Tracey Ramsey

[Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1, June 6th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I can assure my colleague across the aisle that I am not nervous at all about the way I will vote on this particular bill and that I have studied the budget extensively. While there are things that will help people in my region, there are gaping holes for others. Those who make under $45,000 in my community, in the small towns I represent with many minimum-wage workers, will not receive any type of tax benefit or help.

He talks about the money that will go to families. Of course, this is a benefit for families, but it does not address a huge issue in my riding, which is child care and the lack of affordable, safe child care spaces. He also mentioned seniors. Seniors are largely left out of this budget. Let us talk about health care, the gaping hole that exists for palliative care, the $3 billion that was promised to communities that simply does not exist. This is the reason I am looking critically at this bill.

Again, I promise my colleague across the aisle that I will stand with full confidence in my vote.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1, June 6th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to the report stage of Bill C-15, an act to implement provisions of the Liberal government's first budget, which was tabled earlier this year, on March 22.

I would like to thank the NDP finance critic, the hon. member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, for the incredible amount of work he has done on this and other files.

We have had a lot of debate in this place about the omnibus nature of Bill C-15. While the government claims that it is not an omnibus bill, New Democrats have pointed out many similarities between Bill C-15 and the omnibus budget bills we saw from previous Conservative governments. Bill C-15 is 179 pages long, amends over 30 different statutes, refers to nine different ministers, and impacts several others. It includes various retroactive changes in addition to a complex chapter on bank recapitalization. Clearly, the bill contains many more important elements that deserve proper study, which unfortunately it did not receive. Bill C-15 should have been split up so that changes to veterans benefits, employment insurance, and our banking system received proper study.

The NDP proposed amendments to fix and improve the bill at committee stage. We are also recommending changes at report stage, including a call for the government to fulfill its election commitment to small and medium-sized businesses. For many years, the NDP has called for a reduction in the small business tax rate from 11% to 9%. It is part of our vision for job creation. The Conservatives agreed with us in their last budget, and in the 2015 election all three parties, the NDP, Liberals, and Conservatives, pledged to reduce the tax rate to 9%. However, the Liberal budget misses the mark by only reducing the rate to 10.5%.

In my riding of Essex, small businesses create good local jobs and play an integral role in our communities. The Liberals' broken campaign pledge will cost small-business owners money and hurt their bottom lines.

There are several positive measures in Bill C-15 that I support. It would restore the tax credit for labour-sponsored funds. It would add feminine hygiene products to the list of zero-rated products for taxation purposes, an initiative that my colleague, the member for London—Fanshawe, worked tirelessly to advance. The bill would also eliminate the income splitting scheme, raise GIS rates for seniors, and repeal the Conservatives' legislation to raise the age of retirement from 65 to 67. All of these issues are important to the people of Essex I represent.

I am pleased to see that the budget fulfills the commitment to reopen nine Veterans Affairs offices closed by the Conservatives, including the Veterans Affairs office in Windsor. Make no mistake, none of these Veterans Affairs offices should have been closed in the first place. When people in Windsor—Essex learned of the imminent closures, they came together and raised their voices in protest. Their determination and hard work has no doubt led to the government's promise to reopen our veterans office. I will follow this file closely to ensure that it offers quality service for our veterans, including improved financial aid and mental health services.

On employment insurance, the Liberal government said repeatedly that it would reverse the unfair changes made by the Conservatives. These promises have, unfortunately, been significantly downgraded. It did not establish an equitable and universal eligibility threshold to put EI back on track and will not reduce the waiting period to one week until 2017.

Several months ago, the NDP introduced a motion proposing changes to EI that would truly improve access and increase benefits for those who need them most. I am disappointed to see that the Liberals voted against our plan. Instead, we see changes that will not achieve the strong EI system our country and its workers deserve.

I have met with many in our region who are deeply concerned about the future of Canada's auto sector, particularly in relation to the disharmonization that would be created by the trans-Pacific partnership. From the parts sector to the assembly line, where I used to work, people in Essex are worried about their jobs and the competitiveness of our industry.

The region of Essex, which I am so proud to represent, lost nearly 12,000 auto manufacturing jobs between 2001 and 2013. It is a trend that started under the previous Liberal government and continued under the Conservatives. We must tackle these worrisome job losses head on. Instead, the new Liberal government has signed Canada on to what has been called the worst trade deal ever. It is a deal that puts thousands more auto jobs at risk.

The Prime Minister likes to proclaim on the world stage that Canada is back, but when it comes to manufacturing, this is unfortunately not the case. We desperately need an automotive and manufacturing strategy, now more than ever. If we do not create a strategy and aggressively seek new investment, we will continue to lose jobs to other jurisdictions.

I have heard an incredible level of support for the NDP's auto plan, which would make better use of the auto innovation fund and the supplier innovation program. Our plan would also make it easier for automakers to set up operations in Canada by creating iCanada, a one-stop shop with access to all three levels of government and dedicated staff who would be working to bring investment to Canada.

As an MP who represents rural communities across Essex, I welcome the government's commitment to improving access to broadband internet, but this commitment alone falls far short of the support farmers have asked for. The budget makes no provision for promised compensation for farmers who will be hurt by trade deals like the TPP and CETA, even as the government continues to push to ratify these deals. These trade deals chip away at Canada's supply-managed industries at a time when we should be strengthening family farms and ensuring that they have the tools they need to remain viable.

The budget shortchanges promises for new funding for agricultural research and value-added production and also for the Canada Food Inspection Agency by more than $130 million over two years.

I must also reiterate my call on the government to finally implement a PACA-like payment protection system for fresh fruit and vegetable growers. Producers have called for this for years, but their pleas fell on deaf ears under the Conservatives. They were so hopeful that things would finally change and were disappointed to see no commitment to PACA in the Liberal budget. The absence of a PACA-like system hurts farmers' ability to export and exposes them to unnecessary costs and great financial risk.

I introduced a motion calling for action and a resolution by the end of the year, which received support from the Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Ontario Greenhouse Vegetable Growers, and the Canadian Produce Marketing Association. My friends on the agricultural committee have also been studying the issue, and witness after witness has called for a PACA-like system. This should not be a political issue. Farmers just want to see the solution they are asking for implemented. I am determined to work with my colleagues to move this file forward for farmers so they can get the protection they deserve.

My riding of Essex is home to a short line rail service called the Essex Terminal Railway. This 54 kilometres of rail service runs from the east side of Windsor through La Salle and ends in Amherstburg. It is integral to the economic strength of our region and provides jobs and economic competitiveness while reducing congestion and pollution on our roads.

The short line rail industry has made several requests of budget 2016, including a seven-year capital funding program to help the industry improve existing infrastructure, expand its network, and meet new federal regulations. While they will be disappointed that the Liberal budget neglected their requests, I look forward to working with our local partners in support of the Essex Terminal Railway.

On a similar note, our Windsor-Essex region is excited about the prospect of high-speed rail. Rail investments such as this would usher in a new era of economic opportunity for our region. I urge Canada, the only OECD country without high-speed rail, to move forward and seize the potential of rail investments to stimulate economic growth in all of our communities.

As the member of Parliament for Essex, I am committed to working closely with municipalities in my riding to seek funding opportunities for improving and restoring historical and federally owned buildings. This will help our region protect and celebrate our heritage while creating new opportunities to attract tourism.

Speaking of tourism, I am also committed to being a strong partner for vintners in my region. Essex county is home to nearly 20 wineries, producing award-winning wines and attracting tourists from afar. The Canadian wine industry contributes nearly $7 billion to the Canadian economy and is working hard to increase international exports as well as their domestic market share. I have met with wine producers in Essex county, and I support their call for greater federal government support for the industry's continued development.

I have spent a lot of time looking at this budget and what it means to the people I represent.

I would like to end on a positive note. I am thrilled that the government has increased funding for the Canada summer jobs program. This will mean that more students in Essex will get valuable, paid work experience to help them build the skills they need to succeed in today's job market. It also supports local businesses and organizations with talented young people who are eager to learn and contribute. I look forward to working with the government on this file and will work hard to help the people of Essex access available funding from all government grants and funding streams.

I am honoured to serve as the representative for Essex and to stand up for their priorities each and every day.

[International Trade, June 3rd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, a new report is warning that the TPP will make our growing trade deficit with Asia even worse. It will hurt employment, kill growth in manufacturing and high tech, and damage our ability to diversify the Canadian economy.

To make matters worse, the Canadian Nurses Association warned us at committee this week that it could even block us from ever implementing pharmacare. The evidence is clear.

Will the minister finally stand, put the interests of Canadians ahead of corporate rights, and reject the damaging TPP trade deal?

[Dairy Industry, June 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, that was the story 30 days ago and remains the same today with more farmers standing here on the Hill. I know the Liberal MPs were quick to shake hands with the dairy farmers on the lawn, but when it comes to rolling up their sleeves and taking action to defend dairy producers, Liberals are nowhere to be seen. Imported diafiltered milk undermines our supply-managed system and cost Canadian dairy producers more than $220 million just last year. A fix is simple and quick. Why are the Liberals failing to enforce laws and protect Canadian dairy farmers?

[Dairy Industry, June 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is for decades, supply management has guaranteed reliable and safe poultry and milk, meaning stable livelihoods for hundreds of thousands of Canadians. But now Liberals are pushing ahead with a job-killing TPP trade deal with no sign of compensation for dairy producers who stand to lose big from this bad deal.

Canadian farmers are tired of the deafening silence from the government. Why are Liberals backing away from their commitment to Canadian farmers?

[International Trade, June 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for his commitment as well on this file, and the work that he has done in sharing with the committee. I thank him for his kind comments as well about my riding.

The parliamentary secretary identified that they have the responses. It is time to share those responses not just with the committee but with the Canadian public so people can know what the minister has been doing, whom the government has met with, and actually how they stand on that. The member has named many groups today and many of them have opposing views on the TPP. It is time to come forward with that. The intent of my motion was to bring that forward from the minister and from the member so that we can share that information. It is a valuable piece to the work that we do at the committee level.

I want to also say that there are different conclusions. The member mentioned some of the different studies, but they all show negligible benefits for Canada. When we look at this on a whole, we have to look at tariff, non-tariff, and the pieces that are inside the trans-Pacific partnership that frankly have very little to do with trade. When we look at all of these pieces together, we will be able to finally form a full picture and opinion.

It concerns me that I hear that the government is in favour of the deal before taking all of this into account and on balance. This trade deal is not good for Canada. If we are going to suffer job losses under a trade deal, we have to sit down and seriously look at the implications to the communities that we all represent in this House.

I look forward to receiving the answers that the parliamentary secretary and the minister will provide to add to the conversation so that again at committee level we can have a full understanding of where Canadians sit on the TPP.

[International Trade, June 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, my question at the beginning of March highlighted the concerns of Canadians about CETA and the TPP. Both deals contain an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism that would limit the federal government's ability to regulate in the public interest, affecting everything from environmental protection and labour rights to drug costs.

I asked the hon. minister when we would see an economic impact study on the TPP from the government and where was the consultation with Canadians. I find it incredibly frustrating that seven months after the election the government still cannot provide satisfactory answers to these basic questions.

A few weeks ago, the minister appeared before the Standing Committee on International Trade. I thought that finally Canadians would get some answers. Instead, there were more non-answers and evasiveness on consultations and the non-existent impact study. I have heard the government's talking points time after time. They provide zero clarity, zero new information, and zero progress on the government's commitments. It is time for results.

After listening to the minister at the trade committee, I brought forward a motion that put dates and deadlines to the promises of the Liberals. The motion requested that by the end of June the Minister of International Trade would submit to the trade committee the proposed economic impact study, a schedule for broad public consultations on the TPP, and a breakdown of the consultations that had been done to date. This is not an extraordinary request. In fact, the minister's parliamentary secretary, the hon. member for LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, told our committee back in February that he would get us a list of consultations done to date. However, it has been three months and there still is no list.

When I brought my motion forward, my colleagues from the Liberal Party chose to shelve debate on the matter for another day. While they may be okay with conducting a full study and so-called consultation on the TPP without a proper impact study, I am not. We need the government to start delivering on its commitments.

I find it all a little ironic. My colleagues opposite talk about wanting to have meaningful TPP consultations, but when push comes to shove, the government is not doing a good job of informing and consulting with Canadians on the TPP.

This session, the trade committee travelled across parts of Canada to hear testimony from stakeholder groups and individuals. Many of the committee members know that our efforts, though well-intentioned, fell short of the full, meaningful, public consultation that Canadians expected. Many people did not even know the committee was coming to their region. Our committee simply does not have the resources or means to deliver on the public consultations that Canadians deserve and the Liberals promised.

Our committee also did not have an economic impact study from the government to guide our work. We have a few other studies on which to rely. For example, the Tufts University study estimates that under the TPP, 58,000 Canadian jobs will be lost, inequality will increase, and the GOP will rise a meagre 0.28% after 10 years. There are many other reports and studies, some suggesting gains and some suggesting losses. However, none of these reports are replacements for an economic impact study done by the Canadian government.

My riding of Essex already has a higher than average unemployment rate, and people in Essex will face even more job uncertainty with this bad deal hanging over their heads.

Therefore, again I rise in this place and ask for some concrete answers from the government. When is the impact study coming? Is it this month? Is it next year? When will the government listen to the criticisms of its consultations and finally start opening up the process?

[Air Canada Public Participation Act, June 1st, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Elmwood—Transcona for his passion for working people in this country.

I am a worker. We are here to fight for workers. What we saw in the campaign that my colleague highlighted well were the Liberals standing shoulder to shoulder with working-class people saying they would fight for jobs. Now we see that they are not doing that. The impact on these communities will be devastating.

Could you please speak to the impact on the communities and working-class people across Canada in seeing these jobs outsourced?

[Automobile Industry, May 30th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, southwestern Ontario is the heart of Canada's auto sector, providing good jobs for tens of thousands of families in our communities. However, over the past decade, Canada has lost over 400,000 manufacturing jobs, with over 260,000 of those lost in Ontario.

Last month, auto industry leaders from business, labour, and academia gathered in Windsor for a policy and solutions forum. They reiterated calls for a national auto strategy that would attract investment, support research and innovation, and sustain good jobs. For years, our auto sector has worked collaboratively and has been united in its call for a national strategy. Our region knows how to work together like no other, because we share a vision for a stronger future.

Last week in Japan, the Prime Minister promoted auto investment in Canada. However, if the Liberal government is serious about supporting Canada's auto sector, it needs to say no to the job-killing TPP and implement a national auto strategy.

As the elected representative for Essex, I will do everything I can to get the job done.

[Privilege, May 19th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent speech in this place today. I think he speaks for all of us in saying that we need to raise the level of decorum in this place and where we have devolved to over the last few days has become a shock to many of us.

It is not just those of us sitting on this side of the House, but I have to believe there are members opposite who also became members of Parliament to effect that exact change the hon. member spoke about, to do something better, to represent people. However, stifling opposition parties, stifling other MPs in their ability to represent the people they are elected to represent is not the way to do that. I have to imagine there are members opposite who would agree with that as well.

We all signed a code of conduct when we entered into this Parliament, which said that we would be in a harassment-free place inside this House of Commons, which is part of our workplace. We have heard that spoken to today very well.

I want to be clear, though, that in order to restore this decorum, I think it is incredibly important that the government immediately back away from this unacceptable proposal to strong-arm the opposition in Parliament. I ask the member if he would agree with that statement.