Lots.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 56% of the vote.
Safeguarding Canadians' Personal Information Act October 26th, 2010
Lots.
The Economy October 25th, 2010
No, not even close.
Madam Speaker, I understand the concern raised by my hon. colleague, but the problem is that, frankly, she does not understand the technology.
Music in the future will not be listened to simply on MP3s. This is a band-aid solution, it is very shortsighted and it is about purchasing votes. It is nonsense.
What we need is a thoughtful approach to copyright reform that is in the best interest of creators and consumers. Has she ever heard of Rhapsody? Has she ever heard of the idea of streaming digital online music and what that means for creators and that universe? Does she understand that? That is the way the future is going.
It is not about MP3s. MP3s can be played, streamed, uploaded and synced into automobiles and onto planes. There are all sorts of uses of MP3 files. Music is happening in a digital way, in ways that are far beyond the scope of the amendments that the Bloc Québécois and the NDP have come up with. They, frankly, do not understand the technology and have no sense of understanding of where the technology is going with regard to consumers' interests and supporting a digital universe in the future.
Our copyright bill is balanced and effective for consumers and for creators. Again, we will vote against any new tax on consumers that is not necessary.
Madam Speaker, I was not really prepared to discuss this question from my Bloc Québécois colleague, but we are here to discuss the important matter of the firearms registry. I will take this opportunity to point out that our government is against a new tax, which goes against the interests of consumers, on iPods, BlackBerrys, computers, automobiles, laptops and anything else that is capable of playing music. But that is what the Bloc Québécois is proposing.
I understand the concerns she has raised about copyright, and that is why our government introduced Bill C-32, which would modernize our country's copyright laws. We conducted unprecedented consultations to ensure that everyone was involved in the copyright debate. As a result of our consultations, we introduced Bill C-32, a very responsible bill for both consumers and artists.
What we are talking about here is the fact that the NDP, the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois want to impose a huge new tax on consumers. The last time that the Bloc Québécois spoke here, the last time that this tax was proposed, it was a new $75 tax on every iPod, BlackBerry, computer and laptop, on anything that is capable of playing music.
This idea of imposing a new tax on iPods and MP3 players is not a new idea because there are very few new ideas, unfortunately, that come from the opposition on the issues of copyright and taxes. However, this idea is really toxic and, frankly, really dumb. This would punish consumers if we were to put in place a tax of up to $75 on iPods, Blackberries, cell phones, laptops, computers, memory sticks and automobiles, anything that is capable of playing digital music.
I understand the idea of modernizing the private copying levy and I understand the desire, but every time the opposition has come up with an idea with regard to this, I can say, as we have looked at this issue and we have struggled with this issue, that it gets very tricky.
This simplistic idea that has been put forward by the opposition, the Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Liberal Party, with regard to a new iPod tax is incredibly shortsighted and it is an incredibly bad idea for consumers. It is not the way to go. We have artist after artist who has come forward and said that this is not the way to go.
We will go forward as a government will Bill C-32, the modernizing copyright legislation. We are prepared to work with the opposition parties to ensure the legislation is in the interest of consumers and in the interest of creators. We will not support an amendment to our copyright bill that puts in place a massive new tax on consumers. We will not support that. It will not happen.
However, we are more than prepared to take forward reasonable ideas to ensure that artists' creations are protected and to ensure that just compensation and the framework for that, through effective copyright legislation, goes forward. We also want to ensure that the legislation takes care of what is in the best interests of consumers.
This idea from the Bloc Québécois is a massive tax increase on consumers. It does not achieve the balance that we want to achieve, which is in the interest of consumers and creators, and we will block every effort by the NDP and the Bloc Québécois to put forward any tax on consumers that will punish consumers and do nothing that is in the long-term interest of creators.
Questions on the Order Paper September 20th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, in response to (a), the Public Service Commission, PSC, did not change the contracts into multi-year options; the original periods of the contracts were for one year with the option to renew for up to three additional one-year periods under the same terms and conditions. The proposed periods of the contracts were posted in the ACANs.
In response to (b), designated consultants were provided a copy of their respective ACAN document in advance in order to inform them of our intention to post information related to them on MERX, the government public contracting system. The PSC also has the obligation to verify that the proposed contractors meet the minimum requirements identified in the ACANs. The PSC did not consult with the contractors to tailor the contracts.
Questions on the Order Paper September 20th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, in response to (a), Senator Greene Raine accepted the position with the agreement that the Government of Canada would pay her travel expenses. Senator Greene Raine submitted a travel claim for $610.60 broken down as follows:
$448.05 for a return trip from Kamloops to Whistler, B.C., in a private vehicle ($0.515 per kilometre);
$83.55 for one day of meal and incidental allowances; and
$79.00 for taxis.
Senator Green-Raine was also provided accommodation in Whistler for 15 nights at a total cost of $8,193.75. These rooms were prepaid by the Department of Canadian Heritage.
In response to (b), the Department of Canadian Heritage paid these expenses as the lead coordinating department for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games.
In response to (c), no hospitality claims were submitted.
Copyright June 17th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the only thing the Bloc Québécois has proposed in this regard is a massive new tax directed at consumers, which would also affect artists. This is what the president of the Canadian Recording Industry Association had to say, “I do not think that is the solution. I do not think the artists will benefit. ...No one will benefit.”
Here is what Loreena McKennitt, who is a Juno Award winning songwriter, said, “I too would oppose the itax. I would rather have a strict and predictable business model in which I can conduct my business as an artist”.
That is what they need. They do not need an itax from the Bloc Québécois.
Quebec Nation June 17th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, we have a good understanding of the Bloc Québécois' policies. It is just not in the interest of Quebeckers or Canada. Our government has programs, investments and laws that protect the identity of Quebeckers and also the national unity of Canada.
Protecting Children from Online Sexual Exploitation Act June 15th, 2010
moves that Bill C-22, An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Government Programs June 14th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, that application was considered fairly. The organization did not qualify to receive taxpayer money for three reasons.
I will explain to my colleague very clearly. The reason this festival did not qualify for taxpayer funding was that this particular festival had a $1 million surplus left over from last year.
The reason we are not funding this festival is that it has a surplus and we think there are other festivals and other priorities for taxpayer dollars other than giving money to festivals for a second and third time unnecessarily.