Alexis Deschênes
- Career
- Lawyer, journalist
- Political Experience
- Candidate for the Parti Québécois in Trois-Rivières in 2014, candidate for the Parti Québécois in Bonaventure in 2022, elected Member of Parliament for Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj in 2025, elected vice chair of the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans in the 45th Canadian Parliament in 2025
- Notable
- Unseated cabinet minister Diane Lebouthillier
Based on publicly available information — may contain inaccuracies
Business & Financial Interests
Before entering federal politics, Alexis Deschênes had a career in education. He worked as a teacher and later became a school principal. Public records indicate he has declared employment income from the Centre de services scolaire René-Lévesque, a school service centre in Quebec.
Where Alexis falls on key policy spectrums
Your Money
People & Society
How We're Governed
Land & Community
Diane Lebouthillier won with 21,817 votes (38.3%)
Total votes cast: 56,984
How does Alexis Deschênes's voting record line up with your values?
Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague's contribution to this debate. The Bloc Québécois welcomes the idea of making our democratic system more transparent and ensuring that taxpayers have a way of finding out when the government decides to write off debts. I commend his initiative and his ability to gather support across party lines, which is not nothing. Can he tell us more about the
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her contribution to the debate. I do believe we need to work toward reconciliation. Part of our job as elected officials is to reconcile competing interests. We have try to see both sides. My colleague seems to be severely downplaying the legal uncertainty resulting from the decision in the Cowichan case. While it does not resolve everything, it is true
Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader of the official opposition for his contribution to the debate. My question is the following. Given that the decision is based on an interpretation of section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and that the courts must therefore interpret that section of the Constitution, how could the government possibly provide a solution today without allowing the judicial
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. As I listened to him, I wondered what he was actually proposing. What we are seeing here is the Conservative Party attacking guideline number 14, arguing that limitation defences were not argued. We see that it is possible for the attorney general to raise limitation arguments under common law simply by obtaining authorization from the
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his contribution to the debate. I thought my colleague's tone had a hint of reassurance in it, but the question I would like to ask him is this: Why has the government decided to appeal this case?
No.
Madam Chair, I just want to be absolutely sure that, in the motion, in its amended version, we still mention the Gulf of St. Lawrence and seals, but with the addition of the part…. I'm told that's the case. Well, that's perfect. That works very well for me.
I agree with Mr. Small's amendment to broaden the scope so that we cover seals and sea lions on the west coast, as well as other pinniped species on the north side. I'm fine with extending the study to cover all of that. What I want is for us to mention seals in relation to the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the Maritimes, because that's what makes sense to us. As for the additional hour, I'll leave
loup-marin phoque pinnipède I agree with my colleagues' amendments. The only thing I'd like to point out is that we could useorinstead ofin the French version. It would be more accurate.
For me, it's important that the motion focus on seals, which is why I don't want it to be broadened too much. I don't know whether sea lion hunting takes place elsewhere. However, I want seals to be included in my study. That's what's important to people back home.