Nycole Turmel

[Taxation, November 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have taken another page from Mike Harris's shady playbook by deciding to deliver their economic update outside Parliament to an audience of financial elites rather than to the people's representatives. Not surprisingly, they are completely out of touch with what families need.

Instead of offering tax cuts that will not benefit 85% of Canadians, why is the government not using next week's economic update to keep its promise to create 125,000 day care spaces?

[Status of Women, November 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, some serious allegations surfaced regarding the conduct of certain members of the House.

Last February, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women issued a series of recommendations on harassment in the workplace, including the House of Commons.

Could the chair of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women tell us when the committee will meet to discuss the government's response to this report?

[Status of Women, November 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, some serious allegations surfaced regarding the conduct of certain members of the House.

Last February, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women issued a series of—

[Taxation, November 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue stands idly by while the crown corporation responsible for administering the public sector pension fund uses shell companies as part of a tax avoidance scheme.

How will the minister explain to public servants in her own department, who fight tax evasion on a daily basis, that the money in their own pension fund is invested in a notorious tax haven?

[The Environment, November 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, France understands the scope of this issue. The international community must take action and implement science-based policies.

However, the Prime Minister responds by cutting funding to combat climate change, refusing to limit emissions in the gas and oil sector, and derailing the efforts of the international community.

Communities across the country are already experiencing flooding and weather extremes.

Why do the Conservatives revel in doing nothing?

[The Environment, November 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, France will host the next United Nations conference on climate change. France's foreign affairs minister, who is trying to build a consensus, believes that now is the time for the international community to take immediate action.

Has the Prime Minister spoken about this topic with President Hollande, and did he commit to putting an end to 10 years of Conservative inaction on climate change?

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, October 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his observations on the current situation, on previous budgets presented here and on the fact that Conservative members are not responding to this.

I cannot believe that the members opposite are not getting any feedback or questions from their constituents. How can they explain to their constituents that the government is making cuts everywhere, preventing new jobs from being created and introducing unethical regulations or rules?

We cannot forget that the Conservative government was elected with just 39% of the vote. In other words, there are a lot of people who are opposed to this government's policies.

I am very concerned that the government is not showing any flexibility or any semblance of respecting democracy.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, October 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for raising the issue of the money being siphoned off the EI fund. The Liberals did it, and now the Conservatives are doing it, all at the expense of workers.

At the same time, EI services have been cut back. Workers have unstable and poorly paid jobs, and are often entitled to fewer weeks of EI benefits. It is very unfortunate, especially knowing that 800 jobs are going to cost $550 million.

It is unbelievable and unacceptable that the Conservatives are doing this and are governing a country this way. It is very unfortunate, particularly when we could be improving our legislation and regulations. That would help Canadians, and especially the manufacturing sector, which my colleague talked about this morning.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, October 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to a topic as important as the act to implement certain provisions of the budget.

That said, I must stress that I think it is shameful that as we debate such a broad and complicated bill, we are under our 83rd gag order. The Conservatives have imposed this gag order, and the Liberals are complicating things even more by making irrelevant objections that prevent us from having real discussions.

As I mentioned, today we are debating a document that is around 460 pages long, includes 400 clauses and amends several dozen pieces of legislation. This document even includes measures that were not mentioned in the budget speech.

This bill is the kind of thing we have come to expect from the Conservative government. The government ignores middle-class families, workers and people in need. Instead, it manages to find a way to help out the banks.

The content of the bill is worrisome, and so is the way it is being presented to us. By refusing to split this omnibus bill, the government is once again demonstrating how little respect it has for our democratic institutions. On that note, I would like to quote Manon Cornellier, who writes a blog for the well-known magazine, L'actualité. This is what she had to say about the government's practice:

For the Conservatives, the omnibus bill process is too useful to step away from. It is the perfect way to succeed without having to be overly accountable. The fact that Parliament feels marginalized is the least of their worries.

How can the government ask MPs, who represent millions of Canadians, to make a decision on dozens of legislative measures with one single vote?

The Conservatives know all that. It was not that long ago, when they were in opposition, that they were the ones tearing their hair out over Liberal omnibus bills. In fact, the Prime Minister himself made a passionate argument against these types of bills. I would like to quote what he said in 1994, when the House was debating a 21-page bill, not a 400-page bill like the one we are looking at now.

...in the interest of democracy I ask: How can members represent their constituents on these various areas when they are forced to vote in a block on such legislation and on such concerns?

We can agree with some of the measures but oppose others. How do we express our views and the views of our constituents when the matters are so diverse? Dividing the bill into several components would allow members to represent views of their constituents on each of the different components in the bill.

When I look at the 460 pages of this bill, I wonder whether, after 10 years in power, the student has managed to surpass the teacher in the art of holding this Parliament in contempt.

We must also talk about some of the measures that we support and that is what really does not make sense in this whole undertaking, in this entire exercise. We could easily work together to pass measures that both parties support.

Nevertheless, it is true that the Prime Minister's comments apply to the current situation. There are indeed some measures in this bill that meet the NDP's demands. For example, since 2007 we have been calling for the creation of a DNA data bank to help the authorities solve missing persons cases. I am pleased to see this measure in Bill C-43, even though we can question why it was included in a budget implementation bill.

The government has finally admitted that it was time to put an end to pay-to-pay fees, the fees charged to consumers who want to receive a paper rather than an electronic invoice. These fees are being abolished for broadcasting and telecommunications companies, but, and this is very odd, not for banks.

That is about it for the good things. This bill has dozens of problematic measures though. For example, the government is using this mammoth bill to sneak in its private member's bill to let the provinces restrict access to welfare for refugee claimants and people who are not permanent residents.

This measure is a direct attack on women, men and children of all ages who are already vulnerable. Over the past three years, I have met a number of refugees and asylum claimants at my riding office. These individuals have often gone through incredible ordeals, and when they get here, they have to keep being brave so they can integrate into our communities

Considering that it takes months or years to process asylum claims in Canada, it is not surprising that some claimants might need a little help from time to time while they wait. If the government wants to scrimp and save at someone's expense, maybe it should start by asking corporations and banks to do their fair share rather than go after the poorest people around.

I will give another example of worrisome measures included in this bill. The Conservatives decided to go forward with their plan to introduce a tax credit to create jobs in small businesses. Let us be clear. The NDP has been saying for a long time that the government needs to provide proper support for small and medium-sized businesses, which make an enormous contribution to our economy.

However, the Conservative Party is whistling in the wind with this measure. We already know that it will not be effective even though it has not even been implemented yet. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has already warned the government that its plan will create at most 800 jobs in Canada.

The current government is certainly not behaving responsibly by spending $500 million to create 800 jobs. We have said this a number of times and we hope that the public will hear this message: spending $500 million to create 800 jobs is not at all effective. Why are the Conservatives insisting on moving forward with this bad idea?

I could go on and on listing examples of the negative measures set out in this bill. When it comes to a budget or a forecast for the coming years, it is really important for the parties to work together to find solutions to our economic problems, particularly with regard to stable jobs and lower-paying jobs. Unfortunately, we cannot do that because of the gag order and the attitude of the Conservative government.

I could also talk about what these 460 pages do not contain, namely initiatives to address youth employment, increase access to social housing, improve our health care system or protect our environment, for example.

This bill once again proves to Canadians that they cannot count on the Conservatives to stand up for their interests and respect our democracy. Canadians know that they deserve better than what we are currently seeing in this bill.

[Taxation, October 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' proposed income splitting plan is costly and ineffective. It will benefit few families, and only well-off families will be able to take advantage of it. This plan is based on a paternalistic and regressive ideology that does not consider the realities facing women and the labour market in the 21st century. Even the former finance minister said that this plan was unfair and too costly.

Why do the Conservatives insist on continuing down this reckless path?