Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2013.

Sponsor

Jim Flaherty  Conservative

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

Part 1 of this enactment implements certain income tax measures and related measures proposed in the March 29, 2012 budget. Most notably, it
(a) expands the list of eligible expenses under the Medical Expense Tax Credit to include blood coagulation monitors and their disposable peripherals;
(b) introduces a temporary measure to allow certain family members to open a Registered Disability Savings Plan for an adult individual who might not be able to enter into a contract;
(c) extends, for one year, the temporary Mineral Exploration Tax Credit for flow-through share investors;
(d) allows corporations to make split and late eligible dividend designations;
(e) makes the salary of the Governor General taxable and adjusts that salary;
(f) allows a designated partner of a partnership to provide a waiver on behalf of all partners to extend the time limit for issuing a determination in respect of the partnership;
(g) amends the penalty applicable to promoters of charitable donation tax shelters who file false registration information or who fail to register a tax shelter prior to selling interests in the tax shelter;
(h) introduces a new penalty applicable to tax shelter promoters who fail to respond to a demand to file an information return or who file an information return that contains false or misleading sales information;
(i) limits the period for which a tax shelter identification number is valid to one calendar year;
(j) modifies the rules for registering certain foreign charitable organizations as qualified donees;
(k) amends the rules for determining the extent to which a charity has engaged in political activities; and
(l) provides the Minister of National Revenue with the authority to suspend the privileges, with respect to issuing tax receipts, of a registered charity or a registered Canadian amateur athletic association if the charity or association fails to report information that is required to be filed annually in an information return or devotes resources to political activities in excess of the limits set out in the Income Tax Act.
Part 1 also implements other selected income tax measures and related measures. Most notably, it
(a) amends the Income Tax Act consequential on the implementation of the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, including the extension of the tax deferral allowed to farmers in a designated area who produce listed grains and receive deferred cash purchase tickets to all Canadian farmers who produce listed grains and receive deferred cash purchase tickets;
(b) provides authority for the Canada Revenue Agency to issue via online notice or regular mail demands to file a return; and
(c) introduces a requirement for commercial tax preparers to file income tax returns electronically.
Part 2 amends the Excise Tax Act to implement certain excise tax and goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) measures proposed in the March 29, 2012 Budget. It expands the list of GST/HST zero-rated medical and assistive devices as well as the list of GST/HST zero-rated non-prescription drugs that are used to treat life-threatening diseases. It also exempts certain pharmacists’ professional services from the GST/HST, other than prescription drug dispensing services that are already zero-rated. It further allows certain literacy organizations to claim a rebate of the GST and the federal component of the HST paid on the acquisition of books to be given away for free by those organizations. It also implements legislative requirements relating to the Government of British Columbia’s decision to exit the harmonized sales tax framework. Additional amendments to that Act and related regulations in respect of foreign-based rental vehicles temporarily imported by Canadian residents provide, in certain circumstances, relief from the GST/HST, the Green Levy on fuel-inefficient vehicles and the automobile air conditioner tax. This Part further amends that Act to ensure that changes to the standardized fuel consumption test method used for the EnerGuide, as announced on February 17, 2012 by the Minister of Natural Resources, do not affect the application of the Green Levy.
Finally, Part 2 amends the Air Travellers Security Charge Act, the Excise Act, 2001 and the Excise Tax Act to provide authority for the Canada Revenue Agency to issue via online notice or regular mail demands to file a return.
Part 3 contains certain measures related to responsible resource development.
Division 1 of Part 3 enacts the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, which establishes a new federal environmental assessment regime. Assessments are conducted in relation to projects, designated by regulations or by the Minister of the Environment, to determine whether they are likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects that fall within the legislative authority of Parliament, or that are directly linked or necessarily incidental to a federal authority’s exercise of a power or performance of a duty or function that is required for the carrying out of the project.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the National Energy Board or a review panel established by the Minister are to conduct assessments within applicable time limits. At the end of an assessment, a decision statement is to be issued to the project proponent who is required to comply with the conditions set out in it.
The enactment provides for cooperation between the federal government and other jurisdictions by enabling the delegation of an environmental assessment, the substitution of the process of another jurisdiction for an environmental assessment under the Act and the exclusion of a project from the application of the Act when there is an equivalent assessment by another jurisdiction. The enactment requires that there be opportunities for public participation during an environmental assessment, that participant funding programs and a public registry be established, and that there be follow-up programs in relation to all environmental assessments. It also provides for powers of inspection and fines.
Finally, the enactment specifies that federal authorities are not to take certain measures regarding the carrying out of projects on federal lands or outside Canada unless they determine that those projects are not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects.
This Division also makes related amendments to the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Act and consequential amendments to other Acts, and repeals the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
Division 2 of Part 3 amends the National Energy Board Act to allow the Governor in Council to make the decision about the issuance of certificates for major pipelines. It amends the Act to establish time limits for regulatory reviews under the Act and to enhance the powers of the National Energy Board Chairperson and the Minister responsible for the Act to ensure that those reviews are conducted in a timely manner. It also amends the Act to permit the National Energy Board to exercise federal jurisdiction over navigation in respect of pipelines and power lines that cross navigable waters and it establishes an administrative monetary penalty system.
Division 3 of Part 3 amends the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act to authorize the National Energy Board to exercise federal jurisdiction over navigation in respect of pipelines and power lines that cross navigable waters.
Division 4 of Part 3 amends the Nuclear Safety and Control Act to extend the maximum allowable term of temporary members of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission from six months to three years. It is also amended to allow for a licence to be transferred with the consent of that Commission and it puts in place an administrative monetary penalty system.
Division 5 of Part 3 amends the Fisheries Act to focus that Act on the protection of fish that support commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fisheries and to more effectively manage those activities that pose the greatest threats to these fisheries. The amendments provide additional clarity for the authorization of serious harm to fish and of deposits of deleterious substances. The amendments allow the Minister to enter into agreements with provinces and with other bodies, provide for the control and management of aquatic invasive species, clarify and expand the powers of inspectors, and permit the Governor in Council to designate another Minister as the Minister responsible for the administration and enforcement of subsections 36(3) to (6) of the Fisheries Act for the purposes of, and in relation to, subject matters set out by order.
Division 6 of Part 3 amends the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 to provide the Minister of the Environment with the authority to renew disposal at sea permits in prescribed circumstances. It is also amended to change the publication requirements for disposal at sea permits and to provide authority to make regulations respecting time limits for their issuance and renewal.
Division 7 of Part 3 amends the Species at Risk Act to allow for the issuance of authorizations with a longer term, to clarify the authority to renew the authorizations and to make compliance with conditions of permits enforceable. The Act is also amended to provide authority to make regulations respecting time limits for the issuance and renewal of permits under the Act. Furthermore, section 77 is amended to ensure that the National Energy Board will be able to issue a certificate when required to do so by the Governor in Council under subsection 54(1) of the National Energy Board Act.
Part 4 enacts and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 4 amends a number of Acts to eliminate the requirement for the Auditor General of Canada to undertake annual financial audits of certain entities and to assess the performance reports of two agencies. This Division also eliminates other related obligations.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act and the Cooperative Credit Associations Act to prohibit the issuance of life annuity-like products.
Division 3 of Part 4 provides that PPP Canada Inc. is an agent of Her Majesty for purposes limited to its mandated activities at the federal level, including the provision of advice to federal departments and Crown corporations on public-private partnership projects.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Northwest Territories Act, the Nunavut Act and the Yukon Act to provide the authority for the Governor in Council to set, on the recommendation of the Minister of Finance, the maximum amount of territorial borrowings and to make regulations in relation to those maximum amounts, including what constitutes borrowing, the relevant entities and the valuation of the borrowings.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Financial Administration Act to modify, for parent Crown corporations, the period to which their quarterly financial reports relate, so that it is aligned with their financial year, and to include in the place of certain annual tabling requirements related to the business and activities of parent Crown corporations a requirement to make public consolidated quarterly reports on their business and activities. It also amends the Alternative Fuels Act and the Public Service Employment Act to eliminate certain reporting requirements.
Division 6 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to establish the Social Security Tribunal and to add provisions authorizing the electronic administration or enforcement of programs, legislation, activities or policies. It also amends the Canada Pension Plan, the Old Age Security Act and the Employment Insurance Act so that appeals from decisions made under those Acts will be heard by the Social Security Tribunal. Finally, it provides for transitional provisions and makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Division 7 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to add provisions relating to the protection of personal information obtained in the course of administering or enforcing the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act and repeals provisions in the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act that are substantially the same as those that are added to the Human Resources and Skills Development Act.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to add provisions relating to the social insurance registers and Social Insurance Numbers. It also amends the Canada Pension Plan in relation to Social Insurance Numbers and the Employment Insurance Act to repeal certain provisions relating to the social insurance registers and Social Insurance Numbers and to maintain the power to charge the costs of those registers to the Employment Insurance Operating Account.
Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Parks Canada Agency Act to provide that the Agency may enter into agreements with other ministers or bodies to assist in the administration and enforcement of legislation in places outside national parks, national historic sites, national marine conservation areas and other protected heritage areas if considerations of geography make it impractical for the other minister or body to administer and enforce that legislation in those places. It also amends that Act to provide that the Chief Executive Officer is to report to the Minister of the Environment under section 31 of that Act every five years. It amends that Act to remove the requirements for annual corporate plans, annual reports and annual audits, and amends that Act, the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act to provide that that Minister is to review management plans for national parks, national historic sites, national marine conservation areas and other protected heritage areas at least every 10 years and is to have any amendments to a plan tabled in Parliament.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act in order to allow public sector investment pools that satisfy certain criteria, including pursuing commercial objectives, to directly invest in a Canadian financial institution, subject to approval by the Minister of Finance.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the National Housing Act, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act and the Supporting Vulnerable Seniors and Strengthening Canada’s Economy Act to enhance the governance and oversight framework of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
This Division also amends the National Housing Act to establish a registry for institutions that issue covered bonds and for covered bond programs and to provide for the protection of covered bond contracts and covered bond collateral in the event of an issuer’s bankruptcy or insolvency. It also makes amendments to the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act, the Insurance Companies Act and the Cooperative Credit Associations Act to prohibit institutions from issuing covered bonds except within the framework established under the National Housing Act. Finally, it includes a coordinating amendment to the Supporting Vulnerable Seniors and Strengthening Canada’s Economy Act.
Division 12 of Part 4 implements the Framework Agreement on Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America signed on May 26, 2009.
Division 13 of Part 4 amends the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act to reflect an increase in Canada’s quota subscription, as related to the ratification of the 2010 Quota and Governance reform resolution of the Board of Governors of the International Monetary Fund, and to align the timing of the annual report under that Act to correspond to that of the annual report under the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act.
Division 14 of Part 4 amends the Canada Health Act so that members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are included in the definition of “insured person”.
Division 15 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act to
(a) remove the office of the Inspector General;
(b) require the Security Intelligence Review Committee to submit to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness a certificate on the Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s annual report; and
(c) increase the information on the Service’s activities to be provided by that Committee to that Minister.
Division 16 of Part 4 amends the Currency Act to clarify certain provisions that relate to the calling in and the redemption of coins.
Division 17 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act in order to implement the total transfer protection for the 2012-2013 fiscal year and to give effect to certain elements of major transfer renewal that were announced by the Minister of Finance on December 19, 2011. It also makes certain administrative amendments to that Act and to the Canada Health Act.
Division 18 of Part 4 amends the Fisheries Act to authorize the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to allocate fish for the purpose of financing scientific and fisheries management activities in the context of joint project agreements.
Division 19 of Part 4 amends the Food and Drugs Act to give the Minister of Health the power to establish a list that sets out prescription drugs or classes of prescription drugs and to provide that the list may be incorporated by reference. It also gives the Minister the power to issue marketing authorizations that exempt a food, or an advertisement with respect to a food, from certain provisions of the Act. The division also provides that a regulation with respect to a food and a marketing authorization may incorporate by reference any document. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Division 20 of Part 4 amends the Government Employees Compensation Act to allow prescribed entities to be subrogated to the rights of employees to make claims against third parties.
Division 21 of Part 4 amends the International Development Research Centre Act to reduce the maximum number of governors of the Centre to 14, and to consequently change other rules about the number of governors.
Division 22 of Part 4 amends Part I of the Canada Labour Code to require the parties to a collective agreement to file a copy of it with the Minister of Labour, subject to the regulations, as a condition for it to come into force. It amends Part III of that Act to require employers that provide benefits to their employees under long-term disability plans to insure those plans, subject to certain exceptions. The Division also amends that Part to create an offence and to increase maximum fines for offences under that Part.
Division 23 of Part 4 repeals the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act.
Division 24 of Part 4 amends the Old Age Security Act to provide the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development with the authority to waive the requirement for an application for Old Age Security benefits for many eligible seniors, to gradually increase the age of eligibility for the Old Age Security Pension, the Guaranteed Income Supplement, the Allowance and the Allowance for the Survivor and to allow individuals to voluntarily defer their Old Age Security Pension up to five years past the age of eligibility, in exchange for a higher, actuarially adjusted, pension.
Division 25 of Part 4 dissolves the Public Appointments Commission and its secretariat.
Division 26 of Part 4 amends the Seeds Act to give the President of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency the power to issue licences to persons authorizing them to perform activities related to controlling or assuring the quality of seeds or seed crops.
Division 27 of Part 4 amends the Statutory Instruments Act to remove the distribution requirements for the Canada Gazette.
Division 28 of Part 4 amends the Investment Canada Act in order to authorize the Minister of Industry to communicate or disclose certain information relating to investments and to accept security in order to promote compliance with undertakings.
Division 29 of Part 4 amends the Customs Act to allow the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to designate a portion of a roadway or other access way that leads to a customs office and that is used by persons arriving in Canada and by persons travelling within Canada as a mixed-traffic corridor. All persons who are travelling in a mixed-traffic corridor must present themselves to a border services officer and state whether they are arriving from a location outside or within Canada.
Division 30 of Part 4 gives retroactive effect to subsections 39(2) and (3) of the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985.
Division 31 of Part 4 amends the Railway Safety Act to limit the apportionment of costs to a road authority when a grant has been made under section 12 of that Act.
Division 32 of Part 4 amends the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act to replace the two Vice-chairperson positions with two permanent member positions.
Division 33 of Part 4 repeals the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development Act and authorizes the closing out of the affairs of the Centre established by that Act.
Division 34 of Part 4 amends the Health of Animals Act to allow the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to declare certain areas to be control zones in respect of a disease or toxic substance. The enactment also grants the Minister certain powers, including the power to make regulations prohibiting the movement of persons, animals or things in the control zones for the purpose of eliminating a disease or toxic substance or controlling its spread and the power to impose conditions on the movement of animals or things in those zones.
Division 35 of Part 4 amends the Canada School of Public Service Act to abolish the Board of Governors of the Canada School of Public Service and to place certain responsibilities on the Minister designated for the purposes of the Act and on the President of the School.
Division 36 of Part 4 amends the Bank Act by adding a preamble to it.
Division 37 of Part 4 amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to eliminate the requirement of a hearing for certain reviews.
Division 38 of Part 4 amends the Coasting Trade Act to add seismic activities to the list of exceptions to the prohibition against foreign ships and non-duty paid ships engaging in the coasting trade.
Division 39 of Part 4 amends the Status of the Artist Act to dissolve the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal and transfer its powers and duties to the Canada Industrial Relations Board.
Division 40 of Part 4 amends the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy Act to give the Round Table the power to sell or otherwise dispose of its assets and satisfy its debts and liabilities and to give the Minister of the Environment the power to direct the Round Table in respect of the exercise of some of its powers. The Division provides for the repeal of the Act and makes consequential amendments to other acts.
Division 41 of Part 4 amends the Telecommunications Act to change the rules relating to foreign ownership of Canadian carriers eligible to operate as telecommunications common carriers and to permit the recovery of costs associated with the administration and enforcement of the national do not call list.
Division 42 of Part 4 amends the Employment Equity Act to remove the requirements that are specific to the Federal Contractors Program for Employment Equity.
Division 43 of Part 4 amends the Employment Insurance Act to permit a person’s benefits to be determined by reference to their highest earnings in a given number of weeks, to permit regulations to be made respecting what constitutes suitable employment, to remove the requirement that a consent to deduction be in writing, to provide a limitation period within which certain repayments of overpayments need to be deducted and paid and to clarify the provisions respecting the refund of premiums to self-employed persons. It also amends that Act to modify the Employment Insurance premium rate-setting mechanism, including requiring that the rate be set on a seven-year break-even basis once the Employment Insurance Operating Account returns to balance. The Division makes consequential amendments to the Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board Act.
Division 44 of Part 4 amends the Customs Tariff to make certain imported fuels duty-free and to increase the travellers’ exemption thresholds.
Division 45 of Part 4 amends the Canada Marine Act to require provisions of a port authority’s letters patent relating to limits on the authority’s power to borrow money to be recommended by the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Finance before they are approved by the Governor in Council.
Division 46 of Part 4 amends the First Nations Land Management Act to implement changes made to the Framework Agreement on First Nation Land Management, including changes relating to the description of land that is to be subject to a land code, and to provide for the coming into force of land codes and the development by First Nations of environmental protection regimes.
Division 47 of Part 4 amends the Canada Travelling Exhibitions Indemnification Act to increase the maximum indemnity in respect of individual travelling exhibitions, as well as the maximum indemnity in respect of all travelling exhibitions.
Division 48 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority Act to provide that the chief executive officer of the Authority is appointed by the Governor in Council and that an employee may not replace the chief executive officer for more than 90 days without the Governor in Council’s approval.
Division 49 of Part 4 amends the First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act to repeal provisions related to the First Nations Statistical Institute and amends that Act and other Acts to remove any reference to that Institute. It authorizes the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to close out the Institute’s affairs.
Division 50 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act to provide for the payment or reimbursement of fees for career transition services for veterans or their survivors.
Division 51 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to add powers, duties and functions that are substantially the same as those conferred by the Department of Social Development Act. It repeals the Department of Social Development Act and, in doing so, eliminates the National Council of Welfare.
Division 52 of Part 4 amends the Wage Earner Protection Program Act in order to correct the English version of the definition “eligible wages”.
Division 53 of Part 4 repeals the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act.
Division 54 of Part 4 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Budget Implementation Act, 2008 to provide for the termination of certain applications for permanent residence that were made before February 27, 2008. This Division also amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things, authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to give instructions establishing and governing classes of permanent residents as part of the economic class and to provide that the User Fees Act does not apply in respect of fees set by those instructions. Furthermore, this Division amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to allow for the retrospective application of certain regulations and certain instructions given by the Minister, if those regulations and instructions so provide, and to authorize regulations to be made respecting requirements imposed on employers in relation to authorizations to work in Canada.
Division 55 of Part 4 enacts the Shared Services Canada Act to establish Shared Services Canada to provide certain administrative services specified by the Governor in Council. The Act provides for the Governor in Council to designate a minister to preside over Shared Services Canada.
Division 56 of Part 4 amends the Assisted Human Reproduction Act to respond to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Reference re Assisted Human Reproduction Act that was rendered in 2010, including by repealing the provisions that were found to be unconstitutional and abolishing the Assisted Human Reproduction Agency of Canada.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 18, 2012 Passed That the Bill be now read a third time and do pass.
June 18, 2012 Failed That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word "That" and substituting the following: “this House decline to give third reading to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, because this House: a) does not know the full implications of the budget cuts given that the government has kept the details of the $5.2 billion in spending cuts from the Parliamentary Budget Officer whose lawyer, Joseph Magnet, says the government is violating the Federal Accountability Act and should turn the information over to the Parliamentary Budget Officer; b) is concerned with the impact of the changes in the Bill on Canadian society, such as: i) making it more difficult for Canadians to access Employment Insurance (EI) when they need it and forcing them to accept jobs at 70% of what they previously earned or lose their EI; ii) raising the age of eligibility for Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement from 65 to 67 years and thus driving thousands of Canadians into poverty while downloading spending to the provinces; iii) cutting back the federal health transfers to the provinces from 2017 on, which will result in a loss of $31 billion to the health care system; and iv) gutting the federal environmental assessment regime and weakening fish habitat protection which will adversely affect Canada's environmental sustainability for generations to come; and c) is opposed to the removal of critical oversight powers of the Auditor General over a dozen agencies and the systematic concentration of powers in the hands of government ministers over agencies such as the National Energy Board, which weakens Canadians' confidence in the work of Parliament, decreases transparency and erodes fundamental democratic institutions by systematically eroding institutional checks and balances to the government's ideologically driven agenda”.
June 13, 2012 Passed That Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, be concurred in at report stage.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting the Schedule.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 753, be amended by replacing lines 8 and 9 on page 424 with the following: “force on September 1, 2012.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 711.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 706.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 700.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 699, be amended by replacing line 16 on page 401 with the following: “2007, is repealed as of April 30, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 699.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 696, be amended by replacing lines 2 and 3 on page 401 with the following: “on September 15, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 685.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 684, be amended by replacing lines 6 to 8 on page 396 with the following: “684. This Division comes into force on September 1, 2012.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 661.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 681, be amended by replacing lines 32 to 34 on page 394 with the following: “681. This Division comes into force on January 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 656.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 654.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 620.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 619, be amended by replacing lines 22 and 23 on page 378 with the following: “608(2) and (3) come into force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 606.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 603.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 602.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 595.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 594, be amended by replacing lines 6 and 7 on page 365 with the following: “on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 578.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 577, be amended by replacing lines 18 to 20 on page 361 with the following: “577. This Division comes into force on June 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 532.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 531.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 530, be amended by replacing lines 24 and 25 on page 342 with the following: “on January 15, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 526.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 525, be amended by deleting lines 6 to 10 on page 341.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 525, be amended by replacing lines 6 to 10 on page 341 with the following: “And whereas respect for provincial laws of general application is necessary to ensure the quality of the banking services offered;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 525, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 340 with the following: “Whereas a strong, efficient and publicly accountable banking sector”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 525.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 522, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 340 with the following: “possible after the end of each fiscal year but”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 516.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 515, be amended by replacing line 28 on page 338 with the following: “September 1, 2013 or, if it is later, on the day on”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 508, be amended (a) by replacing line 1 on page 336 with the following: “( b) humanely dispose of that animal or thing or require” (b) by replacing line 3 on page 336 with the following: “care or control of it to humanely dispose of it if, according to expert opinion, treatment under paragraph ( a) is not feasible or is not able to be carried out quickly enough to be effective in eliminating the disease or toxic substance or preventing its spread.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 506.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 505, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10 on page 333 with the following: “on January 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 490.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 489, be amended by replacing line 20 on page 329 with the following: “February 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 487.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 486, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 328 with the following: “January 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 484.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 481.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 480, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 326 with the following: “subsection 23(1) and all criteria and factors considered in reaching a decision or sending notice under that subsection, with the exception of all commercially sensitive information;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 479.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 478, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 27 on page 325 with the following: “478. This Division comes into force on September 15, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 476.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 475, be amended by replacing lines 18 and 19 on page 324 with the following: “tion 4.1, including their issuance and their”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 474, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 324 with the following: “that he or she considers appropriate for assuring the quality of seeds and seed crops, subject to the conditions set out in subsection (5).”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 473, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 323 with the following: “tion 4.2, including their issuance and their”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 473.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 468.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 467, be amended by replacing lines 3 to 5 on page 322 with the following: “464 and 465, come into force on June 15, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 446.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 445.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 444, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 3 on page 306 with the following: “444. This Division comes into force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 441.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 440, be amended by replacing lines 21 and 22 on page 305 with the following: “force on January 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 427.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 426, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 3 on page 299 with the following: “426. This Division comes into force on May 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 420.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 419, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 295 with the following: “force on January 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 416, be amended by replacing line 40 on page 292 with the following: “considers appropriate and must be subject to regulatory approval.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 413, be amended by deleting lines 25 and 26 on page 291.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 412.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 411.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 391.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 378.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 377.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 374, be amended by replacing lines 31 to 33 on page 280 with the following: “374. This Division comes into force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 368, be amended by adding after line 34 on page 274 the following: “(3) Every officer appointed under this section must conduct every operation, wherever it takes place, in a manner respecting the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 368.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 367, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10 on page 272 with the following: “force on January 1, 2014.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 353.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 325, be amended (a) by replacing line 20 on page 244 with the following: “(2) The Minister shall conduct a comprehensive review of the manage-” (b) by replacing line 22 on page 244 with the following: “at least every 10 years, taking into account any feedback received from the public under subsection (2.1), and shall cause any” (c) by adding after line 24 on page 244 the following: “(2.1) In every year, the Minister shall ( a) publish on the departmental website the management plan for each national historic site or other protected heritage area; and ( b) open the plan to public consultation and feedback, to be taken into account by the Agency in future decisions regarding changes to the management plan.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 324, be amended (a) by replacing lines 13 and 14 on page 244 with the following: “(2) The Minister shall conduct a comprehensive review of the management plan for each park at least every 10 years, taking into account any feedback received from the public under subsection (2.1),” (b) by adding after line 16 on page 244 the following: “(2.1) In every year, the Minister shall ( a) publish on the departmental website the management plan for each national historic site or other protected heritage area; and ( b) open the plan to public consultation and feedback, to be taken into account by the Agency in future decisions regarding changes to the management plan.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 319, be amended (a) by replacing line 39 on page 243 with the following: “(2) The Minister shall conduct a comprehensive review of the manage-” (b) by replacing line 41 on page 243 with the following: “protected heritage area at least every 10 years, taking into account any feedback received from the public under subsection (2.1),” (c) by adding after line 43 on page 243 the following: “(2.1) In every year, the Minister shall ( a) publish on the departmental website the management plan for each national historic site or other protected heritage area; and ( b) open the plan to public consultation and feedback, to be taken into account by the Agency in future decisions regarding changes to the management plan.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 318, be amended by adding after line 36 on page 243 the following: “(2) The report referred to in subsection (1) shall include, for the previous calendar year, all information related to any action or enforcement measure taken in accordance with subsection 6(1) under any Act or regulation set out in Part 3 or Part 4 of the Schedule.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 317.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 315.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 314, be amended by replacing lines 8 and 9 on page 242 with the following: “on May 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 304.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 303, be amended by replacing lines 2 and 3 on page 235 with the following: “on September 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 283.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 281, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 226 with the following: “April 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 223.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 219.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 218.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 217, be amended by replacing lines 21 to 23 on page 194 with the following: “217. This Division comes into force on April 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 217.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 214.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 209.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 175, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 185 with the following: “financial statements of the Council, and the Council shall make the report available for public scrutiny at the offices of the Council.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 170.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 163, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 181 with the following: “(6.1) Subject to subsection 73(9), the agreement or permit must set out”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 163.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 161, be amended by deleting lines 32 to 39 on page 180.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 160, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 180 with the following: “published in the Environmental Registry and in the Canada Gazette; or”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 159, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 179 with the following: “mental Registry as well as in the Canada Gazette.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 157, be amended by replacing lines 37 and 38 on page 178 with the following: “and, subject to the regulations, after consulting relevant peer-reviewed science, considering public concerns and taking all appropriate measures to ensure that no ecosystem will be significantly adversely affected, renew it no more than once. (1.1) Before issuing a permit referred to under subsection (1), the Minister shall ensure that the issuance of the permit will not have any adverse effects on critical habitat as it is defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act. ”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 157.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 156, be amended by replacing lines 29 and 30 on page 178 with the following: “and 153 come into force on July 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 154, be amended by replacing line 18 on page 177 with the following: “Act may not be commenced later than twenty-five years”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 150, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 29 on page 176 with the following: “recommendation of the Minister following consultation with the public and experts or, if they are made for the purposes of and in relation to the subject matters set out in an order made under section 43.2, on the recommendation of the minister designated under that section following consultation with the public and experts.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 149, be amended by replacing line 40 on page 174 with the following: “( i.01) excluding certain fisheries, on the basis of public consultation and expert opinion, from the defini-”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 148, be amended by replacing lines 15 to 21 on page 174 with the following: “42.1 (1) The Minister shall, as soon as possible after the end of each fiscal year, prepare and cause to be laid before each house of Parliament a report on the administration and enforcement of the provisions of this Act relating to fish habitat protection and pollution prevention for that year, including for those fisheries of particular commercial or recreational value and any fisheries of cultural or economic value for Aboriginal communities.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 145, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 164 with the following: “enforcement of this Act, provided that, with regard to the designation of any analyst, the analyst has been independently recognized as qualified to be so designated.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 144, be amended by replacing lines 46 and 47 on page 161 with the following: “results or is likely to result in alteration, disruption or serious harm to any fish or fish habitat, including those that are part of a commercial, recreational”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 143, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 159 with the following: “made by the Governor in Council under subsection (5) applicable to that”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 142, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 158 with the following: “(2) If conducted in accordance with expert advice that is based on an independent analysis so as to ensure the absolute minimum of destruction or disruption of fish populations and fish habitat, a person may carry on a work, under-”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by adding after line 32 on page 157 the following new clause: “139.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 32: 32.1 Every owner or occupier of a water intake, ditch, channel or canal referred to in subsection 30(1) who refuses or neglects to provide and maintain a fish guard, screen, covering or netting in accordance with subsections 30(1) to (3), permits the removal of a fish guard, screen, covering or netting in contravention of subsection 30(3) or refuses or neglects to close a sluice or gate in accordance with subsection 30(4) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable, for a first offence, to a fine not exceeding two hundred thousand dollars and, for any subsequent offence, to a fine not exceeding two hundred thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 139, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 157 with the following: “32. (1) No person shall kill or harm fish by any”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 136, be amended by replacing line 39 on page 154 to line 1 on page 155 with the following: “(2) If, on the basis of expert opinion, the Minister considers it necessary to ensure the free passage of fish or to prevent harm to fish, the owner or person who has the charge, management or control of any water intake, ditch, channel or canal in Canada constructed or adapted for conducting water from any Canadian fisheries waters for irrigating, manufacturing, power generation, domestic or other purposes shall, on the Minister’s request, within the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 135, be amended by replacing line 9 on page 154 with the following: “commercial, recrea-”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 134, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 151 with the following: “programs and, if the Minister has determined, on the basis of the features and scope of the programs, that the programs are equivalent in their capabilities to meet and ensure compliance with the provisions of this Act, otherwise harmonizing those”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 133, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 150 with the following: “thing impeding the free”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 132.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 131, be amended by replacing lines 35 and 36 on page 149 with the following: “force on August 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 124, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 141 with the following: “replace a licence after consulting the public, expert opinion and peer-reviewed scientific evidence, or decide whether it is in the public interest to authorize its transfer, on”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 123, be amended by replacing line 18 on page 141 with the following: “seven months.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 122.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 121, be amended by replacing lines 7 and 8 on page 141 with the following: “June 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 116.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 115, be amended by replacing lines 33 and 34 on page 138 with the following: “and 99 to 114 come into force on September 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 97, be amended by replacing lines 40 and 41 on page 125 with the following: “120.5 The Board may issue a ”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 94, be amended by replacing line 36 on page 124 with the following: “recommendation, the Board shall, after all required consultation with members of the public and with First Nations, seek to avoid”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 93, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 124 with the following: “oil or gas, the Board shall, after all required consultation with members of the public and with First Nations and taking into account all considerations that appear to it to be relevant, satisfy itself that the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 90, be amended by replacing line 12 on page 118 with the following: “was constructed in accordance with the Navigable Waters Protection Act and that passes in, on, over, under, through or”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 89, be amended by replacing line 16 on page 117 with the following: “certificate under section 52 or 53 authorizing the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 88, be amended by replacing line 11 on page 117 with the following: “under which section 58.29 does not apply or leave from the Board under”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 87, be amended by replacing line 44 on page 114 with the following: “a work to which that Act applies, unless it passes in, on, over, under, through or across a navigable water.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing line 32 on page 112 with the following: “V, except sections 74, 76 to 78, 108, 110 to 111.3,”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 85, be amended by replacing lines 2 to 4 on page 111 with the following: “the Board shall have regard to all representations referred to in section 55.2.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 84, be amended by replacing line 36 on page 109 with the following: “the time limit specified by the Chairperson pursuant to a motion and vote among Board members,”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 83, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 27 on page 105 with the following: “shall consider the objections of any interested person or group that, in their opinion, appear to be directly or indirectly related to the pipeline, and may have regard to the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 82, be amended by replacing lines 39 and 40 on page 104 with the following: “(4) Subsections 121(3) to(5) apply to”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 81, be amended by replacing line 14 on page 104 with the following: “(2) A public hearing may be held in respect of any other matter that the Board considers advisable, however a public hearing need not be held where”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 79, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 103 with the following: “(2) Except in any instances where, based on what the Board considers necessary or desirable in the public interest, the Board considers it is advisable to do so, subsection (1) does not apply in respect”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 78, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 103 with the following: “(1.1) Except in any instances where, based on what the Board considers necessary or desirable in the public interest, the Board considers it is advisable to do so, subsection (1) does not apply in respect”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 76, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 101 with the following: “15. (1) The Chairperson or the Board may authorize one”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 75, be amended by replacing line 11 on page 101 with the following: “14. (1) The Chairperson may propose a motion to authorize one”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 72, be amended by replacing lines 34 to 40 on page 100 with the following: “(2.1) For greater certainty, if the number of members authorized to deal with an application as a result of any measure taken by the Chairperson under subsection 6(2.2) is less than three, the Board shall elect a third member to satisfy the quorum requirements established under subsection (2).”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 71, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 99 with the following: “an application, the Chairperson may propose a motion to put in place a”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 68.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 67, be amended by replacing lines 20 and 21 on page 98 with the following: “force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 52, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 29 on page 35 with the following: “with respect to a project, that a group or individual is an interested party if, in its opinion, the group or individual, including those who use adjacent land for recreational, cultural or hunting purposes, is directly — or could potentially be indirectly — affected by the carrying out of the project, or if, in its opinion, the group or individual has relevant information or expertise:”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 52, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 31 the following: “Whereas the Government of Canada seeks to achieve sustainable development by conserving and enhancing environmental quality and by encouraging and promoting economic development that conserves and enhances environmental quality; Whereas environmental assessment provides an effective means of integrating environmental factors into planning and decision-making processes in a manner that promotes sustainable development; Whereas the Government of Canada is committed to exercising leadership, within Canada and internationally, in anticipating and preventing the degradation of environmental quality and, at the same time, in ensuring that economic development is compatible with the high value Canadians place on environmental quality; Whereas the Government of Canada seeks to avoid duplication or unnecessary delays; And whereas the Government of Canada is committed to facilitating public participation in the environmental assessment of projects to be carried out by or with the approval or assistance of the Government of Canada and to providing access to the information on which those environmental assessments are based;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 52.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 19.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 16, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 14 with the following: “on January 1, 2013 a salary of $137,000.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 16.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 4.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 8 with the following: “interest, being any activity that contributes to the social or cultural lives of Canadians or that contributes to Canada's economic or ecological well-being.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 5 on page 7 with the following: ““political activity” means the making of a gift by a donor to a qualified donee for the purpose of allowing the donor to maintain a level of funding of political activities that is less than 10% of its income for a taxation year by delegating the carrying out of political activities to the qualified donee;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 1.
June 12, 2012 Passed That, in relation to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, not more than 10 further hours shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the Bill and 8 hours shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill; and That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the 10 hours for the consideration at report stage and at the expiry of the 8 hours for the consideration at the third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.
May 14, 2012 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance.
May 14, 2012 Failed That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, because it: ( a) weakens Canadians’ confidence in the work of Parliament, decreases transparency and erodes fundamental democratic institutions by systematically over-concentrating power in the hands of government ministers; ( b) shields the government from criticism on extremely controversial non-budgetary issues by bundling them into one enormous piece of legislation masquerading as a budgetary bill; ( c) undermines the critical role played by such trusted oversight bodies as the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, the CSIS Inspector General and the National Energy Board, amongst many others, thereby silencing institutional checks and balances to the government’s ideological agenda; ( d) raises the age of eligibility for Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement from 65 to 67 years in a reckless effort to balance the government’s misguided spending on prisons, incompetent military procurement and inappropriate Ministerial expenses; ( e) includes provisions to gut the federal environmental assessment regime and to overhaul fish habitat protection that will adversely affect fragile ecosystems and Canada’s environmental sustainability for generations to come; ( f) calls into question Canada’s food inspection and public health regime by removing critical oversight powers of the Auditor General in relation to the Canada Food Inspection Agency all while providing an avenue and paving the way for opportunities to privatize a number of essential inspection functions; and ( g) does nothing to provide a solution for the growing number of Canadians looking for employment in Canada’s challenging job market and instead fuels further job loss, which according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer will amount to a total loss of 43,000 jobs in 2014.”.
May 3, 2012 Passed That, in relation to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, not more than six further sitting days shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the sixth day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Order, please. The hon. member for Winnipeg Centre has the floor.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am just wondering who the member thinks would benefit from driving down construction industry wages, because now, without the protection of this legislation that has been in effect for 75 years, the non-union sector—the merit shop and the CLAC—can pay anybody anything, and a unionized contractor would never be able to win another contract because of the unfair advantage. Then, if nobody answers the call for $10-an-hour carpenters, they get temporary foreign workers. The government is driving down the middle class's ability to consume, and that is the biggest advantage to our economy. Whose benefit is that?

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON

Mr. Speaker, my opinion is that the member's form of logic is nonsense. In my riding of Huron—Bruce, Bruce Power has just completed one of the largest infrastructure programs with the refurbishment of two reactors. The member's comments are complete nonsense. The project needed thousands of skilled workers and well-paid workers.

If we go on the Internet today and look up all the companies in Alberta and Saskatchewan and northern British Columbia, we will find tens of thousands of open positions ready to be filled, so this whole idea that somehow there will be reduced wages does not hold any water. It does not make any sense and it is just another example of what we would be faced with if we ever had to have a New Democrat government in Canada. Then we should look out.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, something Canadians are just beginning to understand is that this budget implementation act goes far beyond anything that was in the budget announced by the Minister of Finance. One of the things that I find quite surprising for a government that has been struggling with its lack of transparency around the F-35 fiasco and missing, somehow, $10 billion in procurement costs is that in this bill, one of the single largest moves to restrict accountability is a broad reduction in the oversight powers of the Auditor General. This bill would eliminate mandatory Auditor General oversight of financial reporting in about a dozen agencies under the government.

I would like to ask the hon. member this: why would you want less transparency and less accountability, when in fact you used to campaign on just the opposite? What happened?

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that this government is the most transparent government in the history of any government in this country. I will just use one example.

I am a member of the veterans affairs committee. It is this government that brought in the ombudsman for veterans affairs, so we do not need to take any lessons from the NDP on transparency. I would like to bring a point up to the member who just asked the question, because she used to be associated with the CAW. In my riding the CAW has built an industrial wind turbine in Port Elgin that strictly violates the current Green Energy Act.

I would ask the hon. member this: why do you not call up your boss and ask him to get on board and start protecting the people in the communities? There are over 200 homes in Port Elgin that are going to be directly impacted. They are clearly within the 550-metre setback of the Green Energy Act. Call your boss.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I will just remind hon. members to direct their questions and comments through the chair.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to express the anger and frustration that I and many people in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles feel with the tabling of this budget implementation bill.

Bill C-38, the bill to implement the budget, is a profoundly illegitimate bill. The Prime Minister promised to govern on behalf of all Canadians after the last election. In fact, however, with this budget, we see that the Prime Minister is governing for oil companies and mining companies, not for taxpayers. He is not governing for working people, for families, for seniors, for veterans, for people who are unemployed, for farmers or for people who work in manufacturing industries.

I have also met with Aveos workers in my riding who are worried, because they have been laid off and have no way of supporting their families. They are outraged at the Conservative government’s track record since the last election, which amounts to a lot of back-to-work legislation but no support for working people and their families.

When it comes to providing unreasonable subsidies for big business, the government shows no hesitation, but when Canadian workers lose well-paid jobs, there is total silence from this government. We saw the same thing in the case of the Electro-Motive Diesel employees in London, Ontario.

There are other reasons why this budget concerns me, however. It is obvious that the Prime Minister's agenda was not laid out for Canadians. In the last election, the Conservatives were very careful not to tell voters that they would be taking their axe to the Environmental Assessment Act, that they would be going back on Canadians’ word on the Kyoto protocol, that they would be cutting employment insurance benefits and services to veterans, and especially that they would be pushing Canadians’ retirement age back two years.

How can the government claim to have the consent of the public when it concealed such fundamental aspects of its political agenda from them?

This brings me to another point: the government is adding insult to injury by including a series of provisions in the budget implementation bill that have nothing to do with the budget—provisions relating to the Kyoto protocol, environmental assessment, food safety, the powers of the Auditor General, assisted reproduction, oversight of the intelligence service and protection of fish habitat, to name just a few.

This bill can be described as containing everything but the kitchen sink. It is wholly improper for the government to include these provisions in a catch-all bill in the hope that it can slip them past parliamentarians unnoticed. This approach prevents parliamentarians from exercising the oversight that it is their job to exercise.

A modicum of decency would require that we split the bill to allow the Standing Committee on Finance to study the budget measures and other committees to study the measures contained in Bill C-38. The government refused this reasonable suggestion made by the official opposition. What does it have to hide?

Finally, in addition to short-circuiting Parliament by introducing an omnibus budget bill, the Conservatives have decided to steamroll Bill C-38 through. The government has used its majority to limit debate in the House to seven days.

Imagine. Just seven days to study a 431-page bill with 750 clauses that amend 70 laws. That is unprecedented.

Journalist Manon Cornellier called bill C-38 a mammoth budget. I do not know if she was referring to the size of the bill or the prehistoric nature of the measures it contains, but she is concerned, and with good reason, about how it will affect our democracy. I would like to quote her:

At this rate...the Conservatives will succeed in transforming Parliament into a theatre for political posturing. It will be a shadow of the democratic institution it is meant to be, a place where elected members are supposed to be the voice of the people. What a sorry spectacle.

I commissioned a poll of 100,000 constituents in the riding of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles and I can tell you that the main elements of the Conservative budget do not pass muster.

Some 73% of the population of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles opposes raising the retirement age from 65 to 67, and 60% believes that the spike in the costs of the old age security system will be offset by increased government revenues.

The people of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles are not fools. Like the Parliamentary Budget Officer and many economists, they know that the public pension system is viable and capable of dealing with the retirement of all the baby boomers.

In contrast to the provisions of this budget, which will reduce the benefits of thousands of unemployed workers, 50% of the residents of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles are calling for improvements to the employment insurance system. Finally, 75% of the people of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles condemn the withdrawal from the Kyoto protocol, as the government is proposing in Bill C-38.

This all clearly demonstrates that this budget and the budget implementation bill are completely out of touch with the priorities of the people of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles and that the Prime Minister can in no way claim to be governing on behalf of the people of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.

What is most shocking about Bill C-38 is that this budget bill does not include any measures for job creation. Indeed, the only employment strategy included is the Conservatives' attempt to placate businesses by eliminating environmental protections. So what if we are jeopardizing our future by destroying the environment?

Bill C-38 is an unprecedented attack on the environment. It gets rid of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, an organization responsible for advising the government on sustainable development. It also repeals the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act, which required the federal government to comply with international greenhouse gas reduction targets and to report its progress.

If Bill C-38 is passed, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will be gutted. The public consultation process will be reduced to a rubber-stamping operation to satisfy gas, oil and mining companies. Cabinet will give itself the power to green-light projects even if the agency responsible for environmental assessment recommends that they not go ahead.

This bill gives the government the power to suppress charities, including environmental groups, that are too critical of the government. Bill C-38 is intended to silence the environmental movement.

On May 22, I was proud to be one of 400,000 Quebeckers who marched through the streets of Montreal to protest the backward environmental policies of this Prime Minister and his government. Clause 699, which repeals the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act with no reason or explanation, is buried on page 401 of the bill now before us. That is insulting.

I would also like to take a few minutes to talk about automatic registration for the guaranteed income supplement. We know that 135,000 Canadians and 45,000 Quebeckers are entitled to the guaranteed income supplement, but they do not receive it because the government is not doing everything it can to reach them.

To remedy this problem that has been going on for years, I introduced a bill on March 15 to force the government to contact those who are entitled to this supplement. During the budget speech, we learned that the government was considering implementing a proactive enrolment system for old age security benefits and the guaranteed income supplement.

Clause 454 of Bill C-38 states that, from now on:

(3.1) The Minister may, in respect of a person, waive the requirement...for an application for payment of a supplement...if...the Minister is satisfied, based on information available to him or her under this Act, that the person is qualified under this section for the payment of a supplement.

I must say that I am disappointed by the very restrictive wording used. At first glance, it seems very limiting since it implies that Service Canada has to have a file on the people who may be eligible. That does not solve the problem for people whom Service Canada is unaware of but who are known by other departments, such as Revenue Canada or Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

In my opinion, the government's measures do not solve the problem of red tape needlessly imposed on those entitled to benefits. It may mean, for example, that the government will continue to require proof of marital status, when Revenue Canada already has that information.

I would like to summarize my ideas. I believe that the government, out of respect for Canadians and democratic institutions, should at least submit Bill C-38 to public debate and let the opposition do its job.

Bill C-38must be split to allow the appropriate committees to study it. For this reason, and others mentioned in my speech, I strongly oppose Bill C-38.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Independent

Bruce Hyer Independent Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON

Mr. Speaker, as I know the hon. member has a huge interest and a lot of expertise in the environment, I will ask her a couple of questions.

The bill would change or repeal almost all of the federal environmental legislation to date. It is a massive deregulation. It would inadequately protect fish and wildlife habitat. It would mean less democracy for environmental decisions. There is hit back against non-profit organizations. It also would weaken the laws to keep Canadians and our communities, our land, air, water, ecosystems and species safe.

Is this the way we should be going in balancing economic and environmental priorities in Canada? What would she and the NDP do to greatly improve the bill and help with these serious concerns?

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

NDP

Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of serving with my colleague on the Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development, so I know he is also familiar with these issues.

When we look at Bill C-38, we know that it would have numerous negative consequences for our fisheries. It would change the rules around fish habitat protection and the deposit of deleterious substances in fish bearing waters.

Having served on the environment committee, it has become clear to me that the government does not have a clear understanding of how biodiversity works. It does not have a clear understanding of the fact that we need to protect species of fish that are not necessarily fish that are exploited by fisheries, because these fish belong to an ecosystem that is interdependent among species. We see that there is not a lot of expertise on the government side on this issue.

We take issue with the fact that the bill would increase ministerial discretion when it comes to our fisheries and would give sweeping powers to the minister to transfer authority to the provinces or other bodies to allow for fisheries management. This is something that is of great concern to my constituents and to Canadians.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent remarks and for her work in the House generally.

I would like to raise with her the issue, which I do not seem to be able to get an answer from the Conservatives on, of accountability. Many areas in the budget implementation bill have nothing to do with the budget. The environment, of course, is a key piece of that.

However, something that is really troubling Canadians is the changes that would reduce the transparency and accountability of the government, such as the elimination of Auditor General oversight from about a dozen agencies within the federal government. It seems to me that if we want to have clear accountability with an independent financial review, most Canadians look to the Auditor General.

Could the member help us understand why, in her opinion, the federal government is eliminating this clear accountability for Canadians by eliminating the Auditor General's oversight from so many government agencies?

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

NDP

Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for her comments and her question.

I would like to mention some of the organizations affected by these changes. The Auditor General will no longer examine the activities of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board, or the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. These are rather important organizations that look after Canadians' health, food and transportation.

We are very concerned that this government is attempting to undermine the transparency of Parliament. This also prevents us from doing our job, which is to provide oversight. The government is trying to destroy the tools we use to do that.

Bill C-38 disbands the Public Appointments Commission, which will significantly reduce the transparency of the public appointments process. This is very worrisome and is the reason why we will be voting against Bill C-38.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have this opportunity to address the House today. I will begin by asking members to imagine what we, as legislators, might do if we wanted to ruin the Canadian economy, if we wanted the men and women of this great nation to have less opportunity, not more, and if we wanted families and communities to lose hope in tomorrow.

Since governments derive their power to control from the power to tax, we would start here. To begin, a government out to wreck our economy would enact a carbon tax, thereby driving up the cost of all goods and services paid by consumers. At the same time, personal income taxes would rise, shrinking the take-home pay of Canadian workers, making it uneconomical to work for an extra $1 of income, say, by taking an overtime shift. Also, business tax rates would increase, boosting the cost of investment and making our nation less competitive next to our trading partners. If any citizen believed he or she should be able to keep more income from his or her hard work or risk-taking, the individual would be called greedy.

Next, that government would drive up the spending to levels beyond what taxpayers or even the economy could manage. It would table budget after budget that recorded nothing but red ink as far as the eye could see. It would issue billions of dollars of debt backed by paper IOUs. Those deficits would go up every year and we would be told that all that debt was a necessary investment and a small price to pay for nirvana. That t ruinous government would proclaim this was all being done for the greater good, in the name of fairness and building tomorrow's economy. Should taxpayers think this was the road to serfdom, they would be thought of as uncompassionate.

Lastly, regulations would be enacted to stop the development of our natural resources, even though this abundant gift of nature fuelled Canada's growth. Environmentalism would no longer be about conservation but anti-development and statism. These prophets of doom would urge costly government solutions to our problems. Instead of relying on free markets and the ingenuity of mankind, they would create phony markets that buy and sell carbon credits as part of a cap and trade scheme.

Other proposals to make Canada a poor nation would be a draconian reduction in our energy consumption by a third almost overnight, throwing thousands of people out of work to comply with an international agreement that does not require the world's biggest carbon producers to reduce their emissions. If Canada failed to hit its domestic targets, a government bent on hurting the Canadian worker would pay out billions and billions of tax dollars to nations exempt from making carbon reductions under the very same flawed Kyoto protocol. All this, Canadians would be told, would be done in the name of progress.

Political and environmental groups would receive funding and tax concessions paid by our tax dollars, tax dollars that ought to pay for social programs but do not. That ruinous government, along with environmentalists, would push to shut down producers of abundant cheap energy. Fear-mongering, one asks? Federal regulators were recently petitioned to shut Point Lepreau, which is the only nuclear plant in Atlantic Canada and a provider of affordable energy. The shale gas industry in my province is finding it nearly impossible to establish itself in the face of a reckless environmental campaign. All the while, the New Brunswick government collects tax dollar transfers that come from shale gas earnings in other provinces. Our young workers go west to work in the very same industries that cannot open at home and our communities are despondent that they are hollowing out and the schools emptying.

A government working to damage our economy would hand powers to unelected bureaucrats to control industrial output and enact rules that make it impossible to open new markets and start new businesses. It would make energy from windmills and solar panels appear economical by driving up the cost of power from oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear energy. It would work to de-legitimize the use of abundant natural resources at home and eventually ban the export of those resources to other consumers in other markets. We are already seeing evidence of this with the oil sands.

Finally, a government that wanted to hurt Canada and Canadians would attack the foundation of our economy, notwithstanding that where free markets have been adopted, the west, Japan, more recently eastern Europe, China and throughout Asia, millions have climbed out of poverty, which, it is so easy to forget, was the human condition for most of history. Where statism has triumphed, such as Greece, Spain, Cuba, parts of Africa, people suffer.

It really is not difficult to imagine these ruinous ideas becoming reality since they are, in one form or another, championed almost daily by the official opposition. Yet, we reject these policies. We understand that any government that is big enough to give us everything we need is also a government big enough to take away everything taxpayers have.

What our government is proposing in the 2012 budget is a low tax, low debt plan to keep Canadians working, to make Canada a place where businesses want to invest and to maintain our economic lead over other nations. It is a budget that puts us on track to eliminate the deficit. Voters sent us to Ottawa to manage the public finances the same way households and businesses administer their budgets; , prudently and with respect for the people paying the bills. This budget is a step toward a better government.

Total spending is not being cut this year. It will instead grow slightly by a modest 1.4%. If we listen to the opposition, its members are not proposing a serious alternative. In fact, they are proposing no alternative. We are seeking savings and efficiencies in a federal government that I believe is still too big and too bloated. They want an even bigger government and the inefficiencies and high taxes that come with it. Our focus is on delivering services and programs to Canadians with less bureaucracy. Their policy is more bureaucracy.

We should never apologize for streamlining government. Indeed, this is precisely why Canadian taxpayers sent us here. Of course, it would be easier to spend and spend more but to do so has a cost: higher taxes on ordinary families that make paying the household bills that much more difficult.

According to the Fraser Institute, a typical family makes $74,200 each year and already pays a whopping 41.5% of that, some $31,000, to one level of government or another. It is worth noting that Canadians pay more in tax than they do for shelter, food or transportation. That is why this side of the House believes taxes must be lowered. We recognize that government does not create wealth. It only consumes wealth others have created.

Instead of working to undermine Canadian workers, our plan will promote growth. It will remove burdensome regulation that hurt entrepreneurs and job creators. It will not raise taxes. It will finally wind down federal deficits. We owe it to Canadians to not let the reckless call for higher taxes and more spending coming from the opposition go unanswered or become a reality.

In fact, it is important that we stick to our pledge in the last election that we balance the budget by 2014, not 2015. We need to have a balanced budget so we can continue to bring in some much needed tax relief. Family income splitting is a promise we made to Canadians. We have an obligation to deliver on that promise.

Because of our many years as a minority government, we ended up having to campaign on the same promises two or even three times. Income splitting is a pro-family, pro-work promise I do not want to campaign on a second time.

Our Canada is one that is economically strong, creates opportunity and offers hard-working families a better tomorrow. We will continue to work for Canadians and remain focused on the economy.

Our economic action plan has Canada moving in the right direction. Next, we need to get our fiscal house in order and bring in some much needed tax relief to all Canadian families.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would challenge what the member opposite has said. I think all members in this House want to ensure that tax dollars are well spent and that our government is efficient and effective at delivering the programs and services that Canadians want and need.

However, this budget implementation act we are debating contains so much more than financial measures. I would like to ask the member why, in the name of efficiency or any other measure, would the government want to remove the oversight of the Auditor General from a dozen agencies and thereby reducing accountability and transparency. What does the government have against transparency being provided by the Auditor General? That is something the Conservatives used to campaign on but in office they are doing exactly the opposite.

Could the member explain that to us?

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Mr. Speaker, I am perhaps one of the biggest fans of the Auditor General of Canada. In the past, Sheila Fraser was a great champion for taxpayers and I have no doubt that the new Auditor General from my home province will do just as good a job.

Part of our challenge as a government is to deliver better results while watching how we spend money. There are changes that are being made that will result in dollars being spent differently but that does not mean taxpayers will receive less value or less oversight for that. We continue to have the oversight that we need from the Auditor General and I do not see that changing despite certain budget reductions that are in this document.

Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity ActGovernment Orders

May 8th, 2012 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his republican-style speech. We just need to think back a few years ago to when the current Prime Minister stood in the House and said that a 30-page budget bill was disgraceful, that there was far too much in it. I am trying to understand how the Conservatives can now stand with a 400-page document full of all kinds of things, one of them being environmental changes to regulations that are clearly there to protect the interests of Canadians. The Conservatives are going to throw out all of those things in the name of expediting everything along the way.

The Conservatives will change OAS because they say that it is not sustainable, yet we know it is fully sustainable. This is just another choice that the government has made so it has less intrusion into the lives of people.

How can that member stand and say that his government is offering an alternative to Canadians, or protecting Canadians, when it is cutting out everything of value when it comes to protecting our country?