Andréanne Larouche
Shefford, Quebec · Bloc Québécois · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I would also like to join my colleagues in wishing the member a happy retirement. As women in politics, she and I help make up barely 30% of Parliament. I truly wish her a wonderful retirement. Although we do not always share the same values, we live in a healthy democracy.”
“Mr. Speaker, with just two weeks to go before July 1, hundreds of people still cannot find housing and are at risk of becoming homeless. Municipalities are investing to address the unprecedented homelessness crisis, including Montreal, which has tripled its budget. Quebec has also increased funding for this issue in its latest budget.”
“Mr. Speaker, June 15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. At a time when fraud targeting seniors is gaining attention, let us remember the importance of staying vigilant and taking action against the various types of abuse, including financial abuse.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have a quick comment and then a question for my colleague, whom I thank for her speech. I will add my thoughts on this democratic issue. While the government was busy manufacturing its majority, it did not accept any of the 11 recommendations from the Bloc Québécois.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord and reiterate another point. Certain groups have written to us because there has been a great deal of disinformation coming from the Conservatives.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be brief. I listened carefully to my colleague. Does he believe that the amendments proposed in committee will really ensure that the bill effectively addresses this hate speech that should not even be happening in the first place? Does he believe we have the necessary tools to tie all this together properly?”
The complete record
Every one of 640 lines we hold for Andréanne Larouche, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 13.
“I also mentioned a number of figures in the first part of my speech, but I want to start with a few statistics. In Quebec, these offences increased from 45 to 98 per 100,000 population, which is an increase of 119%. In absolute terms, 20,466 sexual assaults were reported in Canada in 2015 compared to 35,956 in 2022. However, these figures should be interpreted with some caution. The important nuance is acknowledging the effect of the #MeToo movement. A large part of the increase in reports can be explained by the #MeToo movement. This movement, which emerged in 2017, has really raised collective awareness, made victims more willing to report their attackers and improved police practices in classifying complaints.”
“Mr. Speaker, I already had an opportunity to speak about this bill for four minutes. It was at the end of the last hour. I was given four minutes to begin the debate on Bill C‑246 , which deals with consecutive sentences for sexual offences. The bill aims to acknowledge the seriousness of sexual violence. Some sexual offences are among the most serious crimes in our society. They leave deep and lasting scars on victims. Victims experience psychological trauma, relationship challenges, loss of trust and sometimes an inability to get back to a normal life. Yes, indeed, sexual offences are among the most serious crimes in our society. According to Statistics Canada, level 1 sexual assaults in Canada increased from 57 to 87 per 100,000 population between 2015 and 2022, which is an increase of 52%.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would have liked to ask my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton that question, but I will ask this colleague instead. I am a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking, and we are very interested in finding ways to strengthen laws to ensure that the products we buy are not tainted with blood. Working groups have pointed out the existence of forced labour and human rights violations in Indonesian supply chains. We really want to encourage the government to include strong protections for workers, indigenous communities and the environment. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the agreement that offers these groups binding protections. On the contrary, the agreement represents a step backwards on the progress that has been made to protect workers in Canadian trade agreements.”
“My question for my colleague is this: Why did the Conservatives vote against several of the amendments proposed by my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to start with a comment and then move on to my question. Just because no one in Shefford is talking to me about the agreement with Indonesia does not mean that we should not diversify our markets and seek to reduce our dependence on the United States. As I said earlier, my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton succeeded in getting various amendments adopted in committee, including the one I mentioned earlier, which provides for a review of the agreement's operation and effect every three years, with a report to be tabled in the House. I would like to congratulate him on that achievement. The other amendment stipulates that the government must ensure that companies exploiting natural resources in Indonesia, particularly palm oil plantations, comply with environmental standards and respect workers' rights.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about the process. The Bloc Québécois is proud to have gotten an amendment adopted that will require the minister to ensure that a review is carried out every three years and a report submitted to the House. That is a good thing. However, we would rather have debated the agreement itself. Instead, we are being forced to debate its application. On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton introduced Bill C‑228 to strengthen Parliament's role in the treaty ratification process. What are my colleague's thoughts on that? Would it not be democratic if we could discuss it more ahead of time and talk about the process as well?”
“Mr. Speaker, thousands of seniors are worried and anxious because of the minister's computer system. To be honest, she does not seem to be taking the situation very seriously. The government is more willing to defend Cúram than stand up for seniors. Seniors may not be getting their OAS payments because of the issues in Cúram, but bills are still coming in. They still have to buy groceries to put food on the table, and they still have to pay rent on the first of the month. What concrete action will the minister take to help the more than 85,000 seniors who are victims of her malfunctioning computer system?”
“Mr. Speaker, yesterday, while answering a question from the Bloc Québécois, the minister accused us of fearmongering over Cúram. Apparently, pointing out that 85,000 seniors are experiencing problems with their OAS is fearmongering. People are not worried about the Bloc Québécois's questions, but about the costly failures of a malfunctioning computer system. Radio-Canada wrote, “The failures of the new federal OAS pension management system are causing concern and anxiety among many Canadian seniors.” Does the minister believe Radio-Canada is fearmongering as well?”
“Its lobbying efforts with various levels of government are a testament to its firm commitment to supporting the work of new generations of researchers and academics in Quebec. On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I wish the Quebec Student Union continued success and, in particular, the best of luck in its endeavours.”
“Mr. Speaker, for 10 years, Quebec students have been coming together to make a real and lasting difference in the living and academic conditions of thousands of Quebeckers through the Quebec Student Union, a national association representing 15 university member associations. Its commitment to supporting the next generation of researchers and improving the living conditions of academics is commendable. It plays an essential role in paving the way for the future of scientific development in Quebec. At a time when scientific and technological developments are moving at lightning speed, now more than ever we need partners like the Quebec Student Union to remind us of the conditions that are necessary to encourage research and innovation. That is one of the things this organization does.”
“Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for her speech, in which she spoke in particular about these courageous Iranian women and their “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement. She expressed her hope that, in the future, these women will have a state that respects their rights. Does my colleague really believe that, by leaving the choice of Iran's next leader to the U.S. president at this time, she can truly guarantee that these Iranian women will be able to live safely and that their rights will be respected?”
“Madam Chair, my colleague did not answer the question from my colleague from Saint‑Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton. Does she know of a country where forced nation-building has worked, and does she believe that forced nation-building, like what Donald Trump is doing right now, will really meet the expectations of the “Women, Life, Freedom” movement?”
“Madam Chair, my colleague has clearly outlined the solutions proposed by the Bloc Québécois. He talked about consulting with allies while acknowledging that Iranians must be the only ones to choose their leaders. Then he talked about preparing a contingency plan beforehand, of course. It has to be prepared. I would like his thoughts on a point that I think has been overlooked: preparing measures to mitigate the impact on the people here. I would like to hear my colleague talk about that, briefly.”
“Madam Chair, my colleague talks a lot about this coming war and their support for it. However, one of the aspects my leader mentioned in his speech earlier is the impact this conflict would have here, such as inflation, when the economic situation is already unstable. Is my colleague aware that this conflict is escalating? Earlier, I attended a meeting with farmers who fear this conflict will continue to escalate and who are particularly concerned about the inflation it could cause here.”
“Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his speech. He opened the door: Yesterday, March 8, was International Women's Day. My colleague talked about the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement. It is more of a comment than a question, but I want to commend that movement. What does my colleague think of the fact that, as my leader said earlier, sadly, women are often the first victims of these religious regimes?”
“Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his speech. I know he is very interested in the United Nations, of course. We have actually travelled there together on a couple of occasions. I would like him to comment on the fact that the majority of members of the United Nations Security Council expressed serious concerns and immediately called for de-escalation and a return to diplomatic negotiations. UN Secretary-General António Guterres is particularly concerned about the risk of renewed violence throughout the region. Could my colleague comment on that?”
“The Liberals, with the support of the Conservatives, have made it so that land can be expropriated for the high-speed rail project without the landowners being given the same rights as those whose land is expropriated for other infrastructure projects. In short, it is clear that the Bloc Québécois made some really good proposals to try to improve the bill. Why did the Conservatives refuse to acknowledge that these proposals would fill in the gaps?”
“Mr. Speaker, Bill C-15 continues a trend we have been seeing with this government. I have been trying to form an opinion on this omnibus bill, on all the laws that amend other laws, particularly with regard to the high-speed rail issue. My colleague mentioned that in his speech, and I will come back to it. It is a bit absurd that we are talking about this when the Bloc Québécois proposed simple amendments, some specifically aimed at allowing victims of disasters to rebuild. There is a gap in this bill on that issue. The amendment was rejected by the Liberal Party, with the support of the Conservatives. The same thing happened with the provision limiting people's ability to challenge expropriations.”
“Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague that veterans deserve our utmost respect and much better treatment, as do many other people in our society, including people with disabilities and seniors. It is hard to invest properly to help them. Let me explain. My colleague talked about cost overruns and the Liberals' tendency to mismanage things. Phoenix and ArriveCAN were mentioned today as examples. Now the Cúram software project is way over budget. It seems like the government is losing control of these programs. That means less money is available to help people in need. Can my colleague comment on that?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleague a question about Bill C-15 and the message it sends for democracy. Let me explain. My colleague, the member for Mirabel , spoke out about the tax on digital giants that was withdrawn to please the U.S. president. In the end, it achieved nothing except to exacerbate the media crisis, because there were no announcements to provide further assistance to local or community media and private media outlets that are losing advertising revenue. Yet there is clear evidence of a direct link between these media outlets, this diversity of voices in the regions, and democracy. Regarding Bill C-15, I have been approached by many environmental groups who are concerned about the environmental impact of this bill and the fact that it repeals existing laws.”
“Mr. Speaker, according to the government's own estimates, 85,000 pensioners have been affected by the issues with Cúram. That is 85,000 people who have been affected by a software with cost overruns of close to $5 billion. If this were happening in Quebec, there would have been a public inquiry a long time ago. However, the government House leader thinks that everything is fine and dandy. He is basically patting himself on the back because, if 85,000 pensioners are having issues, that means that all of the others are doing fine. How out of touch does the government have to be to think that causing problems for 85,000 people is no big deal?”
“Mr. Speaker, according to the government, 85,000 seniors have been having problems getting their old age security benefits because of issues with the Cúram software. Some of them have been waiting for nine months. Yesterday, we saw why it is taking so long. The government House leader said that the errors would be corrected. He said, and I quote, “If there are cases...[we] would have heard about them.” His own government says there are 85,000 victims, and he is still in denial. Do members see now why nothing ever gets fixed at the federal level?”
“Mr. Speaker, the minister said that 85,000 retirees are having problems with their old age security payments because of the federal government. When 85,000 people are affected, it is time for the Liberals to stop treating them as isolated cases. The government needs to pour resources into resolving these cases, which are piling up in Ottawa. The problems with the Cúram software need to be fixed. Civil servants need help to better serve the public. At the very least, Ottawa needs to start taking the problems seriously. When will the federal government get to work for these people?”
“Madam Speaker, we are talking about creating this position through Bill C-10 , which we are debating today. We can only commend the creation of this position as an important step. I am a member of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. For genuine reconciliation with indigenous peoples to occur, we must ensure that action is taken for indigenous women and girls. How many reports show that they are disproportionately affected by problems of all kinds? What does my colleague think about that?”
“Mr. Speaker, we frankly have to wonder whether the ministers read the francophone media. If they did, then they would stop downplaying the problems faced by pensioners who are not receiving their OAS pension. If they did, then they would also know that public servants have been forced to become whistle-blowers because they are fed up with being silenced instead of supported. Enough is enough. There are pension mistakes because of the Cúram software, as every public servant has said. The Liberals seem to be putting more energy into trying to put a lid on the problem than solving it. When are they going to take action?”
“I know that a group of chambers of commerce was here earlier this week to talk about how essential these workers are to supporting businesses in the regions. I will give my colleague the opportunity to talk about these two measures, among others.”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech and for her excellent work. She raised a number of important points, and I want to pick up on a few of them. Of course we agree that this GST credit was necessary. However, I think we need more meaningful measures, which are being discussed in our ridings. I would like to give my colleague the opportunity to talk more about the issues the Liberals are dragging their feet on, such as real EI reform. I know she can attest to the fact that, at the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, the Liberals do not really want this reform, which was proposed some time ago. It could really help some people and would be much more transformative than the GST holiday. I would also like to come back to the issue of foreign workers.”
“Mr. Speaker, there are seniors who have been waiting for their OAS pension for nine months. Meanwhile, we have learned that the government is not only pretending that everything is fine, but it is also not telling the truth to the media or to us when we ask questions. The government is asking public servants to lie to people and tell them that their problems have nothing to do with the Cúram software. What should the Liberals' priority be: helping seniors or covering their own butts?”
“Mr. Speaker, at first, the Liberals did not think there was any problem with pensions. They called it fearmongering. The following week, there were about 30 cases, or 0.2% of the files. Yesterday, that rose to 2% of claimants, which could mean up to 10,000 cases. The Liberals are still treating this like it is no big deal. This government is so accustomed to providing poor services to the public that 10,000 retirees potentially being deprived of their pensions is no big deal. Why does this government never take anything seriously?”
“Mr. Speaker, some retirees are being deprived of their old age security benefits because of errors in the Cúram software. The minister is telling us to give her their names and that they will help them. There are 500,000 new applicants every year. If we are to believe the minister's figures from yesterday, figures that are constantly changing, and if it is true that only about 2% of files are problematic, that still means that 10,000 retirees could be affected. When will she help them instead of downplaying their problem?”
“Mr. Speaker, in five years, people will still need to pay for groceries and rent. Where will we be economically? No one can predict that. One thing is for sure: It is time we thought about solutions that will help people and give them some predictability. This measure will make people think they have a little more money now, but that they have to be careful because they do not know what will happen next. That means that people are still in a state of economic uncertainty, which adds to their stress. We know that stress and economic uncertainty are determinants of health.”
“Mr. Speaker, I addressed that a little in my speech. It breeds political cynicism. The government did not act until it sensed it was in hot water, or once it saw an electoral opening or opportunity. As I said earlier, my electoral crystal ball is no more accurate than any other. This government is presenting measures that might look extremely appealing at first glance. In the past, the Liberals were good at doing that instead of finding solutions. We need only think of the impact of the cost of climate change on food. The OAS pension is our universal system. Why not spend the same amount on a long-term initiative rather than a one-time measure? Unfortunately, governments tend to focus on the short term, not the long term, when it comes to helping people.”
“Mr. Speaker, I think I more than covered that in my speech. The Bloc Québécois made a proposal, and we believe it is one way to help people who are truly in need. We were told that there was no money to increase OAS for people aged 65 to 74 who did not receive anything, yet money was found for this benefit. I would point out, however, that the cost is the same, or nearly the same. The government tends to introduce measures that are more electioneering in nature. One example is the GST credit, which was not appropriate for helping people, or the one-time cheques distributed to just about everyone, including people who did not need them. That is why the Bloc Québécois said that this GST credit is clearly more targeted, but it does not solve the problem in the long term. What will happen to these households in a few years?”
“We could have talked about climate change and its impact on price inflation, the lack of competition among grocers or the increase in housing costs. What can be done about the commodification of housing? All of this has an impact. As I said, people are increasingly turning to food banks. Does the government want to help food banks, or would it rather help people have an income that allows them to live with dignity and access decent housing, so they can feed and take care of themselves properly—in short, grow old with dignity?”
“Aside from the increase to OAS, some seniors say they want to work, first to balance their budgets, but also because they still have the energy to do so. This brings us back to the issue of the senior workforce and their desire to remain in the labour market. Once again, the government is putting obstacles in their way. That is why, in the bill we introduced, we also addressed the income that seniors should be able to earn without having their GIS clawed back. The GIS supports seniors who are struggling the most. These folks would sometimes like to earn a little more money while remaining active, but they are penalized for doing so. These things needed to be considered. There is one last thing that could have been discussed. It is important to recall that inflation will not be fixed simply by sending a cheque.”
“Will there be other measures for helping low-income individuals and struggling families? Money is not the problem. This is a political choice. To wrap up, of course we will be supporting Bill C‑19 , because people need help. However, we in the Bloc Québécois would like to point out that this assistance is insufficient, poorly structured and, most importantly, does not fix the problems with the GST credit, which should be paid monthly to reflect the expenses that people have to pay each month. Helping the most vulnerable, including seniors, is not about sending a cheque from time to time. It is about ensuring they have a stable and predictable income that allows them to live with dignity, month after month.”
“The Bloc Québécois is wondering why this measure was not included in budget 2025. It is nice to make these kinds of announcements, but at some point someone needs to explain where the money is going to come from. We could have debated this when the budget was tabled. When the Bloc Québécois asks the government to adopt measures for seniors, it keeps saying that it does not have enough money. Now that the budget has been tabled and we are even talking about its implementation bill in committee, the government proposes this measure. Now it finds billions of dollars to implement these one-off measures. Let us not forget that one-off measures do not help in the long term. Many organizations are already wondering what is going to happen once this top-up ends in a few years.”
“Meanwhile, the wealthiest households' financial assets are skyrocketing: 70% of financial assets are held by the wealthiest 20%. Housing is becoming less and less affordable, food inflation remains high, and food bank use is spiking. I recently began reviewing SOS Dépannage Moisson Granby's annual report, which highlights a continued increase in requests for food assistance, particularly among seniors. Reports from organizations working with the homeless also show an increase in the number of seniors living on the streets. We can see that this is a reality. As for the GST credit, we know that it is one of the few tools that is well targeted to help the most vulnerable. However, it should be made much more effective. There is an inconsistency in the government's budget planning.”
“(1600) That is why the Bloc Québécois has long been calling for another way to help people cope with inflation and this somewhat uncertain economic period, namely by increasing OAS for seniors aged 65 to 74. The government has refused. My colleague from Mirabel railed against the government earlier today because it kept saying that it could not afford that measure. Now, according to Bill C‑19 , there are billions of dollars available and the government will cut one-time cheques rather than implement a long-term measure that would allow for better budget planning. That leads nicely into the topics of debt, inequality and political choices. Household debt continues to rise. People owe $1.67 for every dollar of disposable income. That is high.”
“With interest rates often above 20%, this can really trigger a poverty spiral. That is why the Bloc Québécois has long been calling for the GST credit to be paid monthly. We even brought it up again in the last campaign as a way to help people in these somewhat troubled economic times with inflation. There is something else that we have noted. I am speaking on this topic today because I have been critic for seniors for quite some time now. There is a direct link to the incomes of seniors. Allow me to explain. Low-income seniors are among the main beneficiaries of the GST credit. Many of them live on a fixed income, which comes primarily from OAS and the GIS. Seniors are also being hit hard by increases in housing costs, food costs and health care costs.”
“While researching comments made about the bill, I read an interesting quote from Clay Jarvis, a banking expert at NerdWallet Canada. He called it a “considerate move” but said that “a few hundred dollars spread out over the course of a year won't be enough to stabilize struggling households”. He wondered about that, and it is obviously a valid point. There is a fundamental problem with providing quarterly payments to deal with a monthly reality. Apart from the one-time cheque, the GST credit is paid every three months. This is a problem because some expenses, such as rent, must be paid every month. Groceries need to be purchased every week, and credit card bills have to be paid every month. This means that many low-income people have to go into debt between payments.”
“I also listened to an interview, which I intend to listen to again, with the Estrie Association coopérative d'économie familiale, an economic co-operative that helps families with their budgeting. This organization seemed to be saying that no one can afford to turn down this assistance. In times of inflation, it may be helpful, but ultimately, it is unclear whether it would have been better to do something more predictable, planned over a longer term. This approach is ad hoc rather than planned. It is tempting to send out one-time cheques when an election is being contemplated. That is what the government must be thinking. A similar measure, known as the grocery rebate, was adopted back in 2023. What people need is not a one-time special cheque, but rather an income that is predictable and adapted to their actual expenses.”
“The bill provides for a one-time payment equal to 50% of the annual GST credit for 2025-26, to be paid by June, and a 25% increase in the GST credit starting in July for a period of five years. According to the government, this will help approximately 12 million people at a total cost of $11.7 billion over six years, including $3.1 billion for the one-time payment. We acknowledge that this measure is definitely going to provide some real relief over the short term. My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's, but this seems to us like more of an electioneering ploy than a planned measure, given that the government opted for one-time payments rather than immediately and permanently increasing the regular payments. This raises questions.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are speaking to the bill introduced today, Bill C-19 , on the GST credit. It is a start, in that it provides some necessary relief, but it does not go far enough. Bill C-19 seeks to provide financial relief to millions of Canadians against a backdrop of the persistently rising cost of living. My colleague from Mirabel just explained the Bloc Québécois's position on the bill in detail. He is a tough act to follow, but I will nonetheless reiterate that we support the bill in principle because the Bloc Québécois is well aware that this help is more than welcome. However, it must be said that the government has missed an opportunity to do better in a fairer and more sustainable way.”
“Mr. Speaker, imagine retiring and then not receiving your pension for nine months. Imagine how much that would affect your financial planning. Some people need their pension to pay their rent. Some people need it to pay for groceries. Imagine being in their shoes and watching this government behave as though everything were going smoothly. The Bloc Québécois is calling for an investigation into the problems the Cúram software caused for retirees, as well as the cost overruns. Will the government co-operate?”
“Mr. Speaker, we are debating a lot of issues related to the Criminal Code. However, I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this because it once again raises the issue of the fiscal imbalance. We can pass all the bills we want, but the bottom line is that Quebec and the provinces are the ones responsible for the administration of justice. It is important for the House to pass legislation, but it is also important to recognize that we then need to transfer funds to Quebec and the provinces so that they are able to administer their justice systems. As my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord rightly said, it is all well and good for us to pass this bill, but if the fiscal imbalance continues, then Quebec and the provinces may not have the means to implement all the laws. What does my colleague think about that?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague on his speech. He spoke at length about his criticisms and what is missing from the bill. I would like to return to certain important aspects that a number of victims' groups have called for and that even his female Conservative colleagues are calling for. For example, in Bill C‑16 , there is an openness to criminalizing coercive control, which is something that groups in Quebec have been advocating for since the publication of the “Rebuilding Trust” report. In fact, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women held a non-partisan press conference in November demanding this type of measure. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this. Of course, there are still things that need to be looked at in this respect. Would it not be worthwhile to at least study it in committee?”
“That is why Quebeckers no longer want to be subject to this law on multiculturalism. We would sooner follow our own model based on who we are.”
“It has been identified as a city in Quebec where people from other places are invited to settle. It is interesting because SERY works very hard, and not only on French-language training. I have taken part in discussion forums with people to share information about our political system, our history and our culture. As a member of Parliament, it is extremely rewarding to speak with these new Quebeckers who are coming to Granby. I cannot forget Valcourt 2030, an organization that hosts summer skills competitions, among other things. These events bring together athletes from around the world who have settled in the Valcourt area. At Christmastime, people gather to share their cultures and traditions from here and other places. These organizations do important work.”
“That is sad because it was a denial of history, and not just Quebec history, including everything that happened with the Durham report and the patriots. History matters. Of course, we want to look to the future, but to know where we are going, we need to know where we came from. Quebec is not the only one that has had historical problems with the British. There was also the hanging of Métis leader Louis Riel and the deportation of the Acadians. In short, history and culture are extremely important. To come back to the organizations in Shefford, I want to acknowledge the work of Solidarité Ethnique Régionale de la Yamaska, or SERY, whose motto is “our home is your home”. Of course, the organization is involved in French-language training, but beyond that, SERY organizes key events, because Granby is a welcoming place.”