Maxime Blanchette-Joncas

Mr. Speaker, Greeting · 7 wordsI am pleased to rise this evening.Greeting Claims · 55 wordsIt is quite late, and we are debating this important bill, Bill C‑39, an act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy. It will come as no surprise to learn that the Bloc Québécois strongly opposes this bill as introduced by the Minister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons. Procedure · 5 wordsLet me be quite clear: ProcedureReasoning · 11 wordsWe are not opposing it just for the sake of it. Positioning · 84 wordsI can confirm that we would all be happier to be able to put our energy and time into serving our constituents rather than spending another evening in the House debating this bill, before a government that refuses to listen and pushes forward as though it were free to do whatever it wants. We oppose it because the proposed changes are simply unreasonable and unjustifiable to the public and our constituents. That is what Liberal-style democracy under the Prime Minister looks like right now.Positioning Claims · 40 wordsThe government is using a temporary trade crisis as an excuse to impose legislative changes that will be permanent. These changes are likely to follow us for decades, long after the end of the crisis that served to justify them. Positioning · 13 wordsThe government is exploiting a trade dispute to further centralize power in Ottawa.Positioning Claims · 58 wordsThey want to allow themselves to circumvent certain environmental laws, they want to weaken workers’ rights, they want to open the door to the privatization of our ports and airports, and above all, they want to compromise independent scientific analyses, even while infringing on the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces when it comes to natural resource management. Procedure · 9 wordsLet us start with a first example: workers’ rights.Procedure Claims · 111 wordsThe bill contains amendments to section 107 of the Canada Labour Code.¹ These amendments are intended to authorize the Canada Industrial Relations Board to limit workers’ right to use necessary job action in a labour dispute.² A minister would be allowed to ask the Canada Industrial Relations Board to impose a binding settlement during collective bargaining when the minister determines that a strike or lockout would have a negative national impact or cause serious social disruptions.³ It is a roundabout way of telling employers that they can take a hard line during negotiations, that they should not worry, that there will be no strike. That is essentially what it does legislatively. Reasoning · 85 wordsWhen negotiations between employers and unions break down to the point where one of the workers’ only remaining options is to exercise their right to strike, we believe the very purpose of that right is to create economic and social repercussions that will encourage the employer to return to the bargaining table. To claim that these changes do not weaken the right to strike shows a striking misunderstanding of the history of the social movements that fought to secure that right in the first place. Claims · 36 wordsIt took decades of social struggle to make progress on workers’ rights and environmental protection, but with this bill, the government would like to be able to sweep away these gains in a matter of minutes. Procedure · 33 wordsThen there is the issue of environmental assessments and major projects. I think that is a pretty important part of this bill. I would like to focus on division 1 of Bill C‑39, ProcedureClaims · 25 wordswhich would impose a maximum one-year time limit on the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada for completing its reviews of so-called projects of national interest.⁴ Reasoning · 104 wordsAgain, it is one thing to want to speed up the assessment process, but it is quite another to not even wait for the recommendations of those assessments before approving major projects. If there is one thing I quickly understood as the Bloc Québécois critic for public accounts, it is that, when a political decision is made too quickly and needs to be reversed, the price to be paid is much higher than if the government had taken the time to do things right from the start. When it comes to the environment or biodiversity, the price is not always calculated solely in dollars. Procedure · 5 wordsLet me give another example.Procedure Claims · 150 wordsChanges to the Fisheries Act would allow proponents to pay money to third parties to offset habitat loss caused by their project.⁵ The government is making decisions that could have long-term consequences on the environment without even taking the time to consult the experts within the government itself. I am referring to the chief science adviser. I have sat as vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Science and Research since it was first created.⁶ The chief science adviser came to see us a few months ago when the government introduced Bill C-5.⁷ She described it as a disaster, ⁸and said that the government was circumventing laws, especially legislation related to the environment and other measures, without even consulting scientific experts. The chief science adviser confided that neither she nor the other members had been consulted in any way about the selection of major projects said to be of national interest.⁹ Positioning · 36 wordsThis is a government that simply wants to do things its own way, or listen only to people who share its views and want the same things it does. That is what we have come to.Positioning Reasoning · 29 wordsOnce a decision is made, it has to be owned. Sometimes, by the time it can be reversed, it is already too late. Certain things simply cannot be repaired. Claims · 26 wordsConcerning Bill C‑39, we understand that the government wants to fast-track the new Alberta pipeline project.¹⁰ It could be approved even before environmental assessments are completed. Positioning · 10 wordsWhat is the plan if we have to reverse course?Positioning Claims · 22 wordsThe government pre-approves a project, does not even know if it will be good, and then it is too late to backtrack. Positioning · 26 wordsIf the final recommendations from the experts were negative, would it really be possible to make changes to the project when it is already under way?Positioning Reasoning · 6 wordsI think the answer is obvious. Procedure · 5 wordsLet me give an example.Procedure Reasoning · 47 wordsWe build the foundation of a house and then realize that the ground is unstable and we have to rebuild somewhere else. Imagine the cost. That is for a house, but let us draw a parallel with a pipeline. That is precisely the problem with this bill. Positioning · 15 wordsRight now, the government before us has exhausted its political arguments to persuade the public.Positioning Claims · 111 wordsIt says that there are major projects of national interest and that it wants to create pathways and mechanisms by concentrating power in the hands of a single minister who could, by the government’s own account, designate a project as being in the national interest, amend the Impact Assessment Act, weaken environmental policies and even permanently eliminate them. Instead of continuing discussions in a democratic manner, bringing together the relevant stakeholders and the various levels of government around one table, the government decides to introduce a bill that is over 250 pages long and imposes the vision of just one man or maybe a few people in the Prime Minister’s Office.¹¹ Positioning · 6 wordsThey want to build Canada strong, PositioningClaims · 11 wordsand that is the slogan the Liberals keep spewing every day. Reasoning · 22 wordsI do not really agree that undermining accountability and weakening the decisions made in Parliament is the way to build Canada strong. Claims · 26 wordsPower is increasingly being concentrated in the hands of the executive. The government wants to limit the ability of elected officials to hold it to account. Positioning · 31 wordsWhere else in any modern, industrialized country is this kind of legislation being introduced? If the Liberals can come up with an example of this, I would be curious to know.Positioning Claims · 33 wordsI checked. No G7 country has brought forward this sort of legislation.¹² They are no worse off than we are. They too face challenges when it comes to the economy and assessment processes. Positioning · 29 wordsWhat we are seeing today is more of an authoritarian drift than the application of sound economic and mathematical reasoning to projects said to be in the public interest.Positioning Procedure · 10 wordsI want to be clear for those watching at home.Procedure Positioning · 34 wordsThis government is not introducing these changes in the interest of Quebeckers and Canadians. Its goal is to concentrate power in the hands of a small group of individuals or even a single individual.Positioning Claims · 9 wordsQuebec’s motto is “Je me souviens” or “I remember”, ¹³Off pointPromise · 19 wordsand I can guarantee that we will remember this Liberal government’s authoritarian abuse for a long time to come.