Debates of Nov. 7th, 2014

Taxation

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, a new gag order has been imposed on the Conservative caucus. It is all but impossible to get Conservatives to utter the phrase “income splitting”. Even the Prime Minister's lips are sealed, and we all know why. It is bad policy and it will leave 85% of Canadian families empty-handed.

Today, the Canadian Press agreed that this is no baloney. Why can they not just admit that their misguided scheme will mean nothing for the vast majority of families in the country?

Let us see if the minister says “income splitting” in his answer.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Minister of State (Social Development)]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting, because the Liberal finance critic, in 2003, said that income splitting was good. The leader of the Liberal party said that he was misguided, but he clearly is misguided; look who is guiding him on financial policy.

We know that the Liberals would not only reverse income splitting for families, they would reverse it for seniors. They would increase taxes and the burden on seniors and on families. We are going to put more money into the pockets of Canadian families. Liberals are going to take it right out. We are not going to let that happen.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the late Jim Flaherty was concerned that income splitting would not benefit the vast majority of Canadians. He was right.

He talked about single-parent families, families whose kids are in university and families in which both parents have similar incomes. However, an MP who makes $160,000 could get $2,000.

How is that fair?

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Minister of State (Social Development)]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals and the NDP are absolutely on the wrong side of this issue. Every Canadian family with children will benefit, and when it comes to our income-splitting family tax cuts, in fact close to two million families will benefit.

What are the Liberals thinking? What are they doing voting against a great measure that will put money in families' pockets, and in fact, committing to reversing it and reversing it for seniors? One has to wonder, who are they listening to? Who is advising them? It is very bad policy.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, the jobs minister suggested it is only stay-at-home parents who make sacrifices for their kids. Unlike what Conservatives believe, all parents make sacrifices to raise their children. Is this the real reason Conservatives excluded millions of hard-working families from their income-splitting scheme? Do they actually believe millions of single parents and two-income families do not make sacrifices for their kids, or are they just trying to buy votes?

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Minister of State (Social Development)]

Mr. Speaker, it actually was the Liberal member for St. Paul's who said mothers who stay at home are not really doing real work. I think that is an incredibly disrespectful thing.

Here is what we value. We value every single parent in every single family and respect their choices. Whether it is a single mom or a single dad, whether it is a two-income family with both working outside the home, or a family that decides one will work outside the home and the other will stay and work at home, we respect their choices. We will continue to put money behind that respect in the universal child care benefit.

Veterans

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Coalition for Veterans says it plans to boycott all government photo-ops.

It also says it will not agree to be quoted in any news releases until Ottawa improves its treatment of veterans. This government is not doing nearly enough for our veterans, particularly those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

Why is it that veterans have to stage a protest for this government to treat them properly?

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, our government has a strong record when it comes to standing up for Canada's veterans. It is part of the reason we have invested almost $30 billion since coming to office. That is approximately $4.7 billion in new funds.

Almost every single initiative we have brought forward as a government to help Canada's veterans the opposition has voted against. I would encourage the opposition to stop paying politics and support our initiatives.

National Defence

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence is abandoning not only veterans, but also serving military personnel. The Department of National Defence departmental performance report reveals that the level of satisfaction among soldiers regarding the health care they receive is not even 67%, including for mental health care. That falls well below the 90% to 100% targets the department had set.

Why is this government failing to meet its commitments?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we have significantly increased investments in health services for the Canadian Armed Forces, particularly with respect to mental health services. We now have approximately 415 full-time mental health care workers, which is more than double the number there were when we assumed office in 2006. This means that Canada now has the highest ratio of mental health professionals to soldiers in NATO.

We have increased the military health budget by more than $130 million, and this includes boosting the annual health budget by $11.4 million, for a total of $50 million.

We will be tabling the government's response to all these concerns that keep arising from the opposition.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague just pointed out, the rate of satisfaction of Canadian Armed Forces members with the health care they receive is far below National Defence's target levels. Despite the well-known problems in staffing military mental health care, $41 million of spending on health care for soldiers was allowed to lapse last year while the crisis in military mental health unfolded. This is unacceptable.

Why has the current government failed on almost every measure to deliver the needed health care for soldiers and veterans during this urgent crisis?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind everyone here that we inherited the decade of darkness from the Liberal government. Every measure we have brought forward, increasing spending and hiring more people to support our soldiers in health care and mental health care, has been voted against by the NDP. We will continue to do the right thing and hire the appropriate personnel and invest the dollars to help our soldiers who so greatly serve this country. We will continue to ensure that we have all the dollars needed to get the job done.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, they have had a decade to fix it.

This morning, at 9:00 a.m., our Veterans Affairs critic and the member for St. John's South—Mount Pearl were scheduled to tour the Canadian Forces Station St. John's after being invited by the commanding officer. Last evening they were told by the minister's office that a tour could not happen, because the station was not in their riding. No, it is in my riding, a stone's throw from St. John's South—Mount Pearl. The minister knows full well that this facility serves and draws from all of St. John's and the surrounding area and indeed all of eastern Newfoundland. This is outrageous.

Why do the Conservatives continue to treat military assets as if they were political assets instead of the pride of all Canadians?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, members of Parliament can visit bases when it works into the best schedule for our armed forces. They have to remember that right now we have a heightened level of security at all our military bases across this country. These are not parks. These are where people work and have to be concerned.

We will continue to work with members of Parliament to arrange visits at the appropriate times. We want to ensure that the resources of the Canadian Armed Forces are being used wisely at every base across this country.

Veterans Affairs

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the truth is this: Last year, nine Veterans Affairs offices across Canada were closed by the Conservatives. That included more than 3,000 veterans in Thunder Bay who lost their office.

These unnecessary cuts saved the current government just $5 million, the same amount now being spent on advertising about how well the government treats veterans. We have seen the guy dressing in front of the mirror: $5 million. That is $5 million taken from veterans so the government can spend $5 million on advertising.

Why is the minister more focused on papering over his government's atrocious record on veterans than on providing actual care to veterans?

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, our government believes that we have a responsibility to provide benefits and services to veterans nationally. That is why we have created 600 points of service across this country in areas where a district office did not exist. There are many cities, towns, and regions in this country where veterans now have access to Service Canada locations.

I would like to remind that member that where the offices were closed, we put a fully trained Veterans Affairs Canada employee in those locations, and most were in the same buildings.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the relationship between Conservatives and veterans has deteriorated dramatically, precisely because of the government's ongoing failures when it comes to veterans. Most serious is the systematic failure to deal fairly with disabled veterans.

The Canadian Coalition of Veterans says that members will not participate in government photo ops or be quoted in news releases until veterans are better treated by Ottawa.

Why does the government not fully implement the report of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs and provide quality benefits to those who serve Canada so greatly instead of fighting them?

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Veterans Affairs and the government, in its response, have made perfectly clear, we agree with the intent and the spirit of most of the recommendations put forward by the committee in a unanimous report.

This is Veterans' Week. This is an opportunity for all Canadians to honour our veterans who have made a tremendous sacrifice. I would encourage the member opposite to stop playing politics, especially this week, and get on board with the government to support Canada's veterans.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the best way to honour our veterans is by listening to them.

The funeral and burial program has been very hard to access for years now, and yet nearly $1.2 million allocated to the program for 2013-14 was not spent. In other words, 12% of the $10 million allocated to the program was left unused, even though there is a desperate need.

Why did the government not use that money to improve access to the program?

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage the members opposite to get their facts right. It is not the first time they have had difficulty with numbers. I will point them out once again. Our government has invested almost $30 billion since taking office. That is almost $5 billion in new funding.

I would like to remind all members opposite that if they have respect for Canada's veterans, if they truly care about Canada's veterans, they need to support the initiatives this government brings forward. They have opposed virtually every single initiative we have brought forward to support Canada's veterans.

Ethics

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a month ago, the Prime Minister invited some European senior officials to go to Toronto with him for the evening. The Prime Minister requested that they be given the royal treatment, which included flying them back to Europe on a government Airbus. We now know the cost of that royal treatment: $450,000, including $120,000 for an extravagant evening.

How can the Prime Minister justify wasting $450,000, especially since the agreement with the European Union has still not been concluded?

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the Canada-European trade agreement represents an amazing opportunity for our country and for Europe—80,000 net new jobs. The Canada-EU coalition that was announced is working on ensuring that we benefit from the $12-billion injection to our GDP that deal represents.

The real question for this question period today, now that the final text of the agreement is out, is if the NDP is going to oppose yet another trade deal that is great for Canada.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, spending $120,000 on a last-minute reception is simply unjustifiable. This royal treatment for Europeans cost Canadians $34,000 on food and hotels, $13,000 on drinks, $8,000 on music, $19,000 on backdrops, and a total of half a million dollars for a party and a pointless photo op.

Does the minister not agree that this money would be much better spent helping Canadians and Canadian businesses actually benefit from trade opportunities?

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the fact that Conservative governments in Canada have granted 98% of the market access our exporters have.

The European Union market represents 500 million consumers, $17 trillion in its economy, and a huge opportunity for our businesses and for creating employment. One in five Canadian jobs are attributable to trade. We are going to pursue this agreement with gusto.

The real question for that member is this: Will the NDP finally come out and say it opposes this agreement?

Taxation

[Emmanuel Dubourg, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we learned that a Canadian crown corporation used an aggressive tax avoidance scheme to avoid paying $20 million in taxes in Germany. Climate change, international development, the United Nations and now taxes: the Conservative government keeps tarnishing Canada's reputation abroad.

The Conservatives are not credible leaders in the fight against tax evasion, because they themselves are guilty of it. How are the Conservatives going to fix this embarrassing mistake?