Andrew Saxton

[Consumer Product Safety, June 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian industry and environmental groups alike welcome and strongly support our new Bill C-36, the Canada consumer product safety bill.

With an average of 300 products that are subject to recall per year, there are many stakeholders who welcome the opportunity to finally have legislation that will provide the government with the needed tools to do this.

The hon. Minister of Health tabled this legislation yesterday in response to many requests from Canadians.

We have often heard stories from victims' families recounting accidents or deaths that could have been prevented had we had legislation. Our commitment is to them, as well as to all Canadians who deserve to be represented and protected from those who continue to sell unsafe products in our country.

On this side of the House, we look forward to and encourage the support of all members of the House and the Senate in getting this done as soon as possible. Canadian families deserve it.

[June 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I find this rather ironic coming from the member opposite. The Liberals opposed efforts to expand access to information when they were in government, opposing even their own members' bills.

In 2005 the Liberals voted against a Conservative Party motion to extend access to information laws to crown corporations.

Our government passed historic changes to the Access to Information Act making 70 new crown corporations and institutions accountable to Canadians. We got rid of the system used by the Liberals to centralize control of access to information.

Our government also increased the Information Commissioner's budget from $8.5 million to $10.7 million a year. That is a 25% increase.

We look forward to continuing to work with the Information Commissioner to improve access to information for Canadians.

[June 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, since this government came to power in 2006, we have fought to strengthen the openness and transparency of public institutions in Canada. Since then we have not backed away from our commitment one bit. If anything, we have strengthened it. We believe Canadians have a right to know what goes on behind the scenes in government, departments and agencies. Our record demonstrates our commitment to that principle.

In 2006 the first thing we did in coming to power was to introduce the Federal Accountability Act, the toughest anti-corruption legislation in Canadian history. That act made public institutions in Canada more open, accountable and transparent than at any other time in this country's history. Through this act we broadened the Access to Information law to include crown corporations, foundations and agents of Parliament.

As a result, 70 more institutions are now accountable to Canadians through the Access to Information Act, a step the Liberals never took. That means that more than 255 federal institutions are now subject to the act. For the first time, Canadians can see how these institutions spend their tax dollars.

Some of these institutions are finding it challenging to adapt to the requirements of the act as the Information Commissioner noted in her report last week. But overall we think this is a step in the right direction and we did not stop there.

While we took steps on the front end to increase transparency, we acted to improve things on the back end as well. Expanding access to so many new institutions means that staff need proper training. We needed to have the right policies and directives in place to ensure that right decisions are made by the right people. Of course, I am referring to the designated officials across the government who actually make decisions when it comes to access to information; people like Denise Brennan, Ann Wesch and Tom Makichuk who process these requests every day.

Let us be clear, each of those officials I just named clearly told the ethics committee that they do not encounter political interference in their work. The member opposite may be confused by that as she thinks back to the practices during the previous Liberal era. But our record speaks for itself. Is the system perfect? No, but few things are.

We should not let that blind us to how good our access to information system is and how much work the government has put into making it that way. I am proud to be part of a government that fought for the right of Canadians to know how their government operates, that can point to solid achievements in access to information, and that is committed to making the system even better.

Our record is clear. Our commitment has not evaporated. We will continue to uphold this fundamental pillar of Canadian democracy.

[June 2nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member complains about the length of time it took. Well, the Liberals had 13 years while they were in power and they never did anything about it. So, it is about time.

The hon. member is likely aware that the Public Service Commission is an independent organization at arm's length from the government. When the Public Service Commission announced its intention to bring in preferential hiring for widows and widowers of Canadian heroes, we on this side of the House supported them 100%.

Officials across the government, including the Department of Justice, provided the PSC with any and all assistance in preparing the draft regulations and in moving them through the system as quickly as possible.

As I noted previously, the job got done.

[June 2nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the comments from the hon. member opposite and I thank him for providing me with the opportunity to speak to this issue.

As the member will no doubt recall, in April the President of the Treasury Board responded his initial question on that matter very clearly. He told members of this House that within a number of weeks they could expect to see regulations in place allowing survivors of fallen Canadian heroes to access jobs in the public service on a preferential basis.

We are talking about the families of Canadian soldiers who have given the ultimate sacrifice in the service of their country. We on this side of the House are proud to support initiatives that honour the families of these brave Canadians.

That is why I am so pleased to note that on May 12, the Public Service Commission published regulations establishing a new priority right for surviving spouses or common-law partners of employees, members of the Canadian Forces and members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police whose death is attributable to the performance of their duties.

These regulations are retroactive to October 7, 2001, the date on which the Canadian Forces first began service in Afghanistan so that veterans' families are not left out.

As of May 12 of this year, spouses can add their names to the Public Service Commission's priority list, where they can remain for up to two years, alongside military and RCMP members who are discharged for medical reasons.

Canada's armed forces are fighting a war. We have sent our men and women in uniform into harm's way. For every soldier, there is a mother, a father, a spouse, a child or a friend back home. I will not stand here today and claim that this assistance will erase the suffering of a lost loved one, but it is my sincere belief that the government must support these families where we can and we will continue to do so.

[The Economy, May 28th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday an important study was released. It confirmed that the Liberal business tax hike would lead directly to 233,000 lost jobs. Earlier this year another study revealed a Liberal GST hike would cost Canada 162,000 jobs. We now have independent evidence that these two Liberal tax hikes alone would kill nearly 400,000 jobs.

Our Conservative government knows that lower taxes create jobs and fuel economic growth, which is why we have cut the GST and over 100 other taxes since forming government.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I remind my hon. colleague that this bill passed through committee unamended.

Here are some of the provisions the NDP members are delaying with their political games: eliminating tariffs on manufacturing imports of machinery and equipment; narrowing the definition of taxable Canadian property; implementing important changes to strengthen federally regulated private pension plans; implementing the one-time transfer protection payment to the provinces; regulating national payment card networks and their operators; enabling credit unions to incorporate federally and to act as banks; stimulating the mining industry by extending the mineral exploration credit; creating greater fairness between single-parent and two-parent families with respect to claiming universal child care benefits; and implementing an enhanced stamping regime for tobacco products to deter contraband.

These are just some of the wonderful things in this budget bill. I ask the opposition members to get together and pass it so that we can get Canadians back to work and on track.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the government is acting to save thousands of Canadian jobs by enabling competition within the outgoing international-mail marketplace. Canadian businesses will have more choice and opportunity for their outbound international mail if this legislation passes.

What we are really talking about today is delaying implementation of key elements of budget 2010, a budget designed to stimulate the economy and create jobs so that Canadians can go back to work.

The jobs and economic growth act is a testament to the proactive and ambitious actions our Conservative government has taken to ensure that Canada was not only protected from the worst of the global economic storm but will lead the global economic recovery.

The NDP claims to try to help workers, but has failed to give any suggestions or a plan to get more people back to work or create jobs. That is what year two of Canada's economic action plan is about: helping Canadians emerge from economic hardship.

Instead of helping workers, the NDP is too busy playing political games. It is delaying the implementation of a bill designed to help Canadians and continue the fragile recovery that is already taking place.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, May 27th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak against this ill-advised NDP motion, which is clearly a delaying tactic, and to speak for supporting jobs and Canada's economic recovery. Like my colleagues on the government side of the aisle, I am opposed to this motion.

I oppose this motion, because delaying or threatening to gut budget 2010 and the jobs and economic growth act would only threaten the economic security of Canadians. I oppose delaying over $500 million in transfer protection payments to the provinces. I oppose delaying funding for organizations, such as the $75 million for Genome Canada, the $20 million for Pathways to Education Canada to provide support for disadvantaged youth, and the $13.5 million for the Rick Hansen Foundation.

I oppose delaying important reforms to protect federally regulated pension plans, such as requiring an employer to fully fund benefits if the whole of a pension plan is terminated. I oppose delaying legislative authority to enforce the code of conduct for the debit and credit industry. I oppose delaying crucial tax changes to revitalize Canada's venture capital industry and much more.

I oppose delaying Canada's economic action plan. It is important that we stay the course and do what we must as legislators to ensure that we implement year two of Canada's economic action plan, as outlined in budget 2010, in a timely manner so as to best assist Canadians. Our government, through the jobs and economic growth act, is working to address the long-term opportunities and challenges our country will be confronting in the years ahead.

One of these key challenges is ensuring that our companies remain competitive in the global marketplace. We are determined to assist our hard-working manufacturers in meeting this objective. The jobs and economic growth act proposes to bring forward a series of economic measures to contribute to Canada's advantage now and in the future. One of these measures is the action we have taken to eliminate tariffs on manufacturing inputs, machinery, and equipment, which would make Canada a tariff-free zone for manufacturing.

Some have charged that the act is too ambitious, too large. However, if you were to carefully review the actual act, you would soon realize that because of the technical and legal requirements, the bold action to make Canada a tariff-free zone for manufacturing actually makes up over half of the act. In other words, half the pages in the jobs and economic growth act are the result of that one single measure.

Clearly, as suggested by its size, this measure has immense short-term and long-term benefits for our economy. This has been recognized by the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, who were clear that in their view, budget 2010 and the jobs and economic growth act will help Canada's manufacturers and exporters compete. They said:

We worked with the government directly to reduce tariffs for manufacturing and I believe this is an important cost-savings mechanism for companies....[I]t is a bottom-line boost to cash flow for manufacturers at a time when it is needed the most.

By lowering production costs for manufacturing, this initiative increases the competitiveness of our manufacturers, which will help them better compete with foreign suppliers, both in Canada and abroad. By reducing the cost of importing key factors of production, this measure also encourages innovation and allows businesses to enhance their stock of capital equipment. This is very important for improving productivity.

Equally important is the positive impact this measure is expected to have on employment. All in all, it is estimated that our move to make Canada a tariff-free zone for industrial manufacturers will create 12,000 new, good-quality jobs in the years ahead. This will certainly help strengthen our economy. That is why measures such as tariff elimination have been so widely applauded.

We have heard from business leaders, such as like Dani Reiss, CEO of that popular Arctic Canadian coat manufacturer, Canada Goose. He heralded it as “a great move” and said, “tariffs only made it more expensive to be a Canadian manufacturer. I think this move by the government will make 'Made in Canada' viable for more apparel companies”.

However, the jobs and economic growth act does so much more. For instance, the targeted measures include the provisions in part 7 and part 8 of the bill that are part of budget 2010's actions for containing growth in government spending and ensuring that the government lives within its means. In particular, part 7 implements the budget 2010 commitment to freeze the salaries of the Prime Minister, ministers, members of Parliament, and senators for the 2010 through 2013 fiscal years.

By putting forward the salary freeze for the Prime Minister, ministers, MPs, and senators, the government is leading by example in budget 2010.

This initiative has been welcomed by Canadians. The opposition has also reacted positively to the proposed salary freeze, at least initially.

Before concluding, let me directly address those who have been critical of the jobs and economic growth act. They seem to have randomly pointed to select measures and for singularly political reasons have deemed them unnecessary. They would, it seems, delay or defeat the act to prevent these measures from going forward.

Many of these individuals, spurred on by vested interests, have used as their partisan punching bag the provisions that would allow competition in the outgoing international-mail marketplace. This is a measure that we know will directly save thousands of Canadian jobs. I ask those individuals to put partisanship aside and read the frank testimony the finance committee heard from a witness who spoke on this measure, a witness who pointed out that this competition has already been occurring for decades.

Barry Sikora is a small businessman from British Columbia. Mr. Sikora has been involved in the international mail industry for over 30 years. He has been employing people for over 30 years and contributing to his community for over 30 years. He was that witness, and he had a simple message: pass this act. In his own words, and I quote, he said:

...[M]y company employed 31 people. We're not a huge corporation; we're an average business in the printing industry. Now, because of this situation, we're down to 17 employees. Many of our customers have left us...[and] they have taken their business to another country. They have forced our industry to lay off long-time employees, and that's not a pleasant thing to do...Already we've lost a significant amount of business. We're hoping that it will come back, but...if this [act] doesn't pass, I'm out of business.

For those individuals who are spurred on by vested interests and their ideological, procedural, and partisan narrow casting, remember Mr. Sikora and the Canadians he employs and the Canadian jobs he would like to add. Think about those jobs lost and the families impacted if we delay or defeat this act.

Clearly, Canadians are looking to all members of this House to take action to support jobs and economic growth. We cannot afford to delay the implementation of budget 2010.

This motion by the NDP is simply a tactic to delay House consideration of measures that are urgently needed to ensure that Canada's economic recovery continues. That is why the government does not support the motion. Instead, we will continue to work with the opposition to ensure that this act is adopted by Parliament as quickly as possible for the benefit of all Canadians.

I therefore call on all members of this House to oppose this motion.

[Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, May 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal leader's list of reckless spending promises keeps on growing. It grows in lockstep with the ever-increasing list of tax hikes he proposes to pay for these promises. No wonder he calls himself a tax and spend Liberal. These are the same old failed tax and spend policies the Liberals are famous for; billions here, billions there.

The Liberal leader told Canadians recently that before endorsing any new proposal “One of the issues we have to confront is: How do we pay for this? We can't be a credible party until we have an answer for that question”. Canadians are still waiting for the answer.

So far, the only answer the Liberal leader has given is that he will hike job-killing business taxes, raise the GST and bring back the carbon tax.

It is becoming clearer by the day that Canadians just cannot afford the tax and spend policies of the Liberal leader.