Ralph Goodale

[Copyright, October 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, artists looking for copyright changes have been told to wait until 2017, but the Conservative Party gets served right now, this fall, by a copyright change bootlegged into a omnibus bill. Journalists will have their news content taken—they would say stolen—without permission or remuneration, and then they will be forced to broadcast their own stuff in partisan attack ads. It is expropriation without compensation. It degrades integrity and freedom of the press. Why does the government behave like such a tinpot banana republic?

[Finance, October 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, with the latest unemployment figures showing 112,000 lost jobs, and Canada's latest monthly economic growth at zero, what does the government plan to put in its next omnibus budget bill?

Well, first, there is an EI scheme that the Parliamentary Budget Officer says will actually kill 9,200 jobs, and second, there is another scheme authorizing the swiping of television news programs for use in political attack ads. Why is the government perverting a budget bill to legitimize illegal behaviour?

[Rail Transportation, October 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we do not yet know the cause of the Saskatchewan train wreck, but apparently operator error is being ruled out. Nevertheless, there is clearly an ongoing argument between Transport Canada and the railway companies about the issue of operator fatigue. Some reports suggest that as many as three-quarters of freight operators may actually have fallen asleep at the controls.

The issue is acknowledged. It has been under investigation since 2009. Air crews and truck drivers are regulated against fatigue. Will the government implement the necessary safety regulations for train crews before Christmas?

[Rail Transportation, October 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, people in Saskatchewan are cleaning up the mess from yesterday's train derailment. There were no injuries, thankfully, but it was dangerous. Twenty-six cars crashed. Dangerous goods spilled. There was a fire and pollution, and 50 people were evacuated. The province, municipalities, and private individuals incurred costs.

I have three questions. Will all those costs be fully and quickly reimbursed? Were local first responders informed of the contents of that train before they had to deal with the emergency? Were these the old DOT-111 cars?

[Erik Spicer, October 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an illustrious parliamentarian who passed away September 27.

Erik John Spicer was never elected to the House of Commons or called to the Senate, but for 34 years he served these two institutions with skill and devotion as the Parliamentary Librarian of Canada.

Erik loved the library, as a building of huge historic importance, as an institution fundamental to our democracy, as a service indispensable to Canadians. He served eight prime ministers, 22 Speakers, thousands of MPs, and millions of citizens.

Erik was a decorated veteran, a patron of the arts, a man active in his local community and devoted to his family.

Canada's longest continually serving parliamentary official, Erik was uniquely recognized on his retirement as Librarian Emeritus and an honorary officer of both Houses.

Our thoughts and prayers are with his loving wife of 61 years, Helen, and the entire Spicer family.

[National Defence, October 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, there are, of course, many different ways in which Canada can do its part in rooting out the evil that is ISIL. How then has the government weighed all of the alternatives, the costs, benefits and effectiveness, for example, of strategic airlift or training, signals intelligence, reconnaissance, medical support, critical infrastructure engineering, all in addition to massive humanitarian relief and all to do our part against ISIL?

How has the government calculated that the highest and best use of limited Canadian resources are air strikes, potentially crowding out all of the rest?

[National Defence, October 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, complexities in the Middle East are daunting. We could soon be bombing people in Libya who we were trying to defend not long ago. Even some misguided Canadians who have run amok could soon be among our enemies. In Turkey, which is a NATO ally, there is a long-running fight with the Kurds, but the Kurds are currently a major source of local resistance against ISIL.

Has this conundrum been carefully explored with the Turkish government? Is it clear who is on what side in the combat Canadians are about to get into in Iraq?

[National Defence, October 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, its various important missions have extracted a large toll from the financial and human resources of the Canadian Forces. Some senior military commanders have argued for a pause in the tempo of deployments. The budget has been cut and procurements have been postponed. Even ammunition is in short supply. In dollars and in personnel, what will Canada's maximum exposure be in Iraq over the next five years? Will there be a new and extra appropriation in this fall's fiscal update?

[National Defence, October 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chrétien had enormous support.

Canadians need to know whether the government has thought through the combat mission that it is launching.

In rooting out the evil of ISIL, how have the Conservatives calculated that the highest and best use of Canadian resources is a small fleet of CF-18s? What about those other alternatives: strategic airlift, training, signals intelligence, reconnaissance, medical support as well as the massive humanitarian relief that is required?

The cost of the air strikes will crowd out all those other things in which Canadians excel. Therefore, what is the rationale for the choice that is being made to the exclusion of everything else?

[National Defence, October 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, consensus requires clear, honest, complete, and factual answers. It would appear that the prime ministers of the United Kingdom and Australia worked really hard at building trust and common ground in their countries, but that has not happened, at least not yet, in Canada.

In making its case, why does the government think it is better to drive wedges of division and keep Canadians in the dark?