Karen Vecchio

[Business of Supply, February 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, equal pay for work of equal value is important. That is basically what I stated. If there is a difference, then we must look at other variables. Is the person doing the same level of work? If the answer is no, then I can understand there being a bit of a difference. However, at the same time, there must be equal pay for equal work. That is what I believe.

I recognize that at this time we do not have total equality. As I indicated, there is still a 2.2% gap for individuals under the age of 35. I recognize that. It is important that we work together as Canadians to continue to close that gap. It is not perfect, and we must work together to make sure that it does become effective. As I indicated, we have seen a decrease in the gap. We have also seen an increase in the number of federal public servants who are women.

[Business of Supply, February 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the act was put in place in 2012, not 2009. I am not sure we are looking at the same thing, but we probably are. The act sits there as a guideline. It sits there as our legislation. It is important that we enforce this.

Even today's motion is a template for Canadians to follow. It is up to us as Canadians to make sure we are abiding by this new legislation and these new laws.

Although I am not sure of the quote that this lady has used, legislation of this sort is important. The motion on the table is important. We must close the gap on gender equality when it comes to pay.

At the same time, my concerns are with sections (c) and (d). I do not stand for the quotes that they said about the Conservative Party because there is some incorrect information there. I am also concerned, as are the taxpayers of Canada, that we spend taxpayers' money well. I do not believe setting up another committee would do that.

[Business of Supply, February 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, today I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Yorkton—Melville. I am proud to rise in the House on today's opposition motion. To begin, as a woman and mother, I will always support an effective motion for equal pay and compensation for equal work. It is important that every Canadian entering the workplace receives equal compensation.

In 2012, the Conservative government successfully passed the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act. This act affirms that women in the federal public sector should receive equal pay for work of equal value, consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

This act included significant objectives, including timely and efficient resolutions for compensation matters as well as accountability, definition, processes, and transparency. I am proud to say that in the last 10 years, we have seen an increase of women in the public sector. Fifty-five per cent of the federal public service are women and we have seen the gap in pay equity decrease in the public sector. Currently the pay gap between women and men aged 35 and less has lowered to 2.2%.

The Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act and the reform of pay equity is the only act that advances joint union-employer accountability, providing a proactive process, collective bargaining, and the right to equal pay for equal value. This is just one advancement put forward by the past Conservative government.

Our party was the first party to have a female cabinet minister as well as the first female senator, and the most current support can be seen by our very own leadership.

Studies completed in the 41st Parliament include: “Women in Skilled Trades and Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Occupations”; “Promising Practices to Prevent Violence Against Women and Girls”; “Economic Leadership and Prosperity of Canadian Women”; “Eating Disorders Amongst Girls and Women”; and “Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace”. We have an excellent track record.

I would support this motion with the following amendment, “That, given that the Conservative Party absolutely supports pay equity, the motion be amended to delete part (c) and part (d) in their entirety.” Part (c) accuses the Conservative Party of removing the rights of public service employees to pay equity, which is not factual, and part (d) calls for a special committee to look at the pay equity issues for women, and this committee would duplicate the work of the status of women committee.

Today, I am joined to speak on this motion by fellow Conservative members representing Sarnia—Lambton, South Surrey—White Rock, and Yorkton—Melville, great women from across this country.

Women represent nearly half of the Canadian workforce. Women make up the majority of enrolments in college programs and the number is higher among graduates. The majority of graduates from university since the early 1990s have been women.

I am proud to stand in this House as the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London. I am proud to share that at my party's nomination, four of the six candidates were women. In the 2015 election, three of the six candidates bidding to represent my riding were women.

Furthermore, in my own constituency, there are a large number of females in leadership roles including chief financial officers and chief administrative officers in many of the municipalities that I represent. Many of the successful small and large corporations in my riding are run by women, including construction companies, financial institutions, and automobile dealerships.

I come from a family with very strong-willed women in leadership roles. My sister Linda is a principal. My sister Ann is the head of a science department at a high school. My sister-in-law Lisa is in charge of logistics for a successful trucking company. My own mother ran the business side of the family farm.

Personally, I have dealt with pay equity issues. In 1989, after working two and a half years at a business in my community, it came to the attention of a co-worker and I that the male employees were being paid almost $2 more an hour. Our action was to take this issue and address it with management and the board of directors. Shortly after, this issue was ratified and equal pay for equal work was the policy.

Maybe as a young woman, I did not realize that a girl playing on an all-boys baseball team was strange. Maybe I was not aware that playing ice hockey and football in the schoolyard was not supposed to be for girls, or maybe I have always seen myself as an equal.

Women's issues are very important in this country and I believe we must focus on important issues, including violence against women and children as well as self-esteem issues. We must educate our youth to be sure that we condemn abuse to others, and we must work to instill values of equality in all people, including young girls.

We must support programs on mental health as well as local programs in our communities to improve self-worth. We must work together as a society to be inclusive.

As I said so many times, I am a proud mother of two teenaged daughters. I have five nieces and one great-niece. Just yesterday, one of my daughters found out that she was accepted into a program at St. Clair College for protection, security, and investigation. My niece Britney just received a recognition as the College Hockey America player of the month, and my niece Sarah was awarded the sportswoman of the year for the Mid-American Conference for golf. At one time, these were all-male dominated fields and activities.

Last year, I was proud to be one of the speakers at the Elgin Business Resource Centre's International Women's Day event. I was surrounded by successful businesswomen, including two local business owners who were also presenting. The room was filled with successful businesswomen and entrepreneurs.

I would like to share with members a few exciting facts. Women represent nearly half the workforce in Canada. Women are senior executives, CEOs, and board members here and across this country.

Our party's view is that Canada will be far better off when the full potential of women and girls is represented in every sector of the economy and society.

The previous government launched the successful “It Starts with One—Be her Champion”, seeking 5,000 leaders to not just counsel those they mentor, but to truly champion young women.

In budget 2015, status of women was mentioned multiple times, and $700 million was invested in the Business Development Corporation. Our government also introduced changes to the Labour Code that have supported longer leaves for families. In 2012, the federal budget announced women on boards. Then again, in 2015, the first women's trade mission took place in Brazil, and our Conservative government created the women's entrepreneur forum, a national conference for women entrepreneurs.

I must reiterate that I fully support equal pay for equal work. However, portions of the motion before us duplicate an act that we already have in place, and that we already have seen provides excellent growth for women. We must continue to support women in the workplace and provide opportunities for them. However, the request for a committee consisting of 10 members, and that includes more resources, would just duplicate the work that the Standing Committee on the Status of Women already does. I am a proud member of that committee.

The mandate for the status of women committee already allows for subcommittees to focus on particular issues as well as to study policies, programs, expenditures, and legislation of departments and agencies. The motion would duplicate a committee as well as have an added expense for the taxpayers. The status of women committee under its mandate already focuses on equality, poverty of women, and violence experienced by women. I cannot support additional funds for an additional committee when one already exists.

When reviewing the motion, I will accept points (a) and (b). I believe it is important to continue to close the unacceptable gap in pay between men and women, which contributes to income inequality and discriminates against women. I do recognize that pay equity is a right. As a proud woman, I will always support equal pay for equal work. Unfortunately, the motion does nothing further for any cause for Canadians.

The Conservative Party supports pay equity for women. By introducing the Public Sector Equitable Compensation Act, Conservatives ensured that pay equity cases were dealt with fairly, quickly, and directly through collective bargaining. The act ensures pay equity issues are dealt with forthright instead of lingering for up to 15 years as in the previous Canadian Human Rights Commission process. That is not fair for anyone.

The motion also seeks to create a special committee of the House. There is no need for another special committee to be created. The House has a standing committee on human resources as well as the status of women committee that could certainly examine this if they wished. We need to be accountable to taxpayers, and additional funds for duplicate committees is not about spending well.

[Government Appointments, February 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, political interference is political interference.

This is just not about the government House leader. His own letter says that he was writing on behalf of the Prime Minister.

Why does the Prime Minister think that he has the right to openly interfere with judges and quasi-judicial board members?

[Government Appointments, February 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, political interference is political interference.

The Liberal House leader has written a number of letters that directly interfere with operations of the immigration review board and citizenship judges.

In the past, this exact issue has required ministers to resign.

Just how low are the Liberal standards when it comes to ethical guidelines?

[Income Tax Act, January 29th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I truly respect where the member is coming from. I myself have worked for 11 years for a member of Parliament and have worked for all Canadians. I believe that job creation is the number one thing that we need to continue to focus on, to help our country. Yes, we must help our seniors. We must help those who are the most vulnerable. Job creation is one of the biggest things and should be our priority in doing so.

When it comes to CPP, that is a very important program. I will continue to support the Canada pension plan, allowing people to put it into their investments. However, I also think that investments made into the tax-free savings account are an excellent way for seniors to save as well. It does not just need to be the government that assists them with saving; it allows all Canadians to have accountability and choices as to how they wish to save their money.

[Income Tax Act, January 29th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, although I did not sit in the House of Commons, I am a Canadian who watched what happened in the House of Commons, and as well, I worked for a previous MP for 11 years. I have worked with constituents and I have worked with Canadians.

As the critic for families, children, and social development, I have taken it upon myself to do pre-budget consultations. Through them, I have had the opportunity to speak to many people regarding homelessness as well as affordable housing. One thing that I continue to hear back in meetings and briefings and through the ESDC is that housing first, the initiative we put forward for homelessness, works. That is why today I continue to ask the Liberal government to ensure that our vulnerable people be cared for with programs like this, which our Conservative government introduced and which had excellent benefits.

[Income Tax Act, January 29th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, today I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa.

I am honoured to rise today to speak on Bill C-2. This is my maiden speech, and I wish to start by thanking the people of Elgin—Middlesex—London for giving me the opportunity to represent them in the House of Commons for the next four years.

I would not be here if not for the amazing volunteers and friends, but most of all my incredible family. To start, I know that as I speak today my mom and dad are watching these proceedings. I would like to thank my parents, Patricia and Harold Martyn, for all of the opportunities and support they have always given me. As the daughter of people who farm turkeys and pigs, I understand hard work and commitment, and I thank them for instilling these values in me. Whoever thought the girl from Sparta would be sitting in the House of Commons.

To my siblings who have always held me accountable, and doing so with love, a huge thanks for believing in me: Linda, Ann, Paul, and my in-laws, Greg, Scott, Trish, Lisa, Pete, and David. I thank them all. To Sandra and Bill, a.k.a. Nana and Pops, who have always been there for me, I love them both.

Making this decision to get into federal politics was not an easy decision, but I truly had a head start. My mentor and former boss, Joe Preston sat across this aisle from 2004 to 2015. “Trust me” was a common phrase used daily in our discussions. Today I would like to thank Joe for encouraging me. Without his support, this would not have been possible.

Now for the hard part, naming the people I miss every day as I serve this amazing country: Dakota, Garrett, Marissa, Hannah, and Christian. I hope from this new chapter of my life they will realize that anything is possible, will believe in themselves, and surround themselves with good people. I cannot wait to see what the future holds for them.

Finally, to Michael, my better half, the guy from band camp whom I married, I miss our evening walks, but I am definitely thankful for Facetime, or this journey would never have been possible. Although we are 640 kilometres apart, he is always with me. I believe in him, just as much as he believes in me, and I look forward to kicking off our bucket list in the next 20 years.

Elgin—Middlesex—London is an incredible riding. It is filled with beautiful lake harbours, rich agricultural land, small and large vibrant businesses, but most of all, great people. The volunteers not only on my campaign but throughout this riding helped mould me and educate me.

I would like to personally thank all the people who got me here, including Brian, Fran, Francine, Marci, Whitney, Jeff, Jen, Betty, Ena, Blake, Bob, Mae, Terry, Reinhardt, Dan, Shirley, Dean, Bridget, Melissa, and all the residents on Crescent Ave. I thought if I went fast, no one would know if I missed them. I send a special thanks to Ninja Turtle Noah, Maddie, Lauren, and Sarah.

To the ladies in the office, Cathy, Kaylie, Jena, and Kim, knowing that they are a part of the team makes me confident that Elgin—Middlesex—London is in good hands.

It is with all of these wonderful Canadians in mind that I stand in the House to oppose the proposed alterations to the Income Tax Act. Canadians have utilized the tax-free savings account since its introduction in 2009. This program has provided Canadians with incentives to develop attitudes of economic responsibility.

TFSAs are helpful tools for Canadians who are seeking to save or are preparing for unforeseen economic vulnerability, a tool used by many of my constituents in Elgin—Middlesex—London, both young and old.

The current Liberal government has proposed a reduction in the maximum amount of funds that Canadians can invest in these accounts per year. Unfortunately, the government does this on the false pretence that doubling of the TFSAs only benefits the highest earning Canadians rather than just the middle class.

On the contrary, statistics demonstrate that this investment tool is utilized by many middle-class Canadians. Half of those holding TFSAs earn less than $42,000 a year. In fact, 60% of Canadians who take advantage of the TFSA's limit earn $60,000 or less a year. What is more, in 2015, 600,000 Canadian seniors invested in TFSAs, maximizing their yearly deposits while earning less than $60,000 a year.

CARP, Canada's association for the fifty-plus, was in favour of increasing the limit the TFSAs to help seniors form fiscally responsible plans for the future. When the Conservatives raised the limit on TFSAs, the majority of Canadians supported that decision. Lowering the limit on TFSAs will do absolutely nothing for the low-income families, including financially burdened Canadians, to which the government must remain accountable.

The proposed changes in Bill C-2 will negatively affect Canadians by noticeably reducing their incentive to save for the future, creating a heavier reliance on government support during financial crises. Further, it will limit the choice of Canadians.

Why put up roadblocks for people who want to engage in responsible saving practices? Why remove the sensible avenue for saving, which costs the government very little?

Bill C-2 would do more than limit the choices available to the middle class. It would also reduce the amount of attention given to the vulnerable people in Canadian society. Instead of worrying about nitpicking a program that already works for Canadians, the Liberal government should be seeking out programs and initiatives that would actually aid in giving a hand up to this country's most vulnerable people.

The current government needs to continue to support programs such as the housing first initiative, which was undertaken by the previous Conservative government. This initiative was directly aimed at ending homelessness by identifying those most desperate in Canadian society and ensuring they were given a real opportunity for self-advancement. By seeking out these programs, the current government would have the ability to ensure that its efforts to end social issues do not go a mile wide and an inch deep. Spending well, rather than just spending, is the key to improving social issues today. Unfortunately, spending responsibly does not seem to be the current government's strongest attribute.

These tax cuts are aimed at making the public feel better about Canada's current position during this time of economic uncertainty. However, these cuts are not enough to provide true relief for Canadians being affected by the dipping dollar. It will take much more than just tax cuts to regrow the Canadian economy. This remedy is a mere surface solution to a much more serious problem.

Even more indicative of the Liberals' spending habits are the alterations to revenue that Bill C-2 would cause. Originally, the Liberals claimed that their new tax programs, including the lowering of the ceiling of the TFSA, would be revenue neutral. However, the tax bracket changes contained in this bill would actually cost the government $8.9 billion in the next six years. Since the government failed to accurately project and report these financial results, why should we trust the Liberals' promises that they will aid Canadians in the long run?

My constituents in Elgin—Middlesex—London have addressed this issue to me personally and are concerned about these changes. All age groups from all tax brackets have been using this method of saving their money for the future. Young adults have been putting their money away through TFSAs to invest in new homes, families have been using it to invest in their children's education, and many have been using it as a retirement tool.

As the official critic for families, children, and social development, I can assure members that I have spoken to many constituents and Canadians who want to see the ceiling of the TFSA contributions remain at $10,000 per year.

I look forward to continuing to hear from my constituents in the great riding of Elgin—Middlesex—London and to working with all Canadians in my new role. I would like to thank this House and my hon. colleagues for indulging me and for the opportunity to speak to this very important piece of legislation that would affect all Canadians.

[Finance, January 29th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, while Liberals are threatening to run a $10-billion, $20-billion, $30-billion deficit this year, the fact remains that Conservatives left Liberals a healthy surplus. It is only through runaway Liberal spending and planned job-killing increases that they are putting Canada back into deficit.

Will the finance minister take ownership and admit that Liberals have no economic plan for Canada?

[Finance, January 29th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, just as question period was starting, we learned that Canada was left with a $392 million surplus in November. Do not take my word for it. The finance minister's own officials said it. In fact, from April to November, the federal surplus stands at $1 billion.

Will the Liberal finance minister just admit that Conservatives left Liberals a healthy surplus and that in fact it is just bad economic management?