Mario Beaulieu
La Pointe-de-l'Île, Quebec · Bloc Québécois · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague said that the laws already exist and that they need to be enforced. At least one area does require a legislative amendment, specifically the religious exemption for incitement to hatred.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the repeal of the religious exemption in the Criminal Code for cases of incitement of hatred.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois tabled an amendment that has been adopted. It seeks to abolish the religious exemption in the Criminal Code regarding incitement to hatred. I would like to know what my colleague thinks of this.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois's supplementary opinion seeks to address the issues raised by all of the witnesses and stakeholders who participated in this study. It seeks to resolve the underlying problem behind the current crisis facing Quebec broadcasters, which is driving their calls to reduce the quota.”
“Mr. Speaker, the money for health transfers comes from the taxes paid by Quebec and the provinces. Initially, the federal government committed to covering 50% of the provinces' health care costs. It is now covering just 22%. The provinces protested. They wanted the government to raise that amount to 35%.”
“Recently, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, took a step in the right direction by requiring online streaming companies, such as Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime, to invest 15% of the revenues they generated in Canada in Canadian content, with a view to easing the burden on traditional broadcasters.…”
The complete record
Every one of 260 lines we hold for Mario Beaulieu, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 6.
“Mr. Speaker, the new Minister responsible for Official Languages is already fed up with his mandate. He thinks that saying that French is in decline is about electioneering. He thinks that saying that Montreal is being anglicized is an identity-based grievance. That is how he is starting his mandate. For him, it is very clear that defending French is a boring file that gives racist, xenophobic separatists a chance to complain. Why did the Prime Minister appoint someone who is opposed to protecting the French language as the official languages minister?”
“Mr. Speaker, this bill is poorly thought out. The government is offering a tax cut, but at the same time, this means higher taxes for some seniors and some people with disabilities. What does my colleague think about these flaws in the bill?”
“Mr. Speaker, by officially scrapping the carbon tax, Bill C-4 confirms that Quebeckers were robbed. The Liberal government decided to entice voters with compensation for the carbon tax, even though the tax had not even been levied for the period in question. This was funded through taxes paid by Quebeckers, meaning we lost $814 million. What does my colleague think of that?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to recognize the 40th anniversary of Les Relevailles de Montréal centre in La Pointe‑de‑l'Île. Since 1985, this centre has supported 15,000 families as they transition to parenthood and through their journey of parenting a child from birth to age 2. The centre provides training, support services, in-home respite care and prenatal and postnatal activities in Montreal East. The centre shares its expertise with parents and professionals throughout the greater Montreal area, and even abroad. I want to commend the executive director, Josée Lapratte, the president, Martine Alary, and the entire Relevailles team. Every day, their respectful work with parents helps support children so that they can reach their full potential and become successful citizens, ready to contribute to the Quebec of tomorrow.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks of the Liberal strategy to buy votes. For example, during the last election campaign, the government handed out $3.7 billion in election goodies in the form of a carbon tax rebate for a period when the carbon tax was not even collected. We in Quebec certainly find this shocking, since $814 million of our tax dollars went to fund these election goodies. What does my colleague think about that?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the various strategies for trying to buy votes. In the last election, the Liberals provided compensation for the carbon tax for a period in which Canadians did not have to pay that tax at all. The Liberals did not provide compensation in Quebec and British Columbia, saying that those provinces did not pay any carbon tax. However, there was no carbon tax during the period targeted by the government's measure. Quebec was deprived of $814 million. What does my colleague think about that?”
“Mr. Speaker, I was told earlier that I am not a Conservative. That said, I can confirm one thing for my colleague. Some people say that the Conservatives are not as interested in centralization as the Liberals are. We saw an example of centralization in housing. We asked for the funds to be transferred to the Quebec government, with no strings attached, but the federal government is centralizing things even more with its Build Canada Homes program. What does my colleague think about that?”
“If the government needed to find areas to make budget cuts, this might have been a good place to start. At the very least, the government could have taken that money and transferred it to Quebec. This shows that when it comes to language, the only way to ensure the future of French in Quebec is through independence.”
“Mr. Speaker, I see that the member for Mirabel understands the situation. There is nothing in the budget on official languages. We see that francophones outside Quebec are struggling. We hear them say that they have rundown schools that are former anglophone schools. They are truly being treated like second-class citizens and the government is sitting on its hands and doing nothing. In Quebec, however, despite the changes to the Official Languages Act, the government keeps spending and exclusively funding the development of English-speaking communities, namely their education system, to promote English, for anglophone lobby groups, for more English in the legal and health care sectors. However, in Quebec, it is French that is under threat. If the government does not want to help French in Quebec, then it should at least not harm it.”
“Mr. Speaker, the request amounts to 0.5% of Canada's GDP. That is not excessive at all. However, I do agree with my colleague to a certain extent. The Liberals often say that this is a generational budget. Of course, they are going to leave behind a generational debt and deficit. Above all, they will be leaving behind measures that promote climate change and that will be very difficult for future generations.”
“Mr. Speaker, the provinces were asking for $100 billion for infrastructure. They got $9 billion in new money. That is not very much. It is like a sprinkle of little goodies. The entire thing is just a bad deal for Quebec and the provinces.”
“Finally, while the Bloc Québécois called for the renewal and unconditional transfer of funds for homebuilding, the Liberals announced further centralization. We offered our co-operation, but it is clear that this is an oil-driven conservative budget and that we were the only ones who really wanted to work in the interests of Quebeckers.”
“They are facing serious challenges and are sounding the alarm. French-language radio associations are so desperate that they are even asking for a reduction in French content quotas. The federal government could easily take action to support them without costing it a penny. For example, it could spread out the federal government's advertising dollars and give them a little more. Of course, ultimately, the only solution is to tax and regulate American digital platforms, which are suffocating them by sucking up their advertising revenue. We have been denouncing this situation for years. It is a matter of tax fairness. Furthermore, the government will be investing only $9 billion in new infrastructure spending.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised climate competitiveness. Well, what we got was climate capitulation. Furthermore, we have just learned that the Liberals are going to announce funding for a new dirty oil pipeline. This is the second pipeline they are going to invest in. All of this will, of course, be financed in part by Quebeckers. As for news media, CBC/Radio-Canada is getting $150 million, with no requirements or conditions; however, there is nothing at all to support private broadcasters and digital media newsrooms. After depriving them of $1.2 billion by refusing to tax American digital platforms, the Prime Minister is now completely abandoning them. The Standing Committee on Official Languages is currently meeting with representatives from private media, notably those from Quebec.”
“It is basically an expense used to justify extracting even more oil. Those companies will get other tax credits until 2040. This is what the government is offering after getting rid of carbon pricing and reducing EV purchase incentives and quotas. It also abandoned the strategy to plant billions of trees. That was a ridiculous measure, but it was supposed to happen. The government has also dropped the 2030 greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets that are needed to meet the Paris targets and much more. Mark Carney promised climate competitiveness—”
“Everyone knows that Quebec takes in much more than its share of asylum seekers. This budget does not address that at all. Instead, it offers $120.4 million over four years, starting in 2026‑27, for a single initiative to recognize eligible protected persons as permanent residents. We all see cases of people waiting to get their permanent resident status or citizenship. It takes four or five years for these migrants and asylum seekers to get a response. This results in truly inhumane situations. Most significant of all will be this budget's impact on the environment. Climate action is virtually absent from this budget. In contrast, fossil fuel industries will get bigger tax credits for longer. Oil and gas companies will keep pocketing even more public money, especially for carbon capture, a process that will never pan out.”
“The Bloc Québécois was calling for a refund for the $3.7 billion in pre-election goodies that were distributed by the Liberals and disguised as a carbon tax rebate. Funnily enough, the carbon tax was no longer being collected, but the Liberals saw an opportunity to hand out goodies and decided to send out a rebate for the carbon tax, even though it had not been collected, without giving anything to Quebec or British Columbia because they do not have a carbon tax. That money was taken from Quebeckers' pockets, from their federal taxes. It amounts to $814 million stolen from Quebeckers. We will say it again. We will continue to say it. We keep harping on this, but it is completely unacceptable. (1620) The Bloc Québécois also asked that Quebec be compensated $733 million for costs associated with taking in asylum seekers.”
“We know that they have been losing purchasing power since 1975. That year, the old age security pension was 20% of the average industrial wage. In 2020, pensions represented only 13% of the average wage. After years of pressure from the Bloc Québécois, the Liberals raised pensions by 10%, but only for seniors aged 75 and over. They ended up creating two classes of seniors. Seniors aged 65 to 74 need money. They are often close to the poverty line. We proposed increasing their OAS by 10% too, but there is nothing for seniors. The budget simply renews the New Horizons for Seniors program, which we are all familiar with and which can provide a seniors' organization with up to $25,000 per year, although very few projects are approved.”
“That represents about one-sixth of the amount that Quebec and the provinces calculated they would need. This budget does not include any increase in health transfers. What is more, as of 2027-28, the escalator will drop to 3%. As was said earlier, this will not even cover the natural 5% to 6% increase in costs, mainly due to population aging. The Liberals say that the budget includes $5 billion over three years for health infrastructure. That is peanuts. For Quebec, this comes out to roughly $300 million a year for three years. The Liberals are clearly telling us that we cannot count on them to carry out major projects such as the Maisonneuve-Rosemont hospital renovation, which alone is costing $5 billion, not to mention all the other projects in Quebec. Seniors are being left behind in this budget.”
“Members will recall, as my colleague just mentioned, that federal health transfers used to cover 50% of Quebec's health care costs back in the 1970s. That was a real commitment. Today, the transfers barely cover 22% of Quebec's health care costs, depriving Quebec of billions of dollars. That is what is known as the fiscal imbalance. Half of our taxes go to Ottawa, but the services are in Quebec, and the federal government does as it pleases with its money. In 2020, the premiers of Quebec and the provinces joined forces and demanded a substantial increase in health transfers from the Liberals. They asked that the transfer be increased to 35%, or $28 billion a year. Four years later, the Liberals did what they do so often: They managed to break the consensus by signing individual agreements adding up to $46.2 billion over 10 years.”
“Mr. Speaker, this budget is a complete sham. Thanks to some very creative accounting, it hides a $78-billion deficit by claiming that $45 billion in spending is actually an investment, when that is not the case at all. Normally, an investment is backed by assets. For example, a person who invests in a house keeps the house. However, in the budget, tax credits for oil companies are presented as investments. That makes no sense. My colleague from Mirabel did the math and found that if we applied the same criteria to Justin Trudeau's budgets, then they all would have been more or less balanced. The budget's key measures are the previously announced tax cut, unlikely investments in defence, and the elimination of tens of thousands of public service jobs. This budget is probably most disappointing for the health care sector.”
“Madam Speaker, I am guessing that my colleague has a number of seniors in his riding, as I do. Does he think that the government should increase pensions for those aged 65 to 74, as it did a few years ago for people aged 75 and over?”
“Madam Speaker, we completely agree that the attempts to pass off spending as investment in the budget is all smoke and mirrors. Can my colleague give us other examples of spending that is billed as investment?”
“Madam Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts. The Bloc Québécois wanted the budget to include an increase in old age security for seniors aged 65 to 74. Everyone knows that the OAS was increased for those over 75, but seniors aged 65 to 74 also need support, since many of them have ended up living in poverty. No adjustments are planned to close this gap. The government has created two classes of seniors and has no interest in fixing that. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.”
“Madam Speaker, what my colleague just said in response to my question was completely false. There was no measure to protect French in Quebec. I studied the action plan for official languages 2023-2028, and even Quebec's minister of the French language looked it over and was surprised to see no measures. I also studied the 2023-24 public accounts, and nowhere was there any new measure for French in Quebec. There were only measures for the English-language education system, English-speaking lobby groups, English-speaking community development, the English-language health care system and access to English-language legal services. There was nothing new for French.”
“Madam Speaker, my colleague referred to French-language content and what is in the budget, but there is almost nothing for official languages in the budget. I think there is a measure for National Acadian Day, which is a good thing. However, I am not the only one who has criticized this shortcoming in the budget. Since 2020, the Liberals have been saying that the federal government has a responsibility to protect French both inside and outside Quebec. However, no new measures have been introduced since the last version of the Official Languages Act. Does my colleague believe that it would be great if the government could comply with its own law and take action to promote French in Quebec?”
“In the AQPV's view, the information must be communicated with sensitivity and humanity; and come with the option of speaking with a person who is trained to support victims. Even if the victim has expressed a wish to receive the information they are entitled to in writing, the victim should still be able to speak with a person who specializes in working with victims, such as someone from the NOV, who can answer any questions and explain how the dates were determined. This is a very important bill, to say the least, and I hope everyone will support it so that it can pass as quickly as possible, so that it does not die on the Order Paper, like the previous version did. I would like to thank my colleague once again for introducing this bill. We hope to proceed as quickly as possible.”
“The brief says that to “better support victims...it would be appropriate to provide them with a simple, clear and concise document, and to offer them a telephone meeting with a specialized resource”, if they want one, that is, “from an organization such as CSC's National Office for Victims (NOV)”, because this support “would help victims better understand the next steps and therefore make them feel safer”. This is essential. The brief also talks about support services for victims when they receive information: The AQPV would also like to raise the following questions: How would the explanations of the way the dates were determined be provided to victims? Would they be provided in writing only? What measures would be taken to support victims when they receive this information?”
“Earlier on, my colleague said, first of all, that victims need to want to receive this information. Next, this information must be communicated in a way that is clear and tailored to what victims want. The association wrote in its brief: ...the AQPV believes that, when the sentence is handed down, the victim should already be informed of what a federal sentence consists of, as well as what the offender may be entitled to, including parole eligibility and the circumstances that may lead to it. Correctional Service Canada documentation is “available online, including that concerning the possibility of parole”, but it is complex, even for a criminologist.”
“Madam Speaker, first of all, I congratulate my colleague for introducing Bill C-221 , especially in such an emotional situation. I have never experienced that, so it is hard for me to imagine, but I think victims have a right to know. The bill aims to share information about temporary absences more effectively. It is heartening to see all the parties working across party lines to support this bill for humanitarian reasons. The Association québécoise Plaidoyer-Victimes, or AQPV, felt that the bill was in line with its demands. In a brief, the AQPV said: The AQPV believes it is essential to explain how decisions on eligibility dates and review dates applicable to the offender in respect of temporary absences, releases or parole are made. The AQPV wonders what form these explanations will take....”
“Mr. Speaker, the Jordan decision stipulates that, once a certain time limit has been exceeded, criminals who have committed murder, sexual offences, or acts of terrorism may be released on the grounds that the delay in bringing their case to trial has been unreasonable. Would my colleague agree with us so that the Jordan decision cannot be invoked to justify the release of these individuals solely on the grounds that the proceedings have taken too long?”
“Mr. Speaker, during the 44th Parliament, the Bloc Québécois introduced Bill C‑392 to provide a framework for the use of the Jordan decision, which results in cases being thrown out and criminals being released on the grounds that the proceedings are taking too long. We would like to make it impossible to use the Jordan decision for sexual offences, murder, kidnapping, crimes involving firearms, or terrorism. I would like my colleague's thoughts on that.”
“Mr. Speaker, judges lose a lot of independence with this bill. For instance, it imposes pretrial detention for a range of crimes that do not necessarily pose a threat to the public, such as car theft. Just because someone is accused of car theft does not necessarily mean that they are guilty or that they pose a threat to the public. The Bloc Québécois is not opposed to all reverse onus provisions, like in cases of domestic violence for example, but I would like to hear a little more from my colleague on this subject.”
“Mr. Speaker, the bill eliminates the ladder principle when there is a reverse onus at the bail stage. The Bloc Québécois is questioning this measure because the Supreme Court has never ruled that remand is prohibited. I would like to hear my colleague's opinion on that.”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague said earlier that this budget supports French. She mentioned a subsidy for National Acadian Day. I agree with that. That is good news. However, there is nothing else. At the Standing Committee on Official Languages, we have heard from various francophone associations and school boards outside Quebec who are saying that they do not have enough money or enough schools. There is a real decline in French. Despite the fact that the modernized version of the Official Languages Act includes elements that were adopted to promote French in Quebec, there is nothing at all in the budget for Quebec, nothing has been done. The government is not abiding by its own Official Languages Act when it comes to defending the French language in Quebec. What are my colleague's thoughts on that?”
“Madam Speaker, I am interested to know what my colleague thinks about the magic trick that the Liberals played with the budget by categorizing one part as spending and the other as investments. One expert and economist said that if the same criteria had been applied to Justin Trudeau's budgets, they would almost always have been balanced or even surplus budgets. What does my colleague think of the new creative accounting method used for the budget?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on an excellent speech and for all the work he has been doing. My understanding is that the final outcome will be that someone may have been a resident of Canada for five years, but over a very long period spanning many decades, and that their descendants will automatically gain Canadian citizenship without undergoing a security screening or passing a language and citizenship test. Why does my colleague think the Liberals and New Democrats would want to have such lax requirements when admitting new citizens? Why are they also refusing to tell us the number of new citizens involved?”
“Madam Speaker, the Conservatives want tougher measures to fight crime. I would like to know their thoughts on the following ideas for cracking down on organized crime: creating a registry of criminal organizations and making it illegal to display symbols or insignia used by criminal organizations. What does my colleague think about that?”
“Madam Speaker, the Conservatives want tougher measures to fight crime. I would like to know whether they agree that we also need to crack down on criminal organizations by, for example, creating a registry of such organizations, making it easier to seize their assets and prohibiting them from displaying their insignia and symbols.”
“Mr. Speaker, what is concerning is that, in committee, we asked how many people might be impacted by this measure, and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship was unable to answer the question. She did not know. One of the effects of the amendments proposed by the Liberals and the New Democrats is to remove the requirement to produce reports that indicate how many people will actually be affected by this measure. Does my colleague have an idea of how many people could be affected by this measure? What does he think of this amendment, which simply removes the government's obligation to be accountable?”
“Mr. Speaker, basically, if we were to accept the Liberal and NDP amendments to the amendments proposed in committee, let us just say that someone could have lived in Canada for three years out of 65, and their children, who never lived in Canada, could automatically apply for Canadian citizenship by descent without a security check, language test or citizenship test. Why does my colleague think the Liberals want to offer citizenship by descent unconditionally, without any checks?”
“Mr. Speaker, beyond the semantic debates about naturalization and descent, with Bill C‑3 , we could have someone who obtained citizenship in Canada after living in Canada for three out of 60 years and whose children could get citizenship without ever living in Canada, without knowing the language and without passing a security assessment. What does my colleague think about all that? Why are the Liberals bent on having such weak conditions for citizenship by descent?”
“Mr. Speaker, one objective of the amendments proposed is to grant citizenship by descent. However, the amendments state that the applicant should still be required to undergo security, language and knowledge testing, like any other naturalized citizen. What have my colleague and the Liberals got against that?”
“There are people who believe that the Quebec model does not exist, that there is no other model for integrating newcomers than multiculturalism. How does my colleague explain this lack of knowledge—”
“Mr. Speaker, what we are increasingly seeing around the world is that models based on multiculturalism are being rejected. Multiculturalism involves interacting with people on the basis of their ethnic origin, which encourages people to remain within their ethnic group. In contrast, the Quebec model, which we call an intercultural model and which many people today refer to as cultural convergence, aims to further promote integration into the workplace and integration into the culture of the host society. This could apply to the rest of Canada if people were interested in such an approach. It would further encourage the integration of newcomers into the francophone culture all over Canada. This bill has been introduced several times in the House over the years.”
“Mr. Speaker, according to the bill, border officers have a surveillance mandate, but they are not truly a part of national defence. They cannot intervene directly. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about that.”
“Mr. Speaker, English is hardly at risk in Quebec. It is unacceptable to waste $52 million of our money to anglicize our hospitals, rather than providing people with actual health care. Obviously, the Government of Quebec has spoken out about this, saying, “Once again, the federal government is infringing on Quebec's jurisdictions....Instead, it should be transferring the money to Quebec with no strings attached and letting the government that is responsible for health decide how best to use it”. Why not transfer the money to Quebec so that it can be put to good use in providing actual health care to Quebeckers?”
“Mr. Speaker, imagine being this out of touch with Quebeckers: On Thursday, the federal government announced $52 million for Quebec's health care system, but not for treating the sick. No, that $52 million is for anglicizing our hospitals. What our hospitals need is money to care for Quebeckers, not money to anglicize Quebec. English is alive and well in Quebec, including in hospitals. When will the government stop its crusade to anglicize Quebec?”
“Madam Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the fact that the Customs and Immigration Union estimates that we need an additional 2,000 to 3,000 officers in order to truly ensure better border control. What are his thoughts on the fact that the Canadian Coast Guard, despite having a mandate to control and monitor the border, is not authorized to intervene and is not a part of DND?”
“Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the minister on his speech. The Bloc Québécois has long called for better border control, whether to combat the export of stolen vehicles, reduce the number of asylum seekers in Quebec, or fight fentanyl and money laundering. We are pleased that Bill C‑12 is doing away with the most problematic elements of Bill C‑2 with regard to privacy violations. However, there is one major issue on which we are still looking for clarification. The minister said he would add 1,000 RCMP officers and 1,000 border officers. The 1,000 RCMP officers were mentioned in the Speech from the Throne, but the 1,000 CBSA officers were not. The unions tell us that it would take at least 2,000 or 3,000 more CBSA officers for the agency to be able to truly fulfill its mandate. I would like my colleague to comment on that.”