Debates of Nov. 21st, 2011

Keeping Canada's Economy and Jobs Growing Act

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, although I appreciate the comments from my colleague on the opposite benches, I obviously disagree with them 100%. When the member tells his constituents he will vote a certain way on the gun registry and then votes the opposite way once elected, is he misleading his constituents before or after he was elected? Which is it? I am not sure what he considers ethical in his position.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Wow, Mr. Speaker, I have just been floored by one of the greatest performances I have ever seen in democratic history, or how about not. I was actually expecting Annie Oakley to ask me the question.

A member from Manitoba actually came to my riding and had maybe 15 people show up.

If the member knew anything--

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. The hon. member for Burlington is rising on a point of order.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, would you remind the member what name calling an individual member can do to other members. That member used inappropriate parliamentary language when he called a member on this side of the House--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, order. In order to evaluate the point of order that the member for Burlington is trying to raise, I do need to hear what he is saying. There is too much noise in the chamber.

I wonder if the hon. member for Burlington could finish his point of order and then we will see where we go from there.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I am finished, Mr. Speaker. I look forward to the report on what defines parliamentary language in reference to somebody else on the other bench.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I thank the member for Burlington for his point of order.

If members are referring to other hon. members in the House, or in the Senate for that matter, it is good to use names that are appropriate to the case, in this case a member of the chamber, either by his or her riding name or, as the case may be, by title if he or she is a parliamentary secretary or minister.

I am sure that the member for Timmins—James Bay will confine himself to that description.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My hon. colleague has one important point. I might have said as a metaphor that she was Annie Oakley and not like Annie Oakley. I referred to someone earlier as Mr. Magoo. Referring to people as historic characters is irrelevant to the issue.

What is relevant is the fact that during the last election I talked to my constituents about the government's lack of plan for pensions. I talked about the government's complete disregard for the lack of rural doctors. The Conservatives came into my riding and the only thing they talked about was guns.

The people of Timmins--James Bay overwhelmingly voted for the New Democratic Party because they knew we were right and they supported us. The Conservative government has nothing to offer, otherwise it would have a Conservative member in northern Ontario--

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cape Breton--Canso.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, maybe some members in the chamber will not know this, and some people who may be watching at home as well, but my friend is a very accomplished Juno nominated songwriter and has written some fabulous songs. Crossin' the Causeway is one of my favourites. It is a great song.

The member would agree with me that one important aspect of songwriting is ensuring that when titling a song, the title should reflect something that is through the actual body of the song.

The title of this particular piece of legislation is “Keeping Canada's economy and jobs growing act”. Because 40,000 fewer Canadians are working this month than last month, would my colleague agree that the government might have missed the target a bit with the title of this particular piece of legislation?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad I received such great respect from my hon. colleague.

He knows the song Crossin' the Causeway is about Cape Bretoners who had to leave to find work in Ontario. Unfortunately, the Conservatives responded by saying that if they did not like it, they could go to Fort McMurray. I have nothing against going to Fort McMurray, but I would like to see some investments in our region in terms of job training so people could stay.

I was actually surprised at what the government has called this bill. It is one of the most bizarre names it could ever come up with. I would have thought it should have been something like “Busted flat in Ottawa” or “Smoke on the water”, but it would probably be better to say “Smoke in the mirrors”. In terms of a credible name for a budget, it certainly does not pass that test. We can work on a song so maybe we can correct that.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today I am honoured to have the opportunity to speak on our budget implementation act. I am pleased to offer my own insight into what I really believe to be a budget for the times. The strength of our economy is referenced again and again by national and international bodies such as the World Economic Forum, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. They all confirm that what we have been doing as a government is the right thing at the right time.

Clearly and indisputably, this budget is what is needed to take us on the road to recovery. However, our government does believe that one must be prudent and realistic, and recognize that challenging times are still ahead. The state of the world economy may still impact us in a negative fashion from forces beyond our control whether they be the Middle East, U.S.A. or Europe. Being a responsible government, we must do what we can and what we will do here is to manage the efficient and effective use of taxpayers' dollars. We must support families and individuals in a caring and compassionate manner.

In this budgetary process we propose and we will promote job creation and economic growth, certainly our number one priority, in a number of ways: by providing a temporary hiring credit for small business to encourage additional hiring; by expanding tax support for clean energy generation to encourage green investments; by extending the mineral exploration tax credit for flow-through shares investors by one year in order to support fully Canada's mining sector; by simplifying custom tariffs in order to facilitate trade and lower the administrative burden for business; by accelerating the accelerated capital cost allowance treatment for investments in manufacturing and processing machinery and equipment for two years in order to support the manufacturing and processing sector; and by eliminating the mandatory retirement age for federally regulated employees in order to give older workers the option to remain in the workforce.

We will support communities by legislating a permanent annual investment of $2 billion in the gas tax fund to provide predictable, long-term infrastructure funding for municipalities. We will enhance the wage earner protection program to cover more workers affected by employer bankruptcy or receivership and we will introduce a volunteer firefighter tax credit for volunteer firefighters.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time this evening with the member for Prince Albert.

By increasing the ability of Canadians to give more to legitimate charities, we will introduce a package of integrity measures designed to help combat fraud and other forms of abuse. We will help families by introducing the new family caregiver tax credit to assist caregivers of all types of infirm dependent relatives. We will remove the limit on the amount of eligible expenses caregivers can claim under the medical expense tax credit in respect of financially dependent relatives. We will introduce a very popular new children's arts tax credit for programs associated with children's artistic, cultural, recreational and developmental activities.

We will certainly invest in education and training by forgiving loans for new doctors and nurses in underserviced rural and remote areas. We will help apprentices in the skilled trades and workers in regulated professions by making occupational trade and professional examination fees eligible for the tuition tax credit. We will improve federal financial assistance for students by making it easier to allocate registered education savings plan assets among siblings without incurring tax penalties or forfeiting Canada education saving grants.

We will respect taxpayers by phasing out the direct subsidy of political parties by closing tax loopholes that allow a few businesses and individuals to avoid paying their fair share of tax.

Yes, by doing all of those things and many more, we are doing an absolutely tremendous service to a significant group across this country. We are supporting families. We are supporting seniors. We are supporting volunteer firefighters. We are supporting small business. We are keeping taxes low. We are keeping Canada on track for balanced budgets. We are supporting our farmers, our forest industry, and our manufacturers. We are investing in our environment. We are supporting students. We are protecting consumers. We are supporting Canada's charities and yes, as I mentioned earlier, we are phasing out per vote political subsidies for political parties which will support all taxpayers and which I note will negatively affect our governing party the most.

The budget implementation bill in process is a comprehensive piece of legislation covering a broad scope of Canadian society. I would like to offer some personal insight on one particular component of the budget and that is the measures for small business.

I was a small business owner for over 35 years, prior to my election in 2004 as a member of Parliament. I have extensive experience in retail, wholesale, hospitality, sports, tourism and trade. As such, I am pleased that we will implement a number of key measures to assist small businesses, which are the cornerstone of our economy. We will do it in a number of ways.

One is by a new-hire credit for small business. This is a temporary one-time credit of up to $1,000 toward a small firm's increase in its 2011 employment insurance premiums over those paid in 2010. This new credit will help up to 525,000 employers defray the cost of additional hiring. That is over half a million businesses, a significant impact for Canada, particularly in the rural areas.

We are reducing the red tape by upgrading the BizPaL service and further consulting Canadians through the Red Tape Reduction Commission. I commend the hon. Minister of State for Small Business and Tourism for the work he is doing.

For our youth entrepreneurs there is $20 million to support the Canadian Youth Business Foundation activities. This foundation works with young entrepreneurs to help them become the business leaders of tomorrow through mentorship, learning resources and start-up financing.

We are extending the work-sharing arrangements to help business keep workers. We are providing $10 million in additional support to assist those employers that continue to face challenges by making available an extension of up to 16 weeks for active or recently terminated work-sharing agreements.

We are extending the accelerated capital cost allowance to help manufacturers and processors make new investments in manufacturing and processing machinery and equipment.

This builds on our government's significant action to reduce taxation for small business where we increased the small business limit to $0.5 million. This refers to the amount of income earned by small business eligible for the reduced federal tax rate where we reduced the small business tax rate from 12% to 11%.

We are lowering the federal corporate income tax rate to 15% by 2012, as passed in Parliament.

These reductions will help create jobs and economic growth for Canadian families and communities.

We have increased the lifetime capital gains exemption. We are helping companies invest in themselves through a temporary 100% capital cost allowance rate for computers. We eliminated the corporate surtax for all corporations in 2008. While the elimination of the surtax benefits all corporations, it is of particular benefit to small business corporations since the surtax represents a larger proportion of their overall tax payable.

In addition, the creation of the Red Tape Reduction Commission has helped reduce unnecessary and ineffective regulations so small business can focus on growing and creating jobs.

Our government recently released a code of conduct for the credit and debit card industry in Canada to protect small businesses.

For much of my life I was very active in the sporting world. I observed that in the game of hockey there are two types of players. There are those who simply heckle and have no focused commitment and there are those who act decisively and get positive results. Our Conservative Party believes that our team must have a solid game plan in order to get that puck down the ice and in the net.

The budget implementation bill would do just that. It certainly deserves the unanimous support of the House. I am pleased to see the overwhelming encouragement and support from my colleagues across the House in support of our initiative.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the last speaker was very proud to repeat that the Conservatives have a policy to support volunteer firefighters. However, upon closer examination of the clause in question—something that I have done but that the members opposite obviously have not—we see some absurd things. Not all 85,000 volunteer firefighters are entitled to this credit. Those who work fewer than 200 hours are not eligible and neither are those who work for the municipality as blue collar workers, white collar workers or first responders.

The remaining 55,000 volunteers have to share the massive amount of $15 million, which means that they get $300 each. And the Conservatives have the nerve to tell us that this is a good policy to support volunteer firefighters. This will not buy volunteers trucks, equipment or training and it will not allow them to participate in a national public safety structure. All the Conservatives have done is talk about supporting volunteer firefighters. Nothing more. And so, I would like the Conservatives to talk a bit more about this measure and what it will really do for volunteer firefighters.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please.

I remind hon. members that it is a good idea to check with the chair from time to time as one is responding or questioning to see the signal so we can keep on time.

The hon. member for Prince Edward—Hastings.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague seems to be suggesting that there is no need for a tax credit, and that we should just give everybody in Canada a refund. Where does he think those kinds of dollars would come from? That would upset the apple cart so much that there would hardly be any dollars left for anything in life.

Governments have to make a decision and that decision is based on what they think will get the best results. We responded directly to the firefighters, to their organization. This is what they asked for. There are 85,000 volunteer firefighters in this country. I have talked to a number of firefighters. We attended the various sessions on the Hill and we attended their organizations. The vast majority of firefighters is very pleased with the government's approach.

There is always the hope that every bill, every option and every motion will cover every person in Canada, but that is not the case. The people I have talked to say this initiative has been very widely accepted by the vast majority of volunteer firefighters.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy the remarks of my colleague from Prince Edward—Hastings.

He talked about the Conservatives having a road map and a vision. I disagree with that, of course, because the problem with their road map and vision is that they leave too many people out.

My question relates to firefighters as well. One of the shortcomings of the government's proposals in several areas is that the tax credits should be refundable. The lower income scale does not qualify for a tax credit. The tax credits need to be refundable.

My question is a simple one. Does my hon. friend really think that a low income earner who is working for a fire department is any less deserving in terms of that assistance from the Government of Canada than a higher income earner who is doing the same work and taking the same risks?

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will just flip that around. If there was a tax credit that the hon. member might be able to use on his farm but his income suggested it was not there, should every dollar that would be used as a tax credit automatically be sent to him as a refund?

That is not doable in today's economy, let alone in a booming economy. I would suggest to the hon. member, with all consideration, that he give his head a shake and try to be real in situations like this.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but contrast the remarks of the member for Prince Edward—Hastings and the remarks of the member for Timmins—James Bay.

Our colleague from Timmins—James Bay talked about his broken promise on the long gun registry and that his constituents were wondering about the plan, what were we doing about doctors and what were we doing about jobs and growth. I think the member for Prince Edward—Hastings answered it very articulately.

I would appreciate it if he would talk about the rural doctor issue.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly know the background of the hon. member and her years of dedication to the health field.

As a person living in a rural area, I can say that it has always been a challenge to have a family physician. We have addressed that in a number of different ways, through relocation fees, subsidy and support. The most important thing is that we are doing what we said we would do. In the March budget, we laid out the elements that we would do. To the shock and horror of the opposition we are doing what we said we would do. We are doing what the Canadian population elected us to do. Is it not refreshing to have some honesty on the scene for once?

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start off by thanking people on the finance committee, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of State (Finance). A lot of work went into the background and creation of this great document that Canadians outright approved of on May 2 when they elected a majority Conservative government.

When we look at the budget, there are many items in it. I will mention a few. There is the volunteer firefighter tax credit, the gas tax fund rebate for infrastructure for municipalities, forgivable loans for doctors, arts tax credits, phasing out political subsidies and closing tax loopholes. That is the tip of the iceberg of a great bill and a great piece of legislation. When we all look at all that, we wonder why anybody would even debate it. All clauses of this bill should have passed at one time, in one sitting, and we could have moved on to other important parliamentary business.

Our government is definitely focused on the economy and jobs. That is our role and that is what we understand Canadians want us to do. That is what we ran on in the last election and that is what this budget is doing.

To start off, I will talk about the forgivable loans for doctors and nurses in rural Canada. When I talk to constituents in my riding, that is the number one issue. They ask where they have to go to see a doctor, why they have to drive to a major centre to see a doctor and why they cannot see a doctor in their small town or even in a little town close by.

When I grew up in Canwood, there was a guy by the name of Dr. Ed. Dr. Ed was on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Everybody remembers Dr. Ed. If it was midnight, we could call Dr. Ed, and he would make sure we were taken care of. That was back in the 1970s and 1980s, and those days are gone. Dr. Ed has moved on, God bless his soul, and now people are looking for a doctor to replace him. Unfortunately, I understand doctors do not want to work 24 hours a day. They want companionship. They want to see their patients in a timely manner and do it in such a fashion that they can enjoy life with their families.

This forgivable loan would do a lot to attract doctors and nurses to rural Saskatchewan. Once doctors are taken out of the city and brought to Nipawin, Carrot River, Melfort or Teesdale, it is amazing how quickly they adapt. Their kids end up playing hockey and sports and their families get involved in the community. This forgivable loan allows us to attract doctors and nurses to rural areas and makes it a lot easier for communities. I have been told on many occasions that the communities that search for doctors feel this is a very valuable tool to help them do that.

That is not the only thing in this budget. There are also gas tax funds for municipalities. Every year I try to visit all the cities, municipalities and regional municipalities. I talk to them about their needs and see where we can work together on projects. They all thank us immensely for the economic action plan and for the stimulus that we started in 2008. They talk about how they added a water treatment plant, a sewage lift station, some culverts or a road. It seems as though every town had a need that it could not get, but under Canada's economic action plan, which the NDP and the Liberals voted against, it was done.

What they are asking now is for the gas tax to be continued. With the implementation of this bill, it will be continued. The thanks we get because of that are amazing. When I talked to the mayor of Prince Albert, that was the first question on his mind. He asked about what was happening with the gas tax dollars. He said those dollars were needed and there were still more projects to do. We are in hard times and we are being very careful and prudent, but we will not balance our budget on their backs, and they can count on the gas tax dollars to flow to them. The funds are bankable and are going to be delivered once this bill passes. That mayor and other municipalities know they have a stream of revenue coming from the federal government that they can bank on and use in their planning when they need infrastructure.

The volunteer firefighter tax credit is something that firefighters have been asking for year after year. All firefighters, volunteer or not, said this was a good program. This is what they asked for and this is what we gave them.

In my riding of Prince Albert, there is a volunteer fire department in the regional municipality of Buckland. Jim Miller runs that volunteer fire department. I took some pizzas out to the guys to say thanks. Actually, a $3,000 credit is a token when we look at the hours these guys put in and what they sacrifice, not only the firefighters but their families as well, whether in fundraising or in trying to raise capital to buy another fire engine. On an emergency call when it is 25 degrees below zero at a nasty car accident that could involve a neighbour, these guys are on the scene. They appreciate the fact that we would acknowledge them and appreciate them. They appreciate the fact that we would thank them for their hard work and service and that we are recognizing this hard work. It is another measure that every party should stand behind. There is no reason to criticize it.

Another thing that was talked about was the arts tax credit. Again, we focused on sports. I am a sports fan; that is who I am. I love hockey and I played every sport when I was in high school. However, for the kids who want to take music lessons, dance, art work or drawing, that arts tax credit is there. It puts them on the same footing as the kid who wants to play hockey. I think that is a fair, balanced and reasonable approach. Obviously taxpayers approve of it, because they showed up on May 2 and voted for it.

We want to be fair to people and make sure that everybody pays their fair share of taxes by closing tax loopholes. Getting rid of unnecessary loopholes would ensure that everybody pays their fair share of taxes, and I think Canadians are proud to take on the responsibility of paying taxes.

I come from a province that used to be a have-not province. We had an NDP that wanted to do everything it could to be a have-not province to get money out of Ottawa. In Saskatchewan we were not proud of that and we told the government that we would rather pay our taxes.

We would rather make some money, pay taxes and contribute to the Canadian economy. We would rather contribute to our local economy by paying some taxes. We appreciate the services that the taxes pay for. We appreciate our doctors and the municipal services, such as roads and water, that we get through our taxes, so we expect people to pay their fair share, nothing more and nothing less. Of course, that is something this government is doing, and we are moving forward on it in this implementation plan.

The last thing I will talk about is respecting taxpayers' money. That is something we have to do as parliamentarians. We have to recognize the fact that this is not our money, but taxpayers' money. We have to respect the fact that they work hard for that money. Whenever we can give them a benefit or a tax break, they appreciate it. It shows we are doing our job here in Ottawa. They do not want to see a whole pile of new programs; they do want to see a whole pile of schemes and mechanisms to try to tax them even more. They understand the importance of tax reduction and they understand the importance of how the economy can grow when taxes are lowered. They can see the economic activity.

In Saskatchewan alone in the last four years, through a combination of good economic planning and tax reduction, that economy has gone from an unemployment rate of around 9% to, as they said last week, 3.3%. That is good stewardship, good tax planning and good governance at both the federal and provincial levels. That is what the taxpayers want out of us and that is what we are providing.

When I look at the phasing out of the political subsidies in the budget and all the things in it that could benefit the average Canadian family from day to day, I wonder why the opposition parties are so concerned over this bill. What is the issue?

It cannot be the volunteer firefighters tax credit, even though they try to discredit it because they know it is a popular part of the budget.

It cannot be the bankable gas tax funds. They cannot be against giving municipalities their gas tax funds. They could not vote against that, but maybe they could.

They cannot be against the forgivable loans for doctors and nurses for rural Canada. That would be crazy.

Are they against the arts tax credit? Is that why they are voting against the budget? Do they not want to see kids take part in arts programs? Do they not want to support Canadian arts and culture? I cannot see that. Is that it?

One thing I could see are the subsidies for political parties. That would make a lot of sense to me. It is their own survival. Instead of going out and raising funds from their contributors and the people who support their causes and their policy, telling people what their policy is, listening to them and getting input into their policy, it is pretty nice for them to get so much per vote. Could that be the reason they are voting against the budget? Do they want to keep their political subsidies?

I looked at the budget fairly closely. It is closing tax loopholes. Are the NDP not against tax loopholes?

Therefore, it comes down to one thing: self-preservation. Can they do the job? Can they go out and actually convince Canadians to support their parties? Is that why they are voting against this budget? Again, it cannot be any of the other issues.

In closing, on May 2, as well as during and before the campaign, I talked to a lot of constituents in the riding of Prince Albert. I listened very closely to what they wanted me to do. One thing was very clear: they wanted respect for their tax dollars. They wanted proper representation in Ottawa. They wanted to see the bickering end. They wanted to see politicians work together when things made sense, and this budget makes a lot of sense. They expect us to work together.

Let us pass this budget and get it done.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the hon. member's speech.

I must confess, we agree on one thing. Like him, I do not like to see taxpayers' money wasted. Unfortunately, on everything else we part company.

I remember when this government introduced the public transit tax measure a few years ago. I was angry to see that it was passed because, with this measure—and I have not had a car for almost three years—I was unable to buy a new bus or hire a single new driver to improve the public transit system in Quebec City.

I think that this measure, like the measures for sport and culture, is funny money to pacify people while billions of dollars in tax breaks are given to large corporations that have created an artificial deficit.

How can the hon. member justify, without laughing, the fact that he is giving only crumbs, very small amounts each month to help families?

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the colleague for his question. He is a new member, so I understand that he is still learning about the process that goes into making the budget and the budget document and the consultation that goes on through the process and how we talk to Canadians.

We go and talk to different members of the industry right across Canada, not just here in Ottawa. We do not stay here in Ottawa when we do finance budget preparations; we go right across Canada, right from Newfoundland to Victoria and up into the Northwest Territories and Yukon. We talk to Canadians about what they want to see, and that is what they see in the budget.

I suppose what scares the opposition parties is that we are doing what we promised. Heaven forbid, the Liberals never did that. Now they are faced with a Conservative government that is going to do what it promised; since they do not know how to handle it, they will vote against it, and that is what they are doing.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I was interested in the comments of my colleague with respect to the gas tax. He went on at some length about how the gas tax is now a guaranteed amount. In actual fact, this budget has capped the gas tax transfer to municipalities.

What I found interesting was how he put it into a conversation. The conversation was, “Oh, we're not going to balance the budget on the backs of municipalities”. I just wonder about the conversation he had with veterans, considering that $226 million is being cut out of the Veterans Affairs budget and hundreds of jobs are being lost. If that was the conversation with municipalities, let us hear about the conversation with veterans.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I find it pretty shameful that the member would be playing partisan politics on the backs of veterans. He knows it is not a cut. He knows that that is just a change in how the process works.

Let me continue with the conversation I had with the mayor at that point in time. He was very nervous when we talked about deficit reduction, because he had experienced what the Liberals did. He experienced having to make those tough decisions on transportation. He experienced how he had to go forward and cut his staff and cut his services. He experienced that.

Under the Liberal government, the provincial governments also experienced it when they cut the number of doctors and hospital beds. My family experienced it also. When my mother was sick with cancer, she experienced those cuts and did that two-hour drive to Saskatoon.

We just said we are not going to do that. That is why he should get behind it.