Translate Politics Parliament in plain language.

MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Gabriel Ste-Marie

Bloc Québécois Joliette—Manawan 84 statements translated

Follow by RSS

Ste-Marie fights Bill C-39’s rollback of environmental assessments and strike rights, presses Ottawa to buy back half the duties paid by forestry firms like the Saint-Michel sawmill, seeks higher old age security for seniors 65 to 74, and funding for the Atikamekw community of Manawan. He argues through stacked figures and witness quotes, but often leaves out who must act: “Urgent action is therefore needed.”Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
A
90 / 100 over 79 statements
Signal 84 / 100
Relevance 89 / 100
Respect 99 / 100
Clarity 97 / 100
Averaged over the 79 of 84 statements graded so far.

In their own words

Loses points more than most for

Wording that hides who did something, or who will.2.6 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×2.6

A remark off to the side of the point.2 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×2.0

Thanks and tributes.1.9 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×1.9

Loses points less than most for A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.Less often than most members.What the tags mean

Does well more than most

Answered ×1.5

Says again and again

Echo

Statements 84

Government Orders ·

Safe Social Media Act

“I want to know if the member thinks this online safety bill is flexible enough as it is. It needs to respect provincial powers, especially for Quebec. I also want to know if her party is open to changing the bill in committee to make it better.”

  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want congratulate my hon. colleague on her speech. It was very substantive. Of course, I am sorry that she had to endure so much harassment on social media. That is truly unacceptable. At the end of her speech, she touched on several of the concerns that have been raised during this debate, including respect for areas of provincial jurisdiction, respect for Quebec and the provinces and, for example, flexibility regarding age. In her view, does the bill, in its current form, provide sufficient flexibility? If, as she said, amendments were proposed during the committee study, would her party be open to improving the bill in this regard?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade F View analysis
“I want to know if the member looked at similar online safety laws in other countries, like in Europe and Australia. If he did, what can we learn from them as we study this bill?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, first off, I want to offer my condolences to the family and friends of the individual mentioned by my hon. colleague. I would like to know if he looked at comparable provisions enacted in other countries, like European nations and Australia. If so, are there any aspects that we should keep in mind during our study of Bill C‑34, based on what is being done elsewhere?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis
“Social media companies often ignore national laws and take weeks to remove reported scam ads. If this bill passes, will these companies actually follow the rules, or will there still be problems?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his highly informative speech. One of my concerns is that the digital platforms, social media, are multinational corporations that often seem prepared to flout the laws and regulations of the countries where they operate. The Standing Committee on Industry and Technology conducted a study on fraud. We found that the platforms are slow to act on fraudulent advertising. They claim that they are doing everything they can, but even after fraudulent advertising is reported, it takes them days, if not weeks, to remove it. Once a bill like this is passed, does my hon. colleague believe that the digital platforms will co-operate, or might we still run into a few stumbling blocks?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis
“I want to know if this bill gives provinces enough freedom to set their own rules for social media access, just like they do for the drinking age.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his speech. I would like to hear his views on whether Bill C-34 is flexible enough to allow the provinces to apply their own rules, based on their own interests. I would draw a parallel with the drinking age. We know that Quebec forms a nation, but there are differences even between the provinces, as in the example I gave, where laws and age restrictions can vary from one province to the next. Could the same apply to the issue we are talking about here, namely access to social media? Does Bill C‑34 provide enough flexibility?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis
“I want to know if the government consulted Quebec and the other provinces enough on this bill. Provinces have power over youth protection and social services. I am asking if this bill respects that power.”

  • A repeated line

    “In addressing the effects of influencers and social media on children and adolescents.”

    Said 4 times by 3 members since October 29.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for her speech on this important bill. When the committee considered this matter, it adopted the following recommendation That the Government of Canada, in addressing the effects of influencers and social media on children and adolescents—and while recognizing the jurisdiction and primacy of the provinces in matters relating to social services and youth protection—adopt an asymmetrical and flexible approach. Does my colleague feel that the government has adopted a sufficiently asymmetrical and flexible approach with this bill in order to recognize provincial jurisdiction and precedence in social policy and youth protection? Has it sufficiently consulted Quebec and the provinces on this matter, particularly with regard to youth protection and the various social issues?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis
“This bill deals with areas that belong to Quebec and the provinces, like social services and child protection. I want to know if the government worked closely with them and consulted them enough before introducing this bill.”

  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate and thank my colleague and friend, the member for Laurentides—Labelle, for her great speech. The topic is important, and she addressed it with heartfelt conviction. The issue covered by this bill touches on many areas of jurisdiction that belong to Quebec and the provinces, including social services, youth protection and other related sectors. In my colleague’s view, has the government worked closely enough with Quebec and the provinces on this matter? Did it adequately consult the other levels of government before introducing this bill?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade F View analysis
“A parliamentary committee said the government must respect provincial powers over youth protection when dealing with social media. I want the member to explain how this bill respects the powers of Quebec and the provinces, and how the government consulted with them.”

  • A repeated line

    “In addressing the effects of influencers and social media on children and adolescents.”

    Said 4 times by 3 members since October 29.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, when the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage considered the issue, it adopted the following recommendation: That the Government of Canada, in addressing the effects of influencers and social media on children and adolescents—and while recognizing the jurisdiction and primacy of the provinces in matters relating to social services and youth protection—adopt an asymmetrical and flexible approach. I would like to ask my hon. colleague how, with Bill C-34, the government is taking an asymmetrical and flexible approach that recognizes the jurisdiction and primacy of Quebec and the provinces and how the government consulted and worked with Quebec and the provinces on this bill.

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis
“I have two questions about this bill. Should it include online gaming? How will we make sure people under 16 follow the rules?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my hon. colleague two quick questions. Would it have been appropriate to extend the bill’s scope to cover things like online gaming? How can we ensure that people under the age of 16 comply with the bill’s provisions?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Oral Questions ·

Labour

“I oppose this bill. It gives the minister dangerous and permanent powers to stop strikes without proper limits. The government needs to realize it is out of control.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is a big difference between the wishes expressed here and what is written in the bill. People are still talking about Bill C‑39. Here is what the CSN said this morning: The powers given to the minister to suspend a strike...are...a serious infringement on freedom of association. Even framed by the national interest, it remains arbitrary, vague and...unacceptable. Yesterday, law professor Maxime St‑Hilaire criticized Bill C‑39 for making emergency measures permanent without any guardrails. He said that he has observed several instances of totalitarian behaviour on the part of the current government. Will the Liberals finally realize that they are out of control?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Government Orders ·

Safe Social Media Act

“We need to act quickly to keep young people safe online. What lessons can we learn from Australia, where similar rules did not work as planned? Also, what parts of online safety should the federal government handle, and what parts should belong to the provinces?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating my colleague on her very moving and poignant speech. Indeed, urgent action is needed to protect our young people and improve digital safety. My colleague referred to the measures put in place in Australia that did not produce the desired results. Can she tell us what lessons we can learn from the measures introduced in Australia? What role should the federal government play in ensuring safety, and what role should the provinces play?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis
“I support this bill, but big tech companies often act like they are above the law. In committee, we heard that Meta took more than five days to remove a fake scam ad, and Meta said it could not do any better. How will this bill actually force these platforms to follow the law and take action?”

  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 45 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by commending the minister for his bill and his speech. The Standing Committee on Industry and Technology heard from representatives from Meta as part of our study on fraud. Basically, we learned that there are long delays when fraudulent ads or content are reported. Another witness who represented Wealthsimple said that scammers had impersonated Wealthsimple and that it took more than five days for the fraudulent ad to be taken down. The representative from Meta told us that the company is doing everything it can and that it cannot do any more. How will the minister ensure that the web giants, the platforms that often seem to think that they are above the law, do comply with the law and co-operate?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade B View analysis

Oral Questions ·

The Environment

“This bill replaces real science with the opinions of former oil bosses to review pipelines. The minister told me these regulators can ask scientists for help only if they feel like it. I want the minister to admit that this bill makes science optional.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we sat on the same committee, but we did not share the same vision. In Bill C-39, Ottawa is replacing the environmental impact assessment for pipelines with a study by the Canada Energy Regulator. Here are the commissioners’ former bosses: TC Energy, Shell, Pembina, Imperial Oil, Canadian Oil Sands and Cenovus. In short, Ottawa is replacing a scientific assessment with the views of former oil industry executives. Yesterday in committee, the Minister of Internal Trade told me that this is not a problem because nothing prevents the regulator from seeking scientific advice if it feels like it. Does the minister realize that he is making science optional?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Private Members' Business ·

National Strategy on Flood and Drought Forecasting Act

In response to a question from Branden Leslie

“I have doubts about this bill. It creates a new agency to forecast floods and droughts instead of using the weather service we already have. It also does not provide any real money to fix the problem. Quebec already forecasts its own floods.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I too would like to wish you, my colleagues and all House employees a happy Thanksgiving and a fruitful constituency week. Naturally, I am also including the interpreters, pages, security staff and all the employees who make it possible for us to do our jobs. As members know, Bill C‑241 would create new federal administrative structures to carry out meteorological duties that are currently the responsibility of the Meteorological Service of Canada, the branch of Environment and Climate Change Canada that provides weather forecasts, warnings and data. The bill focuses on the goal of improving forecasting for droughts and floods, which are becoming more common as a result of climate change. More specifically, the purpose of the strategy proposed in the bill is to assess the need for future investment in hydrological and water resources analysis, assessment and forecasting, particularly by using supercomputers with inputs from multiple meteorological forecast models and observations. To that end, the bill seeks to create a co-operative national hydrological and water resources forecasting service and system. This proposal raises a number of questions that deserved to be studied and did get studied in committee. For one thing, we need to know why these services cannot be provided by the Department of the Environment’s existing meteorological service. In other words, how would it be useful or necessary to create a new government agency operating in parallel to the Meteorological Service of Canada? If the solution for improving meteorological forecasting for droughts and floods is to free up financial resources to bring in new advanced technologies, it seems like the government could remedy the situation when it tables its budget, which it is expected to do in the first or second week of November, before the parliamentary recess. However, as we know, the current Bill C‑241 has no budgetary impact. It merely suggests that the government assess the need or relevance of making a hypothetical investment. If the problem is not a lack of resources, what legal or administrative obstacles are currently stopping the government from improving the meteorological services provided by the Meteorological Service of Canada? The preamble of Bill C-241 states that most technologically advanced countries have a national flood forecasting service. Since Quebec is an advanced country, the Government of Quebec already provides the public with weather, hydrological and hydraulic forecasts. For example, it has an app called Vigilance that provides 48-hour flood forecasts for many rivers in southern Quebec.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Government Orders ·

First Nations Clean Water Act

“This new water bill ignores the improvements we made to the older version. Why did the government drop those changes? I want to know if we will have to redo all that committee work.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is something that struck me in my colleague’s speech. He said that Bill C‑37 did not take into account the work that was done on Bill C‑61 in committee, where improvements were made. My colleague gave us a lot of examples of that. Why does he think the government did not keep these improvements? Is it just complacency? Is it because the government is not doing its homework? Does my colleague believe that all the work done in committee on Bill C‑61 will have to be redone and repeated for Bill C‑37?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis
“Ten years ago, the government put money in the budget to fix drinking water in First Nations communities. At the end of the year, that money was left unspent. I want to know why this problem is still not fixed today.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague and friend on his excellent speech. He clearly knows his subject well. He is passionate about it. We learn a lot from him. I think he paints a clear picture of the challenges and everything that needs to be done. He was referring to the last Parliament and traced all of this back some 40 years. I would like to go back about 10 years instead. At the time, I was the Bloc Québécois finance critic. During discussions about our budget requests with then minister of finance, Bill Morneau, I asked him to address the issue of access to safe drinking water in all first nations communities across Canada. He assured me that this was in line with their priorities, and that if we were committed to it, his government would resolve the situation. When I reviewed his budget, I could see that the money was there. However, at the end of the year, when I looked at the lapsed appropriations, the money was still there; it had not been spent, and nothing had been resolved. How is it that, 10 years later, even though the government has announced the necessary funding and expressed its willingness to take action, the issue still has not been resolved?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Oral Questions ·

The Environment

“The Liberals and Conservatives are teaming up to pass this bill to help oil companies. It lets ministers ignore environmental laws and limits public and Indigenous input to just one year. Even one Liberal MP has spoken out against it. I want more government members to admit this bill only helps the oil industry.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the Liberals and the Conservatives are joining forces to bulldoze over us with Bill C-39, for the benefit of the oil companies. Fortunately, opponents are starting to mobilize. The Liberal member for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country has spoken out against his party’s bill. He is afraid that ministers will be able to unilaterally suspend environmental legislation. He understands that limiting consultations to one year amounts to setting a time limit on the involvement of indigenous peoples and civil society. Who else on the government side has the courage to say that Bill C‑39 is a pro-oil bill?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis
“I oppose this bill because it helps oil companies and hurts the environment. It removes environmental checks for pipelines, stops enforcing green laws, and harms endangered species. Liberals and Conservatives are working together to pass it, and that should worry people.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the ultimate proof that Bill C‑39 is a pro-oil bill is that the Conservatives voted for it yesterday alongside the Liberals. In Canada, the only time the Conservatives get along with the Liberals is when there is an opportunity to undermine the environment for the benefit of oil companies. When the Liberals propose getting rid of impact assessments for pipelines, suspending the enforcement of environmental laws and sacrificing endangered species, the Conservatives vote red. Frankly, that should worry a lot of Liberals. Who in this government ran for office intending to join forces with the Conservatives against the environment?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A– View analysis

Oral Questions ·

Government Priorities

“I want the government to reject this bill. It weakens environmental protections, labour rights, science, and Indigenous reconciliation. I want the public to speak out against it, and I want more government members to oppose it.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, omnibus Bill C-39 is 250 pages historic rollbacks on environmental protection, labour rights, science, intergovernmental relations and reconciliation with indigenous peoples. The Bloc Québécois is appealing to environmentalists, labour unions, scientists, governments and first nations: We need to mobilize. We also need other Liberals to have the same courage as their colleague from West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country and condemn Bill C-39. Who in the government is going to stand up against the Prime Minister’s big beautiful bill?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

“More seniors are living in poverty because their pensions do not keep up with rising prices. The government increased pensions only for people aged 75 and older, which is unfair to those aged 65 to 74. I want to know if the member supports our bill to give that same pension increase to all seniors.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague on her speech. I would like to know what the government intends to do to support seniors’ purchasing power. Seniors are facing challenges when it comes to affordability. Since the 2000s, the poverty rate among seniors has been rising, mainly because they live on a fixed income that is not sufficiently indexed to inflation. That is particularly true for old age security benefits. The Trudeau government increased the OAS for seniors aged 75 and up, but it failed to do the same for seniors between the ages of 65 and 74, and this created two classes of seniors. One of my Bloc Québécois colleagues has introduced a bill seeking to index and increase the OAS for younger retirees between the ages of 65 and 74. What does my colleague think about that?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis
“The forestry industry is struggling, and a sawmill in my riding has been closed since last year. What can the government do to help the forestry industry?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his excellent speech and the many points he made. I would him to tell me more about the forestry industry and the problems it faces. At the northern end of my riding, the St‑Michel sawmill has been closed since August, not of this year, but last year. It is currently in court, trying to find a solution. What can the government do to help the forestry industry?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis