Discussion · Government Orders
Yves Perron Bloc Québécois
“I want to get as much money for Quebec as possible from this bill. The current housing program already works. The government should invest in what works instead of replacing it with something new.”
“Madam Speaker, for once, the parliamentary secretary anticipated my response quite well. We can both agree on that, but we will also have to agree to disagree. That said, as I mentioned in my speech, we are here to salvage something from the wreckage. We are defending Quebec and trying to get as much as we can for our people. That is what we are doing today. We will take that billion dollars. My colleague mentioned programs that work and working together. I gave an example of such a program in my speech. I hope he appreciated that. The rapid housing initiative is working. It has worked in the past and it is still working. Why get rid of it? Why replace it with an unknown quantity? When a program is working, we should invest in it and leave well enough alone.”
-
Reply to a comment in debate
Signal 24 of 100
Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.
See full analysis
Madam Speaker, for once, the parliamentary secretary anticipated my response quite well. We can both agree on that, but we will also have to agree to disagree. That said, as I mentioned in my speech, we are here to salvage something from the wreckage. We are defending Quebec and trying to get as much as we can for our people. That is what we are doing today. We will take that billion dollars. My colleague mentioned programs that work and working together. I gave an example of such a program in my speech. I hope he appreciated that. The rapid housing initiative is working. It has worked in the past and it is still working. Why get rid of it? Why replace it with an unknown quantity? When a program is working, we should invest in it and leave well enough alone.