Debates of Feb. 10th, 2014

Democratic Reform

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I am always encouraged when there is some lucidity on the front benches of the Conservatives. “This NDP government”—it sounds so good. We can hardly wait.

The Conservatives' electoral “deform” bill will be bad for voter participation. Two out of three young people—65%—between the ages of 18 and 25 did not bother to vote last time around. Most of those who did vote used their voter information card. That will be illegal next time.

How can criminalizing a practice that helps people vote be good for democracy?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, one in six of those cards contains an error, so they are not a secure piece of identification. However, there are 39 other ways for people to identify themselves, including student cards, which is something students have, obviously.

We will also require Elections Canada to do a better job of informing people, especially students, about acceptable pieces of identification.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, even he cannot prevent us from celebrating Alexandre Bilodeau's gold and Mikaël Kingsbury's silver.

The Conservatives' unfair election act would put a gag order on the Chief Electoral Officer. That includes scrapping the student vote program, which has engaged 500,000 Canadian young people and promotes the importance of voting. When we know that 65% of young people did not bother to vote last time around, we know how important this is.

Since when is teaching kids about the importance of voting a partisan issue?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, half of young people were not even aware that they could vote before election day. If they were working or studying on the day the vote was held, they did not have a chance to cast a ballot. The fair elections act would require Elections Canada to better inform young people of all of the voting opportunities available to them. Furthermore, a quarter of non-voting youth said they were not aware of where, when, or how to cast a ballot, and those were some of the reasons that they did not vote.

The fair elections act would ensure they have all that information so that they can participate in democracy.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, in the last election it was the Chief Electoral Officer who warned Canadians about voter suppression through the Conservatives' voter-suppression robocalls. The Federal Court has concluded that the Conservative database was in fact the source of those calls. However, under the Conservatives' new gag order, the CEO would not be allowed to talk to Canadians about anything except when, where, and how to vote.

Why do the Conservatives want to stop Elections Canada from telling? Why do they want to stop Canadians from learning about their voter fraud?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition could not be further from the truth. In fact, the fair elections act would change section 18 of the Canada Elections Act to shift the advertising function of Elections Canada towards the basics of voting: where, when, and what ID to bring.

In other sections in the existing Canada Elections Act, sections 533, 534, 535, and others, not only is the CEO allowed to speak, but he is required to speak, through reports to Parliament and testimony before a parliamentary committee, which automatically become public. That would remain the case with the fair elections act.

The Budget

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in last year's budget, the Conservatives imposed tariffs that raised the cost of everything, from wigs for cancer patients to baby carriages. They also introduced a bogus job training program that went nowhere, because the provinces were being treated unfairly.

Will the government fix those two mistakes in tomorrow's budget?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Minister of State (Finance)]

Mr. Speaker, again, it is a bit rich for the Liberal Party of Canada to criticize our government's record on job creation. Again, like the other opposition party, Liberals have voted against every job creation measure that this government has brought forward.

We froze the EI rates to provide certainty and flexibility to workers and employers. We cut taxes for manufacturers so they could purchase new equipment and invest back in their own businesses. We have provided $70 billion in job creation infrastructure.

The budget is tomorrow. I would encourage that member to have patience until tomorrow.

Intergovernmental Relations

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, Conservative job creation last year was the worst since the recession. There are nearly a quarter of a million more jobless Canadians today than when the recession began. Young Canadians have 262,000 fewer jobs. In the face of that crisis, will the government accept provincial offers to fix the nonexistent jobs grant? Will it improve access to all categories of post-secondary education and training? And will it fill the $3-billion hole it created in the build Canada fund for municipal infrastructure?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Minister of State (Finance)]

Mr. Speaker, all through and across this country, we have heard from Canadians that they want us to continue on the program to help create jobs and to build this economy. Even though the global economy remains fragile, especially in the United States and Europe, our economic policies have helped to protect Canada. There have been over one million net new jobs created since July 2009. Of those jobs, 85% are full-time jobs, and over 80% of them are in the private sector.

The IMF and the OECD say that Canada has a plan and it is working.

Employment

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, middle-class Canadians are worried about jobs and financial uncertainty. Their incomes are stagnant but household debt is away up. Most do not have retirement security. Most do not think they can afford post-secondary education for their kids. Their children may not have the opportunity to do as well as they did.

To relieve some of the pressure, will the Conservatives eliminate the tariff taxes it imposed last year on consumer goods, tariffs not paid by foreigners but by middle-class Canadians? Will they reduce their job-killing burden of higher EI payroll taxes?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Minister of State (Finance)]

Mr. Speaker, 160 times this government has lowered taxes. Every time, the opposition parties have voted against them. We have frozen the EI premiums, the payroll tax. The opposition voted against it. With regard to tax cuts for manufacturers, the opposition voted against it.

The budget comes tomorrow. I would encourage the opposition to wait until tomorrow. It will find that this budget will help create jobs, bring us to balance in 2015, and it will keep our taxes low.

The Budget

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, tens of thousands of Canadians are dropping out of the labour force. Over 20,000 gave up the search for work in January alone. Nearly 300,000 more Canadians are unemployed now than before the recession.

Will the government use tomorrow's budget to help Canadians get back to work? Will it increase the hiring tax credit for small businesses and restore the ecoENERGY retrofit program? Will it help Canadians?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Minister of State (Finance)]

Mr. Speaker, under the action taken by our Conservative government, Canada will continue to have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the G7 and one of the lowest youth unemployment rates in the G7.

In fact, since 2006, our government has helped put 2.1 million young Canadians back to work through job training and skills development. Despite this action, we recognize that more can be done. We look forward to the budget tomorrow.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, far too many Canadians are giving up on the Conservative government because it is not creating enough jobs.

Over 1.3 million Canadians are still out of work and are struggling to pay their bills. This is taking a toll on our economy. Conservatives might be happy to ignore this, but the IMF has raised serious concerns about the impact of skyrocketing household debt, now at $1.4 trillion, and the impact this has on our economic performance.

Will the government take action in tomorrow's budget to make life more affordable for middle-class Canadians? Will it crack down on payday lenders? Will it ensure that people have access to a low-interest rate credit card?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Minister of State (Finance)]

Mr. Speaker, we clearly do not want Canadians to be overextended. We have cautioned Canadians repeatedly that interest rates are at an all-time low and will inevitably increase. Our priority is to ensure that Canadians can make informed financial decisions.

She quoted the IMF. Let me quote from the report:

The Canadian economy strengthened in 2013 [...] Economic growth is expected to accelerate....

It also went on to say:

Executive Directors commended the authorities for their continued sound macroeconomic and financial sector management.

We have had a long-term plan. The long-term plan is working—

Employment

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

Mr. Speaker, for nine years, consumers have been waiting for real action and young people have been abandoned by the Conservatives.

I would like the Minister of State for Social Development to set her notes aside and understand that 280,000 jobs for young people have been lost since the last recession and that less than 10% of those jobs have been recovered. Over the past year, 67,000 young Canadians have lost a full-time job.

What measures have the Conservatives proposed or will they propose to create jobs for young people in the private sector, particularly in small and medium-sized businesses?

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

Mr. Speaker, our economic action plan and our government are delivering real results for young Canadians. We have our youth employment strategy, which includes skills link, career focus, and paid internships. Every time we propose these pieces of legislation, the opposition votes against them.

We will not be deterred by that. We are proud of what our young people are doing in Canada. We know that we can do better. We are going to support them and see them be the best young Canadians that we have.

Democratic Reform

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on the weekend, the Chief Electoral Officer said:

My reading of the act is that I can no longer speak about democracy in this country.

That is essentially what the bill says. The Chief Electoral Officer will be forbidden from discussing topics that have not been pre-approved by the Conservatives.

How will muzzling the Chief Electoral Officer promote voter turnout?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, the question is based on misinformation.

Firstly, the changes we are making to section 17 of the Canada Elections Act will shift Elections Canada's ads to more practical notions such as how, where and when to vote. That is the information that Canadians need, young Canadians in particular. Secondly, the Chief Electoral Officer will continue to be obliged to speak before Parliament and before committees.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in reality, the new bill limits what information the Chief Electoral Officer can provide the public on four topics: how to become a candidate, how to add one's name to the voters list, the location and date of the vote, and the identification that is required for voting. The bill would even make it illegal for the Chief Electoral Officer to participate in a media scrum like the one he spoke to as he was leaving the Parliamentary committee on Thursday.

Why have the Conservatives added this clause, which violates the basic principles of freedom of expression?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP members have not read the Canada Elections Act. Sections 533, 534 and 535 already require the Chief Electoral Officer to testify and submit a report before Parliament, which automatically becomes public. These sections are not being changed in any way in the Fair Elections Act.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are tilting the playing field to their advantage. Their removal of the ability to take an oath and vouch at the polls would impact some groups more than others.

The Chief Electoral Officer said, “Groups that come to mind are aboriginals, young people, even seniors who...have increasing difficulty producing proper ID documents”.

Experts are warning that these changes are likely unconstitutional.

Why does the minister want to make changes that would make it harder to vote and that are likely unconstitutional?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, the member is wrong. Twenty-five per cent of cases where vouching was used resulted in irregularities, according to Elections Canada's own reports. The same reports said that the irregularities were serious in nature.

In fact, the Ontario Superior Court invalidated some votes as a result of the irregularities related to vouching. Now the fact that the Supreme Court later overturned that ruling does not change the fact that it is very serious when any judge has to invalidate votes because of vouching irregularities.

There would continue to be 39 acceptable pieces of ID, and Elections Canada would be required to inform Canadians what they are.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has to stop playing fast and loose with the facts and start answering questions.

The minister knows full well that the 25% statistic for vouching while voting has nothing to do with fraud. It refers to the fact that “the tick [box] confirming that vouching was required was not checked”.

Does the minister really think that unchecked tick boxes are the biggest dangers that our voting system faces, and does he really feel this justifies making it harder for Canadians to exercise their right to vote?