House of Commons photoLost her last election, in 2015, with 24% of the vote.
Ethics October 25th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, one of the people named by Mr. Wright in his RCMP document is Benjamin Perrin. However, the Prime Minister refuses to provide any details on that person's involvement.
The day before yesterday, the Prime Minister said: “any information that we can provide, we have provided and will continue to provide.” So the Prime Minister too has provided information to the RCMP. Is that information about Benjamin Perrin?
Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2 October 25th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question.
First, I would like to go back to Bill C-4, another omnibus bill that deals with technical changes.
Clearly, this is another smokescreen, but we have not been taken in. It does not hide the fact that Bill C-4 really is trying to slip in major changes with no real prior consultation.
Once more, we are seeing a complete lack of democracy and of debate. Debates in this House have become impossible, and all workers, all Canadians, are having a hard time with that.
We are talking about major changes to the public service. A huge number of our workers will be affected by this tired old government's latest moves to take control of all our institutions at all costs. It really is unacceptable.
Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2 October 25th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.
Clearly, what we are also seeing is a major move on the part of the Conservatives to control workers and unions.
In Bill C-4, we see that the Minister of Finance is given the power to manipulate the setting of rates. The Conservatives, in fact, have now completely broken their promise to have an independent and accountable body oversee employment insurance funding.
The government talks about and champions transparency, and forges ahead saying that it is the government that stands for greater accountability and much more transparency. Unfortunately, that is not at all what we are seeing here and these are not at all the principles that this government claims to have guaranteed.
Clearly, this amendment in Bill C-4 will simply prevent workers from having meaningful access to their unions and, at some point, will clearly and specifically prevent them from having any access to their premiums.
Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2 October 25th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, for the fourth time in this Parliament, the Conservative government is introducing a massive bill to implement certain provisions of its last budget.
Bill C-4 is an example of why we have been criticizing this government since it came to power; it is an example of the government's lack of respect for parliamentary processes, as it imposes unrelated measures in a single piece of legislation and limits the work of members of Parliament. It is the epitome of a tired old government that has no vision for Canadians, a government whose pathological partisanship is affecting our parliamentary institutions and the interests of Canadians.
This bill amends close to 70 laws and includes a number of provisions that have nothing to do with the budget, strictly speaking. Bill C-4 contains dozens of measures that could have been introduced in separate bills. In one bill, the government is amending taxation, employment insurance rules, economic immigration parameters, arbitration in the public sector, the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, and so on.
Instead of making room for real parliamentary debate, the government has crammed dozens of measures into one single piece of legislation. Instead of allowing members of Parliament to do their jobs, the government has chosen to impose an anti-democratic approach and a dogmatic vision of politics.
Not only does Bill C-4 violate the whole parliamentary process, but the Conservatives also waited until the very last minute to present the content of the bill. The bill was finally introduced 48 hours ago. We have had 48 hours to review almost 300 pages and to assess the impact of dozens of measures. This is preventing us from doing the job we were elected to do.
The Prime Minister shut down Parliament for five weeks, which is simply outrageous and unacceptable for a democratic country like Canada. Clearly, the negative consequences of this approach cannot be denied. This single vote on a huge number of measures is certainly going to limit debate, and it will increase the potential for errors. As a result, the content will be less representative.
Furthermore, a clear example of the potential danger is the mistake that caused credit unions to face a tax hike of 28% rather than 15%. An in-depth study of the measure in committee and the testimony of many witnesses would have made it possible to avoid that blunder. If parliamentary committees have one meeting only to consider such wide-ranging measures, of course, members of Parliament do not have all the tools they need for a proper review.
In the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, we had only 40 minutes to study measures in Bill C-60 that had major consequences. We had 40 minutes to study a piece of legislation that easily would have required more committee meetings. That is the anti-democratic approach the Conservatives are taking with Bill C-4.
As if the general structure of Bill C-4 was not enough of a violation of democracy, the government moved a time allocation motion yesterday to further limit debate. If that is not mocking democracy, I do not know what it is. The situation is all the more worrisome and deplorable considering that some parts of Bill C-4 have serious and troubling implications.
First of all, the budget implementation bill eliminates the Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board, thereby allowing the Minister of Finance to manipulate the rates for the employment insurance fund. Clearly, the Conservative promises to make the management of employment insurance parameters more independent and transparent are now no more than a distant memory. Once again, the government is going back on its commitments and, in some cases, its own actions.
The Conservatives criticized the Liberals—and so did we for that matter—for helping themselves to and squandering the surplus in the employment insurance fund. In total, $57 billion was taken by those governments. In the past, the Conservatives rose up against that, but now, with Bill C-4, they are changing their tune once again.
With Bill C-4, the Conservatives are once more setting up the same mechanisms that allowed finance ministers, both Conservative and Liberal, to dip into the premiums paid by workers.
With access to benefits constantly decreasing, Canadians find this decision unacceptable. After all, the money involved belongs to the workers and the Conservatives are acting as if it were theirs.
We in the NDP maintain that the employment insurance fund must be managed independently and transparently. The Minister of Finance has decided otherwise by granting himself discretionary powers that will tarnish the very management of the fund.
In addition, Bill C-4 will amend the Public Service Labour Relations Act by redefining the process by which disputes are resolved in the government.
Not only is the government reserving the right to define essential services, but it is also imposing a process of binding arbitration in disputes where less than 80% of the members of a bargaining unit are performing essential services.
As a result, the Conservatives are reserving the right to define the rules on resolving disputes in the public service of Canada and to impose working conditions on its employees through arbitration.
Clearly, the government wants to give itself some elbow room so that it can attack the unions that stand up for the rights of workers.
Amendments of this kind require discussions in depth, with other voices to be heard on the matter, not just Conservative voices. To roll out measures of this kind without real debate is to lay oneself open to regrettable errors.
That applies to the amendments to employment insurance and the dispute resolution processes in the public service. It also applies to the omnibus bill in its entirety.
In closing, never has a government shown so much contempt for our parliamentary institutions and for Canadians. Here we are with a single bill with 300 pages of measures amending about 70 acts. It is impossible for members of Parliament to do their jobs properly. Then we get a time allocation motion that restricts debate even more.
Clearly, our democracy is suffering. All the work by members of the House of Commons is also being placed in jeopardy.
National Summit on Advanced Skills, Demographics and Impact of Technology October 24th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of the House the need for skilled labour in Canada.
This week, the Association of Canadian Community Colleges held the National Summit on Advanced Skills, Demographics and Impact of Technology, which was attended by leaders from Canada's education and economic sectors. The resulting discussions and undertakings just how important a role our colleges play in developing tomorrow's workforce.
Canada has a workforce. Our job is to develop this workforce and help Canadians match their skills to prevailing labour needs. This requires greater collaboration with and support for the provinces and educational institutions, as well as entrepreneurs.
Therefore, I invite my colleagues to congratulate and encourage the Association of Canadian Community Colleges. Together, we will build the skilled workforce needed to tackle the challenges that await Canada in the 21st century.
Employment October 22nd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the lastest TD Bank report is contradicting the nice stories the Conservatives are telling. The shortage of workers—this so-called problem that the Conservatives solved by making terrible EI reforms and giving carte blanche to those who wanted to hire temporary foreign workers—is just a myth. In the end, the crisis announced by the Conservatives amounts to nothing.
On what evidence did the Conservatives base the announcement of such a crisis?
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE AND ITS COMMITTEES October 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question.
As I mentioned in my speech, clearly, it is very important to take a closer look at this tragic reality that is affecting aboriginal women and girls.
In closing, there is just one really simple question: why did the government think that prorogation was needed? The Conservatives have not been able to answer for their own actions. What we know for sure is that this prorogation was meant only to cover up the scandals and to allow the Conservatives to avoid being accountable to Canadians.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE AND ITS COMMITTEES October 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.
He focused on this government's inherent hypocrisy, and I think that hypocrisy is exactly the right word because that is what we are seeing. They are in no position to lecture other parliamentarians when they cannot even face up to their own shortcomings.
At the end of my speech, I compared the government to a pyromaniac firefighter. I am pretty sure that we all understand what that means.
A pyromaniac firefighter is a person who sets a fire and then calls everyone else to come and put it out even though he, as a firefighter, started it himself. For crying out loud.
To me, this is clearly hypocrisy. Our democracy is taking a beating. Unfortunately, we have yet another omnibus motion before us. Omnibus. Worse still, this one comes with a closure motion. It is déjà vu all over again.
When will the government quit using these tactics?
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE AND ITS COMMITTEES October 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
I would say that the Prime Minister certainly seems to be scared of accountability.
Despite our insistence and all the questions asked in the House, it was quite evident to members of Parliament and the general public that no concrete answers have been given on the Senate scandal so far.
Also, I believe it is important for Canadians to understand just how much this government is abusing our democratic process and our work in Parliament.
We have talked about the importance of collegiality and we promoted this idea, just as we emphasized the importance of having concrete information on the programs the government wishes to introduce; however, we are still grappling with a total lack of transparency and accountability, which is typical of this government.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE AND ITS COMMITTEES October 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the government's ineffectiveness and utter nonsense is what got us into this debate here today.
In my speech, I think I clearly emphasized how the New Democratic Party—the official opposition—has focused on the situation of aboriginal women.
We have worked on this file for months, even years. We underlined the importance of setting up a committee well before the prorogation. However, the government totally ignored our efforts. Today, the Conservatives have no business giving us any lessons that they are not even able to apply themselves.