Claude DeBellefeuille
Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, Quebec · Bloc Québécois · Canada
“We are also told that it would have been easier to stop an organized network of pedophiles operating on the Internet. I asked if that means that such criminals cannot be arrested today, because we do not have a law on lawful access on the books. The answer is no.”
“We then asked the government if the commissioner could come back. What was happening was that department officials were completely dismantling all of the amendments proposed by the Privacy Commissioner. It is easy to understand why I was a little skeptical. I wondered if the commissioner and his team had really been that wrong.”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her kind words. I think she is brave, because she came during the clause-by-clause study, like my NDP colleague did. They did not have the right to speak, but they were there, hard-working and rigorous, and they proposed amendments. I have a lot of respect for these two members.”
“All the amendments I proposed came either from the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Quebec Bar Association, or the chair of the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency. I did not propose far-fetched amendments. They were based on expert testimony that sought to help us strike a balance.”
“He is telling us that Canada is lagging behind. What exactly are we comparing ourselves to? The United Kingdom does not have a charter protecting people's rights, and neither does the United States. They have street cameras in the U.K. that film people.”
“However, it is still a parliamentary tool that can be used as a last resort when one feels that, no matter what people say, the government's primary goal is to run out the clock, hold a few hours of debate, and then, after about 20 hours, bring in closure and claim that the opposition parties are wasting their time.”
The complete record
Every one of 543 lines we hold for Claude DeBellefeuille, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 11.
“In the last Parliament, our Conservative colleagues called us the “Liberal Bloc”, but nothing beats the Liberal-Conservative alliance. They are thick as thieves. I saw them all smiling and having fun during the vote earlier. Folks on both sides of the House are happy. At last, they can impose their vision, ignore laws and trample on provincial jurisdiction. No obstacles will stand in their way. Gone is the need for accountability, transparency or consultation with indigenous nations, Métis peoples and the territories. This is unprecedented, yet no one seems upset about it. Only Bloc Québécois, NDP and Green Party members dared to stand up and cry foul. I am a down-to-earth person. I am all about facts, and I like to do the research, but I have failed to find an answer to the question I asked off the top. I think we are being scammed.”
“There is nothing to justify botching the debate on this bill, which literally transforms the way of doing business and reflects the Liberals' affront to democracy. After a short four weeks of work and after the prorogation of Parliament, when we had not sat since December, the first thing the government did was introduce a bill that we did not even have the opportunity to debate. We cannot get on board with that. I may be a bit suspicious, but how does it look when a bill is rushed through right before summer, when people are spending more time grilling than watching television? It certainly limits exposure to criticism. Nobody will make the Liberals justify their actions. That goes double for the Conservatives, because they are complicit.”
“Those include the aluminum and steel sectors, but also the forestry sector, which is not mentioned much on the other side of the House. The Liberals have trouble saying “forest” and “forestry industry”. Quebec's premier told the Prime Minister of Canada today that something had to be done for Quebec's regions, where the forestry industry creates good jobs. The sector is really struggling. I do not understand what the bill we are debating will change or improve for people in Quebec's forestry, aluminum and steel sectors. I think it is an excuse to act quickly, justify the urgency and grab powers that are excessive and akin to those in the Emergencies Act. There is nothing to justify this urgency.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am almost one of the last to speak before the final passage of this bill. Numerous questions remain unanswered, which is normal, because there has been limited debate on this bill. We have heard from almost no witnesses and we did not have the opportunity to move many amendments. This bill was tabled in a rush to respond to the tariff crisis. I will say right off the bat that I am not an engineer. I am a social worker and manager; I managed shelter beds. However, I must admit that I fail to understand how this bill responds to the tariff crisis. It is strange because Mr. Legault, the Premier of Quebec, spoke with the Prime Minister of Canada today and asked him to act quickly to support the sectors that have been affected by the U.S. tariffs for a few weeks now.”
“Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the member. She is very critical of the Liberal government. She has a lot to say. She is highly critical of it, so what I do not understand is why she voted in favour of time allocation to pass Bill C‑5 quickly, with no debate, with no experts, with nothing. She criticizes it, but what she is not saying out loud is that she is happy with Bill C‑5. The Liberals have served up a nice little bill that she herself would probably have liked to introduce. Why did she agree to pass a bill without debate?”
“Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciated the passionate speech from my colleague across the aisle, and I congratulate him as he is just starting out as a new member of the House. He just mentioned the “one project, one assessment” approach on environmental matters. Today, the Premier of Quebec reiterated to the Prime Minister of Canada that projects must be determined based on Quebec's recommendations and that the only environmental assessment must be Quebec's assessment. What does my colleague think of what the Quebec premier is calling for?”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague is always very thoughtful, careful and professional. I would like her, as the Bloc Québécois critic for labour, to say a few words about the fact that the government, in its original proposal, did not exempt the Canada Labour Code from the application of the bill. The work of the member for Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères , with the support of my colleague from Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, ensured that an amendment was proposed to exclude the Canada Labour Code from the bill. According to her, why did the government keep it in and wait for us to propose an amendment? Why did it not occur to the government that it should not touch this legislation?”
“Mr. Speaker, I think the minister is well aware that the Bloc Québécois supports the first part of the bill, which the minister also supports. I have a more technical question for her. Once the bill is passed, we believe that Quebec dairy producers and slaughterhouses could quickly be federally licensed. Basically, we would no longer have to rely on the federal government and they would quickly receive a licence. Can the minister tell me approximately how long it would take for slaughterhouses to become federally licensed once the bill has received royal assent? What is the timeline?”
“Mr. Speaker, as a female MP, I would like to take up the point that my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche made. Not all colleagues elected to the House are exceptional. I think there is a petition going around against one of his colleagues that was launched by a group of women. My colleague is a scholar, he is educated and he knows what “exceptional” means. When he said that, it had an impact on me as a woman. Perhaps he might reconsider his comment. I would like my colleague to tell me why the Liberals were against the amendments that call for the provinces and Quebec to be consulted.”
“Mr. Speaker, I recognize my colleague's thoroughness and professionalism, but I am wondering about something after listening to his speech. If he is interested in the issue and in debating it, why does he not agree that the bill should be studied in committee? Then he would have a chance to debate it and hear from experts. Why does he want to defeat Bill C-3 at this stage?”
“Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech. He is always so impassioned when he believes in what he is saying. I am surprised, because the law is important to him. It seems to me that the bill before us responds to a ruling by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Is he prepared to convince his colleagues in the House of Commons not to respond to a ruling by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice?”
“Motion Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move: That the House recognize the impressive work of the Sûreté du Québec and Ontario Provincial Police in the last few days following the disappearance of little Claire Bell. That it salute and thank the hundreds of volunteer, witnesses and groups who offered their support for the search operations and contributed in one way or another to the successful resolution of this case.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member knows full well that, currently, border officers have the ability and authority to inspect rail cars carrying imported goods. Bill C-2 now includes an additional power, the power to inspect rail cars carrying goods destined for export. How will officers do that, though? Currently, even though they are empowered to inspect rail cars containing imported goods, they do it rarely, if at all, because they are short-staffed. How can they be given additional powers when they are unable to fully assume their role of examining and inspecting rail cars carrying exports and imports?”
“Right now, Canada has the capacity to train 600 customs officers per year. Does my colleague not find it odd that, at this time, we have no idea what the minister's plan is for reaching his target of recruiting 1,000 officers?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to mention that Quebec just got some amazing news. The three-year-old girl who has been missing for three days after being abandoned by her mother has just been found in St. Albert, Ontario. I wanted to share my happiness with everyone in the House of Commons. I want to thank the police officers and everyone else who actively helped find little Claire Bell. She is alive and doing well. Soon we will find out the whole story. Many thanks to the police and to everyone who chipped in, including the members of the public who provided tips that led to the little girl being found in St. Albert. That said, here is my question for my colleague. To reach his objectives, the Minister of Public Safety set a target of recruiting 1,000 customs officers.”
“Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech and got the impression that he has grievances against the government and that he disagrees with its actions. Did I misunderstand? Is this member preparing to vote in favour of gagging debate on the important bill C-5 ?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if you were in the Speaker's chair when I told the House earlier today that June 12 is “Quebec Buy Local Day”. This is the first initiative of its kind in Quebec, and I want to encourage all my colleagues in the House, both the Bloc Québécois and the other political parties, to go buy a local Quebec product. Personally, I always keep a supply of rosemary-marinated eggs from Domaine du Paysan in my fridge. It is a great alternative for people who don't have the time to eat enough protein. Now, with my little advertising plug over, I have a question for my colleague. I want to know whether he really thinks that the government has taken concrete steps to seek justice in the courts against people who literally stole from and took advantage of taxpayers.”
“Can my colleague tell me whether she agrees and whether she thinks her government is doing enough to find the guilty parties to make them pay and to ensure that we are reimbursed?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today because it is a special day. It is June 12, “Quebec Buy Local Day”. Today is Quebec's first-ever buy local day and I am proud to take the floor and showcase my earrings. They were made by a creator in my riding, Verretuose. That was an aside to tell people to buy local. Now, I have a question for my colleague, who is a very conscientious, thorough and hard-working member of Parliament. I listened to her speech, but there is one thing that caught my attention. If the scandal surrounding the ArriveCAN app had never come to light, if no one had leaked the information, we might never have known that the government and taxpayers were being robbed by companies that were taking advantage of the government's generosity and their close ties with the public service.”
“Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech. In his opinion, did the previous government, like the current one, make every effort to recover the amounts that were wrongfully billed to it and, by extension, to taxpayers? Does my colleague believe that the government is doing everything necessary to identify the public service officials who failed to exercise vigilance and diligence in overseeing these contracts? Does he think that more needs to be done? Can he explain this to us?”
“Mr. Speaker, during the 2025 election campaign, the Bloc Québécois proposed reducing spending on the public service and external consultants by $21 million over five years. The Liberal government is also proposing to cut spending on outside consultants, which is a good thing. However, what we do not understand is that the main estimates provide for an 8% increase in spending, while the supplementary estimates (A) still provide for $9.3 billion in new spending. Is the government also proposing to cut revenues without introducing a new budget?”
“We thank Henri Laberge for his tireless efforts in his quest for an independent Quebec, one that is proud of its values and also compassionate. Bolstered by his legacy, we will continue to fight the fight. Thank you, Henri.”
“Mr. Speaker, Quebec has lost a fierce advocate for Quebec independence, the French language, workers' rights and state secularism. Henri Laberge passed away on May 2. On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I would like to offer my sincere condolences to his family and loved ones. Henri Laberge fought on all fronts for our nation, from the Rassemblement pour l'indépendance nationale to the Bloc Québécois, where he served as chair of the citizenship commission. An strong advocate for the French language, he was chief of staff to Camille Laurin when Quebec was drafting Bill 101. He moved in working-class circles and, alongside Michel Chartrand and Fernand Daoust, he was an adviser to the Centrale de l'enseignement du Québec. His 30 years of involvement in the Mouvement laïque québécois helped modernize our society.”
“Worse still, they contributed, through income and sales tax paid to Ottawa, to bankrolling that refund, an election gift to residents of the other provinces.”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague whom I respect. I had the pleasure of sitting with her on the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, and I know that she is a disciplined and principled woman. I would like to know her opinion on the following question. On April 1, in the middle of the election, the Prime Minister abolished the carbon tax, so the tax is no more. If it had stayed, residents of the provinces, with the exception of British Columbia and Quebec, would have been entitled to the carbon tax rebate. Since this tax has not been collected, they are not then entitled to the refund. However, they got a cheque even though the tax was abolished. Does the member consider that to be a normal, fair and equitable way of operating? The people of British Columbia and Quebec did not receive a dime.”
“Madam Speaker, Donald Trump's attacks on our economy are escalating, and our industries are not asking for the moon. They are asking for guarantees in terms of access to liquidity when needed and access to wage subsidies to hang onto their workers and their expertise. All we are asking the Liberals to do is to plan ahead for once, rather than waiting for plants to close and for Quebeckers to lose their jobs. The Liberals need to be proactive, rather than reacting after it is too late. What are they waiting for?”
“Madam Chair, I would like the minister to clarify his thoughts on exit controls for foreign nationals. It is not right that there are foreign nationals in this country but we do not know where. We also do not know when they leave the country. What I really want the minister to clarify is what he is going to do to improve the situation. Is he satisfied with the current measures? Is he not aware that he needs to implement new controls for foreign nationals to properly screen people leaving Canada? I would like him to tell me very specifically how he is going to address this gap.”
“Madam Chair, we have often seen that the government does not really know who is leaving Canada. For example, following a study by CIBC economists in 2023, the government discovered that Canada was undercounting its population by one million. Unlike some other countries, Canada has no exit immigration controls, such as biometric data checks on foreign nationals. As a result, the government is losing track of the temporary immigrants on its territory. Bill C‑2 contains a provision about reporting the departure of sex offenders from Canada. However, without tighter controls, this measure could be ineffective, since the government often has no idea who is leaving the country. It must rely solely on airlines and information shared by foreign countries. How does the minister plan to fix this situation?”
“Madam Chair, could the minister be more specific and tell us what he means by “in short order”? How long will it take? Will it be in a month, two months or a year? Can he clarify what he means by “in short order”?”
“Madam Chair, I would like to ask the minister a question about gun control. We know there are a few months left in the amnesty period for guns that were banned on May 1, 2020. When will phase two of the buyback program be rolled out?”
“Madam Chair, the minister is probably as concerned as I am about the situation of indigenous border communities. In my riding, that means Akwesasne. These communities are victims of geography and are being exploited by criminal groups from the big cities. For example, we know that guns are passing through indigenous reserves, but first nations police services are short on resources. Will the government give more support to indigenous police services? What is it going to do?”
“Madam Chair, regarding foreign interference, several measures in Bill C‑70 were adopted during the last Parliament, but the regulations still have not been implemented. When are you going to adopt these measures?”
“Madam Chair, I would now like to talk about the issue of gender transitions for prisoners and inmates who have assaulted women. There was a deplorable case in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. A pedophile was released and was now identifying as a woman with a different first name, but the information was not shared with the victim he had raped. According to Radio-Canada reports, the victim's family only learned of the attacker's new name and gender identity when they happened to bump into the person. Correctional Service Canada responded that the law prevents it from disclosing information to victims about a sex offender's gender transition. Does the minister agree with Correctional Service Canada's statement, and will he make the necessary changes to the law?”
“Madam Chair, this week, we learned through media reports that the RCMP was recruiting in English only outside Quebec. We were very disheartened to learn that. I know the minister is committed to improving his French. Does he intend to bring the RCMP into line and demand that it remedy this situation?”
“Madam Chair, people in my riding are very aware of the presence of helicopters. We are talking about farmers. We are talking about people whose land is being used by smugglers' vehicles and illegal migrants. People feel as though they have to set up barriers themselves. Does the minister intend to support people who are constantly grappling with this phenomenon and help them cover the cost of installing barriers?”
“Madam Chair, I am concerned about illegal border crossings in both directions because I represent a border region. Some farmers have even paid out of their own pockets, using their own money, to install barriers, to place rocks or vehicles, to prevent vehicles from illegally crossing their farmland. Will the government invest funds to install more physical barriers to prevent smugglers from using private land?”
“Madam Chair, does the minister have a chart to keep track of the hiring process and the start dates of these new RCMP officers? We know that recruitment is challenging and that training takes time. I would like him to explain to me how he intends to go about hiring 1,000 RCMP officers in a short period of time.”
“Madam Chair, to improve border security, the Customs and Immigration Union has proposed that officers be allowed to patrol outside their border crossings to intercept migrants who may be crossing the border illegally. We support this proposal to establish co‑operation between the RCMP and border services officers. Does the minister support the idea of giving patrol officers the authority to monitor the borders? This could be done through regulations and not necessarily through legislation.”
“Madam Chair, I will ask the minister to be more specific. Given that some officers are retiring, does the minister believe that training 600 officers per year will be enough to meet current and future requirements following the passage of Bill C‑2 ?”
“Madam Chair, the government intends to hire 1,000 additional officers, but only 600 border services officers can be trained each year because of a lack of training centres. Does the government intend to create another training centre for border services officers?”
“Madam Chair, according to the Customs and Immigration Union, the Canada Border Services Agency needs an additional 2,000 to 3,000 border officers to carry out its duties. The Canada Border Services Agency training centre can only train 600 officers per year, which is in line with current attrition rates. During the most recent election, the Liberal Party talked about hiring 1,000 additional CBSA officers. However, I was surprised to see that this promise does not appear in the throne speech. Does the government intend to hire 1,000 additional border services officers?”
“Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech, and I would like her to comment on something she did not really say too much about. I think we can all agree that the Liberal government really is managing the entire border, including traffic and border security. Does my colleague truly believe that border officers' powers can really be increased when we know perfectly well that recruiting and training new officers is a massive challenge, one that is actually almost impossible to meet?”
“Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is deeply concerned about the issue of firearms. Bill C-2 talks about giving more power to the Coast Guard to document and observe situations and share that information with the authorities. Does my colleague think this is a good tool for combatting illegal gun trafficking?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome the new member. He made a comment earlier that really got my attention about how opposition members do nothing but oppose and never propose anything. It is the complete opposite. The Bloc Québécois is known here for being hard-working and thorough, for proposing solutions, for improving things and for co-operating. Perhaps no one informed him of this when he arrived for his orientation. I would simply like to tell him that he can count on us to improve things and make suggestions. Now it is up to the government to listen and implement the opposition's common-sense solutions. I have a more specific question. My colleague is from a Montreal riding where there are a lot of newcomers and a lot of problems with the immigration department.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am sure that my colleague shares my concern about the government's current lax approach to controlling gun trafficking. We know that guns are being smuggled illegally from the United States into our country, mainly in my riding, by waterway. Does my colleague agree that the Coast Guard should be given greater authority to monitor, document and report to authorities on certain crossings where illegal firearms are smuggled? Would she agree to having this added to the bill?”
“Madam Speaker, I represent a southern Quebec riding where smugglers and criminal organizations exploit and abuse migrants hoping to cross the border illegally. It cannot be said that the previous government did much to limit, control or reduce this activity. As a member of Parliament, I have worked extensively with the RCMP to document and support residents dealing with this issue. I can also say that we helped the RCMP develop a tool that tells residents what number to call when they see something or experience—”
“Madam Speaker, I think that I have one topic of conversation that might interest my colleague. I am very interested in the issue of gun trafficking. A lot of guns are being smuggled into my riding from the U.S. by water. Bill C-2 would give the Canadian Coast Guard an additional patrolling mandate. What troubles me a bit about this bill is that the government seems to be planning to assign the Coast Guard this new responsibility in the Arctic, but not in areas where gun trafficking is a documented issue. I sincerely believe that we need to do more to curb gun trafficking. The Coast Guard's new responsibilities could help with that, if it is deployed to patrol sectors where gun trafficking is happening.”
“My colleague should urge the Minister of Public Safety to review the decision to reduce the number of hours of monitoring at the Trout River and Herdman border crossings, as well as at Rouses Point, which is in the riding of my colleague from Saint-Jean .”
“Madam Speaker, let me reassure my colleague. As the member for a riding that borders the U.S., I have many contacts at the RCMP and the CBSA, among both the employers and the unions. For that reason, I can say that some of the decisions being made now are not at all consistent with the principle of Bill C-2 . Let me give an example. Two border crossings in my riding have had their hours of service cut. Border crossings used to be monitored 24/7. The CBSA cut 12 hours of monitoring. That means that, in the middle of the countryside, in the middle of a rural area, there are two border crossings, Herdman and Trout River, where there is no monitoring. Municipal officials in both Quebec and the United States disagree with the decision, since it does nothing to protect our borders.”
“If the government commits to doing that, it will certainly have our support. I have much more to say, but my time is running out. We know that this important law is very intrusive when it comes to privacy. I trust that my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord will outline his concerns and ask questions. My colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean will be speaking next, so he will be able to ask questions and talk about his doubts concerning the amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. He will also mention aspects of the bill with which he disagrees. In conclusion, I would like the government to know that, if it respects our willingness to work hard in a professional way, and if it gives us the time we need to study the entire bill, we will work with it in committee to enhance and improve Bill C-2 .”