Patrick Bonin

C-5 C-39 Prime Minister Mr. Speaker, I would remind the House that, using Bill, thegave himself the power to suspend environmental laws for his oil projects. Luckily, the Bloc Québécois managed to limit that abuse to five years. According to the Liberals, it was all in a bid to combat Donald Trump. Billremoves this five-year limit and allows the application of environmental laws to be suspended [more]

Mr. Speaker, right now, the national interest is the government's interest, and it is the government that decides what is in the national interest. Whether the government likes it or not, it is very clear to us that these debates must take place among elected officials, particularly when it comes to the use of arbitrators, restricting the right to strike and restricting workers' rights. It is no [more]

Prime Minister C‑39 Mr. Speaker, thejust returned from the United Nations, where Secretary-General Guterres once again implored countries to phase out fossil fuels. Meanwhile, Canada introduced Bill, which gets rid of impact assessments for pipeline projects and makes it possible to permanently circumvent environmental laws. Greenpeace and Environmental Defence called it the “Bulldoze Nature” [more]

Prime Minister Mr. Speaker, it is simple. Internationally, there are two classes of countries. There are those who are following President Trump, as theis doing, getting into oil and gas, and then there are those who want to break free from this dependence on foreign companies and so on. Canada should invest in the transition, plan for it and not fund a new oil sands pipeline project, to the [more]

C‑39 Mr. Speaker, Billrepresents another another major step backward on environmental issues as well as on workers' rights. The government would have people believe that the bill will not result in environmental rollbacks. It says environmental assessments will not be weakened. Leading environmental organizations and environmental law groups are unanimous. Ecojustice, West Coast Environmental [more]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague seems to be in full agreement when it comes to the exceptional powers the government is giving itself to get around environmental laws. C-39 I would like to point out that Billeven allows for the creation of economic zones where projects will be pre-approved. Projects will be approved before they are even assessed. Obviously, we can expect companies to sue the [more]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes I wonder whether the government thinks our roads have potholes because of the trade war. Hearing the Liberals talk, one might almost believe that the trade war is responsible for traffic and late buses. The government is blaming the trade war for a lot of things. C-39 Billclearly shows that the government has come to the conclusion that it has to trample on workers' rights [more]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his clear remarks. C-39 We are very clearly dealing with a government that is currently exploiting the tariff crisis. Billproposes to make it possible to circumvent environmental laws on a permanent basis. This has nothing to do with the tariff crisis. It shows very clearly that the Liberals want to make this permanent. We have laws and regulations for a [more]

If you're sure, I'm really glad to hear it. I was wondering about the negative form in French. I'll leave it up to the legal expert.

Thank you, Madam Chair. “en cause n'est pas intentionnel n'est pas intentionnel intentionnel I just need some clarification. When I read the French version of the new subsection 125(7) of the legislation proposed by amendment G‑1, it says at the end,”. Yet the English version doesn't contain any negative form, so it's intentional. I don't know whether the French version contains a double [more]

Laurier—Sainte-Marie Mr. Speaker, the event of the year is the Liberals' climate betrayal. Their record includes the pipeline agreement with Alberta. It includes ending environmental impact assessments. It includes pipelines and offshore drilling with no regard for protected areas or endangered species. It includes the member for's resignation. It includes three young Canadians and two groups of [more]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's answer is embarrassing. The Liberals continue to veer off course. The consultation documents for Quebeckers on the decommissioning of the Gentilly-1 nuclear reactor are in English only. If Quebeckers want to get information from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, they have to read 600 pages in English only. That is so disrespectful. In fact, I filed a complaint [more]

It's simpler for the government, then. In fact, who is that simpler for?

I know that. However, you said that we couldn't do this, so does that mean—

I'll try to do the same, Mr. Chair. You just said that the bill would make things simpler than the current system in the United States, for example. Now, let's talk about a bill introduced by the Bloc Québécois. It proposes to target certain regions where forced labour is known to take place—such as the Uyghur region—and to require importers of goods from those regions to show that their [more]

I'm well aware of what the bill proposes. You answered my colleague opposite that having a list would be simpler than the U.S. system, for example. We in the Bloc Québécois have introduced a bill on this subject that states that…. It's unfortunate, I lost a minute because you didn't understand the question. In short, you said that it was simpler to have a list than to have the equivalent of what [more]

You have many resources. We are, after all, talking about a bill. We would like to have as much legal information as possible. You also seem to be saying that Canada couldn't adopt the same approach as the United States for some reason. Could you elaborate on this and also provide supporting documents explaining why Canada couldn't use the same approach as the United States?

Could you elaborate on this?