Joe Daniel

[Taxation, February 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it should come as no surprise that our Conservative government is the only one that stands up for middle-class Canadian families. Through our intensive low-tax plan, our government has managed to help 100% of families receive the benefits they need so they can put their hard-earned money toward their own priorities.

We have doubled the children's fitness tax credit, enhanced the universal child care benefit, and now we have implemented the family tax cut. All parents, including single parents, will benefit from our family tax cut. That is over four million families and over seven million parents.

Meanwhile, the idea of the Liberals and the New Democrats for Canadians is high taxes and high debt. They would take away our benefits and implement a job-killing carbon tax that would raise the price of everything.

The facts are crystal clear. Only our Conservative government can be trusted to keep money in the pockets of Canadian families.

[Taxation, February 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, mothers and fathers should be able to make the important decisions that affect their own children. That is why our new family tax cut and enhanced universal child care benefit will give 100% of families with kids an average of nearly $2,000 per child. That is nearly $12,000 over a child's first six years.

Our government trusts that parents know what is best for their kids. Both the Liberals and the NDP are against putting money back into the pockets of hard-working families. In fact, the Liberals will reverse our tax cuts and will impose more taxes on our middle-class Canadian families. It is the typical high-tax, high-debt Liberal agenda.

On this side of the House, we will not hike taxes like the Liberals and NDP will. Rather, we are proud to ensure that moms and dads have the final say in where their money is going.

[Taxation, February 17th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that Canadian families know best how to spend their money.

This is a fundamental difference between our party and the Liberals and NDP. That is why our government has taken real action to reduce taxes on Canadian families, including family tax cuts and the enhanced universal child care benefit.

Can the Minister of State for Social Development please update this House on our government's initiatives to put more money in the pockets of Canadian families?

[Foreign Affairs, February 16th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituents of Don Valley East, and for all of the members of St. George & St. Rueiss Coptic Orthodox Church in my riding, I was horrified to learn about the beheading of 21 Coptic Christians in Libya by ISIL.

This massacre adds to a list of atrocities and shows us and the world how genocidal ISIL is. From sexual enslavement of the Yazidi women to the burning alive of the Jordanian pilot, beheading of foreign hostages and the persecution of many other minority groups, these acts are simply unacceptable to civilized people. The savage acts in different geographic locations show us that this ideology and its threats are spreading like a cancer. This is a group who has no human decency and no regard for human life.

As the Prime Minister has stated:

Canada is proud to stand with its coalition partners in the fight against ISIL. We will continue to stand firmly together against these terrorists who threaten the peace and freedom we hold so dear at home and that we wish for those abroad.

Barbaric acts such as this do not shake our resolve but, rather, confirm the rightness—

[Taxation, February 4th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, our family tax cut helps 100% of families with kids. Families in Don Valley East and all families with kids across Canada will benefit from our new family tax cut. Every family in my riding and across Canada will benefit by an average of over $1,100 per year, with parents receiving almost $2,000 per child.

The NDP has never met a tax it did not like and the Liberals have never seen a tax they would not hike. The Liberal leader has even pledged to reverse our tax cuts and has threatened to do exactly what the Liberal Party elites always do: raise taxes on ordinary Canadians to put into the hands of bureaucrats.

Only this Conservative government can be trusted to put more money back into the pockets of the people of Canada.

[Public Safety, February 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Liberal member for York West suggested that if ISIL was coming here, it was because the Prime Minister put us in that position.

Jihadist terrorism is not a future possibility; it is a present reality. Our government has never hesitated to call jihadist terrorism what it is. Just as we are not afraid to condemn it, we are not afraid to confront it. That is why our government committed the Canadian Armed Forces to the broad international coalition against the so-called Islamic State.

Extreme jihadists have declared war on us, on all free people, on Canada specifically. Pretending it is not so is not going to make it go away. That may be the Liberal way, but it is not the Canadian way. In defending his MP's remark, the Liberal leader has demonstrated that he and his party do not have what it takes to stand up for Canadians and to stand up against violent extremism.

We will continue to condemn these actions and stand with our allies in this fight against terrorism.

[Taxation, January 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, under the strong and dependable leadership of our Prime Minister, our government will balance the budget and put money where it belongs: in the pockets of hard-working Canadians. The last thing we can do is put our economy at risk with high taxes and debt promised by the Liberals and the NDP.

With the enhancement of the universal child care benefit, moms and dads in my riding of Don Valley East and across the country will receive nearly $2,000 per year for every child under 6 and $720 per year for every child between the ages of 6 and 17. However, the NDP and Liberals want to take this money away and spend it on big government bureaucracy instead.

Our government understands the challenge of balancing a family budget and saving for education, while ensuring that Canadian children can take advantage of the opportunities available to them.

On this side of the House, we know Canadian families deserve to make their own decisions and we are proud to be the only party standing up for them.

[Motor Vehicle Safety Act, December 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to participate in today's debate on Bill C-603.

At the outset, I would like to remind all Canadians that Transport Canada has a long history of working to improve road safety in Canada. Transport Canada is committed to the safety of the Canadian public.

A significant portion of the improvements to date can be attributed to Transport Canada's regulatory action in requiring vehicles manufactured in and imported into Canada to adhere to the highest possible safety standards. While this is impressive progress, we fully realize that there is more to do. Together with our safety partners, including the provinces, territories, and interested vehicle safety organizations, we have set a vision for Canada to achieve the safest roads in the world.

Statistics from Transport Canada's national collision database, a database of information on Canadian vehicle collisions, shows that out of the approximately 2,000 fatalities on Canadian roads each year, there are an average of 13 cyclist casualties from collisions involving heavy trucks. However, few involve collisions with the sides of trucks. Transport Canada has reviewed the need for a mandatory requirement for side guards and has concluded that they would not be an effective means of further reducing cyclist fatalities.

In 2005, a U.K. study, which is commonly cited for the effectiveness of side guards, clearly stated that side guards are only partially effective in one type of collision, which occurs rarely in Canada. In Canada, most cyclist and pedestrian fatalities around heavy trucks occur at the front of the vehicle. One of the best means of protecting pedestrians and cyclists is to focus on avoiding this conflict from occurring in the first place. Effective solutions for preventing collisions are the first and best line of defence.

It has been shown that a significant factor in pedestrian and cyclist fatalities involving heavy trucks has been the result of reduced driver visibility. There are large blind spots around these heavy vehicles. Due to this, some truck drivers simply do not always see the cyclists and pedestrians. Thankfully, this is a fairly rare occurrence.

We believe that there is a potential to save more lives if we focus our efforts on improving the ability of truck drivers to detect cyclists and pedestrians around their trucks. Some emerging technologies now offer considerably more promise in reducing fatalities and injuries than side guards. Cameras can supplement mirrors to improve the field of view, and when placed in strategic places on trucks, can help enhance the driver's field of view by eliminating these blind spots. It is expected that in future, cameras will be able to provide drivers with a full 360° field of view around a vehicle.

Transport Canada has begun working with the National Research Council of Canada, NRC, to test the performance of camera systems on trucks. Its research shows that cameras have considerable promise but that the technology has yet to be sufficiently perfected for use exclusively in lieu of mirrors.

Transport Canada's collision investigations have shown that the majority of cyclist and pedestrian fatalities occur at the front of trucks or when trucks are turning, which are cases that would benefit from an improved field of view for truck drivers.

A 2013 study in the United Kingdom reviewed cases of cyclist fatalities when a heavy vehicle was turning. The study included simulations of cases and found that 79% of the fatalities could have been prevented with a collision avoidance system on the side of the truck. Transport Canada has been in contact with U.K. officials to learn more.

Camera and radar systems are being developed today to automatically identify pedestrians and cyclists and warn the driver when there is a risk of a collision. If the driver does not take action to avoid the crash, the vehicle will apply its brakes automatically. Several car manufacturers are currently installing these systems, and they are already available in Canada. It is expected that a similar technology will migrate to trucks once it has been further perfected and adapted for trucks. These cameras and sensors can also help detect pedestrians and cyclists in the blind spots beside a turning vehicle.

Ultrasonic sensors have been used effectively as parking aids for many years. Parking aids detect stationary obstacles using sensors, and they alert drivers with escalating audible warning and can also display the proximity of a hazard. While ultrasonic sensors do not have the range to reliably detect moving pedestrians and cyclists, there are radar sensors and laser scanners that can detect people. These sensors are already being successfully used on trucks to warn drivers about vehicles in their blind spots or obstacles ahead.

With full consideration, it is evident that the side guards are an unproven approach relative to the new safety technologies that are being developed and perfected for heavy vehicles. In addition, these same emerging technologies might prevent or reduce the severity of collisions between trucks and vehicles.

Forward collision warning systems sense when the vehicle ahead is slowing or stopped and alert the trailing driver of a potential collision. Dynamic brake support systems automatically supplement the application of brakes when information from forward-looking sensors determines that a crash is imminent and that the braking force applied by the driver is not sufficient to avoid the collision. Autonomous emergency braking systems automatically apply the brakes when the system determines that a crash is imminent but the driver makes no attempt to avoid the collision by braking or steering around the vehicle ahead.

Transport Canada is committed to studying these emerging technologies in the interest of improving road safety in Canada.

Any federal side guard regulations would have no effect on the hundreds of thousands of existing trucks on our roadways, as these do not fall under federal jurisdiction. However, individual provincial and territorial governments are able to require side guards on their existing locally registered fleets. We note that no provinces or territories have done so at the present time. In addition, upward of 25% of the trucks on Canadian roads are registered in the United States and are not subject to the regulations under the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Indeed, American federal regulations do not require trucks to be equipped with side guards.

Municipalities have a responsibility to ensure their infrastructure accommodates for the safe transportation of all road users. For example, it is up to municipalities where to design for bike lanes and wider streets where there is a demonstrated need.

While the side guards do not show the benefits that many people would expect, the emerging technologies that I have described have the potential to improve safety, not only for cyclists and pedestrians but also for other motorized vehicles. Transport Canada has demonstrated that it has not hesitated to regulate when there is a convincing argument and a clear safety benefit to mandate a new safety requirement. While we are not able to support a regulation for side guards today, we assure members that Transport Canada will continue to review the world's research and conduct Canadian research aimed at assessment of innovative technologies that will move us to our vision of achieving the safest roads in the world.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I listened diligently to my colleague across the way. It almost seems as if the New Democrats are a little confused as to their story. The opposition cannot seem to get its story straight. First, New Democrats accuse us of not consulting, then, when we do consult with the very association that represents small businesses, they refuse to listen.

Could the member opposite stand and agree with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, which was consulted, that increased payroll taxes are not in the best interest of Canadian small businesses?

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the banking system is sound. That is why banks are able to function as they do. They do a great service for all of us, including not just at the personal level but for small businesses, et cetera, and will continue to do that. The telecom industry is quite different from the banking system. Telecom companies are actually providing a service that they are already charging for in terms of paper billing, and it is just a way of increasing their profit margin on the backs of all of us individuals.