Carole Lavallée

[April 28th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, the Parliamentary Secretary just proved my point. Instead of talking about his love for the arts, instead of saying he was in awe of the creativity of our artists, he spoke about funding and investments.

But where was the Minister of Canadian Heritage when Google went after editors and told them it had digitized all their books and that they could sue if they were not happy? Where is the Minister of Canadian Heritage in the foreign ownership debate?

Members will recall that in 2002, Liberal heritage minister Sheila Copps fought and defended artists against her colleague, then-industry minister Allan Rock, to prevent telecommunications companies from being taken over by foreign companies.

The same thing is going on now, but this Minister of Canadian Heritage is not defending artists.

[April 28th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I would like further clarification on a question I asked in the House on March 24. I doubt many people are watching us at home at this time. The Montreal Canadiens hockey team is about to play and win game seven in Washington. I have a feeling we are all alone tonight.

Nevertheless, I would like to speak for those interested in the arts who are watching us at this time. However, appreciating the arts and enjoying hockey are not mutually exclusive. Personally, I like both.

On March 24, I asked the Minister of Canadian Heritage a very serious question. I talked about the CRTC's new regulatory policy for television. This policy recommends reducing Canadian and Quebec content requirements for broadcasters. I said that reducing those requirements simply because they are too hard to respect was not a good idea. Instead, we should be helping people meet those requirements, especially when the objective is something as important as Canadian and Quebec culture.

I asked the minister whether, just for once, he could defend culture and artists. I asked him to ask the CRTC to review its decision, which the government did quite recently regarding foreign ownership. His reply was non-committal. He told me to call the CRTC and speak to the president, Mr. Von Finckenstein. He ended by saying that his government kept its promises. I do not know what promises he was talking about, because I have not heard the government make any promises about arts and culture. During the most recent election campaign, I did not hear any. The only promise the government made was to cut $26 million from funding for artists.

In the three throne speeches that have followed—in November 2008, February 2009 and March 2010—the government has made just one small promise: to introduce new copyright legislation. It made this promise a year and a half ago, and we still have not seen any legislation.

I am again asking the minister to stand up for the artists and craftspeople and defend them every time they are attacked in one way or another or when they need help. Far too often he tells artists that he does not want to hurt consumers. As far as the media fund is concerned, he says we have to focus our attention on consumers. When we talk about royalties on MP3s, he says consumers do not like that.

Is he the Minister of Canadian Heritage or the minister for consumers? There must be another minister responsible for consumers. We expect him to tell his caucus or cabinet that by doing this or saying that harm will come to the artists, craftspeople and creators. He says nothing to artists. It is easy to see that he does not understand the arts, he does not appreciate the arts and he does not like the arts.

[Arts and Culture, April 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, there is a consensus in Quebec about fair pay for artists. The Union des consommateurs and the main organizations that defend artists' rights are calling for levies on digital players and eventually on new technology. A simple amendment to the Copyright Act would quickly clear up the issue.

How can the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages claim to know the needs of artists and consumers better than they themselves?

[Arts and Culture, April 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage has it all wrong when he says that only the Union des artistes agrees with levies on MP3 players. I quickly came up with a list of a dozen other organizations that also agree with it: ACTRA, SOCAN, SODRAC, the Société professionnelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec, the Guilde des musiciens, ADISQ, the CPCC, Artisti and even the Union des consommateurs.

What will it take for the minister to listen to reason and give artists their fair pay?

[Arts and Culture, April 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government is insulting the cultural sector by refusing to ensure that artists receive fair compensation. Furthermore, the Union des artistes believes that by opening telecommunications companies to foreign investors, the Conservative government is threatening the cultural sovereignty of both Canada and Quebec.

When will the government realize that its deregulation policy is threatening Quebec's culture?

[Arts and Culture, April 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the House of Commons passed a Bloc Québécois motion to extend levies to the sale of digital audio recorders, but it seems that the Minister of Canadian Heritage has no plans to include this measure in the amendments to the Copyright Act that the government will soon be introducing.

Why is the Minister of Canadian Heritage rejecting this legitimate measure, which the Union des artistes au Québec called for, and which would ensure fair compensation for artists?

[April 14th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I cannot get over the fact that he asked me to apologize.

He does not understand, and he is not familiar with his file. Bill C-61 was never voted on here. If I remember correctly, it was introduced on June 5, 2007, but died on the order paper. It was never debated at all. It did not get past first reading. Nobody talked about it. His government introduced it, but never reintroduced it.

Speaking of copyright, if that bill was so good, he should reintroduce it. We have been waiting years for the government to introduce a copyright bill in the House, but nothing has happened yet.

I will repeat my question. The Minister of Industry was never able to state publicly on CBC that he legally downloaded 10,000 songs. Every time he was asked the question, he started laughing. Did the Minister of Industry download those 10,000 songs legally?

[April 14th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, adjournment proceedings allow for additional information to be given and for us to receive better answers than those given during question period. We know that it is called question period and not answer period.

My question from March 16 was basically about CD sales, artists' royalties and the fact that the Minister of Industry bragged to the CBC about having downloaded 10,000 songs onto his iPod. He said iPod, not MP3. It seems his MP3 is an iPod. He was bragging publicly about his 10,000 songs, and he was proud. I am also proud of him because downloading 10,000 songs is fine, but they have to be paid for. The artists who made them have to be paid. We have to pay the creators. We cannot benefit from digital technology that way, walking around with 10,000 songs in your pocket and not paying the artists.

Music is not free. The creators must be paid for their work. That is what we saw earlier, during the vote on providing a levy to artists from the sale of MP3 players and iPods. This motion was passed by a vote of 156 to 147. It is likely that the 156 members who voted for the motion were from this side, while the 147 who voted against it were from across the way. It is the Conservative Party that does not want to pay for music. They do not want creators to be paid for the work they do.

Yet musicians do remarkable work. They work hard, and often alone. We cannot imagine how hard young musicians in an entry-level band must work. They have to have other jobs, because they do not earn much money from the music they make. To become a good musician, it takes years of study. Musicians have to start at a young age, often 7, 8 or 10. After years of studying, they find a job in a corner store or grocery store, and every night they sit alone for hours on end, composing music and writing songs on their computer or by hand. Then they get together with their bandmates once a week to rehearse. They practice every day for months and years. Sooner or later, they get a gig: a stage is available, but they have to pay for it. So they pay for it. Once again, they do not make any money. Before they have even made their first CD, imagine the years of hard work, the years of practice, the sleepless nights, because it is also a passion, and all the time they spend practising their songs. When we have a CD in our hands, we cannot imagine the hours of work that went into it, but it does take a long time.

Some people think it is free. The Minister of Industry thinks it is free. He should be ashamed. He was unable to say whether he had downloaded those tracks legally. My question here in the House is this: did he download those 10,000 songs legally or not?

[Committees of the House, April 13th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, CD sales are plummeting, although people are still listening to music, even more than ever before. At 22¢ for audio cassettes and 29¢ for CDs, as set out in the private copying legislation, in 22 months there will be no more royalties to give to artists. This is very urgent.

Can the member who just spoke tell me how she believes that artists will be able to earn a living from their art from now on? We need to go beyond principles, beyond Liberal Party rhetoric, and take action to do something concrete and ensure that artists have an income.

[Committees of the House, April 13th, 2010]

The member can explain himself to the artists.