Michael Savage

[Questions on the Order Paper, November 25th, 2009]

With regard to securities purchased from banks as part of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation securities purchase program announced in the fall of 2008 and spring of 2009: (a) how much and what type of securities were purchased; (b) out of those mortgage securities, (i) how many defaulted, (ii) in what regions were the defaults most and least prevalent, (iii) what is the dollar value of the defaults; (c) how long does the government plan on holding these securities; (d) how much securities were purchased from each bank or entity, and for how much; (e) were any securities purchased from foreign banks or entities and, if so, (i) what is the percentage, based on the total of securities purchased, (ii) from which foreign banks or entities, indicating the total amount of securities purchased for each; (f) did any of the money to purchase the securities come from the Bank of Canada and, if so, how much; and (g) what are the names of those who sold their Bank of Canada stock to the government?

[Points of Order, November 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Yesterday after question period I rose on a point of order. I was referencing an answer from the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development where she suggested incorrectly that poverty has been cut in half under her watch. I referred to her answer at that time as an absolute lie.

I know the rules of the House and I respect Parliament, and I know that I should not have used that word. I want to withdraw that remark and offer an unconditional apology to the minister and to the House.

In the spirit of conciliation, I am also prepared to table a report entitled “The 2009 Report Card on Child and Family Poverty in Canada”, which the minister can reference to have the correct information in the future.

[Poverty, November 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the government either does not try to understand the struggles of Canadians in poverty or it makes it up as it goes.

Yesterday in QP the Minister of Human Resources misled the House when she suggested that child poverty had been cut in half under her watch. That is completely untrue. Comments like this add to the insult made yesterday by the member for South Shore—St. Margaret's when he attacked the unemployed in Halifax.

Poverty is not a Halifax problem; it is a Canadian problem. It requires political will to make a difference. When will the government stop insulting those in need and start working with them to reduce poverty in Canada?

[Points of Order, November 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, in response to a question, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development seemed to indicate, I think she said, that child poverty under the Conservatives was half what it was under the Liberals. That is what I heard. That is an absolute lie.

[Poverty, November 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, today we mark the 20th anniversary of a parliamentary motion calling for the elimination of child poverty.

We have much work to do to, even to change people's attitudes, including members of the Conservative government.

The minister for employment insurance suggested that she did not want to make EI too lucrative. Today we read the comments from the Conservative member for South Shore—St. Margaret's who referred to the unemployed as “all those no-good [blanks] sitting on the sidewalk in Halifax”. I cannot even use the word in this chamber.

Is this what the Prime Minister meant when he referred to a culture of defeat?

An email apology will not feed children or house families. Will the government commit today to an anti-poverty plan for Canada?

[Poverty, November 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, today marks the anniversary of the 1989 parliamentary motion to eliminate child poverty by 2000. That goal was not reached, so where do we go from here?

Thanks to Campaign 2000 and its partners, the House adopted a new resolution today. It is missing specific targets, but it is a start. The human resources committee continues its study on a poverty reduction strategy, but the federal government has refused a recommendation from the UN Human Rights Council that Canada needs a national strategy to eliminate poverty. The government said no to that. That is not acceptable.

Other countries have successfully reduced poverty, six provinces have poverty reduction plans, and we have vehicles like the child tax benefit and GIS that are proven to reduce poverty. We just need to make them more robust.

Canada is a fortunate land, but that good fortune is far from equally shared. Poverty is not inevitable and it can be eliminated. What it requires is political will. On this day we need to recognize where we fell short, commit to a new goal, and develop a strategy to reach it.

[National Child Day, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, today is National Child Day, and today I have shared with my colleagues blue ribbons made by some of the leading advocates for early learning and child care, Pat Hogan and her staff, from my home riding of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour.

Today is also the 20th anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which states:

In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.

The Liberal Party of Canada, through the Leader of the Opposition, fully supports a national early learning and child care program based on the principles of quality, universality, accessibility and affordability.

Today is about children and the need to provide opportunity for all children, too many of whom grow up in an environment where early quality care is simply not available. A strong national child care program will lead to healthier, happier and more productive children, and a stronger economy for us all.

I want to thank all the champions of our children, many of whom, like Pat Hogan, have dedicated much of their lives to quality early learning and child care. Let us reward their lifetime of work and really invest in their cause of early learning and child care.

[Poverty, November 18th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, for every dollar invested in food banks, eight dollars' worth of essential food can be acquired by food banks to help people living in poverty. The $100 million spent on Conservative propaganda could have meant $800 million for Canadians who are struggling to feed their families. Instead, we get signs, some of which are advertising other signs.

The Conservative government has chosen to spend $100 million of publicly funded money for Conservative waste instead of helping the victims of this Conservative recession.

What kind of pathetic sign is that to Canadian families in need?

[Poverty, November 18th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the government could not tell us why it erected an expensive sign in Gatineau to advertise the installation of another sign. In Yellowknife, another Conservative sign has been bought to advertise the installation of “interior-exterior signs”. Signs, signs, everywhere a sign. Meanwhile, almost 800,000 Canadians are lining up at food banks. Statistics Canada confirms that the jobless numbers are continuing.

Instead of paying for signs to advertise signs, why will the government not send a sign to Canadian families who are struggling in this Conservative recession. That would be real stimulus. Why can the government not help those in need?

[Poverty, November 17th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we need to do something to help food banks. Almost 800,000 Canadians walked into food banks in March, which is an 18% increase over last year. Seven provinces saw double digit increases in food bank use.

While Canadian families struggle, the Conservative propaganda machine is in overdrive, wastefully advertising the politically motivated stimulus plan.

Does the government not understand that stimulus funds could also go to some of those who need help the most: the victims of this Conservative recession who are lining up at food banks across Canada? Maybe they could put a sign on that.