Marilène Gill

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to go beyond what the courts have said. However, as I have mentioned on several occasions, this is exactly the question we are asking ourselves: How can they coexist? On the one hand, when reading between the lines in the New Brunswick judgment, it appears that they cannot coexist, whereas in British Columbia, with the Cowichan Tribes, for example, it appears that [more]

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question. We certainly do not want to blur the boundaries between the legislative, executive and judicial branches. Nevertheless, I believe these issues are relevant to everyone. That is why I decided to deliver a carefully considered, fact-based speech. Some concerns may be legitimate. The goal is not to interfere in a debate, but these rulings do have an [more]

Mr. Speaker, there are actually two points in my colleague's remarks, which I also appreciate. The first concerns the actual impacts. I do not know if my colleague missed the part where I discussed the actual impacts. I said that I had read about the subject in several articles. I said that there were no rigorous and precise studies providing us with conclusive data on the situation. I even said [more]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat myself for what is perhaps the third time, but I am trying to be thorough and the Bloc Québécois is, too. I said that I was in favour of the principle of the motion, but not the wording of the motion. I think that gives my colleague an answer.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak on behalf of the Bloc Québécois on this opposition day. I would like to begin by explaining the underlying premise of my remarks. I want to talk about this in a reasonable and balanced manner, because I think it is in everyone's best interest for Quebeckers and Canadians to be informed. I am glad the Conservatives moved this motion, because it [more]

Mr. Speaker, the minister said that one of our responsibilities is to explain complexity. I would add that another of our responsibilities is to clear up any grey areas surrounding a topic so that the public, Quebeckers and Canadians can clearly understand it. Today, we are debating a Conservative motion. In a few minutes, I will speak to the Bloc Québécois's position on that motion. Would the [more]

Mr. Speaker, I was not expecting to talk about areas of jurisdiction, even though, as a Bloc Québécois member, we often talk about this. Of course it is important to respect jurisdictions. I discussed what makes Quebec unique in terms of civil law and the issue of the signing of the Constitution, which is something that is missing for us in Quebec. I expect everyone to fulfill their [more]

Mr. Speaker, we want to be responsible, reasonable and rigorous, as I said at the outset. These are the three “Rs”. We find that doing all this work in just a few days or a few weeks is asking the committee, and even the government, to work too quickly. We believe that we need time to understand, consult and reflect. That is one of the things I think we can talk about. The whole issue of the [more]

Mr. Speaker, all the credit goes to my colleague from Jonquière, who looked through the economic update. The words “forest” and “forestry” only appear four times, while oil and gas are mentioned some 150 times. It might be anecdotal, but it is indicative of the government's interest, or lack thereof, for the forestry sector. What the government is really proposing is retraining. It is offering [more]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes people say that to ask a question is to answer it, and that is what the member did. However, it is true that there is money that is sitting idle, that is, the $4.4 billion that is being unused and that should be going back to the workers. The bottom line is that government has an opportunity to ensure that this money can be used by the industry to get through the crisis. [more]