Martin Champoux

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my Conservative colleague on his speech. I find today's motion particularly compelling for a number of reasons. First, the national poppy campaign is in full swing. Nearly every member of the House is proudly wearing a poppy in remembrance of those who fought, and those who gave their lives, for our freedom and our values. Against that backdrop, we are confronted [more]

Mr. Speaker, this morning, representatives of thousands of newspapers and magazines from both sides of the Atlantic wrote to Canada and the European Union. They are calling on them to use the upcoming summit as an opportunity to commit to regulating digital platforms and the use of AI. They are calling for the summit's final statement to include “a firm, shared commitment to free, independent, [more]

Madam Speaker, at the time the Defence Investment Agency was created, another mechanism had been in place for decades. The need to procure military equipment is nothing new for Canada. It has always existed. The government has purchased aircraft and had ships built in the past. None of that is anything new. What forces the government to create a new agency now, one that is going to release the [more]

Madam Speaker, before I start, I want to acknowledge my colleagues who are proudly wearing the poppy as we begin the annual poppy campaign to remember those who gave their lives and fought for our values and freedom. This is my annual reminder. This year is the second year that I have the honour of serving as the honorary president of the poppy campaign in my riding of Drummond. The poppy is [more]

Madam Speaker, is this not a way for the government to shirk some of its responsibility? Is it not a bit risky to create an agency to handle such crucial and sensitive defence investments? Questions are already being raised. Prime Minister Minister of Finance and National Revenue First, there is the appointment of the agency's president, who is close to theand has a background at Goldman Sachs. [more]

Mr. Speaker, all TV and radio station operators in Quebec are required to pay levies, pay fees, pay into the system. That is how cultural production is funded. However, thanks to the Liberals, American streamers like Netflix do not have to pay a penny. The American web giants that are infinitely richer than Quebecor or Bell Media get a free pass, which, by the way, directly contradicts the [more]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague very much, and I look forward to hearing his comments on today's motion later on. We should remember that this tax was originally requested and required to fund the cultural sector and the media, this entire sector where American digital companies swoop in and get rich. In the end, it was not used for that purpose at all; it was used for something else [more]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Liberals have forgotten their $600-million promise, their commitment to impose a levy on the web giants. The worst part of all of this is that taxpayers will have to foot a $600-million bill to make up for the government's backtracking on the levy. Instead of making the web giants pay, the government is foisting the bill onto all taxpayers, even those who do not have [more]

That, given that, (i) culture is central to Quebec’s identity, (ii) the cultural sector plays a critical role in Quebec’s economy, (iii) the media and cultural production sectors are facing serious pressures that hamper their development, (iv) the government nevertheless abolished the Digital Services Tax levied on the U.S. digital corporate giants, the House call on the government to: (a) uphold [more]

That is a very good question, Madam Speaker, and I thank my colleague for asking it. My colleague is obviously generalizing; he is really broadening the scope of the issue, but fundamentally, I understand that we are talking about broken promises. In our motion today, we are addressing a promise that, while not yet broken, has not yet been kept, and that is very concerning. I am talking about [more]