House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 45% of the vote.
Foreign Affairs March 1st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the 2012 budget included major cuts of about $116 million to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. The Conservatives have now decided to slash double that amount. Even the Minister of Foreign Affairs was unable to save his department from these draconian cuts.
His government seems to be bent on reducing Canada's diplomatic capacity. Why?
Canada Revenue Agency February 28th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, Revenue Canada now only mails income tax packages to Canadians upon request. Most seniors file a paper return, not an electronic one. However, the Canada Revenue Agency has not clearly indicated that paper copies will only be sent upon request. This measure discriminates against seniors and people who do not have access to the Internet in my riding.
Will the minister fix this?
CBC and Public Service Disclosure and Transparency Act February 12th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to debate this matter in the House today. At the same time, I am very disappointed that we are having the same debate once again.
In 2011, we debated the same subject, transparency for the public. The NDP supports the concept of disclosure, of making things public. However, many of my colleagues and I feel that the members are trying to bring in by the back door what they were unable to bring in through the front door. This discussion only seeks to discredit the CBC.
This all started when someone asked why we need a public broadcaster. Now we have a bill that opens the door to very sensitive information. I am not referring to the salaries; I am referring to the second part, which concerns information that is made public and that the CBC's competitors can use against it.
It is very easy to look at an expense report to see who is meeting with whom and, through that, decide or figure out what kind of programming is going on. My mother has always said, “When you're looking at an issue, consider the source”. The private members' bill comes from a group of people where, and I will quote from the Hill Times, one Conservative MP has acknowledged that his party's members and the government will be “breathing a sigh of relief” when Kevin Page's term ends in March.
To answer the member's question, it has to do with the fact that we have a group of people, we have the government and backbenchers, demanding transparency from all sorts of organizations, while they refuse to be transparent. To the same subject, in 2011, I put forward a question on the order paper, asking for the disclosure of the salaries of the PMO and was met with a resounding thud of silence. Therefore, considering where this comes from, it is not hard to doubt, for lack of a better way of putting it, the motivations of the private member's bill. The type of transparency that the member is looking for, as I said, is the type of transparency that can damage the work that CBC does, both in journalism and its programming.
This same member, as my colleague pointed out, asked why we needed a public broadcaster. I have heard it said time and again: Why do we need a public broadcaster if there are corporate organizations that can do it just as well or better? To that point, I will say that is a possibility. It is a possibility that they would be able to do it better because they have access to more resources to hire the best directors, to hire the best producers.
However, based on my 25 years of experience working in this industry, the fact is that corporate broadcasters do not want to do it. They do not want to create shows that speak to Canadians, created by Canadians, for Canadians. Who else is going to create shows that from coast to coast to coast engage Canadians, in a Canadian voice, for Canadians? Nobody, because there is no money in it.
For example, in 2007, the broadcasters crowed about how much money they spent on American programming. It was over $750 million. In that same period of time, they spent just over $50 million on Canadian programming. That includes the magazine shows, the sports shows and so forth, but no creative programming.
For the last 75 years, the CBC has created programming that Canadians have enjoyed from coast to coast to coast, because they have seen themselves in those shows. They have seen and heard themselves nationally, and internationally with Radio Canada International.
From my perspective, this private member's bill is redundant, because there are already laws that require disclosure. CBC, to its credit, went to great lengths to open up and become better at disclosing information. In less than a year, it went from an F to an A. The hon. member says that going from an F to an A was only for time. Time was part of that, but so was disclosure. It disclosed all it was obliged to disclose and fought those issues it felt were damaging to its ability to do the work.
I must underline that the vast majority of the access to information requests, which were some 1,400 during this period, came from one source: a competitor. It saddens me that the government continues to do the work of a competitor in this environment when it claims it wants a level playing field. If it is to be a level playing field, then let it be a level playing field.
It is clear that there are certain members of the government and/or the backbenches who have a continued dislike for the CBC and are looking for ways to de-fund the CBC. From my perspective, it makes me suspect the motivation for the bill. I say “suspect”. Maybe the member has good intentions. However, if the bill is supposed to shine a light on all government activities, why is it directed at the CBC?
In this context, why does this bill target the CBC?
If the bill has been, as my colleague said, created to shine a light, to make government spending transparent, then why is the bill not called a bill to demand more transparency from government and government institutions as opposed to targeting the CBC?
For that reason, I am suspicious of the motivations.
The CBC is an organization that is very important to Canadians.
For a small cabal of Conservatives who want to see the CBC destroyed, I think this is a very weak attempt to go through the back door to accomplish what they could not accomplish through the front door.
Safer Witnesses Act February 11th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on my Liberal colleague's question with regard to the commission, so to speak, that would oversee the witness protection process. I am wondering if my colleague from Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine would offer her thoughts on the importance of keeping that separate from the RCMP, in a way that does not put undue leverage in the hands of the RCMP in terms of bringing a witness forward.
Safer Witnesses Act February 11th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to expand on the costing. The parliamentary secretary asked how much we would spend on it, but this is a government bill. We have not seen any figures. We have not seen how much the government intends to put into this. Yet Conservative members are asking us to tell them how much we would spend.
I think it is important that we understand how much a bill like this would cost. We think it is an important bill. We think it is something that needs to be done.
What does the member think about the government sharing information with us?
Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act February 11th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, there is talk about having anti-harassment guidelines in this law, which are not there. Would the member agree that there needs to be something that goes a step further?
In any change in an institution, the integration of the armed forces in the U.S., for example, in 1942, or women entering the armed forces or policing throughout the years, there is resistance. Not only does there need to be anti-harassment, but there also needs to be an understanding of the contribution that women can make and why harassment is not acceptable. There needs to be a sensitization of the change in those institutional organizations.
I wonder if my colleague would like to comment on that.
Business of Supply February 7th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I am hearing a lot of back-patting from the member on the other side, that “We did this, we did that”. If the Conservatives are so keen on the Parliamentary Budget Officer position, why have they spent so much energy fighting the Parliamentary Budget Officer on virtually every file he has tried to work on, such as the F-35 and our getting information on that? Why have they fought so hard to keep that information away from parliamentarians and Canadians?
Conflict in Mali February 5th, 2013
Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this topic in the waning hours of the day and this debate.
I am deeply concerned about the conflict in Mali and the resulting instability in the region. I am also concerned about what Canada's role should be if and when this conflict escalates.
The message the government has been sending on Mali, and on Africa in general, has been rather contradictory. Unfortunately, it is consistent with the expressed mantra of the government to reduce Canada's presence on the African continent, thereby eroding Canada's effectiveness, and as a result, Canada's esteem and validity as a global actor, through disengagement.
Disengagement means less of an understanding of the issues that affect countries individually, be it on the African continent or in any other country around the world. Disengagement leaves us in a world of ignorance. This should be cause enough for concern, but disengagement also is noticed.
There may be little concern for Canada's international reputation, as is witnessed by our withdrawal from international climate treaties, our alienation of our traditional partners, and in most recent months, the rather puzzling approach to international development. The government may not concern itself with our international reputation, but Canadians do, and they do notice. Canadians understand that we live among one another within a global community.
On diplomacy, our country is stronger when it works with long-standing partners and allies and respects and encourages a dialogue with potential future partners.
On international development, we must work hard to recapture the role we once held as a global leader in international development, which has been lost through the myopic ideology of cost first and common sense later, an ideology that undermines the ability of our diplomats and our aid workers to do their jobs.
The closing of embassies on the African continent has left gaping holes in Canada's international identity, and as important, our ability to properly monitor ongoing security issues as well as human rights abuses, which are both clearly at play in Mali today.
We intervened in Libya alongside our allies but failed to anticipate the stream of mercenaries flowing out of Libya to their home countries, including northern Mali, accompanied by very high-powered weapons that are being used against others today.
As I only have three minutes, and I have only been able to begin our discussion, I will leave it at that point. Maybe at a future date we can continue this very important discussion on Mali.
Railway Industry February 5th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, my constituents want this government to know that they expect appropriate oversight of our railways. Some of my constituents live near railways that are not only noisy but are also an accident waiting to happen.
In fact, on September 24, 2011, a freight train derailed at Pointe Saint-Charles, a densely populated area in my riding. Luckily, no one was injured and no hazardous materials spilled.
The Transportation Safety Board report concluded that the accident was the result of excessive speed and the ambiguity of the signal indications with regard to speed in this residential sector.
On behalf of my constituents, I urge the government to consider stricter regulations for railways in residential sectors.
Black History Month February 1st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, today marks the beginning of Black History Month. It is an opportunity for Canadians to learn more about their neighbours of African descent, their full, rich, unknown and undiscovered stories. It is a history that stretches back as far as Mathieu Da Costa and his so-called black Loyalists, the men and women who stood by their British brothers and sisters as free persons and built a nation known as Canada.
There are names such as Dr. Anderson Ruffin Abbott, the first black Canadian-born licensed surgeon, who also served with thousands of other African Canadians in the American Civil War, and who was part of select few who stood vigil over Abraham Lincoln, keeping notes on his condition until his death.
African Canadian history did not start with the immigration wave of the 1950s and 1960s, nor did it start with the underground railroad. African Canadian history is older than Canada itself.
This Black History Month, I urge all Canadians, from the House and beyond, to take a moment to learn something new about their neighbours. They might just be surprised.