Pierre Nantel

[Cannabis Act, November 21st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech. I want to ask him a question that just sprang to mind.

Does he think the member for Winnipeg North is aware that his parliamentary work is being influenced by spin doctors?

[Cannabis Act, November 21st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rivière-des-Mille-Îles for her speech.

If I am not mistaken, to date, she has proven herself to be a very practical person who is in touch with the people around her in her riding. The fact that she comes from the retail industry confirms that impression.

However, I cannot resist asking her whether she simply cannot hear the provinces from her seat. They are saying that this is moving too quickly, and they want to know why it is so urgent that this measure be put in place by July 2018. The first nations have also said that this is moving too quickly.

I cannot believe that she would support an approach that is so paternalistic toward the provinces and the first nations.

[Cannabis Act, November 21st, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. She has highlighted the concerns of people who know this issue and work with youth, drivers, and workplaces. She is quite right to raise all these concerns.

It is very obvious that the government is obsessed with its bogus election promise. There are other priorities in life, and the Liberals are downloading this matter onto the provinces without giving them financial resources and, even worse, they have told them that the federal government and the provinces will be splitting the profits. They have some gall.

I would like to hear what she has to say about that.

[Cannabis Act, November 21st, 2017]

Madam Speaker, it is astounding to see how the Liberal Party's political talking points have tainted a person of good faith like this minister, who used to be the chief of the BC Assembly of First Nations. Those folks are saying that this is not working and that we are going too fast. All the provinces are saying that.

In Quebec, legislators are being forced to make hasty decisions on extremely important matters that require a legal framework. Police forces are not ready. It is shameful. I do not understand how the minister can stand up here and tell us that the Liberals are not playing politics simply to fulfill that promise and pat themselves on the back.

How can she defend such a disavowal of her own vision for first nations and all the provinces?

[Canadian Heritage, November 20th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, a month and a half ago, all of Quebec's cultural sectors denounced the void in the government's cultural policy.

Now, the newspaper industry is speaking out. A large coalition of industry representatives published an open letter this morning. They want to know when Ottawa will be offering solutions for print media, which has been in crisis mode for 10 years now. Nearly half of the jobs in this industry have disappeared.

The letter refers to specific solutions, while the minister seems to have only proposed tax breaks for web giants like Google and Facebook.

Does the minister plan on proposing concrete measures to address this crisis, which is a threat to local journalism, our information, and our democracy?

[Taxation, November 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, in a letter that was sent to the Minister of Finance yesterday, the Government of Quebec states its intention to require that Netflix and other Internet giants pay their fair share of taxes, and it asks for the co-operation of the federal government. This is a matter of tax fairness for our business owners.

All of the parties in Quebec agree on this. The Government of Quebec reminded the federal government that, technically, sales tax should already apply to these services. My question is not for the Minister of Canadian Heritage, who has abdicated her responsibility and has been refusing to answer the Government of Quebec for a month now. Rather, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

Quebec stands with its businesses and will not back down. Will the Minister of Finance work with Quebec to ensure that Internet giants pay their fair share, yes or no?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2, November 7th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech. He is obviously very familiar with the circumstances of the people in his riding. That is to his credit.

I would like to ask him whether he is optimistic that the NDP will be successful and the Speaker will rule that it is possible to have a separate vote on the elements that were not announced in the initial budget.

That would be a good thing because when we hear the comments of our colleague opposite, we lose hope and that fuels cynicism.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2, November 7th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

Unfortunately, I missed part of it. Perhaps he spoke about the fact that we were discussing this morning, among other things, the possibility of the Speaker of the House separating out certain elements that were not included in the initial budget. An omnibus bill is always a complex matter for us, and we are wondering whether we should support it or not. The question is whether the subjects that were not announced in the budget initially could be voted on separately.

I would like my colleague to comment on that.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2, November 7th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her speech.

I would like to know if her position has changed. We in the NDP have long been concerned about tax evasion. In my opinion, my colleague's government missed multiple opportunities to address a situation that is unacceptable to middle-class Canadians. The recent events reported in the news are highly alarming. They clearly show that Liberal Party fundraisers are evading taxes with impunity.

Does the member think the government should be doing more to stop this hemorrhaging of money we so desperately need to provide services to Canadians who actually do pay their taxes?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2, November 7th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Leader of the Green Party for her speech. Given her vision, which is the most unifying possible, I would like to ask her a question.

Is she comfortable with the idea that, with respect to the items that were not included in the initial budget or the supplementary documents, it would be a good idea to afford the Speaker the possibility of dividing the vote on these items? I think that is of interest to my colleague as well.