House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 43% of the vote.
Pension Plans May 14th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the reality is that Canada has a very generous employment insurance system. We improved that system through Canada's economic action plan and budget 2009. Here on this side of the House, we are saying that coalitions like the one formed in December must be stopped. Such a coalition cannot be allowed because it is not in the best interest of workers or businesses.
We will not allow that coalition. They do not represent the people of Canada. This is merely another coalition.
Employment Insurance May 14th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, here is the reality: As a result of our economic action plan, we added an extra five weeks to EI, we froze premium rates, and we provided extra work-sharing. Another 100,000 Canadians are protected as a result of our efforts, which that member's party voted against.
We see what is happening here. The coalition is alive and well. The coalition is working together on this issue. They want extra payroll taxes for Canadian businesses and workers. That is their issue. We will not allow that to happen.
Employment Insurance May 14th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I see the member for Kings—Hants applauding his House leader there.
Here is what the hon. member for Kings—Hants said at a more sensible time in his life. He said, “Payroll taxes, especially EI taxes, are a tax on jobs”.
That is what he said then. He was right then. We are right now. We will not forsake the workers. We will not forsake Canadian businesses. We believe in lower payroll taxes.
We believe in lower taxes, whereas his leader said, one month ago today, “We will have to raise taxes”.
That is not good enough.
Employment Insurance May 14th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, as members will have heard from our social development minister as well, we have a generous system of EI in this country. It has been in place for a while. We actually made it better under budget 2009 by extending work sharing and by extending the program itself by five weeks. It is driven by market demands. It is there for times of economic difficulty, and 80% of those who pay in get money out of the system.
We will not be in favour of a system that drives higher payroll taxes, which will not be to the benefit of workers and not to the benefit of businesses.
Pension Plans May 13th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member well knows, or should know, it is one thing to pass a law but it is another to have the regulations in place that will ensure the law can be implemented wisely and in the best interests of the people of Canada.
We are working as fast as we can on those regulations because we want to protect people in that situation, and we will do so with great alacrity.
Foreign Investment May 12th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the high tech sector in this country. Companies such as RIM, for instance, and other companies of that generation are selling to the world. They are world-defining and world-beating companies. We are very proud of our heritage as innovators and inventors.
In the case of Nortel, I think the hon. member is jumping the gun. There have been no bids entertained so far. It will go through a court process and certainly we hope that there will be Canadian buyers that will be interested as well, but in the meantime, our laws stand and they should stand.
Foreign Investment May 12th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, in fact, this company has gone through a court-managed process because it has sought protection under the CCAA. That process is ongoing and should not be interfered with by the Government of Canada.
Our Investment Canada laws have recently changed. They have a national security provision in them so that we can defend our national security interests, but this is a country that also must trade with the world. We must be open for business. That is how we get jobs and opportunity here, as well as through our own domestic competitiveness.
The NDP fails to understand that year after year.
Steel Industry May 7th, 2009
I can, Mr. Speaker. It is called the rule of law. There are certain procedures that I have to go to through in terms of giving an honest review of the situation. I went through those procedures.
I came to the conclusion that U.S. Steel was in violation of the undertakings it made with the Government of Canada when it took over Stelco. I have sent a demand letter to U.S. Steel to rectify the situation within 10 days or face court action. I made this decision with seriousness.
This is a serious issue. The last thing we need is rhetoric from the NDP. All it does is have rhetoric on the situation, when we are acting on behalf of the interests of Canada and the employees of U.S. Steel.
Automotive Industry May 7th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member fails to understand, of course, is that we are trying to move forward with an industry that will still be in Canada with 20% of the production capacity of continental North America.
What will not work is if the union heads do not want to be part of the solution. Then the choice of the workers is to have a job that is cost competitive or to have no job at all. Maybe that is what the NDP would like, but that is not what we would like for the people of Canada.
Automotive Industry May 7th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, as everyone who has studied the issue knows, the fact of the matter is that in order for there to be a proper functioning and restructuring of the auto sector, everyone has to do his or her part. There has to be a massive restructuring of the management, absolutely. Bond holders have to be part of the restructuring.
The Government of Canada and the Government of Ontario have to be part of the restructuring, and also the workers and their unions have to be part of the restructuring. That is only fair, and that is the only way forward if this industry is going to be cost competitive in the future.