Pierre-Luc Dusseault

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his intervention and his comments. That is indeed a common problem in many areas and many ridings. In my own riding of Sherbrooke, the Conservatives have made cuts that have affected many areas. A number of organizations that support refugees and receive funding from many sources have criticized the fact that the federal government eliminated more and more programs, even though they are essential and have proven to be effective. Those projects have unfortunately not been able to continue.

In my riding, the Conservatives have managed to affect immigrants in many other ways. Citizenship and Immigration Canada closed its Sherbrooke office completely and without any explanation. For some time after that, people had to travel to Montreal to take their citizenship test. We are talking about people who often did not have the means to travel to Montreal and stay there for a couple of days. Then they had to go back later in order to swear an oath. That was the case for two years. This situation is starting to change and a few citizenship ceremonies have taken place in Sherbrooke this year.

These numerous examples demonstrate how little support the Conservatives have been giving to immigrants—and they give even less to refugees. It is unfortunate. I hope that in 2015, we will have a government that makes this a priority immediately, in October 2015.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to speak on behalf of the people of Sherbrooke, the beautiful riding that I have proudly represented for three years, with respect to Bill C-43, the second budget implementation act. It is another omnibus bill, and it is not called that for nothing, as it contains 460 pages and 400 clauses. I will therefore not be able to address every measure and its effect on the economy.

What is deplorable is that the measures sometimes have nothing to do with the economy. Everyone is in agreement on that point. Even the minister agrees that most of his budget implementation bill has nothing to do with the budget. I do not know why these measures were included in a budget implementation bill. There are several possible theories, but the most likely is that the Conservatives are looking to hide things.

When something is hidden among 460 other clauses, it becomes difficult for the average Canadian who obtains information through the media and the Debates of the House of Commons to know everything that is in the bill.

Therefore, although we openly support some of the measures, we are opposed to the bill as a whole, since the majority of the measures are detrimental and the bill is not the right way to go. We are also opposed to the way it was drafted. It is a repeat of many previous budget implementation bills. We have grown accustomed to Conservative government omnibus bills that contain numerous items. It is difficult to summarize them in 10 minutes, as I will attempt to do.

I wanted to mention the problems caused by this process that we have seen in the past and we still see today. I hope that they will have ended by the next parliamentary session, when we come back in the winter of 2015.

This bill is proof that the Conservatives could not care less about Parliament and parliamentarians' input in the legislative process. The Conservative government is using its majority to enact things without consulting Parliament properly. There is a pretense of discussions on amendments in committee, but we know very well that the only goal of the majority Conservative government is to enact as many things as quickly as possible, without debate, by limiting parliamentarians' input in bills as much as possible.

Since these are occasionally technical bills, the expertise on each side of the House of Commons could offer improvements, because the bills introduced by the government are rarely perfect. We could seek a consensus. However, we are not accustomed to a consensus with the Conservatives. That is not the way they govern our country, unfortunately, even if it could be much more effective and beneficial and increase Canadians' confidence in our institutions.

What is the Conservatives’ economic record since taking office? I will try to dispel the myth that the Conservatives have been trying to make us believe in for years. They claim to be building a strong economy, but evidence suggests otherwise.

Today, our trade deficit has reached more than $60 billion. This is a negative trade balance of more than $60 billion. However, when the Conservatives came to power, the trade surplus was $26 billion. Currently, the trade deficit is over $60 billion.

I am particularly concerned about the issue of youth unemployment, which is currently at 13.4%, more than double the average national rate. Something is obviously happening in this area, and measures must be taken to try and solve the problem. Clearly, the Conservatives have not addressed this problem in the budget.

There are currently 300,000 additional unemployed Canadians; 375,000 jobs were lost in the manufacturing sector. This was a very active and vibrant sector in Sherbrooke and in the Eastern Townships. However, unfortunately, it has suffered the effects of Conservative mismanagement: 375,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost. This sector offers high-paying jobs and good working conditions. The lack of leadership from the current government on the employment file has likely caused great difficulties and serious challenges for the sector.

It should be noted that the sector faces serious challenges. Unfortunately, the Conservative government has only proposed small measures and is not providing the much-needed help the sector needs. We all agree that, because of today's globalization, our manufacturing sector is in direct competition with emerging countries that have very different conditions within their domestic market, which means that our businesses are competing with businesses from those countries.

Currently, it is important to support these businesses, and to support them in terms of innovation, as innovation plays a key role in helping the manufacturing sector and enabling it to remain competitive with businesses from emerging countries. This means that unique and highly innovative technologies are required to make it possible to compete with these countries, and to create quality jobs with quality work conditions. This is something that is very important for the riding of Sherbrooke.

There are other things about the budget that I want to mention. I will try to sum up and let the people of Sherbrooke know what is in it.

There are changes affecting access to social assistance for refugee claimants. That is an important issue for Sherbrooke. I am very involved in several organizations that support and help newcomers to Canada and refugees. A significant proportion of the immigrant and refugee population is in Sherbrooke. Every year, over half of all newcomers are refugees.

That means they come from troubled countries. Sometimes, these people are escaping dangerous situations in their home countries, even threats to their lives. These people seek refuge in Canada. There is a reason it is called refugee status. Unfortunately, the Conservatives are attacking our refugees, and not for the first time. I think that is utterly deplorable. Many of these people are among society's most vulnerable. We should be doing more to support these people when they come to Canada, to help them manage and to provide financial help.

However, this bill includes a measure that was proposed by a Conservative backbencher: allowing the provinces to impose residency requirements on individuals with no permanent status and to deny basic social assistance to refugee claimants and people who do not have permanent resident status in Canada. This means that if a refugee comes to Sherbrooke, the provincial government could, based on certain criteria, deny that person access to social assistance.

Basically, people might come here without a penny to their names and have to adapt to life in Canada. They might come here in the winter. Just this week, newcomers arrived from Africa. This is their first time in a country as cold as Canada.

It was 10 degrees below zero, and they had nothing. It is very important to support them. Conflicts are ravaging their home countries. We must absolutely help them when they arrive in Canada and not abandon them, as the Conservative government has done time and time again, and as it is doing once again with Bill C-43.

My time is up, so I would be pleased to answer any questions my colleagues might have.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the nice things he said about me at the beginning of his speech.

I have a question for him about the pay-to-pay fees because we have heard a lot about them in the past few months and years. The Conservatives have finally decided to do something, but only in the telecommunications sector. The Conservatives are going to prevent this sector from making users pay to receive paper copies of their bills.

However, unfortunately, for some unknown reason, the Conservatives decided not to regulate other sectors, including banks and credit card companies, in the same way.

Could my colleague explain why it is unethical to make clients pay for their bill, which is the same as making them pay twice, and why the government should take action in this sector?

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his speech.

I would like to come back to something he said, which I have a hard time believing. He said that the Conservatives' EI premium holiday was announced without any consultation. I have a hard time believing that the government would have announced such a costly measure—we are talking $550 million here—without any consultation or a study conducted by the Department of Finance itself.

Is that really what I heard? Did the Department of Finance propose a $550-million tax measure without basing it on an internally conducted impact assessment? Did I understand that correctly?

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles for her speech.

I would like her to comment further on the tax credit for employers, which will be paid for out of the employment insurance fund. She alluded to it in her speech but did not go into any detail about it.

What does she think of the fact that the Conservatives are planning to use the fund to pay for the creation of about 800 jobs at a cost of around $550,000 each? That measure will cost half a billion dollars. Do the math and that comes out to $550,000 per job created.

What does she think of the fact that the Conservatives are going to take money out of the employment insurance fund even though that money belongs to workers and employers?

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to ask my Conservative colleague a question.

The Conservatives have been talking about income splitting for months now. They put the measure in this year's budget, even though the former finance minister said that he did not support such a measure because it did not benefit a majority of the population.

Could my colleague explain why the Conservatives came up with a measure that benefits only about 15% of the population?

What is the point of a tax measure that benefits only a small minority of Canadians?

[The Environment, December 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the people of Sherbrooke and I are concerned about protecting the environment.

However, protecting the environment is last on the Conservatives' list of priorities. That is in part due to the fact that they have an incompetent minister and in part due to the fact that they simply deny that climate change exists. As world leaders are laying the foundation for a new international agreement, Canada is playing the role of a mere onlooker or even a saboteur.

Luckily, for my generation and future ones, in October 2015, we will finally have an NDP government, which will take its climate change responsibilities seriously and will ensure both a healthy environment and a sustainable economy.

One of the first things our government will do is go to the Paris conference and move from being an onlooker to a leader. Waiting is not an option. We need to take action now.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have this opportunity to ask my colleague a question. He seems to be pretending that all of the Conservative government's bad statistics just do not exist.

The Conservatives always want to make us think that they have such a stellar track record, but plenty of numbers suggest the opposite. In 2013 alone, employment growth was slower than ever since the recession. Since the current Prime Minister took over, 300,000 more people have joined the ranks of the unemployed, and there are now 400,000 fewer manufacturing sector jobs.

Sherbrooke has been affected by the loss of manufacturing sector jobs. Some 400,000 good jobs have disappeared on the Conservatives' watch. Canada's trade balance is still in a deficit situation: $61 billion in 2013. In addition, the Conservatives have given us deficit budgets ever since coming to power.

Can the member explain how the Conservatives can call themselves good economic managers when they have run deficit budgets since coming to power?

[Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act, December 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

What does he think of the way such bills are being introduced? Common sense would suggest that there should be a consensus among the parties before a bill is introduced in Parliament. Had there been discussions, I am sure that there would have been an even greater chance of unanimity among all of the parties in the House.

Does he think that would be the right way to do things given that the Conservatives did the opposite in this particular case? There is no consensus on the bill they introduced, not even within the community it will affect.

Does my colleague think it would be better to turn things around and try to achieve consensus before introducing bills?

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed to rise to talk about a time allocation motion and to tell the House what I think about the Conservatives. I say “Conservatives” because even my colleague spoke about the Conservative Party of Canada rather than the Government of Canada. He spoke as though the Conservative Party was the government when that is not really how the country should be managed.

The Conservatives see Parliament as something useless that gets in the way of their ideology. That is why they are always trying to pass their decisions as quickly as possible in the House without taking Parliament's opinion into consideration. They have been doing this for three and a half years. The Conservatives have no consideration for parliamentarians' opinions; yet, those opinions should be a primary consideration. The executive should take Parliament's opinion into account. These two things should be separate, but with the Conservatives, they have basically become one.

I do not think that is good for our democracy. They should consider and respect Parliament's opinion. In order to do so, they have to give parliamentarians the opportunity to speak and express their opinions. That is not what they do, so I am asking the Conservatives why they do not have any consideration for Parliament.