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": "2012-05-28 12:25:00",
"attribution": {
"en": "Mr. Jamie Nicholls (Vaudreuil\u2014Soulanges, NDP)",
"fr": "M. Jamie Nicholls (Vaudreuil\u2014Soulanges, NPD)"
},
"content": {
"en": "<p data-HoCid=\"2892393\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, we can agree that Canadian industry is important. Therefore, where was the minister when the jobs were leaving Mabe? Where was the minister when the jobs were leaving Electro-Motive Diesel? She said that the government will intervene whenever there is an effect on the economy, on Canadian industry. However, we see that she acts when it comes to stopping a strike and stopping workers from protecting their rights, but she and the government did not stop a company from moving all of its jobs offshore or elsewhere. Why is she protecting CP, in this instance, by imposing back-to-work legislation, but she did not protect the jobs of the people at Electro-Motive Diesel, Mabe, and other places such as Aveos, the overhaul workers, who all of a sudden were out of a job? Why the flip-flopping of positions?</p>",
"fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"2892393\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, nous convenons que l'industrie canadienne est importante. Or, o\u00f9 \u00e9tait la ministre quand les emplois ont disparu \u00e0 Mabe? O\u00f9 \u00e9tait la ministre quand ils ont disparu \u00e0 l'usine d'Electro-Motive Diesel? Elle a dit que le gouvernement interviendra chaque fois que l'\u00e9conomie, l'industrie canadienne, est menac\u00e9e. Toutefois, nous voyons qu'elle intervient quand il s'agit de mettre fin \u00e0 une gr\u00e8ve et d'emp\u00eacher les travailleurs d'exercer leurs droits, mais elle et son gouvernement n'ont pas emp\u00each\u00e9 une entreprise de d\u00e9localiser tous ses emplois \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger. Pourquoi prot\u00e8ge-t-elle CP Rail dans ce cas-ci en imposant un projet de loi qui force le retour au travail, alors qu'elle n'a pas prot\u00e9g\u00e9 les emplois des travailleurs d'Electro-Motive Diesel, de Mabe et d'autres usines, notamment les travailleurs des ateliers d'entretien d'Aveos, qui, tout \u00e0 coup se sont retrouv\u00e9s sans emploi? Pourquoi avoir ainsi deux poids deux mesures?</p>"
},
"url": "/debates/2012/5/28/jamie-nicholls-1/",
"politician_url": "/politicians/jamie-nicholls/",
"politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4035/",
"procedural": false,
"source_id": "7599938",
"h1": {
"en": "Government Orders",
"fr": "Initiatives minist\u00e9rielles"
},
"h2": {
"en": "Continuation and Resumption of Rail Service Operations Legislation",
"fr": "La Loi pr\u00e9voyant le maintien et la reprise des services ferroviaires"
},
"document_url": "/debates/2012/5/28/",
"related": {
"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2012%2F5%2F28%2F"
}
}