Guy Caron

[Petitions, June 3rd, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition to the House that calls on the government to make access to employment insurance more universal.

I want to remind members that 35% of unemployed women and 52% of unemployed men who contribute to EI are not eligible for EI benefits.

The petition calls on the government to enhance the current EI system to ensure universal access by lowering the eligibility threshold to 350 hours or 13 weeks, establishing a minimum threshold of 35 weeks of benefits, and increasing the benefit rate to 70% of salary based on the best 12 weeks of salary.

These are just a few of the measures proposed in this petition, which has been signed by people from many regions of Quebec.

[Business of Supply, June 3rd, 2019]

Madam Speaker, there is one element in my colleague's speech with which I agree. It is that this crisis was foreseeable. We knew that the media, especially the print media, was in trouble, but that trouble was compounded by the fact that social media such as Facebook, Twitter and so on, were using, for free, the content created by that media. That accelerated the crisis. That acceleration took place when the Conservatives were in power and they did nothing about it.

I am not saying that what the Liberals are proposing is perfect. I am not saying this it is what we would proposed. However, leaving that crisis for the private sector to solve would be extremely dangerous for the future of our democracy and the future of the independence of the press. There would be very little protection of its independence.

I remind my colleague that we are not only talking about the independence of the media, which I agree is critical, but we are also talking about the viability of the media. We need to find a way to help the media transition to a different model. I would like to ask my friend how this Parliament, the government and the House of Commons can help the media sector to do this.

[Business of Supply, June 3rd, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

In a past life, in my youth, I worked for two weekly newspapers in Rimouski, Le Rimouskois and Progrès-Écho, which are now defunct. There is only one weekly paper left, which was started later on. Diversity of information has really suffered these past few years.

When the Conservatives were in office, from 2011 to 2015, I was in Parliament, and the crisis had already been going on for quite some time. The Conservatives had no solutions to offer back then. I remember my colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert's frequent interventions on this issue, but the Conservatives did not seem to see it as urgent.

Now the Liberals are proposing a plan, which does have many flaws, and the situation is growing ever more urgent. The Conservatives' position is rather confusing, since they have no ideas on how to address the crisis that the media is grappling with.

Could my colleague tell us what the Conservatives would suggest to the media, especially print media, in order to respond to the crisis it is facing today?

[Petitions, May 29th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to present a petition calling on the government to ensure universal access to employment insurance.

I would like to point out that only 35% of unemployed women are eligible for regular EI benefits compared to 52% of unemployed men. That is a grave inequity.

The petitioners, most of whom are from eastern Quebec and the North Shore, would like the government to enhance the current system and ensure universal access to it by lowering the EI eligibility threshold to 350 hours or 13 weeks, by establishing a minimum threshold of 35 weeks of benefits and by increasing the benefit rate to 70% of salary based on the best 12 weeks of salary. The petitioners make other suggestions too.

I am pleased to present this petition on their behalf.

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 28th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to read a quote from a debate that occurred in the House not too long ago.

It is a government that since it acquired a majority has had a different attitude in the House of Commons. It is one where it feels it does not need to consult with people, that it can just walk over some very basic democratic principles. It is one that does not understand the need for diligence. It is one that does not understand the need for working with people or working with members of Parliament. In dealing with important legislation...the government has failed on so many counts.

The government, by once again relying on a time allocation motion to get its agenda passed, speaks of incompetence. It speaks of a genuine lack of respect for parliamentary procedure and ultimately for Canadians. It continues to try to prevent members of Parliament from being engaged and representing their constituents on the floor of the House of Commons.

Who said that? The member for Winnipeg North. He said it on June 3, 2015, when his party was in opposition, shortly before the election. Regardless of what he says now, it is clear that he is talking out of both sides of his mouth, saying one thing when he is in opposition and the opposite when he is in government.

That is not all. They did the same thing with omnibus budget bills. When the government was in opposition, in June 2015, it promised to do things differently from the Conservatives.

I am sorry if I take the member's comments with a grain of salt, but, time and again in this House, the member has completely contradicted what he called for when he was an opposition member.

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 27th, 2019]

With regard to the contract to sell light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia, which Canada signed in 2014 and the government approved in 2016: what meetings were held between Global Affairs Canada and General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada, as of October 2018, including (i) the date of the meeting, (ii) the location of the meeting, (iii) the participants, (iv) the purpose of the meeting?

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 27th, 2019]

With regard to the government’s ratification strategy for the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty: (a) what measures has the government taken so far to comply with the Treaty; (b) what other measures does the government plan to take to comply with the Treaty; (c) what is the timeline for each of the measures in (b); (d) did legal opinions show that measures in Bill C-47 failed to comply with both the spirit and letter of the Treaty, broken down by (i) department, (ii) agency; and (e) for the responses to (d), what are the file numbers of each of these legal opinions?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, May 17th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague would prefer to skip over the debate and send the bill straight to committee.

I would remind him that we were both in opposition during the last Parliament. At the time, opposition members often rose to speak to bills that had unanimous support. We did it so we could voice our concerns.

It is not like the bill is at third reading stage. This is only second reading. I think it is in the best interest of the members of the committee who will be studying the bill to hear what others are saying about the concerns that are out there, even if we do end up voting in favour of the bill.

I would like to know if my colleague is asking to skip the debate and jump ahead to the next stage because he believes that the comments and concerns raised in the House, in this debate, are not useful to the committee's work, knowing full well that there are concerns and reservations on all sides.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, May 17th, 2019]

With regard to project recommendations submitted by Infrastructure Canada during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Investing in Canada Plan, since March 2016: (a) how many project recommendations have been submitted to the Office of the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, broken down by (i) year, (ii) project name, (iii) project financial value, (iv) province, (v) constituency; (b) of the project recommendations in (a), which recommendations were approved by the Office of the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, broken down by (i) year, (ii) province, (iii) federal constituency; and (c) of the recommendations in (a), which project recommendations were not approved by the Office of the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, broken down by (i) year, (ii) province, (iii) federal constituency?

[Telecommunications, May 17th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, one-third of the municipalities in my riding, or 13 out of 39, have little or no cellphone coverage. While big cities salivate at the thought of getting 5G service, some regions are still fighting to get 3G.

The 2019 budget provides funding for high-speed Internet, which is perfect, but once again, there is zero money for cell coverage. This is not the first time this issue has been raised in the House, but the Liberals always sidestep the question.

I am talking about cell service, not high-speed Internet.

Why do the Liberals treat people in the regions like second-class citizens?