Chris Charlton

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, November 21st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my colleague from B.C. His community is obviously profoundly affected by the forestry industry. I am from Steeltown. I am from Hamilton. My riding is Hamilton Mountain. We obviously have huge concerns about what trade deals are doing to industries right around the country.

Yet for this deal, which has such a profound impact on his community, his home province and many other provinces such as Quebec, for example, and provinces right across our country, workers in these communities were not able to actually voice their concerns to the government. All 308 members in the House have committed to take on the concerns of our constituents and voice them in the House and to take our responsibilities seriously. I will bet that the member had many people in his community coming to his community office and wanting to participate in public hearings and make their voices heard.

They are now doing it through him, but I bet those people would have really liked an opportunity to participate in official committee hearings that travelled from community to community. Then all of us could have learned from the experts, not only about how the implementation of trade deals like this one is impacting the forestry industry in those communities, but how it might also ultimately affect communities like mine in Hamilton.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, November 21st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has obviously had a ton of first-hand experience with the very direct impact in her community and home province with the implementation of the softwood deal. She has made it quite clear that this deal, especially in the forestry sector, has been unbelievably harmful. It has affected workers, their families and the entire community.

I come from a community that has been known as “Steeltown”. It has already been devastated by the job losses experienced in a declining manufacturing sector. Obviously trade deals are very important not just in the forestry sector, but in the steel sector as well.

Could the member tell me from her experience and review of the softwood deal if there is any hope at all for those of us in Steeltown, whether trade deals affecting the steel sector might be next and we will lose the same kinds of jobs in our home town as have been lost in her community?

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, November 21st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the comments from my colleague across the way. I must say that I am a little bit surprised because he tried to sort of contort himself into a pretzel in his logic.

I have been very proud to work with the members from that side of the House in supporting labour legislation, in supporting progressive legislation like getting the anti-scab law past second reading, and in speaking to the motion on income support for older workers. I was proud to do that. Yet, here I see the members justifying their support and their party's support for the softwood sellout by saying that they have listened to industry and that this is what industry wanted.

What about the workers in the forestry sector? How will the member go back to the communities in his riding and talk to the steelworkers who have been here on the Hill, and who have talked to us about the devastating impact that this deal will have, not just on the workers but on their families and on the communities in which they find themselves.

If the hon. member wants to have a record of supporting the workers in this country, he must oppose this deal. I would urge the member to reconsider before we get to the final vote on this deal. He should come join us and oppose the softwood sellout.

[Canada Elections Act, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this debate. I listened to both the member's comments and the minister's comments with great interest. If I understood the minister rightly, in his introduction of this bill to the House I believe he said that every effort would be made for people with disabilities to be taken to a polling station where they could exercise their right to vote.

It seems to me that the right to vote is a fundamental right for every Canadian citizens and, therefore, in my view, every polling station needs to be accessible for people with disabilities.

I wonder whether the member might be able to let me know what her party's position is on that very important issue.

[Aeronautics Act, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, although I do not have a question for my colleague, I do want to tell her that she has done a fantastic job of putting on the floor of the House the position of the NDP and our concerns about why the bill needs further examination and should not be passed. So, I will just restrict myself to making a comment rather than asking a question.

Between the member for Parkdale—High Park and the member for Winnipeg North, our position has become clear. I know millions of Canadians are riveted to their TVs watching the debate this afternoon. What should matter to everybody is that the NDP's transportation critic is not able to be here to articulate our position himself.

[Aeronautics Act, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have been following this debate with some interest. I know there were been wide-ranging consultations as the bill was in development. I remind the House of some of the stakeholders. They include the Air Transport Association of Canada, the Canadian Airports Council, NAV CANADA, the Canadian Owners and Pilots Association, the Airline Pilots Association and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Airline Division. As members in the House know, the Department of National Defence is co-sponsoring the bill.

Has my colleague from Lethbridge taken, in anyway, the concerns of CUPE to heart? Could he speak to those and let me know how his government attempts to address those very real concerns that have been put before the House?

[Aboriginal Affairs, November 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the ongoing land claim dispute in Caledonia.

Members may ask why I wish to speak to that issue when the affected community is not within my riding of Hamilton Mountain. I do so by default because the local MP refuses to stand up for her constituents. I do so because it is a dispute that has pitted neighbour against neighbour, customer against small business owner and citizen against the police. The impact of these deteriorating relationships is being felt not just in Caledonia but throughout our entire region.

Last May, I wrote to the Minister of Indian Affairs urging him not to continue the tradition of his Liberal predecessors who believed that prolonged fruitless discussions were cheaper than meaningful negotiations.

Yes, the minister is right that the disputed land was originally sold by the provincial government and, yes, it is also true that the McGuinty Liberals must accept responsibility for the actions of the OPP, but the federal government has the sole constitutional responsibility for dealing with land claims.

In our community, we no longer have patience for political finger pointing. We need the government to step up to the plate and resolve all the issues raised by the Six Nations land claim so that Caledonia and our region can heal.

[Child Tax Benefit, November 1st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the government's disastrous administration of the child tax benefit has left single parents, and yes, they still are mostly women, on the losing side in a game of he said, she said.

The child tax benefit is supposed to provide a financial benefit for low income parents who are the caregivers for their children, but Revenue Canada will not give that money to single parents if a former spouse or common law partner has failed to inform Revenue Canada of his new address. The CCRA's assumption is that he is still contributing to the household income.

Simply because the ex has failed to file his taxes or is fraudulently still using the mother's mailing address or is incommunicado, the burden of proof falls on the single mom to prove that he has moved out. Having to prove that someone is not living with a person is a bizarre and onerous requirement that takes the notion of jumping through bureaucratic hoops to new extremes.

The time to change the rules is now. Single moms might not be on this government's list of five priorities, but I say, do it for their children.

[Labour, October 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's manufacturing sector is being decimated and governments are standing idly by as industrial plants close and their workers become Wal-Mart greeters.

In the last Parliament, all parties agreed that the wages, pensions and collective agreements of workers needed to be protected when companies shut down.

Bill C-55 passed through the House but the Liberals refused to proclaim it into law.

If the government will not live up to its responsibility to develop an industrial strategy to save Canadian jobs, will the Minister of Labour at least do right by Canadian workers and bring forward the bill that would protect the benefits they have already earned?

[Petitions, October 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am also very pleased today to table a petition signed by members of the CAW who are opposed to the Canadian negotiations for a free trade agreement with Korea.

Instead of worsening the one-way flood of automotive products into our markets, the petitioners urge Parliament to develop a new automotive policy that would require Korea and other offshore markets to purchase equivalent volumes of finished vehicles and auto parts from North America as a condition of their continued access to our market.

As the Speaker will be aware, this is part of a larger campaign that has gathered over 47,000 signatures to date.