Lost her last election, in 2008, with 39% of the vote.
The Budget March 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member did not answer my question. She has all the time needed to answer. Will she support the amendment before us? That is the subject of today's debate. This is not a debate on the budget. This is a debate on the motion by the Leader of the Opposition. I want to know, after everything she and other members of her party have said, how they can support a motion that goes against everything she said in her speech?
The Budget March 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to inform the public who are watching us that we are discussing the amendment by the member for Calgary Southwest, seconded by the member for Medicine Hat. I am going to repeat myself a bit maybe, and the member who just spoke can give this some thought and answer me. Is she telling me that they are going to support a motion that is totally contrary to what they have already said in this House? Is that in her speech? For example, the motion states:
—the budget does not reflect conservative principles—
They are telling me that they are going to support this motion, which talks about conservative principles. The motion is against the Kyoto accord, which the Bloc Québécois has always supported. It is also against the national child care program, which the Bloc Québécois has always supported. The member even mentioned it in her speech. In addition, the motion is against the gun registry, which the Bloc Québécois agrees is a good program, despite everything.
The Conservatives are against something else, namely federal government investment in research in Quebec.
All that is mentioned in the motion. I would like to know, after what the hon. member said, whether she is in favour of the motion, because it is really contrary to everything she said in her own speech.
The Budget March 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but comment on and ask the hon. member about the recognition of foreign credentials, which is something she mentioned that we have worked on. Let me tell the hon. member that I actually worked on this issue 25 years ago in provincial politics. We all know that in fact it is the order for medicine, the order of engineers and all the professional associations that have a very important role to play in terms of the recognition of foreign credentials. It also involves the provincial governments because of their involvement in education, which is their jurisdiction.
As for always putting the burden on the federal government, we have said that we will be working in partnership with our provincial colleagues, of course, and also with the different professional associations, so it is not like we have not been doing anything. We have been doing things.
I ask the hon. member for her suggestions in terms of ensuring that in fact there are more doctors, for example, who will be recognized by the professional associations when those same associations control the accreditation of those doctors.
International Women's Day March 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I had the pleasure of honouring many women volunteers from my riding of Ahuntsic at my annual breakfast on the occasion of International Women's Day.
In addition, I paid tribute to six exceptional women during the presentation organized in conjunction with the Ahuntsic-Cartierville CEDC, Concertation-Femme and the Maison Fleury to further commemorate this day. These six caring and active women successfully returned to school and entered the labour market. They are Perla Marrugo Del Rosar, Liping Tian, Rajaa Abou Assi, Annie Gosselin, Cornelia Turturea and Anna Laskowska. They came from the four corners of the earth and, armed with courage and tenacity, they overcame small and large obstacles to integration. They dared to dream and to make those dreams come true, despite those obstacles.
That proves once again that education is the key to many successes.
Allow me to finish with a Congolese proverb, “When you educate a man you are educating one individual, but when you educate a woman you are educating a society”.
I wish everyone a happy International Women's Day.
The Budget March 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I simply want to ask the Bloc Québécois member who just spoke to clarify something for me. Others before him also made the same remarks.
If I am not mistaken, the amendment proposed by the opposition, namely by the Conservatives, suggests that the government's budget does not reflect Conservative principles. Therefore, if Bloc Québécois members approve this amendment, they will of course support the language used in the motion, which suggests that Conservative principles should be supported. We are very clear on this.
This is a motion that opposes the Kyoto Accord, which the Bloc has always supported; it opposes the national child care program, for which the Bloc has fought a number of battles; it opposes the gun registry, which the Bloc has always supported; and, finally, it opposes federal investments in research.
Considering that all these points are mentioned in the motion of the Conservative Party, I would like to know how Bloc Québécois members can truly support a motion that is contrary to the commitments that they made during the election campaign and in this House.
Association of Family Economy of the North February 23rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, this year the Cooperative Association of Family Economy of the North celebrates its 30th anniversary.
Montreal's Cooperative Association of Family Economy of the North is a not for profit agency that helps consumers with problems related to budgeting, credit, debt, and other consumer related issues.
Over its 30-year existence, Montreal's CAFEN has helped many families and individuals in financial distress. Thirty years of action, education and intervention with the public, thirty years of budgeting advice, training workshops and consumer advocacy.
On my behalf and on behalf of my colleagues, I want to thank them for their work, encourage them to continue and wish them happy 30th anniversary.
Supply February 15th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, much of the same and no answer to the question that was asked all along. No one is infringing upon provincial jurisdiction. I and the minister have said that.
As far as making choices, I will reiterate what we have already said on this side of the House. It is that choice that we want to provide for mothers who choose to put their children in early learning and child care programs. That is the choice we want to give them.
I have been asking this question on an ongoing basis. Provided that some parents choose to put their children in early learning and child care programs, what options is the member offering?
The provinces have come to the table and have said that they want to work with the federal government. They want to be able to provide for those parents who choose to put their children in early learning and child care programs, for various reasons. It is their choice. If the member believes in choice, then say so.
Do not keep saying that tax cuts is the way to go. Tax cuts does not cut it for low income families. We have provided those tax cuts and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance has talked about the Canada child tax benefit, the national child benefit and our investment in maternal or paternal leave. We have studied all those options and have acted on them, despite what members have been saying all day.
What is the Conservative Party's position in working with the provinces, which have asked to work with the government, to establish a system that provides a choice for those parents who choose to put their children in early learning and child care facilities?
Supply February 15th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I listened with much care to the hon. member's speech but I just want to clarify two things on what we have been saying all day today.
No one on this side of the House is talking about not giving parents a choice. The parliamentary secretary did mention the tax advantages that we have given to low and middle income Canadians in order to have the means to choose where they would like to place their children, whether at home with themselves or in a child care centre. Whatever the circumstances, economic or being single parents, those options are exactly what we are trying to ensure those parents have. That is why we are working with the provinces.
There is a system in place at the moment and that is what I want the hon. member to acknowledge. The provinces have come together with the federal government to establish a national system for those parents who choose early learning in child care facilities. It is not a question of us imposing or of us telling parents what to do. The parents have those options at the moment. We are not imposing anything.
I would like to ask the hon. member again the question I have been asking all day. When the provinces come to the table and ask for assistance in terms of coming up with a system that can respond to the various needs of parents across the country, what is the Conservative Party proposing to those provinces that have agreed to come to the table?
Supply February 15th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I have listened very carefully all day to the debate that has taken place in the House. I think we have to agree that there will never be much of a meeting of the minds in terms of how we view this issue. Repeating information about what the minister said or did not say or calling him names, as was the case during question period, is certainly not the way to go about this debate.
However, I want to bring something to the attention of the hon. member. We talk a lot about polls. On February 14, the Toronto Star reported on a poll by Ekos. It showed that 61% of Canadians stated how they would like to see more investment in social programs, while only 19% made tax cuts their top priority. Wrapping tax cuts in kids' clothing is not the way to put a system together.
The system does exist. The provinces have said that we should work with them to provide the tools that will be needed. In some cases those tools may be money. In other cases there may be expertise that can be shared around the table. We have a collaborative effort in terms of the provinces, not in terms of imposing our view but sitting around a table and reaching a consensus with the provinces on this issue. That is what the minister has tried to do.
On the other side I have heard nothing in terms of recommendations. How do they propose to work with the provinces? The provinces have already said that they want to work with the federal government. Canadians want us to work together to provide for those families who need early learning and child care, options they have chosen for their children.
What does the hon. member propose to do with the provinces? That was my question this morning to the hon. member for Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar. It is the same question for that hon. member. The provinces have already said to the government that they want to work with us, and we have put the money on the table.
Questions on the Order Paper February 15th, 2005
Madam Speaker, speaking of the type of supports we have given families, I think the hon. member missed the whole speech of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance on the amount of tax cuts we have made and the types of support we have provided, such as the child tax benefit.
However, I thought it was a way of demeaning the whole debate by talking about babysitting. We are not talking about babysitting. We are talking about early learning and child care. There is a huge difference, and it is by choice. It is by choice because we have increased the limit on the child care expense deduction from $4,000 to $7,000 a year for each child under seven years of age. We have provided the child disability benefit for low and modest income families to provide up to $1,600 per year for a child with a disability. We also have reduced net personal income taxes for families with children by at least 21%. Since they are very good at quoting different studies, I will quote the Caledon Institute. It said, “at the current level the child tax benefit reduced the rate of poverty among families with children by 25%”. There is more to come in the budget.
When the hon. member refers to babysitting, does he not agree that there should be a system in place for those families who choose to put their children in a child care system? Does he object to those families, because his vision of society is not the vision of society that we share in the House?