House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2015, with 42% of the vote.
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012 February 15th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, several Conservative MPs have spoken about my party's platform after hearing our speeches on the bill.
I would like my colleague to remind the House how much we would save by abolishing the Senate, which is unelected and spends money hand over fist. Could he remind Canadians how much money they would save by abolishing the Senate?
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012 February 15th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, regarding these measures, does my colleague believe it would be appropriate for the government in power, regardless of its political stripes, to introduce a bill every year to correct shortcomings in the tax system? When does she think would be the ideal time? I would like to hear her thoughts on that.
We are examining this bill today, but we may not have time to complete debate before tax time comes around. When would be the ideal time to introduce this kind of legislation so that the measures it proposes would come into effect in time for the next income tax period, while also giving businesses enough time to adapt to the changes?
Citizenship and Immigration February 15th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the situation in Syria is worsening every day.
Many Syrians have even risked their lives to escape Syria and are now spending the winter in overcrowded refugee camps. Canadians of Syrian origin are concerned that members of their family are caught up in this conflict.
The government agreed to expedite the reunification of Syrian families weeks ago.
Why have no real measures yet been taken to address this matter?
National Defence February 13th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' economic credibility is taking a beating today.
We have learned that they were unable to properly calculate the cost of inflation for the shipbuilding strategy. I would like to remind hon. members that many communities are depending on that strategy.
When it comes to military procurement, the Conservatives are no champions. They revealed a long list of purchases in 2008, but then waited five years to unveil a plan for industrial development by way of the Jenkins report.
Why did they wait so long?
National Defence February 13th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the credibility—
Safer Witnesses Act February 12th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague on the costs of implementing this bill.
As regards witness protection, with the new technologies that facilitate communications and access to information all over the world, increasingly better coverage is needed to protect witnesses, because information can travel very quickly.
Is it fair to say that, even if this bill had not been implemented, witness protection costs would still have increased, because better coverage is required? Is it logical to think that increasing eligibility will most certainly push up costs?
National Defence February 12th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the Jenkins report, released yesterday, notes the lack of transparency and the absence of guaranteed industrial benefits in certain military procurement contracts.
That was one of the NDP's main criticisms in the F-35 fiasco. To maximize the economic spinoffs, there needs to be an industrial benefits policy in place and a transparent and competitive process. The Conservatives have done the opposite.
Why did they not have a plan to maximize the industrial economic spinoffs from the F-35s?
National Defence February 11th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, a procurement contract for Cyclone helicopters was signed nine years ago, but the goods have yet to be delivered.
The Minister of National Defence has called this contract “the worst procurement in the history of Canada”. Okay. But then the minister granted an additional $117 million in funding to Sikorsky.
Although the Conservatives like to suggest that they could support the NDP's proposal to create a defence procurement agency, we still have no helicopters.
When will they finally deliver the goods?
National Defence February 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quickly go back to one point.
He said that money had not been spent, but the government has already spent $700 billion on the F-35 joint strike fighter jet development program. It is important to make that distinction, because many people who are having a hard time paying for their groceries could eat for a very long time with that kind of money. It is important to note that.
Now, I am a little confused about what the parliamentary secretary just said. He talked about a restart, while the Minister of Public Works said that the work had already been done and that the money had been used. Alternatives have already been examined, such as the Eurofighter, the Rafale and the Super Hornet.
Have there been any developments with respect to the specific alternatives?
National Defence February 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like an update on the government's plans to replace our fighter jets.
Like me, Canadians would really like to hear some concrete details on what exactly is going on with the secretariat. Has there been any progress on this file? Canadians would really like to have some concrete details on this matter.
La Presse revealed recently that Public Works and Government Services Canada is considering a short-term alternative besides the F-35 to replace the CF-18s.
The government has finally recognized the delays and serious problems associated with the production of that aircraft. It realizes that perhaps we need to take action now to ensure that we do not end up with a fleet that is too old to fly in a few years' time, without any replacements waiting in the wings. The situation is becoming more and more critical.
For months, or even years now, we have been telling the government over and over that it needs to have a plan B, since plan A appears to have some serious holes in it.
Many participating countries have withdrawn from the program and others have put their military procurement strategies on hold. Still others have scaled back their order to adjust to the new production costs.
The government continued the charade, insisting that everything was fine, openly and without shame here in this House. Over the past several months, the program has become quite a joke.
When my colleagues and I said that this program was a fiasco, the minister said:
The member...is stuck in...misinformation and misrepresentation about the benefits to Canada of the F-35 program.
Misinformation and misrepresentation: all the minister's and the government's statements on this issue turned out to be misinformation. No government member ever apologized for misleading Canadians and this House.
For more than six years, the Conservatives have shown us, step by step and point by point, what not to do when it comes to military procurement. They did not have a bidding process for the F-35s. They did not provide any formal guarantee of the industrial spinoffs or any formal guarantee of jobs. They hid the $10 billion overrun in total costs. And more importantly, no one has taken responsibility yet.
The KPMG report released in December highlighted the Conservatives' bad management, just as the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the Auditor General and the NDP did previously. We have been talking about this issue for months.
Yet a short time ago, the Minister of National Defence said that the total cost to acquire the F-35s would be $9 billion. Those who said otherwise were just making their numbers up.
He also said that there was no need for a bidding process because the F-35 was the only option that would provide our troops with the best possible equipment.
We know that the cost of the F-35s has mushroomed, and the Conservatives have no plan B because they selected a sole supplier. We also know that everything the Conservatives said about the F-35s was misleading and false.
How much misinformation, how many false statements, how many internal accounting documents are still hidden away in the offices of the two ministers responsible for this file?
I would also like to know whether the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence can provide any useful details about the secretariat's progress.
Have they visited manufacturing facilities lately? Have there been discussions about alternatives?
I am sure that Canadians would be happy to know any meaningful details he can provide.