Yves Perron

Mr. Speaker, I have a very specific question for my colleague. Minister of Finance Prime Minister She praised the new structure a lot, although we think it will be unnecessary. Apart from that, does she not feel a little uncomfortable at the thought that the head of this new structure is going to be paid twice as much as theand that—to be blunt—this executive used to work with theand is a good [more]

Mr. Speaker, I really liked the fact that my colleague started her speech by paying tribute to our veterans. I would like to point out that, yesterday, I attended the unveiling of a new veterans monument in Lavaltrie in my riding. This wonderful monument was created by Claude Des Rosiers and depicts a man and a woman in uniform. I think that is an important step forward. We are very pleased to [more]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his deep respect for veterans. I sincerely appreciate it. C‑39 If the parliamentary secretary is willing to listen, my question is this. My colleague mentioned several times in his speech that creating a Crown corporation could reduce the government's accountability to parliamentarians. That is a very serious concern for us, and it seems to be [more]

Madam Speaker, without the House of Commons interpreters, there would be no bilingual Parliament. It would be in English only. That is why the government's plan to cut the Translation Bureau's staff by 25% constitutes a serious lapse in judgment. These employees have exceptional expertise that low-cost contractors and ChatGPT simply do not have. Francophones deserve the highest quality [more]

Minister of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères Madam Speaker, I wish to raise an important point of order. Thestated, in response to a question from my colleague, the member for, that interpreters do not fall under the responsibility of the Translation Bureau. He seemed to be implying that we do not know what we are talking about. [more]

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to see you in the chair. I appreciated my colleague's speech, but I am not entirely reassured. It seems like every bill in this Parliament either overrides existing laws or grants more powers to ministers. This bill is highly complex and will require careful study in committee. However, it is already clear that one of its objectives is to confer even more powers on [more]

Madam Speaker, as Gilles Duceppe always says, there are two languages in the House of Commons: English and simultaneous interpretation. He is not wrong: Ninety per cent of translation is from English to French because everyone chooses English, even a good number of Quebec Liberals. Without our exceptionally talented interpreters, our privileges as members of Parliament would be violated. Let us [more]

Madam Speaker, it is great to see you in the chair this morning. The Bloc Québécois has some concerns, even though we support this bill. It is a good thing that we are becoming more independent from the United States. However, since this project is going to take place in Nova Scotia, will the federal government negotiate properly with Nova Scotia, or does it believe that, since this is more of a [more]

C-241 Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise on this important issue. It is fundamental. We are talking about Bill, an act to establish a national strategy respecting flood and drought forecasting. As my colleagues are surely already well aware, the Bloc Québécois has a major issue with any sort of national strategy. Our concerns are many. However, I want to make one thing clear from the outset. We [more]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the member the same question that I asked our Liberal colleagues earlier. We know that this law needs reviewing. I think that we need to conduct an in-depth study in committee, as my colleague just mentioned. We need to review it carefully. However, we have some concerns. This is yet another bill that gives more power to ministers. Since the 2025 election, the [more]

Madam Speaker, in her last answer, my colleague said that it was to be expected that costs would increase once operations got under way. Fair enough. However, there is still a world of difference between $13,000 and the $20-million figure my colleague mentioned earlier. To me, those numbers are worlds apart. Could the government not be a little more disciplined? I would be interested in hearing [more]

Mr. Speaker, that is indeed one of our requests. Can they at least pay the money they promised? In short, we do agree.

Mr. Speaker, if the parliamentary secretary really meant what he just said, which is that we need to move forward, not backward, then he would not have backed down on the digital services tax. The $600 million is a very small amount of compensation. I would like my colleague to look at what is happening internationally, elsewhere in the world. How did the Europeans find a way to put a tax on [more]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague very much. That is the reality on the ground. Some ministers respond to us in a contemptuous tone like that. We have talked about the poutine remark, but we could have talked about how we apparently spend most of our time sitting on our rear ends and just come here to collect our pensions. I think we could get rid of the contempt and work [more]

Mr. Speaker, I begin my speech in good spirits, thanks to the wonderfully quick wit of the member who spoke before me. I am also going to follow in my colleagues' footsteps, because I too have prepared some brief remarks about our representatives in Quebec City that I want to give before starting my speech. We found out who will be in cabinet yesterday. The riding of Berthier—Maskinongé is a [more]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is short and simple. The word he is looking for is “contempt”.

Mr. Speaker, we are so looking forward to hearing the parliamentary secretary's speech. What he just reiterated to the House, and the message he is sending to the media and culture sector, is that they were deprived of $7 billion over five years with the repeal of the digital services tax, that the CRTC's levies, which would have brought in more than $2 billion, have been cancelled, and that this [more]