Chris Charlton

[The Budget, March 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is often said that the hallmark of a just society is how we treat our most vulnerable. If the member is not prepared to bring down the government based on this budget and how it treats the poor, on what exactly will it bring the government down?

The Liberal Party has had the member for York Centre travelling the country, saying that the Liberals really care about fighting poverty and that this time they really mean it. Yet, the Liberals are going to allow the budget to pass, and that does nothing to lift the poor out of their current condition.

The government's answer to lifting poor seniors out of poverty was to tell them to get a job. Instead of raising the GIS, it said that it would not claw back the first $3,500 of income earned. That is not what seniors wanted. Seniors wanted an increase in the GIS.

Let me provide a couple of other examples. There is no increase to the national child benefit supplement in this budget, no investment in child care, no new money for affordable housing, no increase to the minimum wage, no increase to maternity leave benefits and still no proactive pay equity legislation. Yet, the member's party will let the budget pass.

Could the member explain why his party is going across the country telling people that fighting poverty is the number one issue, yet, when it is time to stand up and be counted, it is not going to vote against the budget?

[The Budget, March 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the comments made by the member for Thornhill and was struck by the fact that she did not once mention the environment. Climate change is the biggest crisis of the 21st century and yet the government's fiscal plan, as presented in last week's budget, does nothing to take meaningful steps to address this problem.

I suppose a few people in the Conservative government would not be surprised by that since the Conservatives are still denying the science of climate change, but as a member of the Liberal Party and the official opposition I would have hoped that the member forThornhill would have at least recognized the importance of the issue.

On Friday, I had the great privilege of being invited into the classrooms of Miss Johnson and Mr. Shea at Our Lady of Lourdes Elementary School in Hamilton Mountain. Some of their students had written to me earlier to urge the government to take concrete actions to fight climate change. We had a lively discussion about the environment and they told me what they were doing to fight climate change. They are in the process of undertaking the certification to become an ecoschool. They are having litterless lunches, planting trees, composting, picking up and recycling litter and turning off lights and computers when they are no longer needed.

However, they also had some really strong suggestions for what the government ought to be doing, and that is governments at all levels. Municipally, they wanted to see an anti-idling bylaw, a pesticide ban and a limit on the amount of garbage that people could put at the curb.

Provincially, they wanted to see an extension of GO Transit. They wanted the closure of coal-fired plants and standards to reduce the packaging around products.

Federally, they wanted to see initiatives that supported solar energy, wind turbines and fuel efficient cars.

This budget does not mention any of those initiatives.

A show that is currently on TV is called Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader? On behalf of the students at Our Lady of Lourdes, I would like to ask the member for Thornhill whether she is smarter than a seventh grader and, if she is, can she commit today that she will vote against this budget that lets down an entire generation of young people who recognize what the government does not, which is that climate change should be our number one priority?

[The Budget, February 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe that the Liberals are supporting this weak budget. It continues to give billions of dollars in corporate tax giveaways to the big banks and big polluters, without investing a dime in social programs for income security for seniors. It simply tells seniors to get a job. Instead of increasing the OAS and GIS so no senior has to live in poverty, the budget told the poorest seniors that they could now work and earn up to $3,500 before their GIS would be clawed back.

Why is the coalition of Conservatives and Liberals sending seniors to the food banks, while they are sending their corporate friends to the government trough?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, February 13th, 2008]

With respect to Disability applications under the Canada Pension Plan for the years 2004 to 2006, inclusive: (a) what was the total number of applications received by the end of each respective year; (b) what were the total numbers of both granted and denied benefits on initial application; (c) what was the total number of denied clients who requested a level 81 reconsideration; (d) what were the total numbers of both granted and denied applications at the reconsideration level; (e) what was the total number of clients who appealed to level 82 (Review Tribunal); (f) what was the number of clients who were granted a benefit prior to a hearing (Review Tribunal); and (g) what were the total numbers of granted and denied applications at the level 82 (review Tribunal)?

[Questions on the Order Paper, February 13th, 2008]

With respect to non-posted Canada pension plan contributions, and the project undertaken in or around 2000, where contributions dating back to 1966 were matched to contributor accounts: (a) what was the total number of contributors who had contributions matched to their accounts; (b) what was the total number of underpayments and the dollar value of those underpayments; (c) what was the total number of frozen underpayments and the dollar value that may be owed but which has not been paid as the contributors are now deceased; (d) what is the number of contributors who are now deceased, where the estate would now qualify for a death benefit as a result of this project as they now have the required contributions; (e) how was the Canadian public informed that they now qualify for a benefit that they did not previously receive as a result of not meeting the contributor requirements; and (f) what is the number of valid contributions that have not yet been posted to a contributor's accounts and what is the dollar value of those contributions?

[Prebudget Consultations, February 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, while the Prime Minister is beating the election drums, the Liberals are silent. On the crucial issues that affect countless ordinary Canadians, the Liberals are still figuring out what they believe. They are busy strategizing their way out of an election that they think they will lose.

Seniors and hard-working families do not deserve to be treated like pawns in this political chess game. They deserve to have their concerns addressed in Parliament.

I asked everyday people in Hamilton Mountain about their priorities for the upcoming budget. Seniors want income security, protected pensions, accessible health care, and drug and dental coverage. These are all things that were included in my seniors charter. It was adopted by this House, yet seniors are still waiting for the government to act.

Working families told me they want decent paying jobs, access to education and training, child care, concrete action on the environment, and property tax relief through federal investments in infrastructure.

None of this is pie in the sky, but just as we are heading into an economic downturn, the cupboard is bare. Last fall's mini-budget gave away over $6 billion in corporate tax cuts to big business. Unbelievably, the Liberal leader said that he would go deeper on that.

It is time for real leadership. It is time to put the needs of ordinary Canadians first.

[Petitions, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising yet again to table more petitions on the urgent need for this House to pass Bill C-390, a bill that would allow tradespeople and indentured apprentices to be able to deduct travel and accommodation expenses from their taxable incomes, so they can secure and maintain employment at construction sites that are more than 80 kilometres from their homes.

This time the petitions are signed by members and friends of the building trades throughout Ontario and Nova Scotia. With another federal budget just around the corner, the petitioners are hoping that this time they will get the same treatment that long haul truckers got in the government's last budget. All they are asking for is some basic fairness. Surely, they deserve at least that.

[Petitions, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am also rising to table a petition signed by dozens of people on the subject of the age of consent.

The petitioners are aware that Bill C-22, which raises the age of consent to 16, is currently languishing in the Liberal dominated Senate. They are calling on Parliament to pass the bill without further delay.

[Petitions, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to table three petitions today.

First, I have a petition that has been signed by dozens of people from my home town of Hamilton who are opposed to the so-called security and prosperity partnership.

The petitioners are very concerned about the government's plan for further continental integration because they rightly believe that the SPP is really NAFTA on steroids.

The petitioners believe that this agenda, which was initiated by the Liberals and is now being carried on by the Conservatives, threatens our sovereignty. They are particularly worried about the impact that continental integration will have on undermining Canadian standards related to health, security, energy and food.

They believe that the government is working with the United States and Mexico to put in place a deal that will bypass Parliament and ignore the interests of Canadians. They want to see this deal stopped.

The NDP is the only party opposing the SPP and these petitioners are supporting our call to halt implementation of the SPP.

[Committees of the House, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy the political jousting between the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party about “my corporate tax cuts are bigger than your corporate tax cuts”. In my community of Hamilton, which is Steeltown, they are focusing on a very small part of the report we are debating today.

I did not hear the member speak about other parts of the report, the recognition of foreign credentials. This would make a really profound difference in the lives of a number of newcomers, not just in my community but right across the country.

I did not hear anything at all about support, for example, for the building trades, which have mobile workers. They asked both the former Liberal government and the current government for meaningful tax credits that would allow them to subsidize their accommodation and travel expenditures so they could take work that would be available in other parts of the country.

Support for post-secondary education and training has been not mentioned by either of those two parties.

What about anti-dumping legislation? A motion was before the House this morning to expedite a $1 billion fund to communities in crisis. While we applaud that, it does nothing for Hamilton because we are more than a one industry town.

Nonetheless, we have lost thousands and thousands of decent paying industrial jobs. Our community is being devastated, and all I am hearing this morning is “my corporate tax cuts are bigger than yours”. That does not speak to the needs of my community. Would the member elaborate on that?