Rhéal Éloi Fortin
Based on publicly available information — may contain inaccuracies
Business & Financial Interests
Before entering federal politics, Rhéal Éloi Fortin had a career in law. He was reportedly a co-founder and partner at the law firm Fortin, D'Amour, Goyette, located in Saint-Sauveur, Quebec. His professional background is in civil, commercial, and family law.
Key Relationships & Connections
Rhéal Éloi Fortin served as the interim leader of the Bloc Québécois from 2015 to 2017, following the resignation of Gilles Duceppe. In 2018, he became a key figure in a group of seven MPs who left the Bloc caucus due to disagreements with then-leader Martine Ouellet. This group, which included MPs like Louis Plamondon and Luc Thériault, formed a separate parliamentary group called Québec Debout before eventually rejoining the Bloc caucus after Ouellet's departure.
Public Controversies
The most significant public controversy involving Rhéal Éloi Fortin was the 2018 Bloc Québécois leadership crisis. He was one of seven out of ten Bloc MPs who resigned from the party's caucus, citing disagreements with the leadership approach of Martine Ouellet, which they felt was overly focused on Quebec sovereignty at the expense of other federal issues. The MPs sat as independents under the banner of Québec Debout for several months. The situation caused a major internal crisis for the party. Following a leadership review where Martine Ouellet failed to secure sufficient support, she resigned. Subsequently, Fortin and five of the other dissenting MPs rejoined the Bloc Québécois caucus in September 2018.
Where Rhéal Éloi falls on key policy spectrums
Your Money
People & Society
How We're Governed
Land & Community
Rhéal Fortin won with 25,438 votes (43.8%)
Total votes cast: 58,018
How does Rhéal Éloi Fortin's voting record line up with your values?
Mr. Speaker, Bill C‑235 may seem appealing at first glance because it deals with cases involving people who have committed heinous crimes. It is hard to imagine anything worse than kidnapping, sexual assault and murder. I fully understand the desire to come down hard on people who commit such acts. Still, there is something our Conservative colleagues do not seem to understand, and I do not know
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. As I have said before, the member for Mirabel's speeches are always interesting. He knows a lot more about public finances than I do, so I always learn something when I listen to him. I thank him for his speech. That being said, I heard one thing in his speech that keeps coming up. I get the impression that the government could use the
Madam Speaker, I want to begin by commending my colleague on his speech. On the issue of respect for our veterans and our armed forces, we are on the same page. I think it is important to acknowledge that today. Prime Minister On the issue of buying local, I cannot get over it. The government's decision not to make good on the commitments made by thehimself is quite troubling. I do not
Madam Speaker, creating this new Crown corporation is all well and good. It allows the government to say that decisions will be made independently. However, when we read the bill, it is clear that the government still retains control over decisions. Even if the decisions are officially being made by a Crown corporation, there will still be government oversight. Prime Minister That seems a bit
Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to explain in greater detail how this bill will help veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces successfully transition to civilian life. I agree with her. I have seen cases like this in my constituency. Many individuals leave the armed forces for a variety of reasons, only to find themselves with nothing. They have no job, no social network and no recognition
Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague's views on the 5% of GDP that NATO requires for defence spending. Prime Minister's Personally, I thought the government would be investing in buying tanks or airplanes or recruiting new soldiers. Instead, it seems to be investing primarily in organizational structures. There was going to be an agency, and now it will be a corporation. There was
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question because I have not been able to get a clear answer from our colleagues in the government as to what, in practical terms, this bill will achieve within our armed forces. Will we have more tanks, airplanes, ships, soldiers and so on? Does he have an answer to that question? If not, does my colleague agree with me that the only change is
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his remarks. As always, he demonstrates a thorough grasp of the file. Perhaps he can help clarify something for me. Prime Minister As I read this bill, I am having some difficulty following it as well, much like my colleague. We currently have the Defence Investment Agency, which would be replaced by the Canadian corporation for defence investment. Aside
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. Before I ask her a question, I want to point out to the House that this is a perfect example of the problems we have with the interpretation system. It is forcing a colleague from Quebec to give a speech in English to ensure that her anglophone colleagues understand it. I think that is a shame. Let us not forget that. C‑40 That said, Billtalks