Dean Del Mastro

[June 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I am going to point out the contradiction in the member's very first statement. She started out by saying that she is opposed to copying, but then she wants to put on a digital copying levy. If we are opposed to copying, then we support stronger copyright rules that do not allow copying at all. We certainly do not propose an iPod tax or a digital levy that encourages people to copy. This does not make any sense. She is on both sides of the argument.

Writing a copyright bill is about balance. There is not a consumer group in the country that would support a tax on digital devices, such as iPods and PDAs. She talked about consumer groups. That proposal does not have the support of a single consumer group in this country, and it certainly does not have the support of our Conservative government.

[June 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, that was remarkable. The member jumped back and forth between both groups on both sides and talked both in favour of stronger, more prohibitive copyright legislation and weaker copyright legislation in the exact same speech. It is remarkable.

When we write a copyright bill, such as Bill C-32, it is about the appropriate balance.

The member is going to get angry when I say this. She has advocated on behalf of a tax on iPods, MP3s, laptops, PDAs, and BlackBerrys. She wants to put a tax on them. She wants consumers to pay this tax into some conglomerate fund which would then trickle down to the artists. We do not want to tax consumers.

She talked about how consumer groups are upset about digital locks. It is interesting. I gather from the member's speech that she is in favour of circumvention of digital locks. These are the technological protection measures that would protect against people buying a DVD, putting it on their computer and then sending it out to the Internet.

Under her provision, she is saying that they should be able to do that. It would not pay actors and it certainly would not pay the movie companies, but she is saying that she would put a levy on iPods and so forth so that she could then give the money to music artists for people who break the digital locks on movies and then send them out to the Internet. This does not make any sense at all. The people at home have to be confused. As I talk this out, her positions are in complete contrast with one another.

Bill C-32 is about balance. It is about balancing the rights of consumers and the rights of rights holders. That is why groups across the spectrum, musicians, actors, film companies, students, schools, have come forward and said that it is a balanced bill. Is it perfect? It is pretty tough to write a perfect copyright bill by its very nature. People are going to say they would really like to have just a little bit more rights one way or the other. Consumers would like just a bit more liberty in some ways and rights holders would like to have a bit more protection in some ways. It is about balancing the two.

What people cannot do is argue both in favour of stronger copyright rules and weaker copyright rules and somehow come out with a bill at the other end.

What she has proposed in her speech just a few minutes ago would anger artists and consumers at the exact same time. The member comes from Quebec. I am sure she knows that Montreal is the number three destination for the creation of video games in the world. The position the member is arguing is contrary to those software creators. They are the ones who are asking for technological protection measures to protect the work they are doing in the video game software industry. I cannot believe she would argue that we should not have digital locks on these things.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Government Programs, June 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to supporting culture, this Conservative government has done more than any government in Canadian history. We have been more supportive for culture than any government before.

In fact, I would point out a couple of examples to the member. Les FrancoFolies received $350,000 over two years, the Pop Montreal International Music Festival received $7,300, Le FestiVoix received $36,000, The Envol and Macadam Festival received $25,000, Jazz and Blues Festival in Chicoutimi received $8,300, Festival du nouveau cinéma received $91,000, and Festival Mode & Design received $53,000.

I have a long sheet here. I can keep going.

[Business of Supply, June 10th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I listened quite intently to the member's speech. There is one thing I would point out that is really quite remarkable. The hon. member from the Bloc indicates that Europe has an economic union. Canada is not an economic union. Canada is a country. Establishing a national, not a federal, securities regulator is consistent with a nation. We are a nation. We are a country from coast to coast to coast. The member neither supports nor understands that.

This is the crux of the situation. As a G7 country, we are the only one that does not have this kind of system. Every credible witness who has come before the federal finance committee, certainly in the time I was there since 2006, has insisted it is important that we get this established. It is voluntary. That is the other thing I do not understand about the Bloc position. It is voluntary. Those members have never quite been able to square the problem they have with a voluntary system.

In the market system today, whether it is corporate investors, personal investors or banks, people have a concern of confidence. We should do everything we can within our ability to instill confidence in the system. That is what a national securities regulator would accomplish. I cannot understand why the member would not want to see more investment into Quebec and all parts of Canada.

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, June 9th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I have listened to a number of the comments from NDP colleagues across the way. I find them really quite stunning, especially when we consider we hear no such comments about people like Hugo Chávez from Venezuela, Muammar al-Gaddafi from Libya or even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from Iran. I have never heard them speak this way of Hezbollah in Lebanon. I have never heard them speak of Hamas or Fidel Castro. I have never heard them speak this way of any of them.

It is quite profound that we are hearing it. Is this not really just about an anti-trade, put-up-the-wall ideology, say whatever the NDP can to make it stick. It has nothing to do with anything factual and simply has to do with what the NDP's ideology, which is to put up walls, to block Canadian trade and to prevent economic growth in our country. When it comes to economics, the NDP members are backward.

Could the minister comment on that?

[June 8th, 2010]

We will take no lessons in operating our finances from the tax and spend Liberals, Mr. Speaker.

The member indicated that this was an American company. Too bad that the actual headquarters for this company, its Canadian headquarters, is in the riding of the Liberal member for Mississauga—Brampton South. Perhaps it would like to move to Peterborough. I would welcome it there. I would certainly see it as a Canadian company employing Canadians. Of course, it also has jobs in other ridings, for example, the Liberal member for LaSalle—Émard. However, I guess the member would prefer that in this case it not be considered a Canadian company employing Canadians.

This was a project built by Canadians for Canadians.

The member also talked about the financial record of this government. What is great about the financial record of this government is 6.1% economic growth in the first quarter. That was the expansion of the GDP. There were another 24,000 jobs created just last month and over 300,000 jobs were created since July. That is the record of this government.

That member should be embarrassed.

[June 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the member has indicated that she would like some accounting. I will give her some numbers, absolutely.

At the outset, I would remark that the Canada pavilion was, of course, a tremendous success. She has indicated there was a lineup. In fact, there was a lineup. There was a lineup from the beginning of the games, right through to the closing of the games. In fact, 7,178 visitors visited the Canada pavilion on the first day and 137,163 visitors in total lined up during the games.

Once they were inside the pavilion, visitors were treated to entertaining and engaging interactive activities that highlighted innovative Canadian technology.

The member may think those are meaningless video games, but I would point out to her that one of the big things that is actually developed in Vancouver and in her part of the world are video games and interactive technologies. I am surprised that she would slam them in the House.

Visitors were able to participate in sports trivia games, watch videos highlighting Canada's sports legacy and legends, and view some extraordinary experiences available in our national parks and must see tourist destinations. It was a unique experience. It was truly Canadian.

In fact, the member remarked about the Canada pavilion itself. The Canada pavilion was built by Canadians boasting things about Canada. It was a true expression of Canada. It was well attended, as I indicated. There were lineups there all the time. It was a big part of the success of the Vancouver 2010 games.

I am really surprised that the member has even brought this forward. She asked about transparency. I know the member has asked and received costing, and so forth on this. She knows what it cost to build it. There is no lack of transparency there. She knows what it cost to operate. There is no lack of transparency there. She knows how the contract was awarded. There is no lack of transparency there.

I think the real bottom line is that the member embarrassed herself when she asked these questions. She embarrassed herself because she spoke poorly of something that attracted tens of thousands of visitors and these visitors were all very impressed with what they saw. They were impressed with the experience, which was a big part of the success of the 2010 games, a success that this government worked very hard with other partners, including the B.C. government and of course Vanoc.

We worked together to ensure that the Vancouver 2010 games were a success and they were.

[Breast Cancer Awareness, June 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend 96 teams took to Peterborough's Little Lake, paddling to raise close to $160,000 in the fight against breast cancer.

My wife Kelly and I were proud members of the blisteringly quick Morello's Independent Grocer “Yigomanic” team that carved its way to a first place finish. Big thanks to team captain Angela Pammet and store owners Dave and Kim Morello for all their efforts and support.

The 2010 event marked the 10th anniversary of the dragon boat festival in Peterborough inspired by Meredith Cosborn and driven by the entire Peterborough survivors abreast team. Their contributions to the Peterborough Regional Health Centre over the past decade are saving lives each and every day.

This coming weekend, Peterborough and the entire electric city region are gearing up to host the 2010 international dragon boat festival following up on previous festivals that have been held in Vancouver and Australia.

The objective of the international festival is to promote breast cancer awareness internationally and to encourage participation from breast cancer survivors.

Survivors Abreast Peterborough is tickled pink to be hosting this year's event and we welcome the world to the electric city for this great cause.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 4th, 2010]

That is a great question. Obviously, Madam Speaker, we have done an awful lot for the mining sector, more than any government in recent history.

Of course, we have stimulated the mining industry by extending the mining exploration tax credit. We brought in a CCA writedown so they can depreciate their equipment faster. We have reduced the corporate tax rates, which are a tax on jobs. We have extended the super flow through for prospecting and developing across this country. We have eliminated tariffs on the importation of equipment needed for the mining sector.

The government is standing four-square behind the mining sector, and the NDP members, especially the ones from northern Ontario, which has some of the premier mining constituencies in the world, are holding up the bill, a bill that helps the mining sector. I cannot square it. It does not make a lot of sense.