Louis Villeneuve · TranslatePolitics.ca

Private Members' Business

Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada Act

2026-06-17

“I want the government to make cell service better in my area. It's bad now. It hurts safety and business. The numbers say we have lots of coverage, but that's not my experience. We need better information and modern policies to fix this. The old market approach isn't enough.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, like my colleague, I began my career in radio. That was in 1974. I would imagine he was quite young then. At that time, more people were tuning into AM radio. I rise today with great interest to support Bill C-268. This bill, introduced by my colleague, aims to improve cellular coverage in rural areas across Canada. The member who introduced this bill is my riding neighbour. We often go around together, and we call each other and chat from time to time. There are times when one of us misses something the other just said because the line cut out. We experience these problems, too. I would like to begin by commending her leadership on this issue. I believe she is taking a serious, well-thought-out approach that is deeply rooted in the reality faced by citizens in all regions of the country. Beyond the policies and regulatory frameworks, this debate is about something very simple, in my opinion: enabling Canadians to stay connected to loved ones, to services, to the economy and, most importantly, to their safety. Over the past several years, we have collectively made significant progress in terms of improving Internet access. This was discussed earlier. Substantial investments have been made to bridge the digital divide, which had become unacceptable. However, while progress has been made on that front, there is another equally fundamental and persistent issue, that of cellular connectivity. Today, in Canada, nearly one-quarter of provincial highways have no reliable cellular coverage. Let us imagine what that means in practical terms. It means that a parent driving on a highway with their kids may have no way to reach someone in an emergency. It also means that a worker driving around a rural region may not have cell service for tens of kilometres. It also means that an accident could happen and there could be no immediate way to call for help. This is not some hypothetical situation. This is an everyday reality. In my riding of Brome—Missisquoi, these situations are all too real. Dead zones are part of the landscape there. These include stretches of rural roads, forested areas, valleys, entire concessions and villages. I am thinking of Clarenceville, Saint‑Ignace‑de‑Stanbridge and the area between Bromont and Cowansville. Even at home, I have to wave my phone around to get a signal. I am not talking about a connection that is simply slow or unstable. I am talking about total silence: no calls, no messages, no access. The consequences are very real. For instance, farmers tell me that they have to deal with disruptions in their daily operations, even as modern agriculture increasingly relies on connected technologies. Entrepreneurs also tell me that this limits their ability to innovate, attract clients and grow their businesses. Self-employed workers tell me about contracts they have lost simply because they could not be reached. Above all, citizens confide in me that they feel vulnerable when they are on the road, when a loved one is travelling and when they realize that, in certain situations, they are completely cut off from the rest of the world. The impact of these disruptions is not limited to full-time residents of our regions. In a riding like Brome—Missisquoi, we get tens of thousands of visitors a year. They include families, cyclists and outdoor enthusiasts who come to enjoy our scenery, our wineries and our local attractions. A lot of these visitors are city dwellers who are used to uninterrupted connectivity, and when they encounter our dead zones, the consequences for them and for local residents are very real. People may get lost, be unable to use GPS, have trouble reaching emergency services if needed, or simply be unable to communicate with loved ones. Situations like these can quickly turn a positive tourism experience into a source of stress and anxiety. In addition to the impact on individuals, this situation also has economic repercussions, because an area with unstable connectivity is less attractive. Visitors may be reluctant to come back. Tourism companies may lose business opportunities. All this is to say that the cellular coverage issue in the regions does not just affect the year-round residents. It affects everyone who visits, invests and contributes to the economic vitality of our communities. In a riding like mine, cell service is not a luxury. It is a matter of public safety. It is a matter of economic development and a matter of regional equity. However, the official data make it seem like the issue has largely been resolved. The data shows coverage rates as high as 97%. Let me just say I know one thing about coverage: If the phone is showing just half a bar, there is no coverage. It is important to remember that this data is largely based on information self-reported by telecommunications companies, without any systematic independent verification. This makes no sense. As a result, there is a disconnect between what the numbers suggest and what citizens actually experience. When the data is flawed, so are the decisions. That is why the first good thing about Bill C-268 is that it tackles this problem at its root: the quality of the information. The bill requires the CRTC to establish a mechanism for independent verification of cellular coverage data. I believe this is a simple, reasonable and essential measure. Before we can fix a problem, we must first see it clearly, and right now, we cannot do that. Today, underserved areas are all too often underestimated or even invisible in decision-making tools. The second pillar of this bill is just as important: modernizing our spectrum policy framework. This framework has not been updated since 2007. At that time, smart phones were barely a thing. In fact, they were only just coming onto the scene. Digital usage patterns were radically different. Data requirements were incomparable to what they are today. Since then, everything has changed, except the framework. Continuing to rely on a framework designed for a different era means accepting that our policies are lagging behind reality. That is why the bill provides for a comprehensive review within 18 months. This review must address a fundamental question: Does our current approach truly enable us to serve the whole of Canada? In light of the experiences of regions like mine, the answer is quite clearly “no”. Market forces alone have not been able to ensure equitable coverage. This is not a criticism; it is a statement of fact. In densely populated areas, investment happens naturally. However, in rural areas like ours, in remote regions where costs are higher and where, obviously, return on investment is less immediate, roll-out remains limited. That is precisely why the third pillar of the bill is essential. It introduces a clear priority for underserved areas. It requires that future spectrum policy decisions consider, in a clear and deliberate manner, the needs of rural areas, remote communities, indigenous communities and roadside coverage. Roads are not trivial matters. They are the lifelines of our country. They connect our communities and support our economy. I want to conclude by once again congratulating my colleague. She did tremendous work and I think the issue needed to be tackled head-on.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Combatting Hate Act

2026-06-16

“I want you to know I really feel for you. The other guys are shameful. I want you to be scared and vote for my bill. I want this bill to pass so the government can say it is helping people.”

Statements by Members

Remorquage Boissonneault

2026-06-09

“I want to cheer for a program that tows my father's scooter for free. They're helping seniors avoid extra expenses and maintain their independence.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, today I want to highlight an act of generosity that deserves recognition. Recently, my father, who is 94 years old, had his mobility scooter break down. This vehicle is much more than a means of transportation for him. It also represents his independence and freedom. We called Remorquage Boissonneault for help. Once the vehicle had been towed, I asked the tow operator, Luc Dumont, how much we owed him. His response was that we did not owe him anything and that he does not charge seniors for that type of service. My father was touched by this simple gesture, which allows seniors, who often live on modest incomes, to avoid an extra expense and maintain their mobility. At a time when we often talk about the major challenges that our seniors face, it is important to recognize these concrete gestures that are truly making a difference in their daily lives. I want to thank Remorquage Boissonneault for their generosity and for their example of solidarity with our entire community.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

2026-06-09

“I want you to convince people we need to create a new government agency. I want the government to spend taxpayer money on housing.”

Government Orders

Protecting Victims Act

2026-06-04

“I want Bill C-16 to pass. I want the government to show it is helping women victims. The bill will make access to justice easier for women. I want to cheer for a program that spends money to help women victims.”

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-02

“That makes me sad that the Conservatives don't cheer for the economy. I want the Minister of Industry to cheer for the economy and workers.”

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-06-02

“I want to say the Conservatives are completely wrong about Canada failing because many people have jobs and businesses. Canada's economy is strong!”

Government Orders

Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2

2026-05-29

“I want to cheer for how our government plan helps rural areas. I'm from a rural area too.”

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-05-28

“I want to defend our party against the Bloc. We're not caving! I should ask a question about how the CRTC decision will help protect Canadian and francophone culture. That will make us look good.”

“I want you to say the bill I like will help francophones. I'm filling time with a friendly soft ball.”

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

Brome—Missisquoi Business

2026-05-25

“I'm singing the praises of a business in my riding. They make food for harsh conditions and they're successful, even reaching space missions. Their success reflects well on our region and country. I want to cheer them on and say they set a good example for young people interested in science.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the remarkable contribution made by Happy Yak, an innovative company from Cowansville, in my riding, to the Artemis II mission. Happy Yak's expertise in sustainable and functional food was a perfect fit for the rigorous demands of space exploration, as the company has developed solutions tailored to some of the most extreme environments imaginable. Its participation in the Artemis II mission is a testament to the exceptional expertise found in our regions and the ability of our businesses to make an impact far beyond our borders. Happy Yak's commitment demonstrates that local innovation can have a global and even an extraterrestrial impact. This is a great source of pride for Brome—Missisquoi, for Quebec and for all of Canada. I want to congratulate Guy Dubuc and his entire team on this inspiring achievement and on the example it sets for young people who dream of science, innovation and bold action.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Statements by Members

Story of Two Ukrainians in Mansonville

2026-05-07

“I'm going to tell a story about two Ukrainian immigrants in my riding. They had a hard time but now they're doing well. Their employer helped them. So did a local volunteer group. Now they're giving back. This is what I think Canada is all about.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, today I want to share a heartwarming story. It is a story from back home in Mansonville about Vladyslav and Yulia. They are two Ukrainians who came here in 2022 to rebuild their lives. Their journey has not been easy. There were complicated processes to navigate and moments of uncertainty along the way, but they never gave up. They hung in there, and most importantly, they found a community that chose to stand by them. I am thinking of NexKemina, their employer, which has been there for them every step of the way. I am thinking of the Missisquoi-Nord volunteer centre and its director, Mabel Hastings, who welcomed them as if they were part of the family. The wonderful thing today is that Vladyslav and Yulia can continue working and are now giving back. They are getting involved and are part of our community. When we went to meet them, there were tears, but above all, a great deal of gratitude. That is the Quebec and Canada we love: a community that sticks together and chooses hope.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Statements by Members

Neville Family

2026-04-27

“I'm highlighting a family's donation of land to suggest that private citizens, not just government, should help protect the environment. I'm plugging a motion we recently passed to support voluntary conservation of private land. I'm thanking and flattering the donors to wrap it all in warm feelings.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to pay tribute to the Neville family from Venise-en-Québec in my riding of Brome—Missisquoi, who donated 75 hectares of ecologically valuable land to the Nature Conservancy of Canada. This gesture is part of a family story that dates back to 1846. Seven generations have lived on this land, and now they are choosing to make it part of our collective legacy. This kind of leadership truly makes a difference. It shows that protecting our natural environment is the responsibility not only of governments but also of citizens who choose to take action for future generations. That is exactly the purpose of Motion No. 15, which we adopted recently: to provide better support for the voluntary conservation of private land, while recognizing the importance of ecological gifts, whether in the form of land or money. I want to give my thanks to the Neville family and to all people who are stepping up to protect our natural environment. Their leadership is inspiring, and their legacy will live on for generations to come.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

2026-04-23

“I'm filling time by listing reports and recommendations. I want more procedures and oversight. I really hope this bill passes.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has been clear that he is committed to ensuring that the defence team provides a workplace where all members, both military and civilian, feel supported and respected and have the opportunity to reach their full potential in their work. This is a top priority. Bill C-11 is a critical step toward achieving lasting institutional reform that will foster a culture of respect and accountability and strengthen confidence in the military justice system. With its proposed targeted amendments to the National Defence Act, the bill represents the next critical step in our efforts to implement the recommendations from the independent external comprehensive review and the third independent review of the National Defence Act. This bill is also essential to support future legislative changes that may be required over time to implement additional recommendations and to advance future efforts to foster culture change. Today, I would like to provide an overview of these external independent reviews and talk about the progress that the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have made in addressing the recommendations from these reviews. Let us start with the independent external comprehensive review, also know as the IECR. The review was launched in April 2021 and led by former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour to examine harassment and sexual misconduct within the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as the policies, procedures, programs, practices and culture that have allowed these harms to persist. This includes reviewing policies surrounding the administration of military justice. The final report was released on May 30, 2022. The then defence minister welcomed the 48 recommendations. When the final report was received, 17 recommendations were accepted immediately, including recommendation 48, which is to appoint an external monitor, mandated to oversee the implementation of the IECR recommendations. The then minister appointed Jocelyne Therrien to the position of external monitor. During her tenure, she regularly provided the minister with updates on the implementation of the IECR recommendations. Those updates, which are available to the public, helped us perform our work in a focused and transparent manner in keeping with the expectations of Canadian Armed Forces personnel and the Canadian public. In August 2023, the new defence minister also announced the implementation of recommendations 7 and 9 to change the military grievance and harassment processes. Today, any Canadian Armed Forces member who has experienced any kind of sexual misconduct while performing their duties now has the option of filing a complaint directly with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, without being required to exhaust every possible internal grievance and harassment process first. Moreover, as the external monitor underscored in her June 2024 report, the repeal of the duty to report regulations was one of the most significant changes that the Canadian Armed Forces made to its sexual misconduct policy in recent years. In her recommendation 11, Justice Arbour underscored that, although well-intentioned, the regulations requiring military personnel to report cases of misconduct deprived survivors of their agency and control over the reporting process and could sometimes end up re-victimizing the very people they were meant to protect. In recommendation 28 and in the first part of recommendation 29, the IECR report also made recommendations concerning the military college system. In December 2023, the minister announced the names of the seven individuals selected to sit on the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board to review the situation at Canada's two military colleges. Two members came from the department and the Canadian Armed Forces, and five were external experts on education and culture. In March 2025, the review board released its report, which included 49 recommendations covering a variety of areas, including costs, governance and quality of education and training. The implementation of recommendations from the Arbour report has continued, and the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have already started acting on some of the recommendations at Canada's two military colleges. Ultimately, this is a cornerstone of Bill C‑11. The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are also taking into account the key aspects of IECR recommendation 15 by seeking to remove military jurisdiction over the investigation and prosecution of Criminal Code sexual offences that are committed in Canada. As of December 2021, all new charges for Criminal Code sexual offences are being laid in the civilian justice system, and none of these offences are being tried in the military justice system. The Canadian Forces Military Police Group is leading a working group on the operational framework for Criminal Code sexual offences, in conjunction with the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, Ontario's Solicitor General and Ontario's Ministry of the Attorney General, to develop a framework for transferring cases. In November 2020, former Supreme Court justice Morris J. Fish was appointed to conduct an independent review of specific provisions of the National Defence Act and their application. In June 2021, the department tabled the report in Parliament. Justice Fish presented the department with 107 sweeping recommendations, the majority of which support the ongoing modernization of the military justice system. He also offered recommendations aimed at strengthening the independence of the military police and others concerning the grievance process. Bill C‑11 also addresses several of these recommendations.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗