House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 44% of the vote.
Employment January 30th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, more than five years after the recession hit in 2008, Canada's youth unemployment rate is still sitting at 15%, double the national average.
According to a report by TD Bank, this represents lost earnings of $11 billion to date, which will take a generation to recover. The high youth unemployment rate obviously has significant consequences for our economy.
Why are our young people not one of the Prime Minister's four priorities?
Aboriginal Affairs January 29th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the poverty of Canadian families, not about the banks. They made $33 billion in profit.
Today in Canada, first nations schools receive nearly a third less funding than the schools of other Canadian children. Canada and first nations are grappling with some difficult issues—resource royalties, treaty rights, rebuilding our nation-to-nation relationship—but the principle that our children all deserve an equal shot in life, that is basic, that is fundamental.
A year ago the Prime Minister promised to fix the funding gap for first nations schools. Funding is still at a third less. Why has the Prime Minister failed to act?
The Economy January 29th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, under the Conservatives household debt in Canada has skyrocketed to 167% of disposable income. Over the past three decades the income of the richest 20% of Canadians has increased, while for the other 80% net income is in fact down. The middle class is being squeezed as never before. Savings are down, and more and more families are relying on credit cards just to make ends meet. Household debt is not just hurting families; it is now threatening the stability of our financial system itself.
When is the Prime Minister going to start taking this problem seriously and acting?
The Economy January 29th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, one of the world's leading rating agencies downgraded the ratings of Canada's five biggest banks.
Today, another rating agency sounded the alarm. Fitch said that rising Canadian household debt is “the main domestic threat” to the stability of our entire financial system.
Does the Prime Minister realize that families in Canada carry more debt than those in any other OECD country? What is he going to do about it?
Aboriginal Affairs January 28th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised meaningful consultation. Gutting environmental protection for thousands of lakes and rivers on aboriginal territory is not meaningful consultation. Cancelling thousands of environmental assessments over the objections of first nations is not meaningful consultation.
The Prime Minister promised respect on a nation-to-nation basis. Will the finally agree to Prime Ministerconsult, and to listen, on the environmental protection of first nations' lands and waters?
Aboriginal Affairs January 28th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, current unemployment rates in first nations communities are as high as 80%, and half of the homes in those communities are in a dismal state. Schools and students in those communities receive 30% less funding than those elsewhere.
Last year, during meetings between the Crown and first nations, the Prime Minister promised to renew the nation-to-nation relationship with first peoples. He promised meaningful consultations; he never listened. He promised to attack these problems; instead, he attacked the chiefs.
Will the Prime Minister finally agree to take meaningful action on this matter?
Mali January 28th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by wishing you and your team a productive parliamentary session in the interests of all Canadians.
Can the Prime Minister please update the House on Canada's involvement in the ongoing mission in Mali?
Can he confirm that his government will consult the House of Commons and parliamentary committees on this matter?
Clarity Act January 28th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I wish we could have been talking about the economy, jobs and poverty today. Those issues are of great concern to Canadians. But that is not what the Bloc wants to talk about today. The Bloc would rather reignite old debates from the past.
It seems that the Bloc does not understand what Quebeckers were trying to say in the last election. I would remind the House that in that election, the NDP received record levels of support and a historic mandate here in Ottawa. On May 2, 2011, four and a half million Canadians voted for the unifying vision put forward by my friend, Jack Layton. It is a vision of a Canada that is more inclusive, greener and more prosperous, a Canada that respects Quebec.
As a result, the NDP elected over 100 members, creating the largest official opposition the House of Commons has seen in 40 years.
The New Democratic Party has succeeded where the Liberals and Conservatives failed again and again. For the first time since 1988, the people of Quebec have elected a federalist majority in the House of Commons, thanks to the NDP. That was one of the winning conditions for Canada in Quebec that Jack Layton and our team fought so hard for.
Quebeckers massively rejected the parties that had disappointed them in the past and those that took them for granted from one election to the next. The people expressed a desire for deep and sincere change. That is what the NDP offers. It promises to unite people around an optimistic and progressive vision, to restore the hope that Ottawa will respect Quebeckers and work together with them to build a better Canada for everyone.
Quebeckers do not want to move backward. They have had enough of the old disputes that were the trademark of the Liberal Party and the Bloc Québécois. We must put an end to those pointless quarrels and move forward. That is what the NDP is committed to doing.
Our team has managed to restore hope among Quebeckers, the hope that they can be listened to, understood and respected in their own country and the hope that their values will be shared by other Canadians and that they may soon guide our government's actions.
Unfortunately, some people are prepared to stifle that hope merely to score political points, because that is precisely what the Liberal Party and the Bloc Québécois are trying to do by reopening their old debates. Quebeckers deserve better than the Bloc's desperate efforts and definitely better than having to pay for the irresponsible political games of the Liberal Party, which wants to manufacture a national unity crisis where there is none. This lack of respect for Quebec began under Pierre Trudeau. It continued under Jean Chrétien and led Canada to the brink of disaster in the 1995 referendum.
Even after the 1995 referendum, which brought Canada to the brink, what did the Liberals do? They tried to buy Quebeckers with their disastrous, corrupt sponsorship scandal. In the process, they managed to renew the sovereignist movement and gave a boost to the Bloc Québécois.
In 2011, Quebeckers said loud and clear that they were tired of the politics of division. They said it was time to do better, and that is why they chose the NDP. Yet today in Ottawa we face a Prime Minister who did not get the message. Under his government, old debates have once again resumed.
The Conservatives' record in Quebec has given Quebeckers every reason to view the federal government as an adversary rather than an ally. There is a reason why the Parti Québécois campaigned against the Conservative Party and against this Prime Minister. There is still time to change the situation, to show Quebeckers that we belong to one big family that shares fundamental values regardless of political leanings. One need only look at the history of our country to realize that.
The history of our country is filled with examples of what is possible when we work together and stay true to our values. Universal public health care for the sick, retirement security for our seniors, these are the institutions that define us and unite us.
We in the NDP are well aware of the great things we can achieve when we work together. That is why we oppose this attempt by the Bloc to plunge people back into the quarrels of the past.
New Democrats understand that there is more in our country to unite us than there is to divide us. That is why we are proposing practical solutions to improve the lives of all Canadians. That is why we are fighting for a balanced 21st century economy that is based on the principles of sustainable development, an economy that creates wealth not only for a handful of industries and regions but for communities from coast to coast to coast.
Apart from our economic vision, our leadership style would also help us establish a lasting relationship of trust with the people and particularly with Quebeckers. Like my colleagues, I remember the time when the Conservatives advocated open federalism. They have just done it again. What have Quebeckers received instead? Nothing but than a door shut and locked in their face.
Compare the Conservatives' closed attitude to the openness of the Sherbrooke declaration and to the NDP vision of a Canada in which Quebec is respected. The Sherbrooke declaration was adopted at the first NDP convention I had the honour to attend in 2006, and it inspired me as it did many people in Quebec. Its positive and confident vision is that of a successful future for all of us, together.
Since that declaration was adopted, the NDP has undertaken to implement the principles of asymmetrical federalism, with recognition of Quebec's right to opt out, with compensation, of all federal programs that encroach on the Quebec government's areas of constitutional jurisdiction.
The Sherbrooke declaration also expresses a willingness to establish a federalism based on good faith, a federalism that acknowledges that Quebeckers have a right to make democratic decisions about their own future, a federalism that recognizes that, in the undesired event of a referendum on the question in Quebec, that referendum would be won by a majority of ballots cast, a rule on which there is a strong consensus in Quebec.
A simple majority to express the will of Quebeckers was the ground rule in both the 1980 and the 1995 referendums when I was fighting to keep Quebec in Canada.
While the current Prime Minister was proposing the construction of “firewalls” between provinces, I was working to build bridges.
Ironically, it was the same Prime Minister who tabled a private member's bill in 1996, Bill C-341, the Quebec Contingency Act, recognizing the majority threshold for a Quebec referendum.
Robert Bourassa, one of the greatest federalists in Quebec history, said:
...no matter what, Quebec is today and for all times a distinct society, free and capable of taking charge of its own destiny and development.
When it came time to vote, Quebeckers chose Canada twice. The NDP will continue to do everything it can to prove to Quebeckers that their future is within Canada, because our country cannot be built on threats. It takes mutual understanding and respect.
The NDP team has already shown what it is capable of doing in opposition. For example, my colleague from Trois-Rivières put forward a bill to guarantee language rights for employees of companies under federal jurisdiction. Furthermore, my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent has introduced a bill to recognize the bilingual nature of our institutions and to make it mandatory to appoint judges and officers of Parliament who understand both official languages.
Since its founding more than 50 years ago, the NDP has taken a positive and constructive approach to politics, an approach based on good faith, which is the very culture of our party. This is the approach that will define a future New Democratic government. It is also in good faith that my colleague from Toronto—Danforth has put a bill on the order paper, a unity act, to implement both the Sherbrooke Declaration and the Supreme Court secession reference.
Anyone who reads the Clarity Act can immediately see one thing: the Clarity Act is not clear, and it therefore does not fix anything.
Good faith dictates that once subjective clarity is established, objective clarity is obtained by a majority of the votes. That is why former NDP House leader Bill Blaikie tabled an amendment to put this concept in the Clarity Act. The Liberals rejected that amendment and, instead, the Liberals decided to abandon the political fight for Canada in favour of a purely legalistic approach, a losing approach.
I fought from the trenches in both the 1980 and 1995 referendums. I am proud of the active role I played in convincing my fellow Quebeckers to choose Canada.
The NDP believes in Canada and also believes that the vast majority of Quebeckers want to remain in Canada. We believe in the political maturity of Quebeckers. We trust Quebeckers and Quebeckers trust us. We will continue to work together. Together we will build a fairer and more inclusive Canada that respects Quebec and Quebeckers.
Foreign Investment December 12th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister simply does not understand the difference between the takeover of a Canadian company by a foreign company and the takeover of a Canadian resource by a foreign power.
It is not that CNOOC purchased Nexen. It is that the government of China now owns our national resources. Under the FIPA, they can buy whatever they want in the oil patch.
The Conservatives have sold us out. That is the tragedy of this deal. They have not respected Canada's right to control its own resources.
The Environment December 12th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, in failing to apply basic principles of sustainable development such as polluter pay in all of our development in Canada, the Conservatives are leaving the largest ecological, economic and social debt in history on the backs of the next generation. We will stand up and have that debate with them because Canadians agree with us.
The Conservatives are destabilizing the Canadian economy. We have lost the manufacturing sector. We will stand up for the future.