House of Commons Hansard #90 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was families.
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Mr. Speaker, time after time, Conservative B.C. MPs stand and talk about how great the HST is and then they deny that they had anything to do with it. They say that it was a provincial decision, but Gordon Campbell now says that it was pressure from the federal government that convinced him to impose the HST with no consultation and no warning.
Who should British Columbians believe? Will the Conservatives finally admit that they were the ones imposing the HST in B.C.?
John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I respect greatly my colleague from Nanaimo—Cowichan but to hear the NDP decry taxes is just a little too rich.
It was this government, as our first order of priority, that brought in a budget that cut the GST from 7% to 6% and then to 5%, and the NDP said no. It wanted to keep the GST high. Shame on that party.
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Mr. Speaker, for over a year, the people of B.C. have been telling the government in every way that they do not want this tax and yet the Conservatives still deny the HST is a problem and they have been misleading their constituents. Now they will not commit to call the byelection in Prince George--Peace River as soon as possible.
The people of Prince George have no MP but there is no sign that the government will move to call that byelection. Is the government so scared of the HST backlash that it will let this seat remain empty?
John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the seat in question has only been empty for three or four days. In fact, the government is not legally able to call a byelection at this time.
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives say that it was the B.C. Liberals and the B.C. Liberals say that it was the federal Conservatives. The reality is that the HST was a group effort of Conservatives, B.C. Liberals and federal Liberals. They formed the grand let's-impose-the-HST-on-B.C. coalition.
Folks in Burnaby and the rest of B.C. know the HST is a bad idea. Why will the Conservatives not take responsibility for their own actions and do something about it?
John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, it was this government that took responsibility for cutting taxes. Just five short years ago, we brought forward a plan to cut taxes, the centrepiece of which was a cut in the GST.
These tax-cutting measures have led average Canadian families to have more than $3,000 more in their pockets. That may not be a lot of money for members of the NDP, but for Canadian families that is an important part of the family budget that is there to conserve their families.
Every time we wanted to cut taxes, the member for Burnaby stood and voted no. He wanted to keep that $3,000 in the government's coffers and not in the hands of B.C. families.
Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, across Canada, 2.7 million Canadians provide care for sick and aging family members. That will increase significantly by 2017 as our population ages. Many of these family caregivers use their own savings and miss time at work to provide this care.
How is it that the government can find $6 billion for unaffordable corporate tax cuts but cannot find a fraction of that to implement the Liberal family care plan?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, our government has been trying to help families in many ways, especially those who are dealing with long-term illnesses. That is why our government introduced an expansion of the EI program to allow the self-employed access to special benefits, including compassionate care benefits that all other employed people in Canada have, so that these people would have the time, supported by our government, to take care of their loved ones.
Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, the programs that exist today no longer reflect the realities facing Canadian families and, as our population ages, pressure will increase even more.
Groups, like the Canadian Nurses Association, the Victorian Order of Nurses, the Canadian Association of Retired Persons and the Alzheimer Society, support our plan to invest $1 billion annually in our Liberal family care plan.
When will the government take action on this important and growing challenge?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, the question is when would the Liberals actually take action on it because this is the fifth time they have provided this proposal. If they had acted on it during any of the four previous times, they would not need to propose it now.
Their sincerity is lacking here. We, on the other hand, have taken action to help families look after their loved ones. We are delivering for Canadians.
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
Mr. Speaker, there are millions of hard-working Canadians who care for sick or aging loved ones at home. They do great work but their family budgets are stretched. Canadians across Canada have welcomed the Liberal family care tax benefit to help them make ends meet.
The Conservatives, however, say that helping caregivers with a tax break would be “reckless”. Instead, it will borrow billions of dollars to cut taxes for big companies. Why are they making such a bad choice for Canadian families?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, we are making good choices for Canadian families. Members need only look at what we have done for families. We introduced the universal child care benefit, creating more spaces. We created the registered disability savings plan to help families look after people with long-term disabilities, which is a real form of home care. We also introduced special benefits under EI, including compassionate care leave for the self-employed.
We are delivering for Canadians. The Liberals are just making empty promises once again, and for the fifth time.
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
Mr. Speaker, governing is about economic choices. The Conservatives are borrowing billions to build prisons to house perpetrators of unreported crime. They are borrowing billions to buy stealth jets without running a competition or even trying to get the best price. However, if a single mother needs time off work to care for her dying father, the Conservatives say that she should use her vacation time, because Canada's Conservative government does not care enough to help.
Why do the Conservatives always make the wrong choice for Canadian families?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. The facts are that when people need to take care of an ailing or dying family member, they do have access to compassionate care leave, supported by EI.
We ensured that family members and even non-family members would be eligible for those benefits. We also introduced those same benefits and made them available to the self-employed.
We are taking care of Canadians families, unlike the Liberals who are offering nothing but cheap promises that they do not intend to keep.
Luc Desnoyers Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government has announced that it plans on spending over $470 billion over 20 years on military procurement. However, we still have not heard about its defence policies, and it still has not shared its foreign policy with the public.
Would it not make sense for the government to first set some defence and foreign affairs objectives and then invest in equipment? Unless the government's policy is nothing more than an extension of Washington's military policy.
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure where the hon. member has been because the Canada first defence strategy was released two years ago. It is a detailed plan that sets out a great deal of detailed work that will be done with respect to the four pillars of defence policy: personnel, equipment, our infrastructure investments and our readiness. It does include investing in the procurement of new equipment for the military.
I look forward to the hon. member's continued support for those military procurements.
Luc Desnoyers Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government jumped into the purchase of F-35s without even ensuring that there would be economic spinoffs for Quebec's aerospace industry. When the time comes to defend the auto industry, which is concentrated in Ontario, the government is right there. But when the time comes to stand up for Quebec and its aerospace industry, the government is nowhere to be seen.
Why does the government refuse to require a minimum level of economic spinoffs for the Quebec aerospace industry?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, keeping in mind that we will be taking delivery of those jets somewhere in the 2016 or 2017 timeframe, at the peak production of these aircraft, we have already incurred almost $1 billion in investment in the Canadian aerospace industry without having taken delivery of a single jet. It is looking very good with $12 billion of opportunity for the Canadian aerospace industry, much of that located in the province of Quebec.
This is perhaps the greatest opportunity that the Canadian aerospace industry has ever experienced. That is why we have the unqualified support of aerospace industry representatives right across the country, including Mr. Claude Lajeunesse.
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has called his legislation, Bill C-16, the Ending House Arrest for Property and Other Serious Crimes by Serious and Violent Offenders Act.
This is untrue for two reasons. First, this measure only applies to those sentenced to less than two years. In addition, the law clearly states that violent and dangerous offenders cannot benefit from this measure.
Daniel Petit ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice
Mr. Speaker, our government believes that people who commit serious and violent crimes should serve their sentences in prison and not in the comfort of their homes. Our bill would clearly tell the courts that house arrest is no longer an option for dangerous and violent criminals.
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Speaker, since sentences of less than two years are served in provincial prisons, including those in Quebec, and since house arrest only applies to sentences of less than two years, it means that if we pass this law, there will be more prisoners in provincial prisons, which are already overflowing, but not one additional person in federal prisons.
Does the minister have any idea how much this will cost Quebec and the provinces? Does he have an estimate of this cost? If so, can he share it with us?
Daniel Petit ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice
Mr. Speaker, in 2006, our government introduced a bill to put an end to conditional sentences for serious and violent crimes. However, the opposition, including the member who has just asked me this question, kept it from progressing on a number of occasions, finally gutting it. That is the reality.
Judy Foote Liberal Random—Burin—St. George's, NL
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives still will not explain why they cut funding for KAIROS, an organization that undertakes overseas development on behalf of 11 churches and religious organizations representing over 20 million Canadians.
The Minister of International Cooperation's department says, “KAIROS continues to meet all the requirements for CIDA funding and continues to do great work helping millions of impoverished people around the world”.
At the last minute, however, the minister herself decided that none of that was important and cancelled the funding.
Canadians deserve an explanation. What is it?
Deepak Obhrai ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the position of the government has not changed on this matter. Our government has been very clear. We have an aid effectiveness strategy and we are acting on it. We are delivering real results for people in developing countries.
All projects funded by CIDA are assessed against our effectiveness standards. After due diligence, it was determined that the KAIROS proposal did not meet the Government of Canada's priorities.
Our priorities are: more food, more education and more help. In other words, our priority is to make a real difference.
Judy Foote Liberal Random—Burin—St. George's, NL
Mr. Speaker, there is still no explanation.
The Conservatives have turned their guns on an organization that the government, as well as Canadians, have supported for 35 years. The Conservatives have abandoned the over five million people in developing countries who KAIROS helps and they have done it despite the fact that CIDA said that KAIROS should qualify for funding. The minister will not even tell us why.
I am giving the minister one last chance to please explain why she denied funding to KAIROS in full knowledge that its good work was aligned with the priorities of and recommendation by CIDA.