Bradley Trost

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 24th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome all of our viewers who are tuning in. This may seem a little unique to people who are tuning in, but at the House of Commons this is still actually Thursday, even though in the rest of the world it is Friday, which will explain to some of the viewers why many of the patriotic members, all members around here, are not yet wearing red. It is “wear red for the troops” Friday, and I know that many hon. members will be putting on red ties and so forth later on--

[Syria, June 21st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, for months the current Syrian regime has been engaged in a brutal crackdown on its own people.

Yesterday the current Syrian president went on Syrian television to address the crisis. Rather than giving the Syrian people the real reforms they were seeking, he dealt in generalities and gave no real timeline for any reforms.

Today the security forces killed even more people. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs please update the House on Canada's position on this situation?

[Canada Post Corporation Act, March 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today about the importance of literacy for Canada and Canadians. In particular, in speaking to Bill C-509, introduced by my colleague, the member for Brandon—Souris, I am particularly pleased, as the son of a librarian, to be supporting this bill.

I am pleased today to highlight some of the government's ongoing investments in and support of this vital skill and to speak about the important role that the library book rate plays in supporting literacy.

Improving the literacy and essential skills of Canadians is a key part of the government's commitment to building a highly skilled, adaptable and competitive work force. The ability to read is just one aspect of the essential skills today's workers need in a competitive marketplace. Others include document use, numeracy, writing, oral communication, working with others, continuous learning, thinking and computer skills. These are skills that many of us in our daily lives take for granted.

Recognizing how important and fundamental these skills are, the Government of Canada invested $38 million in 2010-11 in the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills. This office serves as a national centre of expertise in literacy and essential skills that complements the work of the provinces and territories in adult learning. It works to ensure that Canadians have the skills they require to participate fully in the labour market and their communities. It does this by developing and sustaining networks of pan-Canadian coalitions and bringing together the key organizations and partners that play a role in literacy and essential skills across Canada.

The office plans, develops, tests and disseminates new ideas, tools, and strategies for effective interventions in literacy and essential skills, and supports organizations and institutions in bettering literacy and other essential skills in their activities and policies. Through the work of the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills, the government provides core funding to literacy coalitions across Canada. It also supports a number of innovative projects that work with businesses to design and test new approaches for addressing the essential skills challenges of workers.

In our global economy, a highly skilled population is a key asset for any nation and is fundamental to economic growth. Globalization and new technologies have propelled us in this knowledge-based economy. Reflecting this, the occupational composition of Canada has shifted toward occupations that require higher levels of education and skill. A knowledge-based economy requires workers who can adapt quickly to changing skills and requirements. Literacy is fundamental to this adaptability. Without literacy, it is difficult to keep up with the rapid evolution of working environments, let alone the increased computerization often required. In order to preserve Canada's competitiveness in today's global economy, it is essential to invest in workers who will be ready and able to keep up with these changes.

There is little doubt that essential skills like literacy contribute not only to the national economy but also to people's personal, economic, and social wellbeing. These essential skills are key to someone's ability to realize their economic and social potential and are the foundation upon which they acquire additional knowledge and skills throughout their lives. Positively associated with good health, employment stability and remuneration, literacy enables people to participate in their communities, to make wise community decisions and to construct social networks.

However, these skills also have to be understood and appreciated for their large social implications in the 21st century. Essential skills, especially literacy, are linked to civic participation, community building and the development of social institutions. Without these skills, there is an increased risk that certain groups could be excluded from these kinds of social and civic activities.

A lot of work remains to be done to improve literacy in Canada. About 9 million individuals or 42% of working-aged Canadians currently score below the minimum literacy level required to function well in a knowledge-based economy. There is evidence of a significant gap in literacy rates between rural and urban Canadians. The gap is found in our schools, with remote students not performing as well on average as their urban counterparts, a trend that persists into adulthood. Similarly, the literacy performance of aboriginal populations is lower than that of the total Canadian population, especially in remote areas.

Canadians without access to information and communications technologies, who do not use computers to access information via CD-ROMs, CDs, DVDs and the Internet, also tend to have lower literacy levels than the rest of the population. Not only are they faced with a digital divide but also a literacy gap.

The key to adults' literacy proficiency and the development of literacy in their children seems to be reading at home. It increases a person's proficiency through engagement in literacy activities, such as reading books, magazines, manuals or newspapers. Libraries play a fundamental role in providing Canadians with access to a wide range of reading materials and literacy activities. With the help of Canada Post's library book rate, libraries are able to dramatically increase rural and remote library users' access to a consolidated Canadian collection of around 465 million items.

In recognition of the important role of libraries in literacy, Library and Archives Canada recently partnered with TD to support Canada's literature and literacy as part of its commitment to foster reading and literacy programs in communities throughout the country. Through this partnership, Library and Archives Canada is involved in a number of programs, like the TD summer reading club, the TD Canadian children's literature awards and, to support higher learning, the TD Canada Trust scholarships for community leadership, as well as other scholarships, bursaries and in-school programs.

These programs help children and students improve their reading skills and develop a greater interest in reading. In particular, the summer reading club increases the number of books that participating children read and teaches them to use the library to open up cultural, community and social horizons. Last summer, half a million Canadian children participated in this club, with over 27,000 events held at 1,995 libraries nationwide. Through the initiative of the summer reading club, participating children read almost 2.4 million books last summer.

Efforts to create future readers and learners and to engage current readers and help all Canadians build and maintain their skills are vital to our economic development and growth. Libraries and literacy programs are fundamental to our future for this very reason.

The library book rate, which my colleague's legislation supports, has played an important role in the sharing of these books across the country, especially with rural and remote locations. The support it has provided to libraries and their communities cannot be overstated.

It is for these reasons that I support this legislation. The library book rate will help with literacy. It is not the only or sole solution but a very small piece. However, it is a piece that helps librarians serve their communities and teachers to access new resources and helps remote students to access the entire world, not just the world on the Internet but also the world still on the printed page, and the world on CDs and DVDs. It is something that is good for our economy. It provides equality of citizenship all across the country and, more importantly, it provides access to the world in remote places all across the country.

I urge all hon. members to support this legislation for the literacy support it provides, as well as its support for remote regions and our current and next generations that are striving to build a better Canada.

[Free Public Transit for Seniors Act, February 18th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I hear the heckling from the other side.

The hon. member asks what do I have against seniors. Let me note on this point that I have a 94-year-old grandmother who I very well know would oppose this because, like many other people in rural Saskatchewan, she lived through the Great Depression and understands that there is no such thing as government money. All money is taxpayers' money and all money needs to be spent wisely and prudently. It is one of those things that we need to be aware of whenever we describe something from the government as “free”.

Indeed, the wording of today's proposal, without a doubt, shows how the Liberals respect Canadian taxpayers. Listen to how they describe it as “free” local public transport. Of all people in Canada, our seniors know there is no such thing as a free lunch, particularly when a politician is making the promise.

The hard-earned money that Canadian taxpayers send to Ottawa is not free money. It is their tax dollars resulting from their personal work and sacrifice. Canadians work hard for their money and watch their money; it is their money after all. Our Conservative government understands that. We do not call it “government money” but taxpayers' money. Every single penny spent in the House is taxpayers' money. We do not raise taxes; we cut taxes.

Indeed, since forming government in 2006, our Conservative government has helped families by putting $3,000 back into their pockets where it belongs. It is their money after all. It is not the government's money and it is definitely not free money. It is money they entrust to their government to spend wisely and not recklessly.

What are the Liberals suggested that we do with taxpayers' money? They are suggesting that we spend more of it. They want to create more and new government programs. They want more and massive new government bureaucracies. Let us be clear that today's example is one of those suggestions of reckless spending the Liberal Party and its leader have engaged in during the last few months.

Moreover, the sponsor of the bill has not presented or prepared a valid cost estimate for today's proposal, as he has requested on other issues. Conservative MPs had the proposal costed through a request to the Parliamentary Budget Office.

This bill reminds me of the Liberal promise of everything under the sun, the 45-day work year, and a national daycare plan, a promise that has been repeated in many election campaigns.

Without a doubt, the Liberals' runaway spending commitments are a recipe for massive and permanent deficits in Canada. Permanent deficits would mean that Canadian families and businesses would have to pay higher taxes permanently, as the Liberal leader digs deeper into their wallets with new tax hikes that kill jobs, and perhaps even reverse our GST cut with a GST increase.

It is little wonder that when the Liberal leader was asked about Canada returning to balanced budgets earlier this year, he replied, “It's not my problem”. Luckily for Canadians, it is not their problem to have the Liberals in government. If the Liberals continue to promise spending the taxpayer's money without any forethought, they will not have an opportunity to be in government any time soon.

What Canadians need and are getting from our Conservative government is leadership in finding real and fiscally responsible solutions to benefit all Canadians, especially seniors. Our Conservative government has taken steps since 2006 to recognize the outstanding contributions of seniors in building our country.

We are providing Canadians with almost $70 billion annually through the public pension system. We are providing $400 million over two years to the affordable housing initiative for the construction of housing units for low income seniors. We are increasing funding for the new horizons for seniors program to $40 million annually to help seniors bring their leadership, energy and skills to benefit communities across Canada. We have also appointed a minister of state for seniors to bring the concerns of older Canadians to the cabinet table and to stand up on their behalf. We are creating a national seniors day for all Canadians to honour and celebrate our seniors.

We have done so much more.

We also understand the importance of a secure and dignified retirement for seniors who have spent their lives building a better Canada through their hard work. In fact, we have dramatically lowered the federal tax bill for seniors and pensioners since forming government in 2006, with more than $2 billion in tax cuts, including increasing the age credit amount by $2,000; increasing the age limit for maturing pensions and registered retirement savings plans to 71 from 69; doubling the amount of income eligible for pension income credit; and, probably, most importantly, pension income splitting, something that the noted financial commentator Jamie Golombek declared was probably one of the biggest tax changes in decades in the amount of tax savings it generated for pensioners.

We also introduced the tax free savings accounts, which is particularly beneficial to seniors. As Jonathan Chevreau, the noted financial commentator, declared:

—the TFSA is also a welcome tax shelter for Canadian seniors—

Our Conservative government is also bringing forward fiscally responsible solutions to improve public transportation in Canada in measured ways.

Before continuing, I would like to clarify that public transit is primarily a provincial and municipal jurisdictional responsibility. It would be questionable for the federal government to unilaterally use the federal spending power to dictate decisions in an area under provincial jurisdiction. It is my understanding that it is one of the reasons that one of the opposition parties will be opposing this legislation.

Nevertheless, our Conservative government has worked constructively and co-operatively through the provincial and municipal governments. We have done this through the gas tax fund, valued at $2 billion annually, which many municipalities across this country use to fund their public transit capital needs.

We have also funded many public transit projects using broad-based programs, such as the building Canada fund, as well as through one-time initiatives in the 2006 and 2008 budgets. In total, about $2.6 billion has been allocated for public transit under the building Canada fund and Canada's economic action plan.

Additionally, because our Conservative government believes that cutting taxes is the right thing to do, we have also introduced the public transit tax credit. Not only is this popular non-refundable tax credit helping cover the costs of public transit, but it has also increased public transit use, including buses, subways, commuter trains and ferries, which have in turn helped to ease traffic congestion.

Indeed, my own mayor, Saskatoon Mayor Don Atchison, has applauded it as:

—a tremendous idea.... I think that's a great way to encourage the public to use mass transit—

The Liberal Party opposed helping seniors and other riders of public transit by voting against the public transit tax credit.

Unmistakably, our Conservative government is helping seniors and public transit users in smart and fiscally responsible ways. This is in stark contrast to the Liberals, who are promising free money from the taxpayers' wallet. Canadians and Canadian seniors know that Canadian taxpayers and businesses will be forced to pick up the tab for this free lunch. It is a tab that we cannot afford.

All taxpayers' money belongs to taxpayers. We as government should be very careful and prudent in how we use it.

[Free Public Transit for Seniors Act, February 18th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to give a response on behalf of the government to this legislation. In particular, I am happy to oppose this irresponsible, excessively costly and reckless Liberal spending proposal.

[Canadian Wheat Board, February 17th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, a few days ago, my colleague, the member for Simcoe North, put forward a bill that would permit farmers to opt out of the Canadian Wheat Board. While I firmly believe it is in the economic interests of farmers to put the single desk Wheat Board to pasture, it is not the economic damage that the Wheat Board causes that I find most obnoxious.

Members should know that the original Wheat Board was installed in the World War I era to keep grain prices down. Then, when the Wheat Board was put into its current form during World War II, it was also aimed at lowering the prices that farmers received.

The Wheat Board did and does this by robbing farmers of the freedom to control their own wheat, their own private property. It is this annual expropriation of property that I find most egregious. No one forces farmers to buy their fertilizer or their fuel from one source and yet if a farmer chooses to sell wheat in his own fashion, he can go to prison.

If freedom means anything at all, it should mean the right to control one's own property, the fruits of one's labours. The Canadian Wheat Board is an assault on the liberties of not just farmers but an assault on the liberties of all Canadians.

[Canada-Panama Free Trade Act, February 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member is one of the New Democrat members most interested in agricultural issues. I was very interested to note that he did not address agricultural issues, at least in the portion of his speech that I heard. Maybe he did in the earlier portion.

I was wondering if the member would respond to that, because one of the things we heard in committee as we discussed the Canada-Panama trade agreement, as with most of them, is that the agreement would have marked benefits for our agricultural producers. We produce very different crops from what they do in Panama. Canada is not known for growing a lot of bananas. So we will not be competing with Panama in that way. However, be they our wheats, pulses, or processed foods, there are very good openings in Panama.

I am wondering why the hon. member has not talked about the advantages that the Canada-Panama trade agreement will have for our agriculture industry.

[Canada-Panama Free Trade Act, February 3rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my hon. colleague's remarks and I heard him talk about what this agreement would mean to Panama.

It is my understanding that as a Canadian parliamentarian my primary duty is to represent Canadians. I appreciate the hon. member's concern for human rights, which we all share, but here is the difficulty I have with his argument and I would like him to address it.

Panama is a democratic country. It is not a dictatorship. The government was democratically elected. If the democratically elected representatives of the people of Panama believe this is a good deal for Panama, why should Canadian parliamentarians be opposed to it on the basis of the argument that it is bad for Panama? Panamanian representatives support it for Panama. Canadian representatives support it because it is good for Canada. Why should we interfere in their democratic process?

[Economic Negotiations with the European Union, December 14th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, I would like to follow up with a question on agriculture for my good colleague from Kelowna.

People watching tonight may not know that the European Union consumes eight million tonnes of beef annually. Yet Canada and the United States together share an 11,500 tonne quota to export beef into the European Union.

Could the hon. member comment about the opportunities of Canadian beef into an eight million tonne market, particularly if we get this trade agreement done without a trade agreement between the European Union and the United States? Could the hon. member comment on the opportunities for Canadian beef, Canadian livestock in Europe and what the potential would be for Canadian livestock producers, cattlemen, ranchers, farmers?

[Economic Negotiations with the European Union, December 14th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, the hon. member summed it up in his question. Trade agreements were stalled at the WTO. This was a part of our economic and foreign policies. Our government took initiative. Rather than sitting around, the Minister of International Trade and the Minister of Foreign Affairs went there to break down barriers to help Canadians access cheaper goods and break into markets and to help Canadian exporters get our world-class products out there.

We have seen that with the trade agreement with Colombia that is about to come into force and with the European Free Trade Association. We are reaching out to places like Ukraine and India. We are going across the world. The ministers who have taken the initiative and the government members who helped craft the strategy need to be commended.

Canada is a trading nation. We are on three oceans. People have immigrated to our country from all over the world. We are in a great position to take advantage of our natural resources to expand our markets throughout the world. It is an important part of our economic strategy.