Charmaine Borg

[Business of Supply, February 26th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent point, because we have seen projects broken into parts. Developing a project and then redoing the application takes a lot of energy. It is very complicated.

We are asking for a permanent program so communities can make long-term plans. That way, if they have a project, they can start planning right away. All that will be left to do is hope that the project is approved. But at least they can start long-term projects and that is the important thing.

[Business of Supply, February 26th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, that is true. We should not think of the proposed plan as an expense because, in the long run, it is an investment in improving our infrastructure. In terms of the economy, it will create direct jobs.

It takes people to build infrastructure. Workers will be able to find good jobs with good wages. This plan has only benefits. I do not understand why the government is not taking action.

[Business of Supply, February 26th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague. As the member for the riding adjacent to mine, he obviously has a clear understanding of the issues facing our region and of the concerns voiced by our constituents.

Regarding new technologies, we need to look ahead and make sure that the plan includes developing infrastructure for high-speed Internet access. All of theses things must be taken into consideration. Merely talking about one area of the economy and making an announcement in a region because it involves a nice building project is not really a plan.

We need to think about the Internet, sewers, bridges, roads and highways. Everything that comes under the heading of infrastructure must be developed. We need to think ahead and include new technologies because they are increasingly prevalent.

[Business of Supply, February 26th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak to this motion on an infrastructure plan that is truly essential to economic and community development and improving the well-being of Canadians.

I would like to take a few moments to read the motion for people who are watching and who may be wondering what we are talking about today. The motion says:

That this House call on the government to commit in Budget 2013 to a long-term, predictable and accountable federal infrastructure plan in partnership with other levels of government, as recommended by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, in order to: (a) improve Canada's lagging productivity; (b) shorten commute times; and (c) fix Canada's crumbling infrastructure.

I would like to talk about the current state of infrastructure in Canada. Every Canadian, in every riding, can identify these problems. Yes, the realities may differ from one riding to the next, but we all have a problem with the state of our infrastructure.

Canada has an infrastructure deficit to deal with. That deficit amounts to $171 billion, which is a huge sum. Our congested highways, the weaknesses in our drinking water supply systems and our potholed roads: it is all truly shameful for a country that is a member of the G8 and the G20. We are a developed country, and we should not have such a huge infrastructure deficit merely because we do not have a plan.

It is all very well to see the Prime Minister and his minister standing in front of a building and cutting a big red ribbon to make a funding announcement with a big cheque, but that is not planning. Those are just announcements here and there, most often made in Conservative ridings rather than other places. Nevertheless, that is not planning. They are not sitting down with the community and with the provinces. They are not sitting down together to see what is needed. That is the duty of the federal government, the duty of anyone considering infrastructure investment.

I would like to provide some explanation of the situation we find ourselves in on the north shore of Montreal. The population has increased over the last ten years, and the result is that getting into Montreal normally takes 30 minutes, if everything goes well. Morning and evening, however, you can sit in your car for two hours. Sometimes it is even longer, depending on road conditions. If you add it up, that makes four hours a day, or 20 hours a week, that a person—a mother or a father—spends doing nothing. It reduces productivity. Trucks carrying products for delivery are kept waiting. It also reduces revenue. It inevitably affects an individual’s quality of life. When a mother, perhaps a single parent, has to wait for hours in traffic, it affects her quality of life and what she can do for her child. Truly, therefore, this is a very serious situation.

A number of projects are pending. Promises have been made at the provincial level, but unfortunately nothing ever happens. We have Autoroute 19, of course. I can talk about people from Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines, who have to travel as far as Montreal on a two-lane highway, one lane in each direction. It is really dreadful. There are hopeless bottlenecks. People are frustrated.

Why can people not just sit down, develop a plan that works for everyone in order to improve the transit system, the bridges and the freeways and see to it that more funding is available? In many cases, that is the problem. We have provinces that no longer have the budget, and communities that have even less. I could point out that the city of Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines is a small community of 14,000. These people do not have the money to do it all themselves. They need support from their government. That is exactly what this motion is asking for.

I have referred to the benefits of this kind of infrastructure plan for the economy, for people’s well-being and improved quality of life, for safety, and for the quality of the environment. I would like to expand on that last point. On the north shore, we do not have a lot of options for public transit. There is the train from Blainville to Montreal, but most of the time, people still need to take their car to get there. Terrebonne is still waiting for its train. There are buses, but they are expensive, and again, you have to take your car to get to the bus.

This is not for lack of will. Everyone in my community would agree to use public transit. It is important; it is good for the environment, it is good for us and it is good for everyone. But money does not grow on trees. Everyone has to sit down together to figure out a plan; otherwise, we will be moving in the wrong direction.

I would also like to talk about the importance of non-traditional infrastructure. Usually, people think of infrastructure as drinking water and sewage treatment, highways and bridges, but I would like to talk about another increasingly important kind of infrastructure in our modern era: access to high-speed Internet. In spite of significant efforts, there are still Canadians and Quebeckers who do not have access to affordable high-speed Internet. They are essentially excluded from the digital economy, which is becoming increasingly important.

As well, while members of Parliament are making increasing use of social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, people without Internet access do not have an opportunity to communicate directly with their MPs via those tools, or even to communicate with the government to claim employment insurance online, for example. High-speed Internet access has become an essential service. Unfortunately, we have no plan for this either. The government made promises—it promised a digital strategy three years ago—but we have seen absolutely nothing so far. Everyone is angry and is waiting for this digital strategy. Rural and remote communities in northern Canada and Quebec are affected by the lack of an infrastructure plan, especially when it comes to high-speed Internet access.

The Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and all the ministers concerned say they are holding consultations for the budget. That is fine, but can they consult the right people? I know it is not the norm for this government, but would it be possible for it to listen to what people want, for once? The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the leading advocate for municipalities, has asked for this.

This motion is our way of asking the government to listen to the communities and sit down with all the stakeholders, provincial and municipal alike, to see what we can do and what sort of leadership we can provide to give Canada an infrastructure plan and a permanent program that includes the involvement of all levels of government.

[Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, February 26th, 2013]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-475, An Act to amend the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (order-making power).

Mr. Speaker, over the past several years Canadians have witnessed what the Conservative privacy agenda has to offer: online snooping bills and inaction on data breaches.

Today I am presenting the NDP's vision of personal information protection. This bill will encourage compliance with Canadian laws and ensure that individuals are notified when their information has been compromised.

In our increasingly digital world, Canadians can no longer wait for the government to modernize our outdated privacy laws. Inaction means greater risk to the security of the personal information of millions of children, seniors and all other Canadians online.

Canadians and Quebeckers should feel perfectly safe using new digital technology. We can encourage Internet users to be fully involved in the digital economy by giving them the confidence to put personal information online.

My bill proposes positive and balanced privacy protections that are needed in the digital age.

I hope that all of the members in the House will vote in favour of this much-needed legislation so that the privacy of their constituents, their children and their families will be well protected.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Telecommunications, February 15th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, although the Conservatives have decided to scrap their horrible Bill C-30 on Internet snooping, we wonder if they will manage to plant their controversial measures in another bill.

Bill C-12 contains hidden measures that would allow the government to obtain personal information without judicial oversight.

If the Conservatives are really serious about abandoning their Internet snooping bill, then why did they not withdraw Bill C-12 as well?

[Public Safety, February 12th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, that answer suggests the Conservatives still have not learned their lesson. This is a victory for Canadians and all those who spoke out against this flawed bill. The Minister of Public Safety introduced a seriously flawed bill, launched attacks on the opposition for pointing out the bill's failings and refused to take responsibility for his vile comments.

Will the Minister of Public Safety stand now and apologize for the despicable way he treated the critics of the bill and acknowledge that his bill went too far?

[Public Safety, February 12th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, those who joined forces with the NDP to protect the right to privacy declared victory yesterday when Bill C-30 was declared dead.

It was rather pathetic to see the Minister of Justice join the ranks of the worst criminals who opposed the defunct bill.

In a rare moment, a Conservative minister admitted he was wrong and listened to the criticisms from politicians and those who use the Internet.

Will the Minister of Public Safety admit his mistakes and apologize to those he insulted?

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his excellent speech.

It is extremely important for this government to hear first-hand accounts of what is happening in his region.

In my region, there are also people who work for community organizations and who contribute a great deal to their community. Unfortunately, organizations do not have enough funding to remain open in the summer. The employees therefore lose their jobs and have to go on EI. They are considered seasonal workers. They are very worried about their jobs. They feel like they are being penalized. They are constantly giving back to their community, but this government never gives them anything in return.

I wonder if my colleague could comment on that.

[Science and Technology, February 4th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, last week, we learned that hackers accessed 250,000 Twitter accounts. Canadians who are victims of such hacking do not have the same protection as citizens of other countries.

Because of the Conservatives, Canada is one of the few countries that still does not have legislation to protect against data breaches. Yet, the Conservatives are forever delaying the establishment and review of legislation that would protect Canadians.

Are they going to stop dragging their feet and commit to the establishment of mandatory reporting?