Debates of Jan. 26th, 2016

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in response to the member for Souris—Moose Mountain, I must say that it is a little rich after 10 years of Conservative control in the House and 41 years of Conservative control in the Alberta legislature to not take some responsibility for the job losses we are seeing in the region.

I would suggest that if any party had any hope of building a pipeline, an unrefined fuel export scheme, and hoped to get a social licence and community support for projects like that, they might consider having that fuel add to Canada's energy security and add to the number of jobs by our refining wherever we can locally, by having some Canadian ownership and Canadian control, and not by having gutted environmental assessment hearings so that public hearings actually involve no hearing, but witnesses who cannot speak and cannot be cross-examined. Furthermore, the Conservative government fought for 10 years and spent at least $100 million of taxpayers' money fighting the truth of indigenous control and the requirement for consent around land use. If those things had not happened, I think the member's government might not have left residents of Alberta in the situation we are now in. The member cannot blame the New Democrat government in Alberta for what happened in the last five or six months.

I will close with the words of a former Conservative MP and former premier of Alberta, Jim Prentice, right before he lost the election to the NDP: “Look in the mirror”.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am not certain I really understood the question put by the member to me. However, I can say that there has been a national energy program that has looked at and assessed all the issues of pipelines. It has gone through all the proper steps, has done the assessments and came up with the assessment to say that these are the steps that need to be met. It is up to the proponents to come up and finish those comments.

A lot of these processes would be furthered if members from the New Democratic Party would stand up and support the process.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Don Valley East.

Let me begin by congratulating you, Mr. Speaker, on your appointment and your place in the chair. It is also wonderful to have you back in the House after a brief hiatus.

I rise for the first time in this 42nd Parliament, and I would like to begin by thanking the good people of the riding of Lac-Saint-Louis in Montreal's West Island for investing their faith in me once again. It is a weighty responsibility and one that, of course, I take very seriously. I look forward to working hard again in this Parliament to represent my constituents well here in the federal Parliament.

The throne speech, which we are debating today, is a fitting reflection of the themes of the election campaign. It speaks to a desire for real change in this country. It is an eloquent statement of the government's intention to bring about the real change Canadians have clearly said they want, change Canadians know is needed in order to move this country forward.

I am not trying to be partisan. Blind and gratuitous partisanship is not constructive. It is not an avenue that leads to sound public policy; in any event, it is not what my constituents like or want. It is fair to say that there was a sense expressed across this land, from the Atlantic provinces, through Quebec, Ontario, the Prairies, and Alberta to British Columbia, that a new impetus was required to deal with the steady accumulation of challenges, including most importantly on the economic front, that the previous government was no longer able to effectively address with its ongoing approach to governance and policy; and that it was time to move past a certain policy inertia in so many areas, from the economy, to aboriginal and foreign policy issues, to the environment, which is itself today so essential to economic policy.

On October 19, Canadians responded in the affirmative to the view that new ideas and the will to implement these were needed for Canada's future prosperity in a fast-moving, highly competitive and complex world and that new ideas were also the key to our cultural and social progress. That is what the throne speech is all about: new ideas to address lingering issues and meet new rapidly emerging challenges, again with a special focus on making meaningful progress on stubborn economic problems that are undermining Canada's middle class.

The core of our government's economic message is that we need to invest in the future in order to bring tangible benefits to Canadians and their families today and tomorrow. We responded in our election platform by, among other things, committing to doubling infrastructure spending over the next 10 years by a total of $60 billion in extra spending. I cannot say at this time what the profile of that spending will be over time. The Minister of Finance and the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities are working diligently on that question as we speak.

As I mentioned, we have an ambitious agenda, which was at the core of the Speech from the Throne. I think you might say that it is custom-made for my riding. That is not the case. This agenda is custom-made for all ridings in Canada, and I am talking about our commitment to increase our investment in infrastructure.

We have made a commitment to invest in Canada's infrastructure, and in three components in particular: green infrastructure, public transit, and social infrastructure, such as social housing.

My riding of Lac-Saint-Louis is a typical middle-class riding. However, it has some needs that the Liberal platform will address, especially with respect to infrastructure investment, to which we are committed.

My riding is a good, middle-class riding with a vibrant economy and a growing population. It has a wonderful natural environment. It is surrounded on three sides by water, including the mighty St. Lawrence. There are pockets of serious and urgent need in my riding, and all three parts of our infrastructure plan will respond to these needs. I would like to go through all three aspects of our infrastructure plan and just relate how those aspects will help the people in my riding of Lac-Saint-Louis.

For example, a group called the West Island Association for the Intellectually Handicapped has prepared a shovel-ready project. It is ready to go as soon as the funds can be unlocked. This project would create a community centre that would provide much-needed space for the organization to expand its existing activities for families with special needs children. However, it would be more than that. It would open itself to a broader set of needs in the community. For example, it would provide a place for parents to meet and talk to each other about how their children are learning, behaving, and playing and how they can encourage positive development through parenting, even in a low-resource family. That meeting place would also be used, no doubt, to bring people together to create maybe some social enterprises, some businesses that are run to raise revenues to finance a more social mandate. Our government's infrastructure plan will hopefully help an organization like the West Island Association for the Intellectually Handicapped to bring this dream to fruition.

Second, our funds for public transit will be welcome. There is a project on the table called le Train de l'Ouest. It has been in the works for about 15 years. It was the idea of my predecessor Clifford Lincoln, who represented my riding for 10 years before I was elected. This project started as a germ of an idea, and today it is shovel-ready. We are awaiting a decision by Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec as to its financing for the project. Our new infrastructure program and the additional funds in that program mean that the federal government would be able to be a partner in that project and hopefully influence the shape of that project. I am looking forward to working with our government and with the mayors of my riding and the MNAs, the provincial representatives, to make this project finally come true. We need public transit on the West Island of Montreal. We have a train, but it shares the tracks with freight trains and the service is not what it should be.

Finally, I met with the mayor and some councillors of the village of Senneville in my riding a couple of weeks ago and they talked to me about the need to replace their sewage systems. That is just the kind of project that would fit well with that aspect of our infrastructure plan, which we call investing in green projects.

I look forward to working with my colleagues and with other stakeholders in making sure that our plan fills the important needs of my community, as I know it will fill the important needs of communities across this country.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am just wondering when the plan for the green infrastructure, the social infrastructure, and the infrastructure plan will be rolled out. Given that there is $20 million for each of those elements over a 10-year period, which comes out to about $2 billion per year, I am wondering how many additional jobs that would create and how that would spur on the economy.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the hon. member to the House and congratulate her on her election.

As the member knows, we have annual budgets in the House, and it is through those annual budgets that details are given in regard to initiatives like the ones I was speaking about in my speech. In terms of the number of jobs, it will depend on the mix of spending. Some projects will create more jobs than others. The point of infrastructure spending is to bring tangible benefits to Canadians today but also to prepare the ground for economic recovery in the future. If we have an economic recovery but we cannot get people from point A to point B, from their homes to the jobs that are opening up, then that economic recovery will hit a ceiling.

We are investing for benefit today, but really we are looking toward the future. This is a future-oriented government, and that is why we are making those investments.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister (Intergovernmental Affairs)]

Mr. Speaker, I note with interest the way in which the hon. member populated the needs of his riding as they related to a social infrastructure, which is part of a larger envelope of spending, which includes housing.

There have been criticisms, and we certainly heard from the third party in the election that social infrastructure that was not dedicated entirely to housing was deficient, and we should only be doing housing and housing alone, and the other add-ons should come from other ministries.

Could the hon. member please talk about the importance of integrating social infrastructure and housing simultaneously to build complete and successful communities, and why it is so critically important that we do not just do housing and housing alone, that we integrate the arrival of social services, house those social services as we build new communities and house Canadians?

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question, because over time we have learned to see the world a little differently than we used to. We used to see it as a group of silos. Now we see the world as an ecosystem; we see communities as ecosystems; and I have often said to my constituents that what is so special about my community—and I am sure this is the case of all the communities represented here—is that we have a network of community groups that fulfill just about every need that an individual or a family could have.

I often say to my constituents that, yes, we have nice homes in our riding. They are buildings on a lot with a car, but that is not a community. A community is when the people in those homes gather in places like the Kizmet Centre, which hopefully will be built, to share ideas and to make connections to help each other.

That is why housing is important. Of course it is important, but we have to bring the people who live in those homes, whether they be social housing or single-unit homes, together to co-operate and to share their lives together.

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his re-election and his speech in the House today.

During the election campaign, I had the opportunity to speak with many dairy farmers all across the riding of Berthier—Maskinongé. They raised serious concerns about trade agreements such as CETA and the TPP.

One of the Liberal Party's election promises was to resolve the issue of milk protein. The 100-day deadline is just around the corner. I know that the Liberals have a lot on their plate right now and that it is not always easy to fulfill promises, but I want to hear the member's comments about when the government plans to take concrete action to resolve the issue of milk protein imports from the United States, since that represents $50,000 a year in losses for our farmers.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I too would like to congratulate the hon. member on her re-election.

My riding is often called a suburb, but it also has a rural aspect. In fact, we are fortunate to have the environmental and agricultural sciences faculty of McGill University in Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, so I know a thing or two about the issues facing the rural and farming sector. In response to the question raised about the deadline, I know that we have talked about it and that we spoke with representatives of the dairy industry when we were in opposition. However, unfortunately, since I am not the Minister of Agriculture, I do not have an answer regarding the specific deadline.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to the Speech from the Throne.

As the member for the great riding of Don Valley East, there are significant steps noted in the Speech from the Throne that will have good, long-term benefits for my constituents and for all Canadians.

Let me begin with the recognition in the throne speech that diversity is our strength. In Don Valley East, close to 60% of the population are first-generation Canadians. People have come to Canada from different parts of the world with one common purpose: to provide a better future for themselves and their families.

Many people in my riding, having established themselves, are giving back to newcomers. A wonderful example of this is an agency called The Clothing Drive. It provides clothing, boots, shoes, school bags, and so forth to hundreds of newly-arrived Syrian refugees. I was proud to have participated in the official opening of its office in my riding.

This organization started as a Facebook post stating, “I need help.” Within four weeks it grew to hundreds and thousands of volunteers from all different backgrounds and cultures whose one main purpose was to help. This is the Canadian spirit. When we work together, we are a phenomenal force for change and for the betterment of society.

The past 10 years have been years of divisiveness. People are tired of that type of nastiness and they want to take back their Canada. This generosity and caring became evident in the riding after our Prime Minister set the example and tone for all Canadians. Thanks to his leadership, we are utilizing this caring nature.

Two weeks ago I welcomed 300 refugees into my riding and was overwhelmed by the generosity of the faith groups, the civil societies, and the individuals who came forward to offer their assistance. As an example, a church group in my riding raised $3.6 million, which is fantastic. It wants to sponsor 17 Syrian refugee families. That is wonderful. It would like to relieve the government of those 17 families. There are synagogues and mosques that have already sponsored four and five families each.

A touching example was when I held a town hall meeting on Syrian refugees. One member from a church group had just picked up his family from the airport and was looking for suitable accommodations. Lo and behold, a generous Canadian offered his basement there and then. He remodelled his house for the family's needs. I am happy to say that an Iraqi Christian family is well settled in a Muslim house. That is the type of pluralism we should work toward. I am glad to say that with this government, Canada is back.

Our government committed to growing the middle class. The first order of business for our government was to reduce the tax rate for those earning between $45,000 and $90,000. This tax break is beneficial to 90% of the population.

In my riding, almost half of the residents earn less than $50,000. They are hard-working people who contribute to the Canadian economy. Our government's tax break is important as it will put money back into the pockets of 90% of Canadians. With this extra disposable income, they will help grow the economy.

I am sure there are many hon. members in the House who are dealing with high rates of unemployment in their riding. In Don Valley East, the unemployment rate is 11%, much higher than the national average. Why? Because over the past 10 years we have not invested in the right form of economy. The unemployment rate is even higher for our youth. Investing in the middle class means that people who need help will receive it. This includes people who are struggling to make ends meet and who want to improve their standard of living.

The government understands that investing in people and our future generation is important. How we invest is as critical as in whom we invest. Our Canada child benefit is a strong pillar in helping to grow the economy and the middle class. Raising a child is expensive. There are parents who work at two to three jobs just to make ends meet. These are survival economies. Therefore, our targeted Canada child care benefit would help those people who need it the most.

The third pillar in growing the economy is to invest in infrastructure, both social and physical, like roads, transit signals, etc. In a place like Toronto or Vancouver, the prices of housing is unattainable for those earning between $45,000 and $50,000. Therefore, investing in social infrastructure is important.

I had the opportunity, together with my other colleagues, to meet with the mayor of Toronto, the Hon. John Tory. The mayor and his team of councillors understand the importance of this investment and are ready to partner with the government. They are excited that the federal government is back in business, that the government is communicating with them and treating them with respect by allowing them to choose projects that would have the maximum return on investment, both from a social justice perspective and job creation perspective.

The mayor was particularly pleased with investments in transit as well. Canada's productivity, as we know, has fallen over the past 10 years. Intelligent investments in transit in a large city like Toronto is important. It helps move people faster, helps in reducing commute times, and helps in reducing stress times, thereby increasing the overall productivity. In my riding, a large number of people rely on public transit to take them to work or school, or to help them volunteer. Therefore, our investment in public transit makes it possible for them to be more efficient, effective, and productive.

To grow the economy we need a cohesive strategy, and that is exactly what our government has done by cutting taxes for middle income people; investing in our future through our Canada child care benefit; investing in infrastructure, including social housing, transit, etc.; and investing in post-secondary education. This is a sure way to boost the economy.

However, the sustainability of the economy relies on a clean environment. For the past 10 years the previous government had denied the effects of climate change and was not willing to diversify its resources. Had it done so we would not be in the situation we are in today. We would have had a cleaner, more prosperous economic environment. Through the previous government's inability or negligence, we lost 74% of the clean energy market. Our government therefore is taking the bold step of engaging with the provinces and territories in ensuring we have the best scientists, engineers, good researchers, and that we regain the market share as we move forward. We have committed to investing in green technology and the jobs of the future.

In Don Valley East, we have a very well educated population. In my riding, 40% of the residents have either a university or college education, which is above the national average. These well-educated people would benefit from our investment in the jobs that are created through our partnership with the environment.

Our government is committed to making real change. We were elected on our commitment for a better, prosperous Canada, an all-inclusive Canada, a Canada that respects its diversity, a Canada that is strong because of its diversity. The Speech from the Throne delivers that message very clearly.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's intervention. She spoke about Canadians who were working hard just to make ends meet and that they were living from paycheque to paycheque. She spoke about investing in the right kind of people.

Oxfam recently released a study which highlighted that the gap between the rich and the poor was growing around the world. The government had an opportunity to address this problem in Canada. However, the Liberals' so-called middle-class tax cut ends up benefiting 30% of the high middle class. In fact, the richest 10% are benefiting from this tax shift.

How are we not addressing the issue for all those in the middle class and those who are actually living paycheque to paycheque? This, unfortunately, is not being addressed? Could my hon. colleague respond to that?

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as a chartered professional accountant, I do a lot of tax returns. Our government's investment in the middle class by cutting taxes for nine out of ten people is a very good step.

The member talked about the gap between the rich and the poor. That gap has been growing over the past 10 years. We have chosen to remedy that situation, and we have done it through wise tax cuts, investment in the Canada child benefit program, investment in infrastructure. Together this cohesive strategy will help the economy grow.

[Kim Rudd, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, one of the things my hon. colleague talked about were families, specifically families in her community, and how they were getting by and trying to move their lives forward. Could she expand a little on the Canada child benefit, how that is lifting 316,000 children out of poverty, and how that is going to impact families in her riding?

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, people in my riding earning $45,000 to $50,000 cannot really afford child care. This additional money they will get, which is geared to income, will benefit them. As the member mentioned, it will lift 316,000 children out of poverty.

A lot of people use the food banks. A lot of people have to work two to three jobs to make ends meet. This will put more money in their pocket to help them alleviate that poverty level.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to hear my colleague talk about infrastructure, green infrastructure and social infrastructure. I am very proud this government did set up the green infrastructure fund that funded and promoted biofuel, organic waste treatment, production of biogas, geothermal, and a reduction in greenhouse gases. I look forward to the additional $20 billion that will go into that fund.

I also want to talk a little about the social infrastructure and the influx of the 25,000 refugees.

In the city Surrey, where I was a former mayor, 95 languages are spoken and we have the largest influx of government-assisted refugees in the province. We are expecting about 900 refugees during this next influx, with 60% under the age of 18. We currently have an overburdened school district. We need up to 425 long-term housing units for the refugees as well as school expansion. Also, there is the potential of a welcome centre closing and the laying-off of settlement workers.

How are the Liberals going to accommodate the refugee influx and will that fall under the social infrastructure program?

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member asked about a lot of things. Number one, in terms of green technology, Liberals are committed to investing $20 billion in green technology. The previous government had no clue about climate change, so we are regaining our strength.

In terms of the Syrian refugees, this is the first time that different levels of government are being consulted. The previous prime minister had no consultation, no meetings with the first ministers, no meetings with any territorial governments. We are back in business by engaging them. As I mentioned, ways are being created within my riding for people to come together and offer assistance to take over government-assisted refugees so that they, as part of the Canadian mentality, engage others and participate.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am splitting my time with my colleague, the member of Parliament representing Berthier—Maskinongé.

Because this is my first full speech in the House, I want to thank the voters and volunteers of Nanaimo—Ladysmith, and my family and friends for the honour of their support and the great privilege of being in this House. I also salute my local government colleagues and constituents who taught me a great deal over four terms serving in office.

I also want to state the privilege of living on the unceded territory of three first nations in my riding, Snuneymuxw, Stz'uminus, and Snaw-naw-as or Nanoose First Nation, along with many Métis and indigenous leaders in the community and many residents. They are teaching me every day about the importance of reconciliation around working on right relationship, work that Canada needs to do vitally. They are teaching me about the importance of holding an inquiry into the murdered and missing indigenous women, implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, implementing recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and moving forward in a true nation-to-nation relationship.

Those were all common cause commitments between the Liberals and New Democrats through the election campaign, but in the throne speech there were no details and no commitments. That makes it hard to pin good intentions down. For concrete actions that might build goodwill, I would love to have seen the Liberal government commit to dedicated investments and a clear plan around its commitment to eliminate boil water advisories on reserve. This is too important for our country to build hopes high and then not to have them implemented.

I am going to flag a few other hits and misses in the throne speech. I am very relieved to see the government reiterate its commitments to infrastructure investments, but we want detail on how much and how they will be distributed. Inter-regional public transit is an example of a win-win-win investment. It is good for our economy, community, and environment.

Nanaimo—Ladysmith has a transit gap between its two communities. We cannot take public transit between Nanaimo and Ladysmith and they are only 20 minutes apart. That makes it hard to get a job outside one's immediate community, it is bad for business, it is bad for the environment. Better yet, supporting inter-regional transit into the the riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford would connect the burgeoning campuses of Vancouver Island University. Inter-regional transit connecting those two communities would be very good for student affordability, let alone the economy and environment.

In my home community, Gabriola Island, residents got tired of waiting on long lists for public transit funding, so they established their own regional service. For a community of just 4,000 people, they have funded three biofuel buses, with some support from the regional district of Nanaimo. They run the whole system on volunteers and on Saturday they celebrated their 33,333rd passenger. It is fantastic work by a very small community organization. I am very proud of what they have done, but running public transit should not fall only to community volunteers. We badly need strong federal and provincial government partners to make public transit work.

Last year, New Democrat members of Parliament representing very reliant communities asked the federal government to make it permissible for BC Ferries to apply for infrastructure funding. Ferry users in our communities have been hit very hard by skyrocketing fares originating from the semi-privatization philosophy of the provincial Liberal government in British Columbia. It is very hard on communities and on affordability. BC Ferries represents our marine highway. As the progressive opposition, New Democrats will keep pushing the Liberal government for strong, reliable, long-term investments in public transit infrastructure.

The throne speech promised legislation that will provide greater support for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault. I cannot overstate how badly Nanaimo—Ladysmith needs such support. We need to prevent violence against women. So much has fallen to front-line organizations that pick up the pieces every day.

One such organization is Nanaimo's Haven Society. It fields eight distress calls every day. Every year, it serves close to 4,000 people in the region, all victims of sexual abuse, physical, emotional abuse, and violence. However, because of inadequate finances, Haven Society has to turn away 75 women every year who are ready to leave abusive relationships, but there is no shelter for them. Imagine the heartbreak of that. They simply do not have enough shelter.

Across the country, there is a powerful network of domestic violence shelters picking up the pieces. One night alone 8,000 women and children were in such shelters in our country. Another night that same year, shelters turned away more than 500 women and children for lack of space.

I acknowledge the personal commitment of the Minister of Status of Women across the aisle. I deeply hope that her Minister of Finance and her cabinet agree that finding solutions is vital. I salute the work of shelters and anti-violence workers across the country. I hope that we have a government that supports them and keeps the vulnerable safe.

Climate change is the challenge and threat of our time. I see it right at home with salmon struggling to spawn in drying and warming streams, like the Cowichan and Nanaimo rivers. Just at the time when we need to have more resiliency and food security, I see farmers in Cedar and Lantzville struggling with drought, in a rainforest. Like many Canadians, I am very glad that the government believes in the science of climate change, but good grief that we would even be celebrating that is a testament to this dark decade that we have just experienced.

Despite that commitment from the government, the throne speech only said that the government would provide leadership. There is no concrete action plan. There is no commitment to reducing emissions. There is no commitment to making the government accountable in law for setting targets and for meeting them. Three times, New Democrats have brought to this House just such legislation. I believe the Liberals have supported us, almost every Liberal, every time, when they were the second or the third party, so why not now.

Also, climate change should be included in environmental assessment and National Energy Board reviews, but that was not in the throne speech either. The Liberals, on campaign, promised to strengthen pipeline reviews, but so far are letting Kinder Morgan carry through with its pipeline and its tanker traffic expansion, carrying through under Harper government rules. The Liberals must live up to their commitments. It is long past time for a review process that includes climate change, that allows full cross-examination, and full public participation, that takes into account local communities, indigenous people, and climate change.

Nanaimo—Ladysmith is a centre for health care. We have many patients, families, and front-line workers that we hear from all the time. All through the campaign we heard how much they are under pressure and how much the public health care system is under pressure. I am very glad the Liberal throne speech acknowledged a commitment to reinvest in a new health accord, which the Conservative government had abandoned. However, again, there is nothing concrete.

My favourite piece that I would love to see is a commitment from the Liberal government to do everything it can to provide a family doctor for the five million Canadians who do not have one. I would love to see a quick fix to the foreign credentials program. I heard from a family in Nanaimo whose son was born and raised in Nanaimo. He went to the States to get his medical degree and wants to come home to Nanaimo to be a family doctor here, but Canada does not recognize his foreign credentials. How frustrating that is.

There is much work to do, much hope and much opportunity. When the economy is in trouble, it is the most vulnerable and those with the least who suffer the most. The government can and must play a direct role in reducing that inequality and New Democrats will push the Liberal government to take concrete actions to do so. Tom Mulcair and our NDP team will be standing up for such action everyday in the House.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

As a reminder to all hon. members, reference was made to the hon. member for Outremont and the hon. member for Calgary Heritage. They should be referred to by their riding names, not their given or family names. It is a practice that we need to follow and it takes a bit of time to become completely ingratiated with that habit.

Questions and comments, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member opposite for being elected and for her comments in the House today.

How does the member opposite and her colleagues intend to work with the government to increase the quality of life for Canadians and ensure that all Canadians are provided for?

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I recognize that Canadians want us to work together and co-operate, and New Democrats absolutely will. We campaigned on most of the same things. I have just provided a great list of things that I believe the member's colleagues also believe in, all implementable, all doable, all would benefit communities across the country, the environment, and the economy.

New Democrats and Liberals have a strong tradition of working together. We have provided some of Canada's best ideas, such as old age security, the Canada pension plan, public health care, and even the residential schools apology by the Conservatives was initiated by the NDP.

We will be constructive, co-operative and reinforcing wherever we can. Where we see that action is not being taken in a way that lives up to the commitments of the Liberal government's election promises and the throne speech, New Democrats will absolutely be standing together and holding the government to account.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the member for being elected and for her speech. It is always a pleasure to hear someone who has ideas about how we can make this country better.

I want to ask the member about the credentialing issue she raised regarding doctors. It is not actually within the jurisdiction of the federal government to provide credentialing. It is up to each individual province as the provinces have jurisdiction over credentialing. In fact, she should be taking up this issue with the B.C. College of Physicians and Surgeons. This is one of the challenges of a federal structure.

I look forward to working with the member on these kinds of issues.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a question of leadership that New Democrats have not seen the federal government take in the area of health care for a decade. I come from local government, so I know how much we need to work together in partnership, but if a federal government is setting standards, taking the lead, passing on transfer funding with some strings attached, and encouraging provincial governments to do the right thing, let alone the doctors associations in each province, that provides the opportunity to change the tone.

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the member opposite for her speech and thank her for all of the kind words about the throne speech. I am not clear, having listened to her, whether she will or will not be supporting the throne speech.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot to support in the throne speech, there is no question, but as we hear leaders say everyday, including the leader of the Assembly of First Nations today, words are easy, actions are hard. We have a decade of lost leadership to make up and actions are our focus on this side of the House.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very interesting speech. She clearly cares very much about her riding.

The member mentioned problems with drought in wetlands. Could she say more about how climate change is affecting her riding and could she tell us how people are concerned about these issues?