House of Commons Hansard #110 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was workers.

Topics

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Nunavut Nunavut

Conservative

Leona Aglukkaq ConservativeMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, our priority is to protect the environment while keeping the economy strong. We are taking a sector-by-sector regulatory approach to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We have taken action on some of the largest sources of emissions in the country: the transportation and electricity generation sector.

I am also looking forward to taking part in the UN climate summit in New York next week to speak to Canada's record on taking action on climate change.

Public Works and Government ServicesOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, not only is Environment Canada missing in action, but Public Works is as well. Emard Court is a 90-year-old World War II veteran. He has lived his entire life next to a lighthouse, but now the government wants to kick him off his land. Three mediation meetings were scheduled to sort out this mess, and all three have been missed by the government. Mr. Court served his country only to be evicted at the age of 90 by the government, a government that cannot even be bothered to show up. Is this how the government rewards its veterans?

Public Works and Government ServicesOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, obviously we do respect our veterans, but Public Works is acting as the disposal agent for DFO and we will continue to work with the Court family to reach a negotiated settlement to land title issues that are associated with this property.

FinanceOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Conservative

Tilly O'Neill-Gordon Conservative Miramichi, NB

Mr. Speaker, our government is proud to have lowered taxes, putting thousands of dollars directly back into the pockets of Canadian families. However, yesterday the leader of the Liberal Party criticized income splitting and said he would reverse it. I know that the seniors in my riding will be outraged when they find out that the Liberal leader would reverse our income splitting, forcing them to pay more.

Could the Minister of State for Seniors explain how reversing income splitting would affect seniors?

FinanceOral Questions

3 p.m.

Richmond B.C.

Conservative

Alice Wong ConservativeMinister of State (Seniors)

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal leader should explain why he has threatened to reverse income splitting and force seniors and families to pay more tax. This type of Liberal arrogance toward middle-class Canadian families and seniors is all too familiar. This is the same party that opposed the universal child care benefit because it thought parents would spend it on beer and popcorn. This is the same party that opposed every tax cut and measure our government has introduced for families and seniors, measures that are saving $3,400 this year for average families and have taken nearly 400,000 seniors off the tax rolls completely.

Regional Economic DevelopmentOral Questions

3 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, weeks ago I wrote the Minister of State for Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency requesting a plan of action for Borden-Carleton due to the impending McCain processing plant closure.

The closure means the loss of 121 jobs, impacts the community and spin-off industries, and places in jeopardy a market for potato producers.

Could the minister now detail for us a plan of action, including ACOA assistance, community industrial development, job retraining, and any measures to assist the P.E.I. potato industry competitiveness?

Regional Economic DevelopmentOral Questions

3 p.m.

Fundy Royal New Brunswick

Conservative

Rob Moore ConservativeMinister of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency)

Mr. Speaker, this was a business decision by the management at McCain.

Our government is committed to supporting economic development in Prince Edward Island and throughout Atlantic Canada. In fact, as a result of the hard work of the member for Egmont, our Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, our government, through ACOA, has invested in over 601 projects throughout Prince Edward Island.

The Liberals, and that member in particular, have voted against each and every one of our economic development initiatives. When will the member get out of the way and allow economic development to continue?

Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Questions

3 p.m.

NDP

Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, Jamila Bibi is facing charges of adultery in Pakistan. The penalty is death by stoning. The UN Commissioner for Human Rights has been looking into the case, but the Conservative government could not wait

Now she is sitting at Pearson Airport waiting to be put on a flight back to Pakistan and a potentially gruesome fate.

In the name of human rights, in the name of compassion, will the minister urgently act now, intervene and stop the deportation of Jamila Bibi?

Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Questions

3 p.m.

Ajax—Pickering Ontario

Conservative

Chris Alexander ConservativeMinister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, Canada has a fair and generous asylum system where decisions are made by the independent Immigration and Refugee Board, not under political pressure but according to the facts.

Where claims fail, there is recourse to appeals. When those appeals are exhausted, we all expect failed claimants to leave our country.

Foreign AffairsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, in the lead-up to Ukraine's parliamentary election in October, the Minister of Foreign Affairs today announced that Canada would be deploying up to 300 election observers.

Our government is proud of its long-standing support of the Ukrainian people's aspiration for freedom and democracy. We continue to stand with Ukraine during these troubling times.

Could the Minister of Foreign Affairs please update the House on the ongoing situation in Ukraine?

Foreign AffairsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean Ontario

Conservative

John Baird ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Elmwood—Transcona for his leadership in this regard.

I can confirm that Canada is sending a large electoral observer mission to Ukraine to monitor the upcoming parliamentary elections. Furthermore, today we announced that Canada would impose additional sanctions on entities and individuals in Russia.

Canadians can count on our Prime Minister to stand up, to do the right thing. They can count on this government. The people in Ukraine can count on Canada to stand with them against this naked aggression.

Canada PostOral Questions

3 p.m.

NDP

Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC

Mr. Speaker, on August 26, 2014, the City of Longueuil and its mayor, Caroline St-Hilaire, passed a resolution calling for the continuation of home mail delivery.

Like us, municipal officials condemn Canada Post's decision, which will deprive Canadians of an essential service and create a real urban planning headache.

More than 5,000 households in Longueuil will be affected by 2015. Canada Post and the Conservatives are undermining the work that municipalities are doing to adapt their services to an aging population.

How can the government support the elimination of postal services, and how can it ignore our municipal officials?

Canada PostOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Halton Ontario

Conservative

Lisa Raitt ConservativeMinister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, in 2012, Canada Post actually delivered one billion fewer letters than it did in 2006.

The state of play today is that two-thirds of Canadians do not receive mail at their door.

In its five-point plan, Canada Post put forward changes that would ensure Canada Post would be able to service Canadians in the long-term future.

It is important to note as well that while some municipalities have made the choice that the hon. member has spoken to, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, at its annual conference in Niagara, defeated a resolution soundly on this same topic.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

September 16th, 2014 / 3:05 p.m.

Bloc

Louis Plamondon Bloc Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC

Mr. Speaker, while work has begun to determine where the future oil port in Cacouna will be located, a public announcement on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada website—and not on Google, as the minister said yesterday—states that there is a considerable risk of harming the belugas.

What is more, the BAPE has not yet started an environmental review and the consequences are inadequately documented, yet the project has been accelerated. Everything seems to be happening too quickly and behind closed doors.

Knowing that Quebeckers were seen as carriers of water in the past, will the government wait and act in accordance with the BAPE's studies and conclusions, or will it now simply see Quebeckers as carriers of bitumen?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Egmont P.E.I.

Conservative

Gail Shea ConservativeMinister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, TransCanada has not yet submitted the construction of the marine terminal in Cacouna for review to the National Energy Board.

Our government has been clear that projects will only move forward if they are safe for Canadians and if they are safe for the environment. At this stage, the only work being conducted in this area is very exploratory in nature. It has been carefully reviewed by DFO experts and it has been authorized contingent on strict conditions.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:05 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Butt Conservative Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to this opposition motion. I want to thank the member for Brant for splitting his time with me. I wonder, when I read the motion, whether we would actually obtain the desired effects that the hon. member believes this motion would do.

First, as I am sure the hon. member well knows, the minimum wage in this motion as it is worded would apply only to those people who work in federally regulated industries, a small percentage of Canada's workforce. Of these workers, only a small fraction earn the minimum wage. According to a survey of federally regulated businesses that was conducted in 2008, only one-twentieth of a percentage point, or all of 416 employees, were actually earning the minimum wage. That works out to approximately 0.05%.

My second point is that if the Government of Canada were to unilaterally raise the minimum wage of workers that fall under its jurisdiction, it would create a two-standard system for workers. If the hon. member opposite were to read the Labour Code, he would find that the federal minimum wage is pegged to the minimum wage of the province or territory in which the work is carried out, as voted on by their respective legislatures. Provinces and territories are clearly best able to assess and respond to the requirements of their labour markets and establish appropriate minimum wage rates, unless of course the opposition parties are proposing to wholly repeal the section of the Labour Code that gives provinces this ability.

Which is it? Are the opposition members proposing to strip the provinces of their ability to respond to their local labour market? Or are they proposing to create a two-tier standard for workers?

We see no need to carry out wholesale changes to a system that is working perfectly well. For nearly 20 years, federal minimum wages have automatically been pegged to match the minimum wage of the province or the territory in which the work is being done. My view is this has worked out pretty well.

Over the past several years, the provinces and territories have all increased their minimum wage, which is based on their local labour market conditions in each of those jurisdictions. In fact, several provinces have now indexed their minimum wage so that it automatically increases every year. Others have mechanisms in place to ensure that the minimum wage rate in their jurisdiction is reviewed on a regular basis.

It would seem a bit pretentious if we were to deny that the provinces and territories are fully aware of their labour market needs and should not be trusted in the analysis of the needs of their citizens and workers. Our government believes that these jurisdictions know how to assess and respond to their local labour market conditions. They are best positioned to establish appropriate minimum wage rates that reflect these realities.

However, the best way to support low-income Canadians is not by increasing the minimum wage or grandstanding the illusion of creating a minimum wage that in reality only applies to a very small fraction of the labour force, but by measures that support a strong economy and by creating well-paying jobs, which is our government's number one priority.

As members in the House know, there are skills shortages in certain regions and sectors of the economy. Our government has taken unprecedented action to train Canadians for new and better jobs in demand by the economy. To date, our actions have resulted in over six million young Canadians getting skills training and support for quality jobs.

I am sure that many of my colleagues, even those on the other side of the House who support this ambiguous motion, have heard from their constituents who own businesses that there is an abundance of people out there looking for work, but they just do not have the skills that are needed. When it comes to training Canadians for jobs that are actually in demand by the economy, the NDP has vehemently opposed virtually all of our measures.

Where was the opposition on the Canada job grant last year? We negotiated in good faith with all of the provinces and signed agreements with them. The NDP opposed this process, cheerleading the expiring of the labour market agreements instead.

When we cut the GST to the benefit of all Canadians, the NDP opposed it. The working income tax benefit? The NDP opposed it. Supporting older workers and their families through the targeted initiative for older workers and expanding it to include workers in small cities? The NDP opposed that too. Overhauling the temporary foreign worker program, during which the Minister of Employment and Social Development directly called upon employers to increase their wages and hire Canadians? The NDP just dismissed it as meaningless.

We have heard about the lack of skilled labour in key sectors from people who are actually on the ground. Many sectors will urgently need new workers in the next decade. It is particularly true in construction and in the mining and petroleum industries. Skills Canada has told us that we will need one million skilled trade workers by 2020. As an example, five years after getting a journeyman's ticket, a plumber in Canada can earn about $68,000 and an electrician about $66,000. These are well-paying jobs that are very rewarding. If a minimum wage worker wishes to become an apprentice, the Government of Canada will support that worker in many ways in getting training for jobs that are in demand in the economy.

Let us be honest about what the NDP motion before us today actually is. It is nothing more than a symbolic stunt. Our government is focused on improving job prospects for Canadians and their families. In addition to the apprenticeship grants, economic action plan 2014 introduced the Canada apprentice loan. This loan provides apprentices with interest-free loans of up to $4,000 to complete their training in a Red Seal trade.

The government is also taking other steps to support and protect Canadian families and to directly benefit people in the workforce. For example, the Minister of Finance recently provided small businesses with a tax break so they would pay less in EI premiums and create more jobs. What is more, the minister also confirmed that EI premiums for workers will go down in 2017. Payments will be reduced from the current $1.88 per $100 of earnings to $1.47. How does this change help minimum wage earners across Canada, not just those hand-picked by the NDP in their symbolic motion? Lower premiums, of course, means more money in those workers' pockets.

For those workers who have lost their jobs due to their employers' bankruptcy or receivership, we have the wage earner protection program. It ensures that employees are paid wages, vacation pay, and severance or termination pay that is owed to them up to an amount equal to four weeks' maximum insurable earnings under the EI Act. Since WEPP's inception in July 2008, over 74,000 Canadians have received $174.8 million in WEPP payments as of July 31, 2014.

In addition to that, our government's Helping Families in Need Act provides federally regulated employees with the right to take unpaid leave. For example, it provides up to 37 weeks of leave for employees who must care for a critically ill child, 104 weeks for children who are deceased due to a probable Criminal Code offence, and up to 52 weeks for missing children who are victims of probable criminal actions.

This government is doing a lot for workers and a lot to create new jobs. We are working on ensuring that things get done, that more Canadians are working, and that more families are being supported.

I will not support this motion. It is nothing more than a stunt. It does not help real workers in real communities like Mississauga—Streetsville. It is nothing more than a stunt effort by the NDP. I will not be supporting this motion.

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT

Mr. Speaker, I heard the hon. member's deliberations about the relationship between the federal government and the provincial governments. I think back to the Conservatives' plan for a single national securities commission, which would take it away from the provinces. For the benefit of corporations, the Conservatives are willing to take away certain powers from individual provinces.

When it comes to wages and workers, though, the Conservatives very much want to let the provinces decide. They will let the provinces spiral downward in terms of their support of workers.

The idea that the provinces are the best place to set minimum wages exhibits the same type of thinking from when provinces started to reduce the corporate income tax rate in order to attract businesses. The same thing applies to workers' wages.

If the federal government set an example of $15 an hour for workers' wages within the next four years, we would be setting a post that the provinces could look at as the right amount, the amount that they should be aiming for. That is not happening today. The federal government is not interested in participating and protecting workers.

Why is it not willing to come to the table here with this very simple and straightforward opportunity to support the workers of this country?

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Butt Conservative Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Mr. Speaker, I hope that my colleague was not implying that provincial governments have been driving down their minimum wages. There is not a single province that has reduced its minimum wage. In fact, in the case of Ontario, the minimum wage is going up, and that is wholly within the jurisdiction of the Province of Ontario. The current Government of Ontario decided to do that.

I certainly have no objection, as a federal member of Parliament, to the province doing that. If the Northwest Territories wants to raise its minimum wage and the member can advocate to his local government and the area he represents that the minimum wage should be raised, let them go ahead. They can certainly do that.

This is a motion that would affect fewer than 10% of all the workers across Canada who are employed in federally regulated industries, among which a very small percentage are making less than $15 an hour. It is a hoax.

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo B.C.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour and for Western Economic Diversification

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Mississauga—Streetsville really talked about this measure as being symbolic. He talked about it as being perhaps a bit of a stunt that would impact very few workers.

NDP provincial governments had the jurisdiction and the ability to make changes when they were in power. What did those governments actually do when they were in power and could have made those changes? As we know, the parties are very closely aligned provincially and federally. What was the reality for those provincial governments?

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Butt Conservative Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Mr. Speaker, obviously decisions on minimum wages vary across the provinces, mainly because more than 90% of all the workers in provinces are covered by provincial labour laws, with the Employment Standards Act in my home province of Ontario as an example.

To answer the parliamentary secretary's question, over the past 20 years many governments of all three political stripes in Ontario have made decisions to freeze the minimum wage and not increase it. Again, though, those decisions were made by those duly elected governments. If people want to change that, then I guess they have to change the government.

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

NDP

Ryan Cleary NDP St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Davenport.

I am proud to say that as many Canadians know, Newfoundland and Labrador is a have province. This is not a news flash. In 2008, for the first time since Confederation in 1949, almost 60 years ago, we hit a milestone in that we stopped receiving equalization.

For years we were seen as a drain, a poor cousin of Canada, although that is most definitely debatable, and I would say it was never the case. Today we officially contribute more to the Confederation than we get back.

Our confidence, our self-esteem in our identity as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians has improved. We are not cocky, though. We are not uppity. We look down on no one. The memory of hard times is not that far off and it never seems to be that far away. There are still far too many people who are not benefiting from the have status. It feels good to be a have province.

We were always known across Canada as hard workers who were proud of where we come from, but now we are just a little bit prouder. But, and here is the but, in the wise words of one of my constituents, there are still too many have-not people. There are too many have-not families in a have province.

Former Premier Brian Peckford once famously said that “one day the sun will shine and have-not will be no more.” The economic sun is finally shining in Newfoundland and Labrador, but there will always be have-nots. That is why I stand today in support of the motion by the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should reinstate the federal minimum wage and increase it incrementally to $15 per hour over five years.

At $10 an hour, the minimum wage in Newfoundland and Labrador is tied for lowest in the country, and we still have the highest unemployment rate of all provinces. There has not been an increase in the minimum wage in Newfoundland and Labrador since 2010. That will change next month when the minimum wage in my province will increase by 25¢ an hour. For a full-time minimum wage worker, that 25¢ extra an hour will work out over the course of a week to $10, which will roughly buy four litres of milk and a couple of loaves of bread. It is not a lot. An increase of 25¢ an hour will not make much of a difference in the lives our have-nots.

The New Democratic Party of Newfoundland and Labrador is calling for a greater increase in the minimum wage. In August 2012, a report commissioned by the Progressive Conservative government recommended increasing the minimum wage and tying it to inflation and the consumer price index. The Progressive Conservative government of Newfoundland and Labrador ignored that report.

So much for the Prime Minister's comment in question period today about how he would leave it to the provinces to set their own minimum wage. Provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador set a minimum wage and then ignore it.

Newfoundland and Labrador New Democrats held a minimum wage town hall in St. John's earlier this month, coincidentally. It was an event that drew too many stories of poverty.

Let me quote Russell Cochrane. He is a St. John's resident in his twenties who has worked several minimum wage jobs. He said:

It's degrading when you work a full-time job, you come out of it with only enough money to pay your rent and then have one week of groceries, wondering where you're going to eat for the second. That hunger sticks, and it's a hunger that doesn't only degrade your body—it wears at your soul, it wears at your sense of self-worth.

The motion before the House today is a starting point to address that degradation, to address that hunger, to address income inequality. By boosting standards for workers under federal jurisdiction, such as those who work in banks and financial services, telecommunications, and broadcasting, the federal government can show leadership, set an example for provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador, and improve wages across the country.

Speaking of my home province, it has one of the highest percentages of minimum wage earners in Canada. In 2011, 9.7% of workers, or 19,700 workers, earned minimum wage. In Canada, as a whole, only 6.8% earned minimum wage. New Democrats believe that Canadians who work hard and play by the rules should be able to make a decent living. Is that asking for too much? It is not. Is that asking for too much here in Canada, one of the richest countries in the world?

We are not reinventing the wheel. There was a national federal minimum wage until 1996. What happened then? The Liberals eliminated it. Instead of doing the right thing and raising the federal minimum wage that had stagnated for a decade, the Liberals washed their hands of the problems and killed the national minimum wage altogether.

In real terms, between 1975 and 2013, the average minimum wage increased by just one penny. That means that workers earning the average minimum wage have only received a 1¢ raise over the past 40 years, even though the Canadian economy has grown by leaps and bounds.

The motion to reinstate the federal minimum wage and increase it incrementally to $15 an hour over five years will have little impact on federal finances as most federal employees already earn above the minimum wage. Most private sector workers under federal jurisdiction also make above the $15-an-hour mark, but the reinstatement of a federal minimum wage will show—and here is that word again—leadership. It will show leadership and send a message to all provinces to follow suit. Income inequality in our country is spiralling out of control. The incomes of the top 1% are surging while the typical Canadian family has seen its income fall over the last 35 years of mostly federal Liberal governments.

Let me summarize. No full-time worker in Canada should live in poverty. I repeat, no full-time worker in Canada should live in poverty. I challenge every member across the floor of the commons to stand and disagree with that point. In the words of Linda McQuaig, an author and journalist and recent New Democrat candidate, a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage would be a bold step toward establishing the principle that no full-time worker should live in poverty.

Minimum wage jobs are not just for teenagers, a way to occupy them after school and put spending money in their pockets. Minimum wage jobs are real jobs. They are real incomes that too many families depend on. Women, for example, are disproportionately minimum wage earners. In Newfoundland and Labrador, women make up 60.4% of minimum wage earners. Other minimum wage earners include immigrants, recent graduates, and too many others who can only find part-time work and need to hold down two or three jobs to survive.

Let me bring this speech home with another quote from the minimum wage town hall in St. John's earlier this month. Let me quote Ellen. She is a Memorial University engineering student. She stated, “We need to stop being cheerleaders for the most wealthy interests in our society and stick up for someone who needs it”.

More and more people in this country need sticking up for. More and more, the gap between the rich and the poor in this country is widening. From the world's perspective, Canada is a have country. Few countries have what we have, but it is the have-nots that we have to look out for. If the measure of a great country is how well it looks after its most vulnerable, then we have fallen short under successive Conservative and Liberal administrations before it.

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his comments. However, as I listened to him, I understood his impassioned presentation but I think he has the argument backwards. He talked about leadership, but leadership is demonstrating change that will ensure change happens through tax cuts, tax credits, leadership and job creation in the economy, and economic growth.

I would like to ask the hon. member, as he considers the data and his argument, to source where he found these numbers for people, which he has been discussing. We see minimal numbers that would be impacted by this particular motion, and that is supported by the third party, I might add.

I think that the opposition members are either working from flawed data or no data. I would ask the member to confirm what the motion would do in numbers, where the NDP members got these numbers, and more importantly, what are we going to do for youth with the motion, because I do not see it.

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

NDP

Ryan Cleary NDP St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister of Canada was asked a question in today's question period, and this will respond to the hon. member's question about leadership.

The Prime Minister was asked a question today about a national minimum wage and whether or not he would agree to it. Would he agree to the New Democratic proposal that we have a national minimum wage of $15 an hour to be set over the next five years? Basically, the Prime Minister said, which again comes back to leadership, that he would leave it to the provinces.

The example I gave in my speech, again coming back to leadership, is how the province of Newfoundland and Labrador set up an inquiry in 2012 to have a look into the provincial minimum wage, and it recommended increasing the minimum wage. What did the Progressive Conservative government of Newfoundland and Labrador do with that recommendation? It ignored it.

The Prime Minister and the Conservatives have an opportunity to show leadership across this country, but what do they fail to do yet again? Show leadership.

Opposition Motion—Federal Minimum WageBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his remarks today and the motion that he has put forward.

I think all of us in the House will agree that no family or individual should ever live in poverty in this country. We are a country of tremendous wealth and opportunity. However, we know that those cases do exist, and I think that, wherever possible, government has to show leadership to industry, business and society in general that doing the right thing always pays off.

I would ask my colleague today how many people employed within the federal service work for less than $15 an hour. How would this increase impact these individuals if it is to be rolled out only over a period of five years? Will the inflation rate at that time have contributed to the necessity of a higher increase in wage?