Thomas Mulcair

[The Economy, September 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, after seven years of Conservative corporate tax cuts, the Conservatives have nothing better to offer than more lectures to Canadian businesses. However, despite their finger wagging, Canadian businesses are sitting on over half a trillion dollars in dead money. Even the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters has said that Conservative corporate tax cuts have had “little observable impact on new investment in Canada”.

What will it take for the Conservative government to finally change course?

[The Economy, September 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, our priority is jobs. The Conservatives' priority is making up stuff about the NDP.

Since 2006, the Conservatives have wasted $55 billion in gifts to big corporations through tax cuts. The Prime Minister swore that this would create jobs, but what is really happening is that Canadian businesses are letting half a billion dollars sit in their coffers.

Since even his Minister of Finance has admitted that these corporate tax cuts have not had the expected results in terms of investments in job creation, what will the Prime Minister do to get all of this money circulating?

[The Economy, September 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, with 300,000 more Canadians unemployed today than before the crash of 2008, a record $50 billion trade deficit and the highest household debt in Canadian history, the Conservatives' solution is to send the Minister of Finance to lecture business leaders, but Canadian business leaders are voting with their wallets and holding off on new investment. They are sitting on over half a trillion dollars in dead money.

When will the Conservatives stop lecturing Canadians on the economy and start listening?

[Foreign Affairs, September 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, he is photocopying his speech at the British embassy.

Two years ago the Conservative government lost Canada's bid for a seat at the UN Security Council, a first in Canadian history. This week the Prime Minister has turned down an invitation to speak at the UN General Assembly, even though he is already scheduled to be in New York.

Has the Prime Minister given up on Canada's role at the UN? We are merging our embassies with Great Britain. Is our delegation to the United Nations next?

[Foreign Affairs, September 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the Conservatives embarrassed the Americans by leaking confidential information. Yesterday, they botched their announcement on the United Kingdom by giving the impression that Canada's foreign policy is going to be under trusteeship from now on. And now the Prime Minister has decided to insult the international community by boycotting the United Nations General Assembly, even though he is going to be in New York this week while world leaders are sharing their views with the international community.

If the United Nations General Assembly is good enough for Barack Obama, why is it not good enough for our Prime Minister?

[Foreign Investment, September 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, in 2010, the Conservatives promised new criteria for assessing foreign takeovers. Last week, we learned that the Conservatives will announce the new criteria at the same time as the decision on Nexen. This means one of two things: either the Conservatives are tinkering with the criteria to make them consistent with the decision they have already made to approve the purchase of Nexen or the criteria are ready but the Conservatives prefer to keep them secret.

Why have Canadians still not seen the criteria promised by the government?

[Foreign Affairs, September 24th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve better. Canadians deserve the best diplomatic representation. They deserve the best consular services and under the Conservatives they will get neither.

The Conservatives need to find money to curb the deficit they created with their irresponsible corporate tax cuts. Why stop at the embassies? They could merge our armed forces. No wonder they are so nostalgic for the War of 1812. Why not merge the Senate with the House of Lords? It is the same difference. Why not a united Olympic team? The Conservatives could do that, or they could stand up for Canada.

[Foreign Affairs, September 24th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has 97 embassies or high commissions around the world. Great Britain has 144. Under this agreement, Great Britain would be Canada's de facto face to the world. Canada's foreign affairs policy would be hard to distinguish from Britain's. If this is the case, how can the Conservatives claim that Canada could maintain a strong, independent voice around the world?

Even nostalgia for the British Empire has its limits.

[Foreign Affairs, September 24th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, this weekend, British government sources leaked the details of a new agreement to create shared British-Canadian embassies in countries around the world. In these countries, Canada would now be represented by a desk at the British embassy instead of an independent Canadian diplomatic mission.

Why did Canadians have to learn about this through the British press? If the Conservatives will not stand up for Canada in the world, why do they expect that the British will do it for us?

[The Economy, September 24th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, TD Bank economists are projecting that growth will continue to fall well below government estimates. Scotiabank economists are forecasting an outright decline in the Canadian economy. The Bank of Canada has downgraded its own projections and is expected to do so again soon.

When will the Conservative government finally admit it is on the wrong track and change course?