Pierre Nantel

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 25th, 2016]

With regard to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), as of December 10, 2015: (a) has the Governor in Council given its approval for moving the Maison de Radio-Canada (MRC) building in Montreal, which must be approved by the Governor in Council in accordance with section 48(2) of the Broadcasting Act and from which real property transactions may arise; (b) what were the project specifications given to the firm Avison Young regarding the possible options for moving the MRC into leased space in Montreal, (i) how much did the CBC pay to the firm Avison Young to carry out this project, (ii) what were the eight options considered in carrying out this project, (iii) what was the estimated leasing and maintenance costs for each of these eight options, (iv) was the Department of Heritage made aware of these eight options, (v) was the Treasury Board Secretariat made aware of these eight options, (vi) was the Canada Lands Company (CLC) made aware of these eight options and, if not, for which reasons; (c) what were the criteria and technical specifications that the CBC provided to the firm Avison Young concerning the desired features of the new MRC; (d) what has been the CBC’s comparative cost-benefit analysis for the various projects considered by the CBC such as leasing new space downtown, partially renovating the existing MRC, or constructing smaller space on the current MRC grounds, for each aspect of the project, namely (i) design, (ii) financing, (iii) construction, (iv) rental, (v) maintenance, (vi) management; (e) which experts and professional associations did the CBC consult with respect to this real property transaction; (f) what are the maintenance costs for the Maison de Radio-Canada in Montreal for the year 2014-2015, broken down by (i) mortgage, (ii) property taxes, (iii) maintenance, (iv) renovations; (g) what is the CBC’s inventory of photo archives, broken down by city; (h) what is the total value of the CBC’s photo archives; (i) what is the CBC’s inventory of audio archives, broken down by city; (j) what is the total value of the CBC’s audio archives; (k) what is the CBC’s inventory of video archives, broken down by city; (l) what is the total value of the CBC’s video archives; (m) what is the inventory of paper-based archives (such as books and music scores) held by the CBC, broken down by city; (n) what is the total value of these paper-based archives; (o) what is the CBC’s inventory of technical equipment, broken down by city; (p) what is the total value of this technical equipment; and (q) who are the bidders who acquired CBC assets since January 1, 2008, broken down by (i) year, (ii) type of asset purchased, (iii) transaction value?

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 25th, 2016]

With regard to the Canadian Museum of History: (a) as part of the transformation of the former Canadian Museum of Civilizations into the Canadian Museum of History, (i) what are the objectives, phases and components planned by this transformation since 2011 in terms of renovations, rebranding, changes to exhibits, the creation of new exhibits including the Canadian History Hall and their subcomponents, (ii) what was the original schedule for these objectives, phases, components and subcomponents, (iii) what is the schedule for the completed objectives, phases, components and subcomponents, with regard to the completion dates, (iv) what is the current projected schedule for the objectives, phases, components and subcomponents to be completed, (v) what were the originally projected costs for the objectives, phases, components and subcomponents, (vi) what are the costs incurred to date, broken down by objective, phase, component or subcomponent, (vii) what are the currently projected additional costs, broken down by objective, phase, component or subcomponent; (b) since 2012, what amounts from the private, corporate or community sector, whether they be sponsors, partners or corporate donors, have been received by the Museum, (i) to which exhibits, services or objectives were these amounts allocated, with these amounts broken down by amount donor; (c) since 2012, what is the nature of each service contract used by the Museum for services that used to be performed by Museum employees before 2012, (d) how many employees, permanent or on contract, have been assigned to research duties, particularly in the Research Division, their numbers broken down (i) by year since 2012-2013, (ii) by position, (iii) by scientific field, (iv) by division; (e) since 2012-2013, what meetings, telephone calls, museum visits and any other contact have taken place between museum representatives and members of ministers’ offices or representatives from their respective offices, including the Office of the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Prime Minister’s Office, broken down by meeting subject; (f) for all exhibitions since 2012, by exhibition, what was (i) the total number of visitors, (ii) the total revenue amount, (iii) the budget at the start of planning stage, (iv) total expenditures; (g) since 2012-2013, (i) what were the museum’s annual revenues, (ii) what are the museum’s projected annual revenues for the next five years, (h) excluding the Canadian War Museum, what is the total number of visitors expected each year at the museum over the next five years; (i) since 2012, which groups such as associations, professional associations, groups representing First Nations and experts were met with and consulted as part of creating the content for the new Museum, particularly with regard to the Canadian History Hall; (j) regarding the costs related to changing the museum’s name such as signage, logos and branding, (i) what is the current budget set aside for these costs, (ii) what is the total projected cost over the next five years; (k) since 2012-2013, what is the museum’s total cost of advertising such as billboard advertising and advertising in newspapers, on the radio, on television and on the Internet, (i) by year, (ii) by type of advertising; (l) for each instance when external legal services were provided to the museum over the past three years (i) which firms or individuals provided these legal services to the museum, (ii) when, (iii) for how long, (iv) what was the nature of these services, (v) what was the purpose of these services, (vi) what was the total cost, per instance, of these services provided to the museum; and (m) for each project or exhibition created by the museum or for those since 2012-2013 that were not presented within the museum building, (i) what was the subject, (ii) where was the project or exhibition presented, (iii) what was the total cost for each project or exhibition?

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 25th, 2016]

With regard to the Copyright Board of Canada, as of December 10, 2015: (a) how many people are employed by the Board, broken down by Treasury Board classification group; (b) is the working committee on its operations, procedures, and processes, that was tasked with examining possible improvements to the Board’s current practices and procedures with a view to reducing uncertainty and streamlining the processes, still active; (c) if the answer to (b) is affirmative, when does it expect to complete its work, (i) what are its preliminary recommendations, (ii) which persons or organizations within the government were consulted in this regard, (iii) was an outside consultant hired, (iv) if so, at what cost as of December 10, 2015; (d) if the answer to (b) is negative, (i) what are its final recommendations, (ii) which persons or organizations within the government were consulted in this regard, (iii) was an outside consultant hired, (iv) if so, at what final cost, (v) when does the government plan to implement the working committee’s recommendations; (e) was the Minister of Industry's office consulted by this working committee, (i) if so, how many times, (ii) which office members were contacted with the respective contact dates; and (f) has the appeal of the “Tariff 8” decision of June 2014 by Re:Sound been heard, (i) if so, what was the court’s decision, (ii) if not, when is the appeal scheduled to be heard?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, January 25th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, since it is our first day back, I would first like to wish everyone here a happy new year. I would also like to commend my colleague on his speech, which demonstrated his sincerity and commitment.

Since he spoke a lot about the middle class, I would like to remind members that, before Christmas, we came to the House somewhat hastily to pass tax credit regulations for the much talked-about middle class. However, so far, that initiative has been a bit disappointing, so I hope that the government will make the necessary adjustments. Right now, an average family with two children earning an income of $45,000 will not benefit from those tax credits.

I would also like to check something with my colleague. Unless I missed it, he did not make any mention of the Liberals' much-vaunted promise to invest $20 million in social housing infrastructure. In my opinion, that situation is urgent. There is a major shortage of such housing in Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, and the social housing community is very concerned about it. I would like to hear what the member has to say about that.

[CBC/Radio-Canada, December 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, this new government is already disappointing many Quebeckers. It is backtracking on Canada Post, labour-sponsored funds, and French, and it is challenging the end-of-life care legislation.

To add insult to injury, this week, the Minister of Canadian Heritage stayed silent on the sale of the Maison de Radio-Canada. However, cabinet will have to approve such a decision. The future of the domestic production of French content is in jeopardy.

Does the minister really intend to approve giving up the Maison de Radio-Canada?

[CBC/Radio-Canada, December 9th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the Minister of Canadian Heritage on her appointment, and I want to assure her that she will have my full co-operation in protecting our heritage.

This week we learned that the board of directors of CBC/Radio-Canada, whose members were appointed by the Conservatives, is continuing to make controversial decisions about the corporation's future and is now looking to move out of the Maison de Radio-Canada and into rented facilities. This plan goes against the public's wishes, shows a lack of transparency and jeopardizes CBC/Radio-Canada's ability to produce programming.

Can the minister tell us whether she intends to green-light this plan to move out of Maison de Radio-Canada?

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, June 16th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his well-documented speech.

If it is true that we have the right to expect this Parliament to deal with such issues with as much dignity and as much attention to what people have to say as possible—the reason why we are here in this Parliament is to talk and pass better laws—does my colleague not find it surprising that the Liberal Party did not propose any amendments regarding polygamy, which was the first problem that he raised?

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, June 16th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his very detailed speech, which addressed this broad issue from several angles. I appreciate his hope to see Parliament address these very important questions with as little partisanship as possible. He is right to raise a number of points that are of concern to many experts.

I would like to mention the legislation in Denmark that reinforced a culture of secrecy, since no acts were reported. On that point, I would like to say clearly that I am very surprised, because my colleague just said that this bill was introduced with great fanfare almost suitable for an election campaign.

I would therefore like to draw my colleague’s attention to this. It is very distressing to see the extent to which this government has used legislative issues for partisan purposes and in such an abhorrent way. It simply went ahead with this bill with no amendments, in spite of the extensive testimony from victims and experts, which was ignored by the government, as if it had all the answers.

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, June 16th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his remarks.

I believe my colleague who spoke before him expressed the scope of the issue and all the finesse required to address these issues. Concern about the protection of these women's rights is shared by both sides of this House.

My colleague pointed out that the member opposite tried to evade a question. I would like to say that it appears as though the government has decided to make this bill law without listening to anyone. No amendments were considered and no comments by witnesses were heard or, I should say, listened to because there were no changes or amendments.

If the section on polygamy is such a concern for people, how does he explain the fact that his party did not present any amendments on this matter, which is nearly as startling as the title?

[Ethics, June 15th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, in 2005, a member said here in the House that he had had enough of this culture of entitlement where taxpayers' money is used for partisan purposes. Who was that member? It was none other than the Prime Minister himself, who at that time, promised more accountability.

However, once he took office, he did exactly the opposite, and now, just before an election, the Prime Minister is redoubling his efforts. In particular, he is going to increase advertising for his two-year old infrastructure program. Is that a coincidence? No. The Prime Minister is doing the same thing as his Liberal predecessors and is misusing taxpayers' money to campaign by conducting more polls and trying to validate his questionable policies. If he got out there and talked to people on the street, he would know right away what Canadians think of the Conservatives. When it comes to corruption, the Conservatives and the Liberals are exactly the same. The student has surpassed the teacher.

In October, Canadians will have a chance to get rid of these old, worn-out parties and finally elect the first NDP government in Ottawa, the only party that will stand up for their interests.