13641 OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) House of Commons Debates VOLUME 147 NUMBER 210 2nd SESSION 41st PARLIAMENT Friday, May 8, 2015 Speaker: The Honourable Andrew Scheer HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) COMMONS DEBATES May 8, 2015 DEBATES Edited Hansard * Table of Contents * Number 210 (Official Version) Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 210 (Official Version) Compte rendu officiel * Table des matières * Numéro 210 (Version officielle) 147 210 08 05 2015 2015/05/08 10:00:00 House of Commons Débats de la Chambre des communes House of Commons Debates 41 2 The House met at 10 a.m.

Prayers Government Orders Business of Supply (1000) [ English ] Business of Supply Opposition Motion—Feminine Hygiene Products Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP) Motion moved: That, in the opinion of the House, the government should remove the GST from feminine hygiene products. She said: Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel . I am honoured to rise in the House today to introduce our New Democrat opposition day motion, which states: That, in the opinion of the House, the government should remove the GST from feminine hygiene products.

While we have come a long way with regard to gender equity in Canada, we still have far to go. Let me first speak of the victories. Women in Canada are considered persons under the law, with equal access to all the rights and privileges of men in Canadian society. Since the election of Sister Agnes Macphail to the House in 1921, we have seen the proportion of female members of Parliament steadily rise.

On Tuesday this week, the province of Alberta made history, not just for electing its first NDP majority government with Premier-elect Rachel Notley at the helm, but for electing the most women in any government in Canadian history.

The Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada, the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, of which Canada was a proud signatory, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, along with the Constitution and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action are all components of the road map to sexual equality in Canada that stipulated that all of the costs of physical and social reproduction, most of which constitutes the unpaid work of women raising a family, caring for frail and elderly family members and housework, should be shared among all members of society.

At this point I will turn from speaking about victories to speaking about the challenges. Canada has not fared so well in the area of gender equity. Placing a discriminatory tax on products that are used exclusively by women, girls and transgendered people is unfair. Allowing the tax to continue for 25 years is inexplicable. This country, which, in the 1990s, could boast about being on the top of the international heap with regard to gender equity using United Nations gender equality indicators, has now slipped to number 19 on the world stage.

Federal tax policies are structured such that the ratio of profit between women and men is 60:40 or less. In other words, federal tax policy favours those with a higher income and since men, by and large, earn higher incomes than women, men are advantaged and women are disadvantaged under current taxation regimes. Women, on average, make only 78% of the wages enjoyed by men for doing work of equal value. The same reality of inequities touches on almost every part of women's experience in this country.

Even though reproductive rights have been enshrined in Canadian law, women must continue to fight to have access to the safe and timely abortions that should be guaranteed in every hospital in every province. Consequently, the reproductive health of women is compromised. We need to be very concerned about that reality, just as we as a country bear the shameful record of thousands of missing and murdered aboriginal women. Violence against aboriginal women, indeed, all women and all people, should never be tolerated or dismissed.

While first nations communities and their supporters continue to call repeatedly and loudly for an inquiry into the systemic causes of this tragedy, the government refuses to acknowledge the problem. Regressive policies such as those that increase the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS from 65 to 67, no seniors strategy at all, and the lack of an affordable, accessible and universal child care program affect women most acutely.

A New Democrat federal government in 2015 would restore the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS to 65, implement a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour, implement a universal child care program accessible to all Canadians at $15 a day, implement a seniors strategy, and call an inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women. While I have no doubt that there are many hurdles yet to face on the road to complete gender equity in Canada, I have hope for that future. There is one way that we in the House can correct gender injustice right here, right now.

Today we have the opportunity to make a minor adjustment to the Excise Tax Act that would remove the GST from feminine hygiene products. Allow me to speak about something the government has deemed a luxury: menstruation. If anyone can believe it, feminine hygiene products actually fall under the category of luxury items in the Excise Tax Act and are, therefore, subject to the federal goods and services tax. This is just the reality.

(1005) As a woman, I think I can call myself an expert on this topic, and while I have heard menstruation described in many ways, the curse, the crimson tide, a visit from auntie flow, monthlies, feeling delicate or the big red monster, I have never heard it described as a luxury. Why then are feminine hygiene products, pads and tampons, treated as luxury items under the Excise Tax Act? Why are women discriminated against while this tax leaves such things as wedding cakes, chocolate chips, cocktail cherries and Viagra exempt? Taxing female hygiene products amounts to gender discrimination. It is clear and simple.

With this motion, we have the opportunity today to rectify that. This motion calls on the government to remove the GST from feminine hygiene products, to simply remove the tax. As often happens when legislation is drafted quickly or thoughtlessly without consultation or debate, or announced outside this chamber in places such as Davos, it is the people who can least afford to bear the brunt of the inequity who suffer the most because of it. Taxing feminine hygiene products is symbolic of the systemic inequality Canadian women face in all areas of life, especially women in poverty.

I would like to thank Jill Piebiak, Kathleen Fraser and the organizers of the Canadian Menstruators group for initiating the awareness campaign on change.org that has resulted in over 10,000 signatures on a paper petition to this House and over 72,000 online signatures in support of this initiative. I am so encouraged by the organizing and mobilizing efforts of these young feminist activists. As a result of their efforts, my office has received countless emails and calls of support. I have heard from women who cannot afford feminine hygiene products and feel compelled to stay home during their periods.

I have heard from students who need to count and parcel out their pads and tampons to make sure they last the month. I have heard from women's shelters and food banks that keep a steady supply of feminine hygiene products on hand for women who cannot afford them once they have paid the rent and fed the kids. The mobilizing effort of the Canadian Menstruators group has also resulted in the organization of pad parties where donations for women's shelters are collected along with petition signatures. The fact of the matter is that these items are essential. Women do not and cannot choose to have a period.

Taxing feminine hygiene products is blatant gender discrimination. It is an injustice that can be quite simply rectified. This House has the power to amend the Excise Tax Act and deem feminine hygiene products as essential, thereby removing the tax. Even with the recent reduction in the GST, people with periods are still paying unfairly into the system. According to Statistics Canada it is estimated that in 2014 approximately 18,000 Canadian women between the ages of 12 and 49 spent about $520 million on menstrual hygiene products.

This amounts to approximately $37 million dollars in government sales taxes collected from women. It just makes me see red. It may seem small but a tax on tampons, pads, panty liners, menstrual cups and alternatives can add up quickly when combined with the systemic challenges faced by many women, trans people, gender-queer people and other menstruators in terms of income, housing and economic stability. My predecessor in this initiative, the former member of Parliament for Winnipeg Centre, Judy Wasylycia-Leis said: The GST on tampons and sanitary napkins amounts to gender based taxation.

The taxing of essential and necessary products used exclusively by women is unfair and discriminatory. It unfairly disadvantages women financially, solely because of our reproductive role. The bill...would be of particular value to lower income women. This motion allows us to correct the injustice, here and now, today. Remove the tax and make life more equitable and affordable for Canadian women.

We can do this, and after we do, feminists young and old, male and female and otherwise identifying, can move on to the next challenge in achieving a Canada that is equitable, accessible and fair, and where not one of us is left behind. (1010) [ Translation ] Mr. Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, as deputy finance critic, I am proud to support this motion. I certainly remember the debate around the introduction of the GST in Canada and the debates over what were considered luxury goods and what goods would one day be GST-exempt.

The member for London—Fanshawe gave an excellent speech and an excellent rationale for why the GST on feminine hygiene products should be eliminated. Would she like to give us a little background and draw a comparison between certain luxury products and others that are no longer designated as such— The Acting Speaker (Mr. Harold Albrecht) : Order. The hon. member for London—Fanshawe . [ English ] Ms. Irene Mathyssen : Mr. Speaker, folks have to understand that when the GST was brought in in 1990, there was a decision made that necessities of life would not be taxed and therefore made more accessible to people.

Among those things were diapers, incontinence products, testing kits and ironically, as I mentioned in my speech, cocktail cherries, wedding cakes and chocolate chips. What people were thinking at the time is sometimes a mystery, but after 25 years there is an opportunity and there has been previously, to correct the injustice. Feminine hygiene products are a part of women's reproductive health. They are an absolute necessity. Young women and girls cannot go to school, to work or cannot operate in society without proper products like this. So the tax must be removed. Mr.

Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, we have the GST, provincial sales taxes and we have harmonized taxes. Provincial legislatures have also had the exemption. Across Canada there has already been a significant movement to do exactly what is being proposed today in the opposition day motion. Maybe the member would provide some comment on that issue.

(1015) Ms. Irene Mathyssen : Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely correct. Some provinces such as Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, British Columbia and the Territories, have indeed removed sales tax from feminine hygiene products. I would say very clearly to the government that if provinces can do that and the sky does not fall, then this federal Parliament can indeed remove what is essentially an unfair tax. I would also note that by virtue of the fact that in a very short time, I received 10,000 signatures and 72,000, some online, it would suggest that women are fed up.

They are angry and they want to be taken seriously. They do not want to be dismissed. They want equity and this is a good first step. Mr. Dennis Bevington (Northwest Territories, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for bringing this issue up. This debate could play out in the north in a different way because I am not too sure that our nutrition north program which subsidizes freight for some items would actually subsidize the freight for this medically required item.

When we look at northern people and the costs of freighting for these types of goods, it probably doubles the cost for these types of products for northern women and it is something we need to look into with the whole subsidy program for northerners. I want to thank my colleague for bringing this up at this time. Ms. Irene Mathyssen : Mr. Speaker, we know that essential products that are shipped to the north are incredibly expensive.

In response to some of the Pad Parties that have been held across Ontario, I purchased some feminine hygiene products and took them to my local shelter and they were horrendously expensive. If they are horrendously expensive in southern Ontario, I cannot imagine how inaccessible they would be in the north. We come back to the dignity of women. Women deserve to have equity and these products. [ Translation ] Ms. Mylène Freeman (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the motion moved by my colleague from London—Fanshawe and to ask the Conservatives to eliminate an unfair tax.

It is unfair for women to pay tax on goods as essential as feminine hygiene products. Menstruation products are not a luxury for women and girls. This discrimination costs women more than $36 million per year. It makes no sense to ask women to pay tax on tampons when there are exemptions for non-essential goods, such as wedding cakes and cocktail cherries. I am proud to be part of a caucus that fights for gender equality and stands up for women by asking the government to eliminate the federal sales tax on feminine hygiene products and make taxes fair for both genders.

Every year, under the Excise Tax Act, the federal government collects millions of dollars in taxes on these products. Products considered essential to daily life are exempt from the tax, but luxury products are not. According to activists with Canadian Menstruators, an organization that has gathered over 72,000 signatures on an online petition on the matter, Canadians agree that taxing these products places an added burden on Canadian households and discriminates against women who menstruate, a group of people who face a disproportionate financial burden.

In 2011, the member for London—Fanshawe introduced Bill C-282 to remove the excise tax on feminine hygiene products. A similar bill had already been introduced by the NDP in a previous Parliament. Last fall, when talking about how unfair this tax is, a group of young women learned about the bill's existence. They organized the Canadian Menstruators campaign and started an online petition, which over 72,000 Canadians have signed. Furthermore, the paper version of the petition that we presented in the House has gathered over 10,000 signatures so far.

Managing taxation is one of the most important aspects of governance. (1020) [ English ] Basic grocery products are exempt from the GST. According to the CRA website: ...the CRA considers a product to be a food or beverage if an average consumer would recognize and purchase the product as such in the ordinary course of buying basic groceries. We are talking about basic necessities. As anyone who uses them or buys consumer products for or with someone who uses them will say, the products that menstruators need are basic. Tampons and pads are not luxury items that are taxable through GST.

No one comes home after a rough day of work and says, “I'm going to go buy myself a box of tampons and relax”. It is not ice cream. It is not cake. It is not wine or chocolate or perfume or nail polish or Viagra. It is a necessity. Necessities identified by the CRA as zero-exempt are foods, such as fresh, frozen, and canned foods, and products like medical oxygen, dispensing services fees, artificial limbs, eyes, and teeth, catheters, glasses, contacts, hearing aids, canes, crutches, stockings, and apparently, human sperm, which is on my list. We are talking about reproductive health, right?

Reproductive health is part of a menstruator's normal healthy course of life, and this measure should be seen as part of a holistic conversation about our reproductive health and lives. It should be seen as something that is basic in a menstruator's course of life and therefore should be exempt. [ Translation ] Gender inequality is reaching new heights in Canada; it is increasing rather than diminishing. That is unacceptable. We need a government that can combat inequality, not one that perpetuates and increases it. Inequality is growing between Canadian men and women.

Instead of tackling the problem, the government is adopting disgraceful measures that ultimately increase inequality. That is why we need to take fundamental action to address inequality. Gender inequality means that women do not have the economic security they deserve, and that fits right into the current agenda. Women make up 59% of minimum-wage workers. Even working full time, women in these jobs do not have enough money to meet all their family's needs. Women who work full time earn an average of 23% less than men; 20 years ago they earned 28% less.

At that rate, it will take 95 years before we achieve parity. The government should endeavour to reduce discrimination and inequality. If we eliminated the wage gap, growth in our gross domestic product would increase by up to 10%. In the meantime, Canada is far from achieving pay equity. The wage gap in Canada is the eighth largest among the OECD countries. More than ever in Canada, women are becoming educated and pursuing careers, but they still are not earning the same as men for the same work.

For every dollar earned by a man with a post-secondary education, his female colleague with the same education will receive only 82¢ in the public sector and 77¢ in the private sector. This gap is even wider when it comes to aboriginal women and women from visible minorities. The progress made over the generations by women who fought for pay equity cannot be attributed to the generosity of employers. In fact, employers often do not know that there is a problem.

Even 44 years after the Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada, which recommended a national child care program that would help women enter the workforce, there is still a shortage of child care spaces in Canada. That is why we are proposing very broad measures to address this problem, including the one we are debating today. The NDP has proposed a national child care program that would charge a maximum of $15 a day. Experts agree that this type of measure will truly result in pay equity.

A discussion of any major issue such as pay equity, the creation of day care spaces or the fight against poverty must include gender-based analysis. We also suggest that the federal tax be removed from very basic products such as feminine hygiene products. We are asking the House to consider anything related to women's reproductive lives as a basic commodity and not a luxury. We must eliminate the federal tax on feminine hygiene products. I would like to take these last few seconds to congratulate my colleague from London—Fanshawe for all her work on this issue.

I congratulate her for introducing this bill and this opposition motion today so that we can talk about women's normal sexual and reproductive life in the House of Commons. I also want to thank all the women who campaigned to put this issue back on the table and who have proven that by mobilizing people we can get results in the House. We are talking about this issue thanks to those women. I congratulate them for all their work.

(1025) Mr. Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel for her excellent speech. The question I am going to ask her is similar to the one I asked the member for London—Fanshawe but from another angle. I remember quite well that when we debated introducing the GST in Canada, one of the discussions that got the most media attention was about how many donuts you had to buy before they were not taxable.

If you bought one, two or three donuts, they would be taxable, but if you bought six or 12 donuts, you would not be charged any GST because they could be considered a meal. This type of debate took up a lot of time in our discussion about the GST, but it seems to me that we overlooked a far more important debate, such as this one, on products that cannot be considered a luxury, such as feminine hygiene products. I would like to hear what the member has to say about the direction the debate on the GST took and the reasons why this important issue was overlooked. Ms. Mylène Freeman : Mr.

Speaker, I mentioned some products that are considered medical products, which are GST-exempt. However, there are other zero-rated products that perhaps should not be or for which the reason for the exemption is not clear. For example, fondue chocolate is exempt from federal tax, as are liquid chocolate icing, cake decorations, cocktail cherries and wedding cakes. I would be very surprised if tampons were less important than wedding cakes.

Perhaps I do not have my priorities straight, but I think that in everyday life, if women had to choose between these two things, they would say that tampons are a bigger part of daily life and that it is much more important to have these feminine hygiene products. It just makes sense to remove the tax from these products. [ English ] Ms. Niki Ashton (Churchill, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, my colleague, a young woman herself, is someone who has come to know incredible feminist activists across our country who are making change every single day.

Our debate here today is a true reflection of the fierce feminist activists who are pushing this issue and so many issues that matter to young women here and now. I wonder if the member can speak to that incredible activism we are witnessing and acting on here today. Ms. Mylène Freeman : Mr. Speaker, this is a perfect example of being able to change things through advocacy and social media. It is amazing. This is a bill that had been introduced before, but it was not publicized, and these girls did not hear about it.

However, because of outreach by the member for London—Fanshawe , they looked at this issue and realized that this is something that is unfair and they decided to do something about it. The petition went viral online. It had 72,000 signatures, which is quite amazing. When we talk to young women and menstruators, we all think it that it is not fair and does not make any sense. It is a basic sort of thing we can be doing to remove a disproportionate financial burden for women. It is a tax, essentially, on menstruating women. We are the only ones who have to pay it.

It does not make any sense, because these are normal products that we need to use throughout the course of our lives. These products are not at all a luxury but are very much a basic necessity.

(1030) Mrs. Patricia Davidson (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today and speak to this opposition day motion. I commend my colleague across the way for bringing this motion forward. I do want to be very clear. Make no mistake that our government has had a long-term commitment to keeping taxes low and making life more affordable for all Canadians. By reducing taxes year after year and enhancing direct benefits to Canadians, the government has given families and individuals greater flexibility to make the choices that are right for them.

The reality is that Canadian families and individuals will receive $37 billion in tax relief and increased benefits in 2015-16 as a result of the actions our government has taken since 2006. Unlike the high-tax, high-spend plans of the opposition, our Conservative government believes in low taxes, tax fairness, and leaving more money where it belongs, which is in the pockets of hard-working Canadians. The opposition would have people believe that our government is not interested in cutting taxes.

That is hardly the case, which is why I will use my time today to show what our government is doing to help all Canadians, including women. Our government is delivering broad-based tax relief to all Canadians, including those whose income is too low to pay income tax on nearly everything they buy. We also believe in the importance of balancing the budget. That is why we are balancing the budget while taking prudent action to lower taxes, create jobs and economic growth, and provide security to Canadians.

Indeed, since 2006, we have cut taxes over 180 times, reducing the overall tax burden to its lowest level in 50 years. Due to measures our government has introduced, small business taxes will be almost 50% lower, which will allow businesses to create jobs and economic growth. Our new family measures, alongside others introduced by the government since 2006, will provide tax relief and benefits of up to about $6,600 for an average Canadian family of four. We have cut taxes over and over again.

It was our Conservative government that lowered the GST twice, from 7% to 6% and then to 5%, providing tax relief to all Canadian families. We did not just lower it on one product; we lowered it for its entire base, so that it benefits all Canadians, even those who do not earn enough to pay personal income tax. However, the New Democrats voted against both of those GST reductions. In fact, they were proud of it. The current NDP finance critic said that cuts to the GST “take us in the wrong direction.

I am very proud that our caucus stood opposed to that direction.” If the members opposite were serious about lower taxes and tax relief for all Canadians, they would have supported our government when it lowered the GST rate. We did not just lower it on one product; we lowered it for its entire base so that it benefits all Canadians, even those who do not earn enough to pay personal income tax. While doing so, we maintained the GST credit level, which translates into about $1.2 billion in GST credit benefits annually for low-income and modest-income Canadians.

Again, for all individuals, we have implemented increases to the basic personal amount, the amount of income that an individual can earn without paying federal personal income tax. As a result of these increases and adjustments for inflation, the basic personal amount one can earn before paying taxes is now $11,327. We have also reduced the lowest personal income tax rate to 15% from 16%, and increased the amount of income that individuals can earn before facing higher tax rates by increasing the upper limit of the two lowest personal income tax brackets.

(1035) We have introduced an enhanced working income tax benefit, allowing lower income Canadians to keep more of their hard-earned incomes and helping them build toward a more prosperous life. We have increased the amount of income that families can earn before the national child benefit supplement is fully phased out and before the Canada child tax base benefit begins to be phased out. This means that more families will be eligible to receive the Canada child tax benefit. It does not stop there.

We also introduced the tax-free savings account, TFSA, a flexible, registered, general purpose savings vehicle, which allows Canadians to earn tax-free investment income to more easily meet their lifetime savings needs. As of the end of 2013, nearly 11 million Canadians had opened a TFSA. Mr. Guy Caron : Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am sorry to interrupt the debate of my colleague from Sarnia—Lambton. I know that we are usually flexible in the content of debates on various motions and bills that are presented, but what we are currently discussing is actually very tight.

We are supposed to be debating the issue of the removal of the GST from feminine hygiene products. I understand that the member wants to talk about all those tax initiatives the government has undertaken, but I do believe the motion has been tightened in a way that we could actually have a specific debate on the importance of the burden the GST represents on that specific item, which is not supposed to be a luxury item, on the contrary. I would like to know if the member could speak specifically to the opposition day motion. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Harold Albrecht) : I would take your point under advisement.

However, I do think the member is speaking about the GST. I would urge her to come to the point of the debate as quickly as possible. Mrs. Patricia Davidson : Mr. Speaker, as far as the intervention goes, we will continue. Part of the motion does refer to the GST and certainly a specific product, but I am pointing out many of the things our government is doing. The TFSA is a popular means of saving for Canadians at all income levels. Individuals with annual incomes of less than $80,000 accounted for more than 80% of all TFSA holders and about 75% of TFSA assets as of the end of 2013.

About half of TFSA holders had annual incomes of less than $42,000. Those who had less than— [ Translation ] Mr. Guy Caron : Mr. Speaker, I completely understand your decision, but I would like to point out that we are halfway through the debate. We talked only about the GST at the beginning and now we are hearing about the TFSA limit, which has nothing to do with feminine hygiene products. I would like the member to focus on the essence of the motion for the rest of her speaking time.

The motion is very specific, and I do not think that the member will have any trouble sticking to this particular topic instead of talking about measures that have nothing to do with the debate. I understand that we have some flexibility, but flexibility does not involve talking about a completely different topic for more than half of the debate. [ English ] Mr. Tom Lukiwski : Mr. Speaker, on the same point, I would point out to my hon. colleague that some of the previous speakers on the NDP benches have been talking of issues not specifically about the removal of GST from feminine hygiene products.

I heard comments about income inequality, for example. If the member wants to suggest that only our side is straying from the topic, he should listen to some of the comments by members of his party. I think the comments by our member are perfectly acceptable. They are framing this debate in context. I would suggest to my hon. friend that if he wants to make a complaint about veering off topic, he talk to some of his own members.

(1040) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Harold Albrecht) : I will take a further point and then we will get on with debate. [ Translation ] Mr. Guy Caron : Mr. Speaker, I heard my colleague's comments, but I listened to the two speeches on our side of the House. These speeches had a very specific connection to income inequality and gender inequality in this very specific debate. There was a very clear connection to the content of the motion.

However, when a member starts talking about TFSAs or other measures that have nothing to do with this specific debate, it detracts from the topic and I think it detracts from the seriousness of the motion we are debating. [ English ] The Acting Speaker (Mr. Harold Albrecht) : I would point out, as I did earlier, to all members that there is some latitude allowed for debate within the various issues that we deal with here in Parliament. I think the hon. member had started on that, is progressing to that and is pointing out the different ways in which taxes have been reduced.

I would urge her to come to the point of the GST specifically to this motion that is currently before the House as early as she can. The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton. Mrs. Patricia Davidson : Mr. Speaker, many of the people who use feminine hygiene products are those who have young families. I would also like to talk about some of the means that we have introduced to help young families who, again, need to avail themselves of the feminine hygiene products. We also introduced the children's fitness tax credit and the children's art tax credit to help families with children.

We put more money in the pockets of families with children by introducing the universal child care benefit, UCCB. All of these things are making it easier and more palatable for women to be able to afford the feminine hygiene products. We have also introduced the registered disability savings plan, a tax assisted savings plan that helps individuals with severe disabilities. This helps them and their families save for long-term financial security. Again, this is a group that is affected and uses feminine hygiene products.

We enhanced support for caregivers of infirm dependent family members by introducing the family caregiver tax credit and by removing the $10,000 limit on eligible expenses that caregivers can claim under the medical expense tax credit in respect of a dependent relative. Again, this puts more money back into the pockets of those who need to purchase feminine hygiene products. We have provided additional support to adoptive parents by enhancing and increasing the adoption expense tax credit to better recognize the costs of adopting a child.

We have enhanced support for workers by introducing the Canada employment credit, which recognizes employees' work expenses for things such as safety gear, uniforms and supplies. Again, this is a group that uses feminine hygiene products.

We further provided support to students and their families, which we heard about from the opposition side, by exempting scholarship income from taxation, introducing the textbook tax credit, making registered education savings plans more responsive to changing needs, and lowering the program duration requirements for the tuition, education and textbook tax credits applying to foreign university programs.

We have assisted first-time homebuyers, who are often in the younger age groups of our residents, by introducing the first-time homebuyers tax credit, and increasing the registered retirement savings plan withdrawal limit under the homebuyers plan. For Canadian seniors and pensioners who helped build this country, we have provided about $3 billion in additional annual targeted tax relief by increasing the age credit amount by $2,000.

We have doubled the pension income credit amount to $2,000, and have raised the age limit for maturing savings in registered pension plans and registered retirement savings plans from 69 to 71. We have also introduced pension income splitting. This benefits over 2.2 million Canadians. The opposition may ask what this has to do with feminine hygiene products, and I would like to state that regardless of age, there are feminine hygiene products that are used by women in every age group in this country.

Building on this tremendous record of tax relief, the Prime Minister announced in October 2014 further tax relief and benefit increases for all families with children. This includes enhancing the UCCB, increasing the maximum dollar amounts claimable under the child care expense deduction, and introducing the family tax cut. The enhanced UCCB will provide an increased benefit of $160 per month for children under the age of six, and a new benefit of $60 per month for children ages six through seventeen, effective January 1, 2015.

The family tax cut allows a higher income spouse or common-law partner to effectively transfer up to $50,000 of taxable income to a spouse or common-law partner up to a maximum benefit of $2,000. Again, this is putting more money back into the hands of those who need it. We have also doubled the amount of expenses that may be claimed under the children's fitness tax credit to $1,000 starting in 2014, and have made the credit refundable starting in 2015.

(1045) Most recently, economic action plan 2015 took our government's record of tax relief one step further. It announced an increase in the TFSA annual contribution limit to $10,000, effective for the 2015 and subsequent taxation years. This represents tax savings of about $1.1 billion over the 2015-16 to 2019-20 period. I could spend my entire time today listing off all the ways that we are helping to lower taxes, create tax fairness, and letting Canadians keep more of their own money.

The opposition likes to talk about tax fairness in today's motion, as though this is something they have any experience in achieving. They also like to forget that they voted against every single tax cut that this government has brought forward. Our government, on the contrary, actually understands that tax fairness means lower taxes for all Canadians in all income levels, and not only do we understand it, we are making it a reality. These tax reductions have helped build a solid foundation for future economic growth, more jobs, and higher living standards for Canadians.

This is good for the overall economy and the right thing to do, which is why tax relief has been a commitment by this government since 2006. This commitment starts right at the most fundamental level, the family. Canadians at all income levels are benefiting from our government's low-tax plan. In fact, more than one million low-income Canadians have been removed from the tax rolls altogether. Measures introduced by our government since 2006 will provide tax relief and benefits of up to about $6,600 for a typical two-earner Canadian family of four in 2015.

That is a lot more money left in the pockets of Canadians as a result of our actions to spend as they see fit; all of that, may I add, is while balancing the budget. One of the most significant ways to ensure the prosperity of Canadians is to keep Canada's books in order and bring the budget to balance. We promised Canadians that we would balance the budget, and we delivered on that promise. However, we did not do it by raising taxes or cutting transfers for education and health care.

We focused on controlling operating expenses for federal departments and identifying efficiencies that focused on making government operations leaner. A balanced budget will preserve Canada's low-tax plan and allow for further tax reduction, fostering growth and the creation of jobs for the benefit of all Canadians. Canadians across the country, including in my riding of Sarnia—Lambton , understand the importance of living within their means and expect government to do the same.

This new balanced budget legislation will prevent future governments from running deficits, except in extraordinary circumstances. [ Translation ] Mr. Guy Caron : Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's speech, and I would like to raise this point again. The motion we are discussing today is very specific. It is about removing the GST from feminine hygiene products. The member did not talk about that except for maybe in the first two minutes of her speech. Now she is talking about the law on balanced budgets, which has nothing at all to do with the specific motion we are discussing today.

She has been talking for at least six or seven minutes but has not addressed the matter before us. I would like to ask my colleague to speak specifically to the content of the motion we are discussing today.

(1050) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton) : I appreciate the hon. member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques 's comments. As the Speaker said 15 minutes ago, the subject before the House today is related to the GST. As the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton said, when the subject is related to taxes, quite a few reasons and arguments can be relevant to the subject before the House. I find that the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton has connected the two issues. It is difficult to speak specifically to the subject before the House, particularly when that subject is the GST.

I therefore give the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton two more minutes. [ English ] Mrs. Patricia Davidson : Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear for this House. Our government is always looking to examine further tax decreases and exemptions. That includes looking at things such as has been brought forward here today. On top of presenting Canadians with a balanced budget, this government can always be counted on to further reduce Canadians' tax burden.

All consumers benefit if the general sales tax rate is kept as low as possible, by maintaining the comprehensive base for the tax and targeting tax relief more broadly than through specific product exemptions. The GST applies to a very broad base, with only a limited and narrow set of exemptions. This includes prescription drugs, certain medical devices, basic groceries, residential rents, and health care services. Specific tax relief from the GST is provided for low and modest-income Canadians through the GST credit rather than excluding more items from the tax base.

The GST credit provides up-front support to low and modest-income families and individuals to offset their sales tax burden, thereby ensuring that sales tax burdens are sensitive to differences in income and family type. In spite of the reduction in the rate of the GST to 5%, the GST credit has been maintained at existing levels. By putting more money in the pockets of Canadians, we are helping them to make ends meet and spend more on what matters to them. I do find it a bit rich to think that the NDP is even advocating for any tax relief.

It is the very same NDP that has voted against every tax decrease that we have introduced. Our government will continue with our low-tax plan for jobs, growth, and security. I hope that the opposition members will finally support our low-tax plan. They did not support the reduction to the GST, but now is their chance to support our low-tax plan for all Canadians. With their new-found zeal for tax relief for Canadians, I would hope that the New Democrats will take every opportunity to support the real tax relief we have been putting forward since we took government. [ Translation ] Mr.

Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, that was a very long 20-minute speech. I have a very simple question for the member for Sarnia—Lambton . How can she justify the fact that there is no GST on Viagra or Cialis, while GST does apply to feminine hygiene products? My question is very specific, so I would like a very specific answer. [ English ] Mrs. Patricia Davidson : Mr. Speaker, certainly I do not think I said anywhere in my speech that the designation of feminine hygiene products was something that did not need to be looked at.

I am quite sure that the member was listening, but I am not sure what he was hearing. Members need to know that we have spent nine years reducing taxes for Canadian families. As a result, the tax burden for families is at the lowest level that it has been in 50 years. A typical family is saving up to $6,600 a year in taxes. These things all go toward helping those people afford what they need to afford, and families certainly have reaped the benefit, of up to $6,600 a year, as I said. We have been opposed every step of the way on these reductions, but we will continue with them.

We do know that this government will put more money back in the pockets of Canadians.

(1055) Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the member spoke a lot about the federal budget, but I am inclined to believe Jim Flaherty over the current government. In fact, the tax breaks that the Conservatives are talking about are in essence tax breaks for Canada's wealthiest people. It is not a fair budget. They can contrast that to what the Liberal Party is talking about, such as the middle-class tax break of 7%, and so forth. We are proposing a fair tax system. I found the spin in the member's speech a little interesting, no doubt right from the Prime Minister's Office.

My question is very specific. Other provincial jurisdictions, through PST, have recognized the value of exempting feminine hygiene products. Why would Ottawa not recognize what the provinces are doing and allow for the exemption? Mrs. Patricia Davidson : Mr. Speaker, I did have some comments in the original text of my speech that were going to refer to some of the Liberal proposals, but thanks to the member opposite, with all of his points of order, I ran out of time to do that. It may be at a future time that we can discuss some of the issues the member would like to discuss.

I do want to remind people that we have been working for nine years, reducing taxes for Canadian families. I have said that before; the tax burden is at the lowest level it has been in 50 years. Canadians know that this is the government that is putting money back in their pockets. I do not believe I said anywhere in my speech that we were opposed to this motion. I cannot recall that I did, although everyone is implying that I did. As far as I am concerned, we are not opposed to it. The government is certainly going to consider this proposal in future budgets, and we will go from there. Mr.

Dan Albas (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that this particular proposal will benefit people, particularly those of lower income. This goes back to the greater aim of what the government has tried to do, which is to provide tax relief for everyone. Would the member not agree that cutting the GST from 7% to 6% to 5% would probably benefit people of low income better than any other measure? As appropriate as this motion may be, would not broader-based tax relief for people of lower income go further for Canadian families? Mrs.

Patricia Davidson : Mr. Speaker, the answer is yes, of course. We have lowered the GST from 7% to 6% to 5%, and that put money back in the pockets of every Canadian. The other thing I think we need to keep in mind is the fact that the GST credit, which was set when the GST was 7%, has not been decreased, although the GST has. The money going back to those low and middle-income Canadians has remained at the level that it was. It has not been decreased. The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Bruce Stanton) : The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton will have five minutes remaining in the period for questions and comments when the House next returns to debate on the question after another part of the day's business. Before we get on with statements by members, I would also like to thank the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga for helping out with the chairing duties this morning, which he did quite well, I understand. Other duties took me out of the House.

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Statements by Members [ English ] RBC Cup Mr. Dan Albas (Okanagan—Coquihalla, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this weekend the finest junior hockey teams in Canada will meet in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba to play some hockey, but not just any hockey. This is the RBC Cup. Across Canada, 129 teams from 10 leagues competed to be the one of just five teams in Manitoba trying to take home the cup. It is my great honour to congratulate the players, coaches and management from the Penticton Vees, which are one of these five teams.

What is truly exciting about the Penticton Vees this season is that the team is not led by a gifted few, but rather it is led by hearts, hard work and, most important, team work. This is perhaps one of the most balanced total team efforts in recent history, and that is a great example of the leadership in the organization. As the fans in Penticton like to say, “Go Vees Go”.

(1100) [ Translation ] Environmental Technology Innovation Centre Mr. Réjean Genest (Shefford, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I am proud to inform the House that, in partnership with the City of Granby, the Université de Sherbrooke plans to create a centre of excellence, the Carrefour d'innovation en technologie écologique, or CITE, this fall in the new phase of Granby's industrial park.

Needless to say, I am delighted that the Université de Sherbrooke is coming to Granby, because it will help us meet the needs of the region's manufacturing sector in terms of innovation and training, through its partnership with the public, private and academic sectors. There is no doubt that the activities developed at the CITE by the university's researchers and its corporate partners will clearly define the economic identity of the region, and this niche identity will become a benchmark in the bio-upgrading and eco-design of products made from biomaterials.

That is why I am confident that the financial spinoffs of this project will be shared locally, as well as across Quebec and Canada.

[ English ] Professional Cycling Mr. Jim Eglinski (Yellowhead, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, Canada's biggest professional cycling event will be held in Alberta this year, from September 2 to 7, with riders from across the globe participating, and an anticipated 45 million TV viewers. The cycling event will start in Grande Prairie on September 2, through to Grande Cache, the Municipal District of Greenview, on September 3, and on to Miette Hot Springs in Jasper National Park. There will be a sprint up Marmot Basin on September 4.

On September 5, the world-class cyclists will continue on to Edson, then to Spruce Grove on September 6, ending in Edmonton on September 7. I encourage all Canadians to cheer on the participants by attending this world-class cycling event in beautiful Alberta. Come visit us and enjoy the great ride. If people want to see more about this, they can watch it on www.tourofalberta.ca.

Arts and Culture Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, for so many reasons, it is great to see President Aquino from the Philippines in Canada, building what will be no doubt a very positive relationship in the years ahead. Last night I had the pleasure of attending the state dinner for President Aquino and what a privilege it was to be sitting with a YouTube sensation Maria Aragon. She is a talented young lady with an amazing voice. Maria was famously discovered by Lady Gaga. Her video has views in excess of 55 million people. She sang in front of Princess Kate and Prince William.

In 2011, she was the most searched term in Canada. Maria will be releasing a single and an album in the next few months. Hailing from Winnipeg, I would like to extend a warm welcome to Maria who is in Ottawa today.

Lighthouse Preservation Mr. Gerald Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Barry MacDonald, past president of the Nova Scotia Lighthouse Preservation Society. Barry's tireless work in lighthouse preservation has been instrumental in protecting historic lighthouses across Nova Scotia and across the country, safeguarding them for future generations. He also provided his expertise during the drafting of the 2008 Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act, important legislation that created a process for designating and preserving historically significant lighthouses across Canada.

Most recently, Barry and society members have been champions of the Sambro Island lighthouse, the oldest lighthouse in the Americas. Since 1759, the Sambro Island light has guided countless people to safety, away from the dangerous rocks and shoals that surround the island, and onward to Chebucto Head and into Halifax Harbour. Because of Barry and the support of the Nova Scotia Lighthouse Preservation Society, I am certain that the light will continue to be part of our history. I thank Barry for all of his service and dedication to lighthouse preservation across Canada.

World Red Cross Red Crescent Day Ms. Hélène Laverdière (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, today we celebrate World Red Cross Red Crescent Day and recognize the critical work of the international Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. The movement, the largest humanitarian network in the world, is dedicated to preventing and alleviating human suffering in warfare and in emergencies, such as epidemics, floods and earthquakes. (1105) [ Translation ] This World Red Cross and Red Crescent Day marks the 50th anniversary of their seven fundamental principles of action.

These principles—humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntary service, unity and universality—are the basis of the movement's decisions and actions around the world. [ English ] Today we recognize the dedication of the international Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and it national societies, including the Canadian Red Cross, of course. [ Translation ] I commend them on their work to protect the life and dignity of those in need.

[ English ] President of the Philippines Mr. Mark Adler (York Centre, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Philippine President Benigno Aquino III arrived in Canada. I, along with some of my parliamentary colleagues, as well as scores of members of the Filipino community, were on hand to give him a warm Canadian welcome. Canada is home to one of the largest Philippine diaspora communities in the world. In fact, some 800,000 Filipinos currently call Canada home. Many arrive here under the caregiver program. Once here, in addition to working long hours, many take courses to upgrade their skills.

They come to Canada to be part of our Canadian family, and what a contribution they are making to make Canada a better country for all. I am proud to say that York Centre is home to one of the largest Filipino communities in the country. Each year we celebrate Philippine Independence Day in Earl Bales Park, where tens of thousands attend. In late August, the entire Bathurst-Wilson area is closed to traffic, where over 100,000 people attend the festival Taste of Manilla. It is my great pleasure to welcome President Aquino to Canada. I know he will feel right at home in our great Canadian family. Mabuhay.

Kitchener—Waterloo 2014 Citizen of the Year Mr. Peter Braid (Kitchener—Waterloo, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Hon. Walter McLean, the 2014 Citizen of the Year for Kitchener—Waterloo. This prestigious award presented by the Lions Club acknowledges the contributions of outstanding leaders in our community. Walter was the member of Parliament for Waterloo for 14 years and was at the forefront of Canada's stand against apartheid.

Since leaving office, Walter has continued to advance civil society and international development issues, and continues to make a deep and lasting impact, both at home and abroad. For our community, he is a wonderful example of the value and the honour of public service, which is why the Citizen of the Year award is so well deserved. We thank Walter for making a difference.

[ Translation ] Second World War Mr. Tarik Brahmi (Saint-Jean, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, 70 years ago today, Nazi Germany surrendered, sealing the fate of the wild saga of Nazi ideology forever. For my grandmother, Antoinette, widowed during the German occupation with a one-year old and a three-year old, this marked the end of a lengthy ordeal. May 8 is also an opportunity for the Algerian community to remember that on May 8, 1945, the French Army massacred thousands in the town of Sétif who hungered for freedom and independence.

May 8 is a time to remember that we have a responsibility to combat all the ideologies that consider one category of people superior to another, or members of one religion superior to those of another. On May 8, 2015, let us remember. Let us remain vigilant.

[ English ] Taxation Mrs. Kelly Block (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Liberal leader has introduced a plan that would raise taxes on the middle class. The Liberal leader admits there is a $2 billion hole in that plan. He also admitted that he would have to raise taxes on people earning less than $60,000 a year by cancelling their expanded tax-free savings accounts. Economists have noted that his proposed tax increases will not raise the money necessary to fund his expensive schemes. His numbers just do not add up.

The only way to make the numbers work will be higher taxes on the middle class by taking away tax-free savings accounts and income splitting for seniors. Canadians know that while the Liberals will raise taxes on the middle class, on this side of the House, we will protect middle-class incomes.

[ Translation ] Second World War Mr. Marc-André Morin (Laurentides—Labelle, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, today, as we celebrate the 70th anniversary of the end of the Second World War and the defeat of Nazism, we should think of the generation of people who sacrificed themselves to save humanity from the worst scourge in history. The Laurentian region provided a large contingent of volunteers, sometimes all the sons in the same family, such as the five Bélair brothers from Nominingue and the three Chapeleau brothers from Prévost. Some of them were too young, but they still left for the front at 17 years of age.

They accomplished amazing feats. They were men like Jacques Viger, from Nominingue, of the Royal 22nd Regiment and André Rousseau, from La Minerve, of the Royal Canadian Navy. With the same courage they showed in combat, they rebuilt their lives and became model citizens in their communities. No one gave as much and asked for so little in return. We are very fortunate: these two young men are still with us. They are visiting the site where in 1939 a decision was made that changed their lives.

(1110) [ English ] Taxation Ms. Roxanne James (Scarborough Centre, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government created our family tax cut and universal child care benefit to ensure that every Canadian family with children would have more money in its pockets. Canadian families have been benefiting from our universal child care benefit since 2006. Now the Liberals want to take it away. Instead of a family tax cut, the leader of the Liberal Party wants to introduce a family tax hike. He wants high taxes and huge deficits. This does not help the middle class or people with low incomes.

Our plan benefits 100% of families with children. I call on the opposition to abandon their high-tax schemes and support our plan for families.

Victory in Europe Day Hon. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, today is the 70th anniversary of VE Day, a special and poignant moment of remembrance and reminder, of celebration and tribute, which we marked in a ceremony of remembrance at the cenotaph in my riding in Côte Saint-Luc. We remembered those who made the ultimate sacrifice so that we may live in freedom and peace. We were reminded of the values that they sought to protect and preserve, and that underpin our freedom and democracy today. I recalled the words of my father on my fifth birthday that VE Day.

As he put it, the VE Day marked the end of two wars: the Nazi war against the allies and the Nazi war against the Jews. We celebrated Canada's role in the liberation of the Netherlands in the presence of the Dutch Consul General, and we paid tribute to the veterans among us. My riding is privileged to have one of the largest percentage of veterans in the country, and when they returned from the horrors of the war, they rebuilt their lives as they rebuilt our communities. Indeed, my riding, like so many across Canada, is full of facilities and institutions built by veterans.

Thanks to them, we can look to the future with hope. May the values that inspired them inspire us all.

[ Translation ] VE Day Mr. Pierre Lemieux (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, today is the 70th anniversary of VE day, marking the official end of the Second World War in Europe. More than one million brave soldiers left their homes, their families and their friends to serve Canada during the Second World War.

Tragically, more than 45,000 were never to return and another 55,000 were injured. [ English ] Despite its small population of some 11 million people at that time, Canada punched well above its weight and became a significant military power by the end of the Second World War, and we emerged as a key player on the world stage. The important sacrifices made to defeat evil will have a permanent place in history. VE Day reminds us that freedom comes at great cost. It has never been free. As we mark Victory in Europe Day today, and everyday hereafter, we will remember those who gave so much.

Employment Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' economic record is nothing short of shameful: 20,000 jobs lost just this month, at a time when a quarter-million more Canadians are unemployed than before the recession in 2008; and another 1,000 job cuts in the auto sector just announced, on top of the 400,000 good manufacturing jobs that have already been lost under this government. Youth unemployment is double the national average, while the Conservatives leave $30 million sitting on the table, unspent, instead of helping young people find jobs.

Job quality is at a record low, while far too many Canadian families rely on precarious, insecure jobs to make ends meet. Instead of a budget plan to help the millions of families struggling under the government, the Conservatives offer nothing but tax breaks and loopholes for the wealthy few. The New Democrats have proposed practical steps that will help fix the damage done by the Prime Minister and create good jobs and opportunity for Canadian families. Together, we will build an economy that works for Canadians when Canadians elect a New Democrat government this October.

Taxation Mr. LaVar Payne (Medicine Hat, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government is cutting taxes for hard-working middle-class Canadians with our family tax cut and the universal child care benefit. Our low-tax plan for families is working and we are ensuring 100% of families with kids will benefit with almost $2,000 back in their pockets. The Liberal leader confirmed that he will take this all away and introduce a high-tax plan for middle-class families. We know this because there is a $2 billion hole in his plan and the only way he can find that money is to raise taxes on Canadians.

Canadians know that, unlike the Liberals, we keep our promises and are the only party Canadians can trust to lower their taxes.

ORAL QUESTIONS Oral Questions (1115) [ Translation ] Ethics Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail reported that the Prime Minister's Office was directly involved in tampering with the audit report on the expenses of Conservative Senator Mike Duffy. According to the RCMP, some members of the Prime Minister 's inner circle did everything they could to prevent problems for Mike Duffy and his colleagues in the Senate. Can the Prime Minister tell us who in his office intervened to alter the report on Mike Duffy's fraudulent expenses? Mr.

Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question many times. This matter is before the court, so it would be inappropriate for me to comment. However, as I said yesterday, a number of New Democrats used House resources to violate the rules of the House. [ English ] In fact, the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent used $31,888 to support an illegal office in Montreal and is refusing to repay the taxpayers of her riding. I hope she will do the right thing and repay taxpayers that $31,000. Mr.

Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP) : More evasions and more refusals to answer, Mr. Speaker. The RCMP have found some answers, though. The RCMP is saying that the Prime Minister's Office engaged in a deliberate strategy to suppress and alter information. RCMP Corporal Jolette said this about the confidential audit change cover-up: The report, we’ve learned through the investigation, had made its ways to the PMO, to their office, and...revisions, what they wanted to have written in the report, was done.

When will the government finally come clean about attempts from within the PMO to alter this confidential audit report to protect Mike Duffy? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have answered that. Again, I will repeat that this is obviously before the court, and the member knows that it would be inappropriate for me to comment. However, it is a sad day, because still there are 68 members of the NDP who owe taxpayers some $2.7 million. I understand that they have admitted their guilt and are trying to seek a settlement on this.

They have actually taken it away from the court, they have admitted their guilt, and they are trying to seek a settlement. I think Canadian taxpayers will settle for the full $2.7 million they owe them. Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's Office is implicated in a cover-up of serious criminal behaviour, and we get buffoonery instead of answers. That did not work for President Nixon; it will not work well for the Prime Minister , either.

The RCMP also said: Throughout our investigation...we've learned that PMO has had a lot of communication with the diverse senators who were involved in these committees.... Will the spokesperson for the Prime Minister now tell Canadians which Conservative senators the Prime Minister's Office was in touch with about altering the confidential Deloitte report? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, it is the members opposite who are engaged in buffoonery when they think that Canadian taxpayers do not care about the $2.7 million they used illegally. It is no wonder that the new premier of Alberta is trying to distance herself from this crew over here. It is a shame, because they came to Ottawa and said they would be different. They said they would be different when they were elected, but they are no different than the Liberal Party. They are the same group of people illegally using the taxpayers' money and refusing to pay it back.

I hope they will finally do the right thing and repay the millions of dollars they owe the Canadian taxpayer. Ms. Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, Canadians are not fooled by the non-answers from this member. It is all about the Prime Minister . (1120) [ Translation ] This political scandal is tarnishing the Prime Minister's Office. Canadians have a right to know why members of the Prime Minister 's inner circle were trying so hard to protect Conservative Senator Mike Duffy in the face of serious fraud charges.

Why did the Prime Minister 's entourage interfere in the Senate's internal affairs, going so far as to tamper with a confidential report? Did the Prime Minister know that his office was tampering with the Deloitte report? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this case is before the court. It would be inappropriate for me to comment. As I said, 68 NDP members unfortunately used taxpayer resources to support an illegal office in Montreal, violating the rules of the House.

In fact, the member for Beauport—Limoilou used more than $31,000 to support an illegal office. [ English ] I hope that these members of Parliament will do the right thing and pay back the millions of dollars they all owe the taxpayers. Ms. Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, I wish he had the courage to make those accusations outside so that we could sue him. [ Translation ] On February 7, 2013, the Prime Minister 's chief of staff wrote the following to his colleagues: “A purpose of this is to put Mike in a different bucket and to prevent him from going squirrelly in a bunch of weekend panel shows.” That is what people in the Prime Minister's entourage were doing to protect Senator Duffy. Was the Prime Minister okay with his chief of staff playing a

part in the schemes to protect Senator Duffy and prevent his excessive and illegal spending from turning into a political scandal? [ English ] Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, again, I have answered that, and the member knows that this is in front of the courts, so it would be inappropriate to comment. With respect to going outside, I would be delighted, after question period, to meet the member outside to talk about the $24,498 this member personally owes the taxpayers.

I would be very delighted to go outside and talk about the 68 members of the NDP. In fact, I invite the member to meet me outside after question period so we can go over these 68 members, the $2.7 million, and the 23 members who owe $1.1 million. I look— The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton) : Order, please. The hon. member for Kings—Hants .

Taxation Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party has a plan for fairness for Canada's middle class. A Liberal government will send a tax-free monthly Canada child benefit to families to help them raise their kids. The Liberal plan is more generous, it is simpler, and it is a fairer way to help Canadian families. Meanwhile, the Conservatives are going ahead with their income-splitting scheme, which mainly benefits the wealthy. Why are the Conservatives prioritizing tax breaks for the wealthy instead of helping middle-class families who are struggling? Hon.

Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the member should have read the Financial Post today. If he had, he would have seen this: Almost one in five Canadians with a TFSA have maximized the contribution room in their account, according to documents from the Canada Revenue Agency obtained by the Financial Post . It’s not just high-income Canadians who appear to have maxed out their TFSA, which offers a life-time exemption from taxes on any investment gains.

Right across the income spectrum, significant percentages of Canadians appear poised to benefit from the increase in contribution limits. In fact, “Working-class finds ways to max out TFSAs”. It is “60% of Canadians who earn less than $60K”. That is a quote. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, it shows how out of touch the Conservatives are with the challenges facing middle-income families when they think that at the end of the year a working middle-income family actually has an extra $20,000 kicking around to put into a TFSA. The Conservatives are also out of touch in terms of their priorities.

They are spending $100,000 per ad during the NHL playoffs. That could create 30 summer jobs for young Canadians. At the same time, the Conservatives are holding back funding for important programs that could actually help create jobs for young Canadians. When will the government get its priorities straight, and when will it start caring more for struggling, middle-class families? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Liberals do not think that people earning $60,000 a year are middle class.

The Liberals think that people who earn $60,000 are too rich and therefore should pay higher taxes. My data comes right from the Canada Revenue Agency publication. It was just in the Financial Post today. It shows that two-thirds of people who max out their tax-free savings accounts earn less than $60,000 a year. Maybe some of them had a loved one pass away and had a small inheritance. Maybe seniors downsized their homes and wanted to invest the proceeds. Maybe they had a one-time pension payment.

We want to ensure that those proceeds go into their tax-free savings accounts, not into the hands of a tax-happy Liberal government

(1125) [ Translation ] Employment Mr. Emmanuel Dubourg (Bourassa, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, young people across the country are unemployed. The youth unemployment rate is twice the national average. Meanwhile, the Conservative government has no trouble spending money on partisan ads, and it is neglecting hiring programs for youth. It is now May and $30 million of the funding for this program is just sitting there. That is 20% of the funding for this program that is not being used. What are this Conservative government's priorities? Why does it not want to help our young people find jobs? Hon.

Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our priority is to create jobs by lowering taxes. The Liberals think that a government needs to spend money as quickly as possible in order to create jobs. However, the Liberals have admitted to a hole of at least $2 billion in their plan. Economists are saying that the hole would be much bigger than that. The only way the Liberals can fill that hole is by increasing taxes for job creators and workers. That is a big risk, and we will not adopt that policy.

Ethics Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, still no answers to our questions. Even Jill Anne Joseph, the Senate director of internal audit at the time, found that there were far too many changes to and deletions from the reports to the Senate. As she said to police: The report, to my mind, was becoming very scant. There was very little in there to justify the acceptance of a repayment which had already been made. I will ask the question again. Was the Prime Minister aware that his office was tampering with the Deloitte report? [ English ] Mr.

Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this is before the courts. The member knows it would be inappropriate for me to comment on that. What is not before the courts right now, because I understand the NDP has admitted guilt and is trying to create a settlement, is the fact that this particular member personally owes the taxpayers close to $30,000 for an illegal office in Montreal. Of course, the NDP broke the rules of the House.

It is a very troubling pattern that is emerging, a pattern of abuse from the NDP, whether it is robocalls, these illegal offices, inappropriate mailings or illegal union donations. I hope it will start to do the right thing and repay taxpayers. [ Translation ] Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it bothers me that the Conservatives are refusing to tell Canadians whether the Prime Minister 's Office was involved in tampering with the report on Mike Duffy's expenses. That is troubling.

Corporal Jolette revealed that the Prime Minister 's Office was in frequent contact with several senators involved in Senate committees that, coincidentally, were studying the Deloitte reports on three senators' expenses. Can the Prime Minister confirm his office's involvement in tampering with the Deloitte report? [ English ] Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, again, I just answered that question. It is sad. When the NDP members came to the House, they came as a party, and said they would be different.

Ottawa has really changed them. They have actually outdone the Liberals. Now, the Liberals still owe $40 million, but the NDP members are catching up very quickly. It is more its members who are personally responsible to the taxpayers, 68 of them for $2.7 million, and another 23 of them for $1.1 million. That is a lot of money that Canadians worked very hard for. I hope they will do the right thing and repay that money. Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, let us go through some facts.

The RCMP have found that the Office of the Prime Minister of Canada secretly engaged in an elaborate strategy to cover up potential fraud and breach of trust, and manipulate the findings of the audit of Mike Duffy, and yet the Prime Minister continues to duck and hide. Canadians deserve answers. Will the Prime Minister at least admit what the RCMP have already made clear, that it was his office that organized the coverup, that it was his key senators who manipulated the audit, and that it was his chief of staff who cut the $90,000 cheque to keep Mike Duffy quiet? It is a simple question.

(1130) Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, again, that is before the courts. It would be inappropriate for me to answer. Let me quote a justice who reviewed our boundaries, “The advice received at those public hearings, combined with the inappropriate involvement of at least two Members of Parliament, persuaded the Commission to conclude that the status quo, with a few minor” changes was needed. That is about the member of Parliament for Timmins—James Bay who just asked this question.

He voted against his constituents on a number of occasions, so he was worried that he would not be elected again. He tried to gerrymander his riding to get rid of those people. He gets up and asks a question about ethics, when he broke the biggest rule of all: do not interfere with the court process. Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, that the Prime Minister of Canada has to hide behind that man and those pitiful evasions is pretty sad. We are talking about whether or not the Prime Minister of Canada misled this House and Canadians.

He assured Canadians that that audit report was completely independent, and that has been proven false by the RCMP. It was his key advisers who told Tkachuk to whitewash issues of potential fraud and breach of trust. The Prime Minister needs to explain himself. Either his key advisers misled him about the coverup, or the Prime Minister of this country has misled Canadians. Which is it? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, what is sad is this member of Parliament interfering with one of the most important processes that happen here.

A justice brings that out and highlights two members of Parliament, of everybody in this place, highlights two NDP members of Parliament for trying to interfere in a very important process. The reason he was trying to do that is because he broke his promise to his constituents time and time again. As opposed to apologizing to his constituents, he tried to get rid of them by realigning the boundaries in his favour. Whether it is this member or the 68 others who owe $2.7 million, they are not the same party that came here in 2011.

[ Translation ] Employment Mr. Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, Canada lost 20,000 jobs in April. In the regions, jobs are disappearing faster than we can count them. Some 30 workers lost their jobs at Enercon in Matane. Another 125 workers at the Resolute Forest Products mill in Mauricie will be out of a job. In Havre-Saint-Pierre, 31 workers learned last month that they will be laid off from Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium. Why is there nothing in the Conservative budget for those workers? Hon.

Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we have a training plan that includes the Canada job grant. We also introduced an apprenticeship grant. Thanks to the deal with Europe, international trade will create 80,000 jobs. Lastly, we are lowering taxes for job creators. We have introduced the largest tax reduction for small and medium-sized businesses in the past 25 years. The NDP will vote against it, and the Liberal leader has already announced that he will raise taxes for small businesses. Ms.

Rosane Doré Lefebvre (Alfred-Pellan, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, youth were particularly hard hit in April. The youth unemployment rate went from 0.6% to 13.6%, which is more than double Canada's unemployment rate. More than 13,000 jobs disappeared in just one month. Furthermore, there is nothing in the Conservative budget to create jobs for youth. Will young people have to wait for a new government for this situation to turn around? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we have already announced the apprenticeship grant, which will help get young workers into skilled trades that are in demand. We also established the Canada job grant, which, in partnership with employers, will create jobs and train future young employees. We have also reduced taxes for small and medium-sized businesses, which are job creators. Our budget delivered the largest tax cut in 25 years for small business. The NDP will vote against it, and the Liberal leader has already announced that he wants to increase small business taxes.

Taxation Ms. Rosane Doré Lefebvre (Alfred-Pellan, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, there are little things that the government can do sometimes to help people, and a very simple thing that the Conservatives could do to support women in Canada would be to support the NDP proposal to remove the GST from feminine hygiene products. It is simple because these products are far from being luxury items. They are as essential as other products that are tax-exempt. Is the government prepared to adopt this very simple measure in order to help women across Canada? (1135) [ English ] Mrs.

Susan Truppe (Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government does support this motion and will consider this proposal in future budgets. I would just like to point out that our Conservative government has spent nine years reducing taxes on Canadian families. They know it is our government that puts money back in their pockets. Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the latest Conservative budget is full of tax breaks and loopholes for the wealthy few.

The Conservatives are trying to actually ram through income splitting and TFSA increases that cost billions, and they are ramming it through because they know it is unfair policies that will spend billions on those wealthy few. At a time when so many Canadian families are struggling to make ends meet, we should be looking for every and any way we can to help make life more affordable. Just a simple yes or no question.

They have got billions for the wealthy, will Conservatives support the NDP motion to take the tax off feminine hygiene products and make everyday necessities more affordable for Canadian women and Canadian families? Mrs. Susan Truppe (Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I just said our government does support the motion and we will consider the proposal in future budgets. I would also like to point out again that the federal tax burden is at its lowest level in 50 years, and a typical Canadian family is saving $6,600.

Employment Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, Conservative priorities are to spend billions on the wealthy rather than lift a finger to help make life more affordable for Canadian families. The Conservatives' so-called plan is failing-middle class families and working Canadians. The Conservatives are failing our economy. New job numbers show that the Canadian economy shed another 20,000 jobs just last month. That is 20,000 more Canadians looking for work on top of the 1.3 million already unemployed. Young Canadians still have not recovered from the depths of the last recession.

Why did the Conservatives cynically refuse to spend tens of millions of dollars to help young Canadians find jobs? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the long-term trend is positive with 1.2 million net new jobs. Our plan for tax cuts, training and trade is creating jobs. The member across the way said that people earning less than $60,000 a year are wealthy. Let me quote from the Financial Post today, “Working-class finds ways to max out TFSAs” and “60% of Canadians who earn less than $60K”.

The NDP's plan to roll back tax-free savings accounts would raise taxes on thousands of Canadians earning less than $60,000 a year. That is an attack on the middle class, and we will not allow it.

National Defence Hon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister 's videos revealed the identity of Special Operations troops to terrorists. The PMO staff broke DND protocols that protect our Armed Forces. They said they had DND's consent; they did not. We now know PMO staff received two briefings on operational security protocols, yet they still published these propaganda videos. Why has not anyone in the PMO been fired for putting our troops and their families at risk? Mr. James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as we have already said in here, we regret this error. We have apologized and we are reviewing all the protocols to ensure it does not happen again. These videos should not have been posted. However, General Tom Lawson, who is the Chief of the Defence Staff, said: Following a CAF assessment of the photos and video in question, we have determined, though the risk is assessed as low, to recommend two not be posted. There is certainly no requirement for any CAF personnel to be withdrawn from Op IMPACT.

Ethics Mr. Sean Casey (Charlottetown, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, RCMP documents directly implicate PMO officials in helping Mike Duffy by interfering in what was supposed to be a strictly confidential and independent Senate audit. The PMO was into this up to its elbows, but the Senate's director of internal audit was not even told that changes were being made; nor were the opposition senators on the committee. Why was this audit shared with PMO officials without the knowledge of the Senate, and who ultimately ordered the Duffy whitewash? Mr.

Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as I have said on a number of occasions, this is before the courts so it would be inappropriate to comment. However, last night somebody did tell me a joke about four Liberals. They are in a $1-million convertible Mercedes driving around Rockcliffe. They find a $2-million mansion and they get it for a really good deal. They decide to sit around the table and one says to the others, “How can we take money out of the pockets of middle-class Canadians?” Actually, it is not a joke because it is reality.

It is they who want to take millions of dollars from Canadians' pockets. We are going to do just the opposite. We are going to continue to fight to keep money in Canadians' pockets every single day, and focus on jobs and economic growth because that is what we do.

(1140) Mr. Sean Casey (Charlottetown, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, we know that Nigel Wright had Conservative senator, Irving Gerstein, call Deloitte to tamper with the Duffy audit. We also know that the Prime Minister 's former press secretary, Senator Carolyn Stewart Olsen was the perfect accomplice to help carry out the PMO's orders on the coverup. Will the Prime Minister now admit that he masterminded the efforts of his henchmen to save his star Conservative fundraiser, Mike Duffy? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, again it is the same answer: the case is before the courts and we will allow the process to unfold as it will. At the same time, later on this year, disgraced former Liberal senator Mac Harb will be in front of the courts. We understand that he served in the Liberal caucus for many years. We know it was the leader of the Liberals' father who appointed the senator for Puerto Vallarta. They did nothing about it for over 30 years. We are bringing accountability to the Senate. We are helping the Crown in its case against Mr. Duffy. Anybody found guilty will suffer the severest consequences.

Aboriginal Affairs Ms. Niki Ashton (Churchill, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, an internal report compiled by the RCMP shows clearly how closely the government is keeping tabs on first nation protestors. Even more troubling, the report calls the Idle No More movement “bacteria that” could “spread across the country..”. We are talking about events that included ceremony, drum circles, and round dances. Would the minister stand in this House, apologize, and clearly tell Canadians that this kind of discriminatory language toward first nations is unacceptable? Ms.

Roxanne James (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, Canadians know and recognize that it is this party, the Conservative government, that has brought in measures, both legislative as well as funding, for national security agencies. I absolutely reject the premise of that question. Painting the RCMP in that light is absolutely unacceptable. These are men and women who risk their lives on a day-to-day basis in order to keep Canadians safe. I find it absolutely abhorrent that she would bring that up and say that in this place. Ms.

Niki Ashton (Churchill, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the parliamentary secretary look at the documents that have come forward and recognize the severity of this situation. These words are discriminatory and only serve to further damage the relationship between the RCMP, the current government, and first nations. This is on top of ramming through Bill C-51 , a dangerous bill that would limit Canadians' rights and freedoms, and target first nations for simply defending their rights.

The question, again, is, what will the minister do to ensure that the RCMP clears the record and treats first nations with respect instead of hostility? Ms. Roxanne James (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, again, the misinformation about Bill C-51 from the opposition party, the NDP, is absolutely unacceptable. At the very heart of that particular bill, which I am very proud to say passed through this House this week, is the national security of this country and the protection of all Canadians.

Unfortunately for the NDP, the only measures it would support is if the RCMP had handcuffs on and CSIS was blindfolded.

[ Translation ] National Defence Ms. Élaine Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the government still has not responded to the disturbing allegations of mistreatment of Afghan detainees during the Canadian mission in 2010 and 2011. At least two investigations were launched, but the reports were not made public and no charges were laid. We still do not know who was aware of this at the Department of National Defence. Can the minister confirm whether or not his predecessor had been informed of these allegations? [ English ] Mr.

James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we have already addressed this in the House. We take all of these allegations very seriously, and anything like this would be inappropriate if there were any conduct in this way. However, we have been informed that there was an investigation several years ago by the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service, and it found that there was no mistreatment of Taliban prisoners.

On April 18, 2011, after a thorough and complete investigation, the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service concluded that the evidence did not warrant the laying of any charges.

(1145) Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, we are talking about serious allegations of mistreatment of prisoners. As well as secrecy, we also have disinformation coming from the current government. The truth is that military officials did not pre-approve the videos of soldiers on the Prime Minister 's propaganda website, despite what the Prime Minister's Office said on Tuesday. This is an important security matter involving the safety of Canadian Armed Forces members and their families. Why did the Prime Minister 's officials lie to Canadians? Mr.

James Bezan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we have apologized. These videos should never have been posted. We are reviewing all of the protocols. I can tell members that according to the Chief of the Defence Staff, no Canadian Armed Forces personnel are at risk. I can also tell members that all of us on this side of the House are extremely proud of men and women in uniform who are serving on Operation Impact.

Employment Mr. Mike Wallace (Burlington, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the strong leadership of this Conservative government has steered Canada out of the global recession. It has created over 1.2 million new jobs. They are overwhelmingly full-time private-sector jobs, in high-wage industries. Would the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance please tell the House the next steps that this government will take in this year's budget to create more jobs? Mr. Andrew Saxton (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Burlington for that excellent question. Our government is continuing to introduce job-creating measures in budget 2015, such as reducing the small business tax rate down to 9%, providing manufacturers with an accelerated capital cost allowance for another 10 years, supporting young entrepreneurs through Futurpreneur Canada, and introducing the new public transit fund. However, the Liberals and the NDP want higher taxes on the middle class. We know that would kill jobs and harm the Canadian economy. [ Translation ] Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, the youth unemployment rate continues to climb. Apparently, the budget implementation act will finally provide health and safety protection to unpaid interns. However, the legislation fails to guarantee other minimum standards, such as protection from sexual harassment or a cap on hours of work. In Canada, there are roughly 300,000 interns, and most of them are young. Will the minister correct these serious flaws in the budget implementation bill in order to better protect interns? [ English ] Mrs. Susan Truppe (Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, our government knows that internships can provide important workplace-based learning experiences. However, we recognize that many Canadians are concerned about the potential for abuse and lack of protections for unpaid interns. That is why, through economic action plan 2015, our Conservative government would amend the Canada Labour Code to ensure that interns under federal jurisdiction, regardless of pay, receive occupational health and safety protections and are subject to basic safety standards. Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, it took years of pressure from the NDP and intern advocates to get any action from the government whatsoever, but after voting against the NDP's intern protection act, it has now introduced a BIA that would leave interns without key workplace protections, such as those against harassment or excessive working hours. With youth unemployment at twice the national average, hundreds of thousands of young Canadians are forced into unpaid internships. We can do better. Will the minister fix the government's omnibus bill to ensure real protection for Canadian interns? Mrs.

Susan Truppe (Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I just mentioned that in our economic action plan 2015, our Conservative government will amend the Canada Labour Code to ensure that interns under federal jurisdiction, regardless of pay, receive occupational health and safety protections and will be subject to basic safety standards. It would be nice if the member got on board and supported it.

[ Translation ] CBC/Radio-Canada Ms. Hélène Laverdière (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives really have it in for the CBC. We know that the Prime Minister said that Radio-Canada employees hate Conservative values. Some hon. members: Hear, hear! Ms. Hélène Laverdière: Mr. Speaker, that is just great. It is very enlightening to see what is happening on the other side of the House. Now, we have learned that Conservative Senator Maltais insulted one of the crown corporation's executive vice-presidents before a parliamentary committee.

It comes as no surprise that the senator also said that he hopes the CBC will not get any additional funding. I see the members opposite chuckling, and that says it all. Rather than feeding its own obsessions, will the government finally support our public broadcaster? [ English ] Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as you know, the government provides the CBC with over $1 billion in taxpayer funding each and every year.

It has more than enough resources to continue and complete its mandate, in both official languages, in all regions of the country

(1150) [ Translation ] Air Transportation Mr. Pierre-Luc Dusseault (Sherbrooke, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on April 29, 2015, the House unanimously adopted Motion No. 553, which I sponsored. This motion seeks to support the economic development of many cities and regions across the country. The House of Commons has spoken. Like the Prime Minister , the Minister of Transport must act as quickly as possible to set up a mechanism whereby non-designated airports, such as the Sherbrooke airport, can have access to security screening services.

Will the minister quickly introduce this new mechanism—and I do mean quickly—or will she continue to put off taking care of my region's economic development? Mr. Jeff Watson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to ensuring that Canada's aviation security system supports economic growth. If screening has to be carried out at non-designated airports or if it is not required for security purposes, another source of funding must be established.

The minister asked her officials to develop a mechanism whereby non-designated, low-risk airports are able to obtain security screening services on a cost-recovery basis.

[ English ] Aboriginal Affairs Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, Shoal Lake 40 First Nation is a reserve. It is actually located on an island. It has no ferry service. That means that they do not have access to bottled water. They do not have access to groceries, in the same manner. The government has sat back and done nothing to deal with these very important needs of the community. My question for the minister responsible is, what has the government done? This question has been posed on several occasions.

What has the minister done to resolve the state of emergency for the Lake 40 nations? Hon. Bernard Valcourt (Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our immediate priority, of course, is the health and safety of the Shoal Lake residents. For the information of the member, repairs are being carried out on the ferry as we speak. Our officials are in daily contact with the people to ensure food, medicine, and good care is taken of the residents. We will continue to co-operate with the chief and council of Shoal Lake. Hon. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul's, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, this week it is Shoal Lake. Last month it was Kashechewan, where residents were evacuated for the fourth consecutive year because of predictable flooding of the community. The government is not only underfunding emergency management, but would rather spend $750 million on partisan ads rather than invest in long-term solutions. This is not just economic mismanagement, it impacts real people, real families, who are paying the price for these selfish choices. Why is the government stubbornly refusing to help aboriginal communities until they are a crisis on the front page? Hon.

Bernard Valcourt (Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I would be tempted to say that the good news is never on the front page. If we look at this budget, for example, we are increasing expenditures and investment in first nations and aboriginals in Canada by over $500 million. We are going to continue to work on our shared priorities with first nations throughout Canada, with Inuit and Métis, and continue to have them prosper along with other Canadians.

Housing Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the former B.C. RCMP headquarters in the heart of Vancouver is being redeveloped by the federal government. Young families, seniors, low-income earners, folks with disabilities, and many others, are struggling to find affordable homes in the world's second most expensive city. It is essential that affordable housing be part of this property's future, and the federal government must be part of the solution. Will the Conservatives address the housing crisis in Vancouver and commit to building affordable housing on this important site? Hon.

Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we have a housing first strategy which puts money directly into the construction of new housing stock. That said, let us remember that the best way to get someone a roof over their head is to put money in their pocket. That is exactly what we have done with the universal child care benefit. That benefit alone has lifted 41,000 children out of poverty and into the middle class.

During the recession, UNICEF confirms that Canada actually lifted 180,000 children out of poverty and into the middle class. We did that, according to UNICEF, by putting money directly in the pockets of moms and dads. When moms and dads have more money, they do the right things, and they lift their kids up for a brighter future.

(1155) [ Translation ] Employment Mr. Pierre Dionne Labelle (Rivière-du-Nord, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, in 2014, ICI par les arts, an organization in Rivière-du-Nord, applied for a grant through the skills link program. After being approved at the regional level, the project was blocked by Employment and Social Development Canada. Why? We still have no idea. The organization is nearly bankrupt. Young people are left to their own devices on the streets. However, we just learned that the minister had a leeway of $30 million for his youth employment strategy that he failed to spend.

I wrote to the minister to ask why the project had been blocked. I am asking him now: why did the project from ICI par les arts get blocked by his own department? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we help young people get training in order to find jobs. For example, we provided 500,000 apprenticeship grants; these are $4,000 grants that help young people get training to work in skilled trades.

I understand that the New Democrats and the Liberals do not support skilled trades, but we support them and we are making these investments. That is one reason why Canada has created 1.2 million new jobs since the recession.

[ English ] Taxation Mrs. Patricia Davidson (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, families with children in my riding of Sarnia—Lambton are pleased with our government's plan to put more money back in their pockets. That is why we introduced the enhanced universal child care benefit and family tax cuts, which benefit low and middle-income families. Could the Minister of Employment please update the House on how we can ensure that all Canadian families with children benefit from our plan? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I thank the member for her great work on behalf of taxpayers and families. The family tax cut and benefits help 100% of families with kids. The family tax cut, or income-splitting, helps almost half of all families with kids under the age of 18 by allowing parents to split their income to save up to $2,000. The universal child care benefit will be raised to $2,000 per year per child under the age of six, and $720 a year for kids ages 6 through 17. There are about 200,000 families that have not yet signed up.

I would encourage members of all parties to go out this weekend and tell them that they have until May 15 to get signed up under the extended deadline so that they get their lump sum payment in July.

[ Translation ] Foreign Affairs Hon. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, people gathered in Quebec City and Montreal to mark the sad anniversary of Raif Badawi's sentence to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes. Every time we ask the government to demand Raif's immediate release, the government talks about clemency. However, clemency does not mean his immediate release or reunification with his family in Quebec. In this case, clemency is not justice. When will the government demand the immediate and unconditional release and exoneration of Raif and his lawyer, Waleed Abu al-Khair. Mr.

Bernard Trottier (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and for La Francophonie, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we have repeatedly and publicly expressed Canada's strong objections to the imprisonment and punishment of Raif Badawi. We will do so again today. Canada considers Mr. Badawi's sentence to be a violation of human dignity. We will continue to call for clemency in this case. We have made representations to Saudi Arabia's ambassador here in Ottawa, and Canada's ambassador in Riyadh has met with senior Saudi representatives a number of times.

We have also registered our government's concerns with the Government of Saudi Arabia. This will continue going forward until clemency is granted.

[ English ] Aboriginal Affairs Mr. James Rajotte (Edmonton—Leduc, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Nunavut land claims agreement was signed in 1993. It provides Inuit with significant land ownership, mineral rights, resource royalties, hunting rights, and a capital transfer of $1.14 billion. However, soon after the agreement was signed, it was not implemented properly and Nunavut Tunngavik sued the government. I would ask the Minister of the Environment to give the House an update on this situation. Hon.

Leona Aglukkaq (Minister of the Environment, Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and Minister for the Arctic Council, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, I was in Iqaluit to see the signing of an agreement that ended the lawsuit. The lawsuit came about because a former Liberal government failed to implement the Nunavut land claims agreement. Since our government came to power, it has taken the time to work with its partners to resolve the complex issue and find a fair and reasonable solution for all parties.

The signing of this agreement will result in more opportunities for Inuit to unlock economic opportunities and create jobs in Nunavut. I am very proud to be part of a government that stands up for Inuit and northerners.

(1200) [ Translation ] Foreign Affairs Mrs. Sana Hassainia (Verchères—Les Patriotes, Ind.) : Mr. Speaker, two young women from my riding were in Dhunche, Nepal, in the Langtang Valley, during the earthquake. Family members back home saw how disorganized Canada was. The government had no plan to go get Canadians trapped in Langtang. The families were told that the girls would have to find their own way to Kathmandu. How can the Canadian government care so little about the safety of its own citizens? Does Canada have no emergency response plan for this kind of situation?

What concrete measures will be implemented to ensure that this kind of chaos does not arise when the next international disaster strikes? [ English ] Hon. Lynne Yelich (Minister of State (Foreign Affairs and Consular), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely false that Canada has not been there and working very hard. The emergency watch and response centre has worked tirelessly to reach out to Canadians in Nepal. If there are concerns, they can call the emergency watch and response centre at the 1-800 number: 1-800-387-3124.

On three separate occasions a C-17 was made available to evacuate the Canadian citizens who required assistance. We deployed additional consular staff. We have a dedicated staff that has worked around the clock to provide assistance to Canadians, and we have provided hundreds of emergency documents to assist in travelling. Consular operations were being run out of the Canadian consulate in New Delhi and assisted through help from the American embassy.

[ Translation ] Social Development Ms. Manon Perreault (Montcalm, Ind.) : Mr. Speaker, after dismantling a large part of the EI program paid for by workers, the government held back nearly $100 million intended for disability support, literacy and youth unemployment programs. These programs help the most vulnerable in our society. Will the government finally commit to cutting back on the assistance it gives to multinational corporations and making our society fairer and more equal? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we have agreements with our provincial partners to create jobs for people with disabilities. I am pleased to inform the House that these programs have created jobs for people who are struggling. Of course, we are trying to deliver these programs in the most cost-effective way possible for taxpayers and in a way that is most helpful to those in need. I am pleased to inform the House of Commons that we have met those two objectives.

International Trade Mr. André Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska, Ind.) : Mr. Speaker, the government's rhetoric regarding the negotiations for the trans-Pacific partnership is not reassuring anyone at all. In fact, farmers are so worried that the Quebec minister of agriculture, fisheries and food and the Ontario minister of agriculture, food and rural affairs had to write a letter to the federal minister of agriculture, asking him to honour the motion on supply management that I had unanimously adopted in 2005. Minister Pierre Paradis said this week that if it falls apart, it will be a disaster.

He emphasized that the federal government is what poses the threat. Will the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food commit to maintaining his previous position, which was to support the key pillars of this system, as Quebec and Ontario are calling on him to do? [ English ] Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government will continue to promote Canadian trade interests across all sectors of our economy, including supply management.

That has never prevented us from successfully completing other free trade agreements, such as free trade with Europe and South Korea. We make no apologies for ensuring that any deal reached must be in Canada's best interest. As always, we will only sign a trade agreement if it significantly benefits Canadian businesses, workers and their families.

[ Translation ] Presence in Gallery The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton) : To commemorate the 70th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, I would like to draw to the attention of hon. members the presence in the gallery of two veterans of that war, Jacques Viger and André Rousseau. Some hon. members: Bravo!

(1205) [ English ] Points of Order Oral Questions Points of Order Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to review the question period tapes from today and what you will find very clearly on the tapes is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons saying entirely inappropriate and unparliamentary things. It is not the first time he has been caught on audio or video saying inappropriate things.

He needs to understand that when his microphone is on, everything he says, whether parliamentary or not, is actually broadcast into the audiotape. I would ask that you review the tapes, Mr. Speaker, because the kind of insulting and degrading terms that he used today are simply unacceptable whether one is standing in the House or sitting behind a microphone. I would ask you to review the tapes and I am sure he will stand later and apologize for those comments. Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I am not sure exactly what the member opposite is referring to, but if I did use any unparliamentary language, I unreservedly apologize. Of course, any reaction from my side was prompted by the antics of the member opposite, who continuously during question period keeps talking and interrupting speakers from our side. If I did react inappropriately, I certainly apologize. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bruce Stanton) : I thank hon. members for their interventions. Indeed, we will check them.

I know there was some commentary today that was somewhat close to the line in terms of the usual decorum that one would expect in the House, but having said that, I will take this under advisement and get back to the House, if necessary.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Routine Proceedings [ English ] Foreign Affairs Mr. Bernard Trottier (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and for La Francophonie, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs , pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the treaty entitled, “Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of Chile on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters”, done at Puerto Natales on April 13, 2015. An explanatory memorandum is included with this treaty.

Government Response to Petitions Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to five petitions.

Committees of the House Justice and Human Rights Mr. Mike Wallace (Burlington, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 18th report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in relation to Bill C-35 ,

an act to amend the Criminal Code (law enforcement animals, military animals and service animals). [ Translation ] The committee has studied the bill and has agreed to report it back to the House without amendment. [ English ] I also have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 19th report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in relation to the study on the subject matter of Bill C-583 ,

an act to amend the Criminal Code (fetal alcohol spectrum disorder). Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report. [ Translation ] Ms. Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, indeed, in response to the 19th report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, the official opposition is presenting a supplementary report regarding consideration of Bill C-583,

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (fetal alcohol spectrum disorder) . I quickly want to thank all my committee colleagues, especially the hon. members for Nanaimo—Cowichan and for La Pointe-de-l'Île , who were responsible for this bill on behalf of the team. Although we, along with the government, support the report, our main regret is that the bill introduced by the hon. member for Yukon was too watered down.

We think it is a shame that the government persuaded that member to withdraw his bill, which would have represented a step forward and would really have been more effective than a report with extremely soft recommendations. I would ask the government to pay particular attention to the recommendations submitted by the official opposition. These recommendations would move things forward much more quickly than the very simplistic recommendations made by the Conservative government members in the committee.

(1210) [ English ] Philippine Heritage Month Act Mr. Mark Adler (York Centre, CPC) Bill C-675. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-675,

An Act to designate the month of May as Philippine Heritage Month . He said: Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand in the House today to introduce this bill. Canada is home to one of the largest Filipino diaspora communities in the world. Some 800,000 Filipinos currently call Canada home. I am proud that York Centre is home to one of Canada's largest Filipino communities. Let us make every month of May Philippine heritage month. I certainly look forward to the support of every member of the House in supporting this bill. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[ Translation ] Railway Safety Act Mr. Denis Blanchette (Louis-Hébert, NDP) Bill C-676. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-676,

An Act to amend the Railway Safety Act (maintenance of railway works) . He said: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of the Quebec City area, I am proud to introduce this bill, which contains two measures: a measure to recognize that a railway work that is designated as a historic place must be preserved in a way that enhances its beauty and historic character; and, more importantly, a measure that allows the government, in the case of default, to order the work to be done at the expense of the owner. For 10 years, the Conservative government has been unable to have the Quebec Bridge painted.

It has given the people of Quebec City a false impression by claiming that it has put $100 million on the table, but on condition that CN does its part, which CN is refusing to do because it has no obligation in that regard. My bill would force CN to paint the Quebec Bridge, and the mayors of Quebec City and Lévis think it is a good idea. Therefore, I invite all members of the House, especially government members, to work together and agree to quickly pass this simple, pragmatic and effective bill. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

[ English ] Petitions

Agriculture Hon. Ralph Goodale (Wascana, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I have a petition to file today, signed by many people from across the province of Saskatchewan, about the rights of farmers, particularly farmers of small farms. The petitioners call upon Parliament to enshrine in legislation the inalienable rights of farmers and other Canadians to save, reuse, select, exchange and sell their own seeds.

(1215) [ Translation ] Taxation Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr. Speak