This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
{
"time": "2007-05-10 10:40:00",
"attribution": {
"en": "Mr. Paul Cr\u00eate (Montmagny\u2014L'Islet\u2014Kamouraska\u2014Rivi\u00e8re-du-Loup, BQ)",
"fr": ""
},
"content": {
"en": "<p data-HoCid=\"608683\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's speech with interest, but I have a problem with it because there is a great divergence between the text of the motion and the plan of action. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"608684\" data-originallang=\"fr\">The motion denounces the non-deductibility of interest but provides no details or nuances. This is also the case for income trusts. In this regard, we know very well that the main problem is that the Conservatives changed their minds, although they had promised to not touch income trusts. The substance of the issue is another matter.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"608685\" data-originallang=\"fr\"> Is the motion not superseded today by the action plan mentioned by the member? Would it not be more pertinent to completely rewrite it, to present it so it would be acceptable? In our opinion\u2014and we had said this mainly with regard to family trusts\u2014in its present form the proposal submitted by the Liberals is definitely not acceptable.</p>",
"fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"608683\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, j'ai \u00e9cout\u00e9 le discours de mon coll\u00e8gue avec int\u00e9r\u00eat, mais cela me pose probl\u00e8me, puisqu'il y a un \u00e9cart extraordinaire entre le texte de la motion et le plan d'action. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"608684\" data-originallang=\"fr\">La d\u00e9nonciation inh\u00e9rente \u00e0 la motion est sans d\u00e9tail, sans nuance, notamment quant \u00e0 la d\u00e9ductibilit\u00e9 des int\u00e9r\u00eats. Il en est un peu de m\u00eame quant \u00e0 la question des fiducies. \u00c0 cet \u00e9gard, on sait tr\u00e8s bien que le probl\u00e8me fondamental r\u00e9side dans le fait que les conservateurs ont chang\u00e9 d'opinion alors qu'ils s'\u00e9taient engag\u00e9s \u00e0 ne pas toucher \u00e0 ces fiducies. En ce qui concerne le fond de la question, c'est une autre affaire. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"608685\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Finalement, la motion n'est-elle pas un peu caduque aujourd'hui, par rapport au plan d'action que le d\u00e9put\u00e9 a mentionn\u00e9? Ne serait-il pas plus pertinent de la r\u00e9\u00e9crire de fond en comble, de la repr\u00e9senter pour qu'elle puisse \u00eatre acceptable? \u00c9videmment, \u00e0 notre avis \u2014 et on l'avait dit notamment pour ce qui est des fiducies familiales \u2014, sous sa forme actuelle, la proposition soumise par les lib\u00e9raux est nettement non acceptable.</p>"
},
"url": "/debates/2007/5/10/paul-crete-2/",
"politician_url": "/politicians/73/",
"politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/381/",
"procedural": false,
"source_id": "2072416",
"h1": {
"en": "Government Orders",
"fr": ""
},
"h2": {
"en": "Business of Supply",
"fr": ""
},
"h3": {
"en": "Opposition Motion\u2014Finance",
"fr": ""
},
"document_url": "/debates/2007/5/10/",
"related": {
"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2007%2F5%2F10%2F"
}
}