Pierre Nantel

[The Senate, June 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we will let them fight it out. The upper chamber is so high up—uppity, even—that it is completely out of touch with reality. The Senate remains stuck in the 19th century.

The chamber houses unelected party cronies who are not accountable to anyone, other than their buddies who put them there. The very people who are supposed to act as a counterbalance to the executive are themselves appointed by the executive. That is ridiculous.

It gets worse. Senator Dagenais, a walking example of ridiculousness, is ignoring the advice of the Leader of the Government in the Senate and does not want the Auditor General sticking his nose in the senator's business because he follows the rules. The Prime Minister said the same thing about Wallin and Duffy. He said that they followed the residency rules, until we realized that was not true.

The Senate is like that box of junk you drag around move after move without ever opening. Yet that box does not cost $92 million a year and is not mired in scandal year after year.

The Liberals and Conservatives can defend their Senate friends all they want. They can claim to want to reform the Senate or they can propose an improved status quo. The NDP, on the other hand, will take care of things.

[The Canadian Museum of History Act, May 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify something. All night long, we have heard our colleagues across the floor talk about what a great program this will be and how it will be shared with all museums in Canada.

I must emphasize that the issue here is not all these peripheral points, but rather the heart of the bill, which is to change a museum's mission.

I would like to read the description that can be found on the Canadian Museum of Civilization website. It states:

—a panorama of Canadian history unfolds in a space more than 3,000 square metres...in area. Life-size settings of buildings and environments from the history of Canada are reconstructed, furnished with appropriate artifacts...

It seems to me that that is a description of Canada's history. What does the government have against that history?

[The Canadian Museum of History Act, May 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, could we talk about the Canadian Museum of Civilization? We are completely off topic. The member is talking about insurance and protection programs for travelling exhibits. There is no correlation.

[The Canadian Museum of History Act, May 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciated the allusion my colleague made in his speech to the fact that we can actually be surprised that this government claims to like history so much, when the Conservatives have recently dismissed close to 84% of archaeologists.

I would like to tell my colleague that on the Museum of Civilization's website, there is a description that says a lot about the museum's current mandate. It gives us the feeling that our country's history is already very well represented in the Canada Hall.

Does he not think that all this debate and all this discussion is pointless, because if they had simply agreed to roll out the red carpet for the current exhibition in the museum's Canada Hall from the beginning, we would all have agreed with this wonderful initiative?

The problem is that they want to completely redo the historical narrative that is already housed in the museum right now. He should go and see it.

[Canadian Museum of History Act, May 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, oddly enough, as I was listening to the member opposite, it was only at the very end that I understood the real reason why they want to emphasize great military victories.

However, just before that, I heard him say that it was a great opportunity. Indeed, it would be, if we could forget the fact that they are destroying the most popular museum in the region to convert it into a museum of history and the national showcase for the 150th anniversary. It is true that this anniversary is a great opportunity for the museum to perform this kind of role.

On my last visit, there was a magnificent symbolic image showing Parliament as it is today and a first nations village on the other shore in Gatineau, right where the museum is now located.

What precisely does he have against Canada Hall in this exhibition? The museum, as it is now, already represents our history.

[Canadian Museum of History Act, May 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I have no problem with the manner in which the operation is being carried out and the way future projects are being described. The level of collaboration with other museums is also very positive. However, I have a huge problem with the fact that this is the 36th gag order on a bill and that the minister has the nerve to ask us to trust him.

With all the abuses in the campaigns and the way this government goes about doing things, which is true to form but, to say the very least, does not enjoy popular support, everyone agrees that the Conservatives have gone too far and, today, we are being asked to trust them. Yet once again, the right to speak on this subject is being denied us. How dare the Conservatives say that they have properly consulted Canadians when, as we were discussing Canada's 150th anniversary in committee, they clearly stated that the public needed to get on board with this project. Yet we know full well that your plans were made ahead of time.

Here is what I would like to know. You talk of respect, when last week, as I delivered my speech—

[Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012, May 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate my hon. colleague on her speech on a topic that is certainly not easy for everyone to understand.

My question is one that might be asked by anyone who, like me, is following events by watching the headlines and who sees that, on the one hand, the bill encompasses tax notices of the past 10 or 11 years and, on the other hand, the government is still looking for $3.1 billion.

Will this reassure the general public?

[Canadian Museum of History Act, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear what my colleague from Hull—Aylmer has to say about the consultations held in Montreal, which were an incredible sham. I believe that the member is fairly familiar with Montreal. The consultations were held the same afternoon in two underground shopping centres in Montreal, Promenades Cathédrale and Les Cours Mont-Royal.

Does she think those were good places to hold public consultations about this?

[Canadian Museum of History Act, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I will tell them what I have already said. I hope that the New Democratic Party will be in power in 2015 and that it will have the time to set up something like an inter-museum pass. For the Longueuil women's museum, for example, it would be good to sell a pass for Canada's 150th anniversary, and the museum could keep a portion of the proceeds for administration.

The museum network idea is a very good one. It came out of our study on Canada's 150th anniversary, and there was consensus on it.

[Canadian Museum of History Act, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

Obviously, there are qualified people who do this, but there are also people who are put in place.

Am I really being asked to list the individuals appointed by the people opposite to run various institutions like this one, who unfortunately have not made good choices and who clearly were following an editorial line?