Gabriel Ste-Marie

Madam Speaker, they will not be announcing anything on the weekend.The government is going to review the export permits for arms sold to Saudi Arabia to get answers to what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. Do we really need to spell it out for them? The regime had no qualms about murdering this journalist in cold blood, sentencing Raif Badawi to lashings and incarcerating his sister, callously starving the children of Yemen, and repressing its own people with the armoured vehicles purchased from Canada. The government has all the answers it needs.Will the government stop selling tanks to assassins?

Mr. Speaker, there is a desperate need for health care services and Ottawa is not doing its part.Its transfers are woefully inadequate and well below what it could be providing. Its lack of commitment is threatening the viability of the public system and putting unbearable pressure on the finances of Quebec and the provinces.There was nothing in the last budget to correct the situation. The government said that it would talk to Quebec and the provinces about this. However, the finance ministers are getting together next Monday and Ottawa does not even plan on addressing the issue.Can the Minister of Finance confirm that the pseudo-discussions he talked about when he tabled the budget are essentially a load of rubbish?

Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are not happy that an agreement that was working very well is being scrapped.The Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed a motion expressing its great disappointment with budget 2017. There is nothing for forestry, for transportation, or for cheese producers, and nothing is done about tax havens. When Ottawa calls the shots, Quebec will always be left wanting.Instead of swallowing this nonsense and acting like doormats, for goodness sake, would the 40 Liberal members from Quebec stop undermining the interests of Quebeckers?

Let me talk.Does the minister of high finance realize that dirty oil caused his deficit?

Mr. Speaker, that is still just 2% of the naval strategy, or peanuts.We know that the Conservatives and the Liberals are one and the same. They are Irving's minions and lackeys. Only Irving is paid to protect its forests against the spruce budworm. Irving is pushing to revive energy east, to profit while polluting. Irving has been awarded so many federal contracts that it is falling behind.When will the government stop feeding these corporate leeches and finally give Davie some real contracts?

Mr. Speaker, the federal government paid $4.5 billion to purchase an old pipeline, with no negotiation whatsoever. How much do you want for the Trans Mountain pipeline? $4.5 billion? No problem; here is a cheque, and let us add another $9.3 billion to expand the pipeline.To eliminate the deficit and fight climate change, perhaps the Minister of Finance could stop putting all our money in dirty oil?

Mr. Speaker, can the minister assure me that there will be an investigation into the dirty money flowing from the Cayman Islands and that the government will make sure organized crime is not behind it? Based on his answer just now, that is my understanding. I just want to be sure I have understood correctly.

Mr. Speaker, the government has once again dismissed the unanimous will of Quebec. I will give it a second chanceThis morning, the Quebec National Assembly unanimously adopted another motion. It calls on the federal government to work with Quebec to implement the motion I will be moving this evening, which will put an end to the shameful use of tax havens in Barbados. Quebeckers are sick and tired of seeing Canadian law encourage profiteers.Will the Prime Minister make a formal commitment to honour Quebec's unanimous request by supporting the Bloc Québécois's Motion No. 42, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, am I dreaming, or did the government just shove a pipeline down our throats? That is a most bitter Kinder Surprise, indeed.Who did the Minister of Finance consult before deciding to use $4.5 billion of our money to buy himself a pipeline? That is utterly ridiculous.Where in its platform did the Liberal government say it would nationalize a dirty oil pipeline? What is next? Nationalize Enbridge? Nationalize energy east?The government needs to do the right thing and backtrack on this.

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's forests are infested with the spruce budworm and it seems like the federal government is doing everything it can to make matters worse. In 2014, the government gave twice as much money to New Brunswick as it did to Quebec to stop the infestation. The problem is that the spruce budworm does not recognize borders. The infested area in Quebec is larger than the entire province of New Brunswick. Our producers fare just as badly in the new budget: the government is giving $75 million to the Maritimes and not one cent to Quebec, not one cent.What exactly is it going to take for Quebec to get its share?

Mr. Speaker, I did not hear an answer to the question about the budworm. Why is the government giving money to the Maritimes but not to Quebec? That is unacceptable.Quebeckers, especially Davie workers, are extremely disappointed in the 2018 federal budget tabled this week.If I were a Quebec MP on the other side of the House, I would be embarrassed. This is yet another budget with nothing at all for Davie, but surprise, surprise, millions more for Irving.The federal government is clearly not treating everyone equally, and nobody seems willing to speak up on Quebec's behalf, nobody.When will the government give Davie its fair share of contracts? Is it waiting until condos take over the shipyards?

Mr. Speaker, I will continue. I was at $13.8 billion for the acquisition and expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline. To that we can add $2.7 billion in tax breaks for the oil industry over five years and $1.6 billion in support for the industry. Then there is $840 million, if the Liberals buy the railcars to move the dirty oil. In total, that is $19 billion, just like the deficit.Is the minister of high finance aware that his deficit—

Mr. Speaker, VIA Rail is taking $1 billion of our money to get their trains built in California, when we could get them built in La Pocatière.The Liberals are literally watching the train go by. Bombardier came back twice with two competitive offers and with the support of the Government of Quebec. Ottawa did not even consider them. It is a slap in the face to Bombardier and our workers.Who in the government is so determined to have trains built in California, trains that will travel through Quebec and can be built in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, catching tax cheats is not the problem. The problem is that the Liberal government is making legal something that is unethical. This needs to change.In a few weeks, people will be getting their T4s and the government will expect some cheques to come in. Too bad for those who fail to pay the $3,000 they owe the federal government. The Minister of National Revenue will go after them and you too, Mr. Speaker.Nonetheless, in a few weeks, some very wealthy people will be able to hide their money in two new tax havens with the Minister of Finance's blessing.When will the government stop giving free passes to those who do not pay their share of taxes? When will this tax unfairness end?

Mr. Speaker, the American authorities are dragging their feet on certifying Bombardier's C Series jets. Until they do, no money is coming in, and that company and its suppliers are running out of cash. The aerospace industry is to Quebec what the automotive industry is to Ontario. It is a cutting-edge industry, an industry of the future.Why is the government so eager to free up money for Alberta and so slow to do so for the pride of Quebec's economy?

Mr. Speaker, tax cheats must be subject to fines and prison sentences. We are fed up with the government's rhetoric. Ordinary Canadians are the ones who are suffering because the wealthy are using tax havens to avoid paying taxes.The money that Stephen Bronfman has hidden away in the Cayman Islands is not being used to help our hospitals and schools. It is staying in his pocket, with this government's blessing. Our taxes are paying for the roads that these tax cheats are driving around on in their big limousines.When will this government stop thumbing its nose at Canadians and put an end to the use of tax havens?

Madam Speaker, it is shameful. It is as though the government is setting up more speed traps but eliminating speed limits. The government has mastered the art of catching waitresses who do not report all of their tips, but it is authorizing banks to hide billions of dollars in tax havens. When we talk about banks, all we get is radio silence from the Liberal Party. Can the government explain to people who work and pay taxes why banks are encouraged to commit the same acts that would send any ordinary Canadian to prison?

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec economy is being attacked on all sides by Donald Trump, who takes aim at everything that moves. He tried to kill our aerospace industry, he is threatening our agriculture, and he is imposing tariffs on our softwood lumber, paper, steel and aluminum which, let us remember, is the cleanest in the world.In short, all of Quebec is being taken to the cleaners. It is fine for the Prime Minister to say that he is standing up to Trump, and we will support him as long as he does, but our businesses and our workers have been left to fend for themselves.What is the government waiting for to announce support for aluminum SMEs?

Mr. Speaker, if I say “Cayman Islands”, “Barbados”, or “Bermuda”, you will likely think that I am talking about future branches of Morneau Shepell, when I am actually talking about where the money to produce Canadian marijuana is coming from. The Liberals who are running pot companies funded by tax havens are supposedly there to fight organized crime. That pretty much sums up the Prime Minister's big plan.Will the Prime Minister ensure that there is complete transparency when it comes to the ownership of marijuana companies and the source of their funding?

Mr. Speaker, to make the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion happen, the government is assuming all the risk and paying for everything. If the bill contravenes any provincial laws, Ottawa pays. If Ottawa does not have the jurisdiction required to force this project down Canadians' throats, Ottawa pays. If the project proponent falls behind, Ottawa pays. If the proponent backs out altogether, Ottawa pays again and buys the pipeline. Basically, private enterprise pockets the profits, and the government piggy bank assumes all the risk.Can the minister tell us how much this venture is going to cost Quebeckers?

Mr. Speaker, try to follow the logic here because somebody was definitely on something when they wrote the marijuana bill. The Liberals say it is true that tax havens can finance the pot industry. They say we will have to rely on Quebec's Autorité des marchés financiers to make sure profits are not going to organized crime. The problem is that, as the Liberals are well aware, the Autorité des marchés financiers does not know the identity of those who invest in tax havens.Will the government delay bringing its bill into force and take the time to make sure organized crime and Liberal cronies are not the ones benefiting?

Madam Speaker, the Liberal Party seems to be completely oblivious to the plight of ordinary Canadians. When they need help, the Liberal Party is nowhere to be found. I am calling on the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Whenever foreign online companies want to do business in Canada, they can count on the minister and the federal government. Netflix, Google, Spotify, and Amazon get preferential treatment over Quebec companies. This is a clear-cut case of total submission, of digital colonization.How can the minister justify giving preferential treatment to foreign companies? She gives tax dodgers a reward that she would never give to companies—

Mr. Speaker, Irving seems to be suffering from an obsessive jealousy problem. As soon as Ottawa starts eyeing up another shipyard, Irving throws a hissy fit. By way of apology, the government offers Irving gifts. It just awarded Irving another $800-million contract for a useless slush breaker, just so that Irving would not have any gaps in its order book. Meanwhile, there are only 60 workers left at Davie, and the federal government has nothing but peanuts to offer them between now and 2021.When will Davie get the contract for the Obelix?

Mr. Speaker, Quebec produces more than 60% of Canada's fine cheeses.Our cheese producers will be hit the hardest by imports of more than 17,000 tonnes of subsidized European cheese. It will be our producers who pay the price for this unprecedented competition. Our cheese producers have been abandoned by Ottawa, because $25 million a year for four years divided among all the provinces is an insult to an industry that we have every reason to be proud of. Will the minister listen to cheese producers and the Government of Quebec and propose a real assistance package?

Mr. Speaker, with the potential sale of Rona to the American giant Lowe's looming, Quebec is concerned about losing its companies. Now, we have learned that before the government will give Bombardier a line of credit, it is asking the company to do away with its multiple-voting shares, when such shares are helping to protect the company from a hostile foreign takeover. Is the minister aware that with a 70¢ dollar and 80¢ shares, everything is coming together to trigger the buyout and dismantling of Bombardier? Why does the minister want to kill the aerospace industry in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, I do not buy it.Canada is so buddy-buddy with tax havens that it speaks on their behalf at the IMF. Canada is a spokescountry for tax havens. No kidding. Canada speaks on behalf of Barbados, the Bahamas, and a dozen other tax havens.Is the government trying to pull the wool over our eyes with its claims about fighting tax fraud when we all know it is a spokescountry for tax havens?

Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, the House endorsed the findings of the UN mission that military authorities in Myanmar committed a genocide against the Rohingya, a crime that falls under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.This all unfolded under the watchful eye of the de facto head of government, Aung San Suu Kyi. One week later, and nothing has been done to revoke her honorary citizenship.When will the Prime Minister put the question to the House, as he implied he would do?Does he realize that, in doing nothing, we continue to honour someone who was complicit in genocide?

Mr. Speaker, Haiti is in the midst of a dangerous political conflict that inflicting casualties on the population. This is worrisome for families in Quebec who are about to be deported, since their safety is clearly compromised.The government has suspended the removal of people to Haiti, but only until Sunday. Sunday is just around the corner, and obviously, nothing will be solved between now and then.Will the government commit to immediately suspending all removals to Haiti until the conditions are safe?

Mr. Speaker, regarding the Davie shipyard, it is high time the Liberals put their money where their mouth is. The Minister of National Revenue showed a lack of respect yesterday for my constituents and the people represented by all opposition members with her contemptuous remarks in question period, although she did apologize.Will the Prime Minister, who is the grand master of apologies, follow suit and apologize to honest taxpayers, the people who pay their taxes, while his government is giving a free pass to the wealthy by signing more agreements with tax havens?This deserves a real apology.

Madam Speaker, that is not what the Liberal Party election platform said. Only 2% of public infrastructure is federal. The rest, the government does not have a stake in, which is why it takes so long to release the money.By interfering in other people's business, Ottawa is holding up projects, paralyzing cities, and preventing Quebec from moving forward. Only the Canada 150 propaganda infrastructure seems to be getting money. The government knows all about propaganda.In the next budget, will the government commit to paying a lump sum for infrastructure, money that remains frozen in Ottawa, and will it stop dilly-dallying?

Mr. Speaker, the National Assembly is unanimously calling for a single-tax system in Quebec to save Quebec taxpayers time and money, but the government has refused to implement such a system because too many jobs would be lost. This confirms what everyone already knows: there is a duplication of work.This is costing taxpayers $500 million a year, not counting the $150 million Quebeckers pay every year to file a second, useless tax return. It is time to put an end to this waste of money.Will the government allow Quebec to collect all taxes?

Mr. Speaker, I do not think it was a priority for Paul Martin, either.The Minister of National Revenue can spew all the rhetoric she wants and say that her government is combatting tax avoidance and tax evasion, but the truth is, when it comes to fighting tax havens internationally, Canada is part of the problem, not part of the solution. While the OECD agreement that the minister referred to provides for the exchange of information, Canada has signed an agreement with a country that does not even require income tax returns. When will the Liberals start taking this a little more seriously and scrap their agreement with Grenada and Antigua and Barbuda?

Madam Speaker, I moved a motion in the House to condemn the legal use of tax havens by banks and multinationals. My motion is universally supported in Quebec. Students, workers, nurses, teachers, public servants, consumers, and citizens all support it. It has even been presented again at the provincial level and supported by all elected officials in Quebec from all parties. However, all the Liberal members oppose it but one.When will the government start representing the population instead of Bay Street and reconsider its shameful position?

Mr. Speaker, does this mean that those trains will be more comfortable than the ones that would have been built in La Pocatière? That is nonsense.Bombardier won a train contract in the United States this year. Seventy per cent of production will be carried out in the U.S. Bombardier just won a contract in China and, yes, the trains will be built in China. When Bombardier signs a contract with Germany, the trains are built in Germany.Why is it that only Ottawa is unable to require local production from multinationals when our taxpayers are footing the bill?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is the banks' lackey. He is behaving like a lobbyist and Canadians are going to pay for it.First it was securities, and now the federal government is taking aim at the Consumer Protection Act. While Quebec is working on modernizing the law, the government is setting it back about 50 years. It is a nasty boon to the banks, which will increase their obscene profits by taking money straight out of the pockets of Quebec families.Who is drafting the government's bills? Is it the Bank of Montreal, the Bank of Nova Scotia, the Royal Bank, the CIBC, or the Toronto Dominion Bank?

Mr. Speaker, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That the House (a) reiterate the motion passed unanimously in this House on September 20 recognizing that the crimes against humanity committed against the Rohingyas constitute a genocide (b) and, consequently, revoke the honorary Canadian citizenship bestowed on Aung San Suu Kyi in 2007.

Mr. Speaker, the government has finally admitted that it is embarrassing to let the banks get around Quebec law to rip off consumers. Finally! By splitting Bill C-29, the government is admitting that the part that amends the Bank Act is problematic. Why will they not simply withdraw it?

Mr. Speaker, I take it there is no compensation, then. It is disappointing, but that is always how it goes with Ottawa. The government promises to compensate the losers in the agreement, but it forgets all about them as soon as it is done signing.The same thing happened with the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement, the free trade agreement between Canada and the EFTA and the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement. Now, we have the agreement between Canada and Europe, the new trans-Pacific partnership and the new NAFTA, in which our producers have been sacrificed. We have been through this before.When will the government finally come up with a plan that fully compensates dairy producers for the last three agreements, which it signed at their expense?

Yes, Mr. Speaker, let's talk about tax avoidance.Canadian investments totalled $68 billion in Barbados, $48 billion in the Cayman Islands, $39 billion in Bermuda, and $20 billion in the Bahamas.Average taxpayers pay their taxes while the government makes life easy for rich people who hide their money in the Caribbean.Rather than go after little fish who are doing their part, when will the government stop fattening up the financial sharks?

Madam Speaker, the government has lost its marbles. Right in the middle of COP24, where the whole world is preparing to fight climate change, the Prime Minister is talking about purchasing 7,000 railway cars at taxpayers' expense to export more oil from the tar sands.According to the lowest public estimate available, this will cost $840 million. Quebeckers do not want to spend one cent on buying trains for oil companies, which make massive profits at our expense.Will the government reverse course?

Mr. Speaker, displacing artifacts like that and bringing them here is an outrage.Bill C-63 revealed that the government wants to start taxing pot. That is another way of stirring up trouble in Quebec and lining their own pockets. We know that Quebec, not Ottawa, will have to pick up the tab for costs related to health and security. Will the government promise to leave that money to Quebec, or will it once again try to line its own pockets without even doing a thing?

Madam Speaker, the government is boasting about spending millions of dollars on fighting tax evasion. However, not a cent is going toward dealing with the crux of the problem. Most of the money being diverted to tax havens is from banks and multinationals. We are talking about $55 billion in unpaid taxes in five years, and there is nothing illegal about it because the regulations were quietly changed without the members here being consulted.Why does the government keep avoiding the subject? Why does it never do anything about it? Is it because it is the lackey of Bay Street or because this scheme benefits some of the government's members and associates?

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?

Mr. Speaker, the worst thing you can do in business is to do nothing. The government's inaction when it comes to Bombardier sends a clear signal to the business community. Ottawa is disavowing Quebec's flagship company. That sends the message to invest in Boeing and Airbus, since they are getting funding from their governments, but not to invest in Bombardier. Even Quebeckers who do not usually make a point of making demands for the province are fed up with the government's inaction. I am talking about Philippe Couillard, Carlos Leitão, and Jean Charest for heaven's sake.What I want to know is how much longer the government is going to continue to do nothing about Bombardier. A week? A month? A year? Four years? Longer?

Mr. Speaker, half of Canada's dairy farms are in Quebec. Imported diafiltered milk is hurting my home province. We are talking about thousands of dollars lost every week. Our regional economies are in jeopardy. In a show of solidarity, the hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord poured a bag of powered milk on his head. Imagine that. However, in the House, there has been no show of support for our farmers, and nothing is being done to resolve their problem. What will it take for government members from Quebec to start representing their constituents, a nod from Toronto?

Mr. Speaker, the Lawrence family is scheduled to be deported on Sunday. The government had better act fast.We want an explanation before the Prime Minister leaves for China next week. We know that, on May 19, the Prime Minister attended a $1,500 dinner for Vancouver's Chinese community with the founder of a bank. On July 7, the Liberal government authorized that bank to do business in Canada.What we did not know was that, in the space of 48 hours, the Prime Minister received $70,000 from wealthy Chinese individuals in Vancouver for his Liberal riding association. If that is not payback, then what is?

Mr. Speaker, the law requires Air Canada to have all the maintenance of its aircraft done here in Canada. We are talking about 2,600 jobs and dozens of providers of airplane parts. The Air Canada outsourcing legislation would require Air Canada to have only some of its maintenance work done here. Two people and an oil change is all well and good, but it is the aerospace cluster that will be dismantled. Can the minister repeat here in the House what he said to me during the briefing session for the introduction of this bill, namely that he did not even assess the impact on the Montreal aerospace cluster before drafting this shameful legislation? Let him admit it.

Mr. Speaker, by what authority does the Prime Minister claim the right to lecture Quebec on managing health care? How many Ottawa hospitals does he run? Which government do CLSCs, clinics, and hospitals answer to? Who pays the doctors and nurses who care for the sick?Ottawa is acting like an armchair quarterback. It does not know what it is talking about or how to play the game. Will the Prime Minister stop power tripping, transfer the money that Quebec is asking for, and start minding its own business once and for all?

Mr. Speaker, the bank that was announced this morning is a windfall for the world of finance. Our infrastructure, roads, water, and wastewater systems will be privatized and cost taxpayers more. Even worse, Toronto banks will pocket the profits. Some believed that the bank would be located in Montreal, but this is Bay Street's government. Why is the government so intent on having the infrastructure in Montreal, Quebec City, and our regions line the pockets of Toronto's bankers?

Mr. Speaker, as you know, we are going to pay $13.8 billion for the Trans Mountain project, the Americans' old pipeline that no one else wanted to buy. You also know that the $19-billion deficit has largely gone toward dirty oil and goodies for oil companies in western Canada.Like us, Mr. Speaker, you think it is time for the federal government to work as hard for Quebec as it does for the oil sands, with all due respect to my colleagues.When is the Minister of Finance going to start working for Quebeckers and stop handing out goodies to oil companies?

Mr. Speaker, this government is working for Bay Street. It tried to override Quebec's Consumer Protection Act for Bay Street, and it is setting the infrastructure bank up on Bay Street for its Bay Street buddies. Now Ottawa is once again facing off against Quebec in court defending another bad idea: the securities regulator.When will Ottawa stop taking Quebeckers' money and using it to try to undermine Quebec in court for Bay Street's benefit?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal members from Quebec are working very hard to ensure that Quebec either goes into deficit or is unable to maintain its services.After cutting health transfers, now Ottawa has decided to reduce its share of infrastructure spending from 50% to 40%. Once again, Quebec and the municipalities will end up footing the bill. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars less for Quebec.We realize that it is the Liberal Party's favourite colour, but can someone from the government explain why their party is so determined to put Quebec in the red?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is the banks' lackey. He is behaving like a lobbyist and Canadians are going to pay for it.First it was securities, and now the federal government is taking aim at the Consumer Protection Act. While Quebec is working on modernizing the law, the government is setting it back about 50 years. It is a nasty boon to the banks, which will increase their obscene profits by taking money straight out of the pockets of Quebec families.Who is drafting the government's bills? Is it the Bank of Montreal, the Bank of Nova Scotia, the Royal Bank, the CIBC, or the Toronto Dominion Bank?

Mr. Speaker, there is no reason to be reassured. What we see is that the Liberal government could not care less about the consensus in Quebec.The Minister of Finance says that he is flexible when it comes to sharing the revenue from the cannabis tax.Is he prepared to agree to splitting the tax revenue, with no conditions, on a cost basis? That would mean 100% for Quebec, the provinces, and municipalities, and nothing for Ottawa.

Let me talk.Does the minister of high finance realize that dirty oil caused his deficit?

Mr. Speaker, the government has once again dismissed the unanimous will of Quebec. I will give it a second chanceThis morning, the Quebec National Assembly unanimously adopted another motion. It calls on the federal government to work with Quebec to implement the motion I will be moving this evening, which will put an end to the shameful use of tax havens in Barbados. Quebeckers are sick and tired of seeing Canadian law encourage profiteers.Will the Prime Minister make a formal commitment to honour Quebec's unanimous request by supporting the Bloc Québécois's Motion No. 42, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, for months, the government has been telling us that it is prepared for any eventuality in the NAFTA negotiations. For months it has been telling us that it has a plan to protect Canadians' interests, whether the negotiations fail or succeed. However, we still have not seen the slightest hint of a plan.Everyone is worried, including Quebec workers and business owners.Now that it has become clear that Donald Trump would rather provoke a crisis than sign an agreement, can the Liberals tell us what their so-called plan is?

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?

Mr. Speaker, half of Canada's dairy farms are in Quebec. Imported diafiltered milk is hurting my home province. We are talking about thousands of dollars lost every week. Our regional economies are in jeopardy. In a show of solidarity, the hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord poured a bag of powered milk on his head. Imagine that. However, in the House, there has been no show of support for our farmers, and nothing is being done to resolve their problem. What will it take for government members from Quebec to start representing their constituents, a nod from Toronto?

Mr. Speaker, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Donald Trump plans to tell Congress today that the NAFTA talks have failed. It is now clear that he always hoped they would fail, so he could proclaim that he stands for “America first” at his rallies.No matter what the government might have given up on supply management, there would never have been an agreement. The government would be at a disadvantage in the real negotiations after the mid-term elections.Can the government guarantee that it made no concessions whatsoever in Donald Trump's fake negotiations, or did it weaken our agriculture industry for nothing?

Mr. Speaker, the worst thing you can do in business is to do nothing. The government's inaction when it comes to Bombardier sends a clear signal to the business community. Ottawa is disavowing Quebec's flagship company. That sends the message to invest in Boeing and Airbus, since they are getting funding from their governments, but not to invest in Bombardier. Even Quebeckers who do not usually make a point of making demands for the province are fed up with the government's inaction. I am talking about Philippe Couillard, Carlos Leitão, and Jean Charest for heaven's sake.What I want to know is how much longer the government is going to continue to do nothing about Bombardier. A week? A month? A year? Four years? Longer?

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you what the Prime Minister will do about it: not a thing.This morning, against the backdrop of the Prime Minister's upcoming visit to Washington, Agropur expressed concern that our dairy producers could be used as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations with Donald Trump. The co-operative has every reason to be concerned.The government has been in power for over a year, but it has not settled any of these issues with the United States. Its strategy for defending our interests boils down to this: do nothing. Do nothing about diafiltered milk. Do nothing about softwood lumber.Can the government confirm that it will keep doing what it has been doing since the start to protect us, in other words, nothing?

Mr. Speaker, given that Quebec is not yet a country, it is at the mercy of Ottawa's decisions in matters of international taxation. The decision by the Canada Revenue Agency to grant an amnesty to 20 millionaires who were hiding their money in tax havens deprives Quebec of revenue it needs.Does the government realize that these secret deals translate into less money for health, less money for early childhood education centres, and less money for education? Does it realize that?

Mr. Speaker, could the government transfer the funds with no strings attached and do the same for other programs?What we are hearing is that the $800 million has to come out of the green infrastructure fund, meaning that all of Quebec's municipal green programs would have to be scrapped to make way for the Quebec City tramway. We should not have to choose between sacrificing our regions or sacrificing our national capital. We can carry out all of these projects if the money is transferred in a lump sum.Tax revenues are supposed to be used to serve our needs, not to serve programs.Will the government let Quebec handle infrastructure dollars without imposing conditions?

Mr. Speaker, I do not buy it.Canada is so buddy-buddy with tax havens that it speaks on their behalf at the IMF. Canada is a spokescountry for tax havens. No kidding. Canada speaks on behalf of Barbados, the Bahamas, and a dozen other tax havens.Is the government trying to pull the wool over our eyes with its claims about fighting tax fraud when we all know it is a spokescountry for tax havens?

Mr. Speaker, there is a desperate need for health care services and Ottawa is not doing its part.Its transfers are woefully inadequate and well below what it could be providing. Its lack of commitment is threatening the viability of the public system and putting unbearable pressure on the finances of Quebec and the provinces.There was nothing in the last budget to correct the situation. The government said that it would talk to Quebec and the provinces about this. However, the finance ministers are getting together next Monday and Ottawa does not even plan on addressing the issue.Can the Minister of Finance confirm that the pseudo-discussions he talked about when he tabled the budget are essentially a load of rubbish?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development is the only person who has the power to order the Competition Bureau to investigate, and that is what we are asking him to do.Oil companies are certainly not the ones wondering if the price of gas will ruin their vacation plans. Compared to last year's numbers, Esso's profits jumped by 55%, Valero Energy's by 27%, and Suncor's by 22%. Meanwhile, Quebeckers will once again get a nasty surprise at the pump just in time for Saint-Jean and the construction holidays.I am asking the government to stand up for people instead of oil companies for once. Is that too much to ask?

Mr. Speaker, as you know, we are going to pay $13.8 billion for the Trans Mountain project, the Americans' old pipeline that no one else wanted to buy. You also know that the $19-billion deficit has largely gone toward dirty oil and goodies for oil companies in western Canada.Like us, Mr. Speaker, you think it is time for the federal government to work as hard for Quebec as it does for the oil sands, with all due respect to my colleagues.When is the Minister of Finance going to start working for Quebeckers and stop handing out goodies to oil companies?

Madam Speaker, we see the results of the government's efforts.A total of $231 billion, or almost two-thirds of Quebec's GDP, was hidden in tax havens. With regard to Ottawa's hard work, former Liberal candidate Marwah Rizqy told Le Journal de Québec that it is a “farce, hogwash” and that “Canada is asleep at the wheel”. Why is the government only going after the little fish? In the meantime, it is letting the big financial sharks do what they want.

Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, the House endorsed the findings of the UN mission that military authorities in Myanmar committed a genocide against the Rohingya, a crime that falls under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.This all unfolded under the watchful eye of the de facto head of government, Aung San Suu Kyi. One week later, and nothing has been done to revoke her honorary citizenship.When will the Prime Minister put the question to the House, as he implied he would do?Does he realize that, in doing nothing, we continue to honour someone who was complicit in genocide?

Mr. Speaker, the federal government paid $4.5 billion to purchase an old pipeline, with no negotiation whatsoever. How much do you want for the Trans Mountain pipeline? $4.5 billion? No problem; here is a cheque, and let us add another $9.3 billion to expand the pipeline.To eliminate the deficit and fight climate change, perhaps the Minister of Finance could stop putting all our money in dirty oil?

Mr. Speaker, I do not understand what the Liberals are missing. The way Bill C-44 is drafted, the infrastructure bank can ignore the laws of Quebec and circumvent municipal bylaws. No agricultural zoning, and the power to expropriate: that is what will come out of Bill C-44. We have said it, the constitutionalists have said it, the National Assembly has said it, the farmers have said it, and even the Senate has said it. When will this government listen to us and split its bill to have a second look at its infrastructure bank?

Mr. Speaker, the question was for the Minister of International Trade. I am not interested in the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture's meaningless talking points. During the by-election, the Prime Minister promised farmers that he would not make any concessions on supply management in the new TPP. After the election, our farmers ended up paying the price again. It is like the Félix Leclerc song: On the eve of the election He called you son The very next day Your name faded away Why are Quebec farmers always used as bargaining chips in trade agreements? Why?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister realized that the natural disasters affecting Quebec are only going to get worse with climate change.However, his infrastructure plan does not include any measures at all to deal with it. To make matters worse, in this year's budget, he pulled the $2 billion announced in the previous budget to fight greenhouse gases, since there was no plan on how to allocate that funding.Can the government confirm that it is using exactly the same plan as Stephen Harper did to fight climate change, in other words, no plan at all?

Mr. Speaker, to make the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion happen, the government is assuming all the risk and paying for everything. If the bill contravenes any provincial laws, Ottawa pays. If Ottawa does not have the jurisdiction required to force this project down Canadians' throats, Ottawa pays. If the project proponent falls behind, Ottawa pays. If the proponent backs out altogether, Ottawa pays again and buys the pipeline. Basically, private enterprise pockets the profits, and the government piggy bank assumes all the risk.Can the minister tell us how much this venture is going to cost Quebeckers?

Mr. Speaker, we know that the Liberals do not care about the expense, but $500 million for a duplication of services is a waste of money and a waste of human resources.The minister or her parliamentary secretary could loan those employees to payroll services, which seems to need all the help it can get because of Phoenix. They could have those employees investigate companies that are running schemes to hide their money in tax havens. They could have those employees register all the most vulnerable seniors for the guaranteed income supplement.Why are the minister and her parliamentary secretary insisting on throwing taxpayers' money out the window against the unanimous will of Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, it has gotten to the point where Premier Legault has to think about scaling down and delaying the Quebec City tramway project because the federal government is not pulling its weight. The project is $800 million short. The money is there, but the government refuses to hand it over to Quebec without conditions. This problem could be solved tomorrow morning.Will Ottawa get out of the way, let Quebec manage funds from the integrated bilateral agreement based on its needs and contribute fully to the Quebec City tramway?

Madam Speaker, the Liberal Party seems to be completely oblivious to the plight of ordinary Canadians. When they need help, the Liberal Party is nowhere to be found. I am calling on the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Whenever foreign online companies want to do business in Canada, they can count on the minister and the federal government. Netflix, Google, Spotify, and Amazon get preferential treatment over Quebec companies. This is a clear-cut case of total submission, of digital colonization.How can the minister justify giving preferential treatment to foreign companies? She gives tax dodgers a reward that she would never give to companies—

Mr. Speaker, in its economic update, the government did not allocate one red cent to education transfers. This means that it is going ahead with its plan to take $120 million away from Quebec's students. That $120 million would make quite a difference to students living on a budget.I asked the Minister of Youth about this on Monday, but he hid behind the parliamentary secretary to a minister who has nothing to do with this.Will he stand up today and commit to giving back the $120 million that he took away from them?

Mr. Speaker, CBC/Radio-Canada released a Trump team document listing trade practices it does not like, such as supply management, softwood lumber, potential support for Bombardier, Hydro-Quebec's procurement policies, and patents, all of which are critical issues for Quebec.This is worrisome because every time Ottawa signs an agreement, some Quebec industry pays the price. It happened with softwood lumber in the United States and cheese in Europe.The government must stand firm and fight tooth and nail for Quebec's economy. Will the government commit to leaving the bargaining table if Donald Trump is unreasonable?

Mr. Speaker, I will continue. I was at $13.8 billion for the acquisition and expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline. To that we can add $2.7 billion in tax breaks for the oil industry over five years and $1.6 billion in support for the industry. Then there is $840 million, if the Liberals buy the railcars to move the dirty oil. In total, that is $19 billion, just like the deficit.Is the minister of high finance aware that his deficit—

Mr. Speaker, Quebec is asking the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities to do his job.His job is to take the taxes we pay and to automatically transfer them to Quebec so that we can build our roads, schools, and hospitals. It is not to set conditions and conduct negotiations that slow everything down. It is not his job to create a bank to privatize our infrastructure.When it comes right down to it, the minister's job is to do as little harm as possible, but is he capable of doing that?

Mr. Speaker, I believe that if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That the House call on the government to implement a program that provides financial compensation to egg, poultry and dairy farmers for all the losses they sustain due to the breaches to the supply management system in CETA, the CPTPP and the USMCA, and that it do so before asking parliamentarians to vote on the USMCA.

Mr. Speaker, the National Assembly is unanimously calling for a single-tax system in Quebec to save Quebec taxpayers time and money, but the government has refused to implement such a system because too many jobs would be lost. This confirms what everyone already knows: there is a duplication of work.This is costing taxpayers $500 million a year, not counting the $150 million Quebeckers pay every year to file a second, useless tax return. It is time to put an end to this waste of money.Will the government allow Quebec to collect all taxes?

Mr. Speaker, of course everyone is treated fairly, especially KPMG. While the Standing Committee on Finance was looking into KPMG's activities on the Isle of Man last year, the Liberal Party was appointing a KPMG executive to the position of treasurer. While the rest of us were denouncing the tax evading machine, the government was awarding contracts to KPMG. Now a government official is destroying documents related to KPMG.Is the minister going to sanction the senior government official who destroyed the evidence proving the incestuous ties between her agency and KPMG, or is she going to promote that individual?

Madam Speaker, that is not what the Liberal Party election platform said. Only 2% of public infrastructure is federal. The rest, the government does not have a stake in, which is why it takes so long to release the money.By interfering in other people's business, Ottawa is holding up projects, paralyzing cities, and preventing Quebec from moving forward. Only the Canada 150 propaganda infrastructure seems to be getting money. The government knows all about propaganda.In the next budget, will the government commit to paying a lump sum for infrastructure, money that remains frozen in Ottawa, and will it stop dilly-dallying?

Mr. Speaker, reaction in Quebec to the so-called assistance the government is providing to Bombardier has been unanimous: cheap. Everyone agrees that it is too little, too late, and that it is disappointing.Apart from the government itself and the Conservative Party, no one in Quebec believes that 38 times less than what was given to the auto industry is sufficient to support the flagship of Quebec's aerospace industry.How can the Minister of Transport, a Quebec MP, justify waiting until Bombardier was gasping for its last breath before finally granting some support, which everyone in Quebec sees as vastly insufficient?

Mr. Speaker, after shutting Quebec out by negotiating with the small provinces one at a time—the night of the long scalpels—and after resorting to predatory federalism, the Minister of Health and her colleagues are patting each other on the back and saying, “Way to go, man, we got Quebec”.Instead of arrogantly giving high-fives, will the minister apologize to the patients of Quebec, who will be the first victims of the cuts to federal contributions?

Mr. Speaker, it must be exhausting to have Liberal ministers at odds with one another. On the one hand, the Minister of Revenue says that she is working very, very, very hard to combat tax havens while, on the other hand, the Minister of Finance continues to legalize new tax havens. With the addition of Grenada as well as Antigua and Barbuda, Canada is about to have 26 tax havens, which make it legal not to pay taxes. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Revenue convince her finance colleague not to make these two new tax havens legal?

Mr. Speaker, it is primarily a gift for investors, and that is the problem. The government is basically giving the infrastructure privatization bank the power to expropriate people's land, like Ottawa did in Mirabel and Forillon. It is giving this bank the power to ignore agencies of public hearings on the environment and to disregard agricultural zoning. That is no joke. Why? It is to attract foreign investors who might be turned off by our way of doing things. That does not make any sense.Will the government remove the part about the infrastructure bank that will allow companies to circumvent Quebec laws? We are tired of being walked all over.

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's forests are infested with the spruce budworm and it seems like the federal government is doing everything it can to make matters worse. In 2014, the government gave twice as much money to New Brunswick as it did to Quebec to stop the infestation. The problem is that the spruce budworm does not recognize borders. The infested area in Quebec is larger than the entire province of New Brunswick. Our producers fare just as badly in the new budget: the government is giving $75 million to the Maritimes and not one cent to Quebec, not one cent.What exactly is it going to take for Quebec to get its share?

Mr. Speaker, tax cheats must be subject to fines and prison sentences. We are fed up with the government's rhetoric. Ordinary Canadians are the ones who are suffering because the wealthy are using tax havens to avoid paying taxes.The money that Stephen Bronfman has hidden away in the Cayman Islands is not being used to help our hospitals and schools. It is staying in his pocket, with this government's blessing. Our taxes are paying for the roads that these tax cheats are driving around on in their big limousines.When will this government stop thumbing its nose at Canadians and put an end to the use of tax havens?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in La Baie, 150 dairy producers asked the Prime Minister to protect supply management in its entirety during NAFTA negotiations. While campaigning in Lac-Saint-Jean, he promised those same producers that he would not open up supply management in the TPP, yet three months later, he did exactly that.The dairy producers were not interested in his lines. They made it clear that they want zero concessions. The Prime Minister told them that he understands the challenges their region is facing. You know things are looking grim when a politician says that.Will the government protect supply management in its entirety? This is pretty straightforward. Will the government protect it in its entirety, yes or no?

Madam Speaker, developing public transportation in Quebec is a pain in the behind, and it is the federal government's fault.Quebec City cannot build its tramway because Ottawa decided on its own which infrastructure projects it would fund. There is no way to get money from other programs, since Ottawa still imposes conditions. It has money, it collects half of our taxes, but the second criterion in paragraph 4 has not been met.Why does the government not transfer the infrastructure money to Quebec in a lump sum?

Mr. Speaker, “The aerospace sector is to Quebec what the automotive sector is to Ontario. I expect nothing less than the same intensity of support for Quebec's aerospace sector that the government gave to the automotive industry in Ontario.”It was the Premier of Quebec who said that. Quebeckers all agree with that sentiment.Why is the government abandoning the aerospace industry and choosing to do nothing about the Bombardier file? Is it because Quebeckers' concerns are not as important as what Bay Street wants? That is truly unfortunate.

Mr. Speaker, am I dreaming, or did the government just shove a pipeline down our throats? That is a most bitter Kinder Surprise, indeed.Who did the Minister of Finance consult before deciding to use $4.5 billion of our money to buy himself a pipeline? That is utterly ridiculous.Where in its platform did the Liberal government say it would nationalize a dirty oil pipeline? What is next? Nationalize Enbridge? Nationalize energy east?The government needs to do the right thing and backtrack on this.

Mr. Speaker, when he was in Saint-Félicien in October 2017 for the by-election in Lac-Saint-Jean, the Prime Minister promised the UPA local that he would not make any concessions on supply management in the new trans-Pacific partnership. This morning we learned that that was rubbish. The government bargained away the same thing as in the previous TPP regarding poultry and eggs, and it gave away 3.25% of the dairy market.Why did the Minister of International Trade defy the Prime Minister's mandate ordering him to concede nothing on supply management? Nothing means zero.

Mr. Speaker, the government is throwing another $3 billion into the bottomless pit that is Muskrat Falls: 22 cents per kilowatt hour is a slippery slope. To date, almost $10 billion of taxpayer money has been invested in a project that should never have been started and that will never make a profit.Meanwhile, the government is not offering a cent to Bombardier, the largest exporter in the manufacturing industry and Quebec's aeronautics flagship, which is developing the best technology project in the history of Quebec and Canada.How can the government justify investing $10 billion in the Muskrat Falls project, while refusing to give Bombardier a red cent?

Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, the Liberals knowingly voted against our amendments to Bill C-29, which would have solved this problem. They had the letter. The Liberals chose to protect the banks by attacking all of Quebec.How many $1,500 tickets did it take for the Liberals to sell Quebec's consumer protection to the banks?

A wordy response, Mr. Speaker, but all I heard was no, no and no.Today, the 40 members from Quebec have a choice. They can vote in favour of the infrastructure bank and help wealthy investors get around Quebec laws and municipal regulations. That means no BAPE, no agricultural zoning, and the power to expropriate.They can also vote to ensure that Quebeckers and our National Assembly are respected.Who is going to vote for the infrastructure bank today, 40 Quebec MPs or 40 phantom MPs who do not respect Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, Quebec produces more than 60% of Canada's fine cheeses.Our cheese producers will be hit the hardest by imports of more than 17,000 tonnes of subsidized European cheese. It will be our producers who pay the price for this unprecedented competition. Our cheese producers have been abandoned by Ottawa, because $25 million a year for four years divided among all the provinces is an insult to an industry that we have every reason to be proud of. Will the minister listen to cheese producers and the Government of Quebec and propose a real assistance package?

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, the Liberals promised a wonderful infrastructure bank through which municipalities could borrow money at the federal government rate. Wow.However, once the Liberals took office, they changed the way the infrastructure bank will operate. Ottawa is now going to allow its friends on Bay Street to borrow at the government rate to help them get their hands on Quebec's municipal infrastructure, without having to answer to the Auditor General.Does the government realize that it is doing exactly the opposite of what it promised with its infrastructure privatization bank?

Mr. Speaker, regarding the Davie shipyard, it is high time the Liberals put their money where their mouth is. The Minister of National Revenue showed a lack of respect yesterday for my constituents and the people represented by all opposition members with her contemptuous remarks in question period, although she did apologize.Will the Prime Minister, who is the grand master of apologies, follow suit and apologize to honest taxpayers, the people who pay their taxes, while his government is giving a free pass to the wealthy by signing more agreements with tax havens?This deserves a real apology.

Mr. Speaker, the cleanest and best quality aluminum in the world is produced in Lac-Saint-Jean. There is nothing like it anywhere else. We are talking about 7,000 direct and 30,000 indirect jobs in Lac-Saint-Jean. The people of Lac-Saint-Jean have a lot to be proud of. However, once again, the Liberals' spinelessness towards Donald Trump threatens the future of aluminum in Lac-Saint-Jean.Can the minister make a solemn commitment to protect the aluminum industry, especially in negotiations with the Americans?

Mr. Speaker, the law requires Air Canada to have all the maintenance of its aircraft done here in Canada. We are talking about 2,600 jobs and dozens of providers of airplane parts. The Air Canada outsourcing legislation would require Air Canada to have only some of its maintenance work done here. Two people and an oil change is all well and good, but it is the aerospace cluster that will be dismantled. Can the minister repeat here in the House what he said to me during the briefing session for the introduction of this bill, namely that he did not even assess the impact on the Montreal aerospace cluster before drafting this shameful legislation? Let him admit it.

Mr. Speaker, aluminium is not just about producers. There are almost 1,400 businesses, mostly SMEs, in the processing sector throughout Quebec that may not be able to absorb a 10% American tariff in the medium term. The government said that it would be there for workers. If that is the case, it needs to act now and not wait until workers have lost their jobs.What does the government intend to do? What is its plan for aluminium processors?

Mr. Speaker, try to follow the logic here because somebody was definitely on something when they wrote the marijuana bill. The Liberals say it is true that tax havens can finance the pot industry. They say we will have to rely on Quebec's Autorité des marchés financiers to make sure profits are not going to organized crime. The problem is that, as the Liberals are well aware, the Autorité des marchés financiers does not know the identity of those who invest in tax havens.Will the government delay bringing its bill into force and take the time to make sure organized crime and Liberal cronies are not the ones benefiting?

Madam Speaker, the negotiations are not progressing very quickly.Donald Trump's tariffs on our aluminum are harming Quebec's industry and the 10,000 jobs in the province. However, when I met with elected representatives from Congress and leading industry representatives in Washington, they all seemed to be against these tariffs. Even the U.S. Department of Commerce is saying that free access to our aluminum is of strategic importance. Nevertheless, we may be hit with these tariffs as of Tuesday.Can the government assure us that our aluminum will be permanently exempt from tariffs before May 1?

Mr. Speaker, I will now read a motion that the Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed: That the National Assembly reiterate the importance of preserving the strong consumer protection regime enacted in the Quebec Consumer Protection Act; That the National Assembly call on the federal government to remove the provisions of Bill C-29...that would render inapplicable the provisions of the Quebec Consumer Protection Act that govern the relationship between banks and their clients. Will the minister of high finance listen to the National Assembly of Quebec and amend the bill?

Mr. Speaker, apparently the answer is no. As we all know, Grenada is a very special tax haven. Shell companies pay no tax, file no tax returns, and issue no annual reports.What kind of information is the government hoping to get from Grenada? What the Minister of Finance really wants is more tax havens where nobody has to pay any tax. That is exactly what the government's explanatory memorandum says, and the same goes for the memo about Antigua and Barbuda.Will the Minister of Finance do the right thing and not legalize these two tax havens?

Mr. Speaker, the government announced $3.9 billion in compensation for supply-managed farmers in the budget. However, there is no mention of that money in the budget's financial tables, schedules or votes. There is no line item for the compensation and no program for that purpose. None of the departmental budgets make any mention of this compensation.If there is money to compensate our farmers, can the Minister of Finance tell us exactly where to find it, how much there is and, most importantly, how we can approve that amount in the House before the election?

Mr. Speaker, displacing artifacts like that and bringing them here is an outrage.Bill C-63 revealed that the government wants to start taxing pot. That is another way of stirring up trouble in Quebec and lining their own pockets. We know that Quebec, not Ottawa, will have to pick up the tab for costs related to health and security. Will the government promise to leave that money to Quebec, or will it once again try to line its own pockets without even doing a thing?

Mr. Speaker, that is not the case for diafiltered milk. In both the agreement with Europe and the TPP, Quebec's farmers were sacrificed to make gains for Canada. When Donald Trump withdrew from the TPP, the government did not renegotiate anything. It left the same breach in supply management. It told everyone not to worry about it and that the Americans would have to re-enter the TPP to have access to the concessions. The truth of the matter is that Quebec is paying three times: once for Europe, once for the TPP and once for NAFTA. After three strikes, we are out.What good are the 40 Liberal MPs from Quebec when all they do is trample on Quebec's interests?

Madam Speaker, it is shameful. It is as though the government is setting up more speed traps but eliminating speed limits. The government has mastered the art of catching waitresses who do not report all of their tips, but it is authorizing banks to hide billions of dollars in tax havens. When we talk about banks, all we get is radio silence from the Liberal Party. Can the government explain to people who work and pay taxes why banks are encouraged to commit the same acts that would send any ordinary Canadian to prison?

Mr. Speaker, the Lawrence family is scheduled to be deported on Sunday. The government had better act fast.We want an explanation before the Prime Minister leaves for China next week. We know that, on May 19, the Prime Minister attended a $1,500 dinner for Vancouver's Chinese community with the founder of a bank. On July 7, the Liberal government authorized that bank to do business in Canada.What we did not know was that, in the space of 48 hours, the Prime Minister received $70,000 from wealthy Chinese individuals in Vancouver for his Liberal riding association. If that is not payback, then what is?

Mr. Speaker, through the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, an institutional fund management company, the Government of Quebec can sell its Rona shares, which would allow the deal to go through, or it can refuse to sell those shares, which would block the deal. Should it agree to the sale, there is one thing it cannot do: impose conditions to force Lowe's to respect its commitments with regard to its head office, jobs, supply chain, and the SMEs that depend on it. That is, however, something this government can do.Will the minister commit to imposing conditions to protect our SMEs and protect economic activity in Quebec?

Madam Speaker, the government has lost its marbles. Right in the middle of COP24, where the whole world is preparing to fight climate change, the Prime Minister is talking about purchasing 7,000 railway cars at taxpayers' expense to export more oil from the tar sands.According to the lowest public estimate available, this will cost $840 million. Quebeckers do not want to spend one cent on buying trains for oil companies, which make massive profits at our expense.Will the government reverse course?

Mr. Speaker, by what authority does the Prime Minister claim the right to lecture Quebec on managing health care? How many Ottawa hospitals does he run? Which government do CLSCs, clinics, and hospitals answer to? Who pays the doctors and nurses who care for the sick?Ottawa is acting like an armchair quarterback. It does not know what it is talking about or how to play the game. Will the Prime Minister stop power tripping, transfer the money that Quebec is asking for, and start minding its own business once and for all?

Madam Speaker, I have some big news. Yesterday, the government announced that Davie will not get to build a single ship. Instead, starting in 2021, it is getting just one maintenance contract worth less than 2% of the shipbuilding strategy. Thanks to delays at Irving and Seaspan, the Asterix is the only ship the government has received. Davie, the best shipyard in America, delivered that ship on time and on budget. However, despite the success of the Asterix, the government has been slow to award it the Obelix contract, yet it can offer risk-free guarantees to the wealthy Irving corporation.Could the minister explain why he is so intent on undermining Davie? Why the fixation?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday evening, the NDP and the Conservatives cheered the former attorney general on as she settled scores with the Prime Minister's Office.Not many people seemed all that concerned about the real issue: Why did she decide to sacrifice thousands of jobs in Canada and Quebec for the sake of standing up to her leader?Now that the Liberals have made a huge mess of the SNC-Lavalin affair, what exactly is the government going to do to save the company's head office and the jobs of thousands of Quebeckers?

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about KPMG.To recap, KPMG hires experts from the Canada Revenue Agency, and at the same time, the Canada Revenue Agency hires experts from KPMG. That is quite a tight-knit family. The government has awarded KPMG $92 million in contracts since 2006. The Canada Revenue Agency cut a deal with KPMG and agreed not to prosecute its wealthy clients who were hiding their cash on the Isle of Man.Would the minister really have us believe that the government has declared war on tax evasion, when that very same government has a rather incestuous relationship with what Yves Boisvert of La Presse calls the “tax dodging machine”?

Mr. Speaker, this is the only government not to give these companies special privileges. While the premiers are meeting in Montreal to discuss the new NAFTA, Quebec is still waiting for a clear commitment to dairy farmers from the Prime Minister.It has been two months since the House unanimously called on the government to fully compensate supply managed farmers for the three agreements it signed at their expense. It has been two months.Will the government take advantage of the first ministers conference to commit once and for all to fully compensating supply managed farmers for the three agreements that betrayed them?

Mr. Speaker, as the chair of the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal said, nobody in the government is standing up for Quebec. As my colleague just said, that applies on pretty much every score. Is that going to change? Will the 40 Liberal MPs from Quebec stand up and make themselves heard, or is Toronto still the only place that really matters?

Mr. Speaker, after moving forward with Stephen Harper's cuts to health transfers against the unanimous will of the National Assembly, and after imposing the NDP's conditions on allocating funding from our taxes against the unanimous will of the National Assembly, the minister decided, from on high, to take it one step further by giving herself the right to make decisions on our behalf. Never has a government done so much to undermine Quebec's ability to provide quality care.When will the federal government let health professionals work in peace?

Mr. Speaker, in a letter dated November 29, Jean-Marc Fournier reminded the minister of high finance that “the federal Parliament cannot decide in a peremptory manner that provincial laws do not apply”. Nevertheless, the Liberals voted against—

Mr. Speaker, with Bill C-29, the federal government is protecting banks against Quebec consumers and the Consumer Protection Act. That means that Quebeckers will no longer have any recourse when the banks impose hidden fees on them or rip them off. What a great precedent. Next, cell phone companies will be asking the federal government to protect them from the Consumer Protection Act. Then Internet providers, cable companies, and airlines will be doing the same.I am asking the minister of high finance and his private secretary where the gouging of Quebeckers will stop.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, let's talk about tax avoidance.Canadian investments totalled $68 billion in Barbados, $48 billion in the Cayman Islands, $39 billion in Bermuda, and $20 billion in the Bahamas.Average taxpayers pay their taxes while the government makes life easy for rich people who hide their money in the Caribbean.Rather than go after little fish who are doing their part, when will the government stop fattening up the financial sharks?

Mr. Speaker, on Monday and Tuesday, finance ministers will be meeting to negotiate the sharing of the cannabis tax. As members know, Quebec and the municipalities will be responsible for 100% of the costs. They should therefore receive 100% of the tax.However, out of the blue, in Bill C-63, the government, here in Ottawa, quietly decided to keep all of the tax and then transfer a portion of it as it sees fit. Does the government agree that the tax sharing arrangement should reflect the cost sharing tax revenues should be shared in accordance with how costs are shared, meaning 100% to Quebec and 0% to Ottawa?

Mr. Speaker, can the minister assure me that there will be an investigation into the dirty money flowing from the Cayman Islands and that the government will make sure organized crime is not behind it? Based on his answer just now, that is my understanding. I just want to be sure I have understood correctly.

Mr. Speaker, in his economic update, the parliamentary budget officer confirmed that the government can afford to spend more.However, it is not the expense column I am worried about. It is the revenue column. The government refuses to go after the billions of dollars that the big banks are hiding in Barbados. As a result, it is middle-class families that are stuck with the bill to pay for our declining public services.Why is the government refusing to go after the money the banks are keeping in Barbados?Is the government standing up for Canadians or for Bay Street?

Mr. Speaker, we tried, but once again, this government is determined to ignore Quebec.In the current wording of Bill C-44, the infrastructure bank can be made an agent of the crown, allowing it to circumvent Quebec statutes and regulations. This even includes expropriation powers. If that was not its intention, it needs to amend the bill. Otherwise, this will be just one more example of Ottawa walking all over Quebec.This is the last chance. Will the government remove this power to give the infrastructure bank crown agent status, a power that goes too far?

Mr. Speaker, we knew that there were $92 million in contracts and that the government is a good partner of KPMG.However, now we are learning that the government is not just giving money to KPMG, it is also giving it employees. For the director general of the Institute on Governance, this can create an appearance of cronyism. Frankly, when it comes down to it, they are not just buddies anymore, they are family.How can the minister claim that the government is going to war with tax cheats, when that same government is providing those who encourage fraud with its money and expertise?

Mr. Speaker, the government is refusing to ask the banks to pay their fair share. The law remains unchanged and the government is doing nothing about it. However, it does not hesitate to take money from students.The government brags about offering students in Quebec $80 million in financial assistance, but then it turns around and takes $200 million in tax credits away from them. The net balance is $120 million less for students in Quebec. This falls under the Prime Minister's responsibility. He is the Minister of Youth.Will the Minister of Youth announce in tomorrow's economic update that he will return the $120 million he took from Quebec's students?

Mr. Speaker, the problem lies precisely with the bid criteria. When it comes to Crown corporations, the government needs to consider the economic benefits. It is as simple as that.Every time that we see the new VIA Rail trains going by, we will remember that good jobs in the regions are not important enough to the member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount.I am amazed that not one single Liberal from Quebec is standing up for the workers in La Pocatière. What is the point of voting for MPs who use our tax money to fund jobs abroad?

Mr. Speaker, I believe you would find unanimous consent for me to move the following motion: That this House respect democracy and affirm Quebec's right to debate and legislate on any matter within its jurisdiction.

Mr. Speaker, according to the Prime Minister, Canada is not a banana republic. That remains to be seen. Take the diafiltered milk issue as an example. A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Commerce said, “We have made clear to the Canadian government that we expect that they will not take any action to disrupt current U.S. exports of dairy products.” That is interesting, because that is exactly what the government is doing: nothing.In order to please the Americans, the government is deliberately dragging its feet on the issue, when it would actually be quite simple to resolve.What is the name of this country, again? Is it Canada or Santa Banana?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport is sending the message that the free trade agreement with Europe is going to be honoured on the backs of Quebec's workers.VIA Rail, a Crown corporation, where the Crown is the government, is going to have its trains made in Europe rather than Quebec. We have people in Saint-Bruno and La Pocatière who have the necessary expertise, but once again, Quebec gets tossed by the wayside.Why is the Minister of Transport allowing VIA Rail to turn its back on Quebec's workers?

Mr. Speaker, we are still waiting for details. The problem is that people agreed to the last two free trade deals with the understanding that producers would be compensated, but they never got that money. They did not get a penny for CETA or the TPP.Now the government wants to play the same trick on us a third time. It wants to ratify the agreement even though compensation details are not on the table. No way.Does the government understand that no compensation means no ratification?

Madam Speaker, although the government keeps telling us that it is working very hard to combat tax avoidance, we learned that $231 billion dollars were sheltered last year in the tax havens of Barbados, Luxembourg, and the Cayman Islands. Nothing is too good for profiteers.Is the government satisfied with its strategy to crack down on tax havens even though no tax was paid on 231,000 million dollars?

Mr. Speaker, I see why the Liberals are known as “red” party. It does not get much redder than this economic update. We will be in the red for years, a lovely Liberal shade of red. Nobody can blame Quebec for any of this. There is nothing for us in the update, nothing for Davie, nothing for our farmers, nothing for health and nothing for education.When will the Minister of Finance start showing Quebeckers some respect and pay attention to their priorities, such as health?

Mr. Speaker, especially considering the minister's response, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That this House demand that the government immediately suspend all removals to Haiti until Global Affairs Canada has informed the House that the conditions are once again safe.

Mr. Speaker, speaking about the National Assembly, yesterday the members of Quebec’s National Assembly unanimously passed the following motion: “That the National Assembly deplore the federal government’s decision to establish the Canada Infrastructure Bank in Toronto rather than in Montreal.”Everyone in Quebec deplores this decision, except for those 40 phantom Liberal members from Quebec. When exactly are these phantom members going to start working for Quebec instead of undermining it?

Mr. Speaker, instead of working on Bombardier's recovery, the government is going to cause this flagship Quebec company to be dismantled and bought out by foreigners.That is what this government is doing by forcing the company to do away with its multiple-voting shares. This government has it in for Bombardier. This government is well aware of this, because it chose to ignore its officials, who advised giving the company a line of credit.Why did this government, which has 40 members from Quebec, issue this political directive?

Mr. Speaker, that is still just 2% of the naval strategy, or peanuts.We know that the Conservatives and the Liberals are one and the same. They are Irving's minions and lackeys. Only Irving is paid to protect its forests against the spruce budworm. Irving is pushing to revive energy east, to profit while polluting. Irving has been awarded so many federal contracts that it is falling behind.When will the government stop feeding these corporate leeches and finally give Davie some real contracts?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance had a private interest in the motion on tax havens being defeated. As I was saying, according to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, I challenge the Minister of Finance's vote, as well as the vote of all those he could have influenced. I urge you to disqualify them. As indicated on page 214 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, “On being elected, Members of the House of Commons become trustees of public confidence. Members must place the public’s interests over their private interests and derive no personal benefit or gain from their decisions.”I know this because the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is responsible for enforcing the code of ethics and the Conflict of Interest Act. She does an amazing job. This is not about the ethics of a single member of Parliament. This is about the result of a vote and the integrity of the House of Commons as an institution presided over by the Speaker. We are here, at the heart of representative democracy, at the heart of the bonds of trust that need to exist between the public and its representatives and without which the House of Commons has no legitimacy. In light of the irregularities and the appearance of conflicts of interest that tainted the vote on Motion No. 42 on tax havens, I think that the vote should be overturned and taken again.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister announced exactly the opposite in Saint-Félicien.I will tell you what the legalization of cannabis looks like. It is not about health or fighting organized crime. It is the new Liberal gold rush. The government is giving production licences to its Liberal cronies. There is too much money at stake here. Producers are on a “high” after seeing the value of their shares triple in the past three months. What is more, over $165 million is coming from unknown sources in tax havens. There is no way of knowing who is investing in this. Let us be serious.Will the government delay the coming into force of its bill until all of this is sorted out, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue just announced that 100 investigators would be hired to identify tax fraud. That is all well and good, but the problem is that it is essentially legal to use tax havens, since Liberal and Conservative governments drafted the tax rules specifically to allow profiteers to repatriate their profits without paying anything here.Instead of announcing symbolic measures, will this government commit to seriously crack down on tax havens by abolishing the regulatory framework that helps them, yes or no?