Mario Simard · TranslatePolitics.ca

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-05-05

“Quebec is trapped in Canada. The government quickly helps the auto and oil industries. But support for Quebec's economy is weak. I know a solution. What does my colleague think is the best solution for Quebec?”

“The government is proposing some measures to help businesses. But my riding's aluminum and forestry businesses need help right now! Everyone likes the idea of a wage subsidy to keep people employed and give businesses room to breathe. Why doesn't the government like that idea? I want my colleague to explain the government's thinking.”

“I want the government to spend more money on the forestry industry. The government is not doing enough. Things are bad.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague on his French. I will give my colleague a passing grade on that, but I will not give the government a passing grade. The forestry crisis has been going on since 2017. Once in a while, I like to go on the website of the Institut de la statistique du Québec to see how many businesses have closed and how many jobs have been lost since 2017. The last time I checked, 35 major businesses had closed and 29 businesses were experiencing sporadic closures. Their operations were significantly at risk. About 2,200 full-time jobs had been lost and 1,900 part-time jobs had been lost. That is what the softwood lumber dispute is doing. The government has not announced anything yet, other than what we saw last August. That clearly did not meet the expectations of the forestry sector. Everything in the forestry sector is currently destabilized. I want to hear my colleague's thoughts on that, because we are still waiting for an important and worthwhile announcement about support for the forestry industry.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The government gives way too much money to oil and gas. They get way more money than my industries in Quebec. It's not fair. If my industries got the same kind of money, they would do great. The government is playing favorites. I bet my colleague here agrees with me.”

“I want the government to spend money on my preferred program quickly. I think it's unfair that more money goes to the oil and gas sector than the forestry sector. The government should have the courage to support forestry like it supports energy.”

“I want the government to focus on lasting fixes for Quebec businesses instead of oil investments. Loans aren't enough. I want the government to stop spending our money on oil and make a real strategy to help Quebec industries like forestry and aluminum.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think that what the government should be focusing on right now is finding a lasting solution for Quebec businesses that are suffering as a result of the current situation. Instead, as I was saying earlier, the government has created a road map for investing in the energy sector. This is blatantly unfair. Let me be very clear: This is blatantly unfair to Quebec and is undermining Quebec's two strongest economic sectors, which are forestry and aluminum. What I want is not just loans from the government, but a comprehensive strategy that will help support our businesses and industries. What I want is for the government to stop throwing all our money at oil, as we saw in the last budget statement and in the budget.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want to change the subject to a different industry. I'll bring up some scary-sounding statistics about foreign ownership in oil and gas. Maybe people will forget we were talking about trade and forestry.”

“I want to complain that the government helps other provinces' industries more than Quebec's. Quebec's aluminum and forestry need more federal spending.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, what a nice introduction. I will pick up on what my colleague just said. He supports anyone who supports Canada. The major issue with the tariff crisis is that the federal government keeps crowing about building Canada. However, looking at the proposals that the government put forward these past few weeks, it looks more like building Canada while ignoring Quebec. Which two sectors are the most impacted by the U.S. government's tariffs? There is the aluminum sector, which is primarily based in Quebec. Then there is the forestry sector, which is subject to a mix of countervailing and anti-dumping duties on top of 10% tariffs, for a total of 45%. The forestry products we send across the border to the U.S. have their profit margins cut by 45%. No economic sector can withstand that. The entire forestry industry back home is in upheaval and going through incredibly tough times, and the government is not doing anything to help. I just wanted to mention that as a response to what my colleague said. What I want to highlight today is the double standard. I have been here since 2019. Whenever the auto sector or the energy sector—which the government generally equates with oil and gas—is in trouble, the government is there to help. The economic update includes investments in oil and gas. That is a normal thing for the government. When it comes to the more Quebec-centric sectors, however, the government is nowhere to be found. I am feeling generous, so I will split my time. I was getting a bit agitated, but I am calming down now. As I was saying, there is a double standard, and it is major. As I mentioned on Friday, just for fun, I looked through the economic update to demonstrate this double standard. To figure out the intentions behind a document, we can simply search for keywords. How many times do the words “forest” or “forestry” appear in the government's economic update? I searched for both terms. They show up six times. How about the word “aluminum”? It shows up 12 times. Just for the heck of it and to satisfy the member for Repentigny, I looked up “climate change”; there are five occurrences. If we want to hit a home run, to use the federal government's language, we need to talk about oil and gas. If we look up the word “gas” in the latest economic statement, we see that it appears 45 times. That is the federal government's primary interest. The word “oil” shows up 153 times. That is what the federal government is interested in, as we have seen in recent weeks. It offers well-thought-out, deliberate strategies for the oil and gas sector, and it offers absolutely nothing for the forestry and aluminum sectors, which are facing the highest tariffs. I will quickly talk about forestry, because we submitted a proposal to the government. That was part of the discussions that the Bloc Québécois wanted to have with the government, discussions that did not take place when the economic statement was being prepared. Some people got together to talk about how to solve this problem of countervailing and anti-dumping duties. That is money that is being held at the border, and it has likely exceeded $13 billion to date. How can we get this $13 billion back and ensure that it is invested and that the operations and facilities of the forestry sector are maintained? We wondered why Export Development Canada would not play a leading role and make it possible to buy back a portion of the countervailing and anti-dumping duties at the end of each month. The government refused and ignored that. Do members know what I find shocking? The Standing Committee on Natural Resources invited EDC representatives as witnesses, and we spoke with them. Let us look at the double standard I am talking about. In 2022, EDC invested $9.3 billion in the oil and gas sector in tax benefits and incentives. Yes, just in that one sector. It is clear where the federal government's major investments are going. In 2023, the amount was $7.3 billion. If a fraction of that was going to support the forestry sector, we would be over the moon. We would be very happy. However, the federal government has never suggested such a thing. For carbon capture and sequestration strategies alone, EDC handed out $102 million in 2023 and $464 million in 2022. Obviously, the federal government is focused on the energy sector. Forestry is definitely the part of the natural resources sector that gets the least attention. The member for Lac-Saint-Jean and I actually did a comprehensive study to figure out what the federal supports for the forestry sector amounted to. The economic benefits for the federal government coming from our region of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean alone exceed the sum total of federal supports for the forestry sector. That is quite something. Why is that? It is because the federal government has always been afraid of standing up for softwood lumber. It is so shocking that even babies are screaming in the House. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mario Simard: I lost my train of thought. I am sorry. I was saying that my region is giving more to the federal government in terms of economic benefits that the sum total of supports it is getting for the forestry sector. Federal investments in the forestry sector go through EDC. The government has never stood up for that sector because primary processors are told that they need to go through Global Affairs Canada. Global Affairs Canada then says that no financial supports can be offered because that would be in violation of trade deals with the U.S. and our trade dispute with the U.S. regarding softwood lumber. Consequently, not a single primary processor of softwood lumber can receive any kind of support from the federal government. We took a closer look at this, because it seemed so unfair. For medium-sized businesses in the forestry sector, the primary market is Canada. The primary market is domestic; it is within Quebec. Even businesses that do not export anything to the U.S. cannot get any sort of financial support from the federal government. The federal government will soon be tabling a strategy for retooling the forestry sector so that it can get through the crisis and create more added value. That is what we hear, but in the past 20 years, the federal government has never given so much as a dime to the forestry sector. Now it is wondering why it is so hard to invest in infrastructure and why all the small communities in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean and the rest of Quebec that depend on forestry are losing their shirts. It is insane. Sawmills are consolidating. The pulp and paper sector is ailing. Meanwhile, the tariff crisis is going on, but there is no federal government support in any form. Last August, the federal government allocated funding to the forestry sector. Seven or eight months later, no one had yet seen a penny of that money. The program parameters had to be tightened to be able to fund certain forestry companies. I get the impression that the same thing is going to happen in the aluminum sector. Primary aluminum is doing relatively well, because the price is adjusted according to the U.S. Midwest premium. However, aluminum processors, based primarily in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, are in an impossible situation. They are currently paying off loans they took out in 2018, and now the government says it is going to allow them to take out new loans. Who can operate that way in an industrial sector, constantly taking out loans to cover the cost of tariffs because the government is not doing its job? What was announced may be a good start, but we will see how it plays out over time. What I personally hope is that the federal government stops investing Quebec's share in fossil fuels and instead uses it to defend Quebec's own interests. I hope that our colleagues from Quebec, both in the government and in the Conservative Party, will be ready to support us on this.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I'm asking my colleague to pick a side and say if he will vote yes or no on the motion. He didn't give a straight answer in his speech.”

Government Orders

Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act

2026-05-01

“My riding is sad that the crisis response bill doesn't send money to our favored industries. I think this bill is bad. You should too.”

“The Prime Minister promised help for Quebec businesses in the economic update, but it wasn't there. I don't know if we can trust his word that it's still coming. I'm worried the government won't follow through.”

“I don't want to answer the hard question about Quebec's substance abuse problem. I want to change the subject to attack oil companies instead. Conservatives shouldn't give greedy corporations taxpayer money.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and congratulate her on her excellent French, even though she has not been speaking it for very long. Everyone in the Bloc Québécois agrees that she is remarkable. In my view, issues relating to substance abuse and health fall under the Government of Quebec's jurisdiction. I am not trying to avoid her question. I would, however, like to point out that I have rarely agreed with the leader of the official opposition, but I do agree with him on one thing. He has pointed out on numerous occasions that the major oil and gas companies are acting like corporate welfare claimants by asking the federal government for money. I know the Conservatives are in favour of defending the energy sector tooth and nail, but they would not stoop so low as to take money from Canadians and hand it over to the greedy oil and gas sector, which is making record profits and sending them back to the United States. On that point, I congratulate the leader of the official opposition.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want more taxpayer money for my riding. I don't like that other provinces get the nice things. Give my province more money instead.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have read the entire document. The whole problem is that the major investments are being made not in Quebec, but in the oil and gas sector. The accelerated capital cost allowance in the economic update applies only to the gas sector. It does not apply to other sectors that are specific to Quebec. There is nothing for our economic sectors. There is only money for the oil and gas sector. The goal of this economic update is to give even more support to Canada's energy sector using taxpayer dollars. This is being done at Quebec's expense, just as Quebec is dealing with one of its worst tariff crises ever thanks to the United States. If my colleague does not find that outrageous, I can draw him a picture.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I am very upset. The economic statement is very bad for Quebec. It doesn't help Quebec's aluminum and forestry sectors enough. These sectors are facing huge tariffs! Catastrophic! The statement helps oil and gas too much. Oil and gas make lots of money for American companies. It's a scandal! I think the government should do what I want instead.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that comes as a surprise to no one. My colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé made it very clear that the Bloc Québécois is disappointed in the budget statement, as did my colleague from Mirabel in his response to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue. I think that his answer was very well put and it showed all the shortcomings of the economic update. This week, in response to oral questions, I heard my Liberal colleagues say many times that they want to build Canada. The update document does talk about building Canada. However, I would like to finish the sentence, because I think that, in reality, they are building Canada while ignoring Quebec. That is what the document should have been called, and I will explain why. I have a little tip for my colleagues. When we want to understand the intent of a government document or proposal, like a budget or an update, there is usually a fairly simple trick. All anyone has to do is search how many times certain words appear in the document. My colleagues will see where I am going with this. Just for fun, I checked to see how many times the word “forest” or “forestry” appears in the economic update. Those words appear six times. Then, I checked to see how many times the word “aluminum” appears in the economic update. We see that word 12 times, which is a bit better. I also checked to see how often the term “climate change” was used, and the answer is five times. When I searched for the word “gas”, I hit the jackpot at 43 times, but the real winner was the word “oil”, which is used 153 times in the economic update. Why am I talking about this? We immediately see where the government's priorities lie. Given what is happening right now, the economic update should have responded to the tariff crisis to help the industries in Canada that are currently facing the highest tariffs. Which two industries in Canada are facing the highest tariffs? First, there is the aluminum industry. As we know, primary aluminum producers are managing to get by without too many problems, but this is catastrophic for aluminum processors. The 50% tariffs are catastrophic for them. Many are operating on credit and struggling to stay afloat right now. There will be consolidations unless the government takes action. That is for the aluminum industry, which is mentioned only 12 times in the economic update. The other sector facing the highest tariffs, and the one most severely impacted by U.S. policies, is the forestry sector. It is subject to 45% tariffs. This figure is the sum of a 10% tariff, countervailing duties, and anti-dumping duties. This means that every time a forestry producer ships $100 worth of products to the United States, $45 is taken from them, stolen. Not many companies can survive with margins cut by 45%. There is another key factor that has emerged in recent weeks. In fact, we were the ones who sounded the alarm for the government, pointing out that, under a new decree, 25% of the total value of aluminum products will now be subject to tariffs, which is destroying Quebec's industrial base. Is this addressed in the economic update? No, at no point does it offer a solution to the problems facing the aluminum and forestry sectors. This makes me think that the goal is to build Canada while ignoring Quebec. I will return to the many repeated proposals we have made. I can talk about that right now. Time and again, we have proposed solutions to the government for addressing the tariff crisis surrounding softwood lumber. The government has always turned a deaf ear to them. What we see in the economic update when the word “forest” appears is a rehashing of what was announced back in August and subsequently expanded. Nothing is new under the sun. We are still in the same position with a liquidity program ill-suited to the needs of people in the industry. We have made concrete proposals to the government with people involved in the forestry sector. We proposed that the government buy back a portion of the countervailing and anti-dumping duties at the end of each month. The government would not necessarily have to pay out this money, since the anti-dumping duties that are currently being held in the United States will eventually be recovered. The government could therefore recoup its costs. We proposed this solution, but the government never wanted to talk to the Bloc Québécois to try to implement it. The same goes for aluminum. If the economic update is about building Canada while ignoring Quebec, what does this economic update actually contain? In my view, the government's primary intention is to build infrastructure to export energy. The fact that the word “gas” appears 43 times and the word “oil” appears 153 times clearly reflects the government's intention to build oil and gas infrastructure in order to export more oil and gas. We had this discussion at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. We heard from Hydro-Québec. Sometimes I like to be a bit mischievous. I asked Hydro‑Québec, which has built two major lines allowing Quebec to export energy to the United States, one to New York and the other to Massachusetts, how much financial support it had received from the federal government to do so. The answer was zero. The federal government did not offer Hydro-Québec a single penny in financial support to develop this energy export infrastructure. We are talking about clean energy, about hydroelectricity. It is a different story when it comes to the oil and gas sector. What does the economic update contain? It includes an increase in the carbon capture and storage tax credit. That information is not coming from me. The former environment minister has stated on numerous occasions that more money has been invested in promoting carbon capture and storage than in certain carbon capture and storage projects themselves. It is a bottomless pit, and it is completely illogical to try to produce clean oil, but notwithstanding that, we know that Export Development Canada, or EDC, put $102 million into the carbon capture and storage sector in 2023. In 2022, $464 million was poured into this sector, which in no way serves the interests of Quebeckers. I will come back to EDC. When we look at the overall support for the gas and oil sector, we see that it is completely outrageous. The federal government is trying to respond to a tariff crisis by supporting the Canadian energy sector. The question that troubles me is this: Who benefits from the Canadian energy sector? People looking for an answer to that question will find something quite shocking. When looking at the ownership structure of the major oil companies, it becomes clear that 80% of these major oil companies are owned by foreign interests. I repeat, 80% of the ownership structure of the major players in the oil sector belongs to foreign interests. Furthermore, 60% of the ownership structure belongs to American interests. What does this mean? It means that the energy lobby, which aims to boost the Canadian economy, is working to the benefit of American interests. Here is a hair-raising fact. From 2021 to 2024, these people made $131 billion in profits. Did they invest in their infrastructure? No. They asked the federal government to take on the risk for the infrastructure while they raked in the profits. I have never seen a model like that. Capitalism is based on people assuming risks with their own money and then reaping the profits. That is not what the oil companies want. For the oil companies, it means having the government assume the risk so they can reap the profits. They produce 12.3 billion dollars' worth of capital flight. The federal government left Quebec out of its economic update. Instead, it is trying to help the big oil and gas companies that send their money to the United States. That is completely outrageous.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want the government to give Quebec more money for two things. I want Quebec to have money for asylum seekers. I also want Quebec to have money because of the carbon tax. If the government gives Quebec more money for those two things then my party will be happy and we might approve this budget.”

Oral Questions

Public Services and Procurement

2026-05-01

“You said something wrong. I'm going to make you look bad to the people of Quebec. Your majority doesn't mean you can avoid responsibility.”

“The other party is hiding the true cost of this program. I want them to tell taxpayers how much they are spending.”

Oral Questions

Labour

2026-04-29

“I'm saying Quebec doesn't need federal interference on workforce training. Quebec knows what it needs. The federal government should just give Quebec its fair share of funds, no strings attached.”

“Give us the $6 billion training fund to spend as Quebec sees fit, not how Ottawa thinks it should be spent. You already agreed to this 30 years ago.”

Statements by Members

Angine de Poitrine

2026-04-29

“I want everyone to know how amazing my local musicians are. I'm riding their coattails for attention.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, are you familiar with Angine de Poitrine, which roughly translates to “chest pain”? I am not referring to the medical condition, but to the duo made up of Saguenay natives Khn and Klek de Poitrine, the hottest music phenomenon on the planet. They are blowing up on social media. Their song Fabienk has become the most viral hit on Spotify worldwide, and they top the charts in 50 different countries, including Canada, the U.S., France, Spain, Australia, and Chile. This is hardly surprising, considering that their music travels more than the Prime Minister. In the Saguenay region, music is by no means a simple matter of “lah, lah, lah”. With Angine de Poitrine, it also includes “dada pythago-cubist mantra-rock”. Even the most eminent music experts are enthralled by all this innovation. The band's creativity would make Salvador Dali blush, and if Mozart were alive, he would call them geniuses. Angine de Poitrine is a sign of Quebec's artistic ingenuity and offers further proof that where culture is concerned, our nation knows how to raise the roof and, who knows, maybe even build a country.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗