Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Hull—Aylmer.
I want to begin my speech by sharing an excerpt from a piece of correspondence I recently received from a woman on Manitoulin Island.
She wrote:
I am a senior receiving OAS and supplement. My employment income for 2012 was $5,735.64 which is $2,235.64 above the allowable $3,500.
As a result $50.00 is deducted from my supplement each month.
Yes, I have a problem providing myself with food, rent, especially paying bills for a dentist and new eye glasses.
I wish I could say that hers is an isolated case, but I have a small mountain of messages on that exact issue. Clearly these are people looking for a little relief, and given that they took the time to write their MP, they may also have been paying attention when the finance minister delivered his budget. If so, they would have been disappointed by what many are calling a do-nothing budget.
However, I am not happy just calling it a do-nothing budget. I think we are doing the finance minister a big favour with that description, because this budget does an awful lot when we consider how much in the way of clear, identifiable needs it does nothing to address.
For so many Canadians, the basic message of the budget amounts to “Your concerns are of no importance to your government, which is more interested in focusing on a single, self-serving goal.”
Therefore, instead of thinking of it as a do-nothing budget, let us consider what the budget actually does.
It signals the government's acceptance of an ongoing economic recovery that cannot replace the full-time jobs we lost in the recession.
As I mentioned, the budget tells our seniors living in poverty that the government has no plan to either address the problem or to reduce the pinch felt by those who are able to work to supplement their income only to be subjected to a mean-hearted clawback.
The budget tells our disabled community that the smaller agencies who help them so much will not be receiving support, which in turn translates into less support for the disabled across the country.
The budget tells our first nations that they will have to wait, again, for money to improve underfunded schools. It has nothing to improve first nations access to post-secondary education or to ensure adequate resources for the post-secondary student support program.
The budget also tells families waiting for a national dementia strategy that they will have to continue to wait.
The budget tells the communities, individuals, and businesses that rely on tourism in northern Ontario that creating a pre-election surplus is more important than the region's economic prosperity.
The budget goes on to tell small businesses that the government is not interested in continuing with a focused tax credit to assist with the hiring of new employees.
The budget also tells the forestry sector that the forestry industry transformation program will remain underfunded.
The budget tells communities with important federal infrastructure that the government is not interested in assisting with their local economy anymore.
The budget does nothing to make post-secondary education more affordable or accessible.
I am sure we could do this all day, but the point is that we should not be slapping the Minister of Finance on the back when all that he really has done is dismiss so much need in the pursuit of a single goal designed to benefit the Conservative Party of Canada alone.
Northern Ontario's economy is facing many problems, particularly those related to the boom and bust cycle, which typically affects resource-based jobs. The region has a large number of small businesses, many of which are involved in tourism.
After the budget came down, people in the region wondered whether the Conservatives cared about them at all. They have reason to wonder since the budget made no mention of northern Ontario or its economic development agency, FedNor.
Small businesses in the region work just as hard as anyone, and they would like to know that the government appreciates their efforts and that the billions of dollars they help generate in economic activity are important to the Canadian economy.
Recently, however, the owners of these small businesses have felt as though they are being attacked, and the communities where they run their businesses feel as though they have been abandoned by the government, which continues to deprive the region of its support.
In the few years I have been in this place, we have seen the government walk away from heritage lighthouses that were tourist attractions on the Great Lakes. It is walking away from a modest investment in passenger rail on the Algoma Central Railway, which supports good jobs all along the line from Sault Ste. Marie to Hearst.
In the budget, we see the government will continue to walk away from its responsibilities for federal ports as well. People on Manitoulin Island have just been through the wringer with the government's refusal to accept its clear responsibility to maintain the port in South Baymouth. Now they are bracing themselves as the government prepares to transfer the costs of federal ports onto small communities, communities that have grown local economies to serve tourists who arrive by boat.
However, the problems that flow from this budget are not limited to small tourist-focused businesses. The budget is going to affect all manner of small businesses by eliminating the small business hiring credit. This amounts to the Conservatives turning their backs on job creation opportunities in about 560,000 businesses across the country. The credit was generally used by companies with 20 to 35 employees or less and cost $225 million annually. However, job creation that bolsters small business is not as important for the government as getting re-elected in 2015.
First nations are getting mixed messages in this budget as well, which is in keeping with the relationship the Conservatives have forged with these communities. Despite changing its tune on first nations education, the government has taken a page from the Liberal playbook, which amounts to strong language and distant commitments, but precious few dollars.
There is no reason to delay increased funds for education in these communities. The chronic underfunding is well documented, and every day the government waits to address this need is another day lost in the struggle to bring better results for the young people in Canada's first nations.
When it comes to first nations, the budget makes blue-sky commitments for 2015 and beyond. What money it does allocate to continue the first nations water and waste water action plan and to continue the aboriginal justice strategy still falls short of what is needed, so we see that the well-being of first nations and our aboriginal population remains a low priority for the government, which is preoccupied with its own needs.
I mentioned just how important the resource-based economy is to northern Ontario. The forestry sector in particular has been dealing with significant problems on a number of fronts. Since the current government came to power, 30,000 jobs have been lost in this sector in Ontario alone.
We know that the Forest Products Association of Canada asked the government for $500 million in assistance over six years under the forestry industry transformation program but received only $90.4 million over four years, which represents a shortfall of $410 million.
This once again shows that the government is not prepared to stand up for northern Ontario's or Canada's forestry sector.
Many of us have met over the last few years with delegations from the Alzheimer Society of Canada, which has been advocating for a national dementia strategy. As our population ages, Alzheimer's will only become more of a challenge, and from my own experience, I can say that families already living with the difficult reality of this disease are hearing that their struggles are of no concern to the government. I say that because that is the message sent by refusing to commit to the $3 million requested by the Alzheimer Society of Canada that would let it lay the foundation for the national dementia strategy.
The list of snubs can add up quickly, and while the government sets itself up to hoard cash, household budgets are stretched to the limit. There is little beyond signals of intent in this budget.
In northern Ontario, high gas prices are a constant problem, and New Democrats have long advocated for an ombudsman to ensure that consumers are not being gouged at the tank. While there is some recognition of gas price disparity in the budget, the focus is on cross-border disparity, and even that is nothing more than big language with no details or timelines.
Finally, changes to the way the government administers funding for national disability is a point that I will get to later.
I just want to indicate that these are just some of the things that this budget does. I am certain that my colleagues will continue to inform the government of the widespread effects of its budget, which is anything but a do-nothing budget.
I have so much more. I hope to get it done during questions.