Chris Warkentin

[Child Care, March 10th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals continue to demonstrate their distrust in the ability of parents to take care of their own children.

The member for Beaches—East York has said that parents are only capable of providing child minding, not child care.

Just last week the Liberal MP for Scarborough—Guildwood called the universal child care benefit “a cheesy program”. What an insult to the over 1.4 million families that benefit from this program.

Our plan helps parents pay for the type of care that is best for their families, and it has lifted approximately 55,000 children out of low income status.

The previous Liberal government promised a so-called national child care program in every election since 1993. Sheila Copps said it right when she said, “The Liberal plan is a cash cow for government while families are cash poor”.

As our Prime Minister has said:

Children aren’t raised in academic faculties or government offices or the boardrooms of social activists. Children are raised in families, so that’s where the money flows.

[Business of Supply, March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I do not recall an NDP government of Canada ever being in existence. Therefore, I am unsure as to where that budget of the NDP came from.

However, I remind the hon. member that all tax dollars come from taxpayers. They do not come from the New Democratic Party.

Having said that, I do agree with her that the Liberals did nothing on this file for the duration of their time in office, except to cut and cut and destroy any ability for people who are the most vulnerable to get ahead, specifically on one of the most fundamental of all things, which is to have a roof over their heads.

I saw it in my own community as the $25 billion was cut out of the provincial transfers. We saw more and more of the most vulnerable on our streets. It is going to take some time to rebuild that.

[Business of Supply, March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the member has had an opportunity to look at either of the budgets, but obviously she was supportive of both of them. She had the opportunity to see what was in them. She has indicated her support and that is indeed why we are here today.

I am certain that part of the reason the member is so supportive of them is the important measures that were included.

I do not think that it would be very wise for her to go back to her constituents and say that she voted against the billions of dollars that are being invested in housing in new and innovative ways, specifically in aboriginal communities.

Throughout the country we see aboriginal communities continuing to ask for more money to invest in the creation of innovative ways to house their residents. We, as a government, in the 2007 budget brought forward a very innovative way to help aboriginal communities. We were hailed by aboriginal communities from across the country for bringing forward this initiative.

Obviously the member would not want to vote against this type of initiative or the other initiatives that I outlined in my speech. Although there may be a lot of rhetoric coming from the other side, I do not see any evidence that the Liberals were ever interested in providing housing for vulnerable Canadians.

[Business of Supply, March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Beaches—East York for moving the motion. Specifically, with regard to the issue of housing, our government has a very credible record, an incredible record, quite frankly, considering the 13 years of inaction by the Liberals. I would like to bring some attention to it.

Canada has one of the best housing systems in the world. It has many players working together to meet the housing needs of Canadians across this country. Our national housing strategy requires the coordinated action of many partners to support housing choices for people of different needs, including those who need affordable housing.

Taken together, this government's broad range of coordinating housing activities as well as the efforts of other levels of government has constituted a truly national housing strategy.

The vast majority of Canadians are able to meet their housing needs through their own means and through the private market, either through home ownership or through the rental market without direct assistance from this government.

To help Canadians access a home of their own and secure a mortgage at the best possible rate, our national housing agency, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, provides mortgage loan insurance. CMHC also facilitates financing for affordable housing projects to allow borrowers to have access to loans at the best possible interest rate, lowering the overall cost of borrowing.

Despite the success in Canada's real estate market, which stands in stark contrast to the housing market south of the border, we know there are a number of people who are experiencing core housing needs still. These Canadians are unable to satisfy their housing needs without assistance. Some are experiencing homelessness and some are at risk of homelessness.

Our government's philosophy is to try to help to prevent homelessness and to help those in need find safe, affordable housing. In our most recent throne speech, we renewed our commitment to help the most vulnerable people in our country, those seeking to break free from a cycle of poverty and homelessness. In addition, we committed to working to improve living conditions in the north for first nations and Inuit people through better housing.

I would like to assure my hon. colleague that the Government of Canada is taking meaningful action to address the need for affordable housing. In fact, this federal government is investing more in affordable and supportive housing than has any other government in history.

Indeed, our government currently spends more than $2.7 billion annually on affordable and supportive housing. We are investing significantly in the construction of new affordable rental units, a homelessness partnering strategy, housing renovation and the operation of existing social housing. Annual federal spending in support of this strategy has never been higher.

This government is doing its part, but we all have a role to play in helping to house Canadians. Indeed, helping our most vulnerable is a shared responsibility.

Provincial governments play a pivotal role in the provision of housing and important support services, like health care, training and education. Municipal governments, civil society groups, community associations, the private sector and others help with the on the ground delivery and the management of housing and associated services.

Partnerships at all levels of government are creating tangible results. We are helping to create stable homes, a place where Canadians can get settled and then get on with the business of building a better life and a better future.

Together, we are making the difference in the lives of people and in communities across this country. Our programs include a $1 billion affordable housing initiative, which we are providing in collaboration with provincial, territorial and local partners. To date, this initiative has created thousands of new affordable houses across this country.

Our government has also invested $1.4 billion in a new housing trust for affordable housing, for northern housing and housing for aboriginal people living off reserve. Provinces and territories have begun to roll out programs, and the first affordable housing projects are currently being announced. This is in addition to the $256 million commitment over two years for homelessness and housing renovation programs.

Through CMHC, the federal government continues to invest approximately $1.7 billion a year to support close to 630,000 low and moderate income households. This includes ongoing financial support for many non-profit and cooperative housing projects.

We recognize that there is a high incidence of poverty among first nations communities. That is why we continue to support the construction of new social housing and the maintenance of existing housing on reserves. We are also helping first nations to build capacity to manage housing programs.

Our 2007 budget announced the creation of a first nations market housing fund. This $300 million commitment is supporting the development of housing markets and will create up to 25,000 homes on reserve over the next 10 years.

Budget 2008 builds on the significant progress made to support aboriginal Canadians by allocating $70 million over the next two years for measures to foster aboriginal economic development. Our recent budget also provided $330 million over the next two years to improve access to safe drinking water for first nations communities.

This government also recognizes the challenges that our low income senior population faces when it comes to housing costs. That is why we are working with the provinces to provide rental assistance and other programs to help vulnerable seniors.

In the most recent budget we raised the earned income exemption for guaranteed annual income, GIS, recipients, so that low income seniors can keep a much larger portion of their hard-earned income without having their benefits clawed back.

That is also why our government introduced in our recent budget a new tax-free savings account. It will provide individuals with a tax-free savings vehicle to meet their ongoing savings needs, including saving for a down payment on a home or perhaps the ongoing cost of maintaining a home. For seniors in particular, this is very important because the money that they save in their TFSA will not reduce the benefits that they receive through the GIS or the OAS.

Our government also understands the special needs of individuals and communities. We have an obligation to protect the vulnerable. That is why we provide ongoing support for projects that provide a safe place for women and children fleeing domestic abuse.

This government believes that the most vulnerable Canadian citizens should be able to live a full and active life with dignity. Among the most vulnerable are those who face complex challenges related to mental health disorders, and as a result, often lack basic necessities such as adequate housing.

For this reason, budget 2008 commits to helping those who need the care and support of fellow Canadians. Our government will invest $110 million to support innovative projects to help Canadians facing mental health and homelessness challenges.

We are taking steps to meet the needs of low and moderate income people, not only through housing programs, but also through our emphasis on training and work, and our effective management of the economy and our government's finances.

Canada's economic fundamentals are solid. Our unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in nearly 33 years. Business investment is expanding for the 12th consecutive year. Canada is on the best fiscal footing of the major western industrialized countries.

This is in addition to the tax cuts previously announced, including a further 1% cut to the GST, which is also expected to improve the affordability of homes.

All of these factors contribute to reducing poverty and homelessness and to helping more Canadians afford a home. The best social safety net is a combination of relevant skills and a good job. These things allow individuals to support themselves and their families.

I assure my hon. colleagues that the Government of Canada is delivering on its commitment to help house Canadians and to keep our national housing strategy strong.

[Income Tax Act, February 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-253 is an excessively costly and irresponsible modification to the registered education and savings plan. It would do little to support access to post-secondary education here in Canada.

Before discussing my concerns with this piece of legislation, I would like to provide a brief overview of the current RESP program and how it attempts to encourage savings with post-secondary education.

Currently, over $600 million annually is provided to tax and grant assistance to encourage RESP savings. This is done through numerous ways.

First, contributions attract a Canada education savings grant, or CESG, of up to $7,200 per beneficiary. Second, income in the plan accumulates tax-free, and grants and withdrawals are taxed in the hands of the students. This is usually when their incomes are low and as a result their tax bills are usually quite modest. Third, further additional support is provided for low income individuals through an enhanced CESG and a Canada learning bond. These measures cumulatively aim to provide a substantial incentive to save.

This Conservative government, in its past two budgets, has advanced measures to expand access to RESPs and has introduced additional flexibility for students. Budget 2007 raised the lifetime RESP contribution limit to $50,000. It eliminated annual contribution limits and raised the maximum amount of a CESG that can be received in a year to $500. The budget also provided part time students access to RESPs, recognizing the reality that many students, either by choice or by necessity, work while they learn.

Budget 2007 measures represented a significant but prudent revamping of the program and one that was greeted favourably. Maclean's called them “all smart, progressive ideas that are rightly applauded”, while the Victoria Times Colonist declared them “positive changes”.

Budget 2008 continued along the path with even further enhancements to increase the time limit over which individuals may contribute to an RESP and the time that the plan may remain open. The later change was especially important, as noted by taxation expert Jamie Golombek. He said:

With people staying in school longer, and with many post-secondary degrees—such as medical or law degrees—requiring years of study, the current RESP time limits were no longer sufficient.

Jointly, these measures will both enable families with more than one child and students pursuing an education over an extended period of time to have the ability to utilize RESPs.

The Conservative government's revamping of the RESP program represents a concrete demonstration of our commitment to improve post-secondary access through an improved and expanded RESP program.

I note that Bill C-253 was originally given first reading near the beginning of the 39th Parliament on May 4, 2006. At that time, I am sure that the hon. member of the Liberal Party could not have envisioned that this newly minted Conservative government would undertake such positive modifications to the RESP program in the budgets of both 2007 and 2008.

Nevertheless, we have taken action, and that action has and will have direct ramifications for the already exorbitant costs associated with the already flawed piece of legislation, namely Bill C-253. Moreover, Bill C-253 changes the system and would not improve the RESP program.

Further, neither of the amendments under debate today would take care of such concerns either. For instance, the amendments proposed by the member for Pickering—Scarborough East and the member for Jeanne-Le Ber would make contributions taxed in the hands of the contributor when withdrawn from the plan rather than being effectively tax-free, as is currently the case.

The most serious concern with Bill C-253 remains cost, which, when first proposed in 2006, was estimated to be a whopping $800 million annually, but has since mushroomed an additional $100 million to a massive $900 million annually.

The estimated massive $900 million cost can be broken down into two components. First, it represents an increased tax assistance on current contributions and would cost over $650 million annually. In other words, the measure proposes to spend about $650 million before generating a single dollar in additional RESP savings.

Second, an additional $250 million cost is expected from the contribution of the tax relief provided through the deduction. This is not an isolated instance of Liberal members introducing a proposal with no consideration of cost. Rather, it is part of a larger pattern of reckless and fiscally irresponsible proposals since the 2006 federal election. These have been brought forward by the Liberal Party and its many leaders. They are proposals that would immediately push Canada back into deficit and rack up a $62.5 billion and counting deficit, and push that onto our debt.

I ask the member for Pickering—Scarborough East how he plans to pay for Bill C-253? I personally believe the hon. member to be a good man and a good member of the House, but I am concerned that he might be proposing something that would inevitably cause Canadians to have their taxes raised.

I am wondering which programs he might propose that we otherwise would have to cut and if he is really prepared to see Canada go spiralling into a deficit to address this bill.

We ask these questions rhetorically, really, because we all know that Canadian taxpayers may eventually have to foot the bill for yet another instance where the Liberals have engaged in fiscal irresponsibility. Unlike such fiscal irresponsibility, our Conservative government acknowledges that we need to be prudent during global economic uncertainty. We cannot make such unrealistic proposals that would force Canada to go into a deficit situation.

Outside of the various serious concerns related to the cost of Bill C-253, there are still some technical flaws. The most obvious of them would be the pre-2006 contributions and how they would be withdrawn. In effect, under this bill, contributions that never received a tax deduction would be taxed when they are withdrawn. We cannot support this costly bill and we ask the House to defeat it.

At the same time, we ask for the House's support for the measures brought forward in budget 2008, a budget that builds on our record of investing in the best educated, most skilled, and most flexible labour force in the world.

Budget 2008 introduces a new consolidated Canada student grant program. All federal grants will be integrated into one program that will provide more effective support to more students for more years of study, thus assisting Canadian families who struggle with the cost of higher education.

The new Canada student grant program will be simple, transparent and broad-based, providing certainty and predictability for Canadian families. The reaction to budget 2008 has been overwhelmingly positive among students, leaders and universities.

The College Student Alliance said budget 2008, “--shows that the federal government is keeping an eye to the future and our future leaders of tomorrow--”; the Canadian Federation of Students added, “--the government has responded to a long standing call by students and their families--”; and the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada declared, “We are pleased that the budget has announced important initiatives--”.

Budget 2008 represents prudent, responsible and effective action from this Conservative government while Bill C-253 represents $900 million in Liberal fiscal irresponsibility, the type of which we have come to expect from the Liberal Party and its current leader.

It is reckless Liberal spending that Canadian taxpayers cannot afford. At the end of the day taxpayers may be forced to foot the bill for this reckless Liberal spending and Liberal deficits. I hope not.

[Tackling Violent Crime Act, February 15th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, 78 days ago the tackling violent crime act was sent to the Senate for consideration. Ever since it arrived in the Liberal dominated Senate, it has been held up from passage.

As a father I am concerned about the delay tactics that may jeopardize the passage of these important measures that will better protect my family.

This week, while opposing the tackling violent crime act, Liberal Senator Sharon Carstairs expressed her desire to legalize youth prostitution. I would like to remind the Liberal senator that youth prostitution is already illegal. The age of consent is 18 years where sexual activity involves exploitative activity such as prostitution.

Our bill is about protecting children from the most vile and horrific crimes that can be committed. As a father I call on the Liberal senators to stop their delay and to quickly pass this piece of legislation that will help protect the children of Canada.

[Foreign Affairs, February 14th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, February and March are big travel months for Canadians going on vacation. In March many schools have a spring break and some families take this time to go south and soak up the sun in resorts in the Caribbean, Mexico and the United States.

Given the millions of Canadians who travel abroad every year, could the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs tell us what MPs can do to help inform their constituents about how to travel more safely?

[The Environment, February 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that, as a northern country, Canada is particularly vulnerable when it comes to a changing climate.

Over the weekend, the Minister of the Environment was in Canada's northern regions, where the effects of climate change are becoming more apparent. For example, the melting of the permafrost in the north has destabilized the foundations of homes and schools.

Could the Minister of the Environment please tell the House how the government is taking action to help Canadians adapt to a changing climate?

[Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, February 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank all members in the House who have supported me through this process of advancing the bill through the House and now here at third reading.

As this will be my last opportunity to speak to my private member's bill in the House, I want to reach out my hand in thanks not only to my Conservative colleagues, but to my colleagues from the Liberal Party, the Bloc and the NDP as well.

[Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, February 8th, 2008]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can provide them to the member.