of all these omissions, the government is predicting a $29-billion deficit.Does the government realize that all Canadians, and especially those who need help, are paying for its lax attitude towards tax havens?

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec health minister has made a devastating discovery: the federal government imposes more conditions on assisting sick people in Quebec than it does on selling its armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. Yes, this was revealed by a Liberal health minister.This would be yet another good reason why Quebec should become independent if our sick were not paying the price.Will the minister change her approach and restore the amount of the health transfers to 6%, as the Government of Quebec is asking?

Mr. Speaker, it took closed doors for the Minister of Health to be transparent. It seems that Ottawa is refusing to increase health transfers because the Minister of Finance does not see any political advantage to doing so.When it comes to helping the sick, there are no ribbon-cutting ceremonies or Canadian flag cheques in the mail. It does not please the Minister of Finance. That is pretty weak.Can the Minister of Finance get serious and stop holding the sick hostage because they do not score enough political points for his taste?

Mr. Speaker, SNC-Lavalin just lost $1.6 billion. In real terms, this amount represents jobs lost in Quebec. What is the opposition talking about? It is talking about the Prime Minister and his bad relationship with the former minister of justice. What is the opposition talking about? It is talking about the Prime Minister and his bad relationships. What is the Prime Minister talking about? He is talking about who he can blame for his fiasco. The real issue is getting lost. Without a remediation agreement, Quebec will lose a head office and thousands of jobs.When will the Minister of Justice sign a remediation agreement with SNC-Lavalin?

Mr. Speaker, the Fédération des maisons d'hébergement pour femmes is concerned that the Jordan decision will allow murderers to go free. There is even talk of stays of proceedings in rape cases.Public safety is at risk and, perhaps worse still, the bond of trust between the justice system and Canadians has been broken. This government and its gross and dangerous negligence are to blame. We know that there is a meeting at the end of the month. The Liberals do not need to tell us again.What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to the 14 vacant positions in Quebec? It is urgent.

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 10, my colleague from Joliette asked a question about the Isle of Man tax avoidance scheme involving KPMG clients. In response, the Minister of National Revenue stated, “...there is no amnesty...” I have a simple question. Since there was no amnesty, what penalties is the CRA imposing, and when will criminal charges be laid?

Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: “no comment”.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?

Make no mistake, Mr. Speaker: nobody wants ancillary fees for health care services.Today we learned that the Minister of Health's plan for abolishing ancillary fees involves taking sick people in Quebec hostage by cutting transfer payments by an additional $160 million.The minister can say she is protecting the health care system all she wants, but she is actually victimizing sick people in Quebec. Enough is enough. Will the minister immediately and unconditionally restore the health transfers that she is planning to cut in the next budget?

Mr. Speaker, as we all know, the softwood lumber trade war is about to reignite. Tomorrow morning, the American softwood lumber manufacturers' association will be filing an official complaint against our lumber producers before the United States International Trade Commission. This is the beginning of another crisis.My question is simple. Will Ottawa once again fail Quebec's forestry sector and the families that depend on it, or will the government offer the industry the loan guarantees it needs to respond to the crisis, as members of the National Assembly and Quebec's forestry producers are asking?

Mr. Speaker, it is always “we will, we will, we will”.The Prime Minister has known for over a year now that SNC-Lavalin risks losing all government contracts if there is no remediation agreement. His inaction has cost SNC-Lavalin $1.6 billion over the past few months. Funds belonging to the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, the nest egg of Quebeckers, are at stake. His inaction could cost Quebec thousands of jobs and a head office. Why has the Prime Minister turned his back on the workers at SNC-Lavalin?

Mr. Speaker, provinces representing 90% of the population are standing united, but the government is forging ahead with the Conservative cuts to health transfers and the NDP strings.The Government of Quebec, the Council of the Federation, the Conference Board of Canada, and the parliamentary budget officer all said it, and now the University of Ottawa has found that Ottawa's contribution must at least keep pace with rising costs to ensure the future of our health system. Will the Minister of Finance bring the health system to its knees, or will he listen to the people, reconsider, and restore the 6% increase?

Mr. Speaker, for the past two weeks, the government has been getting bogged down in its versions, secrets, resignations and half-truths.Why did the Minister of Veterans Affairs resign? We do not know.Why did the Prime Minister's advisor resign? We do not know.If the Attorney General can reach an agreement with SNC-Lavalin, why is he choosing not to do so? We do not know that either.Once again, thousands of jobs are on the line in Quebec. Why is there no remediation agreement?

Mr. Speaker, I have to wonder if the earpieces on the other side of the aisle are working, because the answers have nothing to do with the questions.

Mr. Speaker, after sending his Minister of Health to intimidate the Government of Quebec by threatening to impose fines, the Prime Minister is now trying to give the Quebec government a lesson in morality. Canadians are tired of governments that point the finger and accuse each another. That takes some nerve. Rather than acting like a pyromaniac firefighter, could the Prime Minister stop taking sick people in Quebec hostage, restore the health transfers with no strings attached, and forget this bright idea to impose a fine on sick people in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?

Madam Speaker, the government has cut health transfers. Naturally, this has a direct effect on the sick. The government has abandoned our cheese producers and it refuses to provide loan guarantees for the forestry industry, which is facing a new softwood lumber crisis. It is not going to increase regular EI benefits.Does this government and the Liberal Minister of National Revenue realize that the refusal to take action, this lax attitude, and complacency towards KPMG and tax havens have a direct effect on our sick, our workers, and our unemployed?

Mr. Speaker, at yesterday's meeting of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, the minister sought to defend Netflix by trotting out the same old empty phrases, bogus arguments, and tired lines.Instead of standing up for Quebec creators, the minister chose to go after any parliamentarian who had the gall to disagree with her. I have some news for the Minister of Canadian Heritage: contrary to what she seems to think, singling out Netflix for a tax break its rivals do not get is a tax policy.Why the preferential treatment?

Mr. Speaker, even though the WTO and NAFTA tribunals have always rejected accusations of dumping and illegal subsidies against our forestry industry, Quebec changed its forestry system in order to be above reproach. Since 2013, we have sold our wood at public auction, just like in the United States. However, the federal government has done nothing to have this fact recognized by the Americans.Will the government take advantage of the Prime Minister's visit to Washington and the current truce to make the Americans understand that Quebec's forestry is above reproach?

That's just it, Mr. Speaker. The government is talking and waiting, but meanwhile things are simply not working. The government is saying that the triage plan is being held up by the election in Ontario. What will the Liberals' excuse be once the election is over? Will asylum seekers stop coming through Quebec because there is an election in Ontario? When the election is over, will the Liberals blame the delay on the Saint-Jean holiday, the construction holiday, the election in Quebec, or the Christmas holidays? What will their excuse be?We need a triage plan now. Is that so hard to understand?

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, I asked the Prime Minister whether he intended to sink more of Quebeckers' money into Muskrat Falls. His minister replied that if the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador wants to have that loan guarantee extended, the Government of Canada will look at it very seriously. The truth is that Ottawa and Newfoundland and Labrador have been negotiating since May 10. Why did the minister lead the House to believe that there had been no talks? Was it because the decision has been made and he is afraid of how the Government of Quebec will react?

Mr. Speaker, I think you will find the unanimous consent of my colleagues in the House for the following motion: that, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-38, an act to amend an act to amend the Criminal Code regarding exploitation and trafficking in persons, be deemed debated at second reading, deemed read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, deemed considered by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in at the report stage and deemed read a third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, more than five years since the Isle of Man fraud was discovered, the government has still not laid criminal charges against KPMG. Instead, they were awarded contracts totalling 92 million of our dollars. In a similar case, in the United States, KPMG was threatened with being declared a criminal organization, it was fined half a million dollars, its tax department was closed and nine executives were criminally prosecuted, with two of them sent to prison.Will this government stop awarding contracts to KPMG and will it prosecute this company, which shows the rich how to cheat on their taxes?

Mr. Speaker, in recent years, every time Ottawa has negotiated an agreement, it has used supply management as a bargaining chip. When it wanted to open the European market to western beef producers, Quebec paid the price. When it wanted to open the trans-Pacific market to grain producers, our Quebec producers paid the price. The worst part is that Ottawa cannot even be bothered to give them appropriate compensation.With the Minister of Finance on his way to Washington, can the government guarantee that, for once, supply management will not be used as a bargaining chip?

Mr. Speaker, KPMG allowed Canadian multimillionaires to violate the Income Tax Act with impunity thanks to an agreement with the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA. This is no joke; as far as CRA is concerned, KPMG and its clients are above the law. It is not surprising that the Liberals voted against our motion to combat tax havens.The Prime Minister said last spring that if the agreement was flawed, it would be reassessed.My question is simple and is for the Prime Minister. Does he think that the agreement is flawed or that tax evasion is fine for the Liberals?

Mr. Speaker, I think we have the wrong record.Legalizing cannabis is one thing, but making a pot plant as common as a tomato plant is another. The Quebec government has chosen to prohibit growing pot in gardens: it does not believe that this helps prevent young people from accessing marijuana. That is its legitimate choice, and it is consistent with this government’s goal of preventing young people from accessing cannabis.Why, then, is it disrespecting Quebec’s choices within its jurisdiction?

Mr. Speaker, with respect to allowing home cultivation of cannabis, yesterday, the Prime Minister tried to justify his power trip by claiming that the move was meant to fight organized crime. He is ignoring what the provinces, the Senate, the opposition, cities and police forces are telling him.Is that his plan to fight organized crime? To allow people to grow three or four pot plants at home?Could this government be serious for once and let those who tackle the real problems, on the ground, make the decisions that are theirs to make?

Mr. Speaker, I believe you will find unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion: That, in the opinion of the House, the government must do everything in its power and within the bounds of the law, as set out in subsection 715.31 of the Criminal Code, to reduce the negative consequences of the reprehensible acts of certain SNC-Lavalin executives on individuals, be they employees, clients, retired employees or others, who did not engage in the reprehensible acts, while holding responsible those who did engage in said reprehensible acts, in order to preserve thousands of jobs in Quebec and Canada and to ensure that the company's head office remains in Montreal.

Mr. Speaker, the number of mistakes that keep piling up in the management of the SNC-Lavalin crisis is unbelievable. What an utter disaster. Compared to this, Trans Mountain almost seems well managed. While the Prime Minister digs himself into a deeper hole, the jobs of thousands of workers in Quebec are in jeopardy.Will the government take action within the parameters of the law to protect SNC-Lavalin's head office in Montreal and the thousands of jobs connected with it, or will I continue to make the Prime Minister yawn?

Mr. Speaker, before appointing judges, the government is checking to see whether they have ever made any donations to the Liberal Party. Giving party friends preferential treatment is the same old Liberal way.I said it last week and I will say it again. That approach is working. They raised over $300,000 just by appointing judges.For the Bloc Québécois, what counts is merit, not political affiliation.How can the minister seriously justify the use of the Liberalist database in selecting judges?

Mr. Speaker, we will soon ratify the Paris agreement and this government still has no direction.Imposing a tax is not a plan. This government has no plan, and adopting Stephen Harper's targets is certainly no way to show leadership in the fight against climate change. This government has no leadership.Can this government present and will it present a plan like the one in place in Quebec that will make polluters pay and reward provinces, like Quebec, that meet their targets?

Mr. Speaker, it is the same old broken record.Ottawa is not honouring its commitments on health transfers. It is not complicated. Year after year, Ottawa does less and less. Now, the Minister of Health is threatening to further undermine Quebec's health network at the expense of Quebeckers.The Minister of Finance can take immediate action.Will he commit to restoring the 6% health transfer escalator in tomorrow's economic statement?

Mr. Speaker, the act empowers the attorney general to sign remediation agreements. A remediation agreement with SNC-Lavalin would allow taxpayers to recover hundreds of millions of dollars, which we really need, and it could help save thousands of jobs in Quebec and Canada. We know that the minister wants to sign one. We just want to know why he did not simply do so instead of making such a mess of things over the past few weeks. Why jeopardize thousands of jobs in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, how many times do we have to say it? Health care is not a federal responsibility. That should not be hard to understand.It took the Liberals less than a year to start squabbling with Quebec over jurisdiction again. This time, it is at the expense of Quebec patients. That is appalling. Will the Liberal government stop its arrogant power-tripping immediately and let Quebec run the health system for which it alone is responsible?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a very bad decision to resolve the dispute between Alberta and British Columbia. In so doing, he essentially threw social licence, indigenous rights, and the provinces' power to decide what happens in their territory out the window. From now on, Ottawa makes all the decisions. Enough of this co-operative federalism malarkey, we all know that Ottawa knows best. British Columbia was no more interested in Kinder Morgan than Quebec was in energy east.Is that so hard to understand?

Mr. Speaker, respect, respect.If Quebec passes legislation on environmental protection or land development, Ottawa can then ignore those laws passed by our elected officials, all in the name of national interest. No, thank you. In Quebec, imposing a pipeline in the name of national interest is out of the question. That is why we support British Columbia.Since when does acting in the national interest mean going against the interests of First Nations, the interests of Quebec, and the interests of the provinces?Respect, respect.

Mr. Speaker, since this government took office in 2015, it has been dragging its feet and refusing to crack down on pimps. Bill C-452, which would require pimps to serve consecutive prison sentences for their crimes, received royal assent three years ago. Prevention and intervention are not enough. Punitive measures and deterrents are needed to protect our young people, but no, it seems this government would rather protect their abusers.After three years of dilly-dallying, will the Prime Minister finally decide to sign the order to bring Bill C-452 into force?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health's statements are preposterous. She has announced that a 3% increase in transfers is quite enough, as though there were no such thing as population aging. To hell with the federal-provincial negotiations. They are obviously bogus.What is worse is that she wants to split the block transfer into 13 individual agreements in order to tell Quebec what to do in the area of health, even though Ottawa knows absolutely nothing about it. We have stopped counting the fires that the minister has set with a single statement.Can the Minister of Finance, who oversees the health transfer, rein in his pyromaniac colleague?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has decided go after Quebec's health care system. The threat is clear: either Quebec bans private clinics or Ottawa will cut transfers.Can the minister explain the twisted logic that led her to believe that cutting transfers would be a good way to meet the needs of Quebeckers who need health care right now?

Mr. Speaker, speaking of trains, VIA Rail, a Crown corporation, would rather give a contract to Berlin for work that can be done in La Pocatière. They are taking Quebeckers' money and giving it to businesses that are competing with Quebec companies. That is some nerve. We are proud of our workers, and we stand by them.Will the Minister of Transport stand by Quebec companies and workers and ask VIA Rail to reconsider that decision and award the rail car contract to our own companies?

Mr. Speaker, the good news for the Minister of Health is that once she is through with politics, she has a wonderful career waiting for her in the thriving cannabis industry, just like four of her former Liberal colleagues and health ministers. Today we learned that former minister Pettigrew found himself a job as a board director of a customer loyalty company. They offer something like pot Air Miles, except that with these “Pettigrew Miles”, you do not collect points to fly; you collect points to get high.When will the Liberals decide to work in the best interests of Quebeckers and Canadians, and not the best interests of the Liberals?

Mr. Speaker, we have a National Assembly in Quebec City whose members pass laws on issues under Quebec jurisdiction, and the people pay them for their service. Meanwhile, some here in Ottawa want to challenge those laws, even though they, too, get their paychecks from Quebec taxpayers. This is yet another example showing that federalism does not work. Will the Prime Minister promise not to use Quebec money to challenge the Quebec government's own Bill 62?

Mr. Speaker, I have known the member for Outremont for many years. It has been quite a while since we were putting docks in the water, my goodness, but I have always appreciated this passionate and brilliant man. I am also grateful to him. Along with Gilles Duceppe, he was undoubtedly the politician who was the most help securing my victory in 2015, though perhaps somewhat unwittingly. I do not think that this was part of his plan.Now that the Prime Minister has decided to buy a pipeline, the member for Outremont could surely tell him that a pipeline is expensive. It cost him the prime ministership.The member for Outremont is politics' most faithful embodiment of the people of Quebec. Sometimes Liberal, sometimes Conservative, sometimes NDP, he is a Quebecker. I honestly believe that, with his departure today, Quebeckers are losing one of their greatest and most effective defenders in the House. Obviously, I mean from a federalist party.Elected as an NDP member in 2007, he preceded the orange wave that swept through Quebec in 2011, a great win by his friend Jack Layton. He set himself apart as soon as he was elected. He appeared in every forum speaking intelligently on all kinds of topics, cracking jokes at the right times, expressing outrage for the right reasons, making insightful comments, and coming up with the killer line that would take out his opponent. He was the goon, the NDP’s own Claude Lemieux. None of the other teams can stand him, but everyone wants to have him on theirs.I honestly and sincerely believe that the NDP is losing its best and most formidable debater today. He would have made his illustrious and legendary forefather Honoré Mercier proud. Formidable, incisive and hard-hitting, frankly, the man we salute today has been a stand-up Quebecker throughout his career, and we thank him for his contribution.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for his excellent response.KPMG has received more than $92 million in federal government contracts since 2006. That is what we call a good client, a very good client, a partner. This partner, KPMG, encouraged its private clients to evade taxes and avoid paying taxes like everyone else.Until we get to the bottom of these schemes, will this government commit to cancelling its contracts with KPMG or are we to understand that there is nothing wrong with a company encouraging tax evasion?

Mr. Speaker, Bell Helicopter is losing jobs, CAE is losing jobs, Bombardier is losing jobs, and Aveos has lost jobs.The existing law on Air Canada is the best guarantee of keeping airplane maintenance in Canada now and in the future. However, this law was violated and the government has never intervened.Since when has the minister been able to flout laws or change them to please the offenders?When will the government demand that the Attorney General intervene on behalf of unionized Aveos workers to force Air Canada to comply with the law and its obligations to Canadians—

Mr. Speaker, last week, I asked the Minister of Justice why he checks to see if candidates for the judiciary are in his Liberal database. He replied, “We implemented a transparent, merit-based process for appointing judges.”Sure, it is transparent because the media reported on it, but the only merit involved is the merit of being Liberal.Seriously though, can the Minister of Justice explain how being a good Liberal is a sign of having good judgment?

Mr. Speaker, last year, the Prime Minister went to Washington to meet with President Obama. They took nice pictures, but pictures do not put food on the tables of our agricultural and forestry producers in Quebec. The Prime Minister buckled to the Americans by allowing them to breach NAFTA as they see fit. Today, a meeting is imminent: the Prime Minister will be meeting with Donald Trump in the United States.Will the Prime Minister stand up this time and defend Quebec producers and their businesses?

Mr. Speaker, not only have the Liberals decided to legalize cannabis, but they have also decided that Quebec, the provinces, the Senate, the opposition, and everyone else should bend to their will. This is one heck of a power trip.The National Assembly is not interested in letting every family, every household, grow four pot plants. Our elected representatives have spoken: we do not want that. Quebec wants to do this its own way in its own good time.What part of that does the Prime Minister not understand?

Mr. Speaker, we in Quebec are proud of those who make our specialty cheeses, which add to the unique nature of our regions. However, Canada just negotiated the opening of our markets to nearly 18,000 tonnes of imported cheese, almost all of which will be specialty cheeses. A tidal wave of cheese is about to crash, and this government is offering our producers peanuts and hoping they will find something else to sell. Will this government finally acknowledge the importance of Quebec specialty cheeses and fully compensate our producers, as promised?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government wants to introduce a bill laying out the rules for its $1,500 fundraising cocktails featuring privileged access to the Prime Minister, but that will not solve the problem. The government has no plans to end the undue influence of bagmen or privileged access for rich lobby groups that can afford to invest $1,500 in a Liberal cocktail.The Liberal position is that advertising these fundraisers will suffice.When will the Liberals realize that advertising $1,500 privileged access to the Prime Minister does not make it more ethical?

Mr. Speaker, Netflix announced a training program for French Canadian cultural artisans. That is a pittance and does nothing to stop the hemorrhaging that cost TVA 68 jobs just last week. The web giants are not collecting taxes, paying taxes or providing funding for French-language content. We are not asking for anything special. We just want the rules that apply to Quebec companies to also apply to foreign multinationals. As the saying goes, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.When will the government force them to pay their fair share of taxes?

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-452 was passed unanimously and received royal assent in June 2015. This bill included consecutive sentences and reversed the burden of proof. It was a strong and tangible gesture to take action against pimps. However, the Liberals backtracked and introduced Bill C-38, a truncated version of Bill C-452, which itself has been gathering dust since February 2017. It has yet to be debated.Did the Prime Minister really want to take action against sexual exploitation or was this just another show?

Mr. Speaker, in Paris, the Prime Minister promised to help fight climate change. Yesterday, the government said that it wanted to consider the increase in greenhouse gas emissions related to the TransCanada pipeline project. In addition to putting more than 800 Quebec waterways at risk, this project would increase the production of oil from the oil sands and the associated greenhouse gas emissions by 40%. When will the Prime Minister realize that the construction of the energy east pipeline goes against the objectives that he set for himself in Paris?

Mr. Speaker, the government is creating a committee to examine one of the most emotional issues in Quebec in recent years, and that is dying with dignity. The Quebec National Assembly unanimously passed a resolution on this issue. In the mandate letter to his Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, the Prime Minister asked him to ensure that parliamentarians are able to properly represent their constituents. If the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons feels that it is important to add a member of the third party, but without the right to vote, and five unelected senators to this committee, what reason does he have for excluding an elected member of the Bloc Québécois, a party that has 10 elected members and represents more than one million Quebeckers?

Mr. Speaker, on January 28, 2017, the Prime Minister was taking action too. He sent out a tweet that said, “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith.” Since then, Quebec has had its hands full. Could the Prime Minister at least edit his tweet to say “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, be aware that 90% of you will be denied asylum”?

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.In the Speech from the Throne last week we heard that the Liberal government intends to start working with the provinces and territories on developing a new health accord. During the election, the Prime Minister sent a letter to his counterpart in Quebec that referred to the 2004 10-year plan to strengthen health care, where Quebec had the right to opt out with full compensation. Will the Prime Minister do what Quebec is asking for and set the health transfer increase at 6%, while respecting Quebec's right to opt out with full compensation?

Mr. Speaker, in 2014, the Supreme Court confirmed the banks' obligation to comply with Quebec's Consumer Protection Act.What is the Liberal government doing? It is rewriting the law to get around the Supreme Court decision and reduce the banks' obligations to Quebeckers. This attack on Quebec society takes away people's right to challenge the big banks' abusive practices.When are the 40 Liberal members from Quebec going to stand up and stop being accomplices in this money grab?

The process is not working that well, Mr. Speaker.The recreational marijuana industry is still embryonic, but already it reeks of cronyism and patronage. When industry players turn up at cocktail fundraisers a year before the bill is introduced and hire former ministers, senators, and party directors, we can be forgiven for thinking they might have certain expectations.Will the government let Quebec and the provinces select their own authorized producers so they can take what is really starting to look, and not for the first time, like a conflict of interest and nip it in the bud?

Mr. Speaker, the Muskrat Falls hydro project in Labrador has become a total fiasco that has already cost taxpayers $6.5 billion. The work site is literally a disaster. However, the Prime Minister and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador are talking about lifting the cap on federal funding. It could cost as much as $15 billion, and no one can guarantee that it will not go up more than that.Does the Prime Minister plan to throw more of Quebec taxpayers' money down the bottomless pit of Muskrat Falls, a project that will hurt Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, the government's proposal to add four regions to the 12 that are eligible for extraordinary employment insurance benefit extensions is a band-aid solution. What we need is true employment insurance reform that makes benefits available to everyone and is aligned with workers' actual needs. We need to get rid of the notorious black hole. What we need is an independent fund that is safe from the Minister of Finance's nimble fingers.Since the government's 40 Quebec members are keeping mum, I will take it upon myself to ask the minister to commit to reforming employment insurance so that it meets the urgent needs of Quebec workers and Quebec regions.

Mr. Speaker, I believe you will find the unanimous consent of the House for me to move the following motion: Given the scale of the #metoo campaign, launched by male and female victims of sexual assault and harassment, that the House call on the Senate to consider the victims and promptly adopt Bill C-337, the judicial accountability through sexual assault law training act.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' record for this session shows only one priority: cannabis. When Quebec asks for more time to do things properly, Ottawa does not care. When the Quebec National Assembly states its opposition to the limit of four pot plants per family, the Prime Minister makes fun of Quebec's elected officials. When Quebec wants to go at its own pace, Ottawa tells us to take a hike.Will the Prime Minister finally understand that cannabis is not a priority for anybody but him and his friends, the big Liberal cannabis producers?

Mr. Speaker, energy east is an economic and environmental disaster.Last week, the former chief economist at CIBC said that the project was not economically viable. There is no justification for the expansion of one of the most polluting industries in the world. Quebec has resolutely turned toward green energy and has an ambitious plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, Parliament still seems to think that the oil sands are an attractive prospect.When will the 40 Liberal members from Quebec rise and support their constituents by speaking out against this project, which goes against our values and interests?

Mr. Speaker, since early 2018, more than 7,000 irregular asylum seekers entered Quebec. We thought the problem was the safe third country agreement, but now we know that the real problem is the minister. He does not have a triage plan or a plan to amend the agreement. The processing delays are never-ending, and the boss is asleep at the wheel.Will the Prime Minister help resolve the migrant crisis by finally appointing a minister who will do the job properly?

Mr. Speaker, as opposition to TransCanada's energy east pipeline project grows, mayors in and premiers of western provinces are attacking Quebec, calling this pipeline Quebec's contribution to the Canadian economy and threatening that they will demand that Quebec pay back equalization payments. They are acting as though they own Quebec, in the name of Canadian unity. Quebec has different values and has made different environmental choices. It is up to us Quebeckers to decide what happens in our own backyard.Will the Prime Minister respect Quebeckers' right to say no to having a pipeline go through their national territory?

Mr. Speaker, the price of gas in Quebec is approaching $1.50 a litre. When consumers fill up at the pumps, they are the ones getting hosed. On May 29, Pierre Moreau, Quebec's minister of energy and natural resources, wrote the Minister of Economic Development to ask if he was planning to take further action to ensure that the gas market is fair, efficient, and competitive.Could we hear the answer?

Mr. Speaker, before appointing a judge, this government checks its database to see if the candidate is a good Liberal. Well, it is working. We have learned that 91% of political donations from judges went to the Liberal Party. It has raised over $300,000 that way.Their Liberalist database should be called “Sponsorship 2.0”. A friend is a friend. That was and still is true.Could this be the real reason why the government is refusing to restore public funding for political parties?

Mr. Speaker, France's prime minister, Manuel Valls, was telling it like it is when he said, “The full veil is essentially a means to undermine women, [and that] goes against...democratic values.” It is about time that our so-called feminist and democratic Prime Minister understand this. If he truly supports gender parity, what is the prime minister waiting for to require women to take the citizenship oath with their faces uncovered?

Mr. Speaker, as far as the Jordan decision is concerned, the Chief Justice of the Quebec Superior Court was clear: it is time for Ottawa to get moving.We know that the Liberals are preoccupied with legalizing marijuana and with ethical matters, but in the meantime, criminals are being released because their trials are taking too long. This is no time to be arguing over the number of judges. Whether we need 14 judges or six, it is time to take action.Does the minister realize that her procrastination is jeopardizing public safety?

Mr. Speaker, environmental groups, citizens' committees, student groups, unions, universities, indigenous movements, political parties, and all sorts of activists have spoken out against the energy east pipeline, and now the Union des producteurs agricoles is doing the same.At this point we have moved from opposition to energy east to a true consensus.Will the government respect the consensus in Quebec and unequivocally put an immediate end to energy east?

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's largest institutions are united on the two critical issues of diafiltered milk and energy east, but this government is tuning them out. Canada's Parliament is completely indifferent to the consensus in Quebec. The 40 MPs from Quebec in government are the government's ambassadors to Quebec, but they are just as indifferent.Are we to understand that by refusing to respect the consensus in Quebec, the government is saying that the only way for Quebec to have a say in what happens on its own land is to gain independence?

Mr. Speaker, if the government wants to fiddle with democratic processes, then tradition, decency, and common sense dictate that it should attempt to build the broadest consensus possible.The government got 39% of the votes in the election, but it hogged 60% of the voting rights in the committee that is supposed to improve representation. If it wants to improve democracy, it should start by looking at its own ways of doing things. Does the Prime Minister want to reform democracy, or does he want to take control of it?

Mr. Speaker, the TSB's investigation is ongoing, but we already know that the Apollo had all kinds of problems: deck and hull watertightness, fire protection, life-saving equipment, main and auxiliary propulsion, electrical distribution, instrument controls and more. We know the problems are not new even though Transport Canada said everything was fine. Is the Minister of Transport aware that Transport Canada's extreme negligence is costing Quebeckers a fortune and could pose a major threat to users' safety?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, we attempted to better protect young girls in Canada by fast-tracking the passage of Bill C-38, a government bill to combat pimping. We would have preferred Bill C-452, but the Prime Minister went back on his vote. In collusion with the Conservatives, the Liberals said no to our motion. They said no to making life hard for pimps. The Liberals and the Conservatives would rather preserve the status quo than protect our young girls. How can the government justify refusing to pass its own bill?

Mr. Speaker, the government is hiding the truth, two opposition parties could not care less about workers, and thousands of jobs are in jeopardy, but no one is doing a thing. Ottawa sure has its priorities straight.When will someone from this government realize that their inaction on the SNC-Lavalin matter could cost Quebec thousands of jobs?

Mr. Speaker, last week, the government shared its plan for combatting ISIS.Although we are pleased with the Prime Minister's intentions on the humanitarian aid front, his plan falls short, and here is why: without a direct military contribution, the humanitarian aid that we are planning to provide may never reach the people hardest hit by the conflict.Is the government prepared to reconsider its plan? Too many lives are at stake to turn this into a partisan issue.

Mr. Speaker, since the price of lumber from Quebec's public forests is set at an auction, it is higher, and our companies are only competitive when a free trade agreement exists. Under the softwood lumber agreement, Quebec has lost some major sales to British Columbia. Quebec can push for free trade all it wants, but it does not yet have status as a country. The federal government is negotiating on our behalf, but the government has been refusing to answer our questions for six months.If Ottawa accepts a protectionist agreement, will it exempt Quebec so that NAFTA applies to us?

Mr. Speaker, the free trade agreement with Europe is important to Quebec. Our role is to be the bridge between North America and Europe. However, the government's intransigence is standing in the way. Now the Walloons are worried about ceratin provisions of the agreement that could allow multinationals to impede the sovereignty of states. Those fears warrant further attention.Instead of slamming the door, could the Minister of International Trade not remain open and continue the negotiations until a deal can be reached?

Mr. Speaker, this morning we learned that KPMG accountants and senior officials from the Canada Revenue Agency have been getting together to toast the health of Canadians.KPMG and the CRA are as thick as thieves. The firm recruited a senior advisor from among experienced public servants, and KPMG and the CRA even came to an agreement that granted amnesty to profiteers who hid $130 million in tax havens. Does the Minister of National Revenue think that this close relationship between her employees and these tax haven dealers is appropriate?

Mr. Speaker, the member is still missing the point, but this is nothing new. When we talk about ethics and integrity, the Prime Minister tells us that his ministers are following the rules. The $200 fine paid by his Minister of Finance proves otherwise. The Prime Minister's trip to the Aga Khan also proves otherwise. One of the problems is the legal framework around the rules. This limits the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner's scope of action. Instead of finding ways to get around the rules, why does the Prime Minister not agree to strengthen the legislation?

Mr. Speaker, last week, the Minister of Public Safety said that “proper and appropriate treatment for all people from Canada seeking to enter the United States...is a priority for this government.”Some priority. Five days later, a Quebec athlete from Sherbrooke, a regular at international competitions, is denied entry at the border.How many Quebeckers need to be turned away at the border because of the colour of their skin, the sound of their name, or the god they pray to before this government starts to take action?

Mr. Speaker, a Liberal crony is a Liberal crony.A $1,500 cocktail party with the Prime Minister for Chinese bankers, another with the Minister of Finance for Bay Street elite—such is the life of the rich and famous. It is no wonder everyone is so cynical.Everyone knows what the solution is. It is as simple as restoring per-vote public subsidies to political parties and lowering contribution limits.When are the Liberals going to do something about this, or would that not suit them?

Mr. Speaker, we can always count on the federal government to stick its nose where it does not belong. This time, it is interfering in the work of members of the National Assembly by funding a challenge to their right to work in French. I am not making this up. The Department of Canadian Heritage is paying the Montreal Bar Association $125,000 to challenge all of Quebec's laws because they were debated in French. That is right, $125,000. Does the Minister of Heritage really support the challenge she is backing financially?

Mr. Speaker, there has been a deluge of gag orders in the House: Air Canada, medical assistance in dying, and budget implementation. Now the government is pushing ahead with democratic reform, all the while rejecting democracy. The government represents 39% of voters, but is giving itself full powers, while at the same time depriving two parties of the right to vote in committee. Consulting Canadians is also out of the question; six Liberals suffice.I would remind the Prime Minister that we form a legislative assembly here, not a king's court. We are elected to represent our constituents, not to reign over them.When will the Prime Minister finally show some respect for the parliamentary system?

Mr. Speaker, what a pretty picture it was yesterday in Brussels, as the trade agreement with the European Union was signed with handshakes and a—

Mr. Speaker, putting a $500 limit on political donations and restoring public funding for political parties based on votes received would reduce lobbyists' influence over the government. The Liberals obviously do not want that.It would prevent the use of front men, which is something we have become accustomed to under the Liberals and the Conservatives. It would also prevent a judge from being appointed for giving the Liberals over $300,000.We are fed up with patronage. Voters have the right to demand a fair democratic system and public funding for political parties.When will this government do something? Are the Liberals waiting for members of the Bloc Québécois to give them money for their Liberalist database?

Mr. Speaker, it seems that the members opposite do not understand. Rich, anonymous investors from tax havens have invested no less than $165 million in pot production in Canada. Anonymous investors, or maybe even members of organized crime, have bankrolled the legalization of Liberal cannabis.Will the government ensure that the list of investors is made public? Canadians are entitled to that information and we are demanding it.

Mr. Speaker, if cannabis was the main priority for the Prime Minister, here is a list of things that were definitely not priorities for the Liberals: cracking down against tax havens, managing the migrant crisis, tackling climate change, setting appropriate health transfers, securing contracts for the Davie shipyard, and allowing a single tax return.When will the Prime Minister start paying attention to Quebeckers' real priorities?

Mr. Speaker, according Quebec's very federalist, very Liberal premier, funding from the so-called plan to help cheese producers will be distributed equally to all 10 provinces. Not only is $100 million over four years not nearly enough, but Quebec would receive less than a quarter of that money even though 60% of all fine cheeses are made in Quebec.Will the minister enhance his plan so that it really meet the needs of cheese producers, and will he solemnly commit to an equitable approach so that Quebec producers—