Sadia Groguhé

[Business of Supply, April 24th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we must look at what is behind this motion. One reason for the motion is to guarantee equal amounts of speaking time within caucuses and freedom of speech, in light of what the member for Langley raised in his question of privilege to the Speaker. Yes, certain government members are being muzzled.

I would like to ask the Leader of the Government if he thinks that a member in the House should have the opportunity to speak to the issues affecting his or her constituents without being censored by the Prime Minister's Office.

[Employment, April 24th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, there have been problems with the temporary foreign worker program for years.

Yet, it took Canadians speaking out about being ruthlessly replaced before the minister finally began to take the situation seriously.

Mark Carney has some good advice for the government: the program should be used to fill temporary gaps in the labour market.

The misuse of this program drives wages down.

Mr. Carney understands the urgency of finding a solution to this problem. Why does the minister not get it?

[Citizenship and Immigration, April 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the government is always shirking its responsibility to protect refugees.

What is fundamentally unfair is that already vulnerable people could lose their lives. How can the Conservatives continue to deny the truth? How can they tell a refugee who has breast cancer but has no means of accessing treatment that she is taking advantage of the system?

How can they claim that this measure will be effective, when the provinces will foot the bill for the cuts to the interim federal health program? How can they try to score political points at the expense of the least fortunate?

As a result of this measure and this government's irresponsibility, the health of many refugees will worsen. The health network is saying this and organizations are saying it.

When will the Conservatives listen to common sense and reinstate funding for the interim federal health program?

[Citizenship and Immigration, April 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, on June 30, 2012, the Conservative government announced massive cuts to the interim federal health program amounting to $100 million over five years.

For over 55 years, that program has provided temporary health care coverage to asylum seekers, refugees and other migrants. Those measures have made it possible to provide health care services to vulnerable individuals who often left their country of origin under tragic circumstances.

Unfortunately, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism decided to go after the least fortunate members of society instead of meeting the international responsibilities that have guided Canada's actions over the past decades.

In that context, the government stopped funding health care services for those from designated countries, for fear that it may hurt public safety. Asylum seekers from non-designated countries will have access to emergency and essential care, but will no longer have access to medication for chronic illnesses.

This decision will have a significant impact on the health of those who benefited from the program. People with cancer will go untreated, people will not be able to afford childbirth or treatment for asthma, diabetes, serious injuries, and the list goes on.

This will obviously make certain cases more complicated and could result in the death of people who are unable to pay for the necessary medical care and treatment.

In reality, these cuts put more responsibility on the provinces, which will have to take on these treatment costs in the short term, at the risk of ending up with a much higher bill in the end. For a province like Quebec, this could mean an additional $6 million a year.

All stakeholders have unanimously denounced this government's decision. Doctors, refugee organizations and legal experts all agree that this policy is ineffective and that it is harmful to public health and our country's international reputation. They have also criticized the cost of this measure. Everyone agrees that the government has made a mistake and that these cuts could lead to some human tragedies.

This restrictive policy is not in keeping with the Canada that thousands of immigrants identify with. Will the minister reconsider his decision before lives are lost?

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, April 17th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, once again, this government has decided to move a time allocation motion to limit debate in the House of Commons. Imposing closure on Bill S-2 is simply an attack on our democracy.

This bill requires in-depth consideration by parliamentarians and continued debate. We are now debating this bill under a time allocation motion. We asked for true consultation of aboriginal peoples, and that is not at all what is happening.

Once again, the government is revealing its hypocrisy by, on the one hand, supporting a bill and, on the other, reducing the number of speakers to the absolute minimum. We are condemning the Conservatives' constant denial of democracy.

How can the minister justify such action?

[Business of Supply, April 16th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we are now realizing what has happened under this program. We should not lose sight of the fact that the Conservatives have completely mismanaged the temporary foreign worker program and Canadians are paying the price.

Furthermore, some of my other colleagues have also raised the fact that the fundamental rights of all workers must be promoted and protected. Paying a temporary foreign worker 15% less than a Canadian worker erodes these rights.

This program is worthwhile. We must keep it, but we must also redefine it.

[Business of Supply, April 16th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question.

We are absolutely not disparaging this program. I want to reiterate that that is not our intention. Even though the Liberals are saying that it was their party that created this program, the fact remains that the program is being abused because of a lack of safeguards and oversight. That is what we want to talk about and that is what we are proposing.

As I said in my speech, we absolutely must implement these safeguards and an audit system to prevent these abuses and allow this program to do what it was intended to do.

[Business of Supply, April 16th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Cape Breton—Canso for his motion, which gives us the opportunity to speak to the issue of foreign workers and give it the attention it deserves.

It is a good sign that the Liberals are finally reacting and acknowledging that the temporary foreign worker program does not work and needs to undergo changes.

Over the past few weeks, a number of irregularities and controversies have been brought to our attention and have made headlines.

The one thing they all have in common is the fact that large companies are using the generous nature of the temporary foreign worker program to their short-term financial gain and to the detriment of Canadian workers.

Royal Bank is the first company that comes to mind. It found itself in the spotlight after laying off 45 permanent Canadian IT workers and replacing them with temporary foreign workers.

This is not a question of lack of workers. The positions were already filled. There was no reason to hire temporary foreign workers.

However, it seems that RBC was able to benefit from loopholes in the temporary foreign worker program to threaten its employees' job security and drive down their salaries.

The case of HD Mining also demonstrates the program's inadequacies. In 2012, the Conservative government allowed the company to hire 201 Chinese miners on the grounds that the company could not meet its labour needs.

However, more than 300 people had applied for jobs with the company. They were turned down because HD Mining decided that speaking Mandarin was an essential qualification. Obviously, it was a way for the company to cut salary costs and take job security away from workers.

Just like RBC, HD Mining benefited from the generous nature of the temporary foreign worker program, to the detriment of Canadian workers. Just like RBC, it also circumvented the intent of the federal temporary foreign worker program with complete impunity. Foreign workers should not be shouldering the blame for these irregularities; the Conservatives should. They are the ones who encouraged it with their laissez-faire attitude and poor program management.

Our current economic situation is still fragile. While hundreds of thousands of Canadians are currently looking for work, the federal temporary foreign worker program must address labour shortages and not allow foreign workers to be hired to the detriment of Canadian workers.

That is the spirit of this program. It is supposed to address a temporary business need that cannot be fulfilled by the Canadian workforce. It is not meant to allow employers to reduce their payroll costs because they can pay foreign workers 15% less than Canadian workers.

Today the Conservatives are saying that Canadian workers should be given preferential treatment, while the number of temporary foreign workers has tripled, rising from 101,000 to 338,000 in the past 10 years. That number rose from 100,000 to 160,000 under the Liberals, and then it doubled under the Conservatives.

Considering that we have gone through an economic crisis and that 1.4 million Canadians are unemployed, these actions are irresponsible.

Saying one thing and doing the opposite for years on end is clearly hypocrisy. This government brought in incentives for hiring temporary foreign workers. It deliberately left the program's weaknesses in place and it allows large corporations to take advantage of the system, at the expense of Canadian workers.

The direction the Conservatives are taking is having a direct impact on Canadians. It is creating employment uncertainty in this country, as well as pushing down wages and creating a race to the bottom for all workers.

In the end, all employees and unemployed workers will be affected by these practices.

Our current global reality raises many questions about the federal temporary foreign worker program and about the government's intentions.

We have to reflect carefully on what direction this program needs to take.

Clearly, this reflection must be carried out with a view to developing a more effective federal temporary foreign worker program that better meets the needs of the public instead of those of large corporations.

The solution proposed by the hon. member for Cape Breton—Canso would make it possible to consult the public and to have the opinions of stakeholders and analysts. It could make it possible to take the temporary foreign worker program in a better direction, but this Liberal motion may well not yield very convincing results, because we need tangible measures.

It is essential that we find ways to make the program more true to its spirit. We must examine the ideas to improve the effectiveness of processes as well as those to strengthen respect for temporary foreign workers' rights. Actually, that is what we did at our last convention by adopting a resolution promoting co-operation with the embassies of the countries covered in the temporary foreign worker program, in order to improve the transfer of information to temporary foreign workers.

We also proposed the creation of a registration system for employers hiring temporary foreign workers in order to improve the verification of information. In addition, a long time ago, we voted in favour of repealing the provision allowing companies to pay temporary foreign workers 15% less than Canadian workers. We are also in favour of tightening the rules around the temporary foreign worker program to ensure that its precepts will not be violated.

But the proposal of the hon. member for Cape Breton—Canso can only be valid if the Conservatives finally agree to honour their commitments to the program, commitments that they have broken for years. The Liberals would also need to take a clear position and stop the double-talk, just like the government representatives.

Our duty is to promote our country's economy by serving the interests of all Canadians, but the Conservatives and Liberals need to demonstrate a real will to do so—the will New Democrats have.

[Business of Supply, April 15th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech.

I would like to reiterate that the motion moved by my colleague from Victoria asks the House to condemn the tax hikes introduced by the government in Budget 2013. In the last election, the Conservatives promised not to raise Canadians' taxes. They are doing quite the opposite. In fact, the tax hike on more than 1,200 types of goods will have a huge impact on consumers' budgets, especially families' budgets. These tax hikes will also hurt Canadian businesses, which will find it even more difficult to compete with their American competitors.

With all this information, how can my colleague claim that his government wants to ensure tax fairness across the country?

[Business of Supply, April 15th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. I agree with him.

Indeed, this new status regarding the general preferential tariff will have an impact. We have talked about all the repercussions this budget will have on businesses. We have also talked about all the negative and harmful repercussions these tax increases will have on consumers. The same is true of changes that will do nothing to help the general preferential tariff.