Pierre Nantel

[Business of Supply, March 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague on her very enlightened and relevant speech. Her deep respect for the Canadian Forces is evident. I wonder if she could talk a bit about the despair that veterans sometimes feel, because they think no one cares about their needs.

[Health, February 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that was very energetic. Last week, 700 employees at the Sandoz drug factory in Boucherville learned that they would have to reduce the factory's output because the U.S. FDA found that the factory's practices were not in compliance with standards. How is it that U.S. authorities discovered problems in the factories that serve the Canadian market?

Instead of letting other countries conclude that our factories do not comply with standards, putting people's health, our jobs, and our drug supply at risk, will the minister tell us her plan to clean up this appalling mess?

[Community Organizations, February 10th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, January 30, an organization known as Le Fablier, une histoire de familles, officially opened its new premises on Chemin de Chambly in Longueuil. Every day, the dynamic team at Le Fablier welcomes families and organizes various public education activities to prevent poverty and promote literacy. In Quebec, 1.3 million people over the age of 16 have difficulty reading and writing.

Day after day, Le Fablier carries out its mission on a shoestring budget. That is the case for most of the community organizations in my riding, yet I cannot imagine what our society would be like without these courageous and noble organizations. Federal subsidy programs are inadequate or laden with red tape, and offer no guarantees of future funding.

It is time to stabilize funding for all of these valiant organizations that are key to making good things happen in our society. At the end of every fiscal year, the organizations' clientele and staff find themselves in the same boat: vulnerable to the government's whims. Keeping these organizations guessing from year to year not only interferes with their ability to carry out their missions but is also very disrespectful to them.

[Copyright Modernization Act, February 10th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the hon. member on his speech. In light of the major change that took place in the last election, I would like to ask him if he believes that Quebeckers have had the opportunity to have their say regarding this bill.

[Copyright Modernization Act, February 10th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that we are about to wrap up debate on Bill C-11. This is the 15th time the government has limited the time allowed for debate. I find that worrisome with respect to the work the committee is getting ready to do on Bill C-11.

How can they talk about commonality? The member opposite says that he wants to protect artists, but 14,000 people—that is a lot of people—signed a petition. They took the time to go to a website to express their concern about Quebec culture and Canadian culture.

How does he reconcile those two things? He says he is protecting artists, but 14,000 people are worried. That is a lot of people.

[Copyright Modernization Act, February 8th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I find what is happening with Bill C-11 to be really pathetic. If there is one bill where members ought to be walking on eggshells, this is it. Do members agree that this is a really complicated bill? This is the perfect proof of this government's lack of foresight. The government wants to move quickly and says that the opposition has said enough. It is outrageous. I am very familiar with this bill and I can say that it is very complex. Everyone has something they want to say about it.

What is outrageous is that the government is once again imposing a gag order. Clearly, everyone has something to say. It affects me, my colleagues from other ridings, everyone. We want to have choices on cultural issues, and I know that the ministers opposite know this. We are talking about art and inspiration, but this bill is not inspired. The government is telling us that this bill is balanced, but it is just as balanced as a car where the front is a Jetta, the back is a Chevrolet Impala and the middle is some other car. This bill is a nightmare. It is flawed. It is a series of incoherent intentions. It is a major problem. We have things to say and the government is bulldozing us once again.

[Copyright, February 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, if that were the only measure, it would be fine but we voted against similar legislation because it was flawed.

The Conservatives are out of touch with the reality of Quebec artists. We saw it in 2008 and we are seeing the same thing with Bill C-11. This bill also attacks students' right to learn, and students are another group that the Conservatives love to ignore. Students who are taking online courses should not be subject to the minister's blind ideology.

Is the government prepared to amend the bill and stop the attacks on creators or not?

[Copyright, February 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, 14,000 Canadians have spoken out against the Conservatives' copyright bill. They are unanimous. This bill is an attack on creators' rights and income. The Conservatives are taking $20 million from workers in the cultural sector in the form of mechanical royalties and $30 million in the form of private copying rights.

Will the Conservatives once again impose a gag order so that they do not have to debate these major changes, which are of concern to artists across the country—I want to emphasize this—or will they give us the opportunity to amend the bill?

[Business of Supply, February 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague opposite on what was, frankly, a very courageous speech. Indeed, I imagine it must have been very difficult to make such remarks, since his Prime Minister announced without warning, from Davos, that the Conservatives were going to plough ahead with this.

What does my colleague think about the Prime Minister's great qualities as a reassuring communicator?

[Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act, January 31st, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member opposite on his speech. He was very sincere in his delivery. If that speech had been made before Davos, it would have been much less awkward to say the government is concerned about the fate of our country's seniors. I have a question for him about the polls that often suggest that three-quarters of Canadians do not contribute to an RRSP because they are unable to. How is this new program any different?