Debates of March 24th, 2014

Foreign Affairs

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the situation in Ukraine continues to escalate. Russian forces are expanding their takeover of Crimea. They are conducting massive military exercises on Ukraine's border. Russia is now even imposing sanctions on Canadians.

Can the government update us on what action Canada is taking with our allies in response to Russia's criminal assault on Ukraine?

Can the government give us an update on the situation in Ukraine and the new measures that Canada plans to take with respect to Russia?

[David Anderson, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, our government has taken a strong stance in support of Ukraine. We will continue to take action to limit the capabilities of individuals responsible for undermining Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity and facilitating Russian military action against Ukraine.

We have imposed travel bans and economic sanctions against a number of Russian and Ukrainian individuals. Most recently, the latest round of sanctions was imposed just last week.

We will continue to voice our extreme displeasure with the Russian Federation on a variety of levels and will continue to co-operate closely with our G7 partners and allies.

Justice

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court rejected the appointment of Marc Nadon to the highest court in this country.

The court's ruling was clear: the Prime Minister appointed someone who was not eligible, and his amendments to the Supreme Court Act were unilateral and illegal.

Can the Minister of Justice tell us once and for all that the Conservatives will accept the Supreme Court's decision, that Marc Nadon's appointment was inadmissible, and that they will not try to get around the ruling in any way?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, before Judge Nadon was appointed, the minister of justice sought the opinion of former Supreme Court justices Binnie and Charron. Their opinion was analyzed and was supported by another former Supreme Court justice, as well as a respected constitutional law professor.

That is why we were genuinely surprised by the Supreme Court's decision. We think that all parties would agree that Judge Nadon is a distinguished and well-respected legal expert. We are currently reviewing the details of the decision.

Securities

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, it is just one disaster after another with this member.

The Nadon fiasco is just one example among many where the Conservatives have refused to follow the rules, consult the provinces or work with the opposition.

Here is another example: the former finance minister used every trick in the book to circumvent the Constitution and ignore the Supreme Court by imposing a national securities commission, despite provincial opposition.

Will the new Minister of Finance commit to abandoning this unilateral plan for a national securities commission and start following the rules and the Supreme Court decision and respecting the provinces?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to stand for the first time in this House as Canada's Minister of Finance and to follow in the footsteps of my great predecessor, the MP for Whitby—Oshawa.

I appreciate the warm wishes I have received from across the country.

I hope that the leader will give the NDP critic an opportunity to ask a question. After all, he paid $40,000 for the privilege.

Democratic Reform

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

So, Mr. Speaker, the answer is no, they are not going to follow the Supreme Court ruling.

All across the country, Canadians oppose the Conservatives' electoral deform. Thousands of people want their voices to be heard and are taking part in public consultations held by the NDP. These consultations became necessary because the Conservatives refused to consult Canadians. However, it is not too late for the Conservatives.

I therefore invite the Minister of State for Democratic Reform to take part in a consultation being organized by the NDP.

Is he willing to come to Gatineau next Saturday to hear what Canadians have to say about his botched bill?

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his invitation. It is very kind, and I very much appreciate his gesture.

I invite all Canadians and the NDP to call witnesses to appear before the committee, so that we can examine the fair elections act. The bill will protect the interests of our system, improve our electoral system and protect our democracy.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the minister will not listen to Canadians at public hearings, but will he listen to the hundreds of political science and law professors warning that the bill would make it more difficult to vote?

Will he listen to the Chief Electoral Officer who said that, under the bill, “...Canadians will be denied the right to vote”.

Will he listen to the Ottawa Citizen that said the bill radically restricts the role of Elections Canada or The Globe and Mail that said, quite simply, the bill deserves to die?

The bill is not about improving democracy, is it? It is really about improving the Conservatives' chances in the next election.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me cite an expert right here who commented recently, after it was revealed that there were 50,000 serious irregularities relating to vouching. This expert said:

It goes to a fundamental question of the defence of our democratic institutions.... If we can't even guarantee that the people who are voting are entitled to vote, and that can throw off the results of an election, all is being lost.

Do members know who said that? It was the leader of the NDP.

Infrastructure

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

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the new finance minister to his role, where he is going to be deciding how much the government will invest in infrastructure.

On April 1, federal infrastructure funding is set to be cut by 90% because his predecessor made this cut to try to balance the books before the election.

However, these cuts will hurt middle class families, who will face rising property taxes.

Would the new finance minister reverse this cut, put middle class families first, and fix our crumbling infrastructure?

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Minister of Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting to hear this MP say my predecessor worked to balance the budget, when his leader said the budget would balance by itself. We know that is strongly different. We have no lessons to take from the Liberal Party regarding infrastructure funding. Billions of dollars have been invested since 2006, and billions will continue to flow. Since 2007, we have invested $33 billion.

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

Mr. Speaker, that money is largely back-end loaded. In fact, on April 1, the fund will be cut by almost 90% and it will not return to today's levels until 2019.

We still have communities with crumbling roads and bridges, overcrowded public transit, and outdated water treatment plants. To fix these problems, communities are going to have to hike property taxes, and that will hurt middle class families.

Why is the finance minister forcing communities to hike their property taxes or just to wait five years to fix crumbling infrastructure?

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Minister of Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, the preamble is totally wrong. Earlier this year, we announced the details of the longest and largest infrastructure plan in Canada's history: the $53 billion building Canada plan. We have sent the renewals of the gas tax fund to all the provinces since November 5, many are on the way to being signed, and we will invest this money very soon.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is just one week left before the beginning of the new fiscal year, and the Conservatives are celebrating by cutting the building Canada fund by nearly 90%.

The Conservatives are misleading Canadians by failing to tell them that they are reserving most of the infrastructure money for well after the next election. Yes, I congratulate the new Minister of Finance on his appointment, and I invite him to tell us whether he intends to fix the huge infrastructure gap that the government has created.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Minister of Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, that statement is totally false.

We launched the longest and largest infrastructure plan in the history of Canada, with $53 billion. We have already sent every province the gas tax fund renewal and the GST rebate. We are on track to sign agreements with the provinces. Never, in the history of Canada, has a government invested as much as we have. We will continue to do so.

Finance

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as the official opposition critic for finance, I welcome the member for Eglinton—Lawrence to the top job.

Let us begin. His predecessor caused great concern among economists and markets when he referred to quantitative easing actions by the U.S. fed as “printing money”. Does the Conservatives' new financial minister agree with that somewhat unique assessment?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the use of quantitative easing did not have to be resorted to in Canada. It started in Japan. The United States is still doing it. We think, though, it will be finished this year. It is a non-conventional way to expand the monetary supply. It was not necessary in Canada because our banks were in solid condition and the economy was not in the same shape.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, here is another non-conventional idea. The previous minister of finance was also not much of a fan of the Conservative income splitting scheme. He publicly cast doubt that it would “benefit our society”. I am sure the new finance minister's friends on Bay Street love the plan, but the reality is that over 85% of Canadians will not see a dime.

Why does the finance minister side with the wealthiest few and cause the hard-working families in this country not to receive any benefit whatsoever?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said clearly, income splitting has been a good policy for seniors and can be a good policy for families. Once the budget is balanced, our government is committed to greater tax relief for Canadian families, and as a result of our low tax plan, the average Canadian family pays nearly $3,400 less in taxes in 2014.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve a clear answer. The former minister of finance said that low-income Canadians would not benefit from income splitting.

Can the new Minister of Finance tell us whether he shares his predecessor's opinion?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, once the budget is balanced, the government will keep its commitment to further alleviate the tax burden on Canadian families. Thanks to our low tax plan, the average Canadian family will now pay nearly $3,400 less in taxes in 2014.

The Prime Minister was very clear. It is a policy that is good for families, and that—

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Hull—Aylmer.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let us now move on to another very troubling matter: household debt in Canada. I hope that, this time, I will get a clear answer from the minister.

Can the minister tell us what he expects to see from now until the next federal budget with regard to the ratio of household debt to annual disposable income?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, today, Canadian families are better off under our Conservative government. In fact, Statistics Canada found that the net worth of Canadian families is 44.5% higher today than it was under the previous Liberal government.

The historic tax relief we have provided leaves more money in Canadians' pockets, where it belongs.