Niki Ashton

[Business of Supply, April 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to address the Bloc Québécois' motion today.

My party, the New Democratic Party, intends to support this motion. We agree in principle with a number of points in this motion. First, the provinces should be compensated fairly, regardless of the issue involved. Here, we are talking about the harmonization of taxes and the fact that Quebec should have been compensated a decade ago for the arrangement that it made with the federal government. Also, we note that the federal government has reached agreements with other regions, such as Ontario, without respecting the situation of Quebec.

The first reason to support this motion is that we must absolutely recognize that the federal government has a responsibility to compensate each province fairly.

It is truly a matter of fairness, and a province should not be treated differently than another in such cases. What happened in the past must be recognized, and we must ensure that, in the future, agreements with the other provinces will be respected.

The second reason to support this motion is that it says that the federal government claimed to be prepared to find a solution, but only if the administration of taxes was transferred to it. We have a problem with that, since Quebec has been administering the tax system for several years already. Therefore, there is no reason for the federal government to now change what Quebec has been doing. We do not think this is appropriate.

In the end, whether it is harmonization or another issue, we must ensure that Canadian consumers and families are not punished. Regardless of the decision we make on harmonization, we should keep in mind the current reality of Canadians, and also how the regulations and the legislation voted in this House affect them.

Every day, our party comes to the House to talk about the issues and challenges facing Canadians, and to reflect on the fact that we, as their representatives, have a responsibility to help them.

Of course, the government has more than one responsibility. It should, in every case, think about what is best for Canadians. We find that some aspects of harmonization pose a problem. We note that in Ontario harmonization will adversely affect consumers and their families. New taxes will be imposed on goods that have never been taxed. This is very problematic, because these goods are basic necessities of life. People's well-being should be the priority, and these goods should not be taxed.

What is even more important is that we should think about the reality that Canadians must face right now. In a period of economic crisis, very large numbers of jobs are lost in many regions of the country, as is the case in Ontario and in Quebec.

In my region, there have been all time highs in job losses in the forestry and mining sectors as well as in a number of service industries that depend on those industries, which are truly crucial to our region. I feel it is extremely important for us as members to reach decisions on bills that consider the reality of Canadians and do nothing to penalize them when they are already in difficulty.

I believe it is somewhat problematic when not only does this request have to be made in connection with harmonization, but also in terms of other rulings and decisions by this government. For example, the decision concerning employment insurance. Our leader, the member for Toronto—Danforth, has spoken about employment insurance and the fact that the changes made by the government did not benefit the bulk of those in need of it.

Because of my committee work, I realize the difficulties women face, especially those who wish to have access to employment insurance and cannot because of the regulations concerning the number of hours worked and the type of work they do. The few changes that have been made do nothing to support Canadians who have lost their jobs and are trying to benefit from a program into which they have paid for years. We can see what an extremely difficult situation they are in.

There is also a lack of leadership as far as supporting Canadians rather than penalizing them is concerned. As for the motion which we introduced and which was passed by the House last week, this was a motion moved by my colleague, the hon. member for Sudbury. It had the support of the three opposition parties and we are really proud of it. It had to do with credit cards and the role the government should play in regulating the credit companies in order to really protect Canadians who find themselves in quite difficult financial straits. Many of them tend to make greater and greater use of their credit cards.

We believe that the credit card companies continue to abuse their position rather than adopting measures like those that the Bank of Canada has adopted to reduce interest rates. We can see that this is a problematic situation. In fact, even if the House of Commons voted in favour of that motion as well as the one concerning changes in employment insurance, we can see that the government does not respect those results. In the end, Canadians are the ones who will bear the consequences, Canadians who are already in really difficult situations.

I would also like to describe in more detail the difficult situation prevailing in my region. I am here to speak not only as a member of Parliament concerned by this question of tax harmonization, but also as a member of Parliament who sees this issue and the fair treatment of provinces as being directly related to my region, northern Manitoba.

Many of the challenges Canadians are faced with every day are to be found in my region. For example, a large majority of the people from the riding I represent come from one of more than 30 first nations. Many of them do not see the realities of the employment situation as conclusive. There is a lack of economic development which penalizes those people.

It is also directly related to the taxation system. Of course, we know that, traditionally, people from the first nations do not pay taxes in their own region, but when they go out in the urban areas, the reality is not the same. When they come, for example, in my community of Thompson—the business centre in our region—, and they go shopping, they must pay taxes. And, for many of them who suffer from a low rate of employability, since many are unemployed or in quite difficult situations, the idea of paying taxes when outside of their community is difficult to bear.

Generally speaking, the tax situation in Manitoba is a bit different, because we have our own provincial tax. It must also be acknowledged that, in addition to the taxation problem, there are problems relating to plant closures or layoffs, which result in these industries paying less tax to the urban communities they are located in, and of course also to the federal government. This is fairly problematic for our communities, which most of the time depend on a single industry and on the provincial tax to invest in our services: recreation, infrastructure, water. It is the entire community that suffers in such situations.

It must also be acknowledged that, when we speak of taxes here, we are speaking of the Bloc Québécois motion, the Quebec reality and the necessity to respect its situation. It must also be acknowledged that, when we speak of taxes, decisions must be reached that encompass not only the well-being of individuals, of each Canadian, but also that of our communities and our regions which are at present experiencing some unfortunate and historic circumstances because of the economic crisis.

I will make another point: the reference in the Bloc Québécois motion that “the government should negotiate in good faith with the Government of Quebec”. We believe that the two words “good faith” are really the focal point of this motion, the idea of the need to negotiate with our provinces on an equal footing and to really recognize the matter of equity here. This matter of good faith does not apply solely to negotiations with Quebec. It is important, of course, because that is what we are talking about today. But this matter of good faith also applies as a general rule to the discussions we have in this House and with our provinces.

We must recognize that Canada is in a rather unique position in the world as a federation and that, in the past, certain provinces had considerable control over their own regions. The federal government must really work in partnership with the provinces in all areas in order to be able to improve the lives of Canadians, whether in Manitoba, Quebec, the Yukon or Prince Edward Island.

No matter where one lives, one must recognize that Canada is a federation. We must negotiate in good faith on all kinds of matters. For instance, equalization is still being discussed. The government made a number of promises in that regard, but later broke them, especially concerning Newfoundland and Labrador. It is extremely problematic. As politicians, we all know it is extremely important to keep our promises, but even more so, we all know the consequences of breaking our promises. We saw what happened concerning equalization and the frustration expressed by the people of Atlantic Canada.

We also now recognize Quebec's frustration regarding the agreement it reached with the federal government several years ago. That agreement must be respected. If we are going to talk about compensation, we must respect the fact that Quebec has been administering the tax system for several years.

I will conclude today with the following message. We hope that good faith and the well-being of Canadians will remain in the forefront. Canadians must not be penalized by new taxes, credit card problems or employment insurance. As leaders and representatives in this House, we must help them. This is an important message, which will guide us in our decision making, and all of Canada will benefit as a result. In this case, we are talking about Quebec, but all of Canada will benefit.

[Business of Supply, April 23rd, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for drawing attention to a serious lack of sensitivity and recognition of the extremely difficult situation many Canadians face. It is incumbent on all of us as members to touch base with the people that we represent. When we talk about Canadians, there is no doubt that many of them live in the ridings represented by Conservative members. They are looking for this kind of protection.

There is this idea that it is attributed to individuals as to why they are in a difficult situation. We know it is about supporting people who are paying on time. It is also recognizing that there are some sheer examples of abuse in this situation. There is also the need to recognize the difficult situation that people are facing in terms of loss of employment, or the situation that young people are facing as they are going into a job market that is beyond grim. We need the government to take action in this area.

The United States, where the economic situation is far worse than the one we face here, and for both of our countries it is getting worse, is taking the initiative to look out for the well-being of their citizens. Why are we not seeing the same thing here? The New Democrats are calling for that, and we hope we will get the support of all members of the House.

[Business of Supply, April 23rd, 2009]

Madam Speaker, my colleague brings up an excellent point. The issue of student debt, which it seems only New Democrats raise in the House, is truly alarming. A few months ago, we understood that the student debt in Canada had increased over $13 billion on the backs of current and former students. This is debilitating when it comes to students looking for jobs, which in this current economic market do not exist.

How will they pay off this kind of debt? Many of them are indebted to their credit cards and through different loan programs. That is why we need some proactive action to ease the burden that many students, young people and ultimately many Canadians face.

[Business of Supply, April 23rd, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I would like to share my time with my colleague from Windsor West.

I would like to begin by applauding my colleague from Sudbury and the work of the New Democrats in the House in bringing forward such an important proposition and calling for the introduction of a credit card accountability, responsibility and disclosure act. This is so important to us in our every day lives as Canadians in general, but even more important at this time of unprecedented economic downturn.

Basically, this act calls upon the government to protect consumers, protect Canadians who are going through a difficult and rough time, and ensure that their livelihoods are being protected. In many ways, it is modelled along the initiative that the Obama administration south of us took in introducing a credit card accountability, responsibility and disclosure act just some time ago. It was something that was heralded as very good news and very important in protecting American consumers. The question remains, why can we not see the same done here?

I would like to speak to this motion as the critic on youth issues. As a young person myself and the second-youngest person in the House of Commons, I speak in a place where not many people of my generation have the chance to speak. It is a tremendous honour to be here at my age and to represent the people of Churchill, one of the youngest regions in Canada. However, I also hold it very important to represent my generation and people of a similar age whose voices, in many cases, are not heard.

This bill seeks to protect all consumers. Particularly, it pays attention to the challenges and the need to look out for young people in our country. Among the many things this act would do, it would protect young consumers from aggressive credit card solicitations. This is in addition to dealing with interest rate increases and account changes, protecting card holders, and eliminating abusive fees and penalties. However, the particular attention to the situation facing young people is of utmost importance.

I want to paint a bit of a picture of the reality that many young people in Canada and around the world face today. We know that we live in the age of constant advertising and media, whether it is the Internet, television or whatever it might be. We are constantly faced with images of consumption and advertising encouraging all people, but especially young people, to spend their money. In many cases, these things might be useful. However, in many other cases, their usefulness is questionable.

The matter remains that consumption is very much an activity impressed upon young people. In recent years, we have seen the promotion that we need credit cards in order to fuel that consumption, that young people will be able to achieve what they want and be happy by buying, and that this will be easily accomplished through credit cards. Watch the music channels and listen to the radio. All of these messages are readily there and specifically promoting the use of credit cards. Having gone through a couple of universities myself, I am aware of walking down the hallways and seeing numerous credit card companies approach students to take out credit cards and enter into a proposition that for many students is difficult.

Given that encouragement of consumption and the use of credit cards, we also have to see how that interacts with some of the other realities young people face. For example, many young people who are going to university or achieving post-secondary education are facing increased tuition fees. In many cases, they have to take loans out in order to pay off these tuition fees. The average Canadian student debt among those who borrow and graduate from four-year programs is $22,700, an amount that for many students who either work part-time or may not be able to work at all is quite prohibitive.

We are dealing with increased tuition fees and an overall increase in the cost of living, which for many students is highly problematic. The New Democrats have called upon the Conservative government to deal with issues of access and support when it comes to post-secondary students.

I also believe it is important to protect our young people from credit card solicitation, but the abuse of credit card fees also interacts with the employment situation that many young people face.

We talk a great deal about the thousands of jobs that so many Canadians have lost from coast to coast to coast. We need to recognize that, in many cases, this means not only the loss of jobs for young people, but also there are no jobs for them. I see hiring freezes and layoffs in my area. In many cases companies are laying off young people, but they also are shutting down opportunities for them when they come out of our educational institutions and look for jobs.

Given the difficult employment situation that our young people face today, in addition to the constant encouragement of young people to take out credit cards and to be exposed to these difficult situations, is very unfair. We need the government to take leadership, not just looking at it in terms of protecting all consumers, but also the importance of looking ahead to the future and supporting young people in the challenges they are facing today, which in many ways differ from the challenges that other generations face.

I want to particularly point out that the employment situation will continue to be very difficult for young people in that we do not know when exactly we will come out of the economic recession. We recently heard the negative forecasts. The future appears quite grim for many young people. I hear it from peers of mine from university and from college. They say that they are getting an education, and they know that is right, but what kind of opportunities are they going to have?

The difficult situation faced by many of the children of members here and many young people who work in our offices, who make government and our country work, needs to be recognized. The Conservative government needs to take action. It needs to listen to the voices of the House, the leadership that New Democrats have taken. The role of government is to stand up for consumers and to protect them.

I also want to note that young people are not in isolation from the reality that many of us face. Many young people are members of families and depend on them, which are equally finding themselves in very difficult situations as a result of the lack of regulation and unfair credit card rules.

For example, the Canadian household debt to income ratio in 2003 increased by 105.2%, which is incredible. We note that many young people depend on their parents or their families to help them get through their education or to help them get on their feet because they do not have that ability in many cases, and especially now.

It is beyond me to understand why any member would vote against something that not only stands to protect consumers, but, more important, stands to protect our young people and our future.

[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, March 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians from coast to coast to coast do not buy this kind of rhetoric.

The government's ideological attack on the CBC and Canadian voices has hit us hard in Manitoba. A vital link that connects us in northern Manitoba will be broken as CBC is planning to cut our program and station, North Country.

Respected Canadians, such as Peter Mansbridge and the minister of culture and heritage in Manitoba, Eric Robinson, got their start through North Country.

Will the government own up to its responsibility to stabilize and support the CBC so it can reinstate CBC's North Country?

[International Conference on Afghanistan in The Hague, March 26th, 2009]

Madam Chair, I approach this very important debate from numerous directions, including as a young Canadian. Most of the soldiers who have given the highest of sacrifices in this effort have been around my age. Certainly, as a result, my generation is very much affected. My generation of Canadians is also a generation that has grown up with the value of diplomacy and the commitment to development that we have learned in our education system and society. We have taken great pride in knowing that Canadians have been leaders in these areas.

So many people have devoted their lives to looking at conflicts and dealing with issues around our globe. They are talking about the emphasis on diplomacy and development, areas that Canada has led the way. Having heard their feedback and advice, it is disconcerting to the utmost degree that we are not seeing that commitment from the government. We are seeing a change from the way things have been done in the past. That is something that my generation of Canadians and Canadians of many generations are very concerned to see. I would be interested to hear the feedback in terms of that direction that we are pursuing.

[Criminal Code, March 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his comments and very insightful perspective on the important issues we are dealing with today.

I certainly appreciated the hon. member's reference to some of the very worthy initiatives happening in the context of first nations justice processes. I come from northern Canada, where there is great interest in such processes, not just by first nations but also by much of the wider community.

We recognize that these are very important, but also that there is very little financial support in terms of programming. Many of these organizations that work very hard to devise a program of justice that works best for so many young people in our region are struggling.

I would like to hear more about the hon. member's thoughts on the need for support in this area.

[Conservative Party of Canada, March 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, documents leaked recently from an on-campus Conservative Party workshop show that the government is actively encouraging the undermining of campus democracy with the establishment of front organizations to funnel student money to the party.

Through threats and attacks, the Conservative Party is attempting to manipulate the democratic control of student unions across Canada. This is unacceptable.

Does the government condone the overthrowing of democracy on campuses by the Conservative Party?

[Post-Secondary Education, March 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, post-secondary education is important to northern Manitoba and to Canada.

In northern Manitoba we have one of the youngest populations in Canada. People in the north tell us that post-secondary education is key to our future. As a former researcher and instructor at the University College of the North, I have seen the issues firsthand. Canadian students need support.

Aboriginal students across Canada have been calling for adequate funding for their studies and the need for the federal government to respect that education is a treaty right. In terms of research, students, researchers and academics across Canada have decried the cuts and ideological earmarking of research funding. The refusal to see commitments to all research as integral to our economic recovery is damaging to us.

Finally, we need a comprehensive approach to support post-secondary education. We need a long-term commitment to support our institutions, researchers and students in terms of infrastructure, programming and access.

A plan for a strong economic recovery ought to place a priority on post-secondary education.

[Business of Supply, March 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for pointing out some of the challenges faced in her riding, challenges that are very much a reality in the riding that I represent—for example, in the community of The Pas, Manitoba.

The Pas is an example where the province, the municipality, the steelworkers, headed by Chris Parlow, the president of the United Steelworkers, and also the neighbouring chief and council have come together to bring about a solution to the problem. In all of this, the underlying theme is that the federal government has been absolutely absent. I would like her to speak to the existence of that in her region.