With regard to Canada’s Economic Action plan signs the government has purchased: (a) how many signs were purchased; (b) what was the cost of each sign; and (c) what was the total cost to the government?
House of Commons photoLost her last election, in 2011, with 29% of the vote.
Questions on the Order Paper April 14th, 2010
With regard to Canada’s Economic Action plan signs the government has purchased: (a) how many signs were purchased; (b) what was the cost of each sign; and (c) what was the total cost to the government?
Access to Information April 13th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, access to information delays are widespread across the Conservative government and some departments' political interference is the norm. At NRCan, all but the most routine requests are held up by the minister's office. At CIDA, the minister's office saw all but the most basic administrative requests, amounting to about 98% of the 150 requests CIDA received.
Why does the President of the Treasury Board not get the message that political interference needs to stop in the access to information system?
Access to Information April 13th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the interim Information Commissioner says that the right of Canadians to access to information is at risk of being totally obliterated because of delays. As she said, delays are tantamount to censorship. She said, “We used to be leaders in transparency. I think we should reclaim that space”, and that, “Canada is no longer a transparency leader”.
The government falsely claimed that it would be accountable. My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. When exactly will the government become transparent and accountable?
Jobs and Economic Growth Act April 13th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I recall that the party my hon. colleague represents voted in favour of the budget implementation bill in the past budget.
There are things buried in this document, and I have brought forward quite substantive things that I think are of concern in it. On at least two occasions, possibly a number of occasions, I have voted against the budget and I will be doing so again with this implementation bill.
Jobs and Economic Growth Act April 13th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, my colleague raises a very interesting point about what is buried in this rather large document. What is buried in it is a provision that will remove the exclusive privilege of Canada Post to deliver mail outside of Canada, allowing remailers to collect and transport mail to foreign countries. As she indicated, that is very similar to what was being proposed in two previous bills, Bill C-14 and Bill C-44.
My point, and this is what I raised during my speech, is that it should not be encapsulated in this bill. If we are going to discuss Canada Post, bring it forward and look at whether there is a going to be an increase in the price of stamps or, as my hon. colleague called it, a privatization of Canada Post, do we not deserve to know the pros and cons, to have the conversation, the disclosure, the debate and the discussion to ensure we make an informed decision rather than having something buried in another bill?
Jobs and Economic Growth Act April 13th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-9, the so-called jobs and economic growth act, but based on my reading of it, I believe it needs a new title. This rather large tome is short on potential for jobs and growth and long on gimmicks, fee increases and a lot of challenges.
The bill does not address some of the key issues of importance to Canadians, such as child care and pensions. It does not assist small business to encourage job growth. It does not address the requirement for future economic success. It does not address the skills shortage, nor does it encourage lifelong learning. Bill C-9 does not focus on productivity and does not focus too heavily on innovation.
What the budget did do was increase moneys for the Privy Council Office for ministerial advice. It continues the deep investments in government advertising. I guess government ads will be showing up during the Academy Awards and the Super Bowl in the future. This bill funds a record number of ministers, and we all know how that is going.
This bill ensures another huge deficit after 11 straight surpluses. The Conservatives formed government and within a couple of years the country was back in deficit. At the same time the bill does not provide security for Canadians in tough economic times. This bill fails to improve the lives of Canadians. It fails to ensure economic security. It fails to ensure job growth.
According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there are some 400,000 more unemployed today than in 2008. Youth unemployment is double the average national unemployment rate. There have been several reductions in manufacturing shift hours, which means less take home income and a lower standard of living. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, we are 4.5% behind where we should be in terms of job growth.
What did the Conservative government do? It laid out a plan that would raise employment insurance premiums by 35% over the next four years. This payroll tax would cost a two-earner family $900, and a small business with 10 employees $9,000 more.
This bill would also impose an increased charge for air traveller security. The cost of an airplane ticket will rise. For a domestic one-way trip the fee of $4.90 will rise to $7.48, a $2.58 increase. A domestic round trip fee will rise from $9.80 to $14.96, a $5.16 increase. The fee for trans-border trips will increase from $8.34 to $12.71, a $4.37 increase. The fee for other international trips will rise from $17.00 to $25.91, an $8.91 increase. This will raise about $1.5 billion in revenue over the next five years. That is quite a substantive fee increase.
I live on the island of Newfoundland. There are only two ways to get off the island of Newfoundland, either by plane or by ferry. We know what the government is doing with respect to air travel security. We know there is going to be an increase. To get off the island of Newfoundland, there are going to be increased costs.
On the other side of things, in order to get off the island of Newfoundland and Labrador I could drive and get the ferry at Port aux Basques. Marine Atlantic is a crown corporation. In the budget a small amount of money has been set aside to have additional capacity on this ferry. This small amount is a pebble in the ocean of requirements for Marine Atlantic.
The Auditor General produced a report which indicated that over $1 billion was required to ensure that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador had adequate service and to ensure effective and timely capacity so that the transportation of goods and services is efficient and effective and available. During certain times of the year grocery stores hang a sign saying, “Sorry the boat didn't get in”. In this day and age that is simply not acceptable.
I am concerned about this budget. There are several other things in Bill C-9.
There is some mention of pensions. The government is going to increase the maximum solvency ratio for pension plans from 110% to 125%, allowing for more overfunding. However, during the briefing on Bill C-9 the financial officials suggested there would not be many pension plans in a position to take advantage of this extra room. This is an overfunding of pension plans. I wish there were more businesses in a position to overfund their pension plans so that we could ensure that people who pay into their pensions actually have them at the end of their working lives when they retire.
For the second year in a row the government is using the budget bill to weaken environmental laws. We have this tome, as I said earlier, and buried in it is a change to ensure there will be some weakening of the federal environmental laws. This is not acceptable. If the government is going to change environmental laws, there should be full disclosure so that we can have a discussion and debate.
Also buried in this very large bill are changes to Canada Post. Bill C-9 removes the exclusive privilege of Canada Post to deliver mail outside Canada, allowing remailers to collect and transport mail to a foreign country. This is being done through the back door because it would not have been allowed through the front door.
In previous sessions of Parliaments the Conservatives tabled Bill C-14 and Bill C-44 to try to do just that. Now they have included it in this budget implementation bill. It should not be in this large bill. It should have a full discussion. It should go through the proper process. It should have a full review, complete disclosure. There should be complete democracy actually. People should be able to debate it and bring forward their ideas on how improvements could be made, or simply express their concerns with regard to remailers.
There is a lot in this rather large document that does not necessarily work for Canadians. It does not necessarily give the kind of economic security that Canadians are looking for.
We are coming out of a very difficult economic time. We still have a situation where, as the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said, over 400,000 people are still without work. We have been talking about this in Parliament.
Yes, the bill puts in place a second phase of the economic stimulus package and that is going forward.
My view on this bill is that a lot more should have been done to ensure Canada's position for the future. In my riding I have talked to a number of people. A lot more should have been done to ensure that we have the economic security that we require as Canadians, to have a vision.
KAIROS is an organization that did international development work. Sadly, its funding was cut by the government. For 35 years that organization did some great work worldwide. At the same time we see increases in advertising. I guess there is a disconnect between what Canadians want and what the government is prepared to allow to go forward.
This is a stay the course budget that is on the wrong course. I believe that Canadians deserve better. I believe that Canadians want better. I would be remiss if I did not say there is a lot in this bill that should be taken out, debated, disclosed and discussed in other ways.
Again, I appeal to the government and say there are things we should be addressing in this country. We take our international development work quite seriously. We take the needs of Canadians for health care and pensions quite seriously. It is time for us to buckle down and do just that.
Taxation April 1st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, that is thanks to successive Liberal governments. Corporate taxes have been reduced by almost one-third since 2000, giving us a rate that is 25% better than the rate in the United States.
Will the government redirect the money from extra corporate tax cuts to reinvest in education and ensure we fix the skills shortages we face in Canada?
Taxation April 1st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, a KPMG study, in the largest study of its kind, shows that Canada is already among the most competitive countries in the world in terms of the cost of doing business. Corporate taxes have been reduced—
Taxation April 1st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the government has a very simple choice to make. It can continue to cut corporate taxes, which cost $6 billion a year, while the deficit sits at more than $50 billion, or it can invest in Canadians. Lower corporate taxes is fine as a goal to work toward, but that alone will not build a strong competitive Canadian economy. We also need to invest in the brain power of young Canadians and world-class innovations.
Why do the Conservatives choose more corporate tax cuts instead of science and education?
Human Resources and Skills Development March 29th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, it was three weeks later. Either the Prime Minister was not sincere in his edict to ensure access to information or his minister is ignoring him.
There is a pattern of political interference in the denial of access to information requests by the Conservative government, so much so that the Information Commissioner is now investigating.
What new measures will the Prime Minister take to ensure access to information for Canadians, or is he where the problem begins?