House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was conservatives.

Last in Parliament October 2015, as NDP MP for Scarborough Southwest (Ontario)

Lost his last election, in 2015, with 24% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Copyright Modernization Act November 14th, 2011

Madam Speaker, I would like to emphasize for the Conservatives that if they had actually read the bill, they might know that those provisions are in fact there. I think it is troubling that the parliamentary secretary did not know that this provision was in the bill. Conservatives just seem to be making it up as they go along.

Certainly with respect to the 5-day or 30-day provisions, it is inexcusable, given the tremendous cost and burden that students are facing to get their education, that they would not be able to retain that material and use it for years to come.

Copyright Modernization Act November 14th, 2011

Madam Speaker, I will take over my colleague's spot.

While I would like to commend the government for tabling legislation that seeks to bring about long overdue changes to bring Canada in line with advances in technology and current international standards--changes that New Democrats have been recommending since 2004, I might add--I cannot commend the bill in its current form, and will not, unless the government is willing to amend the digital lock provisions and restore royalty provisions for artists. The government has yet to create a copyright reform that would balance the rights of creators and the public. Rather, the legislation it has brought forward would satisfy the demands of large American content owners and trump the rights of Canadian consumers.

Canadians did not give the government a mandate to cater to the needs of already hugely profitable content owners while restricting the rights that consumers currently possess. They also did not elect it to waste time fixing problems that never existed in the first place. The government's own clause-by-clause analysis of the bill, obtained under the Access to Information Act, states that the digital lock provisions apply even when there is not an infringement of copyright and the defences to infringement of copyright are not defences to these prohibitions.

It is not hard to fathom why the government would not attempt to find balance in its legislation. We all know that nothing the government has done since May 2 has ever had anything to do with balance. In committee, witness after witness testified that while the bill brings to life some of the much-needed modernization of our outdated copyright laws, major flaws exist within these digital lock provisions. Witness after witness said these flaws could be fixed and that a balance could be found in the same way that many of our trading partners are achieving, including many European countries and now even the United States.

It is clear from everything the government has done since May 2 that the government is simply not interested in anything to do with balance. All of its actions and all of its legislation have been very obviously one-sided and, frankly, ideological. Nothing the government does has anything to do with consultation or with balance. One would think that it had a mandate from a majority of Canadians, but of course we all know that it has a mandate from fewer than 40% of Canadians. The majority of Canadians support neither the government nor its actions, yet the government has the arrogance to completely ignore the concerns of any Canadian who may question its rigid and inflexible agenda.

Ignoring the concerns and advice of witnesses testifying in committee comes as no surprise to anyone in and around this chamber.

Canadians need to know that the Conservative government is making a complete mockery of the time-honoured parliamentary committee process. Governments have used this process for many years to examine proposed legislation and to garner input and feedback from Canadians. This government does not want input and feedback from anyone with a different point of view.

Canadians need to know that this government wants to effectively shut down the committee process, and not just the committee looking at this bill, but most, if not all, committees. The government simply wants to act as a bully, forcing its narrow agenda on the Canadian public and on the majority of Canadians who did not, and do not, support its agenda.

What witnesses have told the government on the bill is that the provisions on digital locks will create problems, problems that do not exist now. They could have serious implications for many creators in the entertainment industry and also for students, who presumably, as has been demonstrated many times over, will have to destroy their notes after 30 days. This is insane. Frankly, it reminds me of Inspector Gadget and Mission Impossible, where notes self-destruct within 30 days.

It makes absolutely no sense that the government would adopt such restrictive digital lock rules, which have, by the way, been described as the most restrictive in the world. A more balanced approach is not only available but is being used with apparent success in most other jurisdictions. What is wrong with balance and flexibility? What is wrong with fairness? It seems those are rhetorical questions when dealing with this government, which knows nothing of the meaning of fairness, balance or flexibility.

It is clear to the majority of Canadians that digital locks as proposed in this legislation will have a devastating effect on our cultural community, a sector that currently contributes $85 billion a year to our economy and supports over 1.1 million jobs. These are very large and significant numbers, especially in the troubling economic times we are currently seeing. Representatives from this sector cannot simply be ignored, but the government is doing just that.

The Writers Guild of Canada told the government that digital locks might work for software. However, from my own background in technology, I would take a different point of view and remind the House that locks keep honest people out. There is a way around every single lock, and I think the hackers of the world have proven that point in their attacks on governments and industry. If a lock is there, somebody will find a way around it.

Also, according to the Writers Guild of Canada, digital locks

are likely to be selected against in the open market as they were with music. They are neither forward-looking nor in the consumers' or creators' best interests. Digital locks, at their best, would simply freeze current revenue streams for creators.

That is pretty clear advice.

The Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic told the government that:

Overall, these digital lock provisions are some of the most restrictive in the world.

To achieve a fair balance between users and copyright owners, the government needs to fix the digital lock provisions before this bill passes into law.

I could go on quoting from the cultural community, which told the government that it had a problem with the bill and that the government needed to change the digital lock provisions. Did the government listen? No.

It is as if the government is operating in a cone of silence. I would like to say that it is time to get smart. While we may not be using shoe phones, all of our phones nowadays do have the ability to download and receive copyrighted information. The levies and provisions that existed in former forms of media should be advanced onto the new forms.

The government has to start listening to Canadians. Trying to fix the situation after the demise of a whole industry will simply be too late. I call on the government to go back to the drawing board, rework this legislation and protect our vital cultural industry and the jobs it provides. If not, let us do it in committee.

Copyright Modernization Act November 14th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, we heard the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages a few minutes ago say that anyone who does not agree with him does not understand technology. I, of course, would like to comment on that.

First, people who are pirating movies are burning them onto DVDs and people who are downloading songs are putting them onto iPods. What is it that the minister does not understand?

My hon. colleague talked about a $13,000 average income and making a decent living. What kind of missed opportunities does my colleague think there would be with Bill C-11?

Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence November 4th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, I am very honoured to stand again to say how proud I am that two teachers in my riding of Scarborough Southwest are recipients of this year's prestigious Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence.

The second teacher I would like to recognize is Al Baigent, a teacher at Neil McNeil Catholic Secondary School.

The award-winning leadership program that Mr. Baigent has developed is an asset to his students, their families and our community as a whole. Students in his program are developing critical leadership skills that prepare them for the future.

In addition to his incredible work in the classroom, Mr. Baigent is also very involved in extracurricular sports activities, organizing local cross-country running events as well as helping to coordinate province-wide track meets. Mr. Baigent also leads many school trips locally and abroad and shares his expertise with new and interested teachers. Our community is truly privileged to have such a passionate, creative and dedicated teacher working in our schools.

I want to extend my sincere congratulations to Mr. Baigent on receiving this year's Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence and thank him for the commitment he demonstrates on a daily basis to the students at Neil McNeil.

Privacy Commissioner October 28th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, that was an answer, but not to my question.

This is again about the Privacy Commissioner. The commissioner said that this proposal to hugely expand surveillance and weaken judicial scrutiny went far beyond what is needed. According to the commissioner, better alternatives exist to give police the investigative tools they need while still preserving the privacy of Canadians.

When will the government finally acknowledge these serious privacy concerns and agree to fix the bill?

Privacy Commissioner October 28th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, this week the Privacy Commissioner sounded alarm bells again, raising serious concerns about the Conservative government's lawful access legislation. The Privacy Commissioner said that Conservatives had not justified the sweeping search and seizure powers they plan to foist on commercial ISPs.

Will the Minister of Public Safety accept the Privacy Commissioner's recommendations and fix the legislation before it is reintroduced?

Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence October 28th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, I am so very honoured today to say how proud I am that two teachers in my riding of Scarborough Southwest are recipients of this year's prestigious Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence.

One of those is Lynn Wilkins, an elementary school teacher at Courcelette Public School. Ms. Wilkins' accomplishments are simply too numerous to mention here. Her sustainable building project integrates many different subjects with a view to teaching students the importance of the environment and sustainable development. Another of her projects teaches students to build an NGO from the group up.

If this is not enough, her students raised thousands of dollars to assist in building a school in Haiti, support the World Wildlife Fund and help the Sick Kids Hospital in Toronto.

Our community is truly privileged to have such a dedicated, enthusiastic and innovative teacher working in our schools.

I want to extend my sincere congratulations to Ms. Wilkins on receiving the Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence and thank her for the commitment she demonstrates on a daily basis to the students at Courcelette Public School.

Research and Development October 17th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to know that the minister knows there is a report, but it would help for him to read it because it would show him that the government's strategy has failed. As countries around the world move forward with new innovations, Canada keeps falling behind.

When will the government stop subsidizing corporate research and start promoting direct investment in R and D like leading countries do? When will it start listening to New Democrats and begin moving Canada forward by adequately funding basic scientific research so our scientists can get results for Canadians?

Alexandra Dodger October 17th, 2011

Mr. Speaker, today I rise with a heavy heart to remember the life of a friend whose journey was tragically cut short this past Saturday at the age of 27. Alexandra Dodger was killed after being struck by a car near her home in Ottawa.

Alex was an extraordinary woman who was passionate about life and was determined to improve the lives of those around her. She cared deeply about giving a voice to the voiceless. Alex had just graduated from law school at McGill earlier this year and started a promising career with Amnesty International. Alex dedicated so much of her time to many causes, one of which was the Ontario New Democratic Youth, where I had the pleasure of working with her and where we became friends. There is no doubt in my mind that Alex was destined to do great things and was going to bring forth positive change.

I will cherish our time spent together and miss all the times that we will never have. On behalf of myself, Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition and all our staff, many of whom knew Alex well, I would like to extend our deep and sincere condolences to Alex's family, friends and colleagues, but especially to her mother and grandmother, who must now endure what no parent or grandparent should have to.

Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act September 20th, 2011

What I definitely do not appreciate, Mr. Speaker, is being accused of being a booster for human smuggling.

What I would like to throw back at the government concerns why people in my riding are waiting two and three years right now to be reunified with loved ones when they did arrive legally. Why are they not receiving the immigration and settlement services that they deserve? Why are organizations like the South Asian Women's Rights Organization running immigration settlement services out of an apartment because it cannot get funding from the government?