House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2019, with 17% of the vote.
Petitions November 2nd, 2012
Mr. Speaker, today I am speaking on behalf of two groups of Canadians who want to make the government realize, if such a thing is even possible, how important it is to save leading-edge water research.
The Experimental Lakes Area is a unique, internationally renowned infrastructure designed for freshwater research and education. We must do whatever it takes to protect it.
Public Works and Government Services November 2nd, 2012
Mr. Speaker, it does not take a rocket scientist to realize that a $500 million overrun is completely unreasonable. The renovations to Parliament Hill's West Block are now expected to cost $1.2 billion. Considering the way costs have ballooned under the Conservatives’ disastrous management, there is no reason to think they will not rise even higher. Who will pay this exaggerated bill? Canadians.
Why have the Conservatives been twiddling their thumbs instead of keeping a close watch on these costs?
Infrastructure November 1st, 2012
Mr. Speaker, we will make another attempt at getting an intelligible answer.
Canada's infrastructure is in bad shape. In Quebec, outdated water mains are exploding under pressure, overpasses are falling apart and collapsing, and ports, like the one in Trois-Rivières, are waiting for funding for development projects.
While stakeholders are being told to wait until 2014 because there is no more money to fund current programs, we have learned that $2 billion from the 2011 budget—which was supposed to be allocated to infrastructure—has not been spent.
How can the minister justify this situation?
Transport October 31st, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Transport will also soon consider a motion to examine the budget implementation bill. This bill contains transportation-related changes, namely with regard to the Canada Shipping Act. The Standing Committee on Transport must therefore examine these changes.
Will the chair of the Standing Committee on Transport keep the Minister of Finance's promise and put the review of Bill C-45 on the committee meeting agenda?
Canada Revenue Agency October 26th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, we have more bad news that has the Conservative government written all over it.
At the CRA tax centre in Shawinigan, 33 people will lose their jobs and another 22 will lose their jobs at the Jonquière centre. Clearly, this will be a major blow to the local economies of both cities. And to add insult to injury, the targeted positions have to do with archiving personal and corporate income tax returns. This news does not bode well for the privacy of Canadians.
Do the Conservatives plan to entrust the archiving of Canadians' tax returns to private industry?
Job and Growth Act, 2012 October 25th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Sudbury for shedding light on this matter.
I would like to know what he thinks of my interpretation: governments, no matter their political stripe, do not create jobs, but they create the conditions that foster job creation.
It seems to me that the Conservative policies of the past few years have consequences. On the one hand, corporate tax cuts do not find their way back to the economy, and thus are not having the desired results. Members would have had to see the Minister of Finance cry a few weeks ago to understand that that was one of the results.
On the other hand, small businesses create the most jobs in Canada, but they are being offered peanuts over a very short period of time, which makes it impossible for them to take action.
Is my interpretation correct? Does my colleague have something else to add?
Rail Transportation October 25th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, consumers, as well as agriculture and forestry enterprises that must rely on rail service, are at the mercy of CN and CP, and the Conservatives are doing nothing about it.
And yet, just before the last election, the Conservatives promised to deal with these two companies' customer service problems, and the minister promised quick action.
Am I to understand that the pending legislation will suffer the same fate as the committee that the Minister of Industry promised to establish 11 months ago?
Canada Post Corporation Act October 24th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the final vote approaches on Bill C-321, which amends the Canada Post Corporation Act and allows for a continued lower postage rate for library materials.
I am strongly in favour of the bill, and I thank the member for Brandon—Souris for his continued efforts, as this is indeed his third attempt. New Democrats unanimously supported the previous versions of the bill, including in committee, so we are pleased to rise today to renew our support for the bill at third reading.
This bill hits close to home, for two reasons. First, as my colleagues undoubtedly know, I am a teacher, which is why I will always vigorously support this House's efforts to encourage lifelong learning—through reading in this case—and to support culture and the dissemination of knowledge everywhere in Canada. I could tell a great many personal stories involving the students I had the chance to work with for 25 years, but seeing as time is limited, I will have to move on.
The resource materials provided by our libraries contribute to the learning and education of every Canadian.That is why we hope books can be distributed and shared at a low cost across Canada.
I would like to remind my honourable colleagues present that, since 1939, Canadian libraries have shared books at a reduced postal rate. It is vital that a federal institution such as Canada Post, which must serve all Canadians, provide such a service.
We cannot deny that we are pleased to support this bill, which is rather unique in that it places more emphasis on cultural and educational aspects than on economic considerations. It is quite rare for the government to do so, and I wanted to highlight this historic first.
I am also pleased to see that the bill retains the broader definition of library materials, which includes audiovisual and reading materials, of course.
Today, a library is much more than just a place to store books. Libraries are cultural hubs that provide a great variety of documents in very diverse formats. The nature of books is changing and will probably continue to do so in the decades to come. By passing this bill, we are maintaining access to library materials for all Canadians and we are maintaining fairness within the national network.
We also encourage small libraries to lend their collections and their archival documents to larger libraries in urban centres and vice versa. We would also point out that this exchange of documents allows Canadians who might be far away from one another to get to know each other better and recognize commonalities among their diverse fellow citizens.
The second thing that drew my attention in the bill was the key role played by the Canada Post Corporation. I must express a number of concerns I have about this.
Under the direction of the Conservative government, the Canada Post Corporation is closing a number of post offices and transferring certain services to private sector outlets. In the first six months of 2012, at least 16 post offices closed or received a notice of closure. In the next few months, Canada Post is expected to close another 40 or so post offices across the country. I just received an email informing me that the post office in Durham will be closing, and the list will probably grow over the next few weeks.
The NDP strongly opposes this quiet privatization, which has a negative impact on service to Canadians and businesses, and jeopardizes the Canadian economy. This modernization of Canada Post, if you can call it that, is troubling in the context of the bill currently before the House.
Because of the Conservatives, more and more isolated towns and communities are losing their Canada Post services. How will they receive the books that this bill refers to? How can this bill achieve its objectives if Canada Post services continue to dwindle?
It seems ironic, and even illogical, to see some Conservatives rise to support our libraries—something we agree with—and to support maintaining reduced postage rates, while others—or even the same ones—are in the process of reducing the number of post offices across the country.
Bill C-321 is an important bill. If we lost the reduced postage rates for library books, we would end up with a two-tier library system, based on the user's means and wealth. That is unacceptable in a country where access to knowledge is the key to prosperity and future economic development.
Bill C-321 also shows that it is not a mortal sin to require a business to guarantee something that could be considered an essential service in terms of culture and education.
That is why, while the Conservatives are busy making budget cuts—such as the ones to Library and Archives Canada—I will vote in favour of this bill.
However, this does not mean that Canadian libraries are in the clear. Far from it. We must stop privatizing the Canada Post Corporation and ensure that our heritage collections are accessible to as many Canadians as possible.
Canada Post currently offers Canadian libraries a reduced rate for library books, and there is no reason to believe that the corporation could not continue to offer this reduced rate in the future.
This provision would prevent Canada Post from unilaterally changing its reduced postage rate, which could cut interlibrary loan services in rural regions and remote areas of the country.
We must act now to ensure that our library system remains fair and accessible to all Canadians in all communities, especially official language minority communities.
Strengthening Military Justice in the Defence of Canada Act October 23rd, 2012
Mr. Speaker, I am still asking myself the same question. This is the fifth intervention, and I feel like we are at an NDP caucus meeting where we are debating what we already agree on.
Does my colleague from Montcalm think that our friends across the floor have a code of silence that is keeping them from taking part in the debate?
Strengthening Military Justice in the Defence of Canada Act October 23rd, 2012
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for her very enlightening presentation. I will not be very critical because I agree almost completely with what she said. My question instead is about the form of the bill.
Mr. Speaker, in the past hour, you have given me the floor four times. I imagine it is not because I am the darling of the House or the Speaker's pet. At a point in the parliamentary process when we should be debating this bill, it seems that all the questions are from the same side of the House. Is that not another sign of the Conservatives' arrogance? Not only have they rejected the recommendations agreed to in the previous Parliament, but they are refusing to debate them in the House when it is time to do so.