Jamie Nicholls

[Business of Supply, October 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I stand to remind the hon. member that the principles of this country are not life, liberty and property, but peace, order and good government. I believe that the Canadian Wheat Board fits under the principles of that last element of the founding principles of our country, good government.

I appreciate that the member shared with us a story of his past and of his family. It adds a human touch to the laws that we debate in the House, but I would ask why his party chose to abort the debate somewhat early.

I would also remind him that we often take what we have for granted until it is gone. What was the motivation for the original co-operatives that were formed? Was it not to give farmers the powers to be competitive against strong private monopolies that existed at the turn of the century? These private monopolies that we are going to be exchanging for might have the effect of eroding prices and the market security of western farmers.

Could the member address those questions?

[Business of Supply, October 25th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her speech.

She spoke about structures in place for farmers. In Quebec, there are concerns that the government, which is going after the Canadian Wheat Board today, will go after supply management tomorrow. That would hurt Quebec's economy.

Could the member speak to these concerns?

[Canada Post, October 20th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's vague answers show us at least one thing: he has no argument to justify the unfair treatment of Quebec. Postal service is essential across the country. There is no justification for treating a province this way. I repeat: the cuts in Quebec are 53%. Elsewhere in the country the cuts range between 4% and 8%.

Does the minister not think that every province is entitled to the same service from Canada Post?

[Canada Post, October 20th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of State for Transport avoided the question yesterday when asked about cuts to Canada Post in Quebec. Perhaps if I ask the question in English, he might understand the question better. Cuts elsewhere were between 4% and 8%. In Quebec, it chose to cut an alarming 53%.

What is the minister doing to stop these unfair and unbalanced cuts that target just one province?

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, October 20th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I find this disturbing. In my view, time allocation should be used for pressing issues of pan-Canadian interests. This appears to be a regional interest for western farmers.

The Wheat Board has been with us for 91 years. I could see a time allocation motion being worthy if there were unanimity among western farmers for the changes to the board, but from what I have heard in the House, even among western farmers there is not agreement about changes to the Canadian Wheat Board. Since there appears to be no unanimity in this region, why is the government trying to close debate at this time?

[Transport, October 19th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, an information leak revealed that the government has been in possession of a report since January. This report shows that a high-speed train originating in Quebec City would benefit the entire Canadian economy. Canada is the only G8 country that does not have infrastructure for high-speed trains. That is a deficit that puts us at a competitive disadvantage.

Where is the Conservatives' plan for a high-speed train to bring Canada up to speed with the rest of the world?

[Airline Safety, October 18th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, let us discuss safety in general. There were threats made to ground Porter because the carrier did not comply with Transport Canada's safety regulations. Transport Canada refuses to say why or to indicate whether passenger safety was jeopardized.

This government is incapable of acting in a transparent manner. Whether it is a question of costs of bills or even international agreements, the public has the right to know.

Why is the government not protecting Canadians instead of hiding the truth from them?

[Copyright Modernization Act, October 18th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would have to discuss the matter with the member for Timmins—James Bay before making any informed comments on that issue. I look forward to speaking with the member and getting information on that issue.

[Copyright Modernization Act, October 18th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, rather than engaging in a side debate, I would rather deal with what I actually addressed in my speech. I did not mention a tax. I just wanted to point out to members across that the copyright legislation that exists is stronger legislation than what the United States has and I have fears about this bill impeding innovation in Canada. Rather than getting into a side debate, I would prefer to address the issues that I mentioned in my speech.

[Copyright Modernization Act, October 18th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, it will negatively affect people's participation in culture. The hon. member said that when technological locks are applied, new items have to be purchased every time the technology changes. In 1989, I bought a Bob Dylan record and, in the 1990s, I had to buy the same album on tape and then on CD. Buying something three times and never owning it affects cultural participation in a negative way.