Ralph Goodale

[Business of the House, May 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the business of the House, next week members will be in their constituencies. I wonder if the government House leader could indicate what he intends to call to finish the business this week before we adjourn on Friday, and then his business plan for at least the first week we come back, which would be the last week of May.

I would point out that there remains one day to be designated as an occasion when committee of the whole will consider the estimates of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. I wonder if the minister is in a position now to designate which of the remaining days of May will be the day we consider the estimates in committee of the whole.

[Employment Insurance, May 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The previous Liberal government slashed EI premiums 12 consecutive times. That is a cut of more than 40%, and now premiums are frozen at that lower Liberal level.

EI rates will only go up if these Conservatives put them up. So do not blame the Liberals and do not blame the innocent victims who are trashed by a Conservative recession.

The Prime Minister thinks EI benefits are too generous. The minister says they are too lucrative. Will they not just admit the only thing stopping them from fixing EI is their own archaic reform party ideology?

[Employment Insurance, May 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, a third of a million Canadians have lost their jobs under the Conservative government.

Tens of thousands cannot get the employment insurance they paid for, because Conservatives insist on eligibility rules designed for the beginning of a boom. But the boom has gone bust. The C.D. Howe Institute, the Conference Board, and the TD Bank are not socialist organizations, and they all say the Conservatives are wrong on EI.

Why will the Prime Minister not help all the jobless workers who are suffering through his recession, regardless of where they live?

[Employment Insurance, May 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is that side of the House that broke its promise on income trusts and put a 31% tax on the retirement savings of 2.5 million Canadians. The government has been told that it is wrong by the Conference Board, the C.D. Howe Institute, the TD Bank and even provincial Conservatives of Ontario.

Let me ask this: Last September, the Prime Minister promised to make self-employed Canadians eligible for employment insurance. Since self-employment is apparently the government's only strategy, when will it keep the promise to make EI benefits available to the self-employed?

[Employment Insurance, May 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the minister lives on fiction and fancies. The Conservatives are grateful for small mercies, but more than 320,000 families are still without hope. For many, the problem is getting worse. The jobless rate today is up in St. John's, Quebec City, Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton and Abbotsford. In some places, like Kitchener, St. Catharines and Windsor, unemployment has reached double-digit levels.

Why will the Conservatives not take at least some of the pressure off hard-hit families by letting more of them qualify for employment insurance? What is wrong with that?

[Employment, May 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, in January, the government promised 190,000 jobs. So far, the Conservative record is a net loss of 320,000 jobs. The only progress, and that is despite the government, is in the category of self-employment. In other words, Canadians are left to fight this recession on their own.

Do the Conservatives still stand by that pledge of 190,000 jobs? That would mean a net increase of more than half a million jobs from where things stand today. Is their promise still operative?

[Business of the House, May 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have the usual Thursday question about the program the government has in mind for the rest of this week and the week laying ahead.

I would specifically like to ask the government House leader if he is in a position today to designate the dates upon which the committee of the whole will meet for the purpose of examining the estimates of two departments, in particular, the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. It would be helpful if the minister could inform us of the dates he has selected during the month of May for that examination.

I have a specific suggestion to make to him about Bill C-29, the bill having to do with agricultural loans, which is both useful and to the largest extent, non-controversial. I wonder if we might be able to agree to have that bill called on Monday and see if we might be able to dispose of it at all stages before the end of next week.

[Employment Insurance, May 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, those are the Conservatives who solemnly promised never to tax income trusts and then broke that promise. They levied a brutal Conservative tax that destroyed $25 billion in the savings of over two million ordinary Canadians. Worse, they are now presiding over the biggest economic disaster since World War II, 380,000 full-time jobs destroyed. Because they are so uncaring and because the minister gives that answer all the time, this has become their Conservative recession.

When will they fix EI?

[Employment Insurance, May 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the most painful part of a recession is lost jobs affecting hundreds of thousands of families.

The Conference Board of Canada said yesterday the jobless rate will skyrocket this year to nearly double digit levels, but thousands of these victims will not qualify for EI. Existing rules were designed for boom times, not a recession, but rules can be changed to fit the new reality.

Why have the Conservatives dug themselves in so rigidly on the uncaring side of this very human issue?

[Request for Emergency Debate, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on the same issue.

I would like to draw to your attention this one important fact that makes a distinction between what the official opposition whip has asked for today in terms of an emergency debate and the items that are on the order paper relating to a committee report.

The significant new event that has happened overnight is the decision taken by the European Union. This stands out as an international affront to Canada. It is extremely important, it seems to me, for the Parliament of Canada to act in an urgent manner in response to that.

The participation of parliamentarians in an emergency debate within 24 hours of the Europeans making their decision is the appropriate kind of response, not dealing with this matter as a routine item in respect of a committee report, but in fact, the Canadian Parliament taking an extraordinary measure in response to this extraordinary and inappropriate measure taken by the Europeans.

It is the symbolism of an emergency debate within 24 hours that I think is the important thing, and I would ask that you, Mr. Speaker, take that important urgency into account in your deliberations.