Madam Speaker, knowing the good common sense of my colleague, I want to ask him if he does not think it despicable that his party voted against a motion that seemed to make a lot of sense and that—
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 31% of the vote.
Export and Import Permits Act September 21st, 2017
Madam Speaker, knowing the good common sense of my colleague, I want to ask him if he does not think it despicable that his party voted against a motion that seemed to make a lot of sense and that—
Export and Import Permits Act September 21st, 2017
Mr. Speaker, does my colleague believe that this issue and our economic relationship with our trading partner the United States are of such importance that they call for pragmatism, openness, and collaboration in committee? Surely they deserve that.
Preclearance Act, 2016 June 21st, 2017
Mr. Speaker, first, I want to congratulate my colleague on his very informative speech. His expertise never ceases to amaze. I am very proud to work with him.
I have a question for him. He provided a lot of information on the reasons for his opposition to and dissatisfaction with the bill. I have a rather simple question about the botched nature of the bill and the many gaps in it.
A few months ago, we might have thought that the Liberals had an idea, a tactic, or a reason for acting the way they are, but does it not just boil down to incompetence? They are being lazy and introducing flawed bills. I see it in so many other areas. I would like my colleague's opinion on that.
Innovation, Science and Economic Development June 20th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, the government's inconsistency will never cease to amaze us. In Canada, the only plug-in hybrid minivan available is the Chrysler Pacifica, manufactured here by our unionized workers in Windsor. This is a fine opportunity for the National Capital Commission to purchase one and to show it off to all the tourists who come to Ottawa to celebrate Canada 150 right here, in front of the Parliament buildings. Well, no, that will not happen. The National Capital Commission's two new minivans run on gas only. What a missed opportunity.
Can someone tell me why we want to hide our finest technological achievements? These are not made in China.
Amendments to Standing Orders June 20th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I find it quite amusing to hear my colleague opposite talk about discussions, when an agenda cloaked in white, purity, and sunny ways was shamelessly imposed on us in a major way. Today, as an NDP member, I have to mention the Senate, which has said that the infrastructure bank should not be included in omnibus bills. I am even citing the Senate, which goes to show how much everyone agrees.
In my opinion, it is ridiculous for the government to claim to be a new breath of fresh air for democracy when it is imposing a monstrous bill, inserted in an omnibus bill, to make its pals happy.
I would like to hear my colleague’s comments on this.
Amendments to Standing Orders June 20th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. It must be said that his party has always been quite clear about its rather stubborn desire to lead the country without worrying much about details. In the 10 years that the Harper government was in power, we often saw the same kind of approach.
While Canadians have the unpleasant surprise of seeing that the Liberal government, after promising true blue, even “obamaesque”, democracy, is adopting its own preferred agenda, does the member enjoy seeing the Liberals taking a governing approach that somewhat resembles that of his own government, which at least had the merit of not hiding it?
The Conservative government did not care that people were not happy and did what it wanted. As for the Liberals, they give nice speeches on a great positive democracy and sunny ways, but in the end their agenda is rather dark. They decide everything and we must keep quiet.
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission June 14th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, a coalition has formed against the CRTC’s decision on French-language content. Today I expect an answer from the member for Papineau, not because it is Wednesday, but because the Prime Minister’s Office has met with Bell lobbyists more often than has the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Perhaps that explains why she has been silent on this issue.
After all these meetings with Bell and Corus Media, specifically on broadcasting, can the Prime Minister tell this coalition from the cultural community that he will stand with them and overturn this bad decision? This is the third time I have asked the government: will it send this decision back to the CRTC, yes or no?
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission June 13th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, while the Minister of Canadian Heritage has her attention on an export strategy that now will not be unveiled until September, there is an urgent need to send back the CRTC’s wrong-headed decision to reduce the visibility of our content on our screens.
The minister knows perfectly well that the entire cultural industry is calling on the CRTC to go back to the drawing board. As for artists, they still do not know whether they can count on their minister to send the matter back to the CRTC.
Can the minister tell the cultural industry that she will stand shoulder to shoulder with them to overturn the CRTC decision? Will she send the decisions back to the CRTC, yes or no?
She needs to put culture first.
Business of Supply June 8th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech.
Obviously, this is a fascinating subject for everyone, and no one is against virtue, that goes without saying. However, last week, the minister announced that Canada would sit on eight additional committees. I would like to know if the same logic, to follow our allies, applies here and why Canada cannot be the leader that it has already been in this area?
Business of Supply June 8th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Sherbrooke, who has a great interest in this topic. He documented his speech very well and I am proud that our party is raising this topic before the House. Indeed, we can obviously agree on one thing: there is frustration with the previous Conservative government. Canada has always had a reputation of being a progressive actor that strived for healthy agreement between the major countries. That leads me to ask my colleague a question.
How can we explain that this government has decided to adopt this incredibly short-sighted approach? It withdraws from such discussions, which are necessary and progressive, with partners who are equally short-sighted. Is it just a terrible error in managing priorities or is it simply very dangerous doublespeak?