Marlene Jennings

[Employment Insurance, May 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it was a Liberal government that cleaned up the Conservative deficit mess and then brought in seven surplus budgets.

Since October, the number of Canadians depending on employment insurance has grown by 36%. Even worse, Calgary, Vancouver, London, Kitchener have more than doubled their EI recipients in just one year. Thousands of Canadians are left out of EI because of eligibility rules that pick winners and losers by Canadian regions.

When will the government stop pitting Canadians against each other, establish--

[Employment Insurance, May 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it was a Liberal government that brought in seven--

[Adjournment Proceedings, May 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the member is telling falsehoods in this House, and he should be ashamed of himself. But let us get back to the point at hand, and that is this incompetent government.

The Canadian Federation of Municipalities has said that the gas tax fund and transfer to municipalities is the most effective, transparent and efficient way to allow municipalities to actually upgrade infrastructure and get the shovels in the ground now.

Under the gas tax fund, which was created by a Liberal government, the City of Dorval, in my riding, from the time it was created in 2005 until the end of the current fiscal year in 2010, will have received $2,008,700. Montreal West, another municipality, will have received $608,816. If they took the infrastructure money and put it into the gas tax transfer, Dorval would receive an additional $803,000, whereas Montreal West would receive an additional $243,000--

[Adjournment Proceedings, May 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, last March I asked a question of the Minister of Finance concerning infrastructure money that had been budgeted in previous fiscal years by the Conservative government, which was approved by the House of Commons and which the government appeared to be letting lapse. There were still 26 days left of the fiscal year. There were $2 billion of infrastructure money, the building Canada fund, that the Conservative government brought forward in 2006, money that had been approved and that the government had not sent out the door via cheques. Therefore, it was going to lapse.

The Minister of Finance tried to make fun of me saying that I did not know what I was talking about. In fact, that money did lapse. The money has been approved. It was money that municipalities and provinces were hungry for, that Canadians needed for eroding infrastructure and the government allowed it to lapse.

The parliamentary secretary referred to the Conservatives' January 2009-10 budget and their economic action plan. He said that they had announced 950 projects worth over $3 billion. How many cheques have been mailed for those 950 project? We have seen the government make the same announcement over and over again, as though it is new money, it is a new project, but it is not. In fact, some announcements the Conservatives made recently were the same announcements made back in 2007, the exact same project, the exact same program, the exact same amount of money.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities wants the government to let the federation's members use the gas tax fund. The federation itself says that the gas tax transfer method is efficient and transparent. Over 95% of the gas tax fund has been distributed to municipalities over the past two years. Let us not forget that it was a Liberal government that set up the fund. It was a Liberal government that said it would double the amount in 2005. If the Conservatives—who are trying to take the credit for doubling the gas tax rebate—had followed through on the Liberal government's commitment, we would be talking about $3 billion now, not $2 billion.

It is clear that the government is not sending the money out. The government is incompetent. The most efficient, effective and transparent way to ensure that infrastructure, which is needed for an economic stimulus in this Conservative recession, happens is to transfer the money to the municipalities and the provinces through the gas tax fund, a direct transfer. They will then be able to carry out the infrastructure. The Conservatives know that many of the municipalities cannot borrow the money.

Why will the government not take the most effective, efficient way to get the money out the door to the municipalities so Canadians can have an infrastructure and an economy that might actually pick up?

[Employment Insurance, May 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, to hear the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development, one might conclude that telling the truth is not part of her DNA. She has just misled the House and the Canadian public once again.

First of all, it was not her government that froze taxes and employment insurance contributions; it was the Liberal government. That is my first point.

Second, establishing a national standard of 360 hours does not entitle an individual to a year of benefits. She is misleading the House once again.

[Criminal Code, May 13th, 2009]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-385, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (computer virus programs).

Mr. Speaker, my bill, which is also known as anti-cyber attack, would change section 342.2 of the Criminal Code so as to clarify that the creation, sale and possession of a computer virus program for the purpose of committing a computer offence or mischief is an offence in Canadian law.

Cyber attacks constitute a real threat to Canadian security, Canadian businesses and Canadians' privacy.

Cyber attacks are offences against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and computer systems or networks. In other words, we are talking about hacking, spreading bought computer viruses and denial of service attacks.

Canada lags behind all of the members of the G8 as far as our legal recourses are concerned.

Canadian law enforcement organizations have been calling for this kind of legislation and my bill would fill the gaps in the Criminal Code.

My bill also takes into account the concerns of the telecommunications industry that recommended that any legislation dealing with cyber attacks make clear that criminal intent is necessary and my bill includes just a provision.

I hope that all hon. members in this House will support this bill, and I also hope that it will be discussed in second and third readings, in committee, and at report stage.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[May 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, clearly the Conservative government had no trouble breaking a promise, increasing taxes and creating a tax on income trusts, which it said in the 2006 election that it would never do and it was over 30% tax on income trusts. It bilked over two million Canadian pensioners out of something like $25 billion. It had no problem doing that.

I want to come back to the EI. Scientific studies and expert economists have all concluded that employment insurance is eight times more effective than the entire tax system at mitigating the impact of a recession. For every dollar of EI that is paid out in benefits, $1.61 were put into the economy.

When will the government make EI accessible to Canadians who have worked and paid into it? When will it establish 360 hours as the qualifier to be eligible for EI?

[May 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, some time ago, I asked two questions in this House about the economic situation and the recession. I asked the government, specifically the Minister of Finance, what his action plan would do to help Canadians get through the recession.

The Minister of Finance went on about how Obama and the G20 had called Canada's financial system and the way we regulated it a model for the G20.

Everyone knows it was a Liberal government that pushed back on the Reform Party and its successor, the Canadian Alliance, that wanted us to deregulate Canada's financial institution system and allow bank mergers. The Liberals said no. Our great financial institutions and our regulatory system are thanks to the Liberals.

I want to come back to the issue of the economy.

Canada's unemployment rate has hit 8%, the highest it has been in the past eight years. Since October, 320,000 jobs have been lost, that is net job loss. Youth unemployment, those Canadians under the age of 25, has hit a stunning 14.8%. That means more than 100,000 young Canadians under the age of 25 are starting their working lives unemployed. That brings me to the employment system itself.

According to all of the best statistics, only half as many Canadians qualify for EI today than during the last recession in the 1990s. The current EI system was not designed for a recession as severe as what we are currently experiencing. In fact, according to Stats Canada, a staggering 325,700 EI claims were received by the government in February. That is up 51,000, or 18% from January. This is the single largest number of EI claims since, at least, 1997, when the tracking of EI data first began. The total number of regular EI beneficiaries has climbed 22% since October 2008. This means that as of the end of April, 610,250 Canadians are collecting benefits.

The system, as it stands right now, was not designed for a recession. It was designed for an economic boom, when the government was in surplus, when Canadians did not have difficulty finding jobs at all. In fact, companies and the private sector were having difficulty filling jobs because jobs were being created so rapidly.

The Conservative government is refusing to recognize that and is refusing to modify the EI system to respond to a recession situation. It is refusing to make EI more accessible to more Canadians who have worked and who have paid into it.

Again, when will the government establish a single uniform qualifier for EI of 360 hours? That is the limit. That is what it should be.

[May 11th, 2009]

Can you say that again? I didn't quite get it.

[Employment Insurance, May 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, if excuses were gold, the Conservative government could pay off its humongous deficit in a matter of a couple of weeks. Unfortunately, excuses do not count for much when the power is shut off at home because one's EI cheque has not been delivered. Excuses do not put food on the table and they do not pay for children's clothes.

Why has the government sat on its hands while hundreds of thousands of Canadians face financial ruin? Why?