House of Commons Hansard #126 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was hst.
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, earlier, during question period, my colleague, the member for Joliette, who is also the House leader of the Bloc Québécois, asked a legitimate and very important question. That question, which—
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
Order.
One moment please. There is a problem with the interpretation. Is it working now?
The hon. member for Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord may continue with his point of order.
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that, at the beginning of each parliamentary session, the four whips meet to discuss ways to improve decorum and discipline in the House of Commons. Once again, we have proof that those meetings are just for show. They are completely meaningless, because each party ends up doing whatever it wants anyway. This kind of behaviour does not do our offices justice.
On to my point of order. Earlier, our colleague, the member for Joliette and House leader of the Bloc Québécois, asked a very legitimate and important question about the Geneva convention with respect to the torture of detainees handed over to Afghan authorities.
While my colleague from Joliette was asking his question, members on this side clearly heard the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence say the word “bullshit”. At the time, he was seated on the front bench next to the Minister of National Defence.
I regret having to repeat—
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Does that hurt you people over there?
I regret having to repeat such an unacceptable and utterly unparliamentary word, particularly given the parliamentary secretary's position.
For reference, I would like to read from page 614 of O'Brien-Bosc, which states that:
Remarks directed specifically at another member which question that member’s integrity, honesty or character are not in order. A member will be requested to withdraw offensive remarks, allegations, or accusations of impropriety—
Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I would refer you to chapter 13, page 618, which addresses order and decorum, where the authors provide clear examples of unparliamentary language.
I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence to withdraw his words, if he is capable of acknowledging that he said them.
Laurie Hawn ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, the words were not spoken. The words were mouthed. I applaud the leader of the Bloc's ability to lip-read in English. That is very commendable. I do apologize for mouthing inappropriate comments. The next time I will mouth something more appropriate, like “bovine scatology”.
Since the hon. member is so good at lip-reading, I assume he can read minds, so I would like to apologize for what I am thinking right now.
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
I did not hear the language complained of.
We received an explanation for what was seen, at least.
The hon. member for Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord would like to add something.
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, the member should not be making jokes about something so serious. He is laughing, and still thinks it is funny. The other Conservative members think it is stupid. This is why television viewers or people in the gallery sometimes lose respect for the position of member of Parliament.
We heard the word “bullshit” in the interpretation. The member should stop cracking jokes and retract his comment.
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, I already apologized for mouthing inappropriate words. That apology stands.
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
I will treat the matter as at an end. We have had this word used recently in the House. I would also urge hon. members to refrain from using the word.
I believe that this word is unparliamentary, and members should avoid using it when speaking or responding to another member. I always encourage members to use more appropriate words.
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In answer to my second question, the Minister of International Cooperation continued to speak after the microphone cut her off. I heard her say that KAIROS was unaccountable for their funding. I would like to be certain that those words are on the record, notwithstanding that the microphone was turned off.
Bev Oda ConservativeMinister of International Cooperation
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for pointing this out. In fact, it gives me an opportunity to fully read the quotation. It says:
If success is to be measured in terms of number of lives saved, we must focus on outcome-based, proven, cost-effective solutions that work to prevent needless suffering and death. We can’t afford to funnel money into an unaccountable abyss and hope for the best.
That is a quotation from the member for Ottawa Centre. I was reading the quotation.
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-62, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
When this matter was before the House previously, the hon. member for Sault Ste. Marie had the floor with seven minutes remaining in the time allotted for his speech in the debate. I therefore call upon the hon. member for Sault Ste. Marie.
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to finish what I started before question period.
Before I continue, however, I want to say how proud I am to be sharing my time this afternoon in this debate with the member for London—Fanshawe. She is a really wonderfully hard-working, intelligent, articulate member with whom I have had the pleasure of serving for a number of years in government and in the Ontario legislature, where she served as a parliamentary assistant to the Minister of the Environment and then subsequently as a junior minister with the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation.
The member for London—Fanshawe has worked tirelessly in her own community as an advocate, particularly on behalf of women, the at-risk and the marginalized, and she continues that work as a member and critic in our caucus in speaking out on issues that particularly affect women and their livelihood.
I am always pleased to stand up beside caucus members in the NDP caucus because we have such a wealth of talent here. They are people who work very hard and are very sincere and committed to the issues that we as a party continue to champion in the instance of fairness of justice for all.
That brings me to the debate we are having here this afternoon, the debate on the imposition by the federal government of a harmonized sales tax program that will see, at the end of the day, an increase of 8% in the cost of a lot of goods and services that those in our communities who are finding it very difficult to make ends meet as it is will not be able to afford.
Before question period I said that I wanted to speak on behalf of the people from northern Ontario. I listed a few of the ways that they will be impacted. I said also that I wanted to speak on behalf of the communities of Sault Ste. Marie and Algoma in my riding. I continue to get emails and phone calls from people from across the riding. I want to share a few of their thoughts with you this afternoon. This is only a small sampling of the strong feeling and opposition that I am hearing from my constituents.
There is a gentleman, Bob Kehoe, who wrote to me that we need to block the HST at Parliament.
Another person, Mr. Foster, also said, “Please stop the HST. I struggle enough as it is”.
I will share with members a little note that was sent to me by Charles Dawson from my riding. He says, “My name is Charles Dawson and I consider myself to be a middle class income Canadian. I am very upset about the whole HST that is basically being forced upon us. I have two children and have them involved in lots of sports and activities, and to be honest, I have very little extra money. This extra 8% imposed on more items would definitely make things much harder for my family. I wanted to let you know in hoping that my voice can make a difference”.
I place those thoughts on the record here this afternoon as symbolic of a larger strong feeling coming out of the Sault Ste. Marie riding about this imposition of the HST in partnership with the provincial Liberal government in that province.
I also want to share a brief comment from a local editorialist in The Sault Star, who lives out in the district, so that people will realize and understand that I speak not only on behalf of people from the city of Sault Ste. Marie but also on behalf of the folks out in the district, the rural part of my riding.
As Mr. Keenan points out, there are often differing views on issues, depending on whether people live in the city or in rural Canada. In this piece, Mr. Keenan says:
Spending half my time in the Algoma district and the other half in the Sault, it is nice to get two perspectives on things, and on this proposed HST, all I hear is condemnation.
That is the strong view of many in my riding. It is certainly the strong view of my caucus, the member for London—Fanshawe and the constituents on whose behalf they speak here in this House today in this very limited debate on this very important public policy, a policy that will in fact cost people dearly.
I said earlier that I want to also put on the record my very sincere and deep concern. I have travelled the country twice now to hear from people in at least 15 communities on the issue of poverty and about the struggles of those who live on the margins and are most at risk and vulnerable in our society in this great, wealthy country of ours.
Certainly one of them, the most important, and often the first that comes up, is the question of how they can afford the basics. It is the question of how they can, with the limited income they have, pay for the things they need, the things that keep them, their children and family members going from day to day.
They tell me that they are stretched to the very limit. There is no place else for them to go. Some people who work all year, full time, for minimum wage, particularly if they are living in large centres where the cost of living is high, are saying very clearly that they cannot make ends meet.
They cannot pay for the basics in life. They cannot feed themselves and their children with healthy, nutritious food. They cannot pay the rent. They cannot involve their family members in the things they should be able to be involved in to participate in their communities. Another imposition of a further cost to them will be devastating. They are saying they do not know what they will do.
I plead with the government to please think twice. It still has a few hours today. This will end tonight; we will vote on it tomorrow, and ultimately, next July, there will be another 8% added to the cost of some very basic items for ordinary citizens in my riding and across northern Ontario, and for the poor in Ontario and British Columbia.
This is going to be very difficult, and I would ask those who are supporting this measure to please rethink it.
Jim Maloway NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for a terrific speech on Bill C-62. I know he has been involved in political life for a great many years and I would hazard a guess that in terms of response, this is probably one of the biggest issues that he has had to deal with, by the sounds of it.
It is also borne out by the fact that just yesterday Ipsos Reid and Canwest news released a survey that showed that a whopping 74% of the people of Ontario are opposed to this HST. That is without their knowing the sneaky way the government has gone through the time allocation and closure motion process to try to ram this through just before Christmas, when in fact it could have introduced this legislation a couple of months ago.
In fact, it does not have to do it right now. An amendment moved by the member for Vancouver East just yesterday was rejected by the other three parties, the axis of taxes. It proposed that we would deal with this bill in the normal process: it would go to the Standing Committee on Finance, and public hearings would travel around Ontario and B.C. to hear from the public. What could be wrong with hearing from the public?
Preston Manning would be absolutely disappointed to see what the government has been doing. Complicit with the government are the Liberal members. They are the enablers here. They are the ones who are actually making this happen; without them, this would not be happening.
I would ask the member if he would like to make some further comments on the whole sorry process we are dealing with.
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. Today we are witnessing a real lack of democracy, a shortcoming in the approach of the government toward pieces of legislation that very directly affect every man, woman and child in this province and in the province of British Columbia. We are not willing to take the time necessary to hear them and to go through the public consultation process.
Last week I travelled to northern Canada, to British Columbia and Alberta, to talk to people about some very basic issues, such as how poverty is affecting them and what they think we as a federal government could do. Certainly no one in those consultations suggested for a second that we bring in the HST and raise the cost of living for them.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, throughout the debate, members have been calling for consultations with the public. If they look at Bill C-62, which is an enabling legislation amending the Excise Tax Act, they will see that there are no clauses to do with the HST, at least none that I could see. There are a number of changes on issues such as the provisions for direct sellers and some other consequential amendments, but there is nothing in here that the public would actually be able to comment on, unless the member is aware of any clause in Bill C-62 that has something to do with what he was talking about.
I suggest to the member that the consultation process with the public has to do with the legislation of the Province of Ontario and the Province of B.C., which are harmonizing their provincial taxes with an existing federal tax. The body that will deal with that legislation in fact is a provincial legislature.
Therefore, I would like the member to explain what exactly would happen with the public at our finance committee meetings, if they came before us on Bill C-62. What exactly would they be discussing, other than saying, “We don't want you to pass this bill so that the Province of Ontario can't pass its bill”?
If that is the point, then say so.
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the member for Mississauga South make the same argument all day in this House to my colleagues as we fight on behalf of men, women and children across this province and the province of B.C., who are going to be hit with an 8% increase in the cost of almost everything come July of next year.
He is a Liberal. He is trying to wiggle off the hook, trying to have it both ways here. He cannot have it both ways: Either he is for it or against it.
If we held public hearings, I guarantee that the members would have hundreds of people coming forward, wanting to appear before the committee to tell us to stop this business and to stop the imposition of the HST.
Fin Donnelly NDP New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Elmwood—Transcona.
I rise today to speak against the HST. However, before I do, let me take a moment to say it is an honour for me to stand in the House of Commons, representing the communities of New Westminster, Coquitlam and Port Moody. I am humbled by the trust and faith that voters have recently placed in me. I am committed to building a sustainable community that is socially just, inclusive and economically vibrant. This is why I am so strongly opposed to the harmonized sales tax.
First, let me tell members about the community I represent and the concerns of the people in New Westminster, Coquitlam and Port Moody.
My riding is made up of three unique communities, bordering the Fraser River and the Pacific Ocean.
New Westminster is British Columbia's first capital city and the oldest city in western Canada.
Port Moody is the home to the last spike of the transcontinental train track and is known as the city of arts.
Coquitlam, the youngest of the three municipalities, is home to one of B.C.'s first francophone communities, Maillardville. It is also known for its green spaces and quality education system. Coquitlam literally means “red fish up the river”, so named by the Kwikwetlem First Nation for the abundant sockeye salmon that historically travelled up the Coquitlam River.
The history of these communities is intertwined with that the Fraser River, through settlement, trade and economic activity, and bound by the environmental attributes of this great river and linked to the salmon.
The Fraser River sockeye salmon recently faced one of the most devastating collapses in Canadian history and are in jeopardy of going the way of the Atlantic cod unless immediate action is taken.
This is why I called for an independent public judicial inquiry into the collapse of the Fraser River sockeye salmon. It is also why, as the New Democrat fisheries and oceans critic, I have been actively calling the government to phase out open-net fish farms and move to closed containment; to immediately move existing fish farms away from important wild salmon migration routes; and to invest in habitat protection and salmon enhancement programs to protect our wild salmon.
It is no secret that I am incredibly passionate about the fate of British Columbia's wild salmon. This is why I twice swam the length of the 1,400 kilometre Fraser River to draw attention to the negative impacts we have on this mighty river system.
I feel so strongly because the demise of our wild salmon is really an indication of the broader problems that my community faces.
Homelessness has nearly tripled in the tri-cities and more than doubled in New Westminster since 2005.
We have seen the closure of several mills in our community, and this latest recession has brought some of the highest unemployment in over a decade.
At a time when my community is struggling, at a time when British Columbians need us most, at a time when the world is calling on Canada to take a major role on the international stage in Copenhagen, the government is making life less affordable for students, seniors, families and small businesses.
The HST is more than a new tax on British Columbians; it is a tax shift from big business to B.C. families.
What is worse, British Columbians were not given a chance to vote on it provincially. Students, seniors, families, small businesses and working people were not consulted on this new tax, and they are furious with the government about it.
I know. I have talked with them. This was the number one issue raised on the doorstep. I have knocked on thousands of doors over the past six months.
For instance, I talked to a family, James and Patty, with two small kids and who live in New Westminster. James has recently lost his job and Patty is now the sole breadwinner in the family. If this tax comes in, they will now have to pay 7% more for clothes and basic items for the family. This means they will have to make tough choices in that household. It means they will have to cut things they need to thrive.
I talked to a student, Angie, who lives in Coquitlam and goes to Simon Fraser University. She told me that another 7% on text books, which are already very expensive, will affect her bottom line. She said that if she wants to do the right thing for the environment and purchase a bicycle, that will be another 7% impacting her bottom line that is already faced with some of the highest ever tuition costs.
I talked to Anne, who is a senior in Coquitlam. She told me that another 7% on her strata fees will impact her bottom line. She also said that 7% on taxis to get around will affect her daily choices about what she can and cannot afford.
These are just some of the impacts on hundreds of people I have met over the past month. The HST will hurt people in my community, and when given the chance to voice their opposition to this new tax, constituents in New Westminster, Coquitlam and Port Moody have overwhelmingly rejected it. It will hurt small businesses. It will hurt students and seniors. It will hurt working families.
Having grown up in this riding, I have seen our community go through many changes. The mills were working at full capacity in New Westminster. My father worked in one. Young families were buying their first homes in Coquitlam, and residents were able to walk to work in Port Moody. All of that has now changed. Most of the mills in New Westminster are closed. Average housing costs in Coquitlam have spiralled to over three-quarters of a million dollars. Residents in Port Moody now commute across the Lower Mainland to get to work.
What did I hear from constituents? No to HST. Instead, create jobs and increase infrastructure funding in New Westminster. No to the HST. Instead, implement a national affordable housing strategy and help families in Coquitlam. No to the HST. Instead, fund the Evergreen Line and help small businesses in Port Moody. No to the HST. Instead, increase funding for community policing and crime reduction programs. They said no to the HST. Instead, set meaningful targets to reduce emissions, stop climate change and protect our air, green spaces and our waterways.
Today, on day two of the Copenhagen summit on climate change, world leaders are meeting to discuss the most pressing issues facing the planet. People in New Westminster, Coquitlam and Port Moody understand these connections. They see the changes taking place in our community, in our rivers and around the world and they know things are not right.
Not one penny of this new tax will make life better for their families. This tax takes money out of their pockets, the pockets of working people, and puts it right back in the pockets of big corporations. Today I am calling on all parties to listen to the people of British Columbia and, like our mighty Sockeye salmon, to swim against the current and vote no to the HST.
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome the new member and congratulate him on his maiden speech.
I know the hon. member recently returned from the campaign trail and his successful by-election, and I know his province of British Columbia had an election in May 2009. I understand the harmonized sales tax might have been an issue in that campaign. He certainly suggests it was in the byelection.
Does he not recognize that under a federal state such as Canada, it is up to a province such as British Columbia to decide for itself whether or not it wishes to have a harmonized tax? I come from Alberta, where we have no sales tax. Our neighbour to the east, Saskatchewan, has a provincial sales tax but does not harmonize it.
Therefore, it is really up to the legislature in Victoria. What is his comment in response to that suggestion?
Fin Donnelly NDP New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, this harmonized sales tax was not brought up during the provincial election at all. In fact, it was brought up months after the provincial election. There was absolutely no opportunity for people to provide their input. There was no consultation. However, in the local byelection, there was an opportunity to provide input. When I spoke to people in New Westminster—Coquitlam and Port Moody about the HST and the implementation, they were extremely angry over its implementation. They were extremely upset that they had not been consulted.
When they elected me, they overwhelmingly rejected the notion of implementing the tax framework act we are looking at today. This has not been handled well at all. Unfortunately most Canadians do not have an opportunity to debate on this. This is a lack of democracy and we need consultation on things like the HST.
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
Mr. Speaker, I rise mostly to welcome the new member to the House. It is a great honour for all of us to be here and constituents have shown great honour to him. I wish him all the best for a successful career here.
However, he talked about fisheries which inspired a question from me. I am very happy there is another person knowledgeable about salmon. I am from Yukon. The king salmon and chinook salmon runs have been way down in the last few years. Would he support my calls for more investigation into the causes of this in the north Pacific, whether it is the Japanese fish, disease or climate change and also a reduction of the bycatch of the pollock fleets in the Bering Sea?
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
I am not sure if there is an aspect of the question that touches on the bill before the House, but I will let the hon. member for New Westminster—Coquitlam try to answer it.