Wayne Easter

[Taxation, March 26th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary can bluster, sputter and try to transfer the blame but the fact is that this tax will be downloaded onto ordinary Canadians.

Changing the rules on GST tax exemptions will reduce the value of RRSPs, increase the cost of insurance and increase the cost of mortgages. Who pays? It will be ordinary Canadians.

Why is the government taxing ordinary Canadians and forcing them to bear the brunt of the burden for the government's deficit?

[Taxation, March 26th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, again the Conservatives fail to tell the truth about taxes.

This fiscal year they will increase the tax burden on jobs, health products, air security, retirement savings and education. Now, through conniving deception and cover up, they will also increase the scope of the dreaded GST.

The new Conservatives' $1 billion tax hike from the GST will hurt ordinary Canadians, eliminating exceptions and extending the base for a $1 billion GST increase. Does that not turn Conservative—

[Agriculture, March 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, farm organizations are speaking out increasingly about the government's failed farm policies.

This week's Hill Times carries a full-page ad bluntly telling the minister that his remarks lack truth. The ad by the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, Ontario Pork, the Ontario Cattlemen's Association and Ontario Grains & Oilseeds, among others, states, “Ontario farmers tell us that AgriStability does not work”.

Why does the minister consistently misrepresent the facts? Will he listen and act on farmer concerns?

[Airline Security, March 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister or the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities just not get it?

Section 705 of the Canadian aviation regulations is clear that “argumentative...intimidating, or disorderly behaviour” is a level 3 violation, the second highest on the scale, and we are talking of intimidation here. Any other Canadian would have been grounded, arrested or even “tased”, as Kory Teneycke put it.

Why have there been absolutely no consequences for these ministers who have brazenly broken airport safety regulations?

[Airline Security, March 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, security officials at Canada's airports had a busy month, mostly due to outrageous behaviour by Conservative ministers.

The status of women minister felt baggage limits should not apply to her, not to mention her attempt to crash a security door. The veterans affairs minister wanted security officials to hold his tequila, like it was his personal coat check.

Could the transport minister state where in Canada's air regulations they allow Conservative ministers to berate officials and demand privileged treatment?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have heard interesting words from the minister on the Speech from the Throne.

In all seriousness, this is a minister we believe should not be in cabinet. She came through the Charlottetown airport well over a month ago now, on February 19. I asked the Prime Minister in this House to show some class and show that his cabinet is not above the law. This minister has certainly given the indication that she is above the law and that she does not act on what her responsibilities are as minister.

I go through the Charlottetown airport roughly once a month. Those people are still upset. One man was there who has been working for Air Canada for three decades, and he was never so belittled and berated in those three decades.

So I ask the minister, she is supposed to be a minister for the Status of Women, giving explanations and working with people on bullying, yet she set an example for bullying herself. How can she sit in that chair? How can she sit in that cabinet still as minister for the Status of Women?

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, March 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I have a note here from Tom Shoebridge, the founder and executive director of the Canadian Screen Training Centre, the Summer Institute of Film and Television. It reads, “It is with personal and professional sadness that I announce the permanent closure of the Canadian Screen Training Centre after 29 successful years, effective April 1, 2010. The cutbacks by the federal Conservative government to all of the national film schools in 2008...”.

We listened to the remarks of the parliamentary secretary and agree with them in terms of the veterans. However, there are so many areas that, in previous budgets and this budget, the government has cut, which injures the ability to get into arts and culture.

Being that he is parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister, would the government consider changing its mind on these cuts, as it has done on the CAP and the anthem that was in the throne speech?

[Status of Women, March 16th, 2010]

Clearly then, Mr. Speaker, the facts are well established.

How can the Prime Minister continue to condone the conduct of a senior minister who one, insulted a province, and two, berated, belittled and bullied airport personnel and security staff? The list of Conservative insiders calling on the Prime Minister to fire the minister continues to grow daily.

Does the Prime Minister still condone this conduct? If not, will he fire the minister?

[Status of Women, March 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Transport answered on behalf of the Minister of State for the Status of Women. When he was doing so, she was heckling that the question was a fabrication.

I ask the minister herself today whether any of the reported facts relating to her activities at the Charlottetown airport are incorrect. Did she not call P.E.I. a “hellhole”? Did she not berate, belittle and bully airport staff? Will she correct the record, or will she resign?

[Business of Supply, March 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to the member for Winnipeg Centre. Usually he is quite forceful in telling us where he stands, but if ever I heard anything in terms of his remarks today, he basically talked around the motion.

Just where does the NDP stand on this motion? Is it willing to stand in this House and vote against government waste through false communications that it uses through consultants? Is the member willing to stand in this House and stop the waste of members here who send out these ten percenters, which are nothing short of hate mail and propaganda?

Is he willing to stand up in this House and tell us where the NDP actually stand? Stop talking around the issue.