Debates of Sept. 22nd, 2014

The Environment

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the only part of climate change where the Conservatives lead the world is on empty rhetoric. Take coal regulations, for example. Despite the Prime Minister's crowing that we are ahead of the U.S., a report released last week by former environment commissioner Scott Vaughan shows that Canada's loophole-ridden coal rules will have hardly any impact on greenhouse gas emissions for 15 years. Is this what the minister calls “climate-change leadership”?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat the facts. Canada is the first major coal user to ban the construction of traditional coal-fired electricity generation units. This is the fact. In the first 21 years, the coal regulations are expected to result in a cumulative reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of about 214 megatonnes, the equivalent of removing 2.6 million personal vehicles from the road per year over this period of time.

That is real action. That is real leadership. The NDP should get on board with it.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Conservative hot air does nothing to fight climate change. Just last week, the Conservatives signed an agreement on bilateral energy co-operation with the U.S. that made almost no mention of renewable or clean energy. This, despite the fact that the renewable energy market could be worth over $3 trillion by 2020.

Why are the Conservatives leaving Canada behind as the rest of the world moves forward on clean technology and combatting climate change?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, we have made huge investments in clean technology, and if the New Democrats were paying attention, out west the first carbon capture unit was actually getting on board.

We have been helping with new technology and new investments in research. What we have also done is this. Because we are protecting our economy and balancing that with the environment, since 2005, Canadian greenhouse gas emissions have decreased 5.1% while the economy has grown 10.6%.

This is historic. This is something that the NDP should support without putting forward a $21 billion carbon tax, which would penalize Canadians for doing what they need to do day in and day out.

Canada Revenue Agency

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue continues to deny what can be found in black and white in her departmental documents.

The Conservatives plan to cut 50 team leaders from the aggressive tax-planning branch. These are the senior experts with thousands of hours of experience in going after international tax cheats. The Conservatives promised real enforcement action, but all we are seeing are pink slips.

Will the minister explain to the House why she is firing 50 of her top experts in international tax fraud?

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, once again, the member is completely false in what he is saying. The CRA is not reducing the number of auditors. In fact, we have increased our auditors by 750 since we took office, and this realignment will give us 10 more.

In economic action plan 2013, we put $30 million toward this department. We have a dedicated offshore compliance division, an offshore tax informant program and an expanded audit reach. The CRA now has an unprecedented ability to crack down on tax cheats. We are getting the job done.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we never said that they were reducing the total number of auditors. The minister's answer is muddy but the facts in her leaked documents are crystal clear. Because of the cuts announced in budget 2014, the Canada Revenue Agency is laying off 50 senior tax experts who are tasked with going after international tax cheats. Meanwhile, it managed to find an additional $13 million to go after environmental and human rights groups.

How can the minister defend wasting millions targeting charities, while letting international tax cheats right off the hook?

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, as the member well knows, the rules regarding charities and charitable organizations and their activities are very long-standing. There is nothing nefarious going on here, other than their political agenda.

As far as the 50 managers are concerned, there is a realignment going on. There will be no reduction in the auditors. There will be no reduction in our ability to go after international tax cheats. In fact, we are driving people to our offshore voluntary disclosure program, which is up sixfold since the Liberals were in government.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, no one is buying what the minister is selling.

The truth is, by laying off 50 experts in the aggressive tax planning branch, the government is reducing our ability to combat international tax fraud.

Canada loses $8 billion annually to tax havens. Instead of attacking the criminals, the Conservatives are attacking the investigators. It is ridiculous.

Will the minister admit she got it wrong and cancel these cuts?

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, what is ridiculous is that the NDP is making these allegations with no facts to back them up.

As I said, the Canada Revenue Agency is not reducing the number of auditors. Again, since 2006, we have significantly increased the number of auditors at the CRA.

Thanks to our strategic investments, CRA's ability to investigate cases of international tax fraud is better than ever.

In fact, offshore voluntary disclosures, as I said, are up sixfold.

Taxation

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last year, Bill C-377 was widely criticized. Experts said it was unconstitutional to force unions to disclose their expenses. Unions are already accountable to their members.

Now we are told that the Conservatives are back at it and this time they are even going to try to limit the time for debate.

Does the government not find it ironic to call for more transparency from unions as it tries to pass a bill quickly and quietly?

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

Mr. Speaker, our government believes that Canadians and workers should have the right to know where their mandatory dues are being spent. That is something that all Canadians are asking for. That is why we continue to support Bill C-377, a reasonable bill to increase union transparency.

Bill C-377 was first introduced in December 2011, and it has been before the Senate for almost two years now. We support efforts to move the bill ahead.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives gave up on their vows for governmental transparency. The "T" word is something that they only inflict upon their enemies.

This Conservative bill would go after unions, but it is unconstitutional. Now, it is getting the support of Conservative ministers. We saw how that worked out for their right-wing brothers and sisters in Ontario.

Why are they pressing unions again and not pushing for transparency for their one-percenters on Bay Street?

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

Mr. Speaker, again, we believe that workers deserve the ability to know how their mandatory dues are being spent. Canadians understand that. They get that when we take dues away and make it mandatory that there should be some transparency. That is why we continue to support Bill C-377. It is a reasonable bill. It would increase transparency. I believe that it would increase accountability.

It was introduced in December 2011 and has spent two years in the Senate. It is time to get it out of the Senate. We believe that we need to move the bill ahead.

Infrastructure

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, experts are saying that the $550 million Conservatives are prepared to spend on an EI program will not create the jobs intended and may even encourage layoffs. At the same time, Conservatives have cut infrastructure spending by 90%, which will further hamper economic growth in Canada.

Will the Minister of Finance take his own advice that he gave to Europe and commit to reversing the 90% cut to infrastructure?

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

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Liberal Party just does not get it when it comes to small business. Liberals do not understand small business. They do not know how small business works.

Let me quote someone who does understand small business, and that is Dan Kelly, from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. When speaking about the small business job credit, he said this:

It's a big, big deal for small business. It's good news for people looking for jobs, good news for those in companies where, perhaps, the business owner has had a more limited time in increasing their wages too.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, at the G20 meetings, Canada's finance minister has done a turnaround. He is now arguing for economic growth ahead of austerity, at least in other countries, but here at home his EI tax credit perversely puts a cap on jobs, punishes ambition, and creates an incentive to fire people just when Canada has lost 112,000 private sector jobs.

Will the government fix this defective scheme, as every serious economist has recommended, and will it restore federal infrastructure investments at least at last year's level?

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

Mr. Speaker, again, we know that the Liberal leader is making up EI schemes on the fly. Although he does not understand small business or business of any type, I would encourage him to listen to those people who do understand, who have the experience, who know what it is going to take. I am talking of ones like Jay Myers of the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, who said this:

The Small Business Job Credit will help a powerhouse—the thousands of small businesses—of the Canadian economy become more competitive.

Indeed, it is good news for small business. It is good news for all Canadians.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, at the G20, Canada praises infrastructure, but here at home the Building Canada fund is slashed by 90%. In this entire construction season, the whole thing, the government has made fewer than 10 new infrastructure commitments. The provinces, municipalities, chambers of commerce, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, C.D. Howe, the Canada West Foundation, the engineers, the Canadian Construction Association, urban transit, the Insurance Bureau of Canada, Statistics Canada, David Dodge, and now the G20 all say Canada should do much better.

Why is the government so excruciatingly mediocre?

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, I see that the Liberals did not have the opportunity over the summer to attend summer school to brush up on their math skills. It was only the summer of love over there, perhaps.

The new Building Canada plan is open for business. This is the most significant investment in infrastructure in our nation's history. We are working closely with our municipal and provincial partners. Applications are being received and being approved, including the twinning of Highway 16 in Saskatchewan.

Status of Women

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, my NDP colleagues and I managed to force the House to hold a debate on the fate of nearly 1,200 missing aboriginal women and girls. This is a tragedy that the Liberals and the Conservatives would like to sweep under the rug.

Will the government finally listen and launch a national public inquiry into the murders and disappearances of these women?

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Minister of Labour and Minister of Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, I want to be very clear. Our government is taking action today. We are moving forward to make sure that these women, girls, and families who have experienced these abhorrent crimes are being supported and protected and we are moving forward with prevention programs. That is what our action plan is about.

I encourage the NDP, as opposed to continuing to vote against aboriginal property rights for women or against shelter support for women of aboriginal background, to please support this action plan. It is what families have asked for.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is unbelievable. The minister is talking about the same plan and the same money that got us the same tragic results that we see now—that is, 1,200 missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. What we need is not the status quo. What we need is to get at the systemic causes of this violence.

When will the government call a national public inquiry into the issue of murdered and missing aboriginal women?

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Minister of Labour and Minister of Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, we are moving forward now. We have an action plan, and that is what families have asked for. Bernadette Smith, whom I spoke about here in the House last week, requested that our government move forward, and that she is delighted we are moving forward now, as opposed to waiting for the lawyers and others to move forward, as the NDP would like. We are moving forward now to make sure that these families, these victims of crimes, are the ones we are listening to, and we are acting on their requests.

International Trade

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government ratified the Canada-China FIPA on a Friday afternoon when Parliament was not sitting when it thought no one would notice. Canadians did notice, and so did the Conservatives. Among other things, they used social media to make their opposition to this FIPA clear. Did the government engage these Canadians and defend their decision? No. It just deleted the Facebook comments, hoping no one would see.

Is the government that insecure about the Canada-China FIPA? Does the minister really think that by trying to hide the opposition of Canadians to this flawed deal, he can make it go away?