House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 49% of the vote.
Business of Supply May 4th, 2006
Mr. Speaker, I agree with one portion of my colleague's speech. Truly, it is impossible for a government to impose a solution, as the previous government wished to do.
For its part, the current government wants to propose a flexible approach that takes into account the needs of parents. In this regard, the government made a clear commitment in the election campaign and already it has put in place a program and undertaken, together with the provinces, to create additional child care spaces.
Business of Supply May 4th, 2006
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to the opposition day motion on child care.
This motion implies that the government is not keeping the promise it made to Canadians during the election campaign.
It suggests that Canadians were not aware of the two components of the universal child care plan: providing parents with an annual benefit of $1,200 for each child under the age of six years and creating 25,000 day care spaces a year starting in 2007.
This plan will honour the bilateral child care agreements made by the previous government for one year.
When our Prime Minister said publicly during the election campaign that we were going to create our own child care plan—not the previous government’s plan—he was not joking.
Canadians then took action and elected the Conservatives. We are respecting the democratic will.
The provinces and territories will receive full funding in 2006 and 2007, the transition period during which we will gradually terminate the child care agreements that were made.
During that year, Quebec will receive $152.8 million. It will have the latitude it needs to invest its share of the federal funding in child care and the well-being of families.
I would note that only three provinces had signed funding agreements, and each of those agreements included a provision permitting either party to terminate the agreement on 12 months’ notice.
I would also note that it is up to the provinces and territories to decide what child care strategy reflects the consensus of their populations.
As far as possible, the Government of Canada will respect the right of parents to choose what is best for their children and their families. We will respect the great diversity of this country, from one province to another and from one family to another.
The universal child care benefit amounts to $1,200 paid directly to parents every year, so that they can make choices that meet the needs of their families. This benefit helps parents during a time when expenses are high and income is lower.
No two families are the same. Every family is unique in itself. They live on farms, in small municipalities, on reserves, on the coast, in the urban core and in the suburbs. As a government, our role is to help parents raise their children in the best possible way.
By supporting parents in the formidable job of raising children, a job that contributes to the development of the nation, we are encouraging them to do even better.
Starting in July, parents will receive $100 a month for each child under the age of six years. That money will be taxable in the hands of the spouse with the lower income.
Parents may use the universal child care benefit in different ways. Parents may want to invest in a registered education savings plan for their children. Some parents may use it to enrol their children in a nursery school or junior kindergarten. Others may use it to pay for swimming lessons or to enrol in a sports league. Or this benefit may help a working parent to pay a family member or neighbour for child care. The benefit can also be applied to the child care expenses of a parent who works nights and weekends and who does not have access to daytime services.
I would like to remind the House that the universal child care benefit will complement a range of federal benefits offered to Canadian families: the Canada child tax benefit and the national child benefit supplement, tax-free monthly payments to help families assume the costs of their children’s education; the child care expense deduction, which allows parents to deduct the cost of child care when they are working or studying; and extended parental leave, which provides parents with income support for a maximum of one year when they decide to stay at home to care for a newborn or a child they have just adopted.
It is a real feat for certain parents to earn their living while trying to provide their children with the best possible care. Not all parents can entrust their children to established day care centres: sometimes that option is impossible because of their hours of work or the fact that they live in a rural community.
Statistics Canada recently released a report on child care in Canada. It mentions the wide spectrum of choices that families make in the area of child care. It also indicates that in spite of the increased number of mothers working outside the home, nearly half of parents decide to care for their children themselves in the home.
For those who cannot manage this, the report says that a growing number of parents turn to family members to act as caregivers for their children, and others to friends and neighbours as well. In fact, only 15% of preschool children are enrolled in established day care centres.
We know that, of all the provinces and territories, it is Quebec that has the highest proportion of preschool children in day care, at nearly 52%. That tells us that the cost is very reasonable: seven dollars per day per child. There seems to be a consensus among the people of Quebec that this solution is right for them, and the province is willing to support it.
The Government of Canada recognizes this diversity among families and within our federation itself. Each province is developing a child care strategy that suits its culture and its social policy.
That is why we are offering another solution which will be based on and enhance the nine-to-five child care service model. Starting next year, we are resolved to join with employers, communities and the other governments to create up to 25,000 new child care spaces every year all across Canada.
The plan is simple: we want to offer choices in terms of the design and establishment of child care services. No government can impose a national child care system that is strict and closed to change.
In the months ahead, the Government of Canada will be speaking with employers, small and large businesses, community organizations, the provinces and territories, and people knowledgeable about innovative child care strategies. We will talk to parents to find out their needs and priorities in this regard. Above all, we want to support Canadians and Quebeckers in their important role of parent.
To close, I will mention that Canadians have voted for a government for which children are one of its five major priorities. Our objective is not to impose a solution, but to recognize the diversity of our country and the great ingenuity to be found in each of our communities.
Canadian parents are the real experts on child care. Let us support their choices.
Asbestos April 28th, 2006
Mr. Speaker, the government cares about worker and public health, and it realizes that certain asbestos fibres, such as those of the amphibole variety, present health hazards. However, the only asbestos fibre produced in Canada is chrysotile, which is safe under controlled conditions.
The Government of Canada recognizes the importance of the chrysotile industry to Quebec, and supports the safe use of chrysotile.
Federal Accountability Act April 25th, 2006
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. He has raised a lot of different points. I would like to come back to the case of the Minister of Industry.
The Minister of Industry was elected democratically. The Prime Minister is clear on that point: if members want to introduce a bill, no one is preventing them from doing that in this House.
With respect to the fundraising campaign in New Brunswick, I believe that the Prime Minister was extremely clear. He complied with provincial legislation and the federal government has nothing to do with it. It goes without saying that in the course of his duties the Prime Minister has to travel everywhere in Canada. I do not see a problem in any of that.
Federal Accountability Act April 25th, 2006
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question.
I am part of a government that wants to listen to Canadians. The greater Montreal region accounts for nearly half of Quebec. It is therefore unimaginable that this region should not be able to make itself heard. The Prime Minister has made the wise decision to appoint a representative from that important region so that the issues can be discussed in the proper places.
Federal Accountability Act April 25th, 2006
Mr. Speaker, since I am addressing the House for the first time today I would like to thank the people of the great riding of Mégantic—L'Érable for giving me their confidence and electing me as their representative in the House of Commons. I especially want to thank my parents, friends and volunteers, who believed in me and gave their all to help me get elected. Their hard work was certainly motivated by their desire for change.
In that vein, I must add that in my riding of Mégantic—L'Érable there are three totally different RCMs with various sectors including agriculture, mining, forestry, and all sorts of industries. Despite this diversity, there is one common denominator in my riding: the desire for change. This desire was expressed loud and clear on January 23, as it was in most of Canada's ridings.
My speech in this House on the federal accountability bill is very important. I realize that my constituents, like most Canadians, expect change. Unfortunately, the public has become increasingly cynical about politics.
Worse yet, some Canadians are completely disenchanted and choose not to vote in elections, while in some countries people pay with their lives in order to get that right.
I am very proud that the government, which made federal accountability its ultimate priority, is now presenting strong legislation that will certainly contribute to rebuilding public confidence. We finally have the concrete measures to truly clean things up in Ottawa. For far too long there has been nothing but sterile discussions, when in fact basic ethics rules were being broken. What is more, although the Auditor General was able to uncover these violations, she did not have the authority to do anything about it.
It is all the more scandalous to Canadians who make an honest living and who have to pay taxes from their hard earned money. In future, there will be harsher punishment for lesser crimes than were committed in the past.
It was time that a government finally showed true will to make government transparent, as well as to bring back the clean system Canadians are entitled to. This government, which intends to be one that takes action, is proposing a consistent and efficient system to clean up government. It is not content with haphazardly developing policies to deal with isolated cases. Such policies could prove ineffective in some instances. To propose a system, a comprehensive one, an overall vision is necessary. That is what we, in the Conservative Party, have proposed during the election campaign and, on January 23, the people of Canada voted in favour of our proposal.
The government is delivering on its promises. Less than four months after the election, it is introducing this major and long-awaited reform for approval by the House. More concretely, we can see that, under this reform, accountability is taking on much more importance, starting from the time an election is held. This will make candidates accountable and impress on them the seriousness of our parliamentary institution and the importance of the role played by members of Parliament. Strict election financing rules are being proposed to deal with conflicts of interest and campaign slush funds for candidates. The people are entitled to expect that their peers representing them in the House of Commons are designated democratically.
It is good to talk about ethics but, as mentioned earlier, the role of the Ethics Commissioner has to be strengthened. The commissioner has to play a proactive role and have the skills necessary to exercise control. In fact, that is what is proposed in the bill.
The people also expect transparency in the process to appoint those individuals who will play a significant role within government. A fair process which goes beyond cronyism and is actually based on competency is required. That is what is proposed in the bill.
As a rule a thumb, words fade away but written statements endure. It therefore makes sense for reports on government expenditures to be in writing. The man on the street will have no problem figuring that running a business on the basis of verbal reports does not make much sense. It is no surprise that the people were deeply shocked that such practice was allowed to exist in government.
The bill will therefore require written reports. This is another concrete, simple measure that is easy to implement.
With regard to access to information, major crown corporations such as the CBC and Canada Post are part of Canadians' daily lives.
Yet the public does not have access to essential information. The bill strengthens the Access to Information Act so that the public can have access to additional information.
As has already been stated, the Auditor General must have coercive powers. It is inconceivable that she could identify crimes and major breaches in the past but could do nothing about them. The bill will remedy this deficiency.
The bill also provides for the appointment of a director of public prosecutions. The director's office will be an effective, specialized, independent body. This appointment shows that the government is determined to give complaints all the attention they deserve. We are not talking about just anything here.
Completing the circle, we have whistleblower protection. For our system to work, it must encourage anyone who becomes aware of irregularities to report them. That is what the bill proposes to do in order to make the system effective. Finally, we have a coherent, logical system based on a sound vision. Canadians asked for good governance, and that is what this government will give them.
That is why I say loud and clear that I am proud to be part of the government that is bringing in this major reform. Needless to say, I support this bill.