House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was actually.

Last in Parliament April 2025, as NDP MP for Windsor West (Ontario)

Lost his last election, in 2025, with 28% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Canadian Heritage September 29th, 2023

Madam Speaker, Canadians are putting their heart and soul into creating content for this entire country and the world to enjoy.

However, on TikTok, they are left out of the creator fund and cannot be paid for their work. It is unfair. TikTok compensates its creators in the United States and Europe, but Canadians are left behind. Why are the Liberals allowing this abuse? These content creators are workers. They deserve to be paid. The issue of workers' rights is my Roman Empire.

Will the Liberal government start working for young people and ensure Canadian content creators are compensated fairly?

Business of Supply September 28th, 2023

Madam Speaker, one of the curious aspects of the motion is that it would require the Liberal Party to create legislation within seven days, which would come at a time when we have a national day of significance for first nations' recognition and what we need to reconcile.

I find it rather curious, in the sense, and I ask why they would not create their own legislation. How does the member feel about that? If the motion passes in its current context, the Conservatives, and I have checked, do not actually have legislation tabled for this, so they would have to draft it up within a few days. How does the member feel about the motion that would have his party create legislation?

I find it rather curious that the Conservatives say they do not trust the Liberals, but at the same time they are wanting them to create—

Business of Supply September 28th, 2023

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, whom I enjoy working with at the industry committee.

When I look at this motion, I would ask the member a very serious question about process. The motion calls for the government to actually introduce legislation within seven days. For all the hyperbole in what we have heard today, the Conservatives are asking the government to come with its own legislation within seven days, during a time when we have a national holiday to recognize indigenous persons, and actually table it back in the House. How realistic is it to have that expectation? If the government does not have that prepared, is the Conservative Party going to prepare and actually table that legislation within seven days after this motion fails? It is very juvenile.

Innovation, Science and Industry September 26th, 2023

Mr. Speaker, investing in clean technology is crucial to the fight against climate change. In that fight, one of Canada's leading agencies, Sustainable Development Technology Canada, has had allegations of wrongdoing with the way it has spent its funding and the way it has treated its staff. It is yet again another example of incompetency.

Canadians deserve to know how the government makes decisions on spending for clean technology. The minister needs to release the full report in the House so Canadians can see the transparency they deserve and have paid for.

Whistle-blowers stood up and risked their jobs. Will the minister do the same thing and table the full report for all in the House and for Canadians?

Affordable Housing and Groceries Act September 25th, 2023

Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for Bill C-56. Some movement on the Competition Bureau is very important, and I appreciate his efforts.

It is the 1386 “Yeoman's Tale” that the phrase “better late than never” comes from. It is good to see the efficiency defence being looked at.

This was previously a motion in committee, an amendment to the previous Competition Bureau work we did, which was actually defeated by the Liberals. Since that time, we have also seen greater mergers. Are they really committed long-term to this? We opposed the Rona takeover by Lowe's, which was approved by the Liberals, Zellers being taken over by Target, Future Shop by Best Buy, and most recently the Rogers and Shaw merger. Is this actually going to be a change in behaviour for the long term from the Liberal Party of Canada to increase competition?

Affordable Housing and Groceries Act September 25th, 2023

Madam Speaker, from my colleague's previous work on the industry committee, he knows there would be some improvements in the bill from the competition bureau. The concern I have that I would like the member to talk a bit about is whether he thinks the bill goes far enough. Would we see some improvements? As he knows, grocery CEOs fixed the price of bread and had to be caught. They have also ended pandemic pay, all at the same time. Technically they did not violate the law, but they got together and almost colluded to do it at the same time. Last, most recently, the CEOs met with the minister privately, but I am not sure how successful that is going to be, because most recently the competition bureau has been ordered to pay nine million dollars just doing its job challenging the Shaw-Rogers merger.

Does my colleague have confidence that the bill would actually resolve some long-standing challenges?

Criminal Code September 20th, 2023

Madam Speaker, my colleague has identified that it would have been better if the bill had been here sooner than later, but it is here now.

What can be done to improve the bill? Are there any other opportunities to make up for lost ground? Can he reinforce some of the potential improvements for this bill?

Radiocommunication Act September 19th, 2023

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to talk about this issue. I also want to thank Senator Patterson for putting forth the legislation, which we will hopefully move to the industry committee.

It is really important to understand a couple of things about the spectrum auction. I know that, when we talk about these things, people's eyes usually glass over; they do not see this as something that connects to them and their family on a regular basis. However, it is at the root of the problem in terms of the reason we have high prices. I say that because, from Jean Chrétien to Paul Martin, Stephen Harper and our current Prime Minister, the philosophy has been to grab the cash from these companies and then have no terms and conditions related to pricing, consumer rights or any of those things. The profits these companies have and the way they treat the general public would make a robber baron blush.

It is important for the public to understand this: We control all this. We always have. That is not in dispute. It is something that is not going to change. We issue out the public airwaves. The public space above us, which we own, is a series of different products in terms of speed and the way it can be accessed by companies, but we control it 100%.

There has been $21 billion that has come in to the government coffers under Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin, Stephen Harper and now the current Prime Minister. At the same time, these robber barons have been allowed to set up a system with low competition, high charges and fees, and conduct that is not appropriate.

We can remember that, recently, because of their own turf war, these companies failed Canadians who needed to make 911 calls during an emergency. We lost control of emergency services because of two children having a fight in the playground. What was the response? It was not a whole lot. We had to come up with a legislative solution. The minister was actually out of the country and had to call the companies and beg for us to get back online. That is the nature of these companies.

When I came here originally, Bell Canada would not even follow through with the mandate for pay equity for its women workers at the time. We had to bring in the CEO of Bell, who was actually later hired by the Prime Minister for a side job, to get equal pay for women in their own company. We had hearings here in Ottawa on that. This is the routine behaviour of some of the industry toward Canadians on a regular basis.

I can go on with a few other examples. I congratulate the minister for the TTC, but why did it take the minister's intervention to get cellphone service sorted out properly in an area that is dangerous and is used by millions of people each day? Again, the children on the playground had to be brought together to get a solution.

On the Shaw-Rogers takeover, how outrageous is it that the minister still has not responded? I wrote him a letter about it. Our Competition Bureau took that to court, because we would not do the right thing in this place to stop the takeover and have fewer entries into the market. The Competition Bureau, which is the public interest, took them to court to challenge it. It is a routine thing that other countries do.

What did Rogers do? It sued the Competition Bureau, and outrageously, it has to pay Rogers $8 million for the Competition Bureau just to protect Canadians. Meanwhile, the Competition Bureau has to do all kinds of legislative work and other types of work. Basically, the watchdog ends up paying the robber baron at the end of the day.

What would this bill do? There are a couple of things New Democrats have been calling for. Number one is cellphone service as an essential service, flat out, full stop. It is involved in one's life and emergencies. Remember when the government, for immigration, put out that one could get on the immigration file very quickly? With a higher speed of service, one actually got the spots from the government. The government did that, and it was a policy. Therefore, one's speed affects not only that but also one's work, school and the way one can be involved in life.

The rural component is really abused in this country. In fact, since the pandemic, the speeds have not improved very much. Meanwhile, urban speeds are going up again. Again, New Democrats have called for this to be an essential service.

In addition, we called for stopping the cash grab as a policy that ends up putting those profits, or subsidies, back into the companies. An alternative model, which other countries have used, is to demand that when a company gets a spectrum, it has to have some low-cost service fees for seniors, persons with disabilities and low-income earners, and the speeds have to be the same. We can do that through a mandate the way they do the RFP, request for proposal, on how we sell the spectrum.

Instead, we have added diction for the $21 billion and growing. Until we actually change that process, we are going to pass on that $21 billion. This is not only in terms of the cost going to the public, and where it has gone in the past many years is unbelievable, but also in terms of the expense, which will go to consumers. What do the big companies do? They pass on the cost of the spectrum to their customers.

Let us think about this as a Canadian. Our own government takes our resource, gobbles it up, sells it and then tries to squeeze every single cent it can out of the spectrum auction for whatever else it can get. It then passes on that cost back to the people.

I previously mentioned those former prime ministers. The other thing they have in common is that they have cut corporate taxes when these CEOs and these companies are making record profits. There are no terms and conditions, despite the product, the spectrum, being our own. I do not care if someone is a Canadian on Bay Street, up north, in Alberta, in Quebec, in Newfoundland or in Ontario, and I can go on, but we all own this equally.

It is now a toll road in the sky. That is what we have created with our natural asset. By the way, not all toll roads are created equal. If someone is from a rural area, they get a double whammy. Not only is their resource used against them for the price and costing, but they also get a poor product. That is just plain and simple.

This bill stops one of the worst practices we have. I really want to thank Senator Patterson for this. If someone were to buy spectrum, we were allowing the purchaser to then resell it. How stupid is that? It is not in the public interest that we would actually go out there, try to squeeze what we can out of a company and then let the company that got the spectrum sell it for a profit without doing any work, with no terms and conditions.

Where do people think that cost goes? We get a double layer. How about double or triple taxation? This is unacceptable. Again, this goes back to Chrétien, Martin, Harper and now the current PM in terms of the philosophy. Senator Patterson's bill fixes that one problem. Companies will no longer be allowed to go and do that. We are actually ransoming our asset against ourselves.

When we go to committee with this bill, it will only touch on certain things. Not all those things are going to be dealt with, but these are controllables right now. We have to lower the price of cellphones and services, but we need a prime minister and a minister who are willing to put in place terms and conditions as never before to build out our system, as opposed to just trying to do a cash deal, take the money and run.

We are at $21 billion, and right now, it is estimated that to connect all Canadians at a reasonable rate, it should be $6 billion. By the way, the reasonable rate is set by the CRTC, and the NDP says that should be the floor, not the ceiling. It should be the best, not the worst that someone can get. With $6 billion, we could actually roll out the proper coverage and connection. Our policies should be based upon that.

What is really unfortunate about this is that we have done it to ourselves. It is up to us to fix this now. We cannot continue to have a policy that does nothing other than to be a cash grab for the prime minister of the day, with the fallout of high prices, low accountability, and low standards and services from companies that have to be reined in because of the way they aggressively pursue actions against their own customers.

Radiocommunication Act September 19th, 2023

Madam Speaker, one of the differences with the New Democrats' policy on Internet broadband is to actually have spectrum fund the build-out, which right now requires about $6 billion.

I would ask my colleague if there are any regrets through the process we have had, in which $21 billion has been raised through spectrum auctions since 2001. Conservative and Liberal governments have taken that money in. At the same time, there has not been oversight, and we have some of the highest prices. What are the member's thoughts in terms of why we have taken in so much money and have not had any type of connection with our spectrum auction policy with the $21 billion that the governments have collected from Canadians?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns September 18th, 2023

With regard to funding allocated to all Great Lakes programs and organizations: what was the total amount of funding allocated since the 2012 fiscal year up to and including the current fiscal year, broken down by year, organization, amount and purpose of intended funding?