Debates of Feb. 27th, 2013

Employment Insurance

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, their budget choices consist in thanking the friends of their party and cutting services for Canadians. The minister's attacks against job seekers are as arrogant as the Conservatives are incompetent. She did not even consult with unemployment groups, the provinces and people in seasonal industries. She did not even conduct an impact study on her reform. It takes an amateur Conservative government to make changes without understanding the impact of those changes.

Why did the minister not do her homework before carrying out her reform?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, our government's primary objective is economic growth, job creation and long-term prosperity. For us to achieve that, workers need to have the skills that employers require and people who lose their jobs need support without fail. That is what the employment insurance system is there for. That is why we have instituted reforms to help people get back to work with the skills they need to succeed.

[Philip Toone, NDP, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the question was on employment insurance impact studies. The Minister of Veterans Affairs confirmed that they did not conduct a study. They did not do their job.

The Conservatives' ideological attack on employment insurance is not just hypocritical; it is also bad public policy. Experts agree. A poll of economists shows that most of them think that employment insurance reform will not reduce unemployment, and three-quarters of them are against the Conservatives' aggressive measures.

Why do the Conservatives not listen to the experts instead of attacking seasonal workers?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. For seasonal workers, if there is no work in their field in their region, employment insurance will be there for them, as always. However, there is a labour and skills shortage in many parts of this country, and that is why we have expanded the support system for the unemployed, in order to connect them with available positions in their field in their region.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today seasonal workers showed up at the minister's door to tell her exactly what they think of her short-sighted cuts to EI.

When I look out at them in Ottawa here today, I do not see fraudsters and cheats. I see honest, hard-working seasonal workers who want the minister to explain why she is coming after them. I see workers from seasonal industries threatened by politically driven Conservative cuts.

When will the minister call off her witch hunt, cancel her unfair cuts and finally start listening to the industries, provinces and people affected?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, we do know that Canadians want to work, and that is why we have expanded the EI system to help them find the jobs that are available within their skill sets in their geographic areas.

We do have a shortage of skills and labour in many parts of this country. That is why we are working hard to connect those who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own with the jobs that are there for them. If jobs are not available in their local area, then employment insurance will be there for those people and their families, as it always has been.

Pensions

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we all know the Prime Minister's view that seniors should worker longer and harder to qualify for their old age pension. Seniors want to know why they are being forced to take on more debt because the government is unwilling to help them.

Conservatives waste millions of dollars to advertise their so-called economic action plan but offer only cuts for working-class families and seniors. Why does the Conservative vision for prosperity and success exclude Canada's seniors?

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Minister of State (Seniors)]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to seniors poverty, our government has a record we can be proud of. Canada has one of the lowest senior poverty rates in the world, thanks in part to our actions, which include removing hundreds of thousands of seniors from the tax rolls completely, making significant investment in affordable housing for low-income seniors and introducing the largest GIS increase in a quarter of a century. Canadians know that they can count on our government to deliver for seniors.

Veterans Affairs

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the President of the Treasury Board, a man deeply committed to wasting taxpayers' money, advocated spending tens of millions of dollars on advertising in order to tell Canadians what a great job the Conservatives are doing unravelling Canada's social safety net. Meanwhile, his friend, the Minister of Veterans Affairs, is cutting funding for veterans' funerals as the propaganda budget grows.

Why do Conservatives choose propaganda over the dignity of a veteran's funeral?

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Minister for La Francophonie]

Mr. Speaker, contrary to the Liberals, who cut programs and benefits for veterans, let me assure the member that we are investing in our veterans at record levels.

Regarding the funeral and burial program, members do not have to take my word for it. They can just listen to this: “These measures...were adopted to ensure that the delivery of the Funeral and Burial program for our Veterans remains at its present level of quality”.

Who said that? It was the Last Post Fund, ten months ago.

Government Advertising

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Martin government spent $45 million a year on advertising, which is half of what the current Conservative--

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order. The hon. member for Kings—Hants has the floor. I would like to hear the question.

The hon. member for Kings—Hants.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Martin government spent less than half of what the current Conservative government is spending on advertising every year. I know that, because I was the minister responsible. The Conservatives should know that, because it is in their own government advertising report.

Why is the President of the Treasury Board repeating, as he did yesterday, misinformation in this House? Is it because he does not know his files, or is he trying to mislead Canadians?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, I know it was in the distant past when the member was in government, but the facts speak for themselves: it was $111 million in the Liberals' last year in government, and we are spending tens of millions of dollars less than that.

In fact, I remember when that particular fox for Kings—Hants was in charge of the henhouse. The Liberals were spending tens of millions of dollars more on advertising, and he was up in this House saying, “Wait for Gomery”, when we questioned their advertising budget. We waited, and we still want to know where the $40 million is.

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, speaking of Gomery, yesterday Senator Patterson, of no fixed address, was the latest senator caught doing the Mike Duffy shuffle out the back door. It seems we cannot turn on a TV without catching a senator running from accountability. So much for reform.

We now have 17 senators refusing to say if they are even eligible to be in the Senate. Fifteen of them were personally appointed by the current Prime Minister. How many are under investigation? How much money have they had to pay back? Are there going to be consequences for ripping off the taxpayers, and will the Conservatives stop defending the entitlements of these senators?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, because that question has already been answered, let me take the occasion to celebrate some non-fiction Canadian literature that is just out.

I am reading a page-turner, filled with political intrigue, backroom dirty deals and blatant hypocrisy. The starring character is the member for Timmins—James Bay. It is from the independent Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario, and it says of him, “This was the first hint of what the Commission considers to be inappropriate involvement by a Member of Parliament in the electoral redistribution process”.

How can he explain that?

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

Mr. Speaker, trying to stone me to death with popcorn does not change the fact that it is their senators who are under investigation and that Canadians are fed up.

Speaking of Conservative patronage run amok, an arrest warrant has now been issued for Arthur Porter. He is charged with fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, fraud against government, breach of trust and money laundering. Mr. Porter was personally chosen by the current Prime Minister to be the chair of the Security Intelligence Review Committee.

What is with that? When will the government come clean about its relationship with Mr. Porter?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, by lecturing on ethics, that member is making great progress in his effort to make the world a safer place for hypocrisy.

I read from this report that says of him, “This was the first hint of what the Commission considers to be inappropriate involvement by a Member of Parliament in the electoral redistribution process”. It is clear that Charlie is no angel.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order, please.

The parliamentary secretary knows he cannot use proper names. We refer to each other by the riding or title. We also need to stay away from some of the connotations he may have been implying.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, another partisan appointment, another friend of the Conservative Party, and another friend of the Prime Minister finds himself in hot water. Despite all that has happened, the Conservatives refuse to accept responsibility for their antics. Like Brazeau, Wallin and Duffy, Arthur Porter, who was at CSIS, was the Conservatives' man. Porter made generous contributions to the party and the Conservatives returned the favour. But today, he is facing a litany of charges for his involvement in one of the biggest corruption scandals in Canada's history.

When will the Conservatives admit that they lacked judgment in appointing Porter to CSIS?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, Arthur Porter submitted his resignation. It was accepted almost two years ago. The leaders of the NDP and the Liberal Party were consulted prior to his appointment, and they consented to the appointment.

The allegations Mr. Porter is facing do not have anything to do with his former responsibilities.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is easy enough for them to accuse job seekers of fraud, but it is not so easy for them to admit that the real fraudsters are found within their own party.

Take the Senate, for example. Despite the revelations that are piling up about the residency scandal and travel expenses, the Conservatives are still standing up and fighting for their senator friends. Fifteen of their friends, appointed by the Prime Minister and paid with taxpayers' money to do partisan fundraising, are refusing to say where they live.

How much has Pamela Wallin had to pay back? When was the Prime Minister told about this? What will the consequences be?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, our government has introduced a concrete proposal to allow Canadians to make the Senate truly accountable by choosing who represents them in the Senate. What has happened when we have had that bill debated in the House? It has been blocked 17 times by NDP members of Parliament, including, for example, the member for Beauharnois—Salaberry.

What did this NDP member say about the concept of Canadians actually having a say on who should represent them? That member said, “The bill the Conservative government has introduced is a travesty of democratic reform and an affront to Canadians' intelligence”.

It is an affront to Canadians' intelligence that they get to choose who represents them. That is what the NDP gives a standing ovation to.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order, please. I have asked members to wait until the response is finished before they start their applause. I do not think the minister quite finished his response.

We will have to look at getting rid of coffee at caucus meetings, since today is not going as smoothly as other days.

The hon. member for Wild Rose.