Pierre Nantel

[CBC/Radio-Canada, May 19th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Canadian Heritage had this to say about the sale of Maison Radio-Canada: “I now expect CBC/Radio-Canada to take the next steps in the process in a transparent manner”.

Yesterday, the CBC/Radio-Canada board of directors did not say much. There was no information about the cost, the size, or the number of studios. Nothing at all. Since the vast majority of the board members are partisan appointees, that is worrisome. It is also worrisome because one of the companies selected is best known for the Îlot Voyageur fiasco in Montreal that cost taxpayers millions of dollars.

Can the minister demand that all of the details about this enormous project be made public? Is that not the least she should do?

[CBC/Radio-Canada, May 18th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP had to back CBC/Radio-Canada's board of directors into a corner for it to finally show any sign of life. It was like a papal conclave. I almost saw a little plume of white smoke rising.

What did it announce? It has chosen six secret options for the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal. However, we will not know what they are, because it is a secret.

Yesterday, the minister acknowledged that a partisan, Conservative board of directors that meets in secret to make secret decisions is problematic. She promised that all the board's documents would be made public.

Will the minister promise to make all the options for Maison de Radio-Canada public, yes or no?

[CBC/Radio-Canada, May 17th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, we already knew that the CBC/Radio-Canada board of directors was operating in secret. Now we know that they work in English. Yes, sir.

We have long known that a Conservative-filled board of directors was meeting in secret and not making its minutes public. According to the National Post, this is because of a backlog issue.

Now, we know that the last letter of intent for the Radio-Canada sale in Montreal was sent out in English only.

Come on. Is anyone at the controls here? Can Canadians count on the heritage minister to put an end to this nonsense, for goodness' sake?

[CBC/Radio-Canada, May 16th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the CBC/Radio-Canada board of directors is meeting tomorrow in Ottawa to discuss the sale of Maison de Radio-Canada, but the whole thing appears to be a secret. In the past, CBC/Radio-Canada used to publish the minutes and documents from the board of directors meetings once a month. Since the Liberals came to power, not a single document has been made public. What a joke.

Six months after the Liberals' election the board of directors is still riddled with Conservatives, and the board continues to make major decisions in absolute secrecy.

Does the minister think our public broadcaster should be operating in secret?

[Canadian Heritage, May 12th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, clearly, the honeymoon is quickly drawing to a close.

Earlier this week, the Minister of Canadian Heritage proudly reminded members of her investments in the cultural sector. In fact, this year's budget allocates more than $78 million to the NFB, Telefilm Canada, Radio-Canada, and the CBC.

Well, surprise, surprise. People can applaud all they want, but the money is no longer in the budget. There is no money.

Was the Minister of Canadian Heritage taken for a ride by the Treasury Board? What magic words will she use to explain to cultural groups that they will have to go on waiting?

[CBC/Radio-Canada, May 9th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, that is all well and good, but it is a little late for the CBC.

Last week, a CBC board member resigned in order to run for the Conservative Party presidency. It is a little awkward.

Are there any others who want to get into politics, or maybe become a senator? There are a number of Conservatives on the board of directors. In about a week, that board will get together to make a decision on the sale of the Maison de Radio-Canada and where the millions of dollars of public money will go.

With that consultation about to begin, does the minister think it is morally acceptable that the Conservative Party hacks will be the ones to decide the future of our public broadcaster?

[Criminal Code, April 21st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member across the aisle on taking the bull by the horns and addressing such an important subject in his first bill. I also congratulate him on making the distinction between a bill like his and other kinds of bills that members can introduce, which often seem somewhat frivolous. My colleague is talking about a very fundamental issue here.

I have a question for the member. I am not a legal expert or a lawyer. What charge is the closest to what my colleague is trying to introduce as a new offence?

[Business of Supply, April 21st, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague on his speech, which was based on the testimony of real people who earn their living from this industry. I give him credit for working so well with the people who elected him.

Since my colleague joined the party that was in power a few months earlier, I cannot help but think that he had conversations with the bigwigs of his party before the election about solutions to this glaring problem.

What changes would my colleague make? He must know, since he lives in an area where lots of people talk to him about this, and he has colleagues who were in government. What needs to be done? The plants that produce diafiltered milk, near the U.S. border, certainly were not built yesterday, or on October 19.

[Air Canada Public Participation Act, April 20th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, 35 seconds is only long enough to speak out against what is happening.

My colleague is quite right to describe that scenario. It is absolutely pathetic, and it is important to remember how bad everyone felt for the Aveos workers. Those people and those faces were there when it was convenient for the Liberals to look at them, to say how scary it was. We saw the Prime Minister demonstrating with a sign that read “So-so-so-solidarity”.

What are the Liberals doing now? They are abandoning those workers, so they can move on to the next thing. That is just great, thanks. What a fine commitment to the people of my region.

[Air Canada Public Participation Act, April 20th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her question.

For the people who live in my part of the world, in Longueuil and Saint-Hubert, the aerospace industry is something that has really shaped the landscape. Earlier, I briefly mentioned Pratt & Whitney and Héroux-Devtek. A federal budget that barely mentions the aerospace industry is insulting for people in my riding. It is a slap in the face.

The Liberals made all sorts of nice promises during the election campaign. Some of my neighbours are engineers, men who are now about 75 years old. They worked on the PT6 engine, which is known as man's best friend, after dogs and horses. These people have aeronautics in their blood, and they think that a budget like this one that does not do anything for this industrial sector is pathetic. I would like to remind members that Héroux-Devtek, in my riding, is the company that made the landing gear for the Apollo lunar module.

As far as we are concerned, there are some measures that could have been included, particularly for SMEs, which once again got the short end of the stick. They made their budget forecasts taking into account a tax cut that was supposedly promised to them but that they will never see.