Ted Hsu

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, May 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague talked about tax cuts and lower taxes. It seems to me that the Conservatives believe that almost every problem can be solved with lower taxes.

Canadian mining companies up north want to hire some local skilled labour and even train the local folks to take the skilled jobs, but they cannot do it because not enough people finish secondary school. No amount of tax cuts will allow young people to get the skills and education they need to get good jobs. There is a problem. This is an example of where we cannot simply lower taxes and fix a problem.

We need to help young people get the skills and education they need so they can get good jobs and good wages. They then can pay taxes and lower the tax burden for everybody else. I do not think the Conservatives ever think about future tax burdens.

[Science and Technology, May 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the budget's language says to cut funding for research at NSERC but to protect industry collaborations, scholarships and discovery grants. However, there is not much left to cut at NSERC. So, the RTI grants will be cut, the source of funding to repair and purchase medium-sized equipment.

Researchers are furious. It is like sending a carpenter to work without a hammer.

Why did the minister force cuts to funding used to fix and buy needed equipment?

[Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act, May 3rd, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I would like to continue on with my Liberal colleague's question.

There are many different pieces of legislation in Bill C-38. In the past, the government has restricted debate on other bills to two, three or four days. If we add up the number of days that we might want to debate all of the different pieces of Bill C-38, according to the government's timetable it would add up to a lot more than seven days.

I want to talk about the government shifting away from funding basic research and the fact that it is hurting Canadian researchers in that area. It is a very specific area and a principle that is part of the bill. It needs to be discussed. I want to make sure I have the time to collect all of the information and talk about it.

[Petitions, May 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition concerns the Canada-Europe agreement on comprehensive and economic trade.

The petitioners call on this House to reject any agreement that restricts the favouring of local goods, services and food, restricts the farmers' use of seeds, results in precautionary seizure of property for alleged infringements of intellectual property and increases the cost of health care.

The petitioners also call on the government to disclose the contents of the agreement.

[Petitions, May 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present two petitions.

The first one is from petitioners who are in support of Motion No. 312. This petition calls on the House to amend section 223 of the Criminal Code regarding the definition of when a child becomes a human being and calls on the House to consider 21st century medical evidence.

[Business of Supply, April 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, when I hear about the government's plans to cut scientists who are monitoring our natural environment and the human impact on the natural environment, and when I hear about its plans to cut the monitoring of our food supply, something we need every day, I am reminded of the statement: what gets measured gets done. If we do not look carefully at our food supply and look at how we are impacting the natural environment we depend on, we will not be good managers of these resources.

It was said in the House that the government believes that what gets measured gets done. Who said that? It was the Minister of the Environment. I have always wanted to say that and I thank the members for their indulgence in that regard.

[Petitions, April 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition from my constituents in Kingston and the Islands.

The petitioners are concerned about the legitimacy of Canada's electoral process and the threat posed to it by the voter suppression that we saw in the last election. They ask that the government to conduct a full inquiry into the voter suppression that occurred, to provide for remedies in case suppression has been found and to create deterrents for voter suppression in future elections.

[Public Safety, April 24th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the government said that by closing Kingston Penitentiary, the Regional Treatment Centre and Leclerc Institution, we would save $120 million per year. Public Accounts Canada 2011 says this is just the combined annual budget of the three institutions, but the true savings can only be a fraction of that. The $120 million must be reduced by the total expense of holding the 1,000 inmates elsewhere.

Could the minister inform us how much it will cost to hold these 1,000 inmates elsewhere and what the true net savings will be to Canadian taxpayers?

[Business of Supply, March 14th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I agree that it is deplorable for this government to not assume responsibility for this international problem.

My question to my hon. colleague is about the voluntary system of reporting.

I think that over the last year, if we talked to doctors and pharmacists, we knew that the system was not working. The websites that listed the drug shortages and potential drug shortages did not match what they were seeing on the ground in the pharmacies, hospitals and doctors' offices. We knew that from a Liberal Party round table that was organized last year to discuss the issue of drug shortages. I do not think we need the Sandoz closure to tell us this.

Is my hon. colleague confident that, with this mandatory system of reporting in place, the government will check to make sure that it is working?

[Business of Supply, March 14th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for talking about the effects on Canadians of the shutdown at Sandoz. This problem has been going on for almost two years now. Another aspect of this problem is that it affects generic drugs more than brand name drugs.

In that case, it does not get noticed by certain groups of people, for example, people who are covered by drug plans. This happened to my father. He was taking a generic drug and then had his prescription changed. He asked why his prescription had changed. There is a creeping change. People on drug plans do not notice because the costs are taken care of by the drug plan, but there could be costs that are increasing which we do not know about. Would my hon. colleague agree that some study is needed to look at how this is affecting the overall cost of our health care system?