House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2025, with 53% of the vote.
National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act September 30th, 2016
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my hon. colleague for her nice oversight on this legislation. As this is being formed as a committee of parliamentarians where the chair has been appointed by the Prime Minister, this is already a sign of no accountability whatsoever, and probably the committee will be powerless. Does the hon. member believe that is a fact?
CANADA LABOUR CODE September 26th, 2016
Madam Speaker, I would like to correct some of the facts.
Basically, when the previous government passed Bill C-525 and Bill C-377, there were major consultations, a word I believe the current government loves to hear all the time. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance examined the issue, as did the Senate Standing Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, and the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.
Although no one is accusing the government of being logical, here is the question. What is the motivation behind the legislation? I believe an observer would say it is to protect the union bosses. The irony is that those union leaders are themselves elected by secret ballot. Does it make sense that union leaders be elected by secret ballot if secret ballots are not allowed for union certification votes? That is the question, and hopefully we can hear some logical answers.
Infrastructure September 26th, 2016
Madam Speaker, the member gave what could be called a hopeful speech about projects and what will probably happen in the next 10 to 15 years. He mentioned job creation twice. This is something we have not heard about for a long time from members on the other side. He also mentioned investing $120 billion in upcoming infrastructure projects. Can the member opposite—
Questions on the Order Paper September 19th, 2016
With regard to Public Services and Procurement Canada: (a) what were the total costs incurred as a result of changing the Department’s name; and (b) what related costs were incurred to reflect the Department’s new name, and specifically, what was spent on (i) signage, (ii) stationary, (iii) business cards, (iv) promotional materials?
Health June 17th, 2016
Madam Speaker, Liberals have to do better when it comes to supporting organ donation.
The Kidney Foundation of Canada and the Canadian National Transplant Research Program are just two of the organizations that expressed support for a national organ donor registry. Bill C-223 would have created this.
Can the Minister of Health tell this House why she thought a registry was unnecessary?
Health June 17th, 2016
You had the opportunity to take leadership and you did not.
Health June 17th, 2016
Madam Speaker, Canada's organ donation rate is among the world's worst. Fewer than 25% have made a plan to donate. Given the opportunity to do the right thing, the Liberals instead chose to vote against a national organ donor registry.
Can they explain why they voted against saving the lives of thousands of Canadians?
Income Tax Act June 17th, 2016
Madam Speaker, the plan for those with over $200,000 in income was supposed to be to raise votes not to raise revenue. Does the hon. member agree with that?
Canadian Organ Donor Registry Act June 13th, 2016
Madam Speaker, I would like to deeply thank my colleagues, the hon. members for Vancouver Kingsway, Calgary Confederation, Calgary Shepard, and Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, for their eloquent speeches, their efforts, and their support.
Before I begin my speech, I would like to comment on the parliamentary secretary's speech this morning in which he stated that this bill is unnecessary. Almost 300 Canadians are dying needlessly every year. This bill tries to do something about it by trying to put forward an act that would help reduce that number or perhaps wipe it out completely. It is unfortunate that the parliamentary secretary is taking such a political position on something that would be touching Canadian lives and Canadians' health and future every day.
We in this House have an opportunity to do good or ill for Canada. I am asking all hon. members to make a choice to do good and support Bill C-223.
Health professionals and transplant advocacy organizations are calling for an improved organ donation system in Canada. Working together, we have the power to benefit all Canadians. We need a national organ donor registry.
We have also heard from some today who have concerns about the proposed registry. I appreciate their opinions. However, I urge all members not to allow the naysayers to influence their vote. I am asking members to carefully consider this issue and this bill and to do the right thing. If members feel that this bill has flaws, then they should make suggestions as to what needs to be done to improve it. It should be sent to committee, as all the members on this side and the NDP said earlier today. There, witnesses from across the country can talk about organ donation, transplantation, and the need for improvements in the system we now use.
This is not some abstract theory we are debating. For many Canadians, this literally is a matter of life and death. I have mentioned before that I am an organ donor and that my son is a three-time transplant recipient. Without those operations, he would have died.
In 2014, there were 2,356 organ transplant surgeries performed in Canada. At the end of the year, more than 4,500 Canadians were still waiting for the call that an organ was available for them. I deeply understand how they feel. In 2014, 278 Canadians died waiting for organ transplants, and 246 died the year before. In 2012, Canada ranked 20th out of 75 countries for deceased organ donor rates. Spain, the United States, and the United Kingdom are among the countries that are doing much better than we are.
This is not a partisan issue. This is not an area in which we should be playing politics. This is not something that should be subject to bureaucrats protecting their turf and saying that this bill should be rejected because it does not conform to their vision of the way things should work. The system needs to be improved, and this bill would do that.
When we first spoke about Bill C-223, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health told us “the bill would duplicate existing initiatives between the federal government, provinces, territories, and the Canadian Blood Services.” That is not the case. The bill gives the Minister of Health the legislative authority to determine how the registry is set up. It does not duplicate existing initiatives. However, it does provide a national vision.
Those in transplant advocacy groups are asking for this legislation. They say that what is in place is a good start but is not good enough.
Medical professionals and patient organizations have been telling me that Canada does not have a true organ donation registry and that we must have one.
The parliamentary secretary also said that another reason the bill will not be supported—
Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1 June 7th, 2016
Madam Speaker, there are so many reasons why this legislation is bad for Canadians that I hardly know where to begin. The excessive spending the Liberal budget sets out is not targeted and will end up hurting businesses, families and hard-working Canadians in the form of future tax increases.
The budget is about spending. It will stifle economic growth. The Liberals hope that by throwing out buzzwords like “infrastructure” and “innovation”, Canadians will not notice their true intentions.
When the Liberals took office, taxes were at their lowest point in 50 years, transfer payments had reached an all-time high, our economy was leading the G-7 in job creation and growth since the recession, and the budget was balanced. The Liberal budget is a plan for reckless spending that offers higher taxes, billions in new debt, and no real plan for jobs. It is a fundamental Conservative principle that Canadians should be able to keep their hard-earned money in their pockets.
Before the people of Edmonton Manning gave me their trust as their member of Parliament, I was a small business owner. I have owned and operated a number of businesses since coming to Canada in 1990. I know first-hand the importance of balancing the books. I understand the importance of meeting payroll and how much having a good, steady job meant to my employees. I worked hard to build my business, because I knew that in Canada success comes with hard work.
My experience is the same as that of thousands of Canadian businessmen. We work hard and have the satisfaction of creating something. We are not rich, but we earn a living, and through our businesses, we help others earn a living also. That may be why I was so disappointed to hear, during the last election campaign, that the Liberal leader thought small businesses were just a tax haven for the rich. I am not rich, but I have worked hard for what I have. I did not grow up with a trust fund.
Roughly two-thirds of small and medium-sized business owners fall directly into the middle class. Employers are about four times more likely to earn less than $40,000 than more than $250,000.
We know that small business creates jobs, According to Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, small businesses account for more than 98% of all firms in Canada and play a large role in net job creation. Small businesses created 77.7% of all private jobs from 2002 to 2012, a little more 100,000 jobs each year on average.
Given those statistics, it would seem only logical that governments would encourage small business owners to grow their business, that government would create a climate in which entrepreneurs would want to invest in expanding their companies, creating more jobs in the process. There is no logic in this bill.
We know the Liberals will have to raise taxes to pay for their out of control spending. It is unfortunate that 700,000 middle-class small business owners who employ 95% of working Canadians are the Minister of Finance's first target.
The Liberals ended the hiring credit for small businesses. The Liberals cancelled their planned youth employment hiring credit. The Liberals have broken their clear promise to small businesses to proceed with a small business tax rate reduction.
Our previous Conservative government encouraged job-creating small business by cutting the rate to 10.5% for 2016, with a planned further reduction to 9% to encourage growth and jobs. In 2015 the Liberal Party told Canadians that, if elected, they would also implement these planned cuts.
Apparently a year ago, they recognized the importance of small business. That does not seem to be the case anymore.
The Minister of Finance has said that the planned cuts would be deferred. He has not given a concrete date for implementation. Perhaps we can expect him to live up to his election promise when we see a herd of unicorns on the front lawn of Parliament Hill. What we do know is that the finance department has estimated that this broken promise would cost the small-business sector $2.2 billion over four years. By increasing taxes on job-creating small businesses, the Liberals are discouraging success and entrepreneurship for the whole country. They are hurting the middle class.
Another one of the provisions of this bill that I find profoundly disturbing is the repeal of the Federal Balanced Budget Act. This is a subject I would hope would be of concern to all Canadians. Let me quote from the preamble of that act:
...a sound fiscal position is crucial to economic growth and job creation over the longer term;
...attaining and maintaining a sound fiscal position requires that the Government of Canada achieve annual balanced budgets and reduce debt, other than when a recession or extraordinary situation occurs;
...maintaining balanced budgets and reducing debt helps to keep taxes low, instill confidence in consumers and investors, strengthen Canada’s ability to respond to longer-term economic and fiscal challenges and preserve the sustainability of public services;
...reducing the debt burden will help to ensure fairness for future generations by avoiding future tax increases or reductions in public services;...
The Federal Balanced Budget Act requires the Minister of Finance to be accountable to this House. If he wanted to run a deficit, he would need to appear before the appropriate committee, make a case for the deficit, and present a plan for a return to balanced budgets. I can understand why this is a concern for the current government. After six months in office, the Liberals have discovered that despite their leader's assurance, budgets do not balance themselves.