Fin Donnelly

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, that is a great point. I think that is at the heart of the matter of why we were debating this motion that we have brought forward.

It is the responsibility of each of us as parliamentarians to ensure that public money is spent with a frugal and restrained spirit. When spent properly, tax dollars can be used by government to make smart investments, provide impressive returns, and improve the socio-economic prosperity of all Canadians.

We are pointing out that the use of tax dollars is critical when we are seeing cuts across the country to all departments that provide important services and programs to Canadians. Canadians do not want to see flagrant misuse of tax dollars by the Prime Minister's wealthy friends when we know what they are doing is fundraising for the party through specific partisan purposes and rewarding their friends by using taxpayer-funded jets. We find that unacceptable.

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments and his observation of my speech and intervention. I was trying to point out some relevant priorities that we could be looking at for the use of those dollars, and that Canadians want to see a better use of taxpayer dollars.

To add to the list that I have, the truth is the government does not care about the growing inequality in our country. It does not care that child care is wildly unaffordable or that poverty among seniors is on the rise or that British Columbia has the highest child poverty rate in the country. In fact, the government does not think it has a responsibility to feed our neighbour's child. It simply does not care.

For the government, it is business as usual, whether it is bringing friends on the Challenger jets or trying to find loopholes and ways that are not fair. The average Canadian would not have that opportunity.

That is what I am trying to point out to the House as what we do not want to see. We want to change that situation. The NDP is bringing forward motions that address this kind of waste and inequity.

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I think I did link the topic of ethics. I also talked about transparency and accountability. I am going to finish with priorities, in terms of where we should be spending the money that is being wasted by the government.

Hopefully the member is paying attention to this intervention and does make the link to my points. I spent a lot of time in preparing my comments and I hope members do take note.

As I was saying, this does give an advantage to wealthy candidates. They can contribute up to $5,000 to their own campaign and $25,000 to their own leadership campaign. It exempts fundraising calls made during elections from counting as electoral expenses.

The NDP has fundamental concerns with the bill. We join with journalists, academics, and other Canadians speaking up for democracy, who are now saying that if the bill is not amended, we should kill it.

When it comes to improving our democracy, Canadians cannot rely on the Conservative Party. Its record is one scandal after another. Once again, Conservatives cannot be trusted.

What should we be talking about? What should we be focused on in terms of spending? When it comes to transparency and accountability, Canadians deserve better leadership than what the Conservative government has been offering.

I would like to expand on what this means. Last month I held my annual series of town hall meetings as part of my community consultations. I asked constituents to rank by importance a variety of public policy issues and economic concerns. As was the case in every year I have held these consultations, health care was the highest-ranked issue.

Since coming to power, the government has made little to no progress on reducing wait times, increasing home care, ensuring better access to primary care, or implementing a cost-saving pharmacare plan.

Yesterday the 2004 health care accord officially expired, with no new accord to replace it. Instead of negotiating a new deal, the Conservatives unilaterally imposed a new funding formula on the provinces and have walked away from the commitments to setting standards on wait times, home care, and prescription drugs. The government's record on health care is clear. It is failing to show leadership on this crucial file and is opening the door to increased disparities across our country.

As official opposition, the NDP is listening to Canadians and is holding the government to account for its failed record on health care.

Today we are holding Conservatives to account for their abuse of taxpayers' money and the culture of corruption and entitlement that seems to have overtaken the leadership of the Conservative Party. The public purse is out $118,000 because the government has been treating government jets as personal and partisan taxis. That $118,000 equals old age security for 19 seniors, GIS allowance for 20 seniors, or the average annual pension for five retired veterans.

The Conservative government has done little to address the challenges facing Canada's aging population or to provide adequate services to our Canadian veterans. I find this appalling.

Instead, Conservatives have made it harder for seniors to retire with dignity. OAS changes mean many are forced to work an additional two years before they are allowed to retire.

This is unacceptable. We need change. The NDP is focused on change, and we will bring that change in 2015.

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of the NDP motion before us about the misuse of taxpayers' dollars.

It seems that the Prime Minister and his friends have been wracking up flights on government Challenger aircraft as if these jets are their own personal planes. Access to Information documents reveal that the Prime Minister is increasingly using Challenger jets, not only for his own family's travel, but for personal friends and Conservative Party fundraisers.

Furthermore, the government has changed the rules so that it only has to reimburse taxpayers an amount equivalent to economy class airfare. Those jets cost nearly $4,000 an hour to fly, yet the Conservatives, after changing the rules in their favour, only reimbursed taxpayers an average of $260 a flight. Wow. No wonder they are using these jets so frequently for personal and partisan reasons; they get to travel like rock stars but pay seat sale rates.

When average Canadians are looking to book a flight, they tend to go online, compare prices and schedules, then choose the best deal. They wait for seats to go on sale because they have a budget to worry about. However, not the Conservatives. They have devised quite the scheme to get taxpayers to subsidize their non-government-related travel.

iPolitics, through an access to information request for documents, found that the Conservative Party has reimbursed the Department of National Defence 17 times, for a total cost of over $37,000, but the actual cost of the flights in question is about $118,000. Let us not forget that taxpayers were also on the hook last year for about $50,000 for a paint job for one of these jets, after the Conservatives decided to paint it Conservative colours.

I speak on behalf of the majority of British Columbians when I say that the Conservative Party is unrecognizable from the party that people once hoped would come to Ottawa to clean up the Liberal legacy of corruption and entitlement. The Conservatives said they would make changes once in Ottawa, but instead Ottawa has changed them. I have three examples to illustrate this point.

The first example is with respect to the Senate. The Conservatives promised not to nominate new senators but went ahead and appointed 59 of their closest friends, including Pamela Wallin, Mike Duffy, and Patrick Brazeau. The Senate is under investigation. A Senate expense scandal showed a complete disregard for ethics and transparency. The NDP says that it is time to roll up that red carpet. The record of the Conservatives on the Senate shows they are no different from the Liberals when it comes to a sense of entitlement.

The second example is with respect to the Conservatives abuse of Parliament, specifically time allocation. The Conservatives have shut down debate more than 50 times over the past two years. That is more than any other government in Canadian history. There is a constant use of in-camera proceedings in committees, thereby shutting Canadians out of the proceedings. That severely restricts studies. The Conservatives also pick pro-government witnesses.

When it comes to contempt, the 2011 election was triggered after the Conservatives were found to be in contempt of Parliament for misleading parliamentarians and refusing to provide key details on proposed bills and their cost estimates. The Conservatives record of abusing Parliament as a democratic institution shows they are no different from the Liberals when it comes to transparency and accountability.

The third example is with respect to the Conservatives unfair elections act. The bill would remove powers from the Chief Electoral Officer. That individual would be stripped of investigative powers as well as the power to engage in public education. The bill would make voting much harder for vulnerable Canadians. It would end the practice of vouching, and voter ID cards would no longer be accepted to confirm identification. The unfair elections bill would change political financing rules in favour of the Conservatives. It would increase allowable levels for individuals to contribute, from $1,200 to $1,500, and it would give an advantage to wealthy Canadians by allowing—

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned equivalent cost. I am curious. When he talks about equivalent cost of seats, is he seriously trying to tell the House that a seat on a private jet is the same as an economy seat on a chartered flight?

[Petitions, March 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition calls on the Government of Canada to immediately legislate a ban on the importation of shark fins into Canada.

[Petitions, March 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions signed by thousands of Canadians across the country, including my riding. The first is from Canadians concerned about cuts to Canada Post, including the elimination of door-to-door service, the loss of up to 8,000 jobs, and significant increases to postage fees. They call on the Government of Canada to reverse these cuts and to look for ways to innovate in areas such as postal banking.

[The Budget, February 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, absolutely. In my consultations, I consulted with the municipalities in my riding. Certainly, New Westminster has pointed out, in its infrastructure needs for transportation, that it is looking for a predictable, reliable source of funding. Certainly they are looking for more funding and the gas tax is important. It is an important financing tool for local government. However, being a former city councillor, I recognize that cities are being downloaded on more and more. Federal and senior levels of government are turning to local governments to do more and more, but they are not handing over the predictable, stable financing tools needed to carry out the job and get the job done.

So while I appreciate the comment, more needs to be done to satisfy the work that has to happen, not just in urban municipalities but in rural ones right across the country.

[The Budget, February 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, certainly, putting funding into crime prevention has been shown in study after study to go a long way in increasing public safety in communities. The budget would not do that. In fact, we could look at other areas, like health care. Putting funding and resources into health prevention is also just as important and fundamentally helps increase health in communities.

The member mentioned consultation and the lack of government consultation in not just public safety but many areas. As I pointed out, in my consultations with my constituents I am hearing from people who are very concerned about the lack of consultation on a significant piece of legislation, the unfair elections act. That is what the government really needs to listen to; not just consultation on the budget, but on other proposals like the unfair elections act.

[The Budget, February 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to budget 2014. The government's budget document was over 400 pages, but I must say that it is very thin on ideas and solutions.

The Minister of Finance speaks of returning to a balanced budget, yet this is the government that has created the largest deficit in Canadian history and has delivered eight deficit budgets in a row.

Under the watch of the Conservatives, more than $100 billion has been added to our national debt over the past six years. Their corporate tax cuts have resulted in over $200 billion in foregone revenue over the past six years. At the same time, they are failing to address high unemployment, especially among youth, and record levels of personal debt.

When we talk about managing the economy, Conservatives and Liberals like to sling mud at the NDP, but when we look at the actual numbers, New Democrat governments have the best record of delivering balanced budgets.

New Democrats have a progressive vision for our country, one that promotes a strong economy without compromising social or environmental prosperity. We believe in creating good quality jobs, protecting public health care, providing affordable child care, and protecting our environment. We believe that seniors should not have to work an extra two years before they are eligible to retire. Our vision is affordable and inclusive.

Government revenues would increase by reversing the Conservatives' corporate tax cuts, by creating value-added jobs here at home instead of shipping our jobs and resources overseas, and by ending subsidies to highly profitable oil and gas companies. It is about priorities and prosperity for all Canadians, not just the ultra-rich and well-connected.

This year's budget has been criticized as a Conservative re-election strategy: Do nothing this year, then roll out the goodies before next year's election. It contains many re-announcements of previously committed funds, especially on infrastructure.

My riding has one of the highest commuter rates. Traffic congestion is a daily reality, and infrastructure has not kept pace with our transportation needs. I fought hard to ensure that the Evergreen Line would finally be built, but more work remains. Sewers and waterlines need upgrading, bridges need replacing, and we need more sidewalks and walking paths. The government continues to expect cities to do more with less, to pay for transit infrastructure with uncertain and limited gas tax revenues.

Our region is one of the most unaffordable places to live in Canada. I am disappointed that the government is not addressing affordable housing in this budget. Housing is a basic need, and affordability affects us all, from mortgage rates and property values to the limited supply of quality rental suites. I am concerned about those living in co-ops who rely on a federal subsidy to help pay the rent. Many of these subsidies will soon expire, leaving residents with limited options.

Community groups that provide housing for the homeless and other vulnerable members of society are concerned that the new criteria for the homelessness partnering strategy may prevent them from accessing federal funding.

Housing for those who require mental health care is a concern for many in my riding. We cannot continue to let Riverview Hospital deteriorate before eyes. We need a vision for this site that preserves the land for public use and that addresses the lack of mental health housing in the region.

In this year's budget, the Conservatives continue their assault on public servants and labour unions. They are going after employee compensation through bargaining, focusing on disability and sick leave, despite a PBO report confirming that public sector sick leave is actually in line with the private sector.

Just before Christmas, many Canadians were shocked to learn that Canada Post intends to end door-to-door delivery service, increase the price of stamps, and lay off thousands of employees. These cuts will certainly affect seniors and people with reduced mobility. They also raise mail security issues.

Conservatives seem to think that this is a great idea. Canada Post's CEO even suggested that it would give seniors a chance to exercise more. Only a New Democrat government would defend workers, the middle class, and our most vulnerable.

British Columbia has the unenviable distinction of having one of the worst rates of child poverty in this country. It is not acceptable that one in five children lives in poverty.

This callous response by the government is on the record: “Is it my job to feed my neighbour's child? I don't think so”.

Adopting a poverty reduction plan with targets and a coordinated set of policies is the only proven way to eliminate poverty. However, this requires political will. The government could wipe out poverty among seniors with the stroke of a pen by simply increasing the guaranteed income supplement. Instead, seniors face rising costs on everything from prescription medications to electricity bills.

Last weekend, a team of volunteers joined me in a neighbourhood canvass to talk with their neighbours about affordability issues. People told us that they are feeling nickel-and-dimed to death.

The NDP has put forward simple, practical solutions to help make life more affordable. We believe that the government should regulate outrageous credit card processing fees that eat into small business profits. It should cap ATM fees, which are among the highest in the world. It should crack down on predatory payday lenders and prevent companies from charging customers a monthly fee just to receive a paper copy of their bills.

Many Canadians are unaware of the existing benefits available to them. After hosting a seminar on the disability tax credit, my office helped one family claim $5,500 in a tax refund it was entitled to.

I have also assisted small businesses in accessing government funding for innovation. Small and medium-size enterprises drive our economy and create the majority of new jobs in this country. However, with nearly 300,000 more people unemployed today than before the recession, the government is simply not doing enough. It should be helping SMEs to succeed, not hindering them.

Another NDP proposal for this year's budget asks the government to reinstate the popular eco-energy home retrofit program. This program is a win-win. It saves families money, creates good quality jobs, reduces energy consumption, and more than pays for itself in economic spinoffs and tax revenues.

Last weekend I was on the doorsteps. I had several conversations with constituents about Bill C-23, the unfair elections act. They are alarmed by the Conservatives' cynical approach, which they feel will bring American-style politics north.

The Conservatives' scheme to overhaul Canada's Election Act reeks of a government that puts political interests ahead of the national interest. Bill C-23 aims to make it harder, not easier, to vote by scrapping voter information cards and eliminating the vouching system. It restricts Elections Canada from promoting the very act of voting, leaving that responsibility to political parties.

At a time when voters feel alienated from the democratic process, the Conservatives are moving to disenfranchise even more people from their right to vote. Canadians are asking for real electoral reform, not blatant partisan attempts to tip the scales in one party's favour.

I have long held the position that Canada should adopt an electoral system of proportional representation to ensure that voters' expressions are better represented. I was speaking to concerned citizens in my riding last week from Fair Vote Canada, who raised this very issue.

I also continue to hear loud and clear from constituents who are fed up with paying for an unelected, unaccountable, and still under-investigation Senate. New Democrats believe in abolishing this archaic institution and focusing on making Parliament work for all Canadians.

The NDP's vision for our country is one that promotes economic stability without sacrificing social or environmental prosperity. We need a government that understands the realities of today and that is willing to tackle the tough challenges of tomorrow. We need a government that agrees that it is our responsibility to ensure that future generations have clean and safe drinking water, healthy rivers and oceans, abundant wild salmon, and a stable climate.

In conclusion, while there are some positive elements in this budget, I cannot support a budget so thin on ideas and solutions.