Debates of Feb. 22nd, 2005

Taxation

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Medicine Hat.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, modest tax relief for the massively overtaxed is an insult. This is a government that spends billions of dollars to register farmers' shotguns and hundreds of millions to hang banners at Quebec hunting and fishing shows. Now it wants to spend billions to buy Russian hot air. If one is waiting tables, the government says that increasing one's take home pay is at the bottom of its priority list.

Why is it giving billions to bureaucrats but proposing pennies to the poor?

[John McKay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I keep reminding the hon. member of the five year tax plan which took down the government's revenues in the order of $100 billion over the last five years. There was a 27% tax break for families and a 21% tax break for singles.

I know the hon. member is in love with all things American, but if we look at the way in which the American government has run up a deficit in the order of about $500 billion, I think he will agree with me that our way of approaching tax relief is appropriate.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the truth is there is no tax relief. Today the average person earning $35,000 in Ontario spends 50% of his or her paycheque on taxes; $17,175 goes just to taxes.

Does the minister not think it is just a little obscene that someone with a modest income of $35,000 should pay half of that in taxes, or is the government saying that half a loaf is better than none?

[John McKay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I hesitate to interrupt the hon. member's rhetoric with facts. A typical one earner family of four earning $40,000 will pay $2,000 in actual income tax, a savings in the order of 60% A typical single parent, one child family earning $25,000 will pay $1,150 in taxes, a savings in the order of 80%.

As I say, I know the hon. member is in love with all things American, but we do have a pension plan that is--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Edmonton—Spruce Grove.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance's cynicism is contagious. Quebeckers long ago lost confidence in this nation's accounts, after so many years of the Liberals cooking the books. Year in and year out, the surplus grows more and more gigantic, and the cover ups more and more heavy handed.

The minister has no excuse. He must acknowledge what is obvious to everyone but him and correct it. When is he going to address the distressing matter of fiscal imbalance?

[John McKay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier in a response to the previous questioner, there is no fiscal imbalance. There never can be a fiscal imbalance. We have a very moderated federation where subnational governments have access to essentially the same revenues as does the federal government.

That is not true in other federations where it is the national government that has access to all the revenues and the subnational governments do not. The premise of the question is completely in error.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, but there is only one taxpayer in this country.

Instead of sidestepping the question, the minister should depend on some competent economists. All the real experts say that the surplus will exceed $30 billion over the next three years. He is encroaching on provincial areas of jurisdiction, while shamefully condemning the provinces to oppressive taxation of the middle class.

Tomorrow, will he bow to the arguments of Quebec, or will he continue to bleed the taxpayers dry?

[John McKay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, the committee this morning was actually quite instructive and quite useful in terms of projecting forward what will be the government's revenue sources over the next number of years.

Among those economists there were significant variations in what they anticipate. When we start to break out the variations, we see that some of them are more politically driven variations than are the actual economic variations. One starts with the same numbers and the assumptions that are made are largely driven by one's political philosophy.

In this particular case we do not accept their--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

Employment Insurance

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's employment insurance program provides temporary income support to insured people who must leave their jobs involuntarily. Over the decades, the program has adapted to changes in economic conditions. In most parts of Canada, including my province, many workers, including those in seasonal employment, count on employment insurance as a supplementary income. Still, there are anomalies that reduce the program's effectiveness.

Does the minister intend to make changes in the program so as to better respond to the needs of Canada's labour force, including seasonal workers?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche for his interest in working with the people from his area, both employers and employees, to try to solve the labour market problems.

In fact, the Liberal caucus has submitted a report remarkable by its many recommendations. We hope to be able to put new measures into practice to help employers and employees.

Public Service

[Ed Broadbent, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board.

Some years ago the Liberals moved the taxation centre to Shawinigan, Jean Chrétien's seat. Earlier they had moved the Department of Veterans Affairs down to Charlottetown for the same political reasons.

Will the minister now confirm that the Liberals are at it again and they plan to move thousands of jobs out of Ottawa without consulting the families and workers affected, and without providing taxpayers with a cost benefit analysis?

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

No, Mr. Speaker, I will not confirm that.

[Ed Broadbent, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, at least the answer had the virtue of being brief.

Will the minister guarantee that no jobs will be relocated without prior consultation and after providing a cost benefit analysis? Otherwise the people of Canada will rightly believe that what they are faced with is another $70 billion Liberal boondoggle. That is what it amounts to.

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, the government has been working hard to improve services to Canadians all across the country. Should the decisions that flow from the budget affect any of our staff, they will be treated with the greatest respect.

Foreign Affairs

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister embarrassed Canada by approving the illegal presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon. He made matters worse for himself when he refused to apologize or retract his comments. The Canadian Islamic Conference has thanked the Prime Minister for his approval of the Syrian occupation.

Will the Prime Minister finally apologize for his outrageous comments and get on side with Lebanese Canadians who are advocating true independence for Lebanon?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and everyone on this side of the House have been absolutely clear. We support the UN resolution. We support the withdrawal of Syria from Lebanon, full stop. Nothing could be clearer.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it sure is not clear to the pro-Syrian organizations that have endorsed and thanked the Prime Minister, nor is the record clear, because Prime Minister Chrétien five years ago said that the Syrian army were guests in Lebanon. He met with the leader of Hezbollah. The government for years defended the legitimacy of Hezbollah as a political organization. The government has provided $24 million in unconditional aid to Syria, notwithstanding its occupation in Lebanon.

Is it not true that the record shows that the government really supports that occupation and that it was not just an ironic slip of the tongue last week?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be more outrageous or untrue than that which we have just heard from the hon. member.

We have made it absolutely plain that we support UN Resolution 1559. We have since Resolution 1559 was passed. What we asked for is Syria to leave Lebanon.

Justice

[Belinda Stronach, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today at the foreign affairs committee Canada's new ambassador to the United States said that the government's soft treatment of marijuana was domestic and not his concern. If the Liberals share this view, we have a real problem.

Criminal grow operations are already out of control. Decriminalization would increase demand and supply even more.

The Americans have warned that increased drug trafficking is a security threat that could lead to further border delays. As we all know, border delays hurt our economy and cost Canadians their jobs.

Why is the government pressing ahead to decriminalize marijuana when it knows it will cost jobs?

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, marijuana remains illegal under the proposed legislation. It is an alternate penalties framework.

I agree with the member opposite with regard to the concern with respect to grow ops. That is why we have enhanced offences and penalties to combat grow ops in the proposed legislation.

[Randy White, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, all studies are showing that no maximum penalties are being given in Canada for marijuana grow operations under current legislation. This will not change under Bill C-17. Because of this the bulk of the rapidly expanding marijuana trade in Canada is going south in exchange for American cocaine, money and drugs.

Does the government plan to implement minimum penalties for grow operators, or will it continue to allow border relations between Canada and the United States to erode?

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I reject the premise that our relations with the U.S. are eroding. We have cross-border cooperation. We have met with our counterparts in that regard. We discussed the whole issue of grow ops at the recent federal-provincial-territorial meeting of ministers of justice. We have a full comprehensive approach to the combating of grow ops in this country.