Ed Komarnicki

[Housing, March 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is not a one-off program. We have 3,500 projects under the economic action plan right across the country. We are co-operating with the provinces and territories.

We are ensuring that the dollars are going forward, including $2 billion to repair and rebuild new housing, $475 million for seniors and persons with disabilities, $400 million for first nations reserves, and $200 million in the north. We are working throughout the whole spectrum of it ensuring that housing is a top priority of this government.

[Housing, March 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we obviously do think housing is very important, which is why we are spending billions of dollars to ensure the housing program goes forward, that jobs are created and that people have shelter.

We are working with the provinces and the territories and have signed agreements across the country to ensure these projects go forward, and we are consulting with all of them as we go forward.

[Canada Labour Code, March 18th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate that the member for Compton—Stanstead has an interest in this particular bill. When my colleague read the portion from the throne speech, one could hardly say that it is a message of indifference. In fact, it is a message of compassion.

I rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-343. The bill proposes amendments to the Canada Labour Code and the Employment Insurance Act and would provide for unpaid leave for federally-regulated employees whose family members were victims of violent crime. It would also create a new EI benefit to provide temporary income support to eligible family members who take this unpaid leave.

Our government empathizes with those who have lost loved ones due to violent crimes or suicide. It can take a long time for anyone to fully heal from this kind of tragic loss. People need time to work through their stages of grief and to learn to cope. There is no particular magic formula for what is the right amount of time to deal with this kind of trauma or turns of events. That is especially true when grieving families are victims of violence.

What we need, therefore, is an approach that is flexible enough to meet the unique needs of families in these circumstances. We need an approach that is compassionate. We also need an approach that is as accessible as possible for those who need this kind of assistance. Looking after the needs of citizens who fall victim to violent crime is a priority for this government, has been a priority of this government and will continue to be a priority of this government.

As indicated in the remarks I made in the House on December 10, 2009, our government is concerned about the impact of violence on all Canadians. We are taking action in a manner that is balanced and fair. There have been several references to this bill indicating that this legislation is based upon legislation that was recently implemented in the province of Quebec. This legislation provides a strong example of how a government can support those who are suffering from a violent criminal act. It is my understanding that the Quebec legislation was largely due to the successful efforts of the Murdered or Missing Persons' Families' Association and, in particular, its past president, Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu.

Members may recognize his name as Mr. Boisvenu was named to the Senate by the Prime Minister on January 29, 2010. Mr. Boisvenu was recently part of the announced legislation to strengthen the National Sex Offender Registry and the National DNA Data Bank yesterday with the Minister of Public Safety, and just days ago, he helped announce legislative amendments to strengthen the way the young offenders system deals with violent repeat young offenders. We welcome him to the Senate and wish him every success as he continues to work on behalf of victims of crime to ensure they receive the support they deserve from every level of government.

The member for Compton—Stanstead is to be commended for bringing this issue before the House. We can all see the intent of this bill, which is to give comfort to families who are in a situation that can only be described as heartbreaking. That intent is laudable.

For any family member, the loss of a loved one is painful. It is almost unimaginable when that loss involves a child. I do not think any member of the House or any citizen of this country would ever expect a grieving family to simply carry on after a few days off. There needs to be more time to heal and a comprehensive plan to support these individuals as they come to grips with the impact this violent criminal act has had on their lives. I will be frank. We need to be broader in our approach than this bill permits.

Members on this side of the House understand the need to support victims of crime. This is why our government has had such a strong record of helping individuals whose lives have been fundamentally changed by violent crime.

It was our government that created the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime. This position was created to better meet the needs of victims of crime in areas of federal jurisdiction. It was with great pride that in April of 2007, the Minister of Justice named Steve Sullivan as the first ombudsman. Victims can contact this office to learn more about their rights under federal law and the services available to them or to make a complaint about any federal agency or federal legislation dealing with victims of crime.

In addition to its direct work with victims, the office of ombudsman also works to ensure that policy-makers and other criminal justice personnel are aware of victims' needs and concerns, and to identify important issues and trends that may negatively impact victims. Where appropriate, the ombudsman may also make recommendations to the federal government.

It was our government that contributed $52 million to the victims fund to improve the experience of victims in the criminal justice system. This fund provides individual victims of crime with emergency funding to prevent undue hardship when there is no other source of financial assistance. It also provides funds for family members of homicide victims to assist them with the expenses incurred to attend early parole eligibility hearings or National Parole Board hearings. This is in addition to the support for NGOs that encourage the development of new approaches, promote access to justice for victims of crime, improve the capacity of victim service providers, foster the establishment of referral networks and increase awareness of services available to victims of crime and their families.

It is important to remember in the context of this debate the significant role provinces play, both in administrating the criminal justice system as well as providing supporting for victims of crime. This bill can only apply to federally regulated industries, which comprise around 10% of the Canadian workforce. That is why the provincial and territorial implementation component of the victims fund is designed to encourage implementation of federal, provincial and territorial legislation for victims of crime. This would include Criminal Code provisions, such as victim impact statements and testimonial aids as well as support for adherence to the Canadian statement of basic principles of justice for victims of crime.

However, our work is not done and we have committed to doing more. That is why the following piece was included in the Speech from the Throne:

Our Government will also offer tangible support to innocent victims of crime and their families. It will give families of murder victims access to special benefits under Employment Insurance. It will introduce legislation to give employees of federally regulated industries the right to unpaid leave if they or members of their families are victimized by crime. And our Government will introduce legislation to make the victim surcharge mandatory, to better fund victim services.

This is not a new commitment by our government. During the first hour of debate in the second session of this Parliament on December 10, 2009, I signaled the intent of the government to bring forward its own legislation to assist victims of crime and their families.

While there may be similarities between the broad direction the government has indicated and the member's bill, I do not wish to unduly get the member's hopes up. When I spoke to the bill in the second session of this Parliament, I indicated that the government cannot support the bill. That position has not changed. While we share a common purpose, there are significant details in this bill that will inadvertently increase the cost of such a program or have unintended consequences.

There is also a need for a more comprehensive approach to this issue. While having time off to grieve is essential, our government has taken a more participatory approach to the criminal justice system. We have worked across multiple departments to address the needs of those affected by crime. Without revealing any details of the coming government announcement, I can only say that the government's approach will be more encompassing when addressing the needs of family members.

The member across may question why we would not simply be able to amend her bill at committee. The problem is that the government's proposed changes would go beyond the scope of her bill, and once that scope is established at second reading, it would be procedurally impossible to amend it at committee stage. That is why it would make good sense simply to have this bill traded down the order paper or be defeated at second reading and to support the government's legislation when it is introduced in the House.

For these reasons, we cannot support the bill. I would urge all members of the House to put off consideration of the bill until the government has a chance to table the measures that were mentioned in the Speech from the Throne.

Canadians take great pride in being a society that cares for the most vulnerable and lends a helping hand to those who need it when faced with adversity. In that regard, there is much potential in the bill, but I would urge all members of the House to wait for the government's proposal to be introduced in its place.

Our government has deep sympathy for family members of victims of violent crime, and our legislation and legislative record demonstrate this. Not only are we providing victims of violent crime with the tools they need, we are also finding solutions to help protect our citizens from becoming victims of crime in the first place.

[Taxation, March 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we put in an EI financing board, an arm's length organization, to ensure that the premiums charged will be equal to the benefits over time.

What we will not do is what the Liberals did in the past, which is raid the EI account to the tune of about $50 billion for pet political projects. We put this in place to ensure that the books would not be balanced on the backs of employers and workers.

[Taxation, March 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in fact we have frozen premium rates for EI for two years, 2009-10.

It is quite hypocritical for that member and the leader of Liberal Party to suggest that there is an issue with that when they supported many of those and, in fact, proposed a $4 billion 45-day work year job-killing tax that would have added to the premiums or added to the deficit.

The Liberals cannot have it both ways. They are being hypocritical on this issue.

[The Budget, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that urban transportation is important to all of us. If she looked at the economic action plan and some of the major infrastructure projects that we put forward, she would find that millions of dollars were spent to ensure that transportation was looked after, to ensure that the appropriate infrastructure was there to take us forward and into the future.

[The Budget, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, one thing we have done, as I have said, is we have cut billions of dollars in taxes on the average working Canadian to leave more money in the pockets of Canadians so they can decide where they can put those dollars, so they can cause the economy to revive and go forward.

Also, we have made the climate such that there will be investment, not only by corporations and businesses and individuals within Canada, but from without Canada into Canada.

What do investors do when they invest? What do they do when they go into exploration? What do they do when they set up corporate offices? They create jobs and more jobs. What we are doing is making sure that jobs are created so people can indeed contribute not only to our society, but can contribute by paying taxes and creating more jobs so this economy can go upward and forward and not downward as it would under the Bloc.

[The Budget, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable. I am not sure if the hon. member was listening to what I was saying, but we cut over 220 million dollars' worth of taxes over a number of years. Families today are far better off than they ever were under the previous Liberal government. They needed to run really hard just to stay ahead of the taxes. What the Liberal Party proposes is to tax and spend. That is not what Canadians want.

On the EI program for instance, the Liberals were suggesting a 45-day work year that would cost billions of dollars. Where would they get that money from? Either through deficit or raising the premiums, which would further cut into jobs, when we froze the premiums to make sure that jobs were created, or they would raise the GST or other taxes.

The leader of the opposition said he would have a national daycare program, something the Liberals have promised for years and years and would cost billions of dollars. How would they do that?

If Canadians want management, good management, they should stay with us.

[The Budget, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells.

I would like to extend an invitation to the member for Kings—Hants to visit Estevan, Saskatchewan, my hometown. The Conservative government invested $240 million in a project that will be valued at $1.4 billion with respect to carbon capture and sequestration. It is a project that is perhaps known across Canada and around the world.

In Weyburn, Saskatchewan, which is in my riding, EnCana is using carbon capture and CO₂ for the purpose of enhanced oil recovery and has been doing so for years. It is a world leader in that regard. Certainly it would be a good place to visit to see what is now being done and what will be done in the future and the jobs it is going to create.

This budget focuses on jobs and growth now and into the future. During the good times we paid down debt by approximately $38 billion, and during these difficult times we introduced almost $40 billion of stimulus, of which $19 billion is proposed to be spent in 2010. With the additional $19 billion in stimulus investment across Canada, we are solidifying Canada's recovery by creating jobs and building roads, waterlines and infrastructure projects in our communities throughout Canada.

The stimulus money that our government has been investing through Canada's economic action plan has impacted hundreds of communities across Canada, including a number of communities in my riding of Souris—Moose Mountain. Over $60 million has flowed into Souris—Moose Mountain on the federal side alone through various programs, such as the building Canada fund, the infrastructure stimulus fund, the knowledge infrastructure program, the RInC program and the eco-energy program. In fact, to my knowledge, Souris—Moose Mountain has not seen this level of federal investment ever.

We are building new water plants for communities. We are building roads for communities. We are boosting up sewage infrastructure and sewage lagoons. These infrastructure investments have not been made for many years. In fact, the previous Liberal government downloaded $25 billion to the provinces which got passed on to the municipalities. Indeed, they may have balanced their books, but at the cost of infrastructure that we are only now attempting to mend and there is more that needs to be done.

That said, while government stimulus dollars are being put to work under Canada's economic action plan, budget 2010 focuses on the task of returning to a balanced budget, which is essential to economic growth and job creation over the long term.

Budget 2010 outlines a clear three-point plan to return to a balanced budget. First, we will follow through with the exit strategy built into the economic action plan by completing the balance of the investments; second, we will take action to ensure government lives within its means; and third, we will conduct a comprehensive review of government administrative and overhead costs. These actions are what Canadians want. These are actions we must take. This is something we must do to ensure long-term success and a long-term recovery of the economy.

As the Minister of Finance has stated, we had to run this deficit temporarily because of the most serious economic crisis since the 1930s. Nobody will dispute that, but it does not mean we have to continue with it. Everything considered, in my opinion, the budget strikes the right balance. It is the right budget for this time in our history.

The economy is still fragile and the recovery is tentative, but it is now taking hold. Although a lot remains to be done, much has been accomplished to position Canada for future growth, including Souris—Moose Mountain. At the same time, the people of Canada, including the constituents of Souris—Moose Mountain, want us to get back to balanced budgets but in a logical and measured way that will not harm the economic recovery. That is exactly what we are doing. That is exactly what the budget is addressing.

We said we would not balance the budget by raising taxes and we will not raise taxes. Canadians have been very clear that they do not want taxes raised and taxes have not been raised. I know the Leader of the Opposition has mused openly about raising taxes from the GST point of view, and in fact spending more money. Where he is going to get it I do not know, maybe by driving us further into deficit or raising taxes as he has openly mused. That is certainly the wrong thing at the wrong time and Canadians do not accept it and do not want it.

In the throne speech we said that balancing the nation's books will not come at the expense of pensioners. It will not come by cutting transfer payments for health care and education, or by raising taxes of hard-working Canadians. What we will do is restrain growth in spending by $17.6 million over five years.

Starting this year, the government will freeze the total amount spent on salaries, administration and overhead in government departments, including the budgets of ministers' offices. Legislation will be introduced to freeze the salaries of the Prime Minister, ministers, members of Parliament and senators.

In addition, a review of administrative services will be launched to improve efficiency and eliminate duplication. All department spending will be aggressively reviewed to ensure value for money and tangible results.

That is what Canadians expect. That is what we will do. Once that takes hold, we will be on our way to balanced budgets.

Canadians want prudent governance. They expect their government to set out a clear road map that will bring us out of this downturn in a position of greater strength. Canada's economic action plan is doing just that.

The IMF has predicted that Canada's economic growth will be at the head of the G7 in 2010 and 2011. We are on the right track. We are headed in the right direction.

One of the tools our government has used to keep us on track is lower taxes. Since coming into office in 2006, we have cut over 100 taxes, reducing taxes in every way possible, in every way that the government collects them. We have reduced personal tax, consumption tax, business and excise taxes, and more.

Our current tax plan is reducing taxes on Canadians by an estimated $220 billion over 2008-09 and the following five years. This is the right thing to do. This is what Canadians expect us to do. This is what will get the economy recovering as it should.

What is more, by lowering taxes, our government has sent a strong message to the world, the message that Canada is open for business. Canada will have the lowest overall tax rate on new business investment in the G7 this year, and the lowest statutory corporate tax rate in the G7 by 2012. This is the type of action that will create jobs, boost our competitiveness and increase investment at a time when we need it most.

In my constituency of Souris—Moose Mountain the agricultural sector is one of the key economic drivers. Our farmers play an important role by providing healthy, safe and nutritious food for families in Canada and around the world, but they are facing challenges with respect to commodity prices and so on.

Our government launched various initiatives in 2009 to help the sector adapt to pressures and improve its competitiveness. Canada's economic action plan announced the $500 million agricultural flexibility fund and the $50 million slaughter improvement fund.

In recent months our government also took measures to promote access to foreign markets for Canadian agricultural products through the establishment of a market access secretariat and extended support to the hog industry to assist with restructuring.

The cattle sector in my constituency has been hardest hit. It seems since the BSE crisis there has been one thing after the other that has placed added pressure on an industry that has seen low cattle prices, a high dollar, high input costs and unpredictable market fluctuations. Budget 2010 announces three measures to help ensure Canadian producers continue to have access to competitive cattle processing operations in Canada.

First, funding available under the slaughter improvement program will be increased by $10 million in 2010-11 to support the introduction of new cost-effective technologies. Second, $25 million in 2010-11 will be targeted to cattle processing plants that handle cattle over 30 months of age, something that is much needed and much required. Third, our government is providing $40 million over three years to support the development and commercialization of innovative technologies related to the removal and use of specified risk materials to reduce handling costs and create potential revenue sources from these materials. These measures will be funded from the existing agricultural flexibility fund.

We have also committed millions of dollars to modernize the Canada Grain Act, something that is very important to our farmers.

Looking forward, my riding of Souris—Moose Mountain has a substantial foundation to build upon as our economy grows into the future. We are currently sitting on one of North America's premium oil reserves in the Bakken oil play. As this resource is untapped, it will bring significant economic benefits to our corner of the province, our province and our country.

In Estevan the groundwork is being laid at Boundary Dam for the development of one of the world's first and largest commercial scale clean coal, carbon capture and storage demonstration project. That is world-class technology being completed right in our backyard.

As part of economic action plan, money is flowing to the Southeast Regional College for the development of the new Saskatchewan energy training institute in Estevan.

Mr. Speaker, I see my allotted time is up so I will end my speech here.

[December 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. members of the House that this is a legal strike and that the Minister of Labour has done everything she can to help resolve this dispute.

The Canada Labour Code clearly establishes the roles and responsibilities of the government and the Minister of Labour. In this case, she has exercised every option available to her to help the parties resolve their issues.

Any further involvement by the government would be detrimental to the resolution of this labour dispute. The parties have to work together to reach a settlement. If they cannot achieve such resolution, they could both agree to submit all issues to binding arbitration.

It is clear that acting within her authority, the minister has sought to facilitate a timely and equitable resolution. This is why the minister is urging the parties to go back to the bargaining table and, with the assistance of a mediator, find a solution to this dispute. Everyone in the House would like to see that and it is in the interests of everyone.