Debates of Nov. 24th, 2008

The Economy

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a chart on page 30 of the minister's 2007 economic statement showed that the manufacturing industry had been in recession since 2005. The situation is not getting any better, and tax cuts for businesses that are not turning a profit are not the solution.

One year later, will the minister finally open his eyes and act immediately by putting in place measures to stimulate the economy, as the Bloc Québécois has suggested?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am looking forward to sitting down with my hon. colleague to discuss how we can implement his suggestions.

We have some challenges ahead of us but we need to recognize that the bulk of the tax cuts that we put in place went to individuals so they could make their own decisions about how to spend that money. Whether they want to start a new business or continue with their lifestyle, those are the options Canadians should be given. I look forward to working with my hon. colleagues to help improve that.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on the weekend, the finance minister said that Canada was facing a “technical recession”. We would like to know what the difference is, in the Prime Minister's mind, between a technical recession and a regular recession, and, in particular, whether that makes any difference to the hard-working families and middle-class Canadians who are trying to get by in the real economy.

What is the difference?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, let me read a quote in answer to this question. This comes from the Manitoba NDP government's Speech from the Throne:

The global crisis presents a fundamental choice between stepping back from planned tax reductions or providing predictability to businesses and citizens. Our choice is to maintain predictability. Therefore, our government will carry through on past budget commitments...In July, 2009 the corporate tax rate will be reduced again.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Premier of Manitoba has also pointed out that it makes no sense to give an unconditional corporate tax cut to big, profitable companies when our tax rates are already lower than our largest trading partner. So let us get the full story.

We can debate these statistics as long as we like but what Canadians are experiencing in the real economy is hurting. Will the government, in the economic update, in addition to a stimulus package to create jobs, also do something to protect savings, mortgages and pensions? Will it get the job done now?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we will be waiting for some positive suggestions from that party. We have received some from the Bloc. We are looking forward to some of those positive suggestions. We are also looking forward to the fall economic update on Thursday.

We do have a budget coming down early in the next year and that will provide the details that this House needs.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the NDP presented the basic outline of a plan to stimulate the economy. Perhaps the hon. member was not here—I do not know—but he can read it.

The Prime Minister admitted yesterday that he had led Canada to the brink of a recession, and the Minister of Finance has said that, technically, we are already in a recession. But people do not lose their jobs technically; they lose them for real. It is not technical; it is tragic.

Will the government take steps to improve the employment insurance system in order to help people when they need this assistance?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that is why we put the changes to the EI system in budget 2008. We knew there was some trouble on the horizon. We knew that the notional surplus was long gone before the Conservatives ever took power.

The next budget will address many of the questions that the hon. member is raising today.

Automotive Industry

[Gerard Kennedy, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the economic situation worsens, there is the development of a plan to help the ailing auto industry in the United States. Here in this country, where the auto industry represents 70% more importance to our economy, all we have from the government is more rhetoric and inaction.

When will the Conservatives wake up and propose a plan to help our workers and their families or will the government simply be a spectator watching the U.S. Congress siphon those jobs across the border to the United States?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, let me welcome the hon. member to this House. It is good to have him here, as we worked together in a previous place as well.

Nothing could be further from the truth from what the hon. member was stating. In fact, this government has been working hard with the auto sector. I want to make it clear to this House and to Canadians that there are no blank cheques.

At the same time, we acted well before the U.S. Congress was even contemplating anything. We are the ones who set up the auto innovation fund. We are the ones who have been reducing taxes for businesses, not only the auto sector but the parts suppliers and the dealers, and in fact all the consumers of Canada. We have been acting and we are proud of our record.

[Gerard Kennedy, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the blank cheques are the ones workers are starring at when they have been laid off, for example in General Motors, three months ahead of time because the government has done nothing about the shutdown of the auto industry. They have suffered enough in this country.

In the United States detailed studies have been produced that show the impact on families. We heard from the minister that there is no plan by the Conservatives to conserve jobs.

We at least have the right to know whether the Conservative government has done an impact study. Has it looked into how families would be affected, how other businesses would be affected and how communities would be affected? Does it know the impact so that it can at least be prepared to act as it watches the Americans go through what they are going through?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, whether it comes to the business development fund or the EDC, all these instruments of government activity, we have been there for the Canadian consumer as well as Canadian small and medium sized enterprises.

When it comes to the auto sector in particular, at least on this side of the House, we want to see a plan for the auto sector. We are not like Liberals who send money and blank cheques to wherever without a plan. We want a long term plan, exactly what his former boss, Dalton McGuinty, said as well.

Seniors

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are refusing to grant a grace period to seniors who have to roll their RRSPs into RRIFs. The Conservatives are forcing our seniors to sell their assets at the worst possible time, when the markets have already collapsed.

Is this how the Prime Minister plans to uncover the “great buying opportunities” he mentioned during the election campaign?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, in another pre-emptive move by the finance minister, we raised the age from 69 to 71 when seniors were actually required to roll their RRSPs into RRIFs.

Let me be very clear. On Friday, the finance minister wrote letters to all of the federally regulated institutions that handle RRSPs and RRIFs and told them that they had to allow seniors to roll penalty-free. We are looking forward to a reaction by November 28.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, allow me to give the member an introductory course in finances. When seniors roll their RRSPs into RRIFs, they have to pay taxes. To pay these taxes, seniors have to sell off their investments when the markets are at rock bottom. In their letter to the banks, the Conservatives did not make any suggestions about how this problem could be fixed. They would have gotten better results writing to Santa Claus.

Do the Conservatives not realize that by refusing to act, they are wiping out our seniors' savings?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that is not the case and it is unfortunate that she is invoking Santa Claus into this debate.

We have taken pre-emptive moves. We have allowed seniors--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

If the hon. member could be quiet long enough to listen to my answer she may hear the fact that we have actually taken those steps that allow seniors to roll RRSPs into RRIFS.

Yes, there is tax payable but let us remember that this is a tax shelter for seniors.

Securities Industry

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the vice-president of Quebec's Chambre de la sécurité financière, Luc Labelle, had some harsh words for the common securities commission proposed by the Minister of Finance. He said that such a commission would signal nothing less than the end of entrepreneurship in the financial services sector in Quebec.

How can the Minister of Finance promote a project that could, according to Mr. Labelle, end up benefiting big players in Toronto's financial district at the expense of regional and Quebec stakeholders?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I might remind members of the House that we are the only industrialized country that does not have a common securities regulator. It should be our shame because we are stopping investments from coming in from outside. They look at our country and we have 13 separate regulators. That is not the sort of investment environment we need to be showing to the outside world.

We talk about protecting seniors' investments. A disjointed system of securities regulators spread across this country does not protect investments.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary lied to the House, because it is not true that there are no other countries with securities commissions.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

He misled the House. Mr. Labelle—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Order. I misheard the hon. member for Joliette. I heard him say a certain word in the House, not another word. He knows that such things cannot be said here. I invite the hon. member to correct his mistake and ask a question.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw the word “lied”. But he did mislead the House and the Canadian people. There are securities commissions in other countries, such as in some states of the United States.

Mr. Labelle added that the best way to deal with the disjointed system the minister laments is not the centralization of power, but rather the passport system, which has proven its worth and works a bit like drivers' licences, which are valid across Canada.

Is the minister aware that, if his project goes ahead, the federal government and Ontario will be the ones making decisions about regulation?