John McCallum

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, February 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the minister on his speech.

Coming from a very multicultural riding, one of the things I do not like about the bill and find particularly hard to take, and there is a list of them, is the decision to apply the language test to people in the age range of 55 to 64, who have previously been exempt.

Many of my constituents and many new Canadians across the country find it offensive because, depending on the country from which they come, they may not speak the Queen's English but may nevertheless be highly productive, loyal members of Canadian society and make many contributions, and whose children likely speak very good, if not perfect, English and whose grandchildren will speak perfect English.

Many new Canadians find offensive the imposition of a language test on older, or relatively older, people, a category that I belong to myself.

Why does the minister impose this rather stringent language test on people in the age range 55 to 64 simply because they do not speak the Queen's English, but are nevertheless highly productive, loyal members of this country?

[Finance, February 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, they do not like his balanced budgets.

He resigned from cabinet or was removed from cabinet, depending on the interpretation. At the time, the Prime Minister referred to this as “political and administrative chaos”, but now history is repeating itself.

Given their differences over income splitting, will the Minister of Finance be removed from cabinet, will he leave on his own, or, as in 2002, will there be conflicting stories about what really happened?

[Finance, February 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, back in 2002, finance minister Paul Martin resigned from cabinet, or was removed from cabinet—

[Finance, February 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister did not want to tell us who speaks for the government on fiscal policy.

Regarding income splitting, the discrepancy between the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance could not be any clearer.

I therefore must ask again: who speaks for the government on fiscal policy? It is a very simple question. What is the answer?

[Finance, February 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, referring to income splitting, two weeks ago the Minister of Finance said: “...I'm not sure that overall, it benefits our society”. Then only yesterday, the Prime Minister said: “...it will be a good policy for Canadian families”.

Given these radically different opinions, who speaks for the government on fiscal policy, and with the finance minister practically handing out his resumé at the G20, does it no longer matter what he thinks?

[International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, February 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the completion of Canada's year as chair of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and to congratulate our former colleague, Dr. Mario Silva, on his superb work representing our country as chair.

Dr. Silva stated yesterday:

The IHRA brings political and social leaders together from around the world to help prevent future human rights abuses through Holocaust education, remembrance, and research. I am proud of Canada's leadership on the world stage...

The Holocaust is an unparalleled evil in human history. Remembrance and education are critical parts of ensuring these events are never repeated. As well, we must act upon the lessons of the Holocaust in preventing mass atrocity and genocide, and bringing the perpetrators of such crimes to justice.

In the words of Nobel Peace Prize winner and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, “For the dead and the living, we must bear witness”.

[Taxation, February 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are starting to get a sense of what a Conservative promise is worth. A promise on income splitting really meant not doing income splitting. A promise to exempt income trusts from taxation really meant not exempting them. A promise to eliminate capital gains tax really meant not eliminating the tax.

Does the Prime Minister still have a problem with Bev Oda inserting all those “nots” into her documents, or was it his idea in the first place?

[Taxation, February 24th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, that is no answer. Two years ago, the Conservatives made a solemn election commitment on income splitting. Two weeks ago, the Minister of Finance said that commitment needed more research. More research? From the C.D. Howe Institute on the right to the Centre for the Study of Living Standards on the left, think tanks have panned the proposal.

Just as important, do the Conservatives not do the research on election promises before they make the promises rather than two years later?

[Taxation, February 24th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise to introduce income splitting, which he described as “an historic step forward to achieve greater fairness for families”. Two weeks ago, he broke his election promise and abandoned his commitment to something he described as fair. Why?

[Citizenship and Immigration, February 13th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, three times the government has insulted Chinese Canadians. First, the Conservatives capped the Canadian experience class, which disproportionately affected Chinese Canadians. Then they raised the age limit for citizenship language tests from 54 to 64, when many older Chinese people speak imperfect English. Then they eliminated the immigration investor program, when almost 80% of the applicants are Chinese.

Are Conservatives inadvertently picking on Chinese people?