Laurie Hawn

[Business of Supply, June 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his patience.

Consumers do need to make choices, and it is very difficult sometimes. He is quite correct. There is a plethora of information and small print, so it is really hard for the average person to sort that out. Therefore, it is important that governments take the opportunity, when they can, to make it easier for consumers for their own protection.

We do not regulate the day-to-day operations of banks, but we have obtained commitments from the banks to end pay-to-pay practices.

In terms of legislation or bringing it into law, or whatever needs to be done by the House to do that, as a general statement we would all like government to move more quickly. However, when one is not in government, it is always moving far too slowly. Even when one is in government, it moves more slowly than I would like in many areas. That is a function of the realities of government, the realities of bureaucracy, the realities of working to put it all together.

Yes, I agree that we should move as quickly as we can. We made the commitments and we intend to follow up on them.

[Business of Supply, June 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I do find it a trifle bizarre that somebody is talking about relevance 30 seconds or so into a 10-minute speech. This topic is all about investor literacy in dealing with banks that may be charging pay to pay, to give people the understanding to be able to choose banks on that basis or any other basis. This is all about financial literacy, and if my hon. colleague will allow me my time, I think he will find that we are talking about the protection of consumers and about literacy, part of which is understanding things like pay to pay.

Canada is proud to be a world leader in promoting financial literacy for all Canadians so that they can make decisions.

In the 12 years between my military career and my political career, I was a financial adviser and branch manager for investment firms in Edmonton. A large part of our job was counselling people on effective financial and retirement planning, which too many people take for granted, sometimes with disastrous results after it is too late to change. People do not plan to fail, but they do fail to plan.

We continue to take action to ensure that Canadians can learn the skills they need to make solid financial choices, such as what bank to deal with, which may or may not be charging particular fees.

In 2011 we declared November as Financial Literacy Month. Each successive literacy month has involved more organizations, bringing more resources and events that have helped more Canadians improve their personal money know-how and skills. Budget 2013 committed $3 million specifically to initiatives to develop Canada's financial literacy.

In April 2014, Jane Rooney was appointed as Canada's first financial literacy leader. I am sure that many in the House, perhaps even my hon. colleague, may have heard Ms. Rooney talk about the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy and the consultations it has held with a broad range of individuals and groups. That is a great example of collaboration to strengthen financial literacy in action.

Our country can also be very proud to now have its own Canadian financial literacy database. This one-stop shop will guide Canadians toward the information, educational tools, and events they need to answer their financial questions and improve their financial know-how. This new tool is the perfect example of the power of collaboration among public, private, and non-profit sectors to deliver useful information and resources that people can use right now.

Hundreds of activities are already being featured in the database, and I strongly encourage all members of the House to take the time to look at the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada's website at itpaystoknow.gc.ca. This tool was created for the benefit of all Canadians.

Efforts such as these and others offered by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada are certainly needed. Many struggle to pay their regular bills and many more lack financial understanding about the costs of owning a home and about how much money they will need to retire. Young people, seniors, newcomers to Canada, and low-income Canadians are among the most in need of targeted efforts to improve their financial literacy so they do not fall prey to nickel-and-diming by banks.

Many seniors, for example, are entering their retirement years carrying debt. We need to act to give them the tools they need to understand their retirement needs, and we are. In 2014, the FCAC carried out public consultations with seniors groups across Canada and in mid-October released “Strengthening Seniors’ Financial Literacy”, the seniors component of the overall national strategy for financial literacy.

The seniors strategy has four goals: first, to engage more Canadians in preparing financially for their future years as a seniors; second, to help current seniors plan and manage their financial affairs; third, to improve understanding of and access to public benefits for seniors; and fourth, to increase tools to combat financial abuse of seniors, such as nickel-and-diming by banks.

We are already seeing results. As a stated goal of FCAC's national strategy for financial literacy, combatting financial abuse of seniors has brought together many public, private, and non-profit sector organizations united by a common goal. I will highlight some of the objectives and initiatives targeting financial abuse that are part of this effort.

The first objective is to ensure seniors and their caregivers have access to the tools they need to identify and prevent financial abuse and are aware of what to do if it happens.

The second objective is to ensure governments and stakeholders collaborate to enhance understanding of financial abuse and fraud targeting seniors, the factors that contribute to financial abuse, and effective fraud prevention techniques.

The effort will provide front-line credit union staff with the tools they need to recognize and help combat elder abuse, and it helps to meet both those objectives.

I also spent three years as a member of the board of the Lakeland Credit Union in Cold Lake, Alberta. I want to applaud the credit union movement for the great work it does, especially in smaller communities and especially in combatting higher fees for financial services.

Credit Union Central and Elder Abuse Manitoba are being joined by many other groups active in supporting in this area.

Some examples include the new horizons for seniors program, which supports projects led or inspired by seniors who make a difference in the lives of others in their communities. Expanding awareness of elder abuse, including financial abuse, is among its critical objectives.

We live in a complex world where we can spend money by clicking a mouse, swiping a card, or using a mobile device. With so many ways to spend money, it is easy to get buried in debt and it is not so easy to dig oneself out. In fact, according to Statistics Canada, household debt among Canadians remains close to record highs. This can make consumers vulnerable to a rise in interest rates. It can also impact the food budgets of families on fixed incomes.

This is why our government has made financial literacy a priority here too. It is a key component of Canada's economic action plan. That is the reason we set aside an additional $3 million in budget 2013 for collaboration and coordination. At the FCAC website right now, there is valuable advice on getting out of debt, rebuilding a credit rating, and paying off a mortgage faster, among many other topics. There are also calculators for choosing the right bank account or mortgage and setting financial goals.

Our government understands that when Canadians make decisions about how to spend their money, they must be assured that their interests come first and that they are given fair treatment. That is why our government has consistently demonstrated a strong commitment to consumer protection by ensuring that Canadians are being treated fairly and getting value for their hard-earned dollars.

We have demonstrated that commitment in many ways: by better protecting Canadians using prepaid cards with increased transparency and new consumer protection rules; by requiring greater disclosures of mortgage prepayment charges; by strengthening the position of credit card users by imposing a mandatory 21-day interest-free grace period on credit cards, banning unsolicited credit card cheques, and requiring consent for credit limit increases; by better protecting seniors using financial services by requiring enhanced disclosure by banks on the costs and benefits of using powers of attorney and joint accounts, as well as requiring more robust processes and staff training related to these services; by enhancing access to basic banking services by expanding and modernizing no-cost basic banking services for youths, students, and seniors, as well as ensuring consumers do not have to pay for monthly printed credit card statements; by improving transparency and fairness in the credit card market by developing options to lower the costs faced by merchants to accept credit cards while ensuring those lower costs are passed on to consumers; and by securing a commitment from the major banks to voluntarily provide a range of basic banking services for $4 or less per month.

We must ensure that Canadians are best positioned to make wise financial decisions, allowing them to drive Canada's economy. This is just another way that our government is ensuring that Canada can create jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity.

Specific to today's motion, banning pay-to-pay bank fees is the kind of thing we intend to look at, including in the mandatory financial consumer protection framework that we promised in economic action plan 2015. Canadian consumers can count on our government.

[Business of Supply, June 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, once again it is an honour to highlight our government's strong record in boosting the financial literacy of all consumers.

In basic terms, financial literacy means having the knowledge, skills, and confidence to make responsible financial decisions. It is essential to the prosperity and financial well-being of Canadians, and therefore our country. While governments clearly have a role to play, and this government has played its part, protecting consumers must include giving them the tools they need to protect themselves.

I want to acknowledge the excellent work in this area by my friend and colleague, the hon. member for Edmonton—Leduc. In November 2011, he introduced private member's motion M-269 to help improve financial literacy in Canada and give Canadians valuable tools to help them make better informed financial decisions.

In March 2012, that motion was approved by the House of Commons.

[Health Care, May 15th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to speak on the important issue of innovation in health care and to join today's debate on Motion No. 501, put forth by the hon. member for Nanaimo—Alberni.

I would like to start by acknowledging my colleague's long history in this place and his passion for this particular topic. I know it well and, as I said earlier, I applaud him for it. We all know that representing our constituents is a true privilege, and I know that he has worked hard to earn that privilege every day.

This motion focuses on an issue of critical importance for Canadians: the need for a strong, sustainable, and responsive health care system that provides high-quality, cost-effective care now and into the future. I think we can all agree that innovation will be an essential ingredient if we are to achieve that goal.

Our government is committed to a strong, publicly funded, universally accessible health care system. We are providing record levels of funding to the provinces and territories for the delivery of health care service through the Canada health transfer, and we have done this without raising taxes. This funding gives the provinces the financial predictability and fiscal flexibility they need to address their specific priorities and pressures.

Since we took office, the Canada health transfer has increased by almost 70% and will continue to grow each and every year, reaching $40.9 billion in 2019-20. Of course, we all know that money alone is not the solution to challenges facing Canada's health care system. This government recognizes the important role that innovation can play in maintaining a sustainable system that is responsive to the changing needs of Canadians.

Indeed, our government plays an important role, working with the provinces and territories, to make the most of our investments in health care and produce the best possible health care outcomes. The federal government is already the single largest contributor to health innovation in Canada, providing over $1 billion every year to support research and knowledge development. In addition, the federal government provides targeted initiatives to improve the monitoring of health system performance, support the establishment of electronic health records, and provide supports for residency positions and other challenges to the supply of family doctors.

Economic action plan 2015 has built on this strong record with additional investments of $13 million a year to expand the strategy for patient-oriented research and $14 million over two years for the Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement to identify efficiencies in the health system. Through these investments, our government is actively working to harness the tremendous potential of innovation in health care.

It is essential that governments and the wider health care community make the best possible use of existing resources if we are to secure a more efficient, responsive, and financially sustainable health care system for the long term. That is why I was very pleased by the health minister's recent announcement of an advisory panel on health care innovation, which will look at areas of innovation that have the potential to address spending pressures while improving care and will recommend ways in which the federal government might better support innovation in key areas.

The panel, assembled by the minister, includes individuals from a variety of sectors and brings together a broad range of perspectives and expertise. Dr. David Naylor, who chairs the panel, is the immediate past president and former dean of medicine at the University of Toronto and is a highly respected leader and health researcher.

Neil Fraser, the president of Medtronic Canada, brings a strong business and engineering background to the panel and plays key roles in a number of Canadian organizations, including the Conference Board of Canada's Centre for the Advancement of Health Innovation.

Francine Girard, dean of the Faculty of Nursing Sciences at the University of Montreal, was a member of the Canadian Nurses Association's National Expert Commission in 2012 and is a leader in the nursing field.

Toby Jenkins, president of Columbia Developments, has wide experience in the public, private, and academic sectors and extensive past involvement in the governance of health care organizations.

Jack Mintz is a well-known, internationally recognized economist and tax expert. He is the director of the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy and past president of the C.D. Howe Institute.

Chris Power, the CEO of the Canadian Patient Safety Institute, began her career as a nurse and was previously the president of Capital Health, Nova Scotia's largest regional health authority.

Lastly, I want to acknowledge Dr. Cy Frank, a member of the panel who, sadly, passed away in March. Dr. Frank served as president and CEO at Alberta Innovates Health Solutions and made many important contributions to the direction and future of health care innovation in Canada.

Over the past year, this impressive group of people met with provincial and territorial representatives, providers, patients, stakeholder organizations, industry leaders, researchers, innovators, and many others. It commissioned research and convened international experts to hear about high-performing health systems elsewhere. Throughout, the work of the panel has been guided by respect for the federal, provincial, and territorial roles in health, respect for the core values set out in the Canada Health Act, and a focus on evidence-based analysis and fiscal responsibility.

The panel sought and received a wide range of perspectives through extensive consultations, both in person and online. It heard from hundreds of groups and individuals. Indeed I understand that this has been a truly open process, in which all views were welcomed and considered.

Canadians were given the opportunity to share their health care experiences, what they have seen to be working well, and what they think needs improvement. Canadians were also asked about their ideas for positive change.

Stakeholders were asked to describe promising innovations and the supporting evidence for them, to identify strengths and weaknesses in Canada's current approach to innovation, and to propose avenues for improvement, with a particular focus on actions that the federal government might take.

In response, the panel heard about some of the challenges that impede the spread of innovations in Canada. It learned about successful innovations that are taking place in pockets across the country and the approaches that underpin them. The panel convened meetings from coast to coast to coast where it heard about a wide range of issues, including the power of patient engagement, and the unique health care challenges faced by first nations and those in rural and remote areas.

Recognizing that the advent of personalized medicine is rapidly changing the future of health care, the panel sought input on its potential contribution to higher quality and more efficient care. More broadly, the panel heard about the emerging pressures associated with population aging and the rising burden of chronic disease, and the need for a system that is able to adapt to remain responsive and sustainable in the face of these changes.

In a few short weeks, the panel will offer its advice to the Minister of Health, providing its analysis and proposing ways that the federal government could better align its efforts to foster and accelerate innovation in the Canadian health care system. I know that the minister is looking forward to reviewing what they have to say. The report and recommendations of the committee, to be published in June, will provide much food for thought about the steps the government should take in this area.

The Canadian federation is unique. Respect for provincial and territorial skills and responsibilities regarding the provision of health care and an understanding of the ways we can help at the federal level are key elements of our approach to innovation in the field of health care.

I would like to close my remarks by again recognizing the uniqueness of our Canadian health care system. Respect for the leading role that provincial and territorial governments play in health care delivery and an understanding of the kinds of contributions we can make at the federal level have been key factors in our approach to health care innovation.

I know that the Minister of Health is looking forward the panel's report and the discussion it will undoubtedly generate. We live in a world where technology is rapidly evolving, a world where we might in the future carry our genome around on our smart phones, Skype with our doctor, or use remote patient monitoring to help us stay in our homes for a little longer.

We need a health care system that is responsive to change, that is sustainable, and most of all that offers the best possible quality of care for Canadians. That is why I think it is important that we are having a debate on the best way to support innovation. Our government will continue taking the steps that we can, while respecting the province's jurisdiction over health care delivery and working within the public health care system under the Canada Health Act.

I look forward to hearing more from my colleagues on their thoughts regarding this motion, and I thank my hon. colleague for bringing it forward.

[Health Care, May 15th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for a very educational speech. I know his passion for this subject, and I certainly applaud him for that.

I would like to learn a bit more from the member on maybe what some others are doing, perhaps in the United States or elsewhere. I would also ask him a bit about the holistic approach to health care, treating the patient versus treating the disease.

[Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1, May 15th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to a previous question that continues to be put out to mislead people about veterans' hospitals, could the Minister of Veterans Affairs clarify the situation with veterans' hospitals and what has been going on with them, frankly, for the last 40 years, in terms of transferring to the provinces?

[Economic Action Plan 2015 Act No. 1, May 15th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. parliamentary secretary for a comprehensive speech.

The interesting thing is that this is what veterans want and need, and everyone on the veterans affairs committee, of which I was a member, agreed unanimously that these are good things. We have added things even beyond those.

Given the games that are being played, and there are going to be a lot of accusations in all directions, how important is it, because the time is short, to not give the opposition an opportunity to frustrate getting these measures passed? That is why we put them in Bill C-59 and that is why we are also debating those elements.

The opposition members will have a chance to vote on it at committee. They will have a chance to show that support. How important is it to roll it all into Bill C-59 so that we can make sure that the aim of getting these benefits there for veterans is not frustrated by game playing?

[National Urban Workers Strategy, May 14th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have a chance to comment on Bill C-542 because, while I applaud anybody bringing forward ideas in this place, I think that this one is significantly flawed.

The bill would create an act to establish a national urban workers strategy to be developed by a task force of the ministers of Employment and Social Development, Labour, National Revenue, Industry and the President of the Treasury Board. That is a recipe for more bureaucracy with little to show as a result.

Though it purports to be an national urban workers strategy, the bill is nothing more than a collection of vague generalities about reducing this, raising that, and maybe broadening or extending a few other things. It starts off by telling us that its provisions would apply to all workers in Canada, but then it adds “with particular attention to urban workers”. I have no problem with supporting all workers in Canada, and I will talk about that a little bit more later. However, is it really a national urban workers strategy? It is this kind of vaguely worded proposal that does not reflect well on Parliament, in my view, and the thoughtful and thorough approach that we should taking with private members' bills.

The bill appears to apply to every Canadian who works. On the surface, that is certainly not a bad idea. It appears to apply to them whether they live in the city or the country, work as a bicycle messenger or in an office, operate a farm or drive a truck. It uses words like “vulnerable” and “precarious” to describe the economic interests of the people that it says it wants to help, though it does not offer any specifics about how significant the problems are and how to improve things.

For something called a strategy, the bill does not contain anything that is strategic at all. For example, the bill says that we should be reducing the hours of employment required to qualify for employment insurance benefits. It is nice to see that the opposition has not forgotten about its $6-billion, 45-day work year. It does not say by how much it should be reduced, though. Would the opposition go even further than the previously misguided 45-day proposal? Would it be 35? How many hours? Would it be 1, 10 or 100? This does merit careful consideration, given the labour market impacts and the potential cost to premium payers.

We need to be working collaboratively with all players in the labour market, including businesses and workers, to ensure that Canadians have access to fulfilling employment and that they are encouraged to actively pursue education and employment.

The bill also says that we should be raising the level of EI benefits, but, again, it does not offer any indication as to how much. Would it be another $2 a week, $20 a week or $200 a week? We do not know. Once again, the opposition shows its desire to raise job-killing payroll taxes that are paid for by employers and employees.

The vague nature of the content is only my first concern. Where I think this bill would do the most damage is by simply ignoring anything and everything that has been done over the past several years to help Canadians improve their lives. Surely, it makes more sense to take stock of where we are before starting on the next big plan. Our plan for the past nine years has been simple: trade, training and tax cuts.

Let us start with the big-ticket item of tax cuts. Putting more money back into the pockets of hard-working Canadians and making life more affordable for families is essential to jobs and growth. That is why our government has cut taxes over and over again. The opposition has said that it will raise them, over and over again.

We have reduced the lowest personal income tax rate to its lowest level since John Diefenbaker was prime minister. I can remember that, if only vaguely. We also increased the amount of the basic personal deduction. I was not paying taxes then.

We have cut the GST twice, from 7% to 6% and down to 5%. We have brought in pension income splitting, which applies to millions of Canadian families and gives them more options about how to live their lives. We have created tax credits to support working, low-income individuals and families, public transit users, first-time home buyers and families caring for disabled relatives.

Most recently, we proposed a new family tax cut and enhanced the universal child care benefit and child care expense deduction. These benefits will help every single Canadian family with children under 18. That represents 100% coverage and many millions of Canadian families. Today, because of tax relief and benefit increases introduced by our government, the average two-earner family of four is better off by some $6,600. That is not a vague generalization. It is real money in the pockets of real people who need it, wherever they live in the country.

At the same time, our government increased the transfers we make to the provinces and territories to help pay for the social programs that Canadians want and need. These transfers will amount to an all-time high of almost $68 billion in 2015-16, and they will continue to grow year over year. Canadians take a lot of pride in these social programs, because how we treat those who are less well-off really matters.

That is why we brought in tax relief for seniors, some of the most vulnerable people in our society. The record there speaks for itself.

The guaranteed income supplement for the lowest-income seniors was increased up to $600 annually for single seniors and to $840 for senior couples. This alone has improved the financial security and well-being of approximately 680,000 seniors across Canada.

More people, particularly low- and middle-income Canadians, are also using RRSPs and tax-free savings accounts to shore up their retirement income over and above their Canada pension plan and old age security amounts. In 2013, nearly 2.7 million seniors had TFSAs, including me, and to help Canadians save even more on a tax-free basis, the recent budget announced an increase in the TFSA annual contribution limit to $10,000.

Contrary to suggestions from across the way, TFSAs are held by over 11 million Canadians, and they are not the supposedly rich few. TFSAs are a terrific vehicle for people as an alternative to the RSP, which is less useful to people as they get older. It is also a great way to shelter money from things like a small inheritance, a house sale, or a withdrawal from a RRIF. In fact, the incidence of low income among seniors has dropped dramatically, from 21.4% in 1980 to just 5.2% in 2011. This is real progress.

The latest budget also introduced a new home accessibility tax credit for seniors and people with disabilities. This 15% non-refundable income tax credit would apply on up to $10,000 of home renovations that allow a senior or a person eligible for a disability tax credit to be more mobile, safe, and functional in their own home.

The government also provides a wide range of support for young people preparing for and getting into the job market. During the 2012-13 academic year, the Canada student loans program gave out upwards of $2.6 billion in loans to approximately 477,000 post-secondary students. Nearly 357,000 students received a total of $695 million in Canada student grants, and most of it went to students from low- and middle-income families.

However, not everyone who studies does so in a multi-year program at a college or university. Some people, particularly those preparing for the trades, need help for shorter terms of education. As attractive as a university degree may seem to many, it is in the trades where Canada's labour shortage is the most acute and where younger people joining the workforce can find high-tech, secure, and very well-paying jobs to secure their own and their young family's future. That is why budget 2015 proposes to extend the Canada student grants to students in programs running for a minimum duration of 34 weeks. This means an additional 42,000 students will be eligible to receive financial help.

The government also has made it a top priority to help Canadians get the skills they need to find and keep good jobs. We introduced the Canada apprentice loan to help more apprentices complete their training, and the Canada job grant to involve employers in better matching skills training to market demand.

For those already in the workforce, we introduced the working income tax benefit, the WITB, a refundable tax credit for working low-income individuals and families.

For those who have lost their jobs, our recent budget also announced an extension of the existing EI working-while-on-claim project. EI recipients are able to earn money while still receiving benefits. The aim of this measure is obviously to help them stay more connected to the labour market.

These are some of the concrete initiatives that we have undertaken to help those who are among the most vulnerable in our society to improve their lives. In fact, this year Canadian families and individuals will receive some $37 billion in tax relief and increased benefits as a result of actions taken since 2006.

Both opposition parties have a one-point plan for Canadians: higher taxes. Our plan is simple: trade, training, and tax cuts.

I hope that all hon. members will agree that $37 billion in real support is de facto a national workers' strategy and much more, and is much better than the vague promises contained in this bill. I hope all hon. members will join me in voting against this bill.

[Business of Supply, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely no question that what is available today to veterans is vastly more comprehensive, broader, deeper and affects families to a much greater extent. All around, it is a hugely better package, and it has been acknowledged for that. Even the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore has said that there is more in the new veterans charter than there was before, and we have improved on that very substantially in the last couple of years, and we are going to continue to do that.

It is always going to be a work in progress, as I said. With that many clients, there will always be some who seem to fall through the cracks. We may drop the odd ball, but we are going to try very hard to pick it up on the first bounce.

[Business of Supply, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it is a good question, but I am not in a position to answer it. This is something that is before the courts, and I would not be qualified to speak on that anyway even if I wanted to.

The fact is, through Bill C-58, through the statement of purpose, we are acknowledging the sacred obligation, which we have always tried to fulfill, as has every government before us, Liberal and Conservative alike, tried to fulfill. It is wrapped up in some legal nuances and details that defy logic sometimes to a non-legal mind.

I will say that veterans are never shy to speak up. I do not know any veteran who is shy to speak up, but I have vocally sympathized with some of their frustrations. That is why we have been working so darn hard to fix that. We have not fixed everything, we will probably never fix everything, and it is always going to be a work in progress, but we have made huge strides. For most of the folks who are in that situation now, please come back and let us have another talk, because there is a new team in town.