Marc Garneau

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I refer to a comment from my hon. colleague. He said that he could say emphatically that changing the age from 65 to 67 for old age security would definitely not have an effect on seniors.

First of all, we know that the old age security program is sustainable without making changes to it at the moment, as the Auditor General told us. What about those seniors who, at age 65, are collecting old age security and the guaranteed income supplement?

Seniors have to be at a low-income level to collect GIS, which has a $15,000 a year impact. Over a two-year period, that $30,000 is of enormous significance to them. I wonder what the member has to say to those low-income Canadians who would be affected by this change.

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, since we are dealing with such a small document and my colleague is such an expert on financial issues, let me ask him this short question.

On page 241 of the budget speech last March, Mr. Flaherty talked about the Employment Insurance Financing Board continuing to set the rate. However in the budget implementation plan, Bill C-45, section 435 says that will no longer happen and the rate will be set by the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Finance.

Could the member explain to us why something in the budget last March has been changed in this specific case?

[Census, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, scientists are concerned about the 2013 census data. This government is loudly proclaiming that it believes in science after making the worst possible decision about the census. Now, we have learned that the data on mother tongue and home language are not reliable.

If this government really believes that science is important and wants to prove it, will it bring back the mandatory long form census?

[Census, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the government has recently started trying to make us believe that it believes in science, after taking the worst possible decision with respect to the long form census.

Now Stats Can tells us that the data on mother tongue and home language that were recently published in the 2011 census are unreliable and cannot be compared to previous data.

If the government really believes in science, will it reinstate the long form census?

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague.

She spoke about old age security, which is a very important topic. She also mentioned the Auditor General's report. If I am not mistaken, this report compares the costs of maintaining the current system of retirement at the age of 65 to the costs of a system of retirement at the age of 67, as proposed by the government, which does not believe that the current system is sustainable. But the difference between the two systems represented 0.3% of the GDP. This certainly does not indicate that the current system is not viable.

Why does my colleague think that the government is telling us that the current system is not viable, when we are talking about a difference of only 0.3% of the GDP?

[Preventing Persons from Concealing Their Identity during Riots and Unlawful Assemblies Act, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of questions for my hon. colleague.

Is it not a fact that it is already an indictable offence, under the Criminal Code, for somebody to riot whether they are covered or not? That is my first question.

I believe, also, the member is claiming that it would allow police to pre-emptively arrest somebody who is wearing a mask. I believe that would not be possible for the police to do. Is that correct?

I would like to have his answer on both of those, please.

[Points of Order, October 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to seek the unanimous consent of the House for the following motion: That the House recognize that sections of Bill C-45 dealing with members' pensions should be enacted as quickly as possible and passed without further debate; that Bill C-45, the second act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, be divided into two bills: Bill C-45A, an act to stop the delay on making MP pensions fair act, and Bill C-45B, a second act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures; and

That Bill C-45A be composed of clauses 475, 476 and 477 to 553 inclusively and subclause 545(1); that a clause adding the short title stop the delay on making MP pensions fair act be added to Bill C-45A; that Bill C-45A be deemed to have been read the second time and deemed referred to committee of the whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in at report stage and deemed read the third time and passed; that Bill C-45B be composed of the remaining clauses of Bill C-45; that Bill C-45B retain the status on the order paper that Bill C-45 had before the adoption of this motion; that the law clerk and parliamentary counsel be authorized to make any technical changes or corrections as may be necessary; and that Bill C-45A and C-45B be reprinted.

[Government Appointments, October 18th, 2012]

No, no.

[Business of Supply, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I will say that we tested the system for sure back in the time of the Liberal government. Yes, we tested the system and went beyond it. However, I hope that we are not going to take the attitude today of, “Well you did it so we're going to do it”. That is not what we are here to do.

There is a question of degree. In the 1994 case, we were talking about a 21-page bill with five specific subjects in it. However, Bill C-38 was 425 pages long and affected 74 regulations or acts of Parliament.

Yes, we also stepped over the line and we are here to try to correct that, hopefully with everyone's co-operation.

[Business of Supply, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has indeed touched on something that is even bigger than the discussion we are having today on omnibus legislature, the need for democratic reform. We need to go back to something we espoused many years ago, that MPs represent their constituents. All 308 of us here are duly elected and have a duty to speak on behalf of our constituents, as opposed to simply voting on matters as directed.

In that respect, I think all parties bear some responsibility. All of us need to be thinking and working towards the bigger issue of the democracy that is supposed to exist in this Parliament, an issue that goes well beyond the specific question of omnibus bills.