House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2015, with 39% of the vote.
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, entirely the opposite is true. What the member is talking about is the totality of the government's effort to improve the quality of life of Canadians, which happens to be a multitude of taxation decreases.
Not surprisingly, the Liberals do not understand the complete economic effect of government policy.
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, nearly 1.4 million fewer Canadians are living in poverty under the Conservative government now than under the previous Liberal government. Tax cuts overall mean that over one million low-income Canadians do not pay any federal income tax at all. In fact, the Parliamentary Budget Officer commented on the 180 different reductions in taxes we have made. The Parliamentary Budget Officer says: “Cumulative tax changes since 2005 have been progressive overall and most greatly impact low-middle income earners...”.
Of the 180 reductions to various taxes the Conservative government has brought in, I wonder if the member would kindly name just one that he actually supported.
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, I apologize, but I am sure that my hon. colleague did not mean to mislead the House when he referred to this government taking money out of the EI fund. That was the Liberals. I am certain he would like to apologize for misleading the—
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, some Canadians actually call surpluses that a government has “overtaxation”. I am not sure there is a difference. However, we have said that, once we reach balance and start looking at possible surpluses, we will look for ways to give that money back to the very folks it belongs to. This is just another of some of the 181 ways, I guess we could say, that the Conservative government has found to reduce the tax burden on seniors, farmers, students, single parents, couples, and the list goes on.
My question for the member is this. Of the 181 times we have recommended lowering taxes to one sector or another—in this case income splitting for couples—could he name just one that his New Democratic Party supported for lowering taxes on Canadians? I would be happy with one.
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, if I may offer a very sincere compliment, I find it hard to believe the member was around in the 1950s.
The NDP seems to have taken on this charge about the Conservatives wanting to return to the 1950s as if it is some kind of a bad thing.
Currently, under various policies by this government, we have some of the lowest federal corporate tax rates in the G20. We have the first entirely tariff-free zone for manufacturers. We see less children in poverty. We see less seniors paying any federal tax whatsoever. Right now, I think it is fair to say that we have the best, most fertile economic landscape in our country for business growth since the 1950s.
What we would not disagree with is that, of course, we would like to see taxation on Canadians all across the country as low, if not lower, than it was in the 1950s. If we want to go back to the 1950s, let us lower our tax rates to meet that criteria. This is one piece in the puzzle in doing that.
Why can the NDP not vote yes to at least one lowering-tax initiative by the Conservative government?
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, one of the problems we have here is that members ask for more debate, but then they do not listen to the debate or they do not show up for the debate.
The member just gave a great speech about the totality of the taxation reductions the government has given. He used the number 160, which is the number I use, but I have just done a little more research, and it is actually 180 times our government has lowered taxes for Canadians.
This is just another opportunity to lower taxes for Canadians. We have done it for seniors. We have done it for families. We have done it for children. We have done it for students. I know that students in Canada can now earn just over $20,000 without paying any federal tax. That takes individual policy changes. Here we are talking about yet one other opportunity to lower taxes for Canadians to continue our government's plan to improve the quality of life for Canadians.
I wonder if the member could mention one more time how much the average family in Cambridge and North Dumfries is saving as a result of this side of the House voting yes to tax cuts, but unfortunately, that side continuing to vote no.
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed listening to the member's comments earlier, but I have to admit I have absolutely no understanding of where he is going with his comments. I know that when I was elected to come to the House of Commons, it was to actually protect taxpayers from governments that were charging too much money. It appears that he is objecting to more tax cuts for Canadians.
What I am asking the member to do is consider the totality of what this government has done with its tax cuts. The economic action plan is a strategic year-over-year plan that includes the reduction of taxes, over $200 billion less in taxes to Canadians as a result of this Conservative government.
One plan does not meet all needs and that is why we have reduced taxes for farmers, families, seniors, students, just name it, small businesses, apprentices, people with disabilities, et cetera. Now we have another opportunity to add yet one more piece to the puzzle that represents quality of life for Canadians.
Why does the member not have the ability to put it all together and think about the bigger picture?
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague for what I see as a great speech. I want to congratulate her for bringing together the bigger picture that this government is attempting to do, which is to create a very efficient way of running the country, keeping health care transfers at the highest level ever, social transfers to the provinces, but also reducing taxes in every area we can think of. She makes a valid point that people know how to spend their money better than any government.
In Ontario, for example, we have a provincial government which has tax rates that are out of control. Electricity rates are the highest in North America. People are taxed to death and see money wasted every day.
I wonder if the member would comment on all of the tax initiatives that this government brings forward, and not just this one. It is about the whole picture of making Canadians lives much better.
Business of Supply June 10th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member opposite. I am not surprised that the NDP will vote against yet another way to give Canadians some of their money back.
What I would like the member to try to understand, if possible, is that doctors do not make a diagnosis based on one test or by looking at one cell. It is based on the collective assessment of all the tests. What I mean by this is that this is just one additional way the Conservative government can give Canadians more of their money back.
We have brought in tax reductions for farmers, families, students, businesses and seniors. In fact, we have brought in 160 different tax reduction policies. This is yet one. The NDP voted against all the other 160 reductions. Why would it vote against yet another reason to give Canadians back more of their hard earned tax dollars?
Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act May 28th, 2014
Mr. Speaker, I have enjoyed the debate this evening. It is quite robust.
Bill C-24 speaks to eliminating fraud within the system.
I am proud to say that my riding of Cambridge-North Dumfries has the largest Portuguese community in all of Canada. When I speak to these folks in the Portuguese community, they tell me they are very proud to be Canadians and they are proud of the ethical process that they went through to become hard-working citizens. My first job was on an asphalt crew with a bunch of Portuguese men who were a great influence in my life.
My feeling on the bill is that it works toward preventing fraud in the system, which these hard-working new Canadians want to see happen.
My question for the member is this. Should we not improve this system to enforce and improve the integrity of the system to deal with those who are committing fraud within the system?