House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 32% of the vote.
The Budget March 8th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I believe this Liberal team will act responsibly for the country in these trying and difficult times. The last thing we want to do is plunge this nation into an unnecessary election.
We will stand here to fight. We will stand here to point out the discrepancies and misinformation that the government puts out. We will not go to an election just for the sake of having an election. We will go to an election when it is the right time to go to one.
The Budget March 8th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the member would not have missed anything if he were running for the Liberals at that time. I would be glad to give him a red book. I would be glad to show him where it says that we would replace the GST with an equally revenue-generating country.
This country does not run on thin air. It takes money. There is a price for civility and that is contribution to the treasury. We need to have revenue. If that member thinks otherwise, he is living in la-la land. This is a challenge. I would be more than happy to debate the member publicly in his riding and deal with the facts. I would be prepared to do that at any time, putting his seat on the line against my seat.
In his legacy of broken promises, the Prime Minister said that there was no greater fraud than a promise not kept. This was in the Prime Minister's proclamations literature. It goes on to talk about all the broken promises: fixed election dates, the Senate, the refusal to transfer the $6.9 billion to Ontario, hospital wait times, an elected Senate, Kelowna and the income trust.
The list goes on and on. According to his own brochure, this Prime Minister is a fraud. In conclusion, he cannot be trusted. Those are the facts.
The Budget March 8th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join the debate today on behalf, not just of my constituents of Scarborough Centre, but also on behalf of the many concerned Canadians across the country. I will be splitting my time with the hard-working member for Random—Burin—St. George's.
One of my constituents visited me not too long ago and I would like to read what he said as I make my comments on the throne speech as well as the budget statement. When he uttered his words in my office, I could see the concern on his face and hear the fear in his voice. In response, I said to him that he was a constituent, a taxpayer, and a Canadian and that as such, he was entitled to his views. I asked if I could use his words in the House of Commons so I could convey, not just to the government but also to Canadians, exactly what constituents like him were thinking. He said okay, so today I am authorized to use the name of Mr. James Frandsen, a constituent who lives at 223 Ellendale Drive in Scarborough. He said, “If the Prime Minister can behave and do what he is doing while having a minority government, can you imagine what he will do if he had a majority government?” That is a direct quote from James Frandsen.
Imagine the concern that people have.
The other day we heard the budget and the throne speech the day before. The budget was based on nothing but assumptions about this and that. It was based on assumptions. If someone told me I would grow a lot of hair if I drank a lot of water, that is an assumption. I have been drinking a lot of water for many years, but instead of growing hair I have been losing hair.
The Conservatives also assume that by trying to tamper with our national anthem, they could divert the attention of Canadians. That backfired also.
The budget could be called the misleading budget. Throughout the short 10 minutes that I have, I will point out specific examples of what I mean not just by a budget that misleads Canadians, but also about it being inaccurate. I use the word “inaccurate” and not others because, often, when we ask questions from this side of the House, the government members stand up and tell us that we did nothing during our 13 years in government. I will refer to that in a couple of minutes.
When we ask questions about the budget, the Conservative members do not answer. They simply say, “read the budget”. I know all Liberal members have been reading the budget. Some of them will read it twice again, and the more they look into it, the more loopholes they discover, as I have. I am going to point out the discrepancies that I referred to.
The finance minister said:
deficits are a cancer; the accumulating total national debt progressively limits the government's freedom to act.
So true. We agree with that, and that is why in 1993, when we inherited the largest deficit ever of just over $42 billion dollars, a growing debt, high unemployment, and a nation that was down and out from the then Conservative government of Prime Minister Mulroney, we addressed the cancer that the Minister of Finance referred to. We did so in a responsible way, and we did it by consulting with Canadians from coast to coast.
What was the result? The result in a short three and a half years was that the deficit was eliminated. We provided eight consecutive balanced budgets and surpluses never seen before in the history of our country. We had the longest uninterrupted economic growth in the history of our country. Those are facts that nobody can dispute.
At the end of the day, when we stand up, the Conservatives tell us that we did nothing. For us to appreciate where we are today, we have to take a step back. The first throne speech of the Conservative government was basically six pages, and maybe about 13 or 14 minutes, long.
I will quote the throne speech because it is very important. It states:
Through hard work, foresight and good fortune, we have come together to make our vast country one of the most successful the world has ever seen.
The Conservatives had just become government and they admitted in their throne speech that we were one of the most successful countries in the world. How did they do that in less than 10 days in government? They obviously inherited it from the hard work that the Martin Liberal government brought forth.
Then the Conservatives went on to say that the government was proud of what Canadians had accomplished so far. That was in their own words. This was right after they won the election on 2006. When they stand and say that the Liberals did nothing in those years, then what were they so proud of?
I now will go to the second throne speech, which was seven and a half minutes, a very nice looking pamphlet. I think it took a couple of minutes to read it. The throne speech, page 2, says:
Our Government approached the dialogue in a spirit of open and non-partisan cooperation...Acting on the constructive thoughts and suggestions that have been received, our Government will tomorrow present Canada’s economic stimulus plan.
That was the poison pill of the century. They ask us why we are upset as members of Parliament and as a party. We all know very well what happened with that presentation. It was a premeditated and deliberate attempt to shut down the opposition and democracy, to take away the tools that are necessary to run a democratic country.
We come to the throne speech of the other day. It was almost an hour, three times longer in time and words than the two previous ones. What it adds up to is a lot of rehashing of everything that has taken place in the last three and a half years since the Conservatives have been in government.
For example, it talks about expanding our trade associations, the Colombia trade agreement, Panama, trade with Europe. This is old news. The Conservatives are not telling us anything new. They talk about the $100 child benefit. This is old news. The $100, if I may elaborate for a moment, works out to about $65 a month for only children under six. Try to address a child's needs with less than $2 a day.
Then the Conservatives talk about food safety. We all know what happened with listeriosis, and they did nothing. How did they address it? They state that the government “will hold those who produce, import and sell goods in Canada accountable for the safety of Canadians”. How will they do that when all they did was cut those programs, staff and resources? I do not know how they will do it.
It is odd because the current Minister of Finance was also minister in the Harris government. I am sure he remembers what happened in Walkerton. I do not know how they will protect Canadians.
Since I have only one minute, I will summarize. I found this old article. It states that the Prime Minister's tactics mislead voters. Today this throne speech is misleading Canadians once again because of false data, because of false information. The Conservatives talk about our debt to GDP going down. In essence, it is going up. They talk about our debt going down. It is not. It is going up. They talk about other nations, saying we are going to move forward. They also talk about how the debt to GDP ratio of all our major trading partners, the United Kingdom, the U.S., Japan, et cetera, is going up. If theirs is going up, where is the economic stimulus that is going to generate revenue for us to eliminate the deficit? I know how the government is going to eliminate the deficit. It promised 50-some-odd billion dollars in stimulus and it used coded words such as allocated, assigned, et cetera. The money is never getting out.
It is a very misleading presentation. I hope I have another round to talk about this. There is a lot of data that I wish to put out.
THE BUDGET March 8th, 2010
I will say “misled”, Madam Speaker. I apologize.
“Researchers disappointed by funding for innovation”. Peter MacLeod, a fellow at the Centre for the Study of Democracy at Queen's University, says “much of the funding promised to various agencies will do little more than 'keep the lights on”.
The government has put in some money but that is just crumbs. If we are to invest and if the government is putting us in the whole to the tune of $56 billion or $60 billion, let us do it right.
THE BUDGET March 8th, 2010
Madam Speaker, the member talked about seniors. One of my soft spots is our respect and our support for seniors for they are the reason that this country is here today.
I want to remind the member of the devastation as a result of the income trust fiasco where his own Prime Minister committed in writing that he would not touch it and promised seniors that he would leave it alone. That is why Danny Williams said that there was no greater fraud than a lie. In essence, he called the Prime Minister a liar and, indeed, he lied.
The member talked about jobs, research and innovation. From the National Post, not from a Liberal paper--
Canadian Navy March 5th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry and was very moved. He will certainly have my support.
In giving my support, I recognize that the member did not just wake up one day and decide to put this motion forward. He must have consulted with some members of the armed forces. Could the hon. member tell us a bit more about whom he consulted.
Second, given that this took place so many years ago, why did it take so long to right this wrong?
Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic Games March 5th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, nearly a week has passed since the wrap-up of the Vancouver Winter Olympic Games and yet Canadians are still feeling that exhilaration and pride.
Our athletes represented us with more patriotism, grace and sportsmanship than we could have ever imagined. Their performances, whether on the podium or not, were truly world-class.
The games were not just about sports. They represented something even bigger than the new gold medal world record they set. The 2010 Olympics brought our country together in unprecedented ways. The national pride we demonstrated every day and the way we welcomed the world with open arms and our big Canadian hearts will forever be remembered by all.
To the entire Olympic family, the volunteers and everyone else, congratulations for a job well done. To our athletes, congratulations. They are all winners in our eyes for they made us proud. Their efforts gave us a record golden Canada for so many golden moments. We thank them. Merci.
The Economy March 4th, 2010
Madam Speaker, I listened very carefully to the member's comments.
I am going to quote him before I ask him a question. He said, “I can tell you what does not work, and that is higher taxes”. None of us disagree with him.
Government members say that taxes kill jobs. Those are the words of the Minister of Finance, which I can get for the minister. However, the government has just announced a tax on jobs of almost $7 billion in EI premiums.
Does the hon. member agree that is how to create jobs? If the hon. member believes in what he says, the government should take that $7 billion away and not burden small businesses.
On income trusts, the tax is to be 31.5%, the highest tax increase.
I will close with this: when the lowest income tax rate was at 15% under a Liberal government, the government of the members opposite increased it to 15.5% and called it a tax decrease.
Can the hon. member please answer for of us, and for Canadians who are listening, is that a tax increase or decrease the government is giving us?
Provincial Choice Tax Framework Act December 8th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I am not going to pick isolated comments. The member said in her speech, and I quote, “This is not democracy”. The NDP professes to be very democratic. The title of this bill is, and I will read it for the record, “Provincial Choice Tax Framework Act”. The key word is “Choice”. Why is the NDP today being so undemocratic in not allowing the provinces to choose? That is the question I want to ask.
Provincial Choice Tax Framework Act December 8th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing read letters and then talked about no consultation and what is going to happen with the first nations people, and she is right.
I am not here to defend the current government, but for the sake of transparency and democracy, the question is, why is she not asking her provincial counterparts to do the consultations, to do the town hall meetings, to do all that is needed to consult people? After all, for another time, it is up to the province to decide whether it wants to implement this tax. The Conservative government is simply making a proposal to Ontario and British Columbia. They can say no if they wish to.