Charmaine Borg

[Political Loans Accountability Act, September 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I believe this deserves a thorough study in committee, partly because of the issue with financial institutions. Will some institutions be more likely to give loans to some parties rather than others depending on how the party's position favours financial institutions? That issue deserves an indepth study.

As we have seen, there have been accusations, and that fact does bother some people. Without a doubt, if the manager of a business with 10 staff members asks each of them to donate the maximum amount to a specific political party, it would be extremely alarming.

We need to examine such behaviours and find ways to address them. I believe that if we were to study this bill and look for ways to go even further, it would be the ideal approach for citizens and for a better representation.

[Political Loans Accountability Act, September 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, indeed, it is very important to get young people involved in politics in general. We need to give them the assurance that their voice counts and encourage them to vote.

As I explained earlier, given all the negative events and the fraud that is happening left and right, young people are clearly not inclined to go and vote, as they wonder whether these people really represent them.

As parliamentarians and elected representatives of our ridings, we have a responsibility to put forward initiatives like these to combat the existing cynicism.

[Political Loans Accountability Act, September 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her wonderful question.

It is a cause for extreme concern when a political party receives a large loan from a group with money in its coffers, because that group might be pushing certain ideas. Will the candidate feel inclined to promote these ideas because he received a large loan from the group?

Smaller groups with limited financial resources may not be able to give loans, which really puts some groups at a disadvantage. But this practice is still allowed, even though it is unethical and the House should not be using or promoting it.

I am happy to see that some measures are being put forward aimed at restricting and eliminating the possibility that entities will give loans to political parties or candidates.

[Political Loans Accountability Act, September 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I will pick up where I left off earlier.

Bill C-21 states that political entities must report loans in their financial statements. They must specify the amount of the loan, the interest rate, the lender’s name and address, the dates and amounts of repayments of principal and payments of interest, as well as any guarantor’s name and address and the amount guaranteed. The financial agent must report any amendment to the Chief Electoral Officer.

I would like to talk about this measure because I think that it will make transactions more transparent in terms of the lenders and the political entities receiving the loans.

This measure will also help the public find out where the money is coming from, when and how much. This is extremely important. Unfortunately, some entities are still not behaving ethically. We have seen the Conservative Party's questionable practices. In Quebec, the Charbonneau commission is looking into allegations of fraud. People are very concerned about this issue.

Many of my constituents are asking me what is going on and whether they can trust their representatives. These people watch the news and read the papers, so they are informed citizens. However, when they see things like this, they wonder whether democracy really exists in Canada and to whom their representatives are accountable.

I think that such measures will help boost public confidence in our democracy. People will certainly have more confidence that their representatives are following the rules and funding their campaigns appropriately.

Bill C-21 must move forward. I expressed some concerns about financial institutions. We will have to take a closer look at that issue. In general, we all agree that this bill should go to committee.

[Postal Service, September 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my constituents are extremely concerned about the impending closure of the Terrebonne post office on October 26, 2012. This closure is part of a whole round of privatization of Canada Post services. Many local citizens and businesses will be affected by this senseless closure. Once again, for the Conservatives, profits come before people.

Why are the Conservatives so determined to undermine the economy of my riding by privatizing essential services like Canada Post services?

[Political Loans Accountability Act, September 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-21. I will start by saying that we will support this bill at second reading. I know it is rare for us to support a bill, but it is also rare for us to be able to examine an individual bill that is not part of a big omnibus bill. I ask the Conservatives to take that into consideration.

This bill prohibits corporations and businesses from granting loans to political entities. “Political entities” refers to political parties, associations, leadership candidates or candidates for nomination. Furthermore, this bill sets a time limit for paying back loans taken out by political entities: three years for leadership candidates, four months for a leadership candidate and three years for an association or party.

It is important to set limits on repaying loans. Otherwise, debts could accumulate indefinitely. Moreover, there is typically interest on these loans, which can be very detrimental to someone who, after running for leader or for election, will unfortunately have a lot of debt for a very long time.

Political parties will be responsible for paying back loans that are not paid back by the candidates themselves. Obviously, it is important for the financial institutions granting these loans to know that someone will be responsible for paying them back.

Another measure that I find very interesting is the measure that will enable leadership candidates to receive gifts up to a maximum amount per year instead of an amount per campaign. If someone is still in debt two years after the leadership campaign and has already asked all of his contacts, friends, family members and supporters to make a maximum donation, he is in trouble because those people cannot give the maximum amount again, which limits candidates' ability to raise funds to pay back loans within the deadline. This is a very interesting measure. I congratulate the government for having thought about this problem and for putting this measure in Bill C-21.

It is very important for us, as parliamentarians, to try to find solutions to the problem of debt incurred by candidates during elections or leadership races. These people end up with huge amounts of debt that they are unable to repay. We know that some of the candidates in our own leadership race still have a little bit of debt. There are also candidates in the leadership races of other parties who unfortunately still have a great deal of debt.

This measure is important for someone who will stand for election because they will know the consequences of ringing up that amount of debt. If they know that they have three years to repay the money, they may think twice about how much money they are going to spend and if they are capable of paying it back. This will also make people who stand for election more accountable.

In 2007, the Chief Electoral Officer released a report on political financing, which contained a number of recommendations. The changes proposed by the Chief Electoral Officer were intended to limit the influence of individuals and corporations on political entities, an influence that can be exercised through financing. Bill C-21 takes these recommendations into account. Once again, I congratulate the government for responding to the Chief Electoral Officer's recommendations. We know that quite often the government does not follow through with recommendations made by various stakeholders.

The changes proposed by Bill C-21 seek to eliminate the influence by the more well-to-do in the political world. If a lobby, corporation or individual with a lot of money can provide a loan to a candidate, the latter may be influenced by the ideas of the group, corporation or individual.

For example, if a group campaigns for a certain cause, the person may feel obligated to advance that cause in particular. I think that it is extremely important to bring back this aspect of democracy and to limit this type of individual or corporate loan. It would be extremely unfair if this could happen. It is thus extremely important that we take action, that we support these measures and that we limit financiers' influence on politics.

As we know, there are groups that may have really good ideas or policies, but they may not be able to provide a loan because of financial difficulties. It is thus important to be able to level the playing field so that people cannot say that certain groups with more money will be listened to but it is tough luck for everyone else.

I am also calling on the government to assess the point that my colleague mentioned in her speech. Some financial institutions may be more inclined than others to give parties loans. This is a cause for concern. I understand that financial institutions are supposed to act in an impartial and non-partisan manner, but one never knows. I think that it is this government's duty to assess the issue in committee in order to determine if there is a way to prevent this phenomenon.

I would like to once again applaud the measures put forward. However, I would just like to point out the fact that it is somewhat contradictory to promote these measures that will improve transparency by trying to limit candidates' debt and yet, at the same time, be prepared to limit the amount of money that political parties receive for each vote.

I see that my time is up. We will certainly be able to get back to this issue later on, Mr. Speaker.

[Helping Families in Need Act, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have introduced several bills which, in their opinion, will help victims. On this side of the House, we have trouble believing that these bills will help victims, especially Bill C-10. Of course, the bill contained a number of measures, but it did not seem to directly help victims. Finally, we have a bill that is going to do exactly that.

What distinction does my colleague see in the way that the Conservatives have tried to make people believe that they are really helping victims and what is actually going to help victims? Can the member do a better job of explaining this contrast?

[Helping Families in Need Act, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague's speech, and I would like to congratulate her.

She spoke about caregivers. In my riding, there is a group of caregivers. They are very concerned by the fact that they have to take time off work, because taking care of a sick family member is really a full-time job. They are often looking after a spouse or parents.

I know that the NDP has thought long and hard about this issue. Therefore, I would like to ask my colleague to explain to the House how the NDP proposes to help this portion of the population, which still does not have the support needed to take care of a family member.

I am pleased with this bill because it will actually help the parents of sick children and children who, unfortunately, are the victims of crime. However, we must also consider this other portion of the population, and I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about that.

[Petitions, September 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to present a petition in support of my Motion M-405, which calls on this House to examine the possibility of amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations to equip all household utility trailers with a wheel locking device.

Several fatal accidents have occurred as a result of trailers that became unhitched. As parliamentarians, it is our duty to examine this matter and try to come up with a solution to prevent further loss of life.

[Privacy, September 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Privacy Commissioner has discovered that several popular Canadian websites are leaking personal information. Six of them have allegedly committed serious breaches of Canadians' privacy. Meanwhile, the Conservatives sound like a broken record. Privacy legislation in relation to commercial businesses should have been reviewed over a year ago. And Canadians have been waiting for anti-spam regulations for over two years now.

When will the Conservatives realize that this is the 21st century, that people no longer communicate by Morse code, and that Internet users need real protection?