House of Commons Hansard #169 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was budget.

Topics

Corporate Takeovers
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

NDP

Libby Davies Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present three petitions. The first petition is from residents in Vancouver who are very concerned about the escalating number of foreign takeovers of Canadian companies. They point out that there have been over 10,000 from 1985 to 2002.

They call on Parliament to limit foreign ownership and takeovers, promote Canadian corporations and repeal the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Affordable Housing
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Libby Davies Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from petitioners in Vancouver who are pointing out that subsidies to co-op housing were cut under section 95 of the program. There are more than two million Canadians in desperate need of affordable housing.

The petitioners call upon the government to repay all the lost subsidies, to provide new assistance to co-ops and to build 200,000 new affordable co-op housing units and social housing units and also to renovate 100,000 existing units.

Federal Minimum Wage
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Libby Davies Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, the third petition is signed by hundreds of petitioners in Red Deer and elsewhere who have joined thousands of others across Canada in calling for a federal minimum wage that was eliminated in 1996.

The petitioners call on the government to pass Bill C-375, in the name of the member for Parkdale—High Park, to re-establish a federal minimum wage and to set it at $10 an hour so that people can be paid a fair minimum wage and have a quality of life. Thousands of these petitions are coming in from across the country.

Animal Cruelty Legislation
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Brian Masse Windsor West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition to the Minister of Justice regarding animal cruelty.

The Criminal Code has not been updated significantly since 1892 with regard to animal cruelty. Recently in Windsor we had a case where an animal was abused. A.K. had his ears cut back. It was that case which prompted the petitioners to ask that the law be updated.

The petitioners are calling on Parliament to act immediately and to provide a new modern animal cruelty act to protect animals in this country.

Income Trusts
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

Blair Wilson West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand and present this income trust broken promise petition on behalf of Howard Stevenson who remembers the Prime Minister reflecting on his apparent commitment to accountability when he said, “The greatest fraud is a promise not kept”.

The petitioners remind the Prime Minister that he promised never to tax income trusts, but he recklessly broke that promise by imposing a 31.5% punitive tax which permanently wiped out $25 billion of hard-earned retirement savings of over two million Canadians, particularly Canadian seniors.

The petitioners therefore call upon the Conservative minority government to admit that the decision to tax income trusts was based on flawed methodology and incorrect assumptions, to apologize to those who were unfairly harmed by this broken promise, and to repeal the punitive 31.5% tax on income trusts.

Questions on the Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

June 12th, 2007 / 10:15 a.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre
Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Bill C-52--Time Allocation Motion
Budget Implementation Act, 2007
Government Orders

10:15 a.m.

York—Simcoe
Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

moved:

That in relation to Bill C-52, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 19, 2007, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the Bill;

and fifteen minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government business on the day designated for the consideration of the said 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.

Bill C-52--Time Allocation Motion
Budget Implementation Act, 2007
Government Orders

10:15 a.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker Bill Blaikie

Pursuant to Standing Order 67(1) there will now be a 30 minute question period.

I invite all hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places so the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in this question period.

The hon. House leader of the official opposition.

Bill C-52--Time Allocation Motion
Budget Implementation Act, 2007
Government Orders

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, I have four or five questions that I would like to address to the government House leader and I will attempt to put them all together at once and, hopefully, the answers could be forthcoming.

First, Standing Order 78 contemplates consultations to achieve an agreement on time allocation among all or, failing that, a majority of the parties in the House. I would like to ask the government why the government House leader did not consult with the official opposition on this particular matter.

I would point out to the government House leader that yesterday, in a debate about Bill C-52, I specifically indicated to him and to the House that from the perspective of the official opposition, we expected Bill C-52 to be disposed of today. I made that comment before the notice was given with respect to the minister's intention under Standing Order 78.

That being the case, having given that very clear overture, I would ask the government why there was no effort to consult about this matter and why there was no attempt to reach an agreement in advance of the minister taking the action that he has today.

Second, in the flow of events around Bill C-52 the government itself only got to its 2007 budget very late in this sitting, about the middle of March, and then the government only pursued debate on Bill C-52 sporadically. At one point there was a full, unexplained three week hiatus in the debate at second reading. Why did the government deliberately delay and avoid its own budget bill at several stages during its course through Parliament before we got to the situation that we are in today? What was the government's strategy in delaying its own legislation?

Third, in the committee proceedings on Bill C-52, the government first tried to avoid any scrutiny whatsoever by avoiding all witnesses being called to the committee. The opposition insisted on basic decent hearings and extracted a commitment from the government to hear at least some witnesses in a serious and dignified manner, especially those who believed that the government had not told them the truth. I am thinking here particularly of people who had invested in income trusts and a number of the provinces which believed they had been betrayed on equalization and the Atlantic accords.

The format for these committee hearings to hear these witnesses was unilaterally changed at the last minute by the Conservative committee chair, thus breaking the all party agreement on how to dispose of Bill C-52. Why did the government violate the agreement that was in place on how to hear these committee witnesses, especially any provincial premiers and especially Premier Calvert?

Fourth, and my final question, the Prime Minister and the government have defended Bill C-52 in blanket terms. They deny, for example, that this bill affects and changes the Atlantic accords but still they admit that discussions are indeed underway to fix the problem that Bill C-52 poses for the Atlantic accords. Either there is something that needs fixing or there is not. If Bill C-52 does not negatively affect the Atlantic accords, then what is being discussed with Premier MacDonald of Nova Scotia and will the same flexibility be shown toward Premier Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador and Premier Calvert of Saskatchewan?

Bill C-52--Time Allocation Motion
Budget Implementation Act, 2007
Government Orders

10:20 a.m.

Whitby—Oshawa
Ontario

Conservative

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-52 is, of course, the first budget implementation bill. As a new government, I am very pleased that our budget 2006 had the usual spring implementation bill and the fall implementation bill and, together with this budget, reduces taxes for Canadians by $40 billion or so over three years. It is a very substantial tax reduction and in fact four times higher--

Bill C-52--Time Allocation Motion
Budget Implementation Act, 2007
Government Orders

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Markham—Unionville, ON

You've raised income tax.

Bill C-52--Time Allocation Motion
Budget Implementation Act, 2007
Government Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Jim Flaherty Whitby—Oshawa, ON

The member for Wascana wants to talk again, Mr. Speaker, but I listened to him and I am sure he will listen to me.

Bill C-52--Time Allocation Motion
Budget Implementation Act, 2007
Government Orders

10:25 a.m.

An hon. member

Why?