Stephen Woodworth

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, March 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I know my friend always puts his heart into everything he says in this place. However, I was interested in what he had to say about EI. I know from reading the budget that over $4 billion has been injected by budget 2010 into enhancing EI benefits and training opportunities to get workers from current challenges toward future prosperity.

That includes continuing the five weeks of extra benefits; longer benefits for long-tenured workers; lower thresholds and longer timeframes for work-sharing, which are saving jobs across the country; and more money for training unemployed youth, aboriginals and the pathways to education program.

I would like to know why my hon. colleague and his party did not support these measures in the economic action plan and voted against them again in budget 2010.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, March 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a little amusing to listen to a Liberal talk about credibility. I, for one, am old enough to remember the 1993 election, when the Liberals insisted that they would not proceed with the GST. As soon as they were elected, they turned around and said that they were not really serious.

Right now Canadians know that the Conservative government has brought them through the worst recession since World War II with little or no damage, and it has a great deal of credibility. However, what I found most incredible was the hon. member's observation that the Liberal Party was responsible for Canadian banking success and borrowing practices.

I would like him to think about the fact that Canadians are known around the world as cautious, sensible, fiscally prudent people. Will he admit that the Liberal Party was not responsible for our sound banking and borrowing and that Canadians deserve credit for that?

[The Budget, March 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition shockingly voted against supporting jobs and economic growth in Canada when it voted against budget 2010 and year two of Canada's economic action plan. It voted against a budget that Canadians from coast to coast to coast are applauding.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance please inform the House what he has heard about Canadians' response to budget 2010?

[Business of Supply, March 15th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for his comments and I say that sincerely, not just in the usual polite way that we often address our colleagues across the aisle.

I have sat here and listened to this debate all day long. It is emblematic of the problem because it has been a divisive debate and a debate on a motion that is designed simply to score points. The back and forth debate all day has been about scoring points until the hon. member opposite rose. I am grateful because his comments embraced the spirit of non-partisanship, if I can call it that, in the House. In the same spirit, I encourage him in that and thank him for that.

He referred to some of the comments that were made at the beginning of this Parliament about decorum in the House. I could not agree with him more when he said that it was within the power of each one of us to stop this divisiveness and stop the point scoring that seems to go on.

However, does the member think that same philosophy might be usefully applied to question period? Just the other day, for example, a scurrilous accusation was impugned in question period that the government had interfered in a court case with a former government member. Could we not all benefit if that kind of thing stopped?

[The Economy, March 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to my colleague from the NDP. He had quite a bit to say about the Conservative government's efforts.

I want to draw to his attention that an estimated 130,000 jobs have been created or maintained to date since the economic action plan was implemented. We are aiming for 220,000 by the end of 2010. Just today we heard that 21,000 jobs were created last month. That does not take into account 225,000 jobs saved through an expanded work-sharing program.

Does my colleague agree that the people of Canada really want the government to stay the course with our stimulus efforts through this year and then they want the government to implement its deficit reduction and restraint plan laid out in the budget?

[International Women's Week, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this week is International Women's Week, time to reflect on women's achievements.

Women in Canada have come a long ways since the 1876 law which said, “Women are persons in matters of pains and penalties, but are not persons in matters of rights and privileges”.

This was an illogical definition that excluded women from exercising fundamental rights. How could well-educated, civilized, legal minds of that day arbitrarily define a whole class of persons as “not persons”.

This law proved that too many people, even well-educated ones, put blinders on their eyes to deny human rights when it suits their own self-interest. By fooling ourselves, we make fools of ourselves in the eyes of history. Even 21st century Canadians are not immune.

In the spirit of the struggle for women's rights, let us ensure that all our laws recognize the human rights of every human being.

[The Budget, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I suppose the best way to respond to that is to point out that over 130,000 net jobs have been created or maintained as a result of our economic action plan in the last year. That certainly includes the corporate tax relief that we have put in place.

[The Budget, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I will address the issue of taxes because our Conservative government believes in leaving more money in the pockets of hard-working Canadians. It is the right thing to do and we have the records to prove it.

Since coming to office in 2006, we have cut over 100 taxes, reducing taxes in every way government collects them: personal, consumption, business, excise taxes and more. We have removed over one million low income Canadians from the tax rolls completely and we have reduced the overall tax burden to its lowest level in nearly 50 years.

[The Budget, March 8th, 2010]

I will re-read the quote, Mr. Speaker.

The finance minister walked a fine, intelligent line Thursday to deliver a budget that serves Canada's most urgent needs.

I would add that most Canadians agree and would like the opposition to support this budget and get on with things such as the additional $19 billion in new stimulus spending to create and maintain jobs. This is especially good news for Kitchener Centre, which I proudly represent. Our manufacturers have been hard hit. In addition to the stimulus funding, budget 2010 goes even further to assist manufacturers.

An example is the government's commitment to eliminate all remaining tariffs on manufacturing machinery. Most of these tariffs were eliminated immediately. The remainder will be phased out by January 1, 2015. These tariff reductions will save businesses an additional $300 million annually. This is a significant cost savings for our manufacturers. It will encourage investment in needed machinery. It will encourage innovation. This is very important to Kitchener Centre.

In my prebudget submission on behalf of Kitchener Centre, I urged the minister to do two particularly important things for my riding. He has addressed both of these concerns. What were they?

First, relief for low or no income Canadians is an important issue to Kitchener Centre, which contains our urban core. Those who study such needs agree that social housing is essential to the solution. It is very important to Kitchener Centre that $2 billion of infrastructure stimulus spending invested in social housing in 2009-10 will be followed by an additional $2.1 billion in 2010-11. This brings the two year total of social housing, including housing for disabled and for seniors, to a total boost of $4.1 billion.

This budget would also assist low or no income Canadians with a one year, $30 million increase in skills linked funding to assist more young Canadians while the labour market recovers. Another $20 million is added to pathways to education in support of disadvantaged youth. Yet another $30 million over two years will support aboriginal education.

My second request on behalf of Kitchener Centre, where unemployment remains high, was for continued support for unemployed workers. Once again, this budget delivers. More than $4 billion would be provided in 2010-11. This includes $1.6 billion for additional benefits, $1 billion in enhanced training opportunities, and $1.6 billion in EI premium relief. Five extra weeks of EI benefits, greater access to EI for long-tenured workers, and an extension of the duration and scope of the work sharing program will all continue into 2010-11.

As the member of Parliament for Kitchener Centre, I wanted our government to assist those hardest hit by the global downturn. This budget delivers exactly that.

As a member of the environment committee, I was also pleased with the measures for green jobs. These include $100 million over the next four years for clean energy technologies in the forestry sector. We are also expanding eligibility for accelerated capital cost allowance for investment in clean energy generation assets. This builds on the $1 billion over five years committed in budget 2009 for the development of promising clean energy technologies.

Last year I said:

The Speech from the Throne lays out a path through a dark forest of economic perils. I call on all of our Honourable Members to seize the opportunity to confidently put on the cloak of open mindedness, transparency and mutual trust. Let's travel that path together with common focus on the needs and well-being of all Canadians.

I repeat this request today, but add that there is every reason to believe that we will soon need our sunglasses as we emerge from that dark forest.

[The Budget, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Selkirk—Interlake.

I rise today to support the budget tabled by the Minister of Finance.

Last year in supporting Canada's economic action plan, I said that this budget would be a test of political maturity. Canadians were watching with great interest and quite literally praying that we parliamentarians got it right. A year later I can say unequivocally, “Yes Canada, we got it right”. We are cautiously optimistic that the economy is recovering, but we must remain vigilant.

The House will hear from many speakers about the good things in this budget, and indeed I will mention some which are important to my riding of Kitchener Centre. However, I will begin by mentioning some things that are not in this budget. Why would I do that? Why would I want people to think about what is not in this budget?

Members of the opposition criticized our government for taking an extra five weeks to consult with Canadians. They did not think we should bother with that much consultation. Now they ask why we bothered to consult only to end up with a stay-the-course budget. The answer is that our consultations told us what Canadians do not want in this budget.

For example, Canadians told us that they do not want the overtaxation of past Liberal governments. When Liberals complain that the government squandered the surplus, they are really just saying that we should not have reduced the GST. The Liberal leader is thinking about hiking the GST back up to Liberal Party levels. In fact, by reducing the GST and reducing tax levels generally, as early as 2007 our government injected consumer spending stimulus into the economy. That helped stave off the global recession in Canada for almost a full year after it was felt elsewhere.

We could take up the Liberal Party's complaints and raise taxes in this budget, but Canadians spoke loudly against that option. That is not in this budget.

We could take up the NDP's suggestion to reverse corporate tax relief. Consulting with Canadians, however, confirmed once again that Canadians know that job growth depends upon competitive Canadian employers, so people will not see any job-killing NDP-style corporate taxation in this budget.

Consulting with Canadians also told us that they do not want permanent deficits. Canadians know that government deficits are a kind of reverse Robin Hood. Even now approximately $31 billion every year is taxed from low and middle income and other Canadians, and paid as interest into the pockets of those wealthy enough to lend money to the government. People will not find any long-term extra spending in this budget.

People will not find an extension of the March 31, 2011 expiry date for stimulus spending. Instead of major spending programs, such as the Liberal Party's mythical daycare plan promised in every election since 1993 but never delivered, people will find restraint in 2011 and beyond.

However, people will not find any reversal of our commitments. We are keeping our word. We are increasing foreign aid to historic levels. We are maintaining funding to arts and culture at levels never before seen in Canada. Our record high provincial transfers for health and education will not be reduced.

We will slay the deficit with gradual restraint, not by abandoning our commitments. I am very proud to be part of a government that delivers what we promise.

There is a unique feature which is in this budget. What is unique about Conservative budgets is that they are multi-year plans. They demonstrate foresight. They take account of changing circumstances. Prorogation provided an opportunity to take Canada's economic pulse, to confirm that indeed our economy is recovering but not yet recovered. That is why this budget stays the course with stimulus spending this year. That is also why our government is planning ahead for restraint in later years.

Canadians across our great land already understand the wisdom of this course. As the Governor General said that rainy-day spending must not become an all-weather practice.

I bet Canadians are wishing that just once the opposition parties would find the self-assurance to say, “The government is right. We need to stay the course this year and then exercise some restraint. It is so obvious Canadians want us to support this budget, so that is what we will do”.

Would that not be a great gesture of national unity in difficult economic times? We cannot be all things to all people, but this budget rings all the right notes. Here is what the Waterloo region Record had to say:

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty walked a fine, intelligent line--