Sean Casey

[Veterans Affairs, May 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, 13 days remain until the government must decide whether to appeal the decision of the Federal Court ordering it to cease clawing back veterans' pensions from people like Dennis Manuge.

It has been almost three weeks, and we still have no indication of what the government will do. We are still not sure whether the Minister of National Defence has managed to read the 31-page court decision.

The Conservatives have two choices: appeal the Federal Court decision or do the honourable thing and accept it. Which is it?

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 14th, 2012]

With regard to Canadians discovered to have secret bank accounts in Liechtenstein: (a) since the government received the names of 106 Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein, how many of the 106 have made an application under the Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP) and how many of these VDP disclosures have been accepted; (b) who authorized these disclosures after the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) had already declared these Canadians ineligible for the VDP; (c) does the CRA accept disclosures that do not meet its guidelines for disclosures under the VDP; (d) how many times has the CRA allowed ineligible individuals to make disclosures under the VDP in the past (i) 6 months, (ii) year, (iii) 5 years; (e) what policy or procedures exist that govern whether or not an ordinarily ineligible disclosure will be accepted; (f) does the CRA make exceptions to the VDP for individuals who are suspected of domestic tax evasion; and (g) what percentage of individuals who disclose information to the CRA through the VDP are (i) fined, (ii) penalized, (iii) prosecuted, (iv) convicted of tax evasion, (v) placed under house arrest, (vi) sent to prison?

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 14th, 2012]

With regard to Canadian Forces aircraft procurement, will any pilot training for the proposed F-35 Joint Strike Fighters take place in Canada, and, if so, at which Canadian Forces base or other location will it occur?

[The Budget, May 14th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the minister of national defensiveness is now in his third week of reading a 31-page Federal Court ruling on veterans' pensions. The Conservative House leader, by contrast, has allocated a mere seven sitting days for a 425-page budget bill, a bill which amends over 70 other bills. An appalling seven days for the House to consider clawing back OAS and gutting the environment, with all kinds of time for the minister to read a 31-page ruling on veterans' pension clawbacks. Why is the House leader acting like a parliamentary bully?

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 11th, 2012]

With regard to information supplied by the government of France to the government of Canada regarding secret bank accounts and possible tax evasion in Switzerland as of March 23, 2012: (a) since the government received the names of 1800 Canadians with bank accounts in Switzerland, have any other Canadians been identified as having undeclared bank accounts in Switzerland, and, in total, how many Canadians have now been identified as having undeclared bank accounts in Switzerland; (b) what actions have been taken by Canadian officials to recover unpaid taxes associated with Canadians' undeclared bank accounts in Switzerland; (c) how many identified Canadians have availed themselves of the Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP) with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA); (d) how many identified Canadian accounts have settled with the CRA; (e) how much money has the CRA assessed as a result of investigating these secret banks accounts in Switzerland in (i) unpaid taxes, (ii) interest, (iii) fines, (iv) penalties; (f) how much of the money in (e) has been collected; (g) how many of the cases are under appeal; (h) how many cases remain open; (i) how many more cases does the CRA anticipate will be opened; (j) how many cases have been closed (i.e., the full amount of taxes, interest, fines and penalties have been collected); (k) how much money in (j) has been collected in (i) unpaid taxes, (ii) interest, (iii) fines, (iv) penalties; (l) how many account holders in the cases have made a partial payment; (m) of the partial payments made, what was the (i) largest amount, (ii) smallest amount, (iii) average amount; (n) how much does the CRA have yet to collect in (i) taxes, (ii) interest, (iii) fines, (iv) penalties; (o) of the amounts of money contained in the Switzerland accounts declared or discovered by the CRA, what was the (i) largest amount, (ii) smallest amount, (iii) average amount; (p) on what date was the CRA first made aware of the names of Canadians with accounts in Switzerland; (q) on what date did the CRA begin its investigation; (r) on what date did the first audit of an individual account holder begin; (s) how many of the identified Canadians with bank accounts in Switzerland have (i) had their account or accounts audited, (ii) had their account or accounts reassessed, (iii) been the subject of a compliance action; (t) how many of the identified Canadians with bank accounts in Switzerland (i) have not had their account or accounts audited, (ii) have not had their account or accounts reassessed, (iii) have not been the subject of a compliance action; and (u) how many tax evasion charges have been laid?

[Veterans Affairs, May 11th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the House could get an update from the Minister of National Defence as to how he is getting along with reading the Federal Court judgment that ordered the Conservatives to stop clawing back veterans' pensions.

When I first asked the minister about that on May 1, he said it had been only a few hours since the court had issued the ruling and he needed time. Now it has been 10 days. Is the minister prepared to tell the House he will not appeal the ruling, or does he need more time to read the 31 pages?

[National Nursing Week, May 11th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, this is National Nursing Week and this year's theme is “Nursing - The Health of Our Nation”. We have over 266,000 registered nurses in Canada, constituting the largest group of health care professionals in Canada.

Nurses work on the front line of our health care system and have a real influence on Canadians' lives. Nurses play an important role. They provide care when we are sick; they do their best to reduce wait times; and they work together with other health care professionals in order to provide the best care possible.

We have seen how nurses can play a leading role in reforming our health care system through the National Expert Commission, as well as through their role in multidisciplinary community health care teams.

I encourage all members to take a moment today and celebrate the valuable work that nurses do each and every day on behalf of Canadians.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act, May 11th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the three biggest industries in Prince Edward Island are tourism, agriculture and the fisheries. It has a population of 140,000 and gets one million visitors a year.

While civil service jobs are extremely important to our economy twelve months of the year, the engine that drives the seasonal economy is very much the tourism trade. As I indicated, basically our population goes almost ten-fold. The summer in Prince Edward Island is not really long and that is when we see the bulk of people. The cruise ship industry is one of the success stories in Prince Edward Island.

Anything in the budget that has a negative impact on tourism is yet another blow to a province that has been treated very unfairly in the budget.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act, May 11th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak to the budget implementation act.

I am going to focus my remarks on three main areas. I am the member of Parliament for Charlottetown. Prince Edward Island is still a province, but it has been left out of this budget. I am going to focus initially on the impact of the budget on my home province. Then I am going to spend some time talking about the impact of the budget on veterans. I am the Liberal Party critic for veterans, and this budget has targeted them quite unfairly. Then I am going to talk about old age security. As members know, last night we had a debate in the House on my private member's motion with respect to old age security, and the budget effectively kills it.

The impact of this budget on Canada's smallest and nicest province is devastating. We feel left out. The Department of Veterans Affairs is the only federal government department that has its national headquarters outside the national capital region. Its headquarters are in Prince Edward Island. At the Department of Veterans Affairs, 232 jobs will be cut, partly as a result of this budget and partly as a result of what the Department of Veterans Affairs calls its transformation agenda. I will comment more on that later. The impact of those budget cuts in a province like Prince Edward Island and in a city like Charlottetown is devastating. It affects the entire community.

Prince Edward Island does not have oil in the ground. It does not have a manufacturing sector. We have a seasonal economy. The number of well-paying jobs is not what it is in other centres and to gut the public service, as this budget does, unfairly singles out our province. However, it is worse than that. It is not bad enough to cut the jobs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, but Prince Edward Island will now be one of only two provinces in this country where EI claims are not processed, because the government has closed the EI processing centre in Montague. Again, more well-paying civil service jobs are being lifted out of our economy. Prince Edward Island is now one of the few places in this country where, if people want to talk to someone about their immigration issues, they will be out of luck because the immigration office in Prince Edward Island will close as a result of this budget. Prince Edward Island is the only province in this country where people cannot get a passport processed. If they want to get a passport processed, they have to go to Halifax or Fredericton.

Infrastructure is very important, particularly in my riding of Charlottetown. There are two very significant infrastructure projects right now that are in dire need. One is a storm sewer separation project. The storm sewer system and the sewage system are one, so every time we get a heavy rainfall, the bypass has to come through because the volume is too great to go into the waste water treatment facility in Charlottetown. As a result, untreated sewage pours into the Charlottetown harbour every time there is a heavy rainfall. This is an $18 million problem. It is a serious problem. It desperately affects those who depend on the oyster fishery in and around Charlottetown.

The City of Charlottetown and the Province of Prince Edward Island have stepped up to solve this problem. They have kicked in. The City of Charlottetown has repeatedly made representations to the federal government to have it cost share in the project. Basically what it has been told is maybe in 2014. This is something for which there is a dire need, and it is nowhere to be found in the budget.

Also on the subject of infrastructure, we are in a situation in our city where we are using more than 90% of the available drinking water from the source that we have in the Winter River basin. We need a new source of water. It is a matter of public safety.

Prince Edward Island is one of the only provinces that is 100% dependent on groundwater for its potable water. We need to develop a new well field. One has been identified. There is a need for infrastructure funds for that. Again, it is the city and the province that have stepped up and the federal government is nowhere to be found. There is nothing for that in the budget.

We have this dearth of public services in the province, and the rationale we continually hear from the Conservatives is that they are streamlining and modernizing, doing all these things in the back office, that they need to depend more on technology, yet they have cut the community access program. They have cut the CAP sites. Those who cannot afford a computer, those who do not own a computer, are out of luck. The CAP sites will close as a result of the cuts in the budget.

Prince Edward Island has 140,000 people. Last year, CAP sites were accessed more than 80,000 times. They are necessary. They are used, but thanks to this budget, they will be gone.

Veterans Affairs and the veterans of this country once again have been shortchanged in the budget. The party line is that veterans benefits have not been touched. That is what we hear the Conservatives say, that all of the savings supposedly have been found in the back office in reducing red tape.

The budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs is $3.5 billion, and 90% of that budget is paid out as veterans benefits. That leaves $350 million to run the department. The cut this year is $36 million. We will hear the Conservatives say that they have spared veterans, that the cut to the department was only 1%, $36 million on $3.5 billion, when in actual fact the cost to run the department has been slashed by 10%.

Way back when, we know that every federal government department was asked to submit a 5% plan and a 10% plan. We hear the Conservatives say that veterans have been spared. Spared? In actual fact, the Conservatives could not have swung a heavier axe. Given the choice between a 5% cut and a 10% cut, they took the 10%.

Make no mistake, veterans will be affected. We cannot believe for a minute that veterans are going to receive the same service when 800 employees are being cut from the department.

I see that I am running short on time, so I will sum up by saying that Prince Edward Island is an equal partner in Confederation, but as a result of this budget, it certainly does not feel that way.

I would urge all hon. members to vote against the budget, and to urge the government to afford fair-handed treatment to all regions of the country.

[Old Age Security, May 10th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I am happy to close the debate today on my motion to protect old age security.

I first want to thank my colleagues from Halifax West and Cape Breton—Canso for their speeches today, and also my NDP colleagues from Churchill and Windsor—Tecumseh. I know they care about protecting old age security.

Now I would like to address a couple of the points that were raised by the government members who spoke here today. One of the points raised by the members of the Conservative Party is that there are other countries that are raising the age of eligibility for old age security. What they have not said is that right now in Canada we spend 2.5% of GDP on old age security and GIS. At the height of the bubble, it will be 3.18%.

We heard a lot about what OECD countries are spending. The average for old age security in OECD countries is 7%, yet at the height of the bubble we will spend 3.18%. Quite frankly, the international comparisons do not hold water.

What I also heard tonight is that the member for Charlottetown is being unco-operative in not going along with the government in its efforts to ensure the sustainability of old age security. That is simply not true. In fact, when my motion was initially presented back in March, I received a letter from the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development proposing the very amendment that was presented here tonight. That amendment essentially removed any reference to the increase in the age. Therefore, to suggest that I am not being co-operative because I will not agree to have my motion gutted is quite simply fallacious.

I am sorry to have to say this, but the Conservative government is not telling the truth on the matter of old age security. In fact, old age security is not in crisis, yet the contrary has been repeated and repeated by obedient Conservative backbenchers. The old adage is that if one repeats a lie often enough it takes on a character of truth.

A little over a year ago, during the election, the Prime Minister made a solemn promise. He stated:

We're not going to cut the rate of increase in transfers for healthcare, education and pensions. That is job number one...

However, about four months ago the Prime Minister announced, in Switzerland of all places, as we are fond of saying, from his Alpine perch, that he intended to institute massive changes to old age security in Canada.

Members should think about this. About a year ago, during an election, the Prime Minister told Canadians he would not touch pensions. Four months later he announced wholesale changes to old age security, predicated on a falsehood. The Conservatives know there is no crisis, but the facts do not matter. All that matters is blind, mindless loyalty to the leader.

There is no OAS crisis. Experts on pensions have said that there is no need to make changes. We heard in debate earlier tonight the view of Edward Whitehouse of the OECD. Jack Mintz, the government's own research director for the working group on retirement income, said this past January:

The overall view that was taken about our pension system in total, when you look at Old Age Security, and the Guaranteed Income Supplement, as well as Canada Pension Plan, was that it is relatively financially sustainable...

It is simply not true for the Conservatives to stand in the House and say there is a crisis in old age security and, because there is a crisis, we need to fix it. There is no crisis; there is nothing to fix, and the Conservatives know it.

I hope that next week at least some of the Conservatives will escape the whip and do what is right, vote to protect pensions.