House of Commons Hansard #215 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was families.
Government Response to PetitionsRoutine Proceedings
Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the pleasure to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to seven petitions.
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Mr. Speaker, I have a petition in response to a CBC documentary showing that ultrasounds are being used to tell the sex of an unborn child, so that expectant parents can terminate the pregnancy if the unborn child is a girl. Knowing that Canadians are against sex selective pregnancy abortion and that there are 200 million missing girls worldwide, they are asking members of Parliament to condemn discrimination against girls through sex selective pregnancy termination.
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Mr. Speaker, my second petition is from a number of individuals all across the country, from B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Ontario. Petitioners are drawing the attention of parliamentarians to the high percentage of prostitutes who are forced or coerced into the sex trade and are trafficked.
Petitioners are asking the House of Commons to legislate that it would be a criminal offence to purchase sex with a woman, man, or child, and that it be a criminal offence for pimps, madams, and others to profit from proceeds of the sex trade.
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Mr. Speaker, I have over 300 names, with three different petitions, on Canada Post. The first one from Nelson, Salmo, and Ymir calls upon the government to reverse the cuts to services announced by Canada Post and to look instead for ways to innovate in areas such as postal banking.
The second petition, from folks in Nelson and the Slocan Valley area, calls on the government to ensure that our public post office is not scaring people into accepting community mailboxes and that it continues to provide door-to-door delivery to residents.
The third petition is from residents of Castlegar. It calls upon the government to instruct Canada Post to keep and expand the public post office instead of opening privately run offices or franchises.
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
Mr. Speaker, I also have a petition that deals with climate change, with over 60 signatures, calling for Canada to adopt a carbon policy that applies a fee to greenhouse gas emissions at their source of production in Canada, and calling on nations around the world to adopt a similar policy.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, the Punjab assembly in India unanimously passed a resolution calling on the Canadian Parliament to apologize for the Komagata Maru incident.
The Komagata Maru incident was a dark moment in Canada's past. In 1914, 352 passengers aboard a steamship were denied entry into Canada based on discriminatory immigration policies. The ship was forced to return to India, and as a result 19 passengers were killed.
The petitioners are asking that the Government of Canada provide a formal apology in Parliament for the Komagata Maru incident of 1914.
James Rajotte Conservative Edmonton—Leduc, AB
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to present a petition on behalf of many Canadians. It is a petition organized by Families For Justice, which is a group of Canadians who have unfortunately had a loved one killed by an impaired driver. They are people like Sheri Arsenault from my riding, the mother of 18-year-old Bradley Arsenault, who was killed along with his two friends, Kole Novak, also 18, and Thaddeus Lake who was 22. This was a very tragic incident.
These families believe that Canada's impaired driving laws are much too lenient. They want the crime to be called what it is, vehicular homicide. It is the number one cause of criminal death in Canada. Over 1,200 Canadians are killed every year by a drunk driver. This group is calling for mandatory sentencing for vehicular homicide and for Parliament to support Bill C-652, Kassandra's law.
Isabelle Morin NDP Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am rising today to present a petition signed by hundreds of people from my riding and from Pointe-Claire.
These people are tired of the cuts being made at Canada Post. They are worried that the community mailboxes that are going to be set up will cause difficulty for seniors, single mothers and people with disabilities. The petitioners are calling on the government to put whatever pressure is necessary on Canada Post to stop these community mailboxes from being installed, since they are not in the public's best interest.
I think we have presented enough petitions in support of this cause that the government should listen to us and give us a constructive answer.
Rathika Sitsabaiesan NDP Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Mr. Speaker, I stand today to table petitions on behalf of residents in my riding, specifically from the Rainbow Circle Co-Op and others across the GTA.
The petitions are in respect to the fact that in Canada more than 620,000 social housing units, nearly all created between 1970 and 1994, were provided with long-term agreements with social housing providers, ranging from 25 to 50 years depending on their mortgage. These agreements allow for social housing providers to financially support their tenants, who only devote 25% to 30% of their income to rent.
In the last four years, nearly 26,000 social housing units have been affected by the end of the long-term agreements, and by 2016 the number will reach almost 100,000. The federal government is still refusing to renew these agreements. By 2030, nearly 85% of the entire federal housing budget will have been cut.
The petitioners are requesting that the Government of Canada, in collaboration with the provinces, territories, municipalities and community partners, maintain and expand in line with Canada's obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to ensure that the government renews the funding or preserves the rent subsidies to provide the support that these tenants need.
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition signed by people in my riding who are very concerned about the cuts that are being made to the CBC and the impact that these cuts could have on regional news and access to high-quality French television services.
The petitioners are calling on the government to guarantee stable, adequate, multi-year financing for our public broadcaster to allow the CBC to live up to its mandate from coast to coast to coast.
Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present in the House a petition sponsored by Development and Peace, an international development organization.
The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada and the House of Commons to commit to adopting international aid policies that support small farmers, and especially women, and recognize their vital role in the struggle against hunger and poverty, to ensure that Canada's policies and programs are developed in consultation with small farmers and that those policies protect the rights of small farmers in the global south to save, use and freely trade their seed.
Bruce Hyer Green Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Mr. Speaker, people from across Canada are concerned about climate change, including Diane Beckett from here in Ottawa. They are concerned about the extreme weather events that are becoming more frequent and that we have no climate change plan here in Canada; that we need a plan, targets and prescriptions; and we need to do our part. They also are concerned that we need to have a plan for climate change adaptation.
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-59, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 21, 2015 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.
Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1Government Orders
Erin O'Toole Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to rise in the House, in two capacities, to speak on the budget implementation act.
I am very honoured to represent my home town in Parliament as the member of Parliament for Durham and the communities of Clarington, Scugog and Uxbridge. I will speak to some of the great elements of economic action plan 2015 that concerns my constituents in my riding and issues for which I have advocated.
I also have the tremendous honour to sit in the House of Commons as the Minister of Veterans Affairs. As someone who has served in the Canadian Armed Forces for 12 years and had worked on these issues before joining this Parliament, it is a profound honour that I take seriously. There are some amazing new benefits and programs in the budget implementation act for veterans and their families, which I have made a pledge to pass before Parliament rises for the summer. It is why it is in the budget implementation act itself.
First, as the member of Parliament for Durham, I am very proud of this budget and what we would implement with it, because this is the culmination of four years of dedicated and strategic work by the Prime Minister and by our government.
Budgets do not balance themselves. Governments need to set priorities. They need to plan and they need to ensure they set an environment for job creation and economic growth, without taxing Canadians and small businesses too much, so we can stimulate an active economy and really see job creation and participation in our economy by young people, families and through seniors in their working and retirement years.
First, this budget is a balanced budget. We made a commitment to reach balance in 2015. We did that while raising transfer payments, in my case, to Ontario by over 80% for health and education. We did not take the route the Liberals did to balance a budget by slashing transfers to the provinces and making premiers cut hospitals and nurses. We have been increasing steadily that commitment. We have balanced the budget through growing the economy and by slowing the growth of government to core and strategic areas.
We told Canadians that once we achieved balance, we would offer tax relief for families with young children, seniors who were on fixed incomes and to continue to stimulate our economy. I am proud to say we have done that.
On the universal child care benefit, it is key to recognize that it is universal. Families with children will receive support, and then they can make their own decisions on what best works for their family. Whether one parent steps away from the workforce for a few years, whether one reduces and goes part time, whether they use live-in care, whether they use daycare, whether they use a parent or an aunt to look after the kids, parents make their choices and we empower that through our universal child care benefit. This has been very well received in my riding of Durham.
Now we are increasing it to $160 per month for children under six, which will be almost $2,000 a year for families to make their decisions with respect to child care. We are also enhancing it beyond the age of six, recognizing that there is after-school care. Schools get out 3 p.m. and parents need flexibility. Therefore, there will be almost $720 in a new extension of the universal child care benefit for children 6 to 17. We are increasing the child care expense deduction by $1,000 to allow people who use child care services to have more tax deductibility for that.
With our family tax cut, we are allowing income splitting on a limited basis for families in particular where mom or dad decides to step out of the workplace for a few years or reduce their hours. We are allowing that family unit to be taxed as more of a single unit, because parents are making decisions as a unit when they are raising families. All families do. I see that daily in my area of Courtice, Ontario. Therefore, while they are raising their children, this will allow them to smooth off that income and save up to $2,000 as part of our family tax cut.
For seniors, we are continuing to build on recognizing that seniors built the country, they are on fixed incomes in their pension retirement years and they need our support. Costs are going up.
We introduced pension income splitting a few years ago to allow seniors to be taxed as a unit while on a fixed income. In this budget, we have provided more flexibility so less withdrawals from RRIFs have to occur to allow for more savings. We have increased the tax-free savings account to $10,000 to allow financial planning and certainty for seniors and all families, and to encourage a saving culture.
I am also very proud that this government has listened to the MPs who hear from seniors in their ridings who want to stay in their homes and, in some cases, need modifications made to stay there. We have the home accessibility tax credit of up to $1,500, which would allow seniors to make modifications so they could stay in their own homes.
We are delivering for families and seniors with a balanced budget, as we promised.
Small businesses are the majority of employers across Canada. We have been cultivating the small business sector with over 30% lower taxes for it, allowing small businesses to invest with tax measures and encouraging them to hire in recent years with a new-hire tax credit. I am very proud our government is lowering the small business tax credit in this budget, from 11% to 9%. That allows small businesses to hire a few more people, to invest in their operations, to be competitive and grow. It is about jobs across the country, including in my riding of Durham.
This is how governments should work. It makes a plan, sets priorities, articulates that to Canadians, and then has the leadership that this Prime Minister has shown to deliver on that plan. This budget and the implementation of it recognizes that we are delivering exactly what we said when we reached a balance budget: support for families with young children, support for seniors, and stimulating economic growth and job creation in communities across the country.
In the remainder of my time, I will speak as the Minister of Veterans Affairs. I am very happy that the budget implementation act has some tremendous new benefits for veterans and their families, building on the work of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs last year. The new veterans charter needed to be updated and amended to address our most seriously injured, those who have the most difficult time transitioning from their careers in the Canadian Armed Forces, and some of the gaps in the new veterans charter brought in by the Liberal government, implemented by our government, and voted on by all members in the House. With fixes contained in this budget implementation act, we will get to a veterans charter that will serve more than just most veterans. It will serve all veterans.
The retirement income security benefit addresses the issue of post-65 income for seriously injured veterans, when their earning loss benefit ends at 65 and they hit those retirement years. Under the old system, they would have seen a big drop in income at 65. We fixed that. We are guaranteeing them a predictable level of income post- 65, along with a permanent impairment allowance, another lifetime benefit, which over time I want to see streamlined into a single pension for the most seriously injured. With the retirement income security benefit, the RISB, contained in this implementation act, we will give peace of mind to veterans, who are moderately to severely injured in service to Canada, and their families.
Also in this implementation act is a critical injury benefit, a benefit that recognizes and compensates for the pain and suffering that servicemen and women will go through if they are critically injured in service to their country, an acute injury that leads to hospitalization, intensive care, surgical intervention. In the past, if they recovered, they would get a disability award based on the recovery without recognizing all the pain and suffering of that recovery time. The critical injury benefit would do that.
As well, there is the family caregiver relief benefit for the most seriously injured, which will provide over $7,000 tax free to a family to provide more flexibility. If we know a spouse or adult child is an added caregiver, Veterans Affairs will provide contracted care in the home. However, the home will be changed if someone is seriously injured. We are providing more flexibility, recognizing the critical role of family in the wellness of veterans.
These types of new benefits for the most seriously injured veterans and their families are items for which all parties have asked. They were contained in Bill C-58, but after six weeks of delay, intentional or not, six weeks of criticism of the very reforms that some members of the House asked for last year, I have included all of these provisions alongside our purpose statement of obligation in the budget implementation act.
It is a great act not just as the MP for Durham and the support for families and businesses, but I am profoundly proud of what it would do for veterans and their families.
Jamie Nicholls NDP Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his service to the Canadian Armed Forces. He said that he would like to pass this before Parliament rose and yet he had an opportunity to do so just last week when the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore asked for unanimous consent to pass Bill C-58 several times, which roughly covers the same ground.
It is hard to listen to the member talk about us putting obstacles in the way of veterans' benefits when the member was not willing to pass it right away. Our veterans need real support. Veterans Affairs runs just one hospital close to my riding, which is known as Ste. Anne's Hospital. Sean Bruyea, a veterans advocate, says that it is essential to have such hospitals because they understand that the needs of veterans are unique.
Supporting our troops needs to be more than just a bumper sticker slogan. We need true support for our troops and support for the families of veterans. Will the member undertake to take Bill C-58 out of the omnibus budget bill and pass it right away, right here, right now?
Mr. Speaker, I made a commitment to veterans and their families over the last four months, as we have rolled out new benefits, new improvements, many of which members like the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore recommended as part of the standing committee last year. When these benefits were rolled out, they were criticized, suggesting there would be delays on it. Therefore, we are moving to ensure I keep my commitment by putting it in the budget implementation act.
When the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore asked for unanimous consent of Bill C-58, it was after the budget implementation act had already been earmarked to go before the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs for debate. Unfortunately, that member and the NDP continue to be several steps behind and continue to play a little politics on these issues.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, the member made reference to a balanced budget. It is important for people to recognize that we are months away from an election, and the Minister of Finance proclaims to all Canadians that we have a balanced budget. He wholesaled $2 billion worth of GM shares. He dipped into the contingency fund, something which other ministers said they would not do, to balance the budget. The Conservatives created a false impression that they actually created a balanced budget with a surplus of just over $1 billion. Canadians need to be aware that the Conservative majority government has never achieved a balanced budget, but miraculously in the year of an election, it has claimed it has one.
Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin consistently produced balanced budgets. Does the member believe the Conservative government will fool Canadians into believing it has a balanced budget when in reality it does not?
Mr. Speaker, I am little surprised my friend would phrase the question that way if he listened to my remarks. This is a balanced budget. There still is contingency funds set aside. There has been spending on priority areas for Canadians. However, what makes it very different from the budgets of the Chrétien era is the fact that we have balanced this budget without foisting on the provinces massive cuts to health care. The interesting thing is that member would know he made the provinces cut and slash. He made Roy Romanow close more hospitals than any premier in the history of that province because Liberals balanced the budget on the backs of the provinces. That is not leadership.
The Liberals also slashed the Canadian Armed Forces in the nineties down to threadbare status. We have not done that either.
I am proud that we are balancing the budget and offering tax relief. My province of Ontario, under the course of this budget, has received over 80% more in transfers. We are allowing the provinces to have a steady and predictable stream of income for their priorities and we are making the priorities set on a federal level to balance.
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, with respect to a previous question that continues to be put out to mislead people about veterans' hospitals, could the Minister of Veterans Affairs clarify the situation with veterans' hospitals and what has been going on with them, frankly, for the last 40 years, in terms of transferring to the provinces?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend and RCAF caucus colleague from Edmonton Centre for his question and his work for veterans. He knows these issues perhaps better than anyone in this House. I have learned a lot from him, and we are going to proceed to inform my friend from the NDP about how this program has worked.
Veterans Affairs Canada did have a network of hospitals in the 1950s, after World War II, before Canada had public health care. Beginning with Prime Minister Diefenbaker in the 1960s, these hospitals started being transferred to provincial governments.
As the member from Quebec noted, the final hospital transfer is of Ste. Anne's Hospital to the Quebec government. The transfer of Camp Hill, for instance, which the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore mentions quite regularly, was carried out in 1978.
The provinces will set the priorities on how those facilities are used. However, any veterans injured in the service of their country will have their care, including long-term care, paid for by the federal government.
Djaouida Sellah NDP Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to denounce this government's undemocratic ways.
We have before us a budget implementation bill that is over 160 pages long, contains over 270 provisions and amends dozens of laws. I find it appalling that the government has introduced such a huge bill that includes legislation that has nothing to do with the budget. What is the prevention of terrorist travel act doing in a budget implementation bill?
I think it is worth pointing out that the current Prime Minister was the first to condemn this kind of practice when the Liberals were in power. At the time, he was shocked that a government could enact so many laws in one fell swoop. He has become very good at something he once denounced.
The number of pages in this omnibus bill is not the only problem. Another frightening thing is that the government is refusing to debate it. It imposed a gag order, as it does every time one of its bills contains contentious provisions. We cannot properly represent our constituents, the people who elected us, if we do not have the time to thoroughly examine the proposed provisions.
We are talking about the budget implementation bill. We are talking about Canada's future, and it is not right for a government to have such contempt for the people or toy with its institutions. This government is making a mockery of democracy and thumbing its nose at Canadians.
I will now talk about the content of the bill. Bill C-59 is a bill that we cannot support.
Let us start with income splitting. This is the perfect example of how out of touch the Conservatives are, since, as we know, only families with two incomes in two different tax brackets will benefit from this measure.
I would like to remind everyone of the impact that income splitting has on women. I have the good fortune of sitting on the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, and I would like to share some of what we heard from witnesses. According to them, single women and single-parent families will not benefit at all from income splitting.
Similarly, the elimination of the child tax credit will take away about $2 billion from parents, many of whom are single parents. All of the family-related tax transfers actually deter the very women the government claims to care about.
Fewer women will be participating in the workforce as a result of this measure. According to Kathleen Lahey of the faculty of law at Queen's University, the advantages of income splitting will actually encourage young women and female college graduates to pay even less attention to their salary, since, after they talk to their peers, spouse or partner, they will know that it may be more worthwhile for the family to replace paid work with unpaid work.
While the whole country is trying to find better jobs for women, the government is using tax breaks to encourage them not to work. Even the Parliamentary Budget Officer, whom the Conservatives love to quote, has been critical of income splitting.
He estimates that the average benefit will go to families whose income exceeds $180,000, which is 15% of families. He also said that income splitting will cost taxpayers $2.5 billion in 2015. The Conservatives are ignoring the 85% of Canadian families who will not benefit from this measure. Why? Because they have their sights set on the election coming up in a few months and they are more interested in helping out those they think will vote for them. That group of people never seems to include families that are working very hard and having trouble making ends meet. The fact is that these families are struggling with income stagnation and the rising cost of living, which is prompting them to take on massive debt.
There are now 250,000 fewer jobs in Canada than there were before the recession, and 160,000 fewer jobs for youth. If one believed all the ads the government has bought with taxpayer money—almost $750 million worth—one would think everything was hunky-dory. However, Canadians know different because they are still carrying the highest debt loads in Canadian history.
In an atrocious economic environment, one would think job one from the government of the day would be to create jobs, to get people back to work, to diversify the economy, and to invest in the economy in ways that would actually produce the jobs that we have been missing since the last global recession.
Instead, we see the true priorities of the Conservatives when it comes to jobs, and that is their own jobs. They are hoping to buy back re-election just one more time. That is why they raised the ceiling for the TFSA, which will benefit only 20% of the wealthiest Canadians and will not increase Canadians' savings; however, it will certainly cost our economy billions of dollars.
Instead of doing things that are not going to stimulate our economy, the government could have invested in our health care system. Investing in health is an investment in Canada's economic future. For example, providing care to someone over 65 costs five times more than providing care to someone between 15 and 65. This Conservative government is turning a deaf ear and abandoning our seniors, the middle class and the least fortunate, who will not be able to access adequate health care. They prefer to spend money on catering to the needs of the highest earners.
Canadians deserve a government that works for all Canadians, not just for its supporters. They deserve a budget that works for them and contains sound economic measures, not electoral goodies.
I will close by emphasizing that this is the 96th time the government is imposing time allocation in this parliament. In Canada, we have never had a government that abused time allocation and closure as much as this one has. This is a testament to the arrogance and incompetence of this government, which has introduced a number of bills in the House of Commons that have been rejected by the courts. They were rejected because the government does not really do its due diligence to verify its bills. Canadians are fed up with this government that plays fast and loose with its institutions and they will prove it in October.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, when I think about the budget as a priority document of the government, there are many things that come to mind, such as the importance of Canada's middle class, which is the driving force in our economy, and the government's unfair approach favouring Canada's wealthiest.
However, I want to also highlight the importance of social programming, whether it is health care, something Canadians feel passionate about; our many pension programs, which are of critical importance to our seniors and those who will eventually become seniors, obviously, because it is about disposable income; and crime and safety in our communities.
There is so much more the government could have done if it understood that the Government of Canada has a leadership role to play in terms of working with stakeholders, whether it is a province, a municipality, or different stakeholders, to make a difference. On many fronts, I would suggest that the government has failed.
I would ask the member if she believes that my comments are fair in looking at the government's disappointments over the last number of years.
