Yasmin Ratansi

[Citizenship and Immigration, October 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's answer shows he is totally clueless. These workers bolster the Canadian economy. In addition, many of them have children who are Canadian-born and have a legal right to remain in Canada.

This is an urgent issue. The minister has the ability to act on behalf of these families. Will he now recognize the complexities of this issue and ensure that the families of Canadian-born children remain in Canada? Or is he going to throw Canadian citizens out of the country?

[Citizenship and Immigration, October 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has failed to announce its plan for an estimated 200,000 undocumented workers in Canada and it refuses to grant them amnesty. Instead of addressing how to use the immigration system to better benefit the Canadian economy, the government is clueless.

Will the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration explain why he continues to ignore the plight of those workers? Why is he throwing them out and slamming the door?

[Global Centre for Pluralism, October 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this week His Highness the Aga Khan visited Ottawa to announce the planned location for the Global Centre for Pluralism.

The centre will transform the former location of the Canadian War Museum on Sussex Drive into a non-denominational, not for profit organization dedicated to fostering pluralism and peace. In his own words, the Aga Khan observed that “Tolerance, openness and understanding towards other people's cultures, social structures, values and faiths are now essential to the very survival of an interdependent world”.

The centre will work in cooperation with the Canadian government to engage in research and promote dialogue about ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious diversity with a view to help foster pluralistic values and establish similar institutions worldwide.

[Access to Information, October 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, in the election platform entitled “Stand Up for Canada”, the Conservative Party made a distinct promise to strengthen access to information legislation.

In fact, on page 12 of their election platform it states that “A Conservative government will implement the Information Commissioner’s recommendations for reform of the Access to Information Act”.

Last April the Conservatives broke this promise when these specific recommendations were left out of the Prime Minister's so called accountability act.

I understand that the newly elected Prime Minister now believes these recommendations represent an extreme view.

Canadians have a right to access information about their government, but the Prime Minister is denying that right.

Once again, “Stand Up for Canada” just fell flat on its face with yet another broken promise from the Conservatives.

[October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, one of the first targets of Kimveer Gill at Dawson College was 18 year old Hayder Kadhim. Mr. Kadhim was shot in the head, in the neck and in one of his legs. Fortunately, Mr. Kidhim survived and is now slowly recovering.

This young man has made a simple request. Mr. Kadhim would like to meet with the Prime Minister and debate the Conservative plan to eliminate the gun registry and make it easier to obtain long guns. So far the Prime Minister has refused to meet Mr. Kadhim. What is the Prime Minister afraid of?

Will the hon. member stand in the House tonight and promise to at least ask the Prime Minister to grant Mr. Kadhim's request for a meeting?

[October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Firearms Centre reports that 85% of spousal homicides occur in private homes, and a shocking 71% of the firearms used in spousal homicides are in fact long guns. In light of these horrifying statistics, I asked the public safety minister last June why the Conservative government was planning to remove all long guns from the firearms registry.

Since then, we witnessed the tragic events of September 13, when Kimveer Gill went on a rampage at Dawson College in Montreal. At the end of the day, 18-year-old Anastasia De Sousa was dead and 20 other people suffered severe injuries. Furthermore, the lives of all students and staff at Dawson College changed forever.

Kimveer Gill was armed with a nine millimetre Beretta Cx4 Storm carbine, a rifle classified as a semi-automatic weapon, or in simpler terms, a long gun. He also carried a .45 calibre handgun and a shotgun.

While it is true that all of these weapons were acquired by Gill according to the rules, Canadians are asking why are the Conservatives walking in the opposite direction to public opinion and why are they planning to deregister all long guns?

The intelligent thing to do would be to add all semi-automatic rifles and handguns to the prohibited list. Instead, the Conservatives are turning a blind eye and are planning to deregister an estimated seven million rifles in Canada. Seven million rifles. That is seven million more firearms that will be easier for people like Kimveer Gill to obtain. It is a disgrace. It is a national disgrace.

The Prime Minister claims that the firearms registry failed to prevent this tragedy. This is not true. The obvious solution is to tighten the rules, add other categories of long guns to the registry and make tougher legislation to prevent people like Kimveer Gill from obtaining these particular weapons in the first place.

I know my hon. friend on the government side of the House will try to make some sort of argument that the firearms registry does not work and that it is too costly and bureaucratic. That is not true. In terms of cost, the real question is, how much value does one place on human life?

In terms of working, in the days that followed the shootings at Dawson College, Quebec police launched an investigation into a 14-year-old boy who posted death threats on the very same website that Kimveer Gill used. Police checked the gun registry, discovered that his father had firearms in the house and the guns were quickly removed. This is how frontline police officers use the firearms registry as a tool to protect Canadians from similar tragedies.

Statistics clearly show that the number of firearms homicides dropped significantly in Canada since the gun registry was put in place in 1995. Therefore, I would like to ask the members opposite to tell the House why the Conservatives are making it easier for criminals to obtain seven million long guns, and how will the availability of these dangerous weapons protect Canadians?

Further, I would like to know if the Conservatives plan to ban the type of weapon that Kimveer Gill used to kill Anastasia De Sousa. I would also like to know if the members would be willing to meet with the students and staff of Dawson College and explain to them how their new policy will make Canada a safer place in which to live.

[Literacy, October 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, economists from across Canada agree that literacy is fundamental to boosting economic productivity and prosperity. Canada currently has one of the highest levels of post-secondary attainment among OECD countries. However, this achievement is in jeopardy, as the Conservative government does not believe in literacy.

Without warning last week and despite a budget surplus of $13 billion, the Conservatives eliminated $18 million from the federal literacy skills program. Incredibly, this announcement came out on the same day that the Prime Minister's wife was on the streets of Ottawa campaigning for more literacy programs.

While cutting literacy programs, the Prime Minister is spending $3 million of taxpayer dollars on renovations for his official residence at 24 Sussex. I hope that includes plans for a comfortable, new doghouse with room enough for two. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Prime Minister will be spending a lot of time in it.

[Retirement Wishes, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, all too often we tend to take for granted the services provided by hundreds of support staff of the House of Commons. They are translators, security guards, maintenance workers, chefs and many others, all of whom make the work of parliamentarians possible.

Today I would like to ask all members to join me in recognizing the retirement of Mr. Ray Gauthier of the House of Commons postal services. For almost 35 years Ray has faithfully provided services and advice to generations of parliamentarians and other staff. Popular with his colleagues, especially Hill staffers, Ray's co-workers always knew whom to go to for advice, earning him the nickname “the book of knowledge”.

On behalf of the House of Commons, I would like to thank Mr. Gauthier for his outstanding services over the years and best wishes for a new life and well earned retirement.

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for York West.

In the wake of the $1 billion that the Conservatives recently cut from the programs aimed at helping people, such as jobless youth, illiterate adults, first nations, women, and those people requiring legal assistance through the court challenges program, I am pleased to rise today and speak to the motion before us. It reads:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government fails to recognize the many roles of women in Canadian society and the importance of providing all Canadian women with equal opportunity; and the House objects to the government's partisan and discriminatory cuts in federal support for women's programs and services.

Let us take a look at some of these cuts. There is $5 million cut from Status of Women Canada, or about half of its operating budget; $45 million cut from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, CMHC, for affordable housing programs; $55 million cut from the youth employment initiatives; $18 million cut from the literacy skills program; $10 million cut from the Canadian volunteer initiatives; $10 million cut from the international youth internship program; $6 million cut from the court challenges program; and $78 million cut from the visitor's GST rebate.

Canadians have experienced cuts in public service throughout our history when government piled up huge fiscal deficits. As an accountant by trade, I would always recommend restraint through tough economic times, to spend within our means, and to always pay off debt.

In fact, the former Liberal government recognized this in 1995 when we inherited a record $42 billion deficit from the Mulroney government. Tough decisions were made and eventually, when the Liberals turned the situation around, we made debt reduction a priority in concert with zero deficit policy.

Yet, that was a decade ago. Through sound Liberal economic policies, we now have an economy that is the envy of the world. The unemployment rate is at a record low and the deficit is history. The Conservative minority government, which has been in power for less than nine months, can hardly take credit for the Liberal record over the past 12 years of fiscal prudence and management.

That is why Canadians are perplexed by the fact that the government recently used a $13.2 billion surplus to pay down the national debt, yet the minority Conservative government found it necessary to cut $1 billion further in programs and services, and this to the most vulnerable in our society.

This smacks as nothing less than a meanspirited ideological agenda by the Conservatives. It is regressive, indeed an aggressive right-wing attack on our social services and national institutions. Even museums and libraries are a target as the finance minister carries out an ideological witch hunt through each federal department in Ottawa.

According to Wendy Desbrisay, executive director of the Canadian Literacy Movement, “This is a black day for us...we did not see this coming”. Neither did the Canadian people.

There are as many as nine million Canadians between the ages of 16 and 25 who do not have the literacy skills needed for today's workforce. This is morally reprehensible and it is reprehensible to simply abandon these people. It is economically irresponsible to cut Canadians loose simply because they cannot read. How can the baby boom generation retire with confidence when the productivity of succeeding generations will sink to all-time lows?

Indeed, it may interest members to know that the Prime Minister's wife was out today promoting literacy programs on the streets of Ottawa and mentioned the following: “You can't succeed in life unless you read...that's the number one thing”. Perhaps the Prime Minister should explain to his wife that he cut $18 million from the literacy skills program this week.

I am quite sure, therefore, that dinner conversation at 24 Sussex will be quite interesting this evening. For the Prime Minister's sake, I hope construction of the new doghouse has been completed on the grounds of the official residence.

Here is another meanspirited cost-cutting measure: $55 million in cuts to the youth employment initiative. Thousands of employers depend on this program to hire summer students every year. These are small and medium sized businesses that cannot afford to hire students otherwise. These cuts boggle the mind.

Even the tourism industry, which has still not recovered from the SARS crisis, was not spared. Eliminating $78 million from the visitor GST rebate program will discourage thousands of people from spending their vacation in Canada. This is especially perplexing when most other countries are enhancing their programs to attract visitors, in an international and highly competitive industry.

Here is another cut that lacks all wisdom: $45 million from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation that would have gone toward affordable housing. Again, the target is the most vulnerable people in this society.

The same applies to women. The mandate of Status of Women Canada is to enhance the full participation of women in the economic, social, cultural and political life of the country.

What message is the government sending? What are the priorities of the minority Conservatives? What is their secret agenda?

The Prime Minister prides himself on his unique communication strategy, that is, avoid journalists at all costs, but he does not in fact rule a majority. Sooner or later, this shaky minority government will buckle under the weight of a growing list of scandals and the disillusionment of the Canadian people. When that happens, the Liberal Party will be there to pick up the pieces and repair the damage to our national institutions and our international reputation.

[Early Learning and Child Care Act, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member and her assessment that child care is expensive, especially in urban centres. The previous Liberal plan created approximately 200 spaces in my riding of Don Valley East. The Conservative government's plan of $100 per month is really unfair, especially for the two parent working family. It is taxable, which amounts to $60 to $80. It is unfair because the Conservatives have increased the income tax rate for the working poor as well. Their plan gives money to the ultra-rich.

The Liberal government invested and made deals with all the provincial jurisdictions for the early learning and child care strategy. The Liberal government decreased taxes for middle income earners. The Liberal government increased the personal income threshold by $500. Given all this, why would the NDP agree with the Conservatives and bring the previous Liberal government down, when the Conservative only agenda is an ideology and an empty plan?