Dave Van Kesteren

[Foreign Affairs, October 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, today we heard more praise for Canada's principled foreign policy.

Today's Wall Street Journal praises the foreign policy positions taken by our government under the Prime Minister. The Wall Street Journal states that under the leadership of our Prime Minister:

Canada has avoided the worst of the global recession and emerged with a vibrant banking system and strong currency (now trading near parity to the U.S. dollar).

It also states:

The courage of its soldiers in Afghanistan, and in other missions, is testament to a nation that honors its commitments.

We agree with the Wall Street Journal and we make no apologies for our principled decisions. In fact, we have said all along that we are proud of our principled foreign policy positions.

Our government makes policy decisions based on what is right, not on what is popular, and we will continue to do so.

[Seniors, October 1st, 2010]

Madam Speaker, today Canada joins the international community to celebrate the United Nations International Day of Older Persons. October 1 is also the day designated in Bill C-40 to be Canada's National Seniors Day.

In my riding of Chatham-Kent--Essex, I have conducted a series of visits to seniors homes, where I converse with seniors in an exercise called “listening to seniors”. It is one of my most enjoyable functions, where a wealth of wisdom and advice is gleaned from our oldest and wisest citizens. We talk about the Canada they grew up in and the changes they experienced, good or not so good. They offer an abundance of great advice about where we ought to go and how we ought to get there.

I am thankful for our seniors and forever grateful to them for the Canada they have helped build. I treasure the time I have been able to spend with each one of them and look forward to our next appointment with “listening to seniors”.

[Committees of the House, September 24th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his questions, and yes, we did sit across from each other during the proceedings this summer.

I would like to remind the member that the number is increasing. It will increase from two million to 4.5 million. That increase will have a direct effect on the answers we receive.

Yes, there will be some people who will choose not to fill out the form, but I really believe, as I stated in the last answer to the previous question, that when given the opportunity, when the people of Canada are asked to fill this out, they will respond. I think we will have a very accurate census, and I believe that the messaging we get back from that, the information we garner, will all be there. I am willing to even go a step further and say that it will be more accurate and that as a result, our citizens will give us better information.

[Committees of the House, September 24th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, indeed it is true. The Americans were involved in this type of procedure.

I would like to suggest that the culture in America compared to the culture here in Canada is different. I would like to believe that when we engage the Canadian population in this particular endeavour, we will have good results.

The other important point is something that was brought out in our committee study, which we attended during the summer. In the past, the result of the mandatory census was that we were getting all kinds of strange answers. Oftentimes people felt that because they were compelled to give answers, for whatever reason, and we have a number of suggestions as to why, they were not accurate.

I believe that when we present this to the Canadian populace, they will believe in and rightfully express their patriotic duty and will certainly fill these forms out as necessary.

[Committees of the House, September 24th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Burlington.

It is my pleasure to rise today to talk about the recently announced change from a mandatory long-form census questionnaire to the volunteer national household survey.

Every five years, Statistics Canada conducts a national census on behalf of the federal government. Since 1971 it has comprised a short form, with basic demographic and language questions, and a long form, to obtain more detailed socio-demographic information.

The 2006 census long form was 40 pages and went to 20% of households. In addition to the short-form questions, it asked questions in such areas as language, education, labour market, housing, ethnicity, citizenship and immigration, and income.

Section 31 of the Statistics Act states that a person who refuses or neglects to furnish information or who knowingly gives false information required under the act, such as for census questions, is liable, on summary conviction, to a maximum fine of $500 or to imprisonment not exceeding three months or both.

Our government does not believe that this threat of a fine or jail time, or both, is appropriate when it comes to a long-form census. This is why our government announced that we would no longer punish Canadians for choosing not to complete the 40-page, 61-question plus 36-subquestion long-form survey sent to 20% of the households.

Critics of this decision believe that if a Canadian refuses to fill out the 61-question long form, that person deserves to be prosecuted and given a criminal record. Clearly, this is just not right.

The government asked Statistics Canada to provide options for administrating a voluntary long-form questionnaire. I want to be clear on this point. Our government took the decision to put an end to the concept of threatening Canadians with fines and/or jail time for not completing the 40-page long form. We then sought options from Statistics Canada on how to implement a reliable survey. This led to the creation and implementation of the national household survey.

This reasoned and responsible approach is about finding a better balance between collecting necessary data and protecting the privacy rights of Canadians. Furthermore, this government has announced plans this fall to remove the penalty of imprisonment from section 31 of the Statistics Act.

Now, as Statistics Canada has noted, a voluntary long-form survey offers challenges. In particular, efforts will need to be made to maintain quality data, and Statistics Canada provided options as to how to address these challenges. The options provided included increasing the sample size of the national household survey.

In 2011, the new survey will be sent to 4.5 million households. This means that one in three Canadian households will receive the survey, compared to one in five households who received the old long-form census.

The census has evolved over time. Questions are modified, added, and deleted, taking into account a number of factors, such as consultation feedback, support to legislation, program and policy needs, respondent burden, privacy concerns, quality, cost, operational considerations, historical compatibility, and availability of alternative data sources.

Collection methods have also evolved. For example, in 1971, Canadians began to complete the questionnaire themselves rather than provide answers to an interpreter or interviewer, as in the past. Beginning in 2006, Canadians were given the option of providing their answers via the Internet.

The content of the national household survey is similar to the 2006 census long form, with 66 questions. It will provide information on key populations for public policy, including aboriginal peoples, recent immigrants, youth, seniors, and visible minorities. The national household survey will include questions on income and housing, which measure crowding and identify housing needs, for example, leading to the development of community housing programs.

It also includes questions on commuting and place of work, which are used in commuting pattern studies, leading to improvements in transportation infrastructure, public transit, and support programs.

Our national household survey content includes education, labour market, language, ethnicity, aboriginal peoples, and immigration and citizenship. Information from these markets, then, analyzed together, can provide insight into the labour market integration of various segments of the population such as, for example, youth, recent immigrants, or aboriginal peoples. This will lead to the development of various programs, such as those related to foreign credential recognition, skills and language training for those lacking knowledge of official languages, and programs aimed at narrowing the education gap between various segments of the population.

New content on child care costs and child and spousal support payments, when combined with income, will help provide better measures of disposable income. This may be useful in developing new measures of low income.

Statistics Canada is internationally recognized as one of the top statistical agencies in the world. This is due in no small part to the professionalism and commitment of its staff members and to the strong leadership provided by its management. I am confident that Statistics Canada will show the same professionalism and commitment in implementing the census and the national household survey in 2011.

StatsCan will use a variety of methods to encourage people to fill out these new voluntary surveys. This is the first time the national household survey will be conducted, and Statistics Canada will monitor the results carefully, applying the same sound methods and standards used for all its voluntary surveys.

In summary, the 2011 census of population remains mandatory, and the new 2011 national household survey, which replaces the census long form, is voluntary.

I would like to take this opportunity to invite all of my colleagues in the House today to encourage all of their constituents to participate in the national household survey if their household is contacted.

[The Economy, September 24th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, international leaders are praising Canada's financial system as a model for others to emulate.

While we are slowly emerging from the economic recession, the economy remains the number one priority of Canadians and our Conservative government.

On the international stage, Canada's economy is envied for its strength during the global economic downturn. As Minister Flaherty highlighted, we have the lowest debt burden of the major advanced economies; we have rock solid banks; and Canada's economic action plan is delivering results and jobs for Canadians from coast to coast, almost 430,000 new jobs since July 2009.

Canada's economy has led the way on the international stage during the global economic recession. Just last week the World Economic Forum ranked Canada's banking system as the soundest in the world for the third consecutive year.

[Natural Disasters, June 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in the early morning of Sunday, June 6, a category F2 tornado ripped through the community of Leamington, Ontario, leaving behind structural damage and a cleanup estimated in the millions of dollars. Thankfully, not a single loss of life nor injury was reported.

What has transpired in the days following is a community pulling together, neighbours helping neighbours, municipal employees and volunteers working around the clock, churches and organizations preparing meals and places to sleep.

I am also proud to say that our government has taken swift action to offer assistance where possible.

I would also like to commend Mayor John Adams, the administration, police and fire departments, as well as the entire emergency response team for their first-class handling of this disaster.

Finally and most importantly, to the residents of Leamington, the resilience they have shown through these tough days makes it an honour and a privilege to serve as their federal representative.

[Firearms Registry, May 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this week, the public safety committee will start clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-391 to scrap the wasteful long gun registry.

Front line police officers from across the country, as well as four key provincial attorneys general and justice ministers have all been clear. They oppose keeping the wasteful and inefficient long gun registry, and yet Liberal and NDP members continue to ignore these voices.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Public Safety tell the House why the Liberals and the NDP should avoid political games and support this bill?

[The Economy, May 28th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's economic action plan is at work in communities across Canada with historic infrastructure and lower taxes for Canadian families.

With the OECD and the IMF predicting Canada's economic growth will grow and lead G7 nations, and with 285,000 new jobs created since last July, it is clear that our plan is working. In fact, an OECD official said that Canada's economic performance “shines”.

Could the parliamentary secretary tell this House what the experts are saying about the Liberal leader's tax hike plan?

[Fairness at the Pumps Act, May 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is going to sound like we have a lovefest at the industry committee, but I think it is fair to say that we have a great rapport. I have a high regard for the member opposite as well. Again, he makes a great contribution to the industry committee.

My answer to the hon. member would be that this specific bill deals with a specific problem. The legislation itself will narrow in on that problem.

He raised the issue with respect to increasing competition. That is a very fair question. It goes to the very heart of what will determine prices. If we do not have enough competition, there exists the possibility of corporations taking advantage of that in prices. He is absolutely right.

In a number of the studies that we have done in the industry committee, we have looked at what is going on in the oil industry. It is very expensive. What seems to have happened in the oil industry is that the number of refineries has been reduced. That is to combat the enormous costs that take place when we refine oil. Today there are fewer refineries in Canada than there were perhaps 20 years ago.

Very near my riding Shell Oil was looking at the possibility of beginning a refinery. That did not happen. I think it spent $10 million just on doing the studies but it has retracted from that.

I would share my feelings with the hon. member. I think we need more competition. We need to encourage oil companies. One of the things we need in this country is another refinery. It would help tremendously with respect to the price of oil.

Perhaps at a future date we could look at that possibility and take that up as a study in the industry committee and produce another fine report from which we could all benefit.