Debates of Feb. 24th, 2014

Democratic Reform

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

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been heard and they will continue to be heard as we move forward with the fair elections act.

However, moments ago, the Leader of the Opposition was complaining about the exemption of fundraising calls from the spending cap. In fact, under section 435 of the existing act, Elections Canada pays half the cost of all election time expenses of political parties. If we include fundraising calls, then taxpayers will be forced to subsidize 50% of the cost of fundraising calls. We do not think that is appropriate. Apparently, neither did the NDP in its last leadership race when it exempted those costs as well.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that unilaterally changing election laws to favour the government is wrong. A minister who refuses to face ordinary people about changes to our democracy is wrong. Is the minister really that afraid of having to meet people who do not agree with him, or does he find the thought of meeting Canadians and consulting them just too daunting?

I ask the minister this. What are the government's real reasons for refusing to allow Canadians to have hearings on this bill?

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

Mr. Speaker, I think I have demonstrated right before them that I am prepared to face their disagreements on the floor of the House of Commons. Unfortunately, their disagreements came before they even read the bill. It is important for them to understand that, in particular, this fundraising provision exists in the NDP's own rule book, and if the Leader of the Opposition says that the change involves cheating, then he means that he cheated in his own leadership—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order, please.

It was just a few moments ago that I urged members to stay away from that word. Maybe the member forgot, but it was just a few rounds ago. If I have to keep interrupting the flow of question period, we are going to lose some time and members may not get to their questions.

The hon. member for Hamilton Mountain.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let us try again, and this time let us be clear. The minister is happy to spend over $600,000 for other committees to travel. He is happy to throw away millions more on 59 Conservative appointments to the Senate. Yet the government draws the line on hearing from Canadians about fundamental changes to our elections.

Clearly, these changes are controversial. Will the minister now do the right thing and agree to the NDP's proposal to launch public consultations on this bill?

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

Mr. Speaker, the fair elections act does do the right thing. It puts everyday Canadians in charge of democracy by putting special interests on the sidelines and rule breakers out of business. It closes loopholes to big money, ends fraudulent voting, and makes it easier for law-abiding citizens to cast their ballots. Furthermore, it will crack down on rogue calls by political imposters by bringing jail time to that offence and a broad registry so that we can track automated calls and prevent abuses in the future. This is the fair elections act. Canadians are asking for it. Let us move forward. Let us study it. Let us get it done.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' bill will deprive many young students and low-income seniors of their votes, and it will make life harder for people who do not have ID or who have a disability. The Conservatives are always coming down hard on the most vulnerable people in society. Today we are offering the minister a chance to get out of the Ottawa bubble. Will there be a free vote on the NDP motion for public consultations on C-23?

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

Mr. Speaker, voters can already use any of 39 forms of identification accepted by Elections Canada. In addition, the fair elections act will require Elections Canada to inform voters about the pieces of identification needed to vote in an election. Yes, voters need more information, and that is what the fair elections act will give them.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I get the feeling the minister is afraid of what Quebeckers have to say about his reform.

Can the minister tell us whether all aspects of his reform are constitutional and in line with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Has he received legal opinions about this and, if so, will he make them public?

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

Mr. Speaker, in the recent Henry v. Canada decision in the B.C. Court of Appeal, the court found that the requirement to prove identity and residence before voting was justified as a reasonable limit on voting rights under section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That being said, we need to ensure that every Canadian is aware of the identifications that are allowed and required of them. There are 39 identifications.

There will be an additional voting day on which Canadians can cast their ballot. This will ensure that all Canadians can cast their ballot and that the franchise will continue to be universal. We will ensure that the law is implemented to that effect.

Finance

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

Mr. Speaker, during the last 13 years of the Liberal regime, middle-class incomes stagnated. Salaries increased by only $1.07 or 8¢ a year in real terms.

The Conservative government decided to continue in the same direction, with attacks on employment insurance, unions and pension plans. These concrete measures help reduce the debt load of middle-class Canadians and make life more affordable them.

The report in question has been gathering dust in a government drawer somewhere for seven years. Why is the government ignoring it? Why is it leaving the middle class to fend for itself?

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

Mr. Speaker, every year the NDP steps forward at budget time and asks the Government of Canada to pick the pockets of Canadians. Every year that party comes forward with suggestions to spend, spend, spend, whether it is payroll taxes like EI or other payroll taxes.

We continue to put money back into the pockets of Canadians because we understand the difficulties that middle-class, ordinary Canadians face daily. Those difficulties would increase immensely with opposition parties coming forward and asking us to spend, spend, spend.

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

Mr. Speaker, the government's own research confirms how Canada's middle-class has been in a long decline. Between 1993 and 2007, middle-class incomes grew at just one-quarter of the rate of high-income Canadians. By 2008, 40% of middle-class families were spending more than they earned.

Middle-class Canadians suffered badly under the Liberals, and the Conservatives have only made matters worse with their attacks on EI, collective bargaining, and retirement support.

Will the government finally take action to help middle-class Canadians get a raise?

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

Mr. Speaker, the greatest threat to the middle class would be a $20 billion carbon tax. The greatest threat to the middle class would be the piling on of more taxes, taking more from their pockets. The middle class has been very well served by this government. Over one million new jobs have been created since the deepest part of the recession.

The IMF and the OECD have both projected that Canada will have among the strongest growth in the G7. That is good for all classes of Canadians.

[Annick Papillon, NDP, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as we know, Canadian families are carrying more debt than ever before. They are mortgaging their future.

Middle-class salaries have been stagnating for many years as a result of the failure to act by consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments.

The NDP is proposing concrete solutions, such as putting a cap on transaction fees, reducing credit card interest rates and limiting gas price fluctuations.

When will this government take action to help the middle class?

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

Mr. Speaker, why does the NDP oppose a budget that is receiving such strong praise from all across the country? Here is just a small list of the organizations that praise economic action plan 2014: Imagine Canada, Special Olympics Canada, the Association of Canadian Community Colleges, the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, Polytechnics Canada, the Royal Canadian Legion, the Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, and the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. All of these line up with praise.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, once again the minister forgot to talk about Canadians and middle-class families that have fallen farther and farther behind while the Conservatives and previous Liberal governments have refused to act. From families being squeezed by unfair fees, to gouging at the gas pumps, to predatory rates from payday lenders, New Democrats have made a series of proposals to make life more affordable, but the Conservatives refuse to work with us. The government's own report says middle-class families need help, but empty promises do not pay the bills and do not put food on the table.

Why are the Conservatives refusing to make life more affordable for Canadians?

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

Mr. Speaker, this budget contains measures that make the tax bills lower for all Canadians. Again, we will not cave in to the opposition party, which continually comes asking for a spend, spend, spend budget.

We have cut taxes 160 times. We will come to a balanced budget in 2015. We will come forward with policy and a plan that continues to build jobs in Canada and make certain taxes are lower. Whenever we do that, we can be assured of a couple of things. First of all, the Liberals and the NDP—

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order, please. The hon. member for York West.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in 2008, the Conservatives misled Canadian farmers and truckers once again by promising to cut the diesel excise tax in half. They vowed that this would “benefit consumers who buy virtually anything that moves...”. After more than five years, their only movement is a retreat, a full reversal by a government that lacks credibility. Farmers, truckers, and all consumers are still waiting for this reversal to happen.

Would the minister agree that this broken promise goes to prove that we cannot trust the Conservative government?

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

Mr. Speaker, we can go through tax after tax that this government has cut. Perhaps what we should do is listen to what some of Canada's best economists speak about when they talk about this budget.

In today's National Post, Jack Mintz said:

While the Liberals might think the federal government has capacity to pump up debt-financed spending, the facts speak for themselves....

The Conservative government has done a good job by steering the federal government toward a balanced budget since the Great Recession.

We continue to have a plan.

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

Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to introduce income splitting, which he described as “an historic step forward to achieve greater fairness for families”. Two weeks ago, he broke his election promise and abandoned his commitment to something he described as fair. Why?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have made a commitment that, once this budget is balanced, we will continue to provide greater relief for Canadian families. That is exactly what we intend to do. Only the Conservatives can be trusted to lower taxes for families. We introduced pension income splitting for seniors. The opposition voted against it. As a result of our low tax plan, the average Canadian family pays $3,400 less this year to the tax man than it did while the Liberals were in power.

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

Mr. Speaker, that is no answer. Two years ago, the Conservatives made a solemn election commitment on income splitting. Two weeks ago, the Minister of Finance said that commitment needed more research. More research? From the C.D. Howe Institute on the right to the Centre for the Study of Living Standards on the left, think tanks have panned the proposal.

Just as important, do the Conservatives not do the research on election promises before they make the promises rather than two years later?