Debates of March 3rd, 2008

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance

[Lloyd St. Amand, Liberal, Brant, ON]

Mr. Speaker, like the member opposite, I certainly enjoyed the speech of my colleague. I am not rising to in any way correct the speech, but rather to ask him to embellish it. As is typically the case with this member, he always brings to the fore in one on one discussions or to this House, and by extension to Canadians at large, that unique and special Atlantic perspective. The member has contributed so much over the years in bringing forward that Atlantic perspective.

He is absolutely correct: at some point the government will come to understand that we have to wean ourselves off reliance on fossil fuels and look beyond fossil fuels. He has touched on wind energy. With respect to solar, we are lagging behind. The member opposite, as a member of the natural resources committee, knows that we need to do more with respect to advancing solar and wind.

I would like to ask the member who made the artful speech what he would see as an appropriate level of funding. What would be the appropriate trigger or signal from the federal government that it is actually serious about promoting a wind energy industry there?

[The Acting Speaker, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Egmont has been left with 25 seconds.

[Joe McGuire, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Mr. Speaker, what the proposal was asking for in regard to the centre of excellence for wind energy was the development of wind technologies for the north and for people who are off the grid, technologies for people with little access to conventional sources of energy. That is what the project was all about.

The centre was asking for a total of $15 million over the five year period, plus the province was going to come in with $4 million. To the little province of P.E.I., it was a major investment that was going to benefit people outside of Prince Edward Island the most, people in developing countries and the north.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have tabled a watered-down budget that lacks originality and fails to meet the needs of Canadians, namely the growing needs of seniors.

One of Canada's biggest successes is its retirement income system for seniors. Who are the architects of this success? The Liberal governments of course. The old age security program, the Canada pension plan, and the guaranteed income supplement are all Liberal accomplishments. And it was Liberals who established the new horizons program.

The Liberal government implemented a number of initiatives for seniors: the creation of a national seniors secretariat; the expansion of the residential rehabilitation assistance program; the creation of a compassionate care benefit; the creation of a home care fund and a tax credit allowing family caregivers to claim medical and disability related expenses. And let us not forget the health agreement to transfer $41.3 billion to the provinces for all Canadians, but especially seniors.

The Conservatives claim to have the interests of seniors at heart, but they have abolished the secretary of state for seniors position. Is that what it means to pay attention to seniors? No.

Under the Liberal government, there were fewer seniors living in poverty. The number of people 65 and older with low incomes went from 11% in 1993 to 5.6% in 2004. Those are positive results.

Canada's population aged 65 and older is growing. According to Statistics Canada's 2007 yearbook, this segment of the population reached 4.3 million in 2006. It is now 2008 and this population is not shrinking. It represents 13% of the Canadian population and it is predicted to reach 27% by 2056. Furthermore, the fastest growth will be in the segment of the population 80 and over.

In 2006, the Quebec polling firm Ipsos Descarie conducted a poll in collaboration with the Chambre des notaires du Québec and the Quebec seniors council. The poll used different selection criteria, in particular age, with respondents having to be 55 or older. Nonetheless, the results were quite interesting and the findings can apply to Canada's population.

This poll paints a portrait of Quebec seniors. Who are they? They are mostly urban dwellers and a high percentage own their own homes. Only 8% live in a seniors residence. According to Statistics Canada, 93% of seniors lived in private households in 2001, but this percentage tends to decrease after the age of 85.

Although a high proportion of seniors live with a spouse, many women seniors live alone. Seniors in rental accommodation tend to live alone.

A Quebec humorist, Yvon Deschamps, said that it was better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick. How wise he was. The Quebec poll indicated that those with the lowest incomes tended to worry more about their health or their financial situation or the fact that they were aging alone. Health and one's financial situation are the main concerns but low-income individuals tend to worry more about those two issues.

Today, most Canadian seniors are in better shape financially than their parents. The creation of the Canada pension plan—by the Liberals—has made it possible for many workers to contribute and to draw pension benefits. According to Statistics Canada:

Seniors are now getting a smaller proportion of their total income from government transfers such as Old Age Security benefits, the Guaranteed Income Supplement and the Spouse's Allowance than in the early 1980s. Still 97% of seniors received income from one or more of these sources in 2005, and these sources accounted for 32% of senior women's income.

There are fewer poor seniors today than there were 25 years ago, but there are still too many. Not everyone has contributed to public and private pension plans, and not everyone has access to such plans. I am thinking of self-employed workers, seasonal workers and especially women, who are often forgotten.

The Confédération des syndicats nationaux or CSN states that 60% of workers work for a company that does not have a pension plan. Government of Quebec data indicate that in 2004, the average total income of women aged 65 or over was $19,600, while for men it was $31,500.

Too many seniors, especially women, are living in poverty. They have to make do with low fixed incomes and deal with steady increases in the cost of rent, energy, drug insurance premiums, communications and transportation.

Finding affordable housing is often a major problem for seniors. Affordable social housing is often allocated to poor families, and seniors tend to be forgotten.

The National Pensioners and Senior Citizens Federation has called on the government to continue implementing heating subsidies for seniors and low-income families. It is also asking the federal government and housing associations to provide appropriate, affordable housing for seniors in need. In addition, the CSN has asked Quebec to pressure the federal government to shoulder its responsibilities for social housing.

Government of Quebec data reveal that nearly half of all seniors receive the guaranteed income supplement, which is a serious indicator of poverty among seniors. In addition, one owner in seven spends 30% or more of his or her income on housing, while nearly half of all renters do.

The Ipsos-Décarie poll reveals that 4% of respondents aged 65 or over say that they are not retired but work part time. If we add the respondents who say that they are retired but work full time or part time, that represents 9% of individuals aged 65 or over, or nearly one person in 10. This is a large group of potential workers.

Not everyone works because of financial considerations. “Pensioners holding jobs say they do so primarily to fill their spare time or because they enjoy their job too much to leave it.” How can we retain these potential workers? What other accommodations can we make in terms of taxes and our labour laws to allow young retirees who can work and older retirees who wish to work part-time to do so?

Seniors are generally happy and devote a large part of their time to leisure activities. The more active you are the more likely you will be happy and healthy. We have to promote the creation and adaptation of sports equipment and facilities. We should also think about extending the child fitness tax credit to seniors.

Many seniors do volunteer work. According to Statistics Canada, women between the ages of 65 and 74 spend more time on unpaid work than men. According to Ipsos-Décarie, the highest proportion of volunteers is found in the 60 to 69 age category.

Ipsos-Décarie also found that one respondent out of five was an informal caregiver, of whom 22% were between the ages of 60 and 69. On average, respondents spent 7.1 hours of their time each week as informal caregivers and one in four caregivers spent even more than 15 hours per week in that role.

As I am being told that my time is running out, I will end with a few proposals for future discussion with respect to helping seniors.

We should fund the development of a national strategy for informal caregivers; establish a department for seniors; develop a national strategy for older workers; expand the new horizons program; invest more in social housing and affordable housing for seniors; increase amounts paid to widows by the government; increase the period of compassionate leave; provide subsidies to help recipients of the guaranteed income supplement to cover rising heating costs; increase the guaranteed income supplement; invest in public transportation by offering free travel to seniors who use it in off-peak hours and on week-ends, as well as making accommodations required for reduced mobility.

I thank my colleagues for their patience.

The Liberals will have more empathy and compassion for Canada's seniors, the—

[The Acting Speaker, Andrew Scheer]

We have to move on to questions and comments.

The hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise again to ask a couple of questions arising from the member's speech. He talked a lot about seniors. I had a hard time imagining him talking about the government not doing anything for seniors when we have talked about pension splitting, reducing the rates and increasing the age credit.

I was talking with a tax preparer on the weekend. I was told of the tremendous number of benefits that seniors are getting this year in taxes back because of the policies that this government has undertaken.

Not only that but the GIS is going up. In my rural riding where there are many seniors who still want to work in the harvest industry, they can still work for that six week period and not have their GIS clawed back.

The Minister of Human Resources has expanded the new horizons program, not only operational but capital amounts now as part of this next round of funding.

We have the Secretary of State for Seniors who has set up the national seniors committee and who was in my riding a week ago. We shared a tremendous round table.

I must say to this member that I am not sure where he has been for the last two years. I do not think there has been any government that has done anything more for seniors in the past number of years than this government.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the comments made by my hon. Conservative Party colleague. I would point out that most of the programs he talked about are for seniors who have money, not for seniors who are struggling. This is about giving more tax credits, but one must have income to benefit from tax credits. Those are the people my colleague was talking about.

I ran out of time earlier, so I will take advantage of my colleague's very interesting question to continue.

There are many changes the government could make, such as creating a financial recognition program for volunteer organizations that help seniors prepare their annual tax returns.

The government could support the development and adaptation of sports facilities and equipment.

The government could apply the child fitness tax credit to seniors.

The government could break down the isolation many seniors experience by offering courses at reduced cost and by implementing measures to help seniors who belong to ethnic communities.

The government could help seniors stay in their homes longer by paying for respite care and by using the Canada summer jobs program to promote the creation of groups that help seniors.

The government could set up a tax deduction program—my friend would like that—such as a tax credit to encourage and recognize volunteer work.

The government could foster a better relationship with seniors by simplifying its interactions with them.

FInally, perhaps the time has come to reconsider the retroactivity of the guaranteed income supplement.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment my colleague for his excellent speech. I want to ask him a question. Why would the Conservative government burn through the $13.1 billion surplus that it had when it came into government and drain that down to a $1.4 billion surplus and put our country on the knife-edge of a deficit? Why would the government do that?

What most Canadians do not know is that this Prime Minister has a certain ideology about these issues. He believes and what he wants to do and is effectively doing is actually making the central government here in Ottawa a small runt of a government, while having powerful provincial governments. He believes that Canada is really just the sum of its parts.

I would argue that we are not the sum of our parts, that we are greater than the sum of our parts, that our provinces together make us greater than individual provinces. I would argue that Canadians from British Columbia to Newfoundland can have the same benefits, regardless of where they go.

Why on earth, from my colleague's perspective, has the government eviscerated the power of the federal government and made us much less than what we are as a nation? Is that not a crime against Canada, Canadians and our history?

[The Acting Speaker, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Hull—Aylmer has only 30 seconds left.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, 30 seconds is not much time.

I thank my eloquent colleague for his question. The question is quite simple and the answer is even simpler. The Conservative government wants to eliminate as much surplus money as it can, because it in no way wants to help the people who need it most.

This government is not interested in helping the seniors who built this country. It is not interested in helping the least fortunate. This would mean, for example, programs for the homeless. This is just another way for the Conservatives to justify the fact that they have no money to put towards these kinds of important programs.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to have the opportunity to say a few words on budget 2008. I will be splitting my time with the member for Leeds—Grenville.

Last week another balanced budget was presented by the Minister of Finance, the third in three years. Three out of three is not a bad batting average.

The budget was, again, full of tax savings for all Canadians: an initiative to pay down the debt with a $10.2 billion payment; assistance for our youth; incentive for our seniors; and a continuation of putting more hard-earned cash back into the pockets of hard-working, ordinary Canadians.

People from coast to coast have applauded our budget. I will quote the minister of finance in Newfoundland and Labrador, the hon. Tom Marshall, who said, “I am pleased to see the initiatives with respect to police officers. The fact that the gas tax is made permanent, that was good”.

That and many other comments across the country have given us hope that we are on the right track on this side of the House.

There are some positive highlights for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. As I just touched on by the minister of finance, the gas tax for municipalities was made permanent. Cities and towns can now make long term plans. Many communities in my own riding of Avalon can take advantage of this situation now.

There will be 2,500 new police officers for Canada. Again, in Newfoundland and Labrador there are $6 million earmarked for this initiative that will put more RCMP officers on the streets of our province.

Very important for Newfoundland and Labrador there will be an additional ferry for Marine Atlantic for the important connection between the province of Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia. This is the Trans-Canada that connects our two provinces. It is an area that we need to work on and we have been doing so with the help of the hon. Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the member for St. John's East.

This will also benefit people in my riding in the area of Argentia, another gateway in Newfoundland and Labrador. In the summer run between Argentia and Nova Scotia, because of problems at times on the Argentia-North Sydney run and problems between Port aux Basques and North Sydney, we end up sometimes having to take the ferry from the Argentia run. Hopefully with this new additional ferry, that will not happen.

There is a new Coast Guard ship to be stationed in Newfoundland and Labrador. In the budget there is a commitment of $720 million to build a new one for Canada's north.

There is major funding in the aquaculture industry. Our government is stepping up to the plate to review it. Some people involved in this industry have been very positive since last week's budget. In Newfoundland and Labrador, $22 million will be spent over the next two years.

We were in my province with the Minister of the ACOA , the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Minister of Veterans Affairs on the weekend to make the tremendous announcement with Cooke Aquaculture on the south coast of Newfoundland and Labrador as it continues to develop the aquaculture industry in my province.

The tax-free savings account is a very positive feature in the budget. I was home on the weekend travelling throughout my riding and many constituents mentioned the tax-free savings account, which is financial assistance for everyday living. It is tax-free, whether people withdraw it in 2 years, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years. Whatever gains they make, interest they receive in capitals gains, it is tax-free. It is in their pockets, another opportunity to build financial security for hard-working Canadians.

Reducing the tax burden of many individuals and families throughout Newfoundland and Labrador and Canada has been a hallmark of this government.

We see new incentives for seniors. On the issue of seniors over the past couple of years, the new secretary who has been put in place is taking the concerns and working on them.

There are $350 million for the new consolidated Canada student grant program. An extra 100,000 students in Canada will be able to avail themselves of this opportunity.

Another important aspect of the budget is $122 million over the next two years to ensure the federal correctional system achieves better public safety results. Within Newfoundland and Labrador there is much discussion about a new federal-provincial prison. No federal prisoners can be housed in Newfoundland and Labrador. They are sent to the mainland. This creates some problems for family and neighbours who want to visit inmates and it is a cost prohibitive situation in my province.

Back in 1988, the creation of a prison was announced for the community of Harbour Grace in Newfoundland and Labrador. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador are still looking for that to be fulfilled.

Seeing this $122 million in the budget being earmarked over the next two years gives us hope. I am sure the minister of justice for Newfoundland and Labrador and the people who are involved in the justice system are looking forward to the continuing discussions on that and to see if we can come to some conclusion on addressing that situation.

There is $10 million for small craft harbours for the divestiture of delinquent wharfs and pieces of infrastructure relating to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans throughout the province. By addressing the divestiture concerns, we are freeing up money for the construction and certainly repairs to be made to existing structures that are being used by the people involved in the fishing industry in the province. That is a good news announcement for the people of the province.

As the chair for the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, the committee has been advocating for more money in the small craft harbours budget. We realize that this is a step in the right direction. We look forward to advocating again and, down the road, to having more money put into the small craft harbours budget. Addressing the divestiture concerns is something that I am sure many people within the province of Newfoundland and Labrador found as welcome news.

Also, over the past couple of years we have seen some major funds put into municipal infrastructure and the building Canada fund is addressing many of those concerns. Over the next couple of years, we look forward to being able to avail ourselves of that throughout the province of Newfoundland and Labrador and, indeed, throughout the riding of Avalon.

Throughout the riding of Avalon, which I have the privilege to represent in the House of Commons, there are 227 different communities ranging in size from thousands of people down to 100 people. Many of their concerns encompass municipal infrastructure, so we look forward to being able to avail ourselves of that fund. We have been doing so. As a matter of fact, when we were in the Avalon riding this week, we partnered with the municipality of Harbour Grace, the provincial Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as a contribution from the federal government, we announced a $1 million project for the town of Harbour Grace to address some its water and sewer concerns.

Small craft harbours is definitely a major concern within the riding of Avalon. Last year we were very successful in obtaining over $7 million to address the concerns. Just to give members an idea, in my riding of Avalon I have 68 harbour authorities, so there is a necessity and certainly a need.

I say to people that the wharfs in my riding are like Highway 401 in Ontario. It is the place where commerce happens in the communities. It is a very important piece of infrastructure that provides not only the opportunity for fishers to have safe landing facilities but, more important, for people to be able to earn a living.

We look forward to working with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and continuing to locate and certainly allocate money for this very important piece of infrastructure in the riding of Avalon.

I continually meet with harbour authorities throughout the riding and tell them that this is a priority for me as their member but also for the Government of Canada to address these concerns.

Another situation that we find many times throughout the riding of Avalon is that we depend on the ACOA funding, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency. We have had tremendous support from the Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency over the past couple of years. Many projects within my riding have been assisted through funding from ACOA and other agencies, and we certainly look forward to continuing with that. We had the Minister of ACOA in Newfoundland and Labrador this past weekend for some announcements. He also travelled around and looked at some projects that are in the works. We certainly look forward to availing ourselves of the money in the budget to address some of these concerns.

As always, through Services Canada we receive excellent cooperation from the minister and his staff in addressing some of the concerns in the Avalon riding.

When I look at budget 2008, I look at a very positive budget for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in many ways. I look at a budget that addresses many of the concerns that we have raised in the past year with the minister.

The minister met with the Atlantic caucus and we put forward some of the highlights and some of the concerns of Atlantic Canada that we wanted addressed. The budget certainly looked at many of those.

We are off to another good start. This is our third budget and it certainly is a very positive budget for Newfoundland and Labrador and for Canada as a whole.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in my colleague's heart and in his soul, is he slightly perturbed or concerned about the fact that his government has pushed our country to the brink of a deficit? Is he at all concerned that in this orgy of spending that has taken place over the past three budgets, the government has restricted and impeded its ability to work with the provinces to deal with urgent situations as they come up? I will give him one example.

Right now there is a crisis of overcrowding in our emergency rooms across the country. At the Royal Columbian Hospital in New Westminster, the fire marshal said that the overcrowding was absolutely outrageous and that it had to stop. This is not a one off deal. This is going on across the country. Our emergency rooms need an urgent infusion of cash.

Does my colleague agree with this evisceration of the spending powers of the federal government or does he approve of the diminishment of the federal government in our federation?

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, what I approve of is that we have addressed health care in our three budgets. We have addressed waiting times throughout the country. We have put money into health care to address the concerns raised by Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

What concerns me is that the government presents a budget and the opposition members raise their concerns and talk about the faults in the budget but their biggest concern is whether they will sit on their hands, walk out or vote against the budget. Those are the three issues they must face and those are the questions that Canadians are asking.

If we are so wrong on this side of the House with budget 2008, if we are so out of the loop, as we hear from the opposite side, why do those members sit on their hands, walk out of the House or not show up for a vote? Why do they not vote against us? It is one or the other. They cannot condemn the government and condemn the initiatives that we have put forward in the budget this year, as in past years, and then continue to allow us to stay here. It is one way or the other: if they disagree with us they have the opportunity to take care of us through a vote, or they can agree with us. The options are very clear.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my hon. colleague from Avalon, who is also a colleague of mine on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, and who in fact chairs that committee.

I imagine that he may, like me, be very disappointed in the direction taken by the Conservative budget this year with respect to small craft infrastructures and harbours. There is nothing in this budget to indicate that the government is concerned about this issue or that it will do anything about the catastrophe people fear lies ahead.

I would like the member to share his thoughts on this, leaving rhetoric aside and responding with much greater sensitivity by referring to the riding that he represents.

I happen to know that in his riding, there are indeed small craft harbours and wharves that are crucial for fishing. Since that is also the case in my riding, we are extremely disappointed by the fact that there is nothing in the way of heavy investments in small craft harbours. Furthermore, that was the subject of a committee report, which was tabled the day before the Christmas break, in which we unanimously denounced the situation.

Is he satisfied with the response from Canada's Minister of Finance?

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I have served with that member on the fisheries committee for more than a couple of years.

I would like to see more money in any part of the budget going into the small craft harbours and other things. However, we have many issues that need to be addressed so we are limited to what we can put into a particular part of the budget. I guess that is the situation here.

I know the Minister of Fisheries has been working hard on getting the budget increased. Last year we made an additional $20 million to the small craft harbour budget permanent so it will be there forever.

Many harbours in my riding of Avalon need to be addressed through further funding. I look forward to working with the Minister of Fisheries and the people on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans to address those concerns.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to stand this afternoon in support of a budget introduced a week ago. I am particularly pleased with this budget for a number of reasons because, amid a budget that talks about responsible spending and sustainable spending, my riding of Leeds—Grenville fares very well.

I am particularly pleased that many of the issues people have spoken to me about over the past year have been addressed in this budget, some directly and some indirectly. The important news in the budget is the new tax-free savings account that will allow anyone over the age of 18 to save up to $5,000 a year and have any gains that they make be treated tax free.

People can use the money for upcoming large purchases such as buying a car or purchasing or repairing a home. The money can be withdrawn at any time tax free and replaced if the cash later becomes available. This is a terrific and innovative way to encourage and help people to save. We are all aware that Canadians' debt has been growing and with this one unique idea the finance minister will help us become a nation of savers instead of a nation of debtors.

For Leeds—Grenville, there is even more good news in this budget. One of the items with which I am most pleased is the commitment of $2 million over two years to support the Canadian Biosphere Reserve Association. I have a major biosphere reserve in my riding, the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve. The biosphere reserve is located roughly between Brockville, Gananoque and Westport. It encompasses many protected natural areas, including the St. Lawrence Islands National Park and Charleston Lake Provincial Park. There are also recreation areas and historic sites: the St. Lawrence Parks Commission lands, the Rideau Canal National Historic site, land trust holdings, lands of the Cataraqui and Rideau Valley Conservation Authorities, provincially designated areas of natural and scientific interest and the Queen's University biological station.

The biosphere reserve recently expanded to include all of south Frontenac township, including spectacular Frontenac Provincial Park. As well, urban and rural zones are important cultural areas of biosphere reserves. With over 500 biosphere reserves worldwide, ours is one of four in Ontario of the thirteen that are in Canada.

The Frontenac Arch is an area where the junction of five ecoregions creates the highest biodiversity in Canada, acre for acre, and features the beautiful Thousand Islands. Combined with human development, the result is a very high number of species at risk as well. It is located on a narrow natural corridor running along the Frontenac Arch between two of the largest natural areas in eastern North America: the Adirondack and Algonquin Park areas. As I said, it features the Thousand Islands. This is the narrowest part as it crosses the St. Lawrence River.

The biosphere reserve operates with members of the community who have been volunteering their services for a number of years. This money will help them achieve their goals on a national scale. It is a shot in the arm that they need and I am pleased that the environment minister, during a visit to Leeds—Grenville last fall, heard their voices and encouraged the finance minister to include this money in the budget.

I have continued to be a champion and advocate of the Canadian Biosphere Reserve network with both the environment minister and the finance minister, and I do applaud them for their insight.

Agriculture is also a major industry in Leeds—Grenville and I was also pleased to see in the budget funds to assist our beleaguered hog and beef industries. Farmers will see additional support through better access to $3.3 billion to cope with extraordinary pressures in the livestock sector and $50 million to help the hog sector adjust to a new market reality.

Geri Kamenz, who is the president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and who happens to live in my riding, said that he was very happy that the government took action. He was very happy saying that the federal government loan guarantees were “exactly what the farmers have asked for”.

These are important issues in my riding. Over the past few months I have met with many farm organizations and individual farmers who asked us to help them out. I and others passed that request along to the agriculture minister and the finance minister and, once again I am pleased to note that those farmers' voices were heard.

The budget also earmarks $12 million over two years to enhance environmental law enforcement in Canada's national parks. I am fortunate to have a number of Parks Canada assets in my riding, including the St. Lawrence Islands National Park, Fort Wellington, the site of the Battle of the Windmill and a major portion of the Rideau Canal. Just down the road from my riding in Kingston is Fort Henry and Bellevue House, the home of our first prime minister.

These are all important assets for Canada and Canadians. They provide a link to our past, as well as employment and recreation for my constituents. Some of these assets will be in the spotlight in four more years when Canada and the United States celebrate the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812 as they figured prominently in one way or another in that period of our history. These assets deserve to be protected to the best of our ability and the funding commitment in this year's budget will help that cause.

In addition, I have two border crossings in my riding: one near Ivy Lea in the Thousand Islands and the other at Johnstown. There are issues that have arisen at these two crossings, especially since the terrible incident of 9/11 that affected recreational travellers and commercial enterprises.

I am pleased to see that solutions are being provided in this budget with a number of initiatives including $75 million over the next two years to address operational issues at Canadian border crossings and $14 million to expand the joint Canada-United States NEXUS program for low-risk travellers. The Thousand Islands bridge has been identified as the location for the expansion of the NEXUS program and hopefully some of this money will be put to good use there.

Canada will soon introduce a new electronic passport, and the government announced plans to extend its validity to 10 years. This is something that I have heard time and time again from my constituents and something that I am sure they are applauding. This is great news for those who are using our border crossings. As I said, it really addresses a concern of my constituents.

The budget provides further assistance for Canada's manufacturing and processing sector by extending the accelerated capital cost allowance, treatment for investment in machinery and equipment for three more years.

It removes disincentives for seniors to work by raising the current guaranteed income supplement earned income exemption to $3,500 from $500.

Students were not left out in this budget. They are going to see the Canada student grant program with a $350 million investment in 2009-2010, rising to $430 million in 2012-2013. As well, the registered education savings plan can remain open for 35 years instead of just 25 years, and the maximum contribution period will be extended by 10 more years.

There is also encouraging news for the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes corridor. First, the government is providing $15 million over 2 years to establish a permanent facility to enhance the security of the Great Lakes–St. Lawrence Seaway area.

Highway H₂O, as it is called, is about to celebrate its 50th anniversary in 2009, as it faces new challenges and opportunities including more containerization of goods, and we all know that is the St. Lawrence Seaway.

The Great Lakes–St. Lawrence Seaway system is a deep-draft waterway extending 3,700 kilometres from the Atlantic Ocean to the head of the Great Lakes in the heart of North America. Ranked as one of the outstanding engineering feats of the 20th century, the St. Lawrence Seaway includes 13 Canadian and 2 U.S. locks.

Recently, our government and the provinces of Ontario and Quebec signed a memorandum of understanding on the continental gateway and trade corridor which will see billions of dollars invested in transportation infrastructure.

As well, our government also recently released the binational Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway study which discusses financial and infrastructure issues on this important trade route. In this budget, the government recognizes the importance of this trade corridor which runs right through my riding of Leeds—Grenville.

As well, the budget sets aside $24 million over 2 years to establish infrastructure for cruise ships on the St. Lawrence.

Other budget highlights for residents in Leeds—Grenville include: making the gas tax refund a federal government infrastructure grant to municipalities a permanent measure, providing $90 million to extend to 2012 the targeted initiative for older workers, dedicating $282 million over this and the next 2 years to expand the veterans independence program to support the survivors of veterans, reducing the availability of contraband tobacco products through new tax compliance and enforcement measures, setting aside $400 million for police officer recruitment, and facilitating compliance by waiving fees for firearms licence renewal until May 2009.

Along with this good news for Leeds—Grenville, the budget addresses the auto industry, the vulnerable, the north, the environment and our international commitments. It is important to note that with previous budget announcements combined with this new budget, the government is injecting $21 billion of stimulus into the Canadian economy.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville. I know that he is in a very important community for eastern Ontario, particularly for tourism.

I know that this is an area of the province where we have a lot of U.S. visitors coming across. In the past this has been an area that has enjoyed tremendous growth, but in recent years, we have had some challenges, particularly in eastern Ontario. I wonder if he could comment on some of the good measures that we see for the economy of eastern Ontario in general, but particularly for tourism.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Simcoe North, who is a champion of the tourism industry and he understands it very well.

My riding happens to rely on the tourism industry a great deal. This government has been making significant investments in that industry through the eastern Ontario development program. Recently, funds were put into the 1000 Islands/St. Lawrence Seaway marketing partnership through that program.

Just a couple of weeks ago I was at an event where the Government of Canada contributed $100,000 to the new art gallery in Brockville. There has been money toward a new anchor attraction study for Brockville.

The member also talks about people coming over from the United States and actions that this government has taken, specifically in terms of border crossings. I am happy to see in this budget that money is going to be put forward to expand the NEXUS program, so that it too would be available for low risk travellers crossing at the two border crossings in my riding.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise in the House today as we continue the debate on the second budget presented by this Conservative minority government.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Halifax West.

The author of this budget expended an awful lot of energy last week suggesting that investors look outside of Ontario when considering their options in Canada. Frankly, I was shocked to hear the finance minister slam my home province in this way. We can be certain that investors around the world furrowed their brows to hear Canada's finance minister suggest that Ontario's economy is tenuous or unstable.

Those of us in Ontario are well aware of the Minister of Finance's limited credibility. After all, he is the guy who left Ontario with a $5 billion deficit. So, we have little confidence in his ability to manage the nation's coffers.

Ontario, through no efforts from this government, is a vibrant and diverse economy. It cannot be ignored and should not be dismissed. In fact, my constituency of Kitchener Centre, which is in the heart of Waterloo region, is one of those bright lights within the province.

BMO, the Conference Board of Canada and the Royal Bank have all predicted that Waterloo region will sport one of Canada's 10 fastest growing economies beginning in 2009. In spite of deep losses that we have had due to the manufacturing crisis, Waterloo region has low unemployment rates and a strong, healthy housing industry.

The unemployment rate in the Kitchener metropolitan area was 5.3% in January. That is half a percentage lower than it was a year ago. There were 256,100 people working in the area in January, which is 3,200 more than were employed the year earlier. Statistics Canada says that 14,300 people were unemployed. That is down from the previous year when that number was 15,400. The percentage of workers who are employed in the region has remained stable at 67% for the last two years. That number is four percentage points higher than the national average, which itself is at an all-time high.

Instead of dismissing Waterloo region, Canada's finance minister should be heralding our success.

That being said, we cannot ignore the devastating impact that the crisis in manufacturing has had in Kitchener Centre. The loss of good, well-paying jobs has had a significant impact, even on a diversified economy such as ours.

However, this Conservative government has turned a blind eye to the manufacturing industry. In fact, on a visit last spring, the Prime Minister himself suggested to the Canadian Auto Workers that those out of work should seek employment in Alberta. That is unbelievable.

I think it would be generous to describe the lastest Conservative budget as bland at best. It does very little, good or bad. In fact, its greatest failing lies in what is missing from this budget.

Homelessness persists as a problem coast to coast to coast in this country. Some estimates suggest that there are upward of 200,000 people experiencing homelessness in Canada. Further, about 700,000 households are believed to be spending more than half of their income on shelter, leaving them exposed to the possibility of being homeless.

Waterloo region has displayed considerable leadership on addressing the needs of the homeless population in the community that I represent. At this time, in Waterloo region, there are more than 4,800 people who use emergency shelters each and every year.

The regional municipality of Waterloo recently completed a housing strategy that provides direction in allocating federal, provincial and local resources to address homelessness locally. It is thorough and it is comprehensive. The strategy looks forward to long term solutions. It looks to this federal government for a long term financial commitment to this important issue.

The current homelessness partnering strategy has not had funding allocated beyond the year 2009.

When I was reading through Waterloo region's report, one of the remarks from a service provider really struck a chord with me. It read, “We as a society somehow think vulnerable populations don't deserve the same quality of life. We need to be careful about keeping our humanity”.

Everyone has a role to play in ending homelessness. I implore the government to accept its role.

While the Conservative government thinks short term on homelessness, its environmental policies are so long term that they are rendered irrelevant and ineffective. Climate change, the biggest ecological threat facing humanity, has become an issue of health, security, prosperity and survival for our planet. At this critical time, Canada cannot be a laggard. Canada must dedicate attention, resources and commitment to the climate change crisis. Canada must commit to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, compared to the 1990 levels, by the year 2020.

There is nothing particularly offensive in the document that was presented by the Minister of Finance. The only things that are remarkable about the budget are how it misses the mark on so many issues that are of great importance to Canadians. The budget would have been more effective if the Conservatives had not already spent the cupboard bare with their previous budgets and fall economic and fiscal update, leaving a razor thin surplus to protect Canada's economy should it continue to falter.

It is a significant concern that the Conservative's projected surpluses of $2.3 billion for 2008-09 and $1.3 billion for the next year are well below the minimum $3 billion contingency fund that the Liberals consider a bare minimum to cushion against unanticipated economic shocks.

Do I need to remind the other side of the House that the government inherited the largest surplus in Canadian history a short two years ago. Two years of reckless spending and haphazard economic planning have left a minimal economic cushion. We are quite simply one SARS crisis away from deficit. That is bad enough. Worse still is the fact that we as a nation have nothing to show for this spending binge.

The government needs to demonstrate that it takes our nation's finances and our national issues seriously. Certainly we are entering a time where fiscal restraint is encouraged, however, we never should let a slowing economy become an excuse to abandon those in greatest need. Let us not let politics get in the way of fundamental humanity.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the comments from the hon. friend across the way and I will ask her a couple of questions.

The fact that she said it was our second budget, it was our third, so I am a little bit worried about the financial acumen on that side of the House. However, she said that we turned a blind eye to the manufacturing industry.

First, what I find interesting about that comment is back in 1997-98, when the Liberals started running these huge surpluses, why did they not get out in front and be proactive for those industries by reducing taxes and giving them breaks like the accelerated capital cost allowance so they would be in a better position today than they are? They could have been out in front of that.

Second, how can the member say that a surplus represents that people are overtaxed? How can she say that giving money back to people is blowing the surplus?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend has to appreciate that when we took over from a former Conservative government, we had a $42 billion deficit that we had to wrestle to the ground. Once we had done that and had our financial house in order, we invested in a lot of things like green technology. We lowered corporate taxes. We actually brought to lower and middle income Canadians the largest tax reductions in the history of Canada.

However, we had a plan and our plan was not retail politics. Our plan looked at the long term fiscal viability not only of our country, but how we could help those in need so when we had good economic times, we did not leave anybody behind. The kind of retail politics we see with the current government is it picks winners and creates losers. Quite frankly, Canadians deserve better than that.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my hon. colleague. I heard her say that there was nothing offensive in this budget. There was nothing for child care. There was nothing for affordable housing, not even a tax incentive to help build rental housing. There were no new financing instruments to combat climate change. Yet there were $14.8 billion in corporate tax cuts that the member's side of the House supported.

How can she answer this basic contradiction of robbing the cupboard bare and leaving people behind while still supporting the budget?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I believe my hon. friend may be misconstruing the fact that we have decided not to succumb to the schoolyard bully. We have said that we will not have the government fall on the budget. It does not mean that we support it.

I remind the hon. member that when the Liberals were a minority government, we took quite seriously the need to work with other parties. We worked with the NDP because we had an intersecting concern about homelessness, the environment and child care. All those things were for naught because the leader of the NDP and his party decided that it was an opportune time politically to cause the fall of the Liberal minority government. With that, because the Conservative government is driven by ideology, there have been no new child care spaces developed. The government ignored the will of Parliament with the clean air act.

The member should look in her own caucus when she wonders why all the great programming and the thrust of the minority Liberal government did not come to fruition. It was because NDP members decided that they would support their Conservative partners.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, after hearing the Liberal member speak, I have never heard so much condemnation of so much good news. There has been a reduction in taxes of over $200 billion over five years. That never happened under a Liberal government.

The hon. member of all people is now castigating this budget. Why would she and her Liberal Party either vote against it or sit on their duffs when this matter comes forward for debate in the House?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I reiterate that we will not succumb to a schoolyard bully. There are many things before Parliament that need to be discussed. There are many things missing from this budget. Again, the budget picks winners and creates losers, and for that reason it is not supportable.