Erin Weir

[The Budget, April 12th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Edmonton West for his remarks. It has been a pleasure working with him on the government operations committee.

He is quite right to point to the hard economic times in Edmonton and that his city is very deserving of being included in the budget's extension of employment insurance benefits. Things are even worse in my province of Saskatchewan, which is not benefiting from the progressive policies of Rachel Notley's government. The last labour force survey from Statistics Canada showed that full-time employment in Saskatchewan had fallen by 2.4% over the past year, the largest drop of any province west of Prince Edward Island.

I wonder if the member for Edmonton West would agree that Regina and southern Saskatchewan also need to be included in the budget's extension of employment insurance benefits.

[The Budget, April 12th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I was somewhat disappointed that the member for Edmonton Riverbend used his speech to take a shot at the Alberta NDP government for allegedly being a day or two late in critiquing the fact that the federal budget EI extension omitted Edmonton.

That strikes me as very interesting. In the question period following the budget, not a single one of the Conservative MPs who represent Edmonton, Regina, or southern Saskatchewan said anything at all about our regions being left out of this extension of EI benefits that were supposedly targeted to areas hit by the downturn in oil and gas. In fact, it was only the NDP that raised this issue and called for the inclusion of Edmonton, Regina, and southern Saskatchewan in this extension.

My question for the member would be this. Does he recognize that the previous Conservative government's cuts to employment insurance are a major part of what led to this situation in which a majority of unemployed Canadians, including in Alberta and Saskatchewan, are not receiving EI benefits at all?

[The Budget, April 12th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the member across the way provided a laundry list of measures in the budget for employment insurance, not all of which will come into effect until 2017. Despite those measures, the budget projects keeping spending on EI benefits below EI premium revenues for four of the next five years. Therefore, I would ask the member whether there is enough money there to make some further improvements to EI, such as including oil and gas-producing regions like Edmonton, Regina, and southern Saskatchewan in the temporary extension of EI benefits, which was supposedly intended as a response to the downturn in oil and gas.

[Public Service Labour Relations Act, March 24th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan for his eloquent remarks. He is a fellow new MP, and, of course, was not part of the previous Conservative government. However, he has often come forward in the House as an ardent defender of that government's record.

Therefore, my question is, if the Conservative position is to support collective bargaining rights for members of the RCMP, subject to a secret ballot certification process, why did the previous Conservative government not extend collective bargaining rights to members of the RCMP when the Canada Labour Code at that time did include a secret ballot certification process?

[Employment, March 24th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, today's EI numbers show just how hard cities like Regina and Edmonton have been hit. For weeks, the Liberals have been pledging help for Alberta and Saskatchewan. Yet, despite Liberal promises, the budget's only concession for regions hit by the collapse of oil and gas has been an extension of EI benefits; except, this measure excluded Edmonton, Regina, and southern Saskatchewan, where oil workers are being laid off.

Why does the budget's EI extension exclude Saskatchewan's oil patch?

[Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act, March 22nd, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan for his kind words about RCMP Depot, which was in his former riding and is now in my riding. I share his sense of pride in representing this iconic Canadian institution.

I would also pay tribute to the member's remarks about his father's role in building the steelworkers union in Saskatchewan. I have inherited some books signed by his father, from my time with that great organization.

It seems that the member is arguing that, because the Conservatives do not like the certification process in the Canada Labour Code, members of the RCMP should be denied any access to collective bargaining. That is kind of like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

If that actually is the Conservative position on this issue, I guess I would have to ask why the previous Conservative government did not extend collective bargaining rights to members of the RCMP when it had its preferred mode of certification in effect in the Canada Labour Code?

[Regional Development, March 21st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, concerns have been raised about millions in federal funding for Regina's Global Transportation Hub. This crown corporation spent $21 million buying land at inflated prices from businessmen with cozy ties to the governing Sask Party. Two weeks ago, the President of the Treasury Board promised to look into this scandal. Even a former Sask Party MLA has called for a police investigation.

Will the minister now report what he found, and will he be referring this matter to the RCMP?

[Income Tax Act, March 11th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps members have seen the movie Groundhog Day. I started out my week by asking the member for Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan a question about Bill C-2. I asked him whether he was concerned that a $10,000 contribution limit over time might allow the affluent to accumulate huge pools of tax-free investments. His response was that it was good to allow people to make contributions tax-free. However, there can be too much of a good thing.

In that spirit of Groundhog Day, I would like to ask the same question. At some point does the member for Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan believe investment profits should be subject to tax?

[Income Tax Act, March 11th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Joliette said that we must stop corporations from using tax havens.

Another big problem is that the Liberals and Conservatives cut the corporate tax rate in half.

Will the hon. member for Joliette also lend his support to the proposal to increase the corporate tax rate?

[The Senate, March 10th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday at committee, the President of the Treasury Board admitted that the new advisory board for Senate appointments would cost $1 million every year and that its recommendations would be secret. That is on top of the $90 million currently spent on the Senate.

It remains unelected, unaccountable, and under investigation. Why is the government pouring more money into this scandal-plagued institution rather than following the example of every provincial legislature and abolishing the upper house?