Xavier Barsalou-Duval

Madam Speaker, with all due respect, Louise Arbour, the Governor General, has no business interfering in Quebec's political debate over the monarchy. Her role does not extend to offering legal opinions, much less meddling in Quebec politics. Furthermore, she is in a clear conflict of interest, considering that she represents the monarchy in Canada. Despite her internationally recognized skills, she agreed to serve as a symbolic ribbon cutter. In the end, it was her decision and she has to take responsibility for it. Will the government remind her that it is her duty to be circumspect and that she should mind her own business?

Madam Speaker, there is unanimity in Quebec. All members of the Quebec National Assembly voted to abolish the oath to the British Crown. In Quebec, the general public and politicians alike agree that a foreign country's monarchy, an undemocratic symbol, must be removed from our institutions. The only thing Quebeckers will miss less than the monarchy in the Red Hall is the Governor General's opinion on the matter. Will the government remind Ms. Arbour that, when she accepted her position, she also agreed to give up politics?

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's speech, specifically the Conservative motion under debate today, is no different from the debates we have come to expect from them. I think almost all of the opposition days in the House have been Conservative opposition days seeking to benefit the oil companies. However, if we look at the reactions to international tensions in recent months, there has been pressure for a lower gas tax, which the Conservatives achieved because the Liberals gave it to them. There has been a really substantial increase in all possible federal subsidies for oil companies. Last week, the government even made a commitment to buy a new pipeline and build it at taxpayers' expense. However, none of that has had any impact on prices at the pump. In fact, prices at the pump continue to rise. If we look closely, the only thing increasing is oil companies' profits. Ordinary Canadians continue to pay more, despite the fact that the government is giving more money to oil companies. Does my colleague really think that his is the right solution?

Mr. Speaker, in his speech, the Leader of the Opposition implied that a Conservative government in Ottawa would dampen Quebec's drive for independence. This raises several questions for me. Let us look at the facts rather than his speech: Yesterday, Quebeckers elected a Parti Québécois government, which obviously advocates for Quebec's independence. Under Conservative leadership, from 2012 to 2014, a Parti Québécois government was also elected, one that advocated for Quebec's independence. For the benefit of my Conservative colleague, I would like to add that the Bloc Québécois has never disappeared. The Bloc Québécois is still here. There have always been people fighting for Quebec to stand on its own two feet. My question is this: Can he not acknowledge that it is a legitimate aspiration for a nation to have its own country?

Mr. Speaker, in the case of Bill C-39, the Prime Minister is using the crisis with Donald Trump to adopt permanent changes that would otherwise be unacceptable. He is circumventing laws with his new pipeline, which he will personally select based on his own criteria. The proof that Donald Trump is an excuse is that the Prime Minister is repealing a provision of Bill C-5 that limited its emergency powers to five years. Donald Trump will no longer be around in five years, but the Prime Minister will be able to continue suspending environmental laws indefinitely. What is that if not an abuse of power?