Jamie Nicholls

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2, October 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's global competitiveness has been hampered by the Conservative government's inaction. Low taxes alone have not attracted innovators, and it is not a creative marketing policy for our economy.

According to the World Economic Forum, Canada's competitiveness would be further enhanced by improvements in its innovation ecosystems, particularly government procurement of advanced technology. It has been saying the same thing for the past five years. Why did the government wait this long? Unfortunately, my suspicion is that the government's libertarian market recklessness was responsible for this hesitation in changing its economic policy.

[Petitions, October 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I present to the House a petition signed by constituents in Vaudreuil-Soulanges who are calling upon the Parliament of Canada to ask the Canadian Transportation Agency to review the regulations pertaining to the speed of trains and to make it mandatory to install integrated command systems on trains.

This petition is signed by many of my fellow citizens, who are calling upon the Parliament of Canada to ask the Canadian Transportation Agency to review train speed regulations and to make positive train control systems mandatory in Canada.

[Ethics, October 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister knew, in October 2012, that there was something fishy about Mike Duffy's expenses. When the scandal erupted, his chief of staff, the now-famous Nigel Wright, wrote in an email to Mike Duffy that this was just a smear campaign.

Was the Prime Minister of the same view as his chief of staff at the time?

[Foreign Affairs, October 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, early yesterday morning I made my way to the Montreal airport to welcome home a Canadian mom and her three children.

Ola Elgadi spent more than a month trapped in Gaza after Egyptian authorities closed the Rafah border. While many Canadians question why a woman and three children would travel to a country under a travel advisory, the answer is simple: the undeniable and unbreakable bonds of family.

In August, Ola and her three daughters went to Gaza to visit their grandfather, who is very ill. The three girls, aged 12, 8 and 3, had never met their grandfather before.

Canadian citizens abroad, regardless of their country of origin, their religion, profession, race, sexual orientation, age, gender are Canadian citizens and deserve the aid of their government in times of need.

We cannot ask, we should not ask Canadian citizens to sacrifice their family bonds because their ancestry is not composed of Canadian citizens. To do so would simply be un-Canadian.

I welcome home the Elgadis, residents of Vaudreuil—Soulanges and proud Canadian citizens.

[Rail Safety, October 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that many municipalities in my riding are worried about rail safety.

The time has come for the federal government, rail companies and experts to work together to make our communities safer. The people of Vaudreuil-Dorion in particular are very concerned. They have collected over 1,000 signatures to reduce train speed in urban environments. As I was knocking on doors in communities near rail lines this summer, it became clear to me just how worried my constituents are.

Rail transportation of petroleum products has increased by 135% over the past four years. The NDP has been calling for stricter regulations for a long time. We can take a giant step forward toward improving rail transportation safety. We just need the government to show some political will. My constituents are still waiting. The NDP is ready to act, but the government is dragging its feet. Canadians deserve better.

[Canadian Economy, October 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I take umbrage with a comment made by the member for Papineau when he used the term “xenophobic” to characterize me and my comments. As someone who has lived and worked overseas, in many countries for many years, I am certainly not an individual who would encourage xenophobia. I take umbrage with the comment made by the member for Papineau. I find the term “xenophobic” a personal insult and slight on my character and I humbly ask you, Mr. Speaker, that the member for Papineau withdraw his comment from the record.

[Canadian Economy, October 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the hon. member for Papineau.

I was around when the Liberals were in power in the 1980s, and I can attest that what his party did never improved the lot of 80% of the people of this country. It is clear that the hon. member for Papineau does not want to look at the past record. Let us talk about today, then.

He said that he spoke to Canadians. To which Canadians did he speak when he says he wants to open the doors to the Chinese government to buy our natural resources and allow the Chinese an agreement that would favour the Chinese government and people over Canadians?

[First Nations Elections Act, June 14th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I will ask the same question that I asked the colleague from Ottawa—Orléans because I did not really get a clear answer from that member.

Is his government considering taking the Assembly of First Nations' advice to remove clause 3, paragraphs (b) and (c), from the current law in order to take the role that is given to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development and remove it and stop the colonial and paternalistic elements that have existed since the foundation of our country and the beginning of the Indian Act? Will the government consider taking out clause 3, paragraphs (b) and (c), yes or no?

[First Nations Elections Act, June 14th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if I heard the member correctly. He said that this legislation would effectively take the minister out of the picture. From what I understand from paragraphs 3 (1)(a) and (1)(b) the minister would be still in the picture. It still has the paternalistic and colonial role for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

I am not sure if I understood it correctly. Is the member supporting what the Assembly of First Nations asked the Senate to do, and that is to take paragraphs 3(1)(a) and (b) out of the bill? Is that what the member was getting at?

[Conservative Party of Canada, June 14th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, although the Conservatives are trying to divert our attention, Canadians remain focused on what matters—and what matters is not being popular, but rather getting answers in order to understand how the Senate expense scandal unfolded and who is involved.

It is the Prime Minister's Office that really runs this country, and that very same office is where Nigel Wright and Mike Duffy's shenanigans took place. The PMO is still happy, however, because the Conservative caucus continues to serve at its beck and call, as we saw yesterday. Their caucus is full of trained seals who are happy to sit back and blindly applaud while the head seal spins a ball on his nose.

Canadians deserve better. They deserve a party that will think of them instead of rewarding its party cronies by appointing them as senators for life.