Mauril Bélanger

[The Desjardins Group, April 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to highlight today the achievements of Alban D'Amours, a great manager in the field of cooperative finance. Mr. D'Amours has just completed a second four-year term at the head of the Desjardins cooperative movement.

Under his leadership, Desjardins Group has experienced eight years of sustained growth. Not only has business volume increased, but the member dividends have also increased. In addition, the movement has formed a new partnership with the Fédération des caisses populaires de l'Ontario and has signed service agreements with the Alliance des caisses populaires de l’Ontario and with numerous credit unions in other parts of the country. I could also pay great tribute to Développement international Desjardins.

Finally, I would like to congratulate the Desjardins Group for having chosen Monique Leroux as the new president and chief executive officer at its annual meeting. Ms. Leroux is the first woman president of the Desjardins Group and the first woman to lead a major financial institution in Canada.

Congratulations to Mr. D'Amours and much success to Ms. Leroux!

[Points of Order, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to return to a question of privilege raised by the member for Acadie—Bathurst and the member for Gatineau.

Yesterday, in response to my question, the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages said that she had not turned down an invitation. I have here a letter dated February 25, 2008, addressed to the chair of the committee, in which she says, “I must respectfully decline the committee's invitation”.

Do I have unanimous consent to table this letter in the House?

[French language Media, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, with the International Day of La Francophonie just a few days away, and on behalf of my colleagues, I would like to express two wishes regarding French-language media.

First of all, regarding TV5 Québec Canada, the only channel to specialize in general interest programming that showcases the multicultural aspect of the francophonie in Canada and around the world, I would like the CRTC to acknowledge its mistake and grant it a mandatory distribution order on digital basic.

Second, I would like Canada to show some leadership by increasing both its contribution to TV5 Monde and its share of ownership in that channel. I would also like Canada to encourage other countries of the francophonie to do the same, in order to ensure that France does not gain disproportionate control over TV5 Monde.

Should these two wishes be granted, the francophonie in Canada and around the world could only benefit.

[Official Languages, March 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, five years ago today, the Liberal government unveiled its action plan for official languages. This plan ends in three weeks, at the end of March, and the budget did not include any money to renew it, even though the Conservative government had promised to renew it in the last throne speech. When the committee invited the minister to appear, she declined. When the committee invited her emissary, Bernard Lord, he also declined.

Considering the uncertainty her government is creating, why is the minister refusing to appear before the committee and explain her inaction? Why does she prefer to keep communities waiting?

[March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have yet to receive an answer.

The hon. member is talking about 2005, but this is 2008. In the meantime, a crisis has occurred in the film industry in Canada, especially when it comes to French-language feature films. There was not enough money. The Government of Quebec acknowledged this and did its part. That is all that was expected of the government. The current minister and her predecessor implied that they would give money, but nothing happened.

The excerpts of my discussion with Mr. Roy, the chair of the board of directors of Telefilm Canada, were very clear. At the end of the meeting, he said:

Currently, in the French-language film market, given the appetite of producers, I don't think funding is sufficient.

Since there was a request, and the Government of Quebec did its part, the Government of Canada could do the same thing.

[March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on February 1, I asked the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages a question in this House.

Here is the wording of that question, which came the day after the new chair of the Telefilm Canada board of directors, Mr. Roy, appeared before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. I am quoting myself:

The new chair of the Telefilm Canada board of directors, Mr. Roy, who was appointed by the Conservative government, yesterday told the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage that Telefilm Canada's funding is insufficient.

I continued on, asking when the government would do something about the needs of that industry, which has been calling for action for two years.

I would like to repeat what was said the day before at the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage meeting, so that my colleague across the floor can answer me later—hoping that my colleagues across the floor will pay attention to the debate.

Here is what I asked Mr. Roy:

But, as Chair of the Board, Mr. Roy, you aren't prepared today to say that there would be grounds to increase Telefilm Canada's funding?

He replied:

As Chair of the Board, I—

I retorted:

You're appearing in that capacity.

He replied:

Currently, in the French-language film market, given the appetite of producers, I don't think funding is sufficient.

In my question of February 1, I reiterated Mr. Roy's comments made the previous day. I will quote one part of the answer I got from the parliamentary secretary to the minister.

I believe if he were to reflect on the answer of the new commissioner, the new commissioner was not asking for increased funding.

That was a bit of smoke and mirrors. He did not ask for increased funding; however, he did say that the funding is insufficient. It is the same thing.

I would like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that I asked this question on February 1 in the hope that the government would include something for French-language and English-language feature films in the budget.

Thus, I began searching. The industry has been looking for additional support for at least two years and has been waiting for answers from both the current minister and her predecessor. An additional $20 million had been talked about. I know that the Charest government has done its part. I believe it put in $10 million. There was hope, and I was told that meetings had been organized, but nothing happened.

When I asked the question on February 1, it was in the hope that something would be included in the budget. We searched and searched. I noted that, in the case of the Department of Canadian Heritage, many cuts were made—departmental savings—and that some amounts were also added. In total, over three years, $72 million was added to cover the Olympics and related preparations, and that is commendable. Except that, of the $72 million, it seems that $60 million is from budget cuts. We were looking for signs that the Department of Canadian Heritage would add $10 million over three years.

I continued to search because there was obviously nothing about feature films. I continued to search. The national museums were in the same boat. The government said it was adding several million dollars when, in reality, it was adding $2.1 million over three years to the total envelope for national museums. In the end, there were mostly cuts there, too. However, there was nothing there for feature films.

And so I continued. With regard to another institution, Library and Archives Canada, which we know well, not only are they not receiving any new funding, but they are being cut. There is mention of the gradual elimination of the book exchange program. Still nothing about feature films. How sad.

[Business of Supply, March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am quite prepared to table the emails I have received if the government is prepared to tell us of the conversations it has had with Mr. McVety.

[Business of Supply, March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, there are two things.

First, perhaps my colleague has not received them because people who are concerned realize they will not get what they want from that party.

Second, I would like the member to look at a Facebook that has been created within the last week on this very issue and which now has, I believe, 23,000 members. I would think that this would be a fairly serious indication of concern out there. On top of that, some of the hundreds of messages that I have received are not only from individuals, but from groups, organizations and associations that are practitioners in the milieu, that work in this area and represent, by themselves, hundreds of people.

Finally, I am not the only one who has received messages. All my colleagues on this side of the House, and I believe from the Bloc and probably from the NDP, have also received dozens and hundreds of messages. That adds up to thousands and tens of thousands.

[Business of Supply, March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I gave a very clear explanation of the four or five reasons that we will not support the Bloc Québécois. We believe that the fastest, most efficient and most transparent way to get the facts, to bring to light the concerns of Canadians who are worried about this measure, as we are, is to use the tools of Parliament. Everyone in the House missed this bill for reasons I explained earlier. However, I believe that the government also failed in its duty to be clear about the contents of a bill like this one. The Conservatives did not make it clear in the House, they did not make it clear to the public, and they did not make it clear in committee. Here we are sayingmea culpa for our mistake, but they should be saying mea maxima culpa for their actions.

My answer to the member's question is no. The reason is simple. This way, we will get clarification and perhaps amendment much faster than if we put our faith in the government's goodwill. It is that simple.

[Business of Supply, March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Burnaby—Douglas was not listening to what I said. I have said exactly what he has asked. Liberals will not support the Bloc motion. All the Bloc motion does is ask the government to introduce an amendment, and we know that will not happen.

This afternoon, my colleagues from the Senate announced that they would hold hearings on this matter. They will review the whole matter. They will call witnesses. They will hear those who want to be heard. They will have clarity. If amendments are the way to go to correct the situation, they will introduce them and the amendments will come back here.

Therefore, we are not having to rely on the government's will to do that. We are relying on the official opposition in the Senate. That is exactly what we are doing. We are not prepared to abdicate the role of the legislature as the Bloc has asked us to do.

I understand the NDP would like to see the abolition of the Senate, but perhaps my colleague will realize that, in this case, we should thank God that we have a Senate.