Rachael Thomas

[Taxation, September 18th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have heard from thousands of people across my riding with regard to the Liberal tax hike on small businesses.

Nicole is 34 and a recent graduate. She is now working as a family physician in a rural area of Alberta. These changes will make it impossible for her to save towards maternity leave and start a family. Currently, there are provisions that support her as a woman by allowing her to save for parental leave, but the new changes will rob her of this very basic right. Nicole feels betrayed and left alone.

Why will the Prime Minister not do the right thing and stop his attack on young women entrepreneurs?

[Finance, June 21st, 2017]

Well, Mr. Speaker, that was another non-answer.

I am extremely worried for Canada's young people. The Liberals should be focused on creating an environment of economic prosperity and making sure the next generation is set up for success. However, instead, the government is racking up debt with no plan whatsoever to balance the budget. In fact, the Liberals are about to set a record as the most expensive government in history outside of a war or recession. This is a huge bill being piled up for the next generation to pay off.

My question is simple, and they say that the third time is the charm. In what year will the Prime Minister balance the budget?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, June 16th, 2017]

With regard to total funding spent by the Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the last five fiscal years: (a) what percentage has been spent inside the National Capital Region versus outside the National Capital Region, including staff costs, operating costs, contract work and transfers to individuals, tribal governments or organizations, broken down by year; (b) what is the total amount spent inside the National Capital Region versus outside the national capital region, including staff costs, operating costs, contract work and transfers to individuals or organizations, broken down by year; (c) what is the percentage of direct transfers to individuals, tribal government, or organizations as opposed to the total amount spent by the Department, broken down by year; (d) what is the total amount of direct transfers to individuals, tribal government, or organizations, broken down by (i) year, (ii) program, (iii) sub-program, (iv) recipient organization, (v) funding amount, (vi) date funds were transferred; and (e) what is the total amount spent by the Department, broken down by year?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, June 16th, 2017]

With regard to federal funding in the constituency of Lethbridge, between April 1, 2016, and April 1, 2017: (a) what applications for funding have been received, including for each the (i) name of the organization, (ii) department, (iii) program and sub-program they applied for funding under, (iv) date of the application, (v) amount applied for, (vi) whether funding has been approved or not, (vii) total amount of funding, if funding was approved; (b) what funds, grants, loans, and loan guarantees has the government issued through its various departments and agencies in the constituency of Lethbridge that did not require a direct application from the applicant, including for each the (i) name of the organization, (ii) department, (iii) program and sub-program they received funding under, (iv) total amount of funding, if funding was approved; and (c) what projects have been funded in the constituency of Lethbridge by organizations tasked with sub-granting government funds (i.e. Community Foundations of Canada), including for each the (i) name of the organization, (ii) department, (iii) program and sub-program they received funding under, (iv) total amount of funding, if funding was approved?

[Main Estimates, 2017-18, June 14th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, it certainly was very fascinating—the word I will choose to use—to listen to the member opposite talk about the Senate and do nothing more than simply read the biographies off the Internet.

We are here in this House today talking about the estimates, which really comes down to our taking taxpayers' money and allocating it into different services and provisions on behalf of the Canadian people.

My question is simple. Why does the member opposite not feel that it is necessary to speak on behalf of Canadians and take this process seriously?

[Canada's 150th Anniversary, June 13th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, as we approach Canada's 150th birthday, it gives us the chance to stop and reflect on our past, to celebrate our present, and to look to our future with anticipation.

Together, as Canadians from coast to coast, we celebrate the place we call home. We celebrate the first nations peoples, who were the first to live in our great country. We celebrate the voyageurs, who risked everything to discover new land and forge new beginnings. We celebrate the Fathers of Confederation for their wisdom and their leadership. We celebrate all those who have contributed to our great country by building homes, by adding their skills and abilities to the labour market, by contributing to the fine arts, by participating in sports, and by offering their time and their talents through volunteerism.

We are a diverse country, in geography, in history, and in our people. Canada is the place we call home, and we are very blessed to do so. As we move forward, may we adopt the best of our past, steward our present, and build for our future.

[Committees of the House, June 9th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the hon. member for Peace River—Westlock for putting forward Motion No. 47.

This report could have served as a very strong voice on behalf of a generation of women who have been objectified and had their equality undermined by violent and degrading sexually explicit material. Instead, however, this committee study was limited to the smallest number of meetings possible, witnesses were prevented from appearing, and the majority of witness testimony was in fact ignored.

For this reason, the Conservative members are tabling a dissenting report.

If we are serious about this topic and preventing rape culture from developing further in Canada, we must do more.

[Salaries Act, June 8th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, yes, the members opposite do deserve to be respected. That was exactly why I said what I did. They should not be treated as an opportunity for quota. They should not be treated as tokens. They should be treated as equal partners in leading Canadians. They should be treated as people who are intelligent, hard working, and able to contribute based on their merits and abilities rather than based on their gender.

That is what I experience on this side of the House. I wish the same for them.

[Salaries Act, June 8th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I could draw on a number of examples where male ministers have been put in place and have not upheld the role and responsibilities they had been granted. I do not wish to draw attention to those things right now. It is beyond what we are talking about today.

The point I am really hoping to make is that regardless if one is male or female, gender really should not be brought into account. Ministers are given a list of responsibilities, a list of tasks, a budget to oversee, a staff to manage, and they need to do that with competence.

Whether male of female, if the person has the ability to do it, is the best person for the job, then that individual should be put into the cabinet post to do that job.

[Salaries Act, June 8th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, what I talked about was with regard to equal treatment of women. Every woman deserves the same pay as a man if she does the same job as a man. I believe in equal pay for equal work. That should be upheld in this place and in the whole country, from coast to coast.