Bob Rae

[Employment Insurance, May 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the minister would never want to mislead the House.

He said that the changes are in the bill. Unfortunately, he is completely wrong and the changes are not in the bill. What is in the bill is the elimination of important protective measures that are found in the existing legislation.

To date, the government has refused to tell us or Canadian workers and employers what is going to replace the sections that are being eliminated.

When will we see the definitions, substitutions and regulations? That is what we want.

[Employment Insurance, May 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I can bring things from Nigeria a little closer to home.

I wonder if I might ask the spokesman for the government this question today. I met this morning with representatives of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. It was a very positive and constructive discussion, and one of the things we discussed was the issue of employment insurance. They themselves were saying they were baffled by the number of different statements being made by the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development, and the complete lack of clarity with respect to what exactly the change is that the government intends to bring forward.

Can the minister please tell us why it is reasonable for the government to ask the House to approve a change which it has not yet seen?

[Pensions, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the government has stated that there is an affordability issue with respect to old age security and the guaranteed income supplement. That was what the Prime Minister said in Davos, and that has been said by the Minister of Human Resources and the Minister of Finance. The odd thing is that the government--neither the minister nor the Prime Minister--can tell us how much money is going to be saved by the changes they are introducing in 2023.

If they cannot tell us how much money they are going to save, could they please explain to us why there is a crisis of affordability? It is a very simple question.

[Employment Insurance, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is absolutely wrong and is refusing to acknowledge what is really going on.

The Conservatives have made it clear to unemployed workers that their rights will no longer be protected by laws passed by Parliament, but by regulations approved and passed by the Prime Minister himself.

What are those regulations and those laws? Canada is not a dictatorship. It is a democratic country in which workers have the right to know which law will protect them.

[Employment Insurance, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, for generations unemployed Canadians have had the protection of the law that was passed by Parliament with respect to when they could claim and how they could claim and how those claims would be adjudicated.

Now the government is saying that those protections will be taken away because the law is being repealed with respect to those issues. It is being replaced by regulations, and no one knows what they are going to be. Not a single soul in this Parliament has a clue as to what the regulations are going to be.

The ideas are in the heads of the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Human Resources. Give us the regulations.

[National Defence, May 15th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the Auditor General, in speaking to the public accounts committee, reaffirmed every piece of information that is contained in his report with respect to the difference in his opinion between what information should have been given to Parliament and what information should have been given to the people of Canada, and what information was not in fact given to Parliament and that information that was not correct was given to Parliament.

My question, once again, is for the Prime Minister. How can we possibly carry on with a situation when the Auditor General of Canada is telling us that Parliament has not been given accurate information?

[The Budget, May 15th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that neither I nor the members in this corner of the House have ever had the sense that either the government or the Prime Minister listen to us. They do not give me that impression.

His answer is completely different from the frank and candid answer we got from the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Yesterday, the minister revealed what is really going on with this Parliament and this government: they are smothering everything they hear from people they do not agree with.

[The Budget, May 15th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, for most governments, George Orwell's 1984 is not exactly a guide to action. It is supposed to be a cautionary tale.

Yesterday the Minister of Foreign Affairs admitted that the reason the government had cut off the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy was because it was providing advice with which the government disagreed. The National Council of Welfare is also providing advice with which the government disagrees. Many charities are currently being attacked and pilloried by the government because they are doing things with which the government disagrees.

Does the Prime Minister not realize that he has to listen to people with whom he disagrees?

[National Defence, May 14th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the minister talks about the government's need and desire to control spending.

Let us look at the Department of National Defence: F-35, a $10 billion difference of opinion; Libya mission, several hundred millions off; joint support ship, restated for budget issue; the Chinook helicopter, delayed and a budget issue; the close combat vehicle, the whole thing had to be restarted because it was so badly handled; military truck, delayed; fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft, delayed; Arctic patrol ships, delayed and a budget issue.

How can the government defend the decade of doofus?

[The Budget, May 14th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear from the minister's response that the government is closing down and silencing institutions with which it does not agree. The Conservatives are telling all these national boards and organizations that they do not like independence, information and criticism and that is why they are closing them. This is why people think that this government looks more and more like a dictatorship. That is the problem.