Debates of March 21st, 2017

Opposition Motion—Budget 2017

[An hon. member]

Fifteen.

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

I think it was fifteen times, Mr. Speaker. Surprise, surprise, the Liberal government refuses to provide an answer, here or even out and about. I would submit to the House that we may very likely have the first finance minister in Canadian history who believes the term “balanced budget” is dirty words.

I hope I am wrong about that. I hope that the finance minister will come to this place and tell Canadians that a balanced budget is important to Liberals, who of course campaigned on a promise to return to a balanced budget. However, more important, I hope we will learn exactly when the Liberals' fiscal plan will return to a balanced budget. Will it be in 2050, as the minister's own department contends, or when will it be? We do not know. Seriously, who knows? Does any member on any side have any idea when Canadians will see a balanced budget? That, of course, takes us to this motion today.

Here is the problem, as this motion summarizes. Spending continues to exceed revenue to at least the year 2050, unless the Liberals can show us otherwise. Spending, by the Liberals' own plan, is set to continue to rise. If the Liberals will not reduce spending, and we know they will not, then that leaves raising taxes. In effect, that is precisely what happens when the Liberals' national carbon tax comes fully online. Carbon taxes increase costs on businesses and hydro costs, and the businesses become less competitive overall. Increased CPP, let us not forget, increases payroll costs to employers, and that in turn makes Canadian employers less competitive against other jurisdictions.

Here is an interesting fact. Business investment continues to decline in Canada. In fact, it has declined basically every quarterly period since the current Liberal government was elected. I am going to give Liberal members of this place the benefit of the doubt to recognize the importance of business investment in Canada, and it is no surprise that if they make the business environment less competitive they lose investment. With Canadian business investment already in firm decline, how much longer can we continue to ignore that? If they are increasing costs onto our employers at the same time our competitors are decreasing them, as is the case in the United States, at the very least I would trust that Liberal members would agree that, if investment is already in decline—as is the case, the lowest since 1981—there is no fiscal capacity to further decrease Canadian competitiveness.

Keep in mind that the minister's own department, in a different set of reports, warned that increasing the Canada pension would be a drag on the Canadian economy for decades. However, of course the current Liberal government—or at least those who run things when the Prime Minister is travelling elsewhere for whatever reason—does not seem to care about Canadian competitiveness. Where do we go from here? Increased taxes are already hurting Canadian competitiveness.

Liberals will not reduce spending, so it is suggested that they may do a one-time sale of some federal airports to raise some cash. This strikes me as being like a tradesman selling his tools in order to make the minimum payment on credit card bills. I am open to privatization, but let us have a conversation and not simply put the items out on eBay. Yes, it would get them through next month's bills, but it would not change the fact that, as long as spending exceeds income, they have a household headed for trouble. We should not lose sight of the fact that it will be Canadian families of the future who will be left to pay these bills. Again, with an aging demographic, it looks as if our children and grandchildren will have a lot of work left for them from us, and that is not a positive development.

Basically, that is what this motion is about: hoping that budget 2017 will help fix these challenges and not continue to make them worse. As the opposition, we are asking for the government to take this motion seriously and introduce a budget that does not ignore the fiscal and competitive realities. The fact is that we are currently not paying our way and we are leaving debt and other challenges behind for our kids and grandkids to pay for. I would submit that it is not investing in the middle class; it is mortgaging it. It is time we stopped the out-of-control spending that results in higher taxes and creates serious challenges for our future generations. That is why I will be voting in favour of this motion. There are some members across the aisle who may not support it, but I really hope they think and also speak to the finance minister, and if not in tomorrow's budget, I hope these concepts are in future budgets. It is in Canada's best interests.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the comments of the member opposite, and I am confused. The previous Conservative government ran deficits just about every year, and yet Conservatives are now saying that deficits are an awful thing.

Before they were in power, Canada had gone from the worst debt-to-GDP ratio to the best, and debt levels went from being called totally unmanageable to being the best in the G8. Having the best debt levels has been maintained through this process. In fact, when there are reviews of how strong the Canadian economy is relative to its peers, one of the key factors is the investment the Canadian government is making in the Canadian economy, saying that is one of the main factors in why the Canadian economy is doing so well.

Despite the fact that I have confusion about why the Conservatives have suddenly found religion on the issue of deficits after running so many of them when they were in government, my main questions are these. Where would they cut, how would it impact the economy, and would he be willing to shut down the growth of this economy to get what he is looking for?

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

Mr. Speaker, simply put, when we look at what the Conservative government did after coming into power, we see it put $56 billion toward paying down the debt and cut taxes, which allowed the Canadian economy to be already ready when the financial crisis in 2006-07 and the subsequent great recession hit, the largest drop in demand since the great depression came. The domestic economy was prepared for a very tough time.

We are in a much different environment today. There are many people who question whether stimulating the economy works in a macroeconomic model when other countries like the United States are not doing so. Therefore, I would suggest to the member opposite that, if throwing money out today does not provide results and, ultimately, productive infrastructure to make our economy grow, what is the purpose? Are Liberals so addicted to throwing money out the door that they will use any reason—in fact, no reason—to do so?

[Karine Trudel, NDP, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about the fact that the government wants to privatize airports. Instead of doing that, the government could get more than $7 billion by tackling tax havens. That is a fact and something we talk about regularly. It is money that could easily be recouped and used to improve our health care system. Earlier, I was talking about post-secondary education and the huge tuition fees. Young people are going into debt in our regions.

It would be easy to get that $7 billion. Instead, the government seems to be at an impasse and would rather privatize our airports and our ports. That really worries me.

In mid-May or June, Canada Post will be tabling its report. Will the government come up with yet another surprise and privatize Canada Post out of the blue in order to scrape up a bit of money? We have to look at the long term and preserve our public services, which are so important. They create good jobs.

I wanted to share my concerns with my colleagues in the House.

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not hold the same ideological opposition to privatization. I believe it is a tool in the tool box and that, in cases where there are privatized airports throughout the world, there have been some very good results.

What I am concerned with is the rationale for doing so. Is the government putting these assets on fire sale simply to pay for the credit card? Second to that, is it doing so in a transparent and open way? It talks about consulting on every widget it comes up with, but when we ask questions in the chamber, all we hear is that it will do what is best for consumers. That is not good enough, and I expect better of any Canadian government.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise in this House, and specifically today to speak to this motion.

I have a good friend. She is a young woman who is just finishing her university degree. She sent me a Snapchat which said, “Do something to stop the Prime Minister from taking my money.” That is really why we are here today. We are debating a motion that would have the government commit to stop spending Canadians' taxpayer dollars in such a reckless and irresponsible way.

The motion in front of us today, which was proposed by the Conservative Party, would have the government agree that there should be no further tax hikes on Canadian families, businesses, seniors, or students. That is a no-brainer. We have not seen a lot of economic growth under the Liberal government's tenure to date. It seems reasonable to ask the government to show Canadians that it is willing to make a commitment, ahead of its disastrous budget tomorrow, to stop the haemorrhaging and to stop raising taxes on Canadian families.

We are also asking the government to take immediate measures to ensure companies hire young Canadians and address the youth unemployment crisis. We know that economic growth has slowed under the Liberal government's tenure, and that the people who are most affected by this are young Canadians. Certainly, in my home province of Alberta, that crisis has been magnified to a very large extent over the last year and a half.

We are also asking the government to vote for a credible plan to return to a balanced budget by 2019, as the Liberals promised Canadians in the election campaign. They have completely abandoned this promise, and they are expecting Canadians just to turn a blind eye to it. The Liberals have an opportunity with this motion today to support that.

In this motion, we are also asking the government to not sell Canadian airports. The analogy I used this weekend on a television talk show is that it is as though the Liberals went to Vegas on a drunken weekend bender, got this massive credit card bill, have nothing to show for it except a hangover, and now they are selling Canadian airports to pay for it. We are asking the government not to do that.

That is the form and substance of the motion. Why is it so important that the government do that today?

First, I need to point out the higher tax burden that Canadians are paying under the Liberal government. We want the government to agree to stop raising taxes. Why? Since the Liberals have formed government, and because they have put in place higher Canada pension plan premiums, each Canadian household will pay about $2,200 more every year. That means $2,200 coming directly out of the pockets of Canadian families. For most Canadian families, that is a lot of money and the government has taken that right out of their pockets.

With the Liberals' national price on carbon, which we know will not actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions and will not do anything to help climate change, that means up to another $2,500 directly out of the pockets of Canadians.

The Liberals cancelled the family tax cut. We know that is about $2,000 per household. They cancelled the arts and fitness tax credit. That is about $225 a child. For a family that is trying to put their kids into hockey, that is a lot of money. The Liberals took that away, so effectively that is a tax increase. The other thing, which is especially for students, is that the government cancelled the education and textbook tax credits, which is another $500 roughly per student.

The Liberals also increased the small business tax rate. That is an average of $1,800 per company. They have also increased employment insurance premiums, which is another $85 per worker.

What is even more important is that the Liberals, if they refuse to stand up and say, “Yes, we agree. It is common sense, and we are not going to increase taxes on Canadians”, and I am not optimistic about it, then they are going to provide Canadians some assurances on what we are hearing is going to actually be in their budget tomorrow. We are hearing that tomorrow's budget will increase the capital gains inclusion rate. What does that mean? The Liberals are pre-positioning this with editorials in the Toronto Star and whatnot saying that the capital gains tax only affects the wealthy.

However, in reality, there are 1.2 million Canadians who earn less than $50,000 who take advantage of that tax credit. Many of them are low-income seniors. These would be seniors who had bought stocks in a company or something 20 or 30 years ago and are looking to divest some of that. They are going to have a huge tax burden. This is going to send a chill right across the economy. If this is in the budget tomorrow, my God. When we look at competitiveness with our neighbour to the south right now, this is just disastrous. It is not only disastrous for the economy, but it is directly disastrous for those 1.2 million people who want to become part of the middle class and are now not going to be able to afford to do it.

The Liberals are going to tax stock options for employees. We have heard about this. Ending the public transit tax credit is on the table, as is ending the volunteer firefighter tax credit. The Liberals have also been pre-positioning a tax on Internet services, like Netflix.

It is very simple for the Liberals to stand here and say, “We understand all of this damage that we have done to Canadian families, but we are going to give them a break tomorrow, and we are going to stand up and say that we are not going to increase taxes.” However, anybody who has been listening to the debate today will know that they are not going to vote for this motion. Why? The Liberals have mortgaged our future into oblivion.

Here is the problem. The Liberals have increased taxes on Canadians by a crazy amount, and members can do the math that I outlined at the start of my speech. This is a lot of money for the average Canadian family. What is even more important is that they have increased our deficits to the point where the parliamentary budget officer is saying that we cannot balance the budget for at least 30 years, and what do the Liberals have to show for it? Nothing.

Here are some key economic metrics. Canadians are working less under the Liberal government. The hours worked are down by 0.3% over the last year. Canadians are earning less wages, down 1.3% over the last year, but the cost of living is up by 2.1%. I do not need to tell these statistics to Canadians, because they are feeling it in their pocketbooks, which is why we need to support this motion here today.

For us in this place, we have a fiduciary responsibility to Canadian taxpayers to be responsible stewards of their money. If we are going to spend into oblivion, as the government is doing, we better have some results from it. I will continue to tell members about what is not happening for Canadians.

This spending has failed to grow the economy. GDP grew by 1.4% in 2016, which is exactly what the federal government projected before last year's budget. If members remember, this time last year, the federal government was saying that it would be mortgaging Canada's future, and all of a sudden we were going to see a massive increase in growth. What did we see? Nothing. There was no growth.

The other thing I am going to point out is that the government was supposed to flow all sorts of money into infrastructure spending. I do not see any roads being built. I do not see the LRT in my riding being completed, especially in Alberta where we have so many people out of work, especially trades that could be getting back to work with some of these funds, but the government has done nothing. However, I will say that the infrastructure minister managed to find time to spend $800,000 to renovate his office here in Ottawa, so that was a priority.

The other problem we have is competitiveness as we compare ourselves to the U.S. As we sink ourselves into a deeper hole, get no results from it, and take more money away from Canadian taxpayers, there is no bright future here whatsoever for Canadians, and that is wrong.

This is why we put this motion forward today. It seems very reasonable to me for the government to stand and say, “We oppose taking away more money out of Canadians' pockets, because we know that we have nothing to show for it.”

It is very funny as I stand here and listen to the Liberals heckle me. They are uncomfortable because they know that I am right. They know there has been nothing to show for their reckless spending. They know that their campaign promises were abysmally improperly costed. It was just a massive sham. Now those chickens are coming home to roost.

I am proud to stand up for my constituents and hard-working Canadians to say that enough is enough. I will be standing up and voting for this motion to say that, no, we do not need to tax Canadians more. No, we do not need to grow government for absolutely no reason with absolutely no results, and that is the difference between this side of the House and that side of the House.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, one of the great things about coming to this House from municipal council is we have friends right across the country who are mayors and members of city councils in places such as Calgary.

I remember talking to Mayor Nenshi specifically in the last year of the Conservative mandate about how the previous government had approved zero dollars in infrastructure projects for Calgary, and not just zero dollars in infrastructure projects for Calgary, but zero dollars for all of Alberta for two straight years.

The member opposite said that she wanted to see results from the federal infrastructure spend. I can tell the member that Mayor Nenshi has been more than glowing in his praise for the federal transfers that have gone through the provincial capital straight to the people of Calgary, including projects like the Green Line, the 17 Avenue transitway, the southwest transitway, the Stoney CNG bus storage and transit facility, the north crosstown bus rapid transit line, the south crosstown bus rapid transit line, the bus rapid transit line, and the Sirocco LRT parking lot expansion to accommodate all the growth and expansion.

If those projects are happening in the member's city, would she open her eyes, please, and acknowledge them?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for giving a laundry list of the infrastructure investments that were announced under our Conservative government. I thank him for mentioning especially the Green Line.

What is very interesting is that if my colleague from downtown Toronto, which is so congruent to understanding the needs of my riding in Calgary which is seeing a 10% unemployment rate right now, had any understanding of what is going on in Calgary, he would know that the municipal tax rate in Calgary is so high that businesses are closing their doors. I really want to thank him for reiterating the infrastructure investments that were committed under our government under a balanced budget with the lowest federal tax burden in 50 years. I would really like to thank him for that, and I would also like to take this chance to remind him that that particular mayor he mentioned has seen a very large increase in property taxes which nobody in Calgary appreciates.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her passionate and very interesting speech.

The Conservatives know that we agree with many points in their motion today, specifically their point on airports because that is absolute heresy. However, when it comes to freezing certain tax rates, we are not on the same page.

In a recent speech, I quoted the British finance minister, Mr. Osborne, who said that their corporate tax rate was among the lowest in the world, but England expects those taxes to be paid. I would like to know my colleague's thoughts on that.

What does she think about the government's inaction when it comes to online suppliers and their unfair competition with our retailers who operate a storefront, have employees, and pay their taxes here in Canada?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, to be honest, I only heard part of my colleague's question. I heard him talk a little about corporate taxes.

What I wanted to emphasize to the House was that under our former government, while the federal tax burden was at its lowest level in over 50 years, we actually saw government revenue increase. Why was that? When we know that there is a competitive environment for job-creating companies to undertake investment, the economy grows and government revenue grows, because if we have more businesses creating more revenue, we have a bigger tax base that can go to government for programs and services.

That is the problem with Keynesian economics. Keynesians think they can spend their way into prosperity and they often forget the other side of the equation which is that what is spent has to be paid back. Both the Liberals and the NDP have no idea about this.

Certainly it is my pleasure to stand up for common sense and my constituents in the House to have a low tax burden and prudent common sense when it comes to government spending.

Vic Derman

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this place and pay tribute to people from my community of Saanich—Gulf Islands. However, it is particularly difficult when I am paying tribute to someone who has passed away far too soon.

Saanich councillor, Vic Derman, died this weekend. He had served on council since 2002, but before that he was a key community leader.

He founded the Saanich Community Association Network. He was a founder of the land conservancy. He was my friend. He was a community leader in every way one could imagine. He was a school teacher before he went into politics. He inspired many young people, who are now paying tribute to him, to give themselves to public service.

He leaves his wife, Lauraine, his daughter Michelle, and countless others like me who hold Vic Derman forever as a hero, a champion of climate action and sustainability.

Valcartier Victims

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is with deep sadness, but also a sense of peace, that I rise today.

In July 1974, young cadets gathered at the Valcartier Cadet Summer Training Centre in Quebec. During a training exercise a grenade exploded, killing six cadets and injuring dozens more.

I was a member of the Royal Montreal Regiment cadets when we learned that some of our fellow cadets were among the victims.

For over 40 years, these cadets and their families did not see the fair treatment or compensation they deserved. This month, the Minister of National Defence offered a formal apology, along with providing compensation for the former cadets and their families whose lives were changed forever by this tragic incident.

The fight for justice for the Valcartier victims was long and stressful. It has been a very important issue for me for many years. I would like to thank the government for finally—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

Plessisville Hunting and Fishing Association

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, do you know the story about the fellow who went fishing and rented a tractor trailer to bring home a huge trout, or the one about a hunter who had to replace the door to his home to bring in the magnificent 12-foot rack of the animal he had watched for so long that his hair turned white?

Over the past 60 years, we have heard lots of these kinds of hunting and fishing stories in Plessisville. Today, I am proud to recognize the 1,400 members of the Association de chasse et pêche de Plessisville, which will be celebrating its 60th anniversary on March 28.

On my honour, the best hunting and fishing is in Plessisville, the most dedicated volunteers are those of the fishing and hunting club, and the best fishers and hunters in Canada live in the riding of Mégantic-L'Érable.

On behalf of all my constituents and myself, I would like to thank and congratulate the Association de chasse et pêche de Plessisville. Thank you to everyone who supports the association by volunteering and supporting a solid membership that will see the association through another 60 years.

Innovation and Economic Development

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a dedicated advocate for innovation in rural Canada. My beautiful province of New Brunswick remains one of the most rural provinces in Canada, and we are proud of it. Rural communities not only feed Canada, they develop and protect our natural resources, and in my opinion, provide an appealing alternative to urban life.

I am proud to be part of a government that understands what innovation looks like in rural Canada and has committed to investments in broadband internet connectivity and other technologies that support resource-based industries, like agriculture and fisheries.

We are working to strengthen the workforce through immigration and investing in training and skills development, as well as growing the economic potential of tourism through infrastructure investments, like our own Fundy trail.

We all must be champions for rural Canada in the House, as we will continue to rely on tenacious and innovative rural Canadians for sustainability and growth. By continuing to look at innovation from a rural perspective, we can realize the full potential of our great country.

International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize March 21 as the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The 2017 UN theme is racial profiling and incitement to hatred, with a focus on how this impacts refugees and migrants.

The recent terrorist attack against the Muslim community in Quebec was a devastating reminder that Canada is not immune from hate crimes and racially motivated violence. Racial profiling of minorities continues on our streets. Systemic discrimination against first nations, Métis and Inuit peoples continues across Canada. People are being discriminated against at our border by Trump's prejudiced immigration and travel ban.

There is no place in Canada for hatred or discrimination of any kind.

Teanna Ducharme, member of the Nisga'a Nation and Daughters of the Vote delegate, stood in the House and said, “I envision a Canada that is fierce in its leadership and shows just how much every person is equal.”

We must challenge racist attitudes and behaviours if we hope to continue building a fair and equitable society, and to change the reality in Canada for racialized people and all who seek racial justice.

International Day of Forests

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today is the International Day of Forests. Protecting our forests is crucial, and this begins with the environment. Forests are the lungs of the earth, and they provide habitat for countless forms of life.

There is a wonderful parable by Dr. Seuss, called The Lorax. In it, the Lorax says, “I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues”.

Today, I encourage all Canadians to speak for the trees through their actions: plant a tree, donate to a charity, or pick up a piece of litter. Finally, take a moment to go for a walk in the woods and contemplate how we are all one with nature.

World Down Syndrome Day

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House to inform members that today, March 21, marks World Down Syndrome Day, a day where Canadians celebrate people with Down syndrome and their families, from coast, to coast, to coast.

Today serves as a platform to share information about Down syndrome in order to debunk the myths and install the facts, facts that will help Canadians have a better understanding of Down syndrome.

The date March 21 is significant because it symbolizes the characteristics of 95% of the people living with Down syndrom, which is the triplication of the 21st chromosome.

I would also like to use this time to recognize the Canadian Down Syndrome Society and its board chair, Laura LaChance. They are here today, as they celebrate 30 years as Canada's only national Down syndrome organization.

I personally would like to thank the society for all the hard work and advocacy that it has provided to Down syndrome awareness in Canada over the past 30 years.

The Push for Change

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge Joe Roberts, his wife Marie Roberts, and The Push for Change team.

In 1989, Joe Roberts was a homeless youth in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, struggling with substance abuse and homelessness. Thanks to the support of his mother and an OPP officer, he turned his life around and became a successful entrepreneur.

On May 1, last year, in St. John's, Newfoundland, Joe began pushing a shopping cart across Canada to raise money and awareness about the issues of youth homelessness that impact 35,000 young people each year.

Today is day 325 of the 517-day walk and Joe has already walked nearly 6,000 kilometres. When he arrives in Vancouver on September 30, Joe will have walked 9,000 kilometres and engaged in over 400 school and community events.

Let us keep pushing for change. We thank Joe.

International Day of Forests

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today, many Canadians are celebrating International Day of Forests.

With the third-largest forest area in the world and 37% of the world's certified forests, Canada's forest sector is ideally positioned to drive innovation, create jobs, and combat climate change.

Canada's forests also provide opportunities for all Canadians to enjoy the outdoors and natural experiences.

In my riding, Pontiac, the iconic white pine has formed the core of our rural culture and was an engine of economic growth for over 200 years. Log Driver's Waltz could be another Canadian national anthem.

The Canadian forest industry continues to embrace innovation by adopting clean technologies, producing green energy, and reducing its need for water.

Our government is proud that our forest industry is recognized worldwide for sustainable forest management, which is vital to securing the health and well-being of our nation's forests and forestry sector.

Sylvia Fletcher Thomas

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to former Gananoque, Ontario, mayor and my friend Sylvia Fletcher Thomas who passed away at home last week at the age of 68.

Sylvia, as she preferred to be known, was a fierce promoter and cheerleader for the town of Gananoque and the 1000 Islands, first as the executive director of the chamber of commerce, then as a councillor, and then as a two-term mayor. She led the community through several controversies that saw major commercial development, along with a new emergency services building required by the police and fire departments.

I had the honour of serving with her on council and the pleasure of working with her on many projects in town. I can say that she was very passionate about her work, both at the chamber and as mayor, but she also enjoyed a good laugh and could even poke fun at herself.

On behalf of all members, I offer condolences to her husband Jim Hector Thomas, her son Dwayne, who is now a town councillor in Gananoque, her daughter Cindy Wrong, her mother Elin Philips, her 10 brothers and sisters, and her extended family.

She will be missed.

International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today is the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

Racism affects all our institutions and has a real impact on the lives of racialized Canadians every day. Indigenous and black communities are vastly overrepresented in our jail; 25% of those in federal prisons are indigenous men and women, and 36% of those in federal prisons for women are indigenous. Other vital statistics illustrate the deep, historical impact of government policies toward our first nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples.

This year, we saw racism manifest in its deadliest form with a shooting in Sainte-Foy, Quebec. Reported cases of Islamophobia have more than doubled in the past three years alone. We see mosques and synagogues vandalized. We see girls and boys, women and men targeted for just being who they are.

On this day, we need to reflect on these startling facts and resolve to fight racism in all its vilest forms, right in Canada and around the world.

Post-secondary Policy Forum Challenge

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, our democracy thrives when each new generation produces thoughtful leaders and thinkers.

Today I am pleased to announce that five students from McMaster, which is a world-recognized institution in my home town of Hamilton, have won the Minister of Finance's post-secondary policy forum challenge. Their submission focused on reform and modernization of employment insurance.

The Minister of Finance called their submission innovative and bold. These talented young people will be on the Hill tomorrow and will be able to hear the minister deliver the 2017 budget, and will also have the opportunity to meet with him afterward.

I wish to congratulate these bright young minds for their innovation and creativity. They inspire great optimism in me, for Hamilton, and for Canada. Well done students; Well done McMaster University.

Sexual Assault

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I recently hosted a meeting in my riding of Parry Sound—Muskoka with local advocacy groups and the mayors of Huntsville and Bracebridge to discuss an alarming report in the Globe and Mail.

The report revealed one in five sexual assault claims in Canada is dismissed as unfounded by the police. My riding has some of the highest numbers in the country, with more than half of sexual assault allegations being dropped. We must work together to address these disturbing and unacceptable statistics.

We should be looking at alternative models of addressing sexual assault allegations, including the Philadelphia model. This model was implemented 14 years ago, and allows front-line groups, which understand trauma, to review reported sexual assault cases directly with police.

I am encouraged that communities and advocacy groups in Parry Sound—Muskoka and across the country are working together and learning from one another to find effective solutions to support sexual assault victims. Let us all help our communities to reduce and eliminate sexual violence, and bring perpetrators to justice.