Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to ask what we are debating. We are supposed to be debating Bill C-43. Have we changed the debate since I came into the House?
House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2011, with 54% of the vote.
Senate Appointment Consultations Act May 7th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to ask what we are debating. We are supposed to be debating Bill C-43. Have we changed the debate since I came into the House?
Mr. Speaker, I do not know where that member lives because I just listed all the Ontario ministers and the premier, who agreed with the budget, which means they are speaking for their constituents. They are Ontarians, so I am not sure where the member lives.
We are taking steps to help all Canadians, including hard-working single moms. I have already outlined numerous initiatives in budget 2007 that will benefit low income workers, including the low income single parents.
Other initiatives include new spending measures such as an investment of $250 million to provinces and territories for the creation of new child care spaces.
The hon. member's constituents particularly benefit from the support in budget 2007, which she voted against: $963 million to fund the GTA transit projects, which she voted against; $586 million from the Canada ecotrust, which she voted against; $574 million for the Canada-Ontario agreement, which she voted against; $205.4 million for patient wait times, which she voted against; $117.2 million—
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Don Valley East. At least she has a lot of respect for the House and does not engage in personal attacks, like the previous speaker, the member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine. I find it disgusting, and I thank the member for Don Valley East for her decorum.
However, I do find it odd that she would criticize our budget of 2007 for not assisting low income Canadians, specifically low income single moms, when in reality, the budget of 2006 did just that.
For instance, let us take the example of one of a member's constituents, a hypothetical single working mother of two earning $30,000 a year in Thorncliffe.
Under the former Liberal government, of which the member was a part, that single mom would have paid over $400 in taxes. However, because of the Conservative government's first two budgets, which the member voted against, that single mother's tax bill is zero. That $400 in tax relief may not seem much to a Liberal, but to that single mom in Thorncliffe Park, it will make a big difference in her life. In fact, in our first two budgets, we removed 885,000 Canadians off the tax rolls altogether.
Our budgets have also brought in numerous measures benefiting those with incomes too low to pay personal income tax, like the one point GST cut and the $1,200 universal child care benefit for families with children under six. These new initiatives are in addition to already existing support for low income families provided through the GST credit, the Canada child tax benefit and the national child benefit supplement.
A major positive development for low income Canadians in budget 2007 was the working income tax benefit, a new initiative assisting Canadians into a more prosperous life for themselves and their families.
I want to quote a few of the organizations and the individuals who found our budget very worthy. The Canadian Labour Congress called the benefit an initiative “worthy of support”. The Canadian Association for Community Living said it would “assist people with disabilities over the welfare wall”. The Retail Council of Canada said it “should help to reduce the disincentives for some individuals to leave welfare with paid work”.
I find it odd that the member for Don Valley East would vote against a budget that restored the fiscal balance, bringing federal support for Ontario to $12.8 billion. Maybe she should have consulted with some of her provincial colleagues before she voted against the budget.
Maybe she should have consulted with Premier Dalton McGuinty, who said that budget 2007 “represents real progress for Ontarians”. Perhaps she should have talked to the finance minister, Greg Sorbara, who said there are “real positives for Ontario” in budget 2007. Maybe she should have spoken to the energy minister, Dwight Duncan, who said budget 2007 was “a good step forward and the kind of thing we wanted to see”.
I want to ask the member for Don Valley East this. Was Dalton McGuinty wrong? Was Greg Sorbara wrong? Was Dwight Duncan wrong? Was Bob Delaney wrong. I would like to know what the member for Don Valley East thinks of that.
Post-Secondary Education April 27th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I remind the member that stakeholders have praised the investments made by the government to post-secondary education in the last budget.
In fact, the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada stated that the investments showed the government's recognition of the importance of research to increasing Canada's productivity and Canadian standard of living.
The Council of Ontario Universities welcomed the $1 billion post-secondary education infrastructure trust fund.
We believe in knowledge advantage in Canada. We are getting things done.
Status of Women April 27th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals cut the budget of women's programs by three times, our government provided an additional $20 million for women's programming.
Under our government, women's programs have the highest budget ever in the history of the Status of Women. This means we are giving money directly to initiatives that help these women. We are getting the job done.
Sales Tax Amendments Act, 2006 April 25th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, what about the refund on the green levy for vans equipped for wheelchair access? Did the member read that part of the budget? I read out the pages. It was in the implementation bill on page 46. If the member had read it, he would know that it provides a refund of the green levy for vans equipped for wheelchair access.
I just want to know if the member would like to correct the record as the finance critic so he will not be misunderstood?
Sales Tax Amendments Act, 2006 April 25th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, would the member agree with Liberal John Manley that “it was the right thing to do” and that “any day that good public policy triumphs is a good day”? What about the policy part of income trusts? What about Sheila Copps' comment that reversing the income trusts decision “would...run afoul of espoused Liberal principles”?
Would the member agree or disagree that this goes against Liberal principles by promoting a tax loophole? In Sheila Copps' view, that is what it was, financed by the rest of us. I would like his answer on what he thought of those comments.
Sales Tax Amendments Act, 2006 April 25th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the member that he says the Liberals would reverse it. There are some high-ranking Liberals who used to be in the party who have the same views as ours, and I am sure there are many who if they ever became government would as well.
Sheila Copps is one of them. She said that reversing the income trusts decision “would...run afoul of espoused Liberal principles, by promoting a tax loophole for a select few, financed by the rest of us”.
John Manley said, “It was the right thing to do...Any day that good public policy triumphs is a good day”.
I also want to ask the member, who is the Liberal finance critic, if he really did read the budget. This concerns his comments on the green levy for vans equipped for wheelchair access. If he did read the budget and the implementation bill, at page 46, in paragraphs 68.02(1) (a) and (b), he would know that this provides a refund of the green levy for vans equipped for wheelchair access.
I also want to comment for member who used to be the revenue minister that if he thinks reducing the GST is inconsequential, then he should think back to when he was the revenue minister. He will remember the underground economy that was going on because of the GST. It was in the billions of dollars, I believe, but maybe he can correct me.
Maybe it was billions that they found in the scams in, I believe, Atlantic Canada at the time; there was a car scam. Maybe I am incorrect, but I do believe there was quite a scam and it uncovered about $1.9 billion. It was done just between car dealerships in Atlantic Canada with the United States.
I would like to know if he realizes that people perhaps welcomed the percentage point reduction in the GST.
Budget Implementation Act, 2007 April 23rd, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised when the member says we have not done anything for education. Our party has spent more on education than any government has. Just this year we have proposed to increase the Canada social transfer by $800 million per year beginning in 2008-09 to ensure that the provinces have the resources they need to maintain and strengthen Canada's colleges and universities, including better access. We also raised the minimum amount of the Canada education savings grant, which goes directly to help poorer families.
Another initiative of the government that certainly helps a lot of people is our national anti-drug strategy. As the member knows, drugs cause many problems among poorer families and many families in my province and on the streets. In fact, it is his party which suggests that is why there is so much homelessness: because we do have some huge problems with crystal meth and other illicit drugs. We have taken that under our control with an anti-drug strategy.
Some of the things that party has asked us for we have implemented in our budget, but we have done it with a strategy and a focus so that we are going to help the real people, the real people who will benefit the most from it. The money will not go just to governments, for example, just like our universal child care benefit goes directly to the child.
The government is addressing education and the drug strategy. I think the member has become carried away with rhetoric when he speaks about what we are not doing.
Budget Implementation Act, 2007 April 23rd, 2007
Mr. Speaker, just as the member thought it was his duty to remind us of how important aboriginals are, I too think it is our duty to remind people that we found it was important to address aboriginals with a strategy. Therefore, we did commit to aboriginal Canadians, provinces and territories to find a workable, innovative solution.
For example, in budget 2006, we provided $300 million for off reserve aboriginal housing and $300 million in affordable housing, and also $300 million starting in 2007-08 for aboriginal communities in the priority areas of education, women, children, families, water and housing.
In 2007, we had initiatives such as $14.5 million over two years to expand the aboriginal justice strategy. As the member said, is not always about money. It is about addressing some of the social issues too. The $300 million to give first nation members the opportunity to own their own homes is a very good start. I know that in our riding and in Saskatchewan one of the issues was that many of the aboriginal women said they would appreciate being able to own their own homes and to have property and matrimonial rights. I could go on, but I think the member can see it for himself.