Pierre Nantel

[Quebec Culture, September 26th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to develop my first passion, the music industry, for 25 years. I have always believed that society's great projects are born of culture. It was because our cultural industry had never been in so much trouble, weakened by the digital revolutions and abandoned by our governments, that I decided to put my money where my mouth was and go into politics.

This week, I am resolutely awaiting the Minister of Heritage's speech about the future of our cultural industries. Like everyone else, I have a lot of expectations, and I am worried.

I am worried that in the new policy, I may not find the measures that are key to ensuring the continuity, the equity, and the support so sorely needed by our industries and by our image as a people on screens both at home and abroad.

I am worried that the reform may not be as solid, not as structuring, for Quebec culture as were Pierre Juneau's quotas or Camille Laurin's Bill 101.

I am worried, unfortunately, that the federal government may once again impose a one-size-fits-all Canadian solution on Quebec, where we have our very own cultural ecosystem, a success that is the envy of the whole world.

I will be listening to the minister's speech on Thursday. Although I still allow myself a little hope, I must confess that I am really worried for Quebec culture.

[Access to Information Act, September 26th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my colleague. I heard the parliamentary secretary say, in so many words, that there is nothing to get worked up about. That is like someone wanting to sell us their house but refusing to allow an inspection and telling us there is nothing to get worked up about since we were given a tour of the bedroom. We want to see the entire house and get an inspection.

That said, I cannot help but roll my eyes when I hear the hon. member saying how dreadful this is and demanding access to all of the information.

Will my colleague at least recognize that the reason Canadians want more information on what is happening in the government stems from the fact that for 10 years they got almost nothing from the Conservatives when they were in government?

[Access to Information Act, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her speech, which she delivered with her usual sincerity. It is right to treat these issues with the dignity they deserve.

However, I heard my colleague suggest that in committee, we should try to seek more control over what will or will not disclosed, so as not to leave it to the discretion of the departments and agencies.

I heard the question from the government member, but I would ask the following question. Even if we can agree that there will be some openness to amendments, what happened with the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage as it was preparing its last report, which was tabled in June, shows that the government is fully capable of rejecting useful amendments and reports out of hand and choosing to stick to the PMO's agenda.

[Access to Information Act, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, if the member were in government, would she be more transparent than the Conservative government we had for 10 years?

[Access to Information Act, September 26th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her speech.

I appreciate the honesty of her speech on transparency, which is something that voters care about and expect. I applaud her for listening to the people who talked to her about it.

However, we must remember that in 2006, the party that she represents had also promised to improve transparency. God knows we talked about it for five years. You were not there. Of course, it is easy to say that you were not there, but what I am trying to ask you is if you—

[Access to Information Act, September 22nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, we are familiar with my colleague's deep experience.

Does she realize that many people get the impression that this is like a mother-in-law going down into the basement to see if it is tidied up, but two or three things were strategically placed so that she would not have to look too far? I get the impression that this is more or less what the government is doing right now. It promises to provide access to all sorts of things, to several examples to prove that everything is just fine, then closes the door that provides access to other secrets and locks and seals it up. It is more complicated than ever to get information.

[Air Transportation, September 22nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, this weekend, most people will be having fun in the sun, but not the people living along the water near the flight schools in Saint-Hubert because of the incessant noise of the planes constantly flying overhead.

Despite desperate pleas from those affected and my repeated interventions with the minister, Transport Canada refuses to enforce the flight restrictions that all parties had duly agreed upon. Transport Canada is completely absent on this issue, and worse yet, the department has the nerve to tell us, after three months of hemming and hawing, that it has never received an official request on the matter of limiting flying hours.

Does the minister find that acceptable?

Can he finally commit to providing his support to ensure at the very least that this does not happen again next year?

[Access to Information Act, September 22nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the new member's enthusiasm, and I am delighted that a breath of fresh air seems to be blowing over the Conservative Party, but the truth is that his party was all about secrecy. The NDP introduced a whole bunch of bills based on the Information Commissioner's reports, and the Conservatives rejected them all.

Can we look forward to a change in tone over there?

[Export and Import Permits Act, September 21st, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Calgary Forest Lawn for his fact and opinion filled speech.

He will forgive me for asking a question that may have already been asked, but I would like to know his reaction to the fact that trucks manufactured in Canada are sold in Saudi Arabia and are used against civilians. I would simply like his opinion on that.

[Export and Import Permits Act, September 21st, 2017]

Madam Speaker, knowing the good common sense of my colleague, I want to ask him why his party did not support our bill that would have given some parliamentary oversight of who we were sending arms to. Knowing the member has good common sense, why would his party not support such an idea?