Scott Duvall

[Pensions, November 6th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, today, after consulting with workers across the country, I am tabling a private member's bill to protect the pensions of workers. Currently Canada's bankruptcy laws do not protect workers' pensions and benefits. The Prime Minister knows this, which is why he promised workers in my hometown that he would improve retirement security for Canadians. However, he has so far refused to fix the rules that let companies shortchange workers' pension plans. Workers fulfill their obligations, and companies and the Liberal government must do the same.

Will the Prime Minister keep his promise and work with me to protect our pensioners, yes or no?

[Bankruptcy, November 6th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, hundreds of people have come to Parliament Hill today to demand changes to Canada's inadequate bankruptcy and insolvency laws. These people have gathered here to reflect the profound support across Canada to make the laws fair for Canadian workers and their families.

The collapse of Sears Canada focused attention on the depth of unfairness in our system as workers are stripped of basic rights, like severance and termination pay, and retirees will see their pensions reduced, but the tragedy of Sears Canada is only the tip of the iceberg. Many of those joining us in Ottawa today know first-hand what happens when workers are put at the bottom of the list. They have lived with and seen these effects: workers losing jobs and benefits and pensioners losing pension and health care benefits.

I salute all those who have come to Parliament Hill today to demand change and the millions of Canadians across the country who support them. Our laws allow for legalized corporate theft, plain and simple, and it has to stop.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2, November 2nd, 2017]

Madam Speaker, the member across the floor mentioned something that was interesting to me when he talked about pensions and what the government has done, namely lowering the eligible age back to 65 from 67, which we welcome. Also, I do not think what was done with the CPP is enough, but it is for our children and our grandchildren going forward.

One thing he did not state is that there is something in the bill that a lot of workers have, a defined pension benefit plan, which will give them a stable income when they retire. However, the government wants to change that to what it calls a “defined target plan”, which would give them instability. Why is the government attacking these middle-class people, and those who are striving to join them, who have defined benefit plans?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2, November 2nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for his passionate speech. It is always an honour to hear him talk about these important issues.

I would like to ask my colleague several questions. We know that the Liberal government has always talked very proudly about how it is helping the middle class and those striving to be a part of it. It is giving a tax break to people making between $45,000 and $200,000.

Does my friend know how much of a tax break people making less than $45,000 got? What if they do not have any children? What about one-income families, a married person with no children who is making $80,000? What about a family with two income earners making $40,000 each? How much of a tax break would they get? Would they get the same as a single person making $80,000?

[Presence in Gallery, November 1st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion:

That notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, the order for second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on Finance of Bill C-27, an act to amend the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985, be discharged and the bill withdrawn from the Order Paper.

[Pensions, November 1st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, maybe he can answer this question since he did not answer the others.

How can the Prime Minister say his government is working for the middle class when it has put forward a bill with the sole intent of shifting the risk of pension plans from the employer to the employee? That is not working for the middle class; that is working for the wealthy and well-connected.

The fact that the Prime Minister is still considering going forward with this bill, which would have huge impacts on middle-class workers, proves that he is completely disconnected from the middle class.

I have a simple question. Will he do what is right and withdraw Bill C-27?

[Bankruptcy, October 27th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, everyone knows our bankruptcy legislation is failing to protect Canadian workers. It is why the Liberals promised to fix the legislation when in opposition and why the Prime Minister promised to protect workers during the election, but since then they have done nothing but help wealthy corporations. Today it is Sears workers and pensioners, but tomorrow it could be workers at another company. If the Liberals are serious about working for the middle class, they must protect our workers and retirees.

It is simple. Will the government commit to changing bankruptcy and insolvency laws?

[Bankruptcy, October 26th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, more is possible. The Liberals just need the backbone to make it happen.

Everyone knows that our bankruptcy legislation is failing to protect Canadian workers. Workers know it, companies know it, we know it, and so do the Liberals. In fact, the Liberal member for Don Valley West said that this legislation needs to be amended and that he hopes the government looks into it.

Again, will the Liberals do what is right and change bankruptcy and insolvency laws, yes or no?

[Bankruptcy, October 25th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, while in opposition, the Liberals vowed to change bankruptcy laws to protect workers, but since then, the government has done nothing to help workers except apparently monitor the situation, leaving workers at companies like Sears, U.S. Steel, Stelco, Algoma Steel, Wabush Mines, and Cliff Mines reeling. Today we wrote to the Prime Minister, asking him to initiate a special parliamentary investigation into the liquidation of Sears.

Will the Prime Minister initiate an investigation, and commit to changing bankruptcy and insolvency laws to protect Canadian workers, retirees, and their families, yes or no?

[Pensions, October 23rd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, it is simple. The finance minister still owns a million shares in Morneau Shepell, a company that would directly profit by the passing of his bill, Bill C-27. This is a major conflict of interest.

Also, the government could have prevented the devastating effects of the Sears bankruptcy by simply changing Canada's bankruptcy insolvency laws. However, in true fashion, the Liberals continue to protect their rich corporate friends instead of protecting the pensions and benefits of middle-class Canadians. When will the finance minister stop this attack on workers' pensions, abandon Bill C-27, and protect workers?