Shelly Glover

[March 1st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to make this very clear for Canadians who might be watching.

When the member from the NDP, who is from Alberta, stands in this place and misleads Albertans as to how she represents them, it must be corrected. I am going to do that very quickly.

This member comes from a party that has said very clearly that it intends to raise taxes, it intends to side with the Liberals and side with the Bloc Québécois to ensure that corporate taxes are in fact raised. It intends to raise the GST. It intends to look at an iPod tax. It intends to carbon tax our Canadians.

That is not what Albertans are calling for. I do not know who she purports to be representing here in this House today, but it certainly is not the Albertans who have spoken very clearly to our government, saying that they appreciate those tax measures. They appreciate the cuts that they have seen, over 120 of them, to ensure that their families have more money in their pockets.

I think she ought to talk to them—

[March 1st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate having the opportunity to respond to the NDP on this question.

First, we need to be clear, very clear, that provincial taxes are a provincial responsibility. That includes decisions about harmonized sales taxes. As former premier of Ontario and the current Liberal MP for Toronto Centre recently remarked, “It's up to the provinces to decide whether they want to proceed with a harmonized tax. It's a decision for them, not us”.

Provinces have full independence to make decisions on sales tax matters. These are exclusive decisions of provincial governments, not the federal government. Recently, certain provincial governments made changes to their provincial tax system. A couple of them decided to replace their sales tax system with another.

The recently elected NDP Nova Scotia government decided to increase its sales tax. As the Chronicle Herald reported last year: “Nova Scotia sales tax is going up to 15% in July. The increase of two percentage points in the harmonized sales tax in the NDP's first full year budget breaks Premier Darrell Dexter's campaign promise that the NDP wouldn't raise taxes”.

I would add the NDP tax hike in Nova Scotia is an important lesson for any Canadian looking at the NDP here in Ottawa.

Again, these were all provincial decisions, not federal decisions. There was no revenue impact at the federal level.

Nevertheless, as a result of recent provincial decisions, questions have come up in provinces, like Alberta, about changes in cost on mail and courier services. Again, nothing has changed at the federal level. For mail and courier services, sales tax has always been applied on the basis of where the consumption takes place.

If the NDP members have an issue with a provincial tax decision, they need to talk to a provincial government to have that debate not a previous provincial representative but the provincial government.

This is a federal Parliament, so let us talk about federal taxes, specifically lowering them. Unlike the NDP, our Conservative government believes leaving more money in the pockets of hard-working Canadians is the right thing to do. Unlike the NDP, we have the record to prove it.

Since coming to office in 2006 we cut over 100 taxes, reducing taxes in every way government collects them. We removed over one million low income Canadians completely from the tax roll. We reduced the overall tax burden to its lowest level in nearly 50 years. We cut taxes for all Canadians, even those who do not earn enough to pay personal income tax. That is when we cut the GST to 5%.

Shockingly, the NDP has voted against every tax cut we introduced. I ask the NDP a very simple question, why did it oppose lowering the GST for Canadian families and why does it continue to oppose every incentive to lower taxes for Canadians, including Albertans?

[February 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to see that NDP members have come to the game, finally.

The member mentioned that there have been breaches, but he voted against even having a code of conduct. Unlike the NDP who stood and voted against that code, our Conservative government believes that small businesses deserve to be protected from unfair business practices. That is why we introduced the code.

While the NDP fought it, the code has been applauded by small businesses and other retailers. In the words of the Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers:

The Code of Conduct is a very positive step and we are very pleased to note...independent retail grocers...have been heard and responded to, by the government.

Rest assured, our government is constantly monitoring compliance with the code. Any possible violation will be investigated and we are ready to take further action, if needed, including making the code involuntary, if necessary.

The NDP still has not explained why on earth it voted against this measure to protect our small businesses.

[February 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the NDP, our Conservative government stands up for small businesses by lowering their tax bills and helping protect them from big credit and debit card companies.

In recent years, we all heard concerns from small businesses about the practices of card issuers in relation to interchange fees and business practices. These concerns focused on what they viewed as a lack of choice and significant costs which small businesses were faced with when dealing with issuers. As these costs could be passed on to consumers and families, this became an issue of importance to all Canadians.

Troubled by the concerns of small business, our government quickly began to address the situation in an effective and balanced manner. This included consulting with small businesses, consumer advocacy groups, retailers, the financial service industry, and other public interest groups.

This led to the introduction of a voluntary code of conduct to govern the credit and debit card industry in May 2010. This code was quickly and formally adopted by all payment card networks, major credit and debit card issuers, and payment processors in Canada. The landmark code represents the first time in Canadian history that a government has moved to protect small businesses and merchants dealing with card issuers.

The code has worked to encourage choice and competition by giving small businesses the freedom to choose which card networks they use, by helping them control their costs, and allowing them to pass savings on to their customers and much more. For instance, listen to what the Canadian Federation of Independent Business said in an opinion piece written only a few weeks ago. It stated:

Since its adoption this past summer, the code has served merchants extremely well. In fact, it has helped ensure that problems with the launch of a new Visa debit product were quickly addressed...the code has done an excellent job in ensuring some fair ground rules and maintaining Canada's low-cost debit system--

Our Conservative government went further, though. We introduced and passed legislation giving the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada the power to monitor compliance with the code. To further underline our commitment, we also passed legislation giving the government the power to regulate the conduct of the credit and debit card networks, if necessary.

We have been clear with credit and debit companies. We will regulate if the code is not respected.

Unfortunately and shockingly, the NDP voted against the code of conduct in Parliament. I ask NDP members, why did they not help small businesses before when they had the chance? Why did they vote against the code and against supporting small businesses?

[Finance, February 18th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to answer that question.

Our Conservative government believes in low taxes, not higher taxes. We are fighting against the Liberal tax hike on job-creating businesses. We oppose any global financial transaction tax on Canadians as well. Unfortunately, the Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition does not agree.

I am absolutely shocked to report that the NDP member for Burnaby—New Westminster is introducing a bill to impose a financial transaction tax on Canadians. We will fight against a new coalition tax both--

[Festival du Voyageur, February 17th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am very excited to return to Saint Boniface tomorrow night to open the annual winter celebration called le Festival du voyageur. This world-class 10-day event celebrates the joie de vivre of the voyageur and fur trade era with food, song and dance. I know festival will be a fantastic display of Franco-Manitoban and Métis culture. I look forward to serving pancakes, visiting the maple sugar shack and enjoying first-class performers.

The Festival du Voyageur is held every February. It is the largest winter festival in western Canada. As a francophone Métis, I have been attending the festival since I was a little girl.

Many thanks to the volunteers, the organizers and the official voyageurs, Roger Chamberland, Michelle Gervais and their two children, who work continuously to promote the festival in our community and elsewhere.

I encourage Winnipeggers, Manitobans and Canadians alike to please get out to le Festival du voyageur in Saint Boniface.

Enjoy the festival!

[Business of Supply, February 17th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I want to read two quotes for my colleague, and then I want to ask him a quick question. The first quote is from the Quebec Employers Council:

The Quebec Employers Council would like to see the government follow through on its plan to reduce corporate income tax to 15% for 2012. The corporate tax reduction would increase private investment, both domestic and foreign, which would enhance our productivity, create good jobs and improve living conditions for Canadians.

That was said at the October 25, 2010 meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance. Here is another quote. This one is from Michel Leblanc of the Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal:

We are asking the government to stick to its target of rolling back the corporate tax to 15% in 2012. Cutting corporate taxes will make businesses more competitive and stimulate job creation across the country.

In light of what these people have said, I would like my colleague to explain to his Quebec constituents why he intends to support the Liberal plan to increase their taxes.

[Business of Supply, February 17th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I know the cost. It is the cost of tears, the cost of blood and the cost of injuries to victims, who I support. It is the cost of nightmares, the cost of personal damage and the cost of property damage. That is the cost of the Liberals' soft on crime agenda. It hurts victims. We will not do that to victims. I will not go to another child autopsy and not have a consequence for the person who murdered that child. I will not do it and I expect the Liberals would not want to do it either.

I encourage the member to stop this nonsense and vote with us to protect victims.

[Business of Supply, February 17th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has actually been not just a colleague but a friend to me here in the House. We were elected at the same time and we have learned an awful lot. He is working very hard for his community. I look to him quite often to hear about what is going on in his community so that we can get this right for it.

He has touched on things we are doing right for his community members. He has touched on the fact that our low tax rates will affect not only urban centres, but the rural areas have small businesses that are affected by every tax hike that the Liberals are proposing. They will have to pay higher GST because the Liberals have promised to hike GST. They will potentially be hit with a $75 iPod tax for their children, which the Liberals have proposed. Those families will have to look at potential carbon taxes, proposed and created by the Liberals and promised.

I appreciate the member sharing the information about his community members to make it better for them. He is doing the right thing and we are alongside him doing the right thing for his community members.

[Business of Supply, February 17th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I will first tackle the fact that single mothers, which is what I was for three years, benefit from the government's low tax plan. We benefit from other decisions made by the government that were not supported by the NDP. I spent $1,200 a month on daycare as a single mother. I would have liked an extra $100 to decide where to put that money because I could not get my children into daycare when I worked shift work.

I would really like the member to speak to the people of Hamilton about that and a number of other things. This what the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce said about our plan:

Our members are from all sectors and collectively employ 75,000 citizens.

We are likewise of the opinion that this remains fundamentally essential to the future well being of private sector jobs and prosperity in Hamilton and Canada.

In 2007 the federal government announced a series of graduated corporate tax reductions designed to keep Canada competitive with our trading partners, many of whom have reduced corporate and payroll taxes in recent years, even through the recent recession.

Employment and investment has been predicated on the availability of funds that, if the tax changes are reversed, will no longer be available. This will have a negative impact on economic growth.

I would ask the member to listen to the people of Hamilton, whom she proposes to represent, because they agree with us, not with her.