Colin Carrie

[Cannabis Act, November 9th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, first, how outrageous is this. The Liberals want to bring in legislation that we have studied at committee and experts have said that the bill will not do what the Liberals have told Canadians it will do, that it will not get not get the job done.

I have a question for my NDP colleague. Many of the things she brought forward are reasonable and sensible. They identify the problems with the bill. It will not get the job done, as the Liberals have promised Canadians, to keep it out of the hands of kids and away from organized crime.

My question for the member is one that many people have ignored. It is about the three international trade agreements to which Canada has been a signatory. They basically state that stated we would not legalize marijuana. If the Liberals wanted to get out of these trade agreements, they had to state that in July. What effect will the bill have on our international reputation, on our international ability to trade, especially with our most important trading partner, the United States, especially when we are undergoing NAFTA negotiations? Will it be detrimental or will it help open up the border?

[Cannabis Act, November 9th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I want my colleague to address something we have heard over and over, and that is the deceitful approach I see in bringing this to Canadians. The Liberals have said that the status quo is not working. I would like to cite a study from the Canadian community health survey, mental health, from 2015. It said that for teens aged 15 to 17, which is the target group, they have lowered marijuana use from 40% to 25%. In other words, the status quo lowered it by 15%.

The Liberals say that they want to keep this out of the hands of children and keep it out of the hands of organized crime. Experts at committee said this bill would not do that.

Could the member comment on the deceptive nature of the Liberals? They are telling Canadians one thing, when they know that the facts do not support this bill.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2, November 2nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, it is really important as parents that we talk to our kids about financial literacy. Our government put that concept forward and I think the Liberal government has put some resources toward it.

When we teach our kids about financial literacy, it is important that we tell them not to borrow money on credit cards to a point where the debt cannot be paid down.

We just had the government's fall economic update. The Liberal government promised a small $10 billion deficit. This time around it is $20 billion. In the last two years, the deficit has been closer to $30 billion. The Liberals brag about all of the money they are handing out to Canadians, but the reality is that this year alone a family of four will be further in debt by $2,222 approximately. During bad times the Liberals like to spend money. Now they say we are in good times so they are spending more. The deficit is twice the amount they promised. That is Liberal ideology.

Does the member believe in financial literacy for children? If so, does he believe in financial literacy for the government, because it is putting us further in debt even in good times?

[Judicial Accountability Through Sexual Assault Law Training Act, October 25th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, on September 29, I rose in the House regarding the absence of community consultation before the Liberal government decided to close the CBSA office in my riding of Oshawa. The parliamentary secretary to the minister of public safety stated that consultations did in fact take place, specifically with the mayor of Oshawa. Since that time, the mayor has been vocal about the fact that he was not consulted and has called on the parliamentary secretary to set the record straight.

I would like to give my fellow Durham MP the opportunity to correct the record and apologize to Mayor Henry and for misleading the House.

[Business of Supply, October 23rd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my NDP colleague and everyone else in the NDP and the House who has spoken to this, because it is an extremely important issue that goes to the heart of our institutions here. Frankly, the NDP and the Conservatives will quite often disagree. We have principles that we disagree on, but we do have principles.

Could the member comment on what it will do to the institutions we are here to support if the motion before the House is not supported and members on the other side do not respect the fact that we have rules, that we have the Ethics Commissioner, and that we are not supposed to do something indirectly that we cannot do directly?

Could the member please comment on how important it is to Canadians and the institutions we support here that every member of this House support this motion?

[Post-Secondary Education, October 23rd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure to recognize and celebrate the outgoing president and vice-chancellor of the University of Ontario Institute of Technology in Oshawa, Dr. Tim McTiernan. Tim has had a profound impact on Oshawa. His work at UOIT has been instrumental in developing our community as a STEM-based institution and a research and innovation hub.

Tim is from Kilkenny, Ireland. He earned his bachelor of arts from Trinity College in Dublin and his masters and Ph.D. from the University of British Columbia. In his six years, Tim oversaw enrolment increase from 8,300 to over 10,000 students. He opened a new software and informatics research centre, increased the number of scholarships and bursaries available to students, and finalized the agreement of the joint UOIT/Durham College campus master plan. The impact of these projects will be felt in our community for generations.

Because of Tim, Oshawa's students will be focused with the skills they need to innovate and compete in a globalized environment. I thank Tim for all his great work.

Ádh mór ort ! Good luck.

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2017]

Can you table the old one?

[Carbon Pricing, October 18th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, transparency seems to be the topic of the week, and obviously, from the parliamentary secretary's speech, the Liberals are running away from it.

My motion being debated here today was brought forward as an opportunity for Liberal and NDP members to prove that they do, in fact, want to be as transparent as possible with Canadians. Motion No. 131 seeks just that. It is a motion that seeks to have the finance committee undertake a study that would determine ways to ensure that the cost of the mandatory Liberal carbon tax is disclosed. The Prime Minister himself has stated that his plan is $10 a tonne by 2018, increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. To put this into perspective, that is an extra 2.33¢ per litre at the pumps in 2018, and an extra 11.63¢ per litre by 2022. That is a potential increase of up to $2,569 per year for the average Canadian family by 2022.

If the provinces choose not to introduce this arbitrary tax on their citizens, the Liberals will impose the tax themselves.

There is no denying that a carbon tax will have profound effects on every single Canadian, so it seems a bit rich that the Minister of Environment had the audacity to say that their plan was credible and fair for all Canadians. How is nickel and diming hard-working Canadians fair? How is it fair to do it without disclosing the actual costs associated with this new mandatory tax?

As the only party that represents the taxpayer, we have continually pushed for answers on these very questions. At first the Liberals said they did not have the answers, but then a very heavily blacked out Finance Canada document showed that the government did have the answers but was trying to keep them from Canadians. Why are the Liberals hiding the cost of the carbon tax if their plan is credible and “fair for all Canadians”?

Canadians are already struggling to make ends meet under the Liberal government. The Prime Minister's out-of-control spending habits have led to increases in payroll taxes. We just found out that the CRA wants to attempt to tax employee discounts. There is the elimination of the vital tax breaks that help low- and middle-income Canadians, and now there will be another new tax grab that will affect every single Canadian and drive businesses right out of the country because it is not affordable.

Why do I think that every member in the House should vote in favour of Motion No. 131? It is simple. This is a non-partisan issue.

While the Conservative Party does not endorse imposing higher taxes on Canadians, the Liberal Party clearly does. I do not think anyone would argue with the fact that a tax on every single Canadian and business should be studied, and in fact, passed unanimously.

As elected members of Parliament, it is up to us to be honest with our constituents and ensure that their voices are heard in Ottawa. Earlier this year, I asked my constituents a very simple question: do you agree with the Liberal government's carbon tax plan? Ninety-six per cent of respondents said no. They do not agree with the Liberal plan. Why? It is because my constituents know that this tax will empty their pockets. This tax will make manufacturers, a major job creator in Oshawa, think twice about investing in our community and in our future. The tax is anything but affordable and fair.

Unfortunately, the Liberals have made it clear that they will not listen to Canadians on most of their tax-grabbing schemes. However, they can at least keep one of their election promises and be open and transparent. If the Liberals vote against my motion, there is no doubt that they are trying to keep this tax grab hidden from Canadians. There is no doubt that the Liberals have broken their promise to set a new tone, something the Prime Minister said he would achieve by being open and transparent with Canadians.

The Liberals are already being criticized for their lack of transparency. We as Conservatives believe in helping Canadians achieve prosperity and opportunity instead of taking it away from them with overspending and higher taxes. Governments should encourage growth and investment. Instead, under this government, businesses will look elsewhere. Jobs will be lost, and Canadians will have less money in their pockets.

I look forward to seeing the committee's report once the study is complete. I encourage all members of Parliament to vote in favour of transparency for Canadians.

[World Spine Day, October 16th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, today is World Spine Day. The purpose of World Spine Day is to raise awareness about spinal health and spinal disorders among individuals, communities, professionals, and all stakeholders associated with spine care. This year's theme is “Your Back in Action”, with a focus on the importance of body awareness and activities that promote a healthy spine.

One in eight Canadians suffer from chronic back pain. We all spend hours reading, hunched over our computers and our smart phones. This all adds up, especially for those with bad posture. As a chiropractor myself, I am pleased that the Canadian Chiropractic Association is on Parliament Hill today to educate members on chiropractic care and opportunities to improve posture. I encourage all members to sit up straight and visit the Speaker's salon after question period to have their postures assessed by leading chiropractors, such as the team of chiropractors for the Ottawa Senators, the Toronto Argos, and the Canadian Winter Olympic team.

Happy World Spine Day.

[Public Safety, October 6th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, Manny Roserio, a small-business owner in Oshawa, employs 55 people and makes major investments in our community. Enterprise Airlines was planning the first daily scheduled charter service into Oshawa from Buffalo. Now that the public safety minister is closing down our local CBSA office, without any prior consultation, it is going to make this much more difficult.

With the Liberals' small-business tax increase and with our local CBSA office closing, the Liberals seem fixated on making communities like mine less competitive. How is that fair?