OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

House of Commons Debates VOLUME 147 NUMBER 047 2nd SESSION 41st PARLIAMENT Wednesday, February 12, 2014 Speaker: The Honourable Andrew Scheer HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) COMMONS DEBATES February 12, 2014 DEBATES Edited Hansard * Table of Contents * Number 047 (Official Version) Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 047 (Official Version) Compte rendu officiel * Table des matières * Numéro 047 (Version officielle) 147 047 12 02 2014 2014/02/12 14:05:00 House of Commons Débats de la Chambre des communes House of Commons Debates 41 2

The House met at 2 p.m. Prayers

Statement by Members (1405) [ English ] The Speaker : It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem led by the hon. member for Pickering—Scarborough East. [Members sang the national anthem] STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Statements by Members [ Translation ] The Budget Mr. Louis Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, BQ) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget was an insult to Quebec. Gone is open federalism. Instead, Ottawa has opted for predatory federalism and delivered a direct blow to Quebec.

Despite the unanimous refusal by Quebec's economic players to allow a made-in-Ottawa job training program to be shoved down their throats, the federal government keeps pushing and has signed off on it. It has even gone as far as threatening to implement its reform as of April 1, whether or not a deal is reached. This morning, saying that he will do what he likes, when he likes, the Minister of Finance proved just how harmful Ottawa's attitude is to Quebec.

The fact that the government was able to find $250 million per year for the automotive industry in Ontario, while leaving nothing but crumbs for Quebec's forestry industry, makes the Quebec Conservative ministers' accusations that Quebec is not supportive enough of its economic growth all the more shameful. The federal government is the one that does not care about the Quebec economy and wants to pick a fight.

[ English ] Youth Employment Mr. Richard Harris (Cariboo—Prince George, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is in everyone's interest to help ensure that first nations youth receive the education, support, and job skills training they need to get good-paying, long-lasting jobs. The New Prosperity mine will provide just that support and training. Skills training is desperately needed to provide good jobs for our first nations youth. I asked the leadership of the Tsilhqot'in nation to recognize that its young people need this training to get those jobs.

I asked the leadership to visualize how its communities could benefit, if good-paying, long-lasting jobs could be filled by its young people. I urged the leadership to take advantage of this once in a generation opportunity that will provide jobs for their citizens that will last for more than 25 years. The New Prosperity mine wants first nations youth to take advantage of its skills training to fill those good-paying mine jobs. This is an opportunity that must not be missed.

[ Translation ] City of Laval Ms. Rosane Doré Lefebvre (Alfred-Pellan, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, this month, Laval was proud to be recognized as a senior-friendly municipality. This recognition was the result of a long process that began in April 2010 and the combined efforts of many organizations in our wonderful region, including the Table régionale de concertation des aînés de Laval, the Laval volunteer centre and food bank, and the Laval committee on abuse and violence against seniors. Laval now has a specific action plan that details the needs expressed by seniors and promotes social inclusion.

These measures relate to public transit, community support, health services and more. The NDP believes that seniors' quality of life is a priority. That is why we have proposed specific measures, such as a plan to improve the CPP and the QPP and lowering the age of eligibility for old age security to 65. All seniors are entitled to spend their retirement years in dignity. Congratulations and thanks to all of the people who have made Laval into a senior-friendly municipality.

[ English ] The Budget Mrs. Nina Grewal (Fleetwood—Port Kells, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, economic action plan 2014 demonstrates our government's commitment to fiscal responsibility and prosperity. It is our launch pad to success, reducing the budget deficit to $2.9 billion and forecasting a $6.4-billion surplus for next year, all without raising taxes or slashing transfers. The economic action plan includes billions for B.C. for health care and social programs.

It would close tax loopholes, control the size and cost of government, invest in skills training, cut red tape for small business, strengthen Canada's food safety system, and launch the Canada job grant. Our government has piloted Canada through economic troubles and chartered a course for greater prosperity, stability, and growth. Thanks to Canada's economic action plan, Canada is one of the best places in the world to live and do business. Budget 2014 is good for Fleetwood—Port Kells, good for B.C., and good for Canada.

Central African Republic Ms. Kirsty Duncan (Etobicoke North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Central African Republic is in free fall, and we must act now, together and decisively. The United Nations ranks it among the top three humanitarian emergencies and warned of the following: It has all the elements that we have seen elsewhere, in places like Rwanda and Bosnia. The elements are there, the seeds are there, for a genocide. Approximately 4.5 million people have been affected, half of them children, and 838,000 have been displaced. Attacks against children have sunk to atrocious, indefensible levels.

Such attacks violate international humanitarian and human rights laws, and they must stop immediately. Concrete action is urgently needed to prevent further violence. A recent UN appeal received only 11% of a $551-million target. What we do now, or fail to do, will have an impact on society for years to come, and we will be judged on how we choose to act.

(1410) Youth Forum Mr. Bryan Hayes (Sault Ste. Marie, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, in January I hosted a round table discussion in my riding of Sault Ste. Marie with the community's youth. The attendees provided their perspective on several pieces of current and pending legislation, including my own private member's motion. All participants supported the government's pending bill on cybercrime, as well as Senate reform as opposed to Senate abolishment. The overwhelming majority do not support the third party's intent to legalize marijuana.

However, all of them supported my pending private member's motion on domestic violence prevention. Jobs were also discussed. I am proud to say that since 2006, the Conservative government has helped more than half a million young Canadians develop the skills they need to help them succeed in the job market. Economic action plan 2014, announced yesterday, builds upon this record by providing $55 million toward paid internships, as well as $100 million for interest-free student loans for apprentices.

This government recognizes that youth are our future, as do I , and I look forward to hosting more youth forums in my riding.

Consumer Protection Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the cost of living in rural and northern communities is much higher than in urban communities. For many, the cost of keeping their homes warm has reached a tipping point. As Teresa from Atikokan wrote to me recently: The propane truck just drove away after filling our tank. It was the first time we've filled it since last May. You can imagine my shock when we discovered the price had risen 80% since our last fill up. That is right, the cost of heating her home has risen 80% in less than a year.

There are many stories like Teresa's. Brian in Nolalu, Kathy in South Gillies, and many others living in Thunder Bay—Rainy River, are hurting. The Canadian Propane Association insists that there is no shortage in Canada. Well, if there is no shortage as the industry claims, then it must be yet another case of price gouging by an industry that targets a captive consumer during a time of need. The Minister of Finance will not notice the price spike until he goes to fill up his barbecue tank at his cottage this summer, but the Canadians he serves are suffering today and deserve action.

If the Conservative government turns its back on rural Canadians on this issue, as they have on so many other issues, then Canadians should know that the NDP is ready to get to work and make life more affordable for them, beginning in 2015.

Killarney Seniors Centre Ms. Wai Young (Vancouver South, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, for over 15 years, southeast Vancouver's 25,000 seniors have identified the need for a local seniors centre to improve their quality of life and provide an accessible space for wellness, recreation, and socialization. Previous Liberal governments did not get it done. Last month, our government delivered. I was honoured to announce a $2.5-million federal contribution to finally build the Killarney seniors centre. In partnership with the City of Vancouver and the Province of British Columbia, this 15-year dream is now a reality.

I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the thousands of constituents who worked so tirelessly to make their voices heard. I especially acknowledge the leadership of Lorna Gibbs, Mohinder Sidhu, Shin Wan Hon, and Keith Jacobson for their tremendous efforts over so many years. This is yet another example of how our government is delivering for Canada's seniors. We have enacted stronger measures to combat the abuse of seniors. We have provided seniors in need with the largest GIS increase in 25 years, and we have reduced senior's annual taxes by— The Speaker : The hon. member for Edmonton Centre.

Kingsway Legion No. 175 Hon. Laurie Hawn (Edmonton Centre, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, for almost 10 years, a small band of dedicated Edmontonians from Kingsway Legion No. 175 have faithfully trekked to the Edmonton International Airport at all hours of the day or night, and in any weather, to say farewell or to welcome back our troops from their tours of duty in Afghanistan. Many of them wear Legion dress and medals. They are supported by others who value and salute the service and sacrifice of Canadians in uniform.

They offer Tim Hortons coffee, donuts, cell phones, and unbridled thanks and admiration for folks who put it on the line. I have been privileged to join them on many occasions and can attest to the gratitude of the troops for the reception they receive, for the occasional escort home by CF-18 fighters, for the police escort through the city to their garrison, for the fire trucks with lights flashing, and for other first responders and citizens who line the streets to say thank you. I have never seen a city embrace the military like Edmonton does.

Thankfully, the duty of providing this 24/7 welcoming committee is coming to an end. I want to thank and salute Vicky, Mac, Wayne, Betty, Jim, Kate, and many others, for their service in days gone by, and for their dedication to honouring those who serve today. You may now stand easy.

[ Translation ] Winter Olympic Games Mrs. Sana Hassainia (Verchères—Les Patriotes, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to rise in the House today to warmly congratulate speed skater Charles Hamelin, who on Monday won a gold medal at the Sochi Olympics in short track speed skating. On behalf of everyone in Verchères—Les Patriotes, way to go Charles. Nicknamed “the locomotive of Sainte-Julie”, Mr. Hamelin enjoyed a nearly perfect season on the World Cup circuit. We wish him the best of luck in his three remaining events, which will give him the opportunity to add to his already impressive record.

I would also like to wish the best of luck to his brother, François Hamelin, as well as Charles Cournoyer. Everyone in my riding sends you their support and is very proud of all of you. I would also like to take this opportunity to encourage all our Canadian athletes in Sochi and congratulate them on the remarkable number of medals they have already won, and the ones still to come. Furthermore, I would like to recognize the 30th anniversary of Maison des jeunes de Varennes.

For the past three decades, this organization has been providing our young people with a friendly place where they can develop their talents and express their creativity. Thank you for your exceptional work and your remarkable commitment. (1415) [ English ] Aboriginal Affairs Mr. Mark Strahl (Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, last Friday I joined the Prime Minister , the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs , and Assembly of First Nations National Chief Shawn Atleo in Alberta for the announcement of a historic agreement and a financial commitment of over $1.9 billion to reform the first nations education system and at long last give first nations control of first nations education. New legislation will provide first nations students on reserve with previously unavailable supports, minimum standards, and opportunities for a high-quality education.

It will introduce statutory funding that will allow for first nations to provide vital language and cultural programs unique to their communities while operating in a responsible and accountable manner. Our Conservative government has engaged in extensive consultation with first nations leaders, parents, and educators, and we will continue to work tirelessly toward ensuring that first nations children have access to a quality education and full participation in the Canadian economy.

As the Prime Minister noted, this agreement is “good for First Nations, it is good for Canadians, and it is good for our country’s future”.

Status of Women Ms. Niki Ashton (Churchill, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, since 1999, the government has been committed to doing full, gender-based analysis of its budgets. We have yet to see this work done by either Liberal or Conservative governments. Now another budget is before us that does almost nothing for women. Women make up over half the workforce in this country, yet the cards are stacked dangerously against them. There is not a drop of money in the budget for child care. There is no money for improvements to parental leave. There is no money for housing security for women who badly need it.

There is no money for a national action plan to end violence against women, even though the throne speech promised action on this front. There is also no money for a national inquiry into the deaths and disappearance of over 600 indigenous women, whose families are still waiting for justice. The budget fails the women of this country. Canadian women work hard, bear the burden of discrimination, and deserve much better than this budget.

Adoption Hon. Steven Fletcher (Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I was proud last year when our government expanded the adoption expense tax credit, which recognizes some additional costs borne by adoptive parents. It is estimated that 2,000 children are adopted from within Canada every year, yet, 30,000 children who are in the care of child welfare agencies across the country are also waiting to be adopted. This means we need to do more, and that is exactly what we are doing through economic action plan 2014.

Currently, eligible adoption expenses related to the completed adoption of a child under the age of 18 may be claimed up to a maximum of $11,774. Economic action plan 2014 proposes to increase the maximum amount of eligible expenses to $15,000. This is fantastic news for prospective Canadian families who are looking to give a deserving child a loving home.

Employment Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today in light of the decision to idle all operations at the Cliffs Wabush mine in Labrador, a mine that has operated since 1965. The decision will put over 400 hard-working Canadians out of work and will provide a major challenge for a community that is so reliant on the success of this particular mine. Let me say to all those affected that my colleagues and I will continue to work hard to do what we can to mitigate the impact of this decision on them, their families, and their community.

I also call upon the federal government to assist these highly skilled mining workers to integrate into new jobs and help transition and grow the local economy to create new opportunities in western Labrador. Now is the time for all of us, including the Government of Canada, to invest in skilled economies like that in Wabush and Labrador City. The people are waiting and they would welcome such action.

(1420) The Budget Mr. Ed Holder (London West, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, like all members of the House, I looked forward with great anticipation to the good news that our Minister of Finance would deliver in budget 2014, and I was not disappointed. Not only would economic action plan 2014 continue to create jobs and opportunities, it also commits to cutting red tape for an industry that is near and dear to my heart, that of craft beer. Whether it is made using blueberries, strawberries, or pumpkin, I think all members would agree that the choice is clear: we best not interfere with Canada's craft beer.

Representing over $14 billion of economic activity, hard-working microbreweries like Forked River Brewing Company in London, Ontario, and those across Canada, work hard to produce quality products. I am proud to stand with a government that is delivering for these talented entrepreneurs. I encourage my friends opposite not to waste their votes along partisan lines but to vote in support of good taste.

The Budget Mr. Andrew Cash (Davenport, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have finally kept a budget promise. They promised they would do nothing, and their budget delivered nothing. For people facing record household debt, there was nothing to make life more affordable; for veterans, nothing to keep support offices open; for young people, nothing to deal with the youth unemployment crisis. We were happy to see they finally agreed to act on pay-to-pay fees. This was long overdue. However, the budget only talks about banks.

What about other companies, like telecom companies that are already forcing seniors and others to pay to get their bills in the mail? Yesterday's budget was about an election in 2015, not what Canadians need today. The NDP knows it can do better. New Democrats know that Canadians work hard and they deserve a fair deal, a fair break. Canadians know they can trust the NDP to fight for middle-class families, to fight for young people, to fight for veterans, to fight for seniors and for all Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

The Budget Mr. Chris Warkentin (Peace River, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, economic action plan 2014 was announced and demonstrates our government's commitment to growing the economy and creating jobs, opportunity, and prosperity for all Canadians. Following the Minister of Finance 's announcement, the Liberal leader had some very interesting and telling exchanges. During an interview, the Liberal leader refused to answer a question on whether he would run deficits or not. I am not making this up. His answer was: “The commitment needs to be a commitment to grow the economy and the budget will balance itself”.

I am sorry, but any good economist knows that a budget does not just “balance itself”. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! The Speaker : Order, please. I would ask hon. members to wait until the member for Peace River has finished his statement. Then they can feel free to applaud. The hon. member for Peace River still has the floor. Mr. Chris Warkentin : Mr. Speaker, the Liberal members know that this is obviously a faulty assessment, and Canadians would agree and expect more from a G7 leader.

What we all know, what we are all convinced of, and what we would ask the Liberal leader is, why will he not just admit that he is in over his head?

Oral Questions Oral Questions [ English ] Taxation Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, there were some interesting criticisms this morning from the finance minister about the Prime Minister 's plan for income splitting. Does the Prime Minister agree with his finance minister that the Conservative plan is of no help to the vast majority of Canadian families? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, this is the finance minister and this is the government, against the wishes of opposition members, which brought in income splitting for our senior citizens, something from which they benefit every day and every year. This government, in the last election, made a commitment that when we balance the budget—the budget is not yet balanced—one of the highest priorities of this government will be tax reduction for Canadian families. I know that their plans would be tax hikes on Canadian families, but we in this party believe we should cut taxes for Canadian families.

(1425) Food Safety Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, to be fair, there is good news in the budget with regard to food safety, including the hiring of 200 new food inspectors. Because it is such a good idea, and we agree on that, can the Prime Minister just answer one simple question: Why is it that he fired 300 food inspectors over the last two years? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Of course, Mr. Speaker, that is not true. This government has been increasing the number of front-line inspectors and will continue to do so.

That is one of the many reasons why the budget was so well received. I would note a number of organizations have spoken very positively about the budget: the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Royal Canadian Legion, Special Olympics Canada, the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors, the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association, the Assembly of First Nations, the Heart and Stroke Foundation, the Alzheimer Society of Canada. I could go on and on.

Democratic Reform Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Temerity is one thing, Mr. Speaker, but those numbers are easily verifiable. The Conservatives did fire 300 food inspectors and they compromised the public when they did it. [ Translation ] Under the Conservatives' electoral “deform” bill, investigators will report to the Minister of Justice from now on. Why should Canadians trust a system in which the people who investigate Conservative election fraud are under the orders of a Conservative minister? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, our legislation ensures that the Commissioner of Canada Elections is fully independent, more independent than ever. [ English ] When the leader of the NDP is talking about issues of facts, let me draw some attention to his own facts. Yesterday, he got up and said it was absurd that we would not count fundraising spending as election expenses in the conduct of an election when, in the leadership race he won in the NDP, they did not count fundraising expenditures against their election cap. Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, under the Conservatives' rigged elections act, the Chief Electoral Officer would be banned from warning the public about election fraud and voter suppression, but the commissioner of elections would actually have to warn suspects under investigation. The public would not be warned, but the fraudsters would. Why do Conservatives want election fraud suspects warned that they are being investigated? Is it because the Conservatives are the suspects? The good people of Peterborough want to know. Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth.

All Canadians, including elections officials, have every responsibility to report any evidence of wrongdoing to Elections Canada and to the commissioner of elections. That is what we do on this side. Certainly, we want to make sure that, when there are incidents like the cheating the NDP did with the union donations, all of that information is made completely public, as it should have been. [ Translation ] Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, from 1995 to 2006, the Liberals took $57 billion from the employment insurance fund to pay for their tax breaks for large corporations.

Yesterday the Minister of Finance admitted that his balanced budget includes the employment insurance surplus. We would like the Prime Minister to tell us one thing. Can he assure us that he will not do the same thing the Liberals did and use money from the EI fund for something else? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we discussed this matter with organizations like the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. There was a deficit in the employment insurance fund during the recession. Now we are balancing that fund.

Our system is based on the idea of keeping that fund balanced over the long term.

(1430) [ English ] Veterans Affairs Mr. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance admitted he had not heard the loud and repeated calls for help from our veterans. He said that he had not “...been asked for money for post-traumatic stress disorder...”. My question is for the Prime Minister . Why did he not ask for more help for our veterans? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this government, even before the budget, has made record investments into precisely those kinds of health services for our veterans.

I was delighted to see the Legion support yesterday for the extension of the Last Post Fund. It is passing strange that the leader of the Liberal Party would ask me about someone else's comments on the budget when yesterday he said that we should not balancing the budget in this country because, according to him, “...the budget will balance itself”. I will let him explain that.

The Economy Mr. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, economic growth in 2013 was down from the year before, which was down from the year before that, which was down from the year before that. Yet we saw in the budget that this year's plan is the same as last year's, which was the same as the year before that, which was the same as the year before that. When will the government offer a real plan for economic growth and prosperity for the middle class? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the record of the government's economic action plans is very clear.

This country, coming out of the recession, has the highest growth rate among major developed economies. It has the highest level of job creation. It is one of the few with a AAA credit rating. It has the strongest financial sector in the world. It has, by far, the lowest debt among the major developed economies. That is our record, year after year after year. Crazy statements about “the budget will balance itself” come from the Liberal Party year after year after year. Mr. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, economic growth balances budgets, not the worst record on growth since R. B.

Bennett. [ Translation ] Economic growth is what will help Canadians prosper, not a vote-seeking surplus swiped from the pockets of middle-class workers. Can the Prime Minister explain why his budget does not include a plan to generate economic growth? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party leader's economic analysis is off. That is not enough. If we want to keep taxes low, we need more than just economic growth.

We also need to control the growth of spending. [ English ] That is exactly what we are doing on this side, controlling our expenses, making sure we are not raising taxes and making key investments while balancing the budget, not all by itself.

[ Translation ] Democratic Reform Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, earlier the Prime Minister tried to distance himself from a rather clear provision in his electoral “deform” bill. I want to give him the opportunity to state clearly what he thinks the legislation says. Does the Prime Minister realize that his bill makes it impossible for the Chief Electoral Officer to warn the public about election fraud? Does he realize that, yes or no? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, the purpose of this reform is to ensure that there is an independent commissioner of elections who can conduct investigations. It is essential that this office have all the necessary tools for dealing with electoral fraud. Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, he is starting to pay attention, but clause 18 is quite clear. The only thing that the Chief Electoral Officer has the right to talk about with voters is where, when and how to vote and nothing else.

The Chief Electoral Officer cannot report to Parliament, as his minister was saying, because, as we know, Parliament is dissolved during the election period. The bill is clear: it muzzles the Chief Electoral Officer. Why does the Prime Minister want to prevent the Chief Electoral Officer from communicating with Canadians about other topics?

(1435) Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the main problem is that the NDP decided to oppose this bill before they even read it. The NDP critic even admitted it. The reality is that the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada has very important duties in the conduct of elections. According to his report, there is a lot of work to be done to improve the system and we encourage Elections Canada to do its job. [ English ] Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I will always respond to that invitation positively.

Let us read the bill under subsection 376(3).“The commercial value of services provided to a registered party for the purpose of soliciting...” is not included in the total. Hundreds of paid telemarketers, hundreds of thousands of phone calls in a federal general election, no problem. They are not in the campaign limit. How would Elections Canada even know if these calls were going out to prior Conservative Party donors? It is just not plausible. Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, this refers to people who have been long-time donors to a political party, which is a very small percentage of the electorate. I point out the hypocrisy of the leader of the NDP. His own party, when it established internal spending limits on its campaign, made an exception for fundraising for its political candidates. It is not reasonable. It is reasonable that those expenses would be paid entirely by the party, and unlike eligible expenses, would not be claimed for reimbursement, as the NDP would like to do. Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, that is coming from someone who never revealed who donated to his leadership. In just one of their scams, the in-and-out scandal, Conservatives spent more than a million bucks illegally. Their technique is quite simple: cheat, fight like hell when caught, and then when convicted, name them to the Senate. Does he really think Irving Gerstein is a model? The Speaker : That seemed to be more a question about party finances instead of government business. I see the Prime Minister rising to answer.

I will allow him to answer the question, but I would urge members to keep their questions on subjects under government responsibility. The Rt. Hon. Prime Minister. Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the allegation about my own donors is completely false. The point I would make is that these kinds of fraudulent allegations are exactly what we get when a party loses an election.

Employment Ms. Peggy Nash (Parkdale—High Park, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, budgets are an opportunity to help make life a little more affordable, to give families a fair break, but yesterday's budget failed to deliver. Nearly 300,000 more people are unemployed today than before the recession, yet the government failed to deliver a plan to create jobs. While so many Canadians are struggling, Conservatives are playing politics. Will the minister now table a real plan to create jobs, or is he really going to make people wait for help until it is an election year? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, the minister tabled an excellent plan and has the record to prove it. That is the best job creation record in the G7. What are the proposals of the NDP? That we should shut down our resource industries, because they are a disease; that we should block all trade agreements, because they are against trade; that we should bring in a carbon tax and raise taxes on Canadian consumers and businesses. The reason Canada has such an outstanding job creation and growth record compared to most other developed economies is precisely because we do the opposite of what the NDP proposes.

The Budget Ms. Peggy Nash (Parkdale—High Park, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is not going to play politics while millions of Canadians are waiting for help. It is just wrong. Canadian cities are facing infrastructure crises. Provinces are trying to meet demands for everything from transit to housing to job training. Canadians are struggling to make ends meet. Why are Conservatives putting Conservative squabbles with the provinces ahead of taking action to help Canadians?

(1440) Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, she talked about playing politics. Last year we brought in, yet again, a new record amount of money for municipal infrastructure investment, with the strong endorsement last year, and again this year, of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. In this budget we want to talk about job creation and hope for young people, and record investments in first nations education, strongly supported by the Assembly of First Nations. So if the member and her party do not want to play politics, they will vote for these good measures. [ Translation ] Mr.

Guy Caron (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, a number of issues have fallen by the wayside in this empty budget. What has not fallen by the wayside is the good old Conservative approach of confronting the provinces instead of working with them. Now, the Minister of Finance , who no longer knows whether his government is for or against income splitting, has decided to repeat his ill-advised ultimatum about the Canada job grant. That drew some harsh criticism from many provinces. Why are the Conservatives getting caught up in pointless bickering that could so easily be avoided?

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the government is focusing on job creation instead of bickering, and our record proves it. The Canada job grant will help us reach our main objective, which is creating jobs in Canada. We are always prepared to work with the provinces that have the same objective. Ms. Élaine Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the Conservatives' inconsistency. The government keeps bragging about supporting our soldiers and taking military procurement seriously.

However, its new budget cuts $3.1 billion from the defence procurement budget over the next four years. This money had been earmarked for new ships, vehicles and helicopters. Can the Minister of National Defence tell us what purchases will be delayed or cancelled? Will it be ships, search and rescue planes, helicopters or trucks? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, that is a rather curious question coming from a party that has opposed every military purchase made by this government and requested by our soldiers.

The government adjusted DND's budget at its request, so that the money will be available when our military personnel need it. There are no cuts. Unfortunately for the NDP, we are committed to moving forward with military procurement. [ English ] Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, first the Minister of National Defence had $3.1 billion taken away from him. Now he is not even allowed to speak for himself. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! The Speaker : Order, please. The hon. member for St. John's East has the floor, and I would like to hear the question. The hon. member for St. John's East. Mr.

Jack Harris : Mr. Speaker, the trucks were supposed to be ready years ago. Construction on the joint supply ships was supposed to have started already, like in 2008. Fixed-wing search and rescue planes were promised in 2006 and again for 2015. Would the Prime Minister confirm then if he is going to answer which projects will be delayed or cancelled because of this budget? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, every year there are profiles of capital expenditures based on what the Department of National Defence asks for in terms of its own spending plans.

There has been absolutely no reduction. On the contrary. We know that the NDP has opposed every single major capital investment we have made in the military. I can assure the hon. member of the NDP, to his great disappointment, that all that money is still there, and all those future capital investments are going to happen. Ms. Chrystia Freeland (Toronto Centre, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget turned a blind eye to our economy's biggest problem, stagnant growth. The finance minister himself admitted that our economy will miss the target he set in his own fall forecast.

Contrary to what we have just heard from the Prime Minister , the experts agree. The IMF says we will lag both the U.S. and the U.K. in growth this year. The OECD predicts we will fall behind its average for growth in 2015, ranking just 16th out of 30. Why did the government give middle-class Canadians a do-nothing budget?

(1445) Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is always interesting to hear that the Liberal Party's definition of “do nothing” is when we are not raising taxes and not spending money we cannot afford. We know the record. The IMF is very clear. The government's policy approach has been completely appropriate. The IMF and others recognize that Canada has had the strongest economic growth coming out of the recession, over many years. All the tables are there for the member to review.

The fact that we are seeing some pickup and growth in the United States and other economies is positive for Canadian exports, and we look forward to that. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance was part of an Ontario government that created a pre-election, phoney, fiscally unsustainable surplus. Instead, Ontarians were left with a $6 billion deficit and a botched Highway 407 asset sale. Now the minister is trying to fool Canadians again with another pre-election, fiscally unsustainable surplus, again based on one-time asset sales.

Is the minister hoping Canadians forget his Ontario record of budget deception and asset sale incompetence? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, that is a rather bizarre question. The member is suggesting that not only should we not balance the budget but that we will never balance the budget, when his own leader says it will balance magically on its own. This government made a firm commitment to Canadians in the last election.

With modest economic growth and controlled spending, we would ensure, without tax hikes on individual families and businesses, that we would balance the budget by the next election. I can say we are certainly on track to do that as Canadians. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, that is rich from a Prime Minister who has added over $160 billion to the national debt.

When provincial governments propose higher CPP premiums to improve Canadian pension income, the Minister of Finance calls it a job-killing payroll tax, but when the minister uses high EI premiums to pad his books to create a phoney pre-election surplus, it is fair game. Why does the minister think that higher payroll taxes are okay when they help Conservative politics but not okay when they help Canadian pensioners? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the employment insurance account ran a deficit during the recession. It will run a balance over time, and that is how it is set up.

Certainly we are opposed to the 35% EI hike that would be required to institute the Liberals 45-day work year. On debt, let me just comment on the facts of debt. The fact of the matter is that the federal debt burden in Canada is the lowest in the G7, by far. In fact, it is about half of what it is in any other country, including Germany. In reality, our debt burden will actually be lower than it was before the recession in the next couple of years. Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims (Newton—North Delta, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, last year's budget unilaterally cut provincial skills training, but the government finally promised to sit down and negotiate these changes. Yesterday, Conservatives were back to making threats. They will unilaterally kill provincial job-training programs unless provinces agree to the government's demands. Too many Canadians are out of work. They want the federal government to work with provinces and with municipalities. Why does the minister prefer threats to collaboration? Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I unsurprisingly reject the premise of the question. The reality is that this government is making record investments in skills development to create jobs, including the labour market agreement of which the member speaks, which was introduced by this government, $500 million in transfers to provinces. We just want to make sure that we are getting maximum bang for the taxpayers' buck out of those dollars so that they actually lead to real jobs. We do not want résumé factories. We do not want training for the sake of it.

We want employers, actually putting money into training so that they guarantee people jobs at the end of it. Why is the NDP against job training that leads to real jobs? (1450) [ Translation ] Mrs. Sadia Groguhé (Saint-Lambert, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of the week, the Minister of Employment and Social Development said that he was having productive discussions with the provinces. His colleague, the Minister of Finance, contradicted him this morning. The provinces will no longer be able to opt out of the program with compensation. Taking unilateral action was not enough for the government.

It also had to hold a gun to the provinces' heads. This new quarrel between the two ministers will not help to warm up their relationship. What is the reality: productive discussions with the provinces or the April 1st ultimatum? Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the reality is clear: we are having productive discussions with the provinces. We continue to have those discussions to get better results from investments in job training that leads to real jobs.

I should also point out that this government has increased tax transfers to Quebec by 65%, or $7.6 billion. In yesterday's budget, the government also announced an increase of $1.8 billion in transfers to Quebec. Ms. Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet (Hochelaga, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the government is turning a deaf ear not only to the provinces, but also to municipalities. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Union des municipalités du Québec and the mayor of Montreal have all denounced the budget's silence on social housing. There is no specific commitment or long-term plan.

Worse still, cuts of $1.5 billion are expected over the next five years. Will the minister review his plans and work with the municipalities to find solutions to the crisis affecting thousands of families? [ English ] Hon. Candice Bergen (Minister of State (Social Development), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities has supported the budget that we delivered yesterday. It has seen the great things that are in that budget. On the issue of housing, we continue to work with our stakeholders and with the provinces and municipalities on this issue.

Let me remind that member of what our government has done and the major investments we have made, such as $2 billion to renovate existing housing, $1.25 billion to renew our investment in affordable housing, and renewed investment in our homelessness partnering strategy. The federal government is doing its part. More importantly, the Canadian taxpayers are doing their part. Mr. Mike Sullivan (York South—Weston, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, some of that money referred to by the minister was actually from Jack Layton, not from the minister.

Working people trying to find a place to live in Vancouver— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. Peter Julian: We had an NDP budget, the best budget ever. The Speaker : Order. The hon. member for York South—Weston has the floor. Mr. Mike Sullivan : And they voted against it, Mr. Speaker. Working people trying to find a place to live in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal face real challenges. Prices go up and up, while the Conservatives just stand by and do nothing. As Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi said, there is nothing in this budget for people who live in cities across Canada.

Can the minister please explain why this budget did nothing to address the housing crisis? Hon. Candice Bergen (Minister of State (Social Development), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, if it was Mr. Layton's idea, it is very surprising, or maybe not surprising, that the opposition again voted against every form of support we have brought to help those who are vulnerable in Canada. The fact is that we have spent $14.5 billion since 2006 to help those who need affordable housing. Together with our partners, we have helped over 880,000 families and individuals. The opposition members vote against it.

They have no plan to help those who are vulnerable, except raising their taxes. We will support them and we will support them with real results. [ Translation ] Ms. Joyce Bateman (Winnipeg South Centre, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, economic action plan 2014 is based on our government's support for science, technology and innovation, in order to create jobs and economic growth in Canada. Could the Minister of Science and Technology explain to the House how our government is helping colleges, universities and research institutes to become leaders on the world stage? [ English ] Hon.

Greg Rickford (Minister of State (Science and Technology, and Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, economic action plan 2014 announced Canada's first research excellence fund to support our post-secondary institutions to build on key strengths in science, technology, and innovation and become world leaders in a given field of research.

Amit Chakma, chair of U15, Canada's key research universities, said it best: This will enable us to make new discoveries we will mobilize for the benefit of all Canadians, strengthen regional and national economies and increase our country's innovative capacity. (1455) [ Translation ] Rail Transportation Mr. Hoang Mai (Brossard—La Prairie, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, in the years prior to the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, MMA had multiple infractions of a safety rule that requires that a minimum number of handbrakes be applied to secure a train.

Despite this abysmal safety record, no minister ever imposed any penalties on these offending companies. Can the minister explain how, under Liberal and Conservative governments, MMA was able to repeatedly break safety rules without ever facing the consequences? [ English ] Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as we all know, there are several investigations ongoing after the derailments in Lac-Mégantic. One of the investigations is the Transportation Safety Board, another is the Sûreté du Québec, and two others are Transport Canada investigations.

If this company is found to have violated the rules and regulations of this country, it will absolutely be penalized to the ultimate extent of the law. Ms. Olivia Chow (Trinity—Spadina, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have in my hand 21 violations by the MMA rail company on which nothing has been done. In fact, only five days after those horrific events in Lac-Mégantic, MMA committed another violation only five kilometres from Lac-Mégantic. For years, nothing had been done to stop these violations. In yesterday's budget nothing was being done there either. How can we trust the Conservatives to keep us safe? Hon.

Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate that our government, over the past number of years, has done a lot to fund rail safety, and every single time that member voted against it. She cannot stand in the House today and tell us that we do not respect the safety of our citizens. I would like to again reiterate that if MMA is found to have violated the rules and regulations of this country, it will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of our law.

[ Translation ] The Budget Mr. Sylvain Chicoine (Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, many Canadians will pay the price for this very disappointing budget. Veterans are shown very little gratitude for their years of service. Because of constant pressure from the NDP, there may be improvements to the funeral and burial program. However, it is downright shocking that the Conservatives are investing in computers instead of veterans' service offices, which they have just closed. Why are the Conservatives not listening to veterans' demands instead of saving money at their expense? [ English ] Hon.

Julian Fantino (Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, let me correct the record. Economic action plan 2014 builds on our government's strong record of support for veterans since 2006, which includes $2 billion to enhance the new veterans charter programs and services for seriously injured veterans; $65 million to enhance the Last Post Fund for Canadian veterans, on top of the $108 million announced yesterday; $282 million to shovel veterans' driveways, cut their grass, and clean their homes; $10 million per year to create five new operational stress injury clinics.

Those parties, and that party in particular, voted against all those items.

National Defence Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is easy to balance a budget when they take away money from disabled veterans and armed forces personnel. The Minister of National Defence knows very well. He knows the name of Corporal— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! The Speaker : Order, please. The hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore has the floor. Mr. Peter Stoffer : Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence knows very well, because I handed him the file, of Corporal Robert MacIver of Beaver Bank, Nova Scotia. He has served this country with great distinction, and overseas.

Unfortunately, because of his service, he suffers from severe psychological wounds. What does the government do? Instead of helping him, it kicks him out a few months shy of his tenth year, which means he and his family will lose out on hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential benefits. My question, then, is on behalf of Robert MacIver and his family. Will the Minister of National Defence now allow Robert to stay in the military a tenth year, or will he stand up and face the camera and tell him why he is kicking him out?

(1500) Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I thank that member for his service to the armed forces. As I have said before, the Chief of the Defence Staff and the Chief of Military Personnel work with the members of the Canadian Armed Forces to ensure they are not released until they are prepared. Every possible accommodation is made to ensure these soldiers are kept in the forces and provided with the best possible support. That said, I have asked my officials to look into the particular case the member has raised.

[ Translation ] The Budget Hon. Stéphane Dion (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Finance agree with what the Minister of Human Resources seems to be saying? According to the minister, if a province is doing a good job of connecting those looking for work with jobs—and the minister acknowledged that Quebec is doing a good job—that province can keep its share of the $300 million that the Minister of Finance wants to take from provincial programs. Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, again, the government is looking for an agreement with the provinces so that it can deliver the Canada job grant and get the best possible result in matching training with real jobs. It just makes sense. This is the Minister of Finance who used the 2007 budget to invest $500 million in the labour market agreement. We hope to come to an agreement with the provinces soon. [ English ] Hon. Judy Sgro (York West, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, whether it is the ice storm in Ontario and Quebec or fires in Alberta, Canadians are strongest when standing together.

That is why Ontarians were appalled to be shortchanged to the tune of billions of dollars by the Conservative budget yesterday. Ontarians need transfer payment protection to build our economy, but instead are being penalized for being the leanest provincial government in Canada. Why are the three failed Mike Harris ministers, responsible for the tragedies of Walkerton and elsewhere, continuing to punish the people of Ontario rather than fighting for them? Hon. Jim Flaherty (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

I had not heard Premier Harris' name in a long time, but that was the last time we balanced the budget. I remember it well. Hon. Tony Clement : I was there too. Hon. Jim Flaherty : Yes, you were there as well. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! The Speaker : Order, please. The hon. member for Nickel Belt. Mr. Claude Gravelle (Nickel Belt, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget did nothing to move the Ring of Fire project forward. Communities we met are still waiting for the federal government to make this a priority.

The President of the Treasury Board once promised that this project would improve the quality of life for this region. Why did the Minister of Finance fail to act? Where is the federal government leadership? Where is their plan to work with our communities and move this project forward? Hon. Greg Rickford (Minister of State (Science and Technology, and Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Ring of Fire is a legacy resource development project with the potential to contribute significantly to the economic future of northern Ontario.

Our government is committed to responsible resource development that creates jobs and economic growth for our region. To that end, we will continue to work collaboratively with first nations, other levels of government, and industry to ensure that the Ring of Fire offers long-term sustainability for communities across northern Ontario.

(1505) Mrs. Carol Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, based on the budget, it appears this is not a priority for them. [ Translation ] Of course, there is significant potential for resource development in the Ring of Fire, but for this project to be sustainable, first nations communities needs to be a major partner. Despite the Conservative promises to reopen talks, we are still waiting to see results. Yesterday's budget made no proposals for moving things forward in the Ring of Fire. What is the Conservative plan for getting this project back on track? [ English ] Hon.

Greg Rickford (Minister of State (Science and Technology, and Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, there are three certainties here. First, from Muskoka to the Manitoba border, our government will continue to focus on community economic development, business growth, competitiveness, and innovation that create jobs and long-term prosperity. We will continue to ensure that communities and businesses in northern Ontario have the tools they need to have a strong, diversified economy, working with all levels of government to that end. Second, the NDP will vote against it.

Third, it will shamelessly try to take credit for it.

The Budget Mr. Corneliu Chisu (Pickering—Scarborough East, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, last year, our government doubled the financial benefit available to a veteran's family from $3,600 to $7,300, plus an average of $1,200 for burial costs. That is a total of $8,500 available to a veteran's family, making the Canadian Last Post Fund one of the most generous compared with our allies. Would the Minister of Veterans Affairs please update the House on the important changes announced yesterday in economic action plan 2014? Hon. Julian Fantino (Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, our government and I have the utmost respect for the brave men and women of our Canadian Armed Forces, our veterans, and their families. In economic action plan 2014, we are expanding the funeral and burial benefits to ensure that modern day veterans of modest means can have a dignified burial. Do not only take my word for it. The Royal Canadian Legion just yesterday said that it was “...very pleased that the issue of a dignified funeral for the most vulnerable, low income Veterans has finally been resolved.... [T]he Government lived up to their commitment...”.

Taxation Hon. John McCallum (Markham—Unionville, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has answered only one question on the budget, and he barely answered that. I wonder if he would not mind standing in his place and explaining to the House what his position is on income splitting. Hon. Jim Flaherty (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member for Markham—Unionville that I am standing in my place. The budget is not balanced yet, as he may have noted yesterday. We hope and we expect that it will be balanced next year. We remain committed to tax relief for Canadian families.

[ Translation ] Canadian Heritage Mr. Jonathan Tremblay (Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, our ancestors passed on countless cultural treasures and traditions, such as ice canoeing on the St. Lawrence. We must protect these traditions so that we too can pass them on to future generations. In 2003, UNESCO created the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. That was 10 years ago, but under the Liberals and the Conservatives, Canada has still not signed the convention.

Does the minister intend to sign the convention, and will she ensure that ice canoeing is included? [ English ] Mr. Rick Dykstra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. The minister is focused on this issue. It is indeed an issue that we are pursuing, and we will get back to him with an answer shortly.

The Budget Hon. Rob Merrifield (Yellowhead, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, our government outlined the economic action plan for 2014. In that plan, we detailed just how we would create jobs and grow the economy right across Canada. In fact, there are some specific benefits in there for western Canada. I would ask the Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification to stand and outline all the benefits for western Canada.

(1510) Hon. Michelle Rempel (Minister of State (Western Economic Diversification), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, middle-class families across western Canada know that in order to balance a budget, there has to be a plan to either generate more revenue or spend less. Make more, or spend less. I am not sure if these families would let the leader of the Liberal Party have his hands on their chequebook, given his assertions that budgets just balance themselves. Folks in Fort McMurray know well that the Conservative Party is the one that keeps taxes low and stands up for the energy sector and the jobs it creates.

Folks in Fort MacLeod know that our investments in federal disaster recovery will impact their lives. Municipalities across western Canada know that we are investing through the building Canada plan, with $50 billion for infrastructure. Ms. Niki Ashton (Churchill, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday's do-nothing budget delivered nothing to address the first nations housing crisis. In my own riding, families in Manto Sipi have no other choice but to live in mould infested homes. Despite tireless efforts, the chief and the grand chief have had to come to Ottawa to push the Conservative government to act.

Will the government work with Manto Sipi to address this housing crisis? More importantly, will it see the value of putting an end to third world living conditions in our own country? Hon. Bernard Valcourt (Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as shown in the budget yesterday, we are committed in economic action plan 2014 to improve in an effective way the standard of living and life on reserve in Canada. It is a priority of ours. Yesterday, there was an unprecedented $1.9 billion in incremental dollars that will be invested in first nation education.

I thought the member would stand up and thank us for it, but she has not. Again, yesterday, we have $22 million for aboriginal justice. Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, in defeating the deficit, the Prime Minister and his Minister of Finance had a choice. They could have gone after the dead money, the $600 billion now sloshing around in the bank accounts of corporations, a staggering 32% of our GDP, or go after the live retirees, retired federal civil servants, breaking faith with promises by doubling their health care premiums.

Would the Prime Minister tell us why he chose to go after live retirees instead of dead money? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, of course, we maintain tax rates for corporations. We expect them to pay their taxes and we go after them when they do not pay their taxes. However, the question that was asked here concerns the voluntary supplemental health benefits for retirees. What we are saying is that we believe it is still a subject of discussion at a bargaining table.

We have been very clear that we believe that when it is a voluntary plan like that, a Cadillac plan, retirees should pay their own fair share, which would be 50% of the plan. It would still make it one of the best plans one could get in this country. Ms. Olivia Chow : Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to table a document listing all of the infractions that have been committed by MMA, relating to my previous question. The Speaker : Does the hon. member have unanimous consent to table the document? Some hon. members: Agreed. Some hon. members: No.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Routine Proceedings [ English ] Interparliamentary Delegations Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association respecting its participation in the Sub-Committee on Transatlantic Economic Relations held in Ankara, Turkey, March 14 to March 16, 2011; the Sub-Committee on Energy and Environmental Security held in Texas, U.S.A., June 24 to June 28, 2013; the Defence and Security Committee held in Washington, D.C. and in Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., July 9 to July 12, 2013; and, the 59th annual session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly held in Dubrovnik, Croatia, October 11 to October 14, 2013.

(1515) Mr. Gordon Brown (Leeds—Grenville, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the reports of the Canadian delegation of the Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group respecting its participation in the following meetings: the 6th Annual Southeastern United States-Canadian Provinces Alliance Conference held in Halifax, Nova Scotia, from July 14 to July 16, 2013; and the U.S. congressional meetings held in Washington, D.C. on February 26 and February 27, 2013.

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 third report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in relation to Bill C-10,

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in contraband tobacco) . [ Translation ] The committee considered the bill and decided to report it to the House without amendment.

[ English ] Procedure and House Affairs Mr. Joe Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. The committee advises that pursuant to Standing Order 91.1(2) the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business met to consider items added to the order of precedence as a result of the replenishment of Wednesday, January 29, 2014, and recommended that the items listed herein, which it has determined should not be designated non-votable, be considered by the House. The Speaker : Pursuant to Standing Order 91.1(2) the report is deemed adopted.

Canadian Heritage Mr. Gordon Brown (Leeds—Grenville, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage in relation to Bill C-501,

An Act respecting a National Hunting, Trapping and Fishing Heritage Day . The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendments.

Natural Resources Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources in relation to Bill C-5,

An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic Accord Implementation Act, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and other Acts and to provide for certain other measures . The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

[ Translation ] Northwest Territories Devolution Act Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Motion Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance : That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of the House, all questions necessary to dispose of the report stage of Bill C-15,

An Act to replace the Northwest Territories Act to implement certain provisions of the Northwest Territories Lands and Resources Devolution Agreement and to repeal or make amendments to the Territorial Lands Act, the Northwest Territories Waters Act, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, other Acts and certain orders and regulations , be deemed put, recorded divisions deemed demanded and the votes deferred to the end of government orders today.

When C-15 is called for debate at third reading, members rising to speak in the first round may divide their time with another member by so indicating to the Chair and any recorded division demanded on Thursday, February 13, 2014, in relation to proceedings on ways and means Motion No. 6 shall stand deferred to the ordinary hour of daily adjournment on Monday, February 24, 2014.

[ English ] The Speaker : The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some hon. members: Agreed. (Motion agreed to) Hon. John Duncan : Mr.

Speaker, I move the following travel motions: that in relation to its study of the prebudget consultation 2014, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Finance be authorized to travel to Washington, DC, and New York, New York, United States of America, in the winter-spring of 2014, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee; that notwithstanding the motion adopted by the House of Commons on December 6, 2013, in relation to its studies on the benefits for Canada in joining the Pacific Alliance as a full member and on the benefits for Canada of the trans-Pacific partnership, six members of the Standing Committee on International Trade be authorized to travel to Chile and Peru in the winter-spring of 2014, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee; that in relation to its study of the review of the Canadian transportation safety regime, transportation of dangerous goods and safety management systems, seven members of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities be authorized to travel to Vancouver and Kitimat, British Columbia, Edmonton, Alberta, and Winnipeg, Manitoba, in the winter-spring of 2014, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee; that in relation to its study of the review of the Canadian transportation safety regime, transportation of dangerous goods and safety management systems, seven members of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities be authorized to travel to Sarnia and Toronto, Ontario, Montreal, Quebec, and Saint John, New Brunswick, in the winter-spring of 2014, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee; that in relation to its study of the review of the Canadian transportation safety regime, transportation of dangerous goods and safety management systems, seven members of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities be authorized to travel to Williston, North Dakota, and Houston, Texas, United States of America, in the winter-spring of 2014, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee; that in relation to its study of opportunities for aboriginal persons in the workforce, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities be authorized to travel to Quebec City, Quebec, in the winter-spring of 2014, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee; that in relation to its study of opportunities for aboriginal persons in the workforce, 10 members of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities be authorized to travel to Prince Rupert, Prince George, and Williams Lake, British Columbia, in the winter-spring of 2014, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.

That is all of the travel motions.

(1520) The Speaker : Does the hon. chief government whip have the unanimous consent of the House to propose these motions? Some hon. members: Agreed. Some hon. members: No. The Speaker: The hon. opposition House leader. Mr. Nathan Cullen : Mr. Speaker, for those unfortunate enough to have been watching at home during that exhaustive and somewhat non-titillating expression by the chief government whip , the point of order I rise on is that this is somewhat unprecedented, in terms of bringing to the House such motions.

Typically parties are able to establish the working conditions for our committees and do the good work of Parliament. What is also unprecedented is that the government has absolutely refused Canada-wide public hearings on its unfair and rigged elections bill, in which the Conservatives are seeking to change the fundamental democratic values in this country. Until the Conservatives have public hearings, we will— The Speaker : On a point of order, I will recognize the hon. chief government whip, but when unanimous consent is sought and it is not given, there is usually no debate about why it is not given.

I hope it is a point of order. The hon. chief government whip. Hon. John Duncan : The point of order, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that these travel motions were arrived at by a joint committee that is all party, and it is ridiculous to be held hostage by such a move by the official opposition.

(1525) The Speaker : I know there are regularly scheduled House leaders meetings, and perhaps the next one will prove fruitful in coming to some type of agreement, but at this time there is, quite obviously, no unanimous consent. Presenting petitions, the hon. member for Fleetwood—Port Kells.

Petitions Impaired Driving Mrs. Nina Grewal (Fleetwood—Port Kells, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today on behalf of the citizens of Fleetwood—Port Kells to present a petition signed by dozens of local residents who are outraged by the unnecessary death of a young woman killed by a drunk driver. The petitioners call upon Parliament to enact tougher laws, including mandatory sentencing for those persons convicted of impaired driving causing death. They also ask that the offence of impaired driving causing death be redefined as vehicular manslaughter.

Rouge National Park Mr. Mike Sullivan (York South—Weston, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have with me a petition on behalf of residents of the area of Toronto.

It asks that the government protect land around the healthy and sustainable Rouge National Park; that it ensure it strengthens and implements the ecological vision, policies, and integrity of the plans, the green belt plan, the Rouge national heritage action plan, and the Oak Ridges Moraine convention plan; that it protect and restore the 600-metre wide wooded main ecological corridor linking Lake Ontario to the Oak Ridges Moraine and Rouge National Park; and that it conduct a rational, scientific, and transparent public planning process to create Rouge National Park's boundaries, legislation, and strategic plan and include first nations and Friends of the Rouge Watershed on a Rouge National Park planning and advisory board.

[ Translation ] VIA Rail Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by a number of residents from New Brunswick who are very concerned about the cuts to rail service in northern New Brunswick. [ English ] Mr. Speaker, as you well know, northern New Brunswick service at VIA Rail is being reduced or eliminated and threatened by the closure of certain rail lines, and the residents of northern New Brunswick, understandably, worry about their economic future and access to passenger rail transportation. I am pleased to present this petition on their behalf.

Sex Selection Mr. Harold Albrecht (Kitchener—Conestoga, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a number of petitions from residents of Waterloo region in southwestern Ontario. These petitioners are calling on members of Parliament to condemn discrimination against females that is occurring through sex-selective pregnancy termination.

[ Translation ] Gatineau Park Mr. Mathieu Ravignat (Pontiac, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present two petitions signed by Canadians who urge the House of Commons to adopt legislation that would give Gatineau Park the necessary legal protection to ensure its preservation for future generations.

[ English ] Genetically Modified Alfalfa Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to present a petition calling to members' attention that organic farming prohibits the use of genetic modification and that the organic sector in Canada depends on alfalfa as a high-protein feed for dairy cattle and other livestock. Therefore, they call upon Parliament to impose a moratorium on the release of genetically modified alfalfa, in order to allow proper review of the impact on farmers in Canada.

Canada Post Mr. David Wilks (Kootenay—Columbia, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition from a number of residents in my riding calling upon the Government of Canada to reverse the cuts to the services announced by Canada Post and to look, instead, for ways to innovate in areas such as postal banking.

Health Insurance for Retirees Hon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of federal retirees who are very concerned about the government's plans to effectively double their health insurance costs. They note that the current cost-sharing formula was part of the contract negotiated by the Government of Canada, the National Joint Council, and the National Association of Federal Retirees. They call on the Government of Canada to honour the contract and continue the existing cost-sharing formula for the Public Service Health Care Plan.

(1530) [ Translation ] Gatineau Park Ms. Marie-Claude Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present two petitions today. The first petition is about preserving Gatineau Park. Although this park is not in my riding, I believe that such a fine park can be an asset to all Quebeckers and Canadians.

Public Transit Ms. Marie-Claude Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the second petition calls on the government to adopt a national transit strategy, something that is sorely needed. Transit is an important issue in my riding, and I am pleased to present this petition. [ English ] Ms. Olivia Chow (Trinity—Spadina, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on the day after the do-nothing budget, I am very pleased to present two petitions.

The first one is from constituents both in Toronto and in my riding of Trinity—Spadina, calling upon the Government of Canada to provide long-term predictable and non-partisan funding for public transit. They note that road congestion is costing the GTA's economy $6 billion a year in lost productivity and that the daily commute time is over 80 minutes.

The Environment Ms. Olivia Chow (Trinity—Spadina, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from residents in Toronto who strongly urge the Government of Canada to immediately legislate a ban on bulk oil tanker traffic off B.C.'s north coast. They note that the project would bring 225 supertankers of a huge size to the pristine northern coast of B.C. each year and that the Enbridge northern gateway pipeline would carry oil 1,178 kilometres from the Alberta oil sands to the coast at Kitimat, B.C.

[ Translation ] Canada Post Mr. François Choquette (Drummond, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition from dozens and dozens of people who are opposed to cuts to services at Canada Post. If Canada Post and the Conservatives move forward with this, Canada will be the only G7 country without home mail delivery. The dozens and hundreds of petitioners are opposed to that, and I support them.

[ English ] Rouge National Park Ms. Rathika Sitsabaiesan (Scarborough—Rouge River, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, my first petition today is from my home community of Scarborough—Rouge River where we know that 100 square kilometres of public land assembly surrounds the Rouge River and Duffins Creek watersheds in Toronto, Markham, and Pickering. It is publicly owned provincial, federal, and municipal land. It is home to the endangered mixed Carolinian forests and is the ancestral home of the Mississauga, Huron-Wendat, and Seneca first nations and their sacred burial sites.

The petitioners are calling on the government to protect the irreplaceable 100 square kilometres of park public land assembly within a healthy and sustainable Rouge National Park and to conduct a rational, scientific and transparent public planning process to create the Rouge National Park boundaries.

VIA Rail Ms. Rathika Sitsabaiesan (Scarborough—Rouge River, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from many constituents of New Brunswick. Considering that VIA Rail service cuts in northern New Brunswick would pose real hardship on many residents for their personal transportation as well as a lot of the local economy and commerce in the community, the petitioners implore the Government of Canada to undertake all measures to reinstate daily round-trip VIA Rail passenger service between Montreal and Halifax through the cities of Campbellton, Bathurst, and Miramichi, New Brunswick.

[ Translation ] Gatineau Park Ms. Rathika Sitsabaiesan (Scarborough—Rouge River, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, Gatineau Park is one of the most frequently visited parks in Canada, and a park that I have enjoyed. Its boundaries are not recognized by any federal legislation and, therefore, Canadians are calling on the House of Commons to pass legislation that would give Gatineau Park the necessary legal protection to ensure its preservation for future generations. Mrs. Sadia Groguhé (Saint-Lambert, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition concerning the protection of Gatineau Park.

The petitioners call for legislation that would give Gatineau Park the necessary legal protection to ensure its preservation for future generations. Mr. Philip Toone (Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present two petitions. The first one calls for legislation to protect Gatineau Park, which was created by

an act of Parliament, as members will recall. We want to protect the park for future generations. The park must be protected immediately and we hope that the government will give a positive answer soon.

(1535) VIA Rail Mr. Philip Toone (Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the second petition that I have the honour to present is about saving VIA Rail services in eastern Canada. It is signed by more than 24,000 people. I am holding just a few of the many signatures collected. We hope that the government will invest in VIA Rail services in eastern Canada, which are so important for economic growth and also for tourism. Transportation in this vast country is also a fundamental right.

[ English ] Rouge National Park Ms. Peggy Nash (Parkdale—High Park, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to present this petition on behalf of some folks from the Toronto area regarding the funds to create the Rouge national park. The petitioners support the creation of the park; however, they have concerns about the draft Rouge national urban park concept.

They want to ensure that existing visions and plans that have been conducted in the past are respected in the creation of this park; that key tracts of land are protected; that there is a rational, scientific, and transparent public planning process involved to create the national park's boundary; and that first nations and friends of the Rouge watershed are included on the Rouge national park planning and advisory board.

[ Translation ] Infrastructure Mr. Jonathan Genest-Jourdain (Manicouagan, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit to the House a petition that attests to the need to renew the programs designed to improve public transit infrastructure in the country and to provide adequate federal funding to support those initiatives.

Rouge National Park Ms. Nycole Turmel (Hull—Aylmer, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on behalf of a number of my fellow citizens in Toronto, I am pleased to present a petition about the Rouge National Urban Park. This park is very important. We must ensure its ecological survival and secure the green corridor between Lake Ontario and the Oak Ridges Moraine.

Gatineau Park Ms. Nycole Turmel (Hull—Aylmer, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the second petition I am presenting today deals with Gatineau Park. I appreciate the fact that my colleagues have also presented petitions calling for federal legislation to protect this important park that attracts so many visitors from across the country. I hope that the government will support our initiative. Mr. Denis Blanchette (Louis-Hébert, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition calling on the House to pass legislation that will provide Gatineau Park with the legal protections necessary to preserve it for future generations. It is important for the House to pass this legislation in order to protect the park, from its boundaries to its endangered species.

VIA Rail Ms. Mylène Freeman (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions for you today. The first petition deplores any budget cuts or rail service reductions in eastern Canada. That will have many adverse consequences for the region's economy as well as for the viability of a number of businesses and business people. Rail is one of the safest, most economical and most environmentally friendly means of transportation.

Public Transit Ms. Mylène Freeman (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, my second petition today is about creating a national public transit strategy. Like me and the people of Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, the petitioners believe that Canadians deserve a reliable, fast and affordable public transit system, especially because of traffic congestion, which causes loss of productivity for those who commute in and to Montreal every day, and because of environmental pollution.

Gatineau Park Mr. Matthew Dubé (Chambly—Borduas, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition for the legal protection of Gatineau Park. This issue is important to all Quebeckers. The environment should not be protected only at the local level. We need people to collaborate and stand together. I am very happy with the work done by my colleague from Hull—Aylmer and other members from the region. This is a very important issue. This is not the last time we will be talking about this kind of protection. We are really hoping for a positive response to this issue.

(1540) [ English ] Questions on the Order Paper

Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand. The Deputy Speaker: Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

Motions for Papers Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand. The Deputy Speaker: Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

[ Translation ] Private Members' Business The Deputy Speaker : The Chair would like to take a moment to provide some information to the House regarding the management of private members' business. [ English ] As members know, after the order of precedence is replenished, the Chair reviews the new items so as to alert the House to bills which at first glance appear to impinge under financial prerogative of the Crown.

This allows members the opportunity to intervene in a timely fashion to present their views about the need for those bills to be accompanied by a royal recommendation. [ Translation ] Accordingly, following the January 29 replenishment of the order of precedence with 15 new items, I wish to inform the House that Bill C-568,

An Act respecting former Canadian Forces members , standing in the name of the member for Saint-Jean , gives the Chair some concern as to the spending provisions it contemplates. [ English ] I would encourage hon. members who would like to make arguments regarding the need for a royal recommendation to accompany this bill, or any of the other bills now on the order or precedence, to do so at an early opportunity. I thank hon. members for their attention.

GOVERNMENT ORDERS The Budget [ English ] The Budget Financial Statement of Minister of Finance Motion The House resumed from February 11 consideration of the motion that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government. Ms. Peggy Nash (Parkdale—High Park, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of Canadians from coast to coast to coast who have been left out in the cold by the government and by the budget. A budget is supposed to be a government's declaration of priorities.

If that is true, then budget 2014 makes it clear that the only jobs the government is interested in protecting are their own. We have heard for weeks that this would be a do-nothing budget, that the Conservatives had no intention of taking real action on the issues that matter to Canadians, because they wanted to wait until an election year to propose anything. In this sense, and in this sense only, the budget did not disappoint. There is nothing to help Canadians save and invest for retirement.

There is nothing to help create the next generation of middle-class jobs, and there is nothing to make life more affordable for Canadians. Instead what we have is the most cynical budget in years. What little so-called new spending there is will not get out the door until years down the line, after the next election. [ Translation ] This budget is chock full of empty words and half-measures that will help absolutely no one.

With this budget, the Conservatives seem to be telling Canadians: “Sorry, but if we help you now, are we really going to have a better shot at getting re-elected next year?” Canadians cannot afford to wait until next year. They need help now. Canadians deserve better. [ English ] Of course, this should come as no surprise. This is a government, after all, that has repeatedly missed the mark when it comes to responding to the priorities of Canadians. Take last year's budget, for instance.

It introduced nearly $8 billion in new taxes, increasing the price of thousands of goods and services that Canadians rely on every day. Budget 2013 promised what the Minister of Finance called the largest and longest federal infrastructure plan in Canadian history. However, it took just a few days for the Parliamentary Budget Officer to expose that this so-called investment was a sham. The PBO found that the budget was nothing more than a shell game, that it delivered $5.8 billion less for infrastructure funding over five years.

Instead of increasing funding at a time when our cities and towns are in dire need of support, the Conservatives actually cut it. Who can forget the dead-on-arrival Canada job grant? It was a $300-million cut to provincial skills training that still has provincial leaders up in arms. I hear from community organizations in my riding about this, and I am sure members are hearing about this across the country. Instead of listening to provincial ministers' recommendations, the Conservatives steamrolled ahead with their own agenda, more or less like they do in Parliament. A year later, what do we have to show for it?

There is nothing more than a $2.5-million advertising campaign for a program that does not even exist. This is the Conservative economic record. What a waste of taxpayers' dollars: reckless cuts, missed projections, and utter mismanagement. Budget 2014 continues down the same path. It fails to tackle Canada's stubbornly high unemployment rate, which is especially high for young Canadians, who are graduating with tens of thousands of dollars of student debt. It proposes to balance the books on the backs of workers and employers by raiding the EI fund to pad its surplus. Now, Canadians know this story.

Successive Liberal and Conservative governments have stolen $57 billion from the EI fund to pay for corporate tax cuts and to mask deficits. The budget also continues the attack on public servants, by cutting billions of dollars from retiree health benefits. These are benefits that people had planned for. They had retired hoping that they could count on them. However, once they are out the door, once they are retired, suddenly the rules of the game are changing. This is a disgrace to the public sector. It is a disgrace to working people.

The budget also delays billions of dollars of procurement spending to boost Conservative fortunes. The fact is that 320,000 more Canadians are unemployed now than before the recession. Those who have found work are often left juggling two, or even three, part-time jobs. Others are working contracts, split shifts, often with barely enough time to see their kids as they head from one job to the next, especially with the gridlock in many of our big cities. Speaking of which, in Toronto alone, a staggering 50% of people cannot find full-time stable work.

It takes them hours to criss-cross the city, often for low wages. There is nothing in this budget to help them. There is nothing to tackle household debt. Despite the fact that the Bank of Canada calls it the biggest domestic risk facing our economy today, there is nothing to tackle this household debt. Last month, the Governor of the Bank of Canada Stephen Poloz warned that our economy will continue to struggle for at least the next two years. He suggested there is little else that the bank can do to help.

That is because the current Conservative government has presided over the largest expansion of household debt in Canadian history: 166% of disposal income. From Surrey to St. John's, household bills are piling up, and household budgets are stretched like never before. We learned just this week that consumer debt is up by more than 9% in the last 12 months alone, to a staggering $1.4 trillion of household debt.

With already historic low interest levels, the Bank of Canada is stuck between a rock and a hard place, and yesterday's budget will not help one bit. (1545) [ Translation ] This budget has absolutely no proposals to stimulate the growth of small businesses. It has absolutely no provisions to help seniors retire in dignity or to help veterans deal with the closure of nine Veterans Affairs offices.

There are no proposals to deal with tax evasion; no proposals to deal with social inequality, which is reaching levels we have not seen since the great depression; and there are no proposals to help the 1.3 million unemployed Canadians get back into the job market.

Instead, this government has chosen to continue along its road of austerity, even though more and more economists are coming together to tell us that it is doing us more harm than good. (1550) [ English ] According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, by 2017 direct federal program spending as a percentage of Canada's GDP will have fallen to its lowest level since 2001. At this pace, federal spending will have been slashed a whopping $90 billion between 2010 and 2017. These are services; things that people want to count on. These are safety inspectors.

These are the people who staff service counters, whether it is Service Canada or veterans services. These are the people who help us access government programs. As Tim Harper wrote Monday in the Toronto Star : Continued government austerity has thrown into question whether Ottawa can, or more importantly, wants to continue to provide services Canadians expect. I guess that is still an open question. We are talking about services and benefits that Canadians have relied on for generations, that we have come to think of as defining us as a nation.

Time and time again, the government has told Canadians that we have to accept less and that our children have to accept less. When it comes to health care, employment insurance, old age security, and services for veterans, we all have to accept less, even though our country is richer than ever before. All these services have met the government's axe. Budget 2014 fails to strengthen any of these services or reverse any of these disastrous cuts. Instead, once again, it chooses ideological dogma over common sense.

It is future generations, our kids and our grandkids, who are going to pay the price. [ Translation ] Clearly, some are sheltered from the Conservatives' budget cuts and inaction. Like the Liberals before them, the Conservatives are continuing to give tax handouts to business. While the middle class is being told to tighten its belt yet again, friends of the Conservatives and the Liberals are helping themselves to the goodies. It is clear who they are working for. We New Democrats on this side of the House know who we are working for, and Canadians know it too.

They know that New Democrats, unlike the Conservatives and the Liberals, are working for them, for all Canadians. [ English ] Just last week, the International Monetary Fund warned the government about the very same reckless austerity that we saw in yesterday's budget. The IMF stated that, “fiscal policy should strike the right balance between supporting growth and rebuilding fiscal buffers”. It went on to highlight some serious threats to our economy, from skyrocketing household debt to continued fragility in the U.S. and Europe.

Those are the very sorts of risks that unchecked austerity leaves us exposed to; in other words, we are not getting the right balance. We now see that the government has ignored that warning. That is not all. The government has ignored the fact that Canada's economic outlook has been repeatedly downgraded by the IMF and others. According to the Conference Board of Canada's report last month, our fledgling dollar is a sign of Canada's lack of growth prospects.

Despite all this, despite the warning from financial experts and the struggles of middle-class Canadians right across the country, the government has chosen to introduce a do-nothing budget. If all of this sounds familiar, it should. We must remember that this is the same government which insisted in 2008 that there would be no recession in Canada, even as the global economy teetered on the brink of collapse. This is the same government that refused to act until it was forced to act by the opposition, and thank goodness for that. It helped get the country out of the recession.

Canadians are tired of waiting for the government to get its act together. We do not have to accept less. We can and should strive for more. New Democrats are ready to do something about it. (1555) [ Translation ] While the Conservatives continue to twiddle their thumbs and ignore the concerns of Canadians, we New Democrats are proposing practical and specific solutions to help Canadians. We know that Canadians work hard and that they deserve a break. This is why New Democrats have established a clear plan to protect consumers and make life more affordable.

We plan to limit the ATM fees that Canadians have to pay each time they want access to their own money. We plan to fight the abusive practices of payday lenders, who are charging interest at rates that can go as high as 1,000%. We plan to put an end to scandalous gas prices and to ensure that all Canadians have access to low-interest credit cards. These simple measures would help to alleviate Canadian household debt and would not cost the government a cent. All across the country, Canadians have told us that measures like that would have a very positive impact on their family budgets.

However, just a few weeks ago, the Conservatives voted against an NDP motion that would have limited ATM fees to 50¢. The Conservatives voted against a motion designed to make the lives of Canadians more affordable, while bank profits continue to rise. [ English ] The Conservatives can talk about being more consumer-friendly, but when it comes to taking real action, Canadians know where they stand. New Democrats have also called on the government to reverse the disastrous cuts to old age security, and to take immediate action to strengthen retirement security.

Far too many seniors in this country are going to be facing a retirement crisis. In the past two years, the current government has really broken faith with Canada's seniors, seniors who have built this country and who now deserve to retire in dignity. The Conservatives have hiked the retirement age from 65 to 67 years; they have turned their back on a plan to expand the Canada pension plan and the Quebec pension plan, Canadians' best and surest hope for a secure retirement; and as many as 5.8 million Canadians, nearly one-third of our workforce, will see a sharp drop in their standard of living when they retire.

This is the retirement crisis so many people are referring to. Provincial governments, labour unions, and pension experts have called on the Conservatives to move forward with plans to increase our public pensions. Even the chief executive officer of CIBC has spoken out about the need to involve government in finding a solution to this retirement security crisis. However, as we saw once again yesterday, the Conservative government still refuses to act. Unlike the Conservatives, New Democrats also focused on creating good middle-class jobs right here in Canada instead of shipping them overseas.

We have put forward ideas to help small and medium-sized businesses create high-quality jobs. We know this is a priority for Canadians, and the current government is letting them down. We have called for a youth employment tax credit to help make sure that we give the next generation of Canadians the same opportunities that our parents gave us. Canada is among the most entrepreneurial countries in the world, and more and more businesses are being started by young people.

Even through the recession, Canadian small businesses continued to thrive and multiply, but for far too long, too many of our small businesses have stayed small. Since 2006, the number of small businesses in this country has grown by more than 44,000, but the number of medium-sized businesses has actually shrunk. That is a trend that cannot continue, and that is why we are going to work together with Canadian businesses, especially small businesses, to help them grow and prosper in the 21st century.

We want to see them grow and to be the best that they can be so that they are investing and creating good-quality jobs right across this country. These are the kinds of solutions New Democrats were hoping to see in this budget. They are the kinds of solutions Canadians were hoping to see. While the government has failed Canadians once again, I can tell members this. These are exactly the kinds of solutions that Canadians can expect from the New Democratic government in 2015. (1600) [ Translation ] All across the country, those in the middle class are having to tighten their belts like never before.

They deserve a government that is committed to focusing on their priorities. At the moment, they have to put up with a government that tells them that they have to go it alone and that they had better get used to it. This is not the Canada that our parents left to us and it is not the Canada that we want to leave to our children.

That is why the New Democrats will vote against this budget and why we would like to propose the following amendments: [ English ] Amendment I move, seconded by the member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques : That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: this House not approve the budgetary policy of the government as it:

a) Fails to take any meaningful action to create jobs while 1.3 million Canadians are unemployed;

b) Refuses to work cooperatively with the provinces on federal transfers, skills training, and infrastructure funding;

c) Does nothing to cap ATM fees, crack down on payday lenders or rein in credit card rates;

d) Does not introduce a youth hiring and training tax credit to combat soaring youth unemployment;

e) Threatens to unilaterally impose the Canada Job Grant over the unanimous objection of the provinces;

f) Pushes ahead with office closures and cuts to veterans' services;

g) Repeats previous governments' misuse of EI funds; and

h) Slashes billions of dollars from the health care plans of Canadian public service retirees. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux : Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, does the seconder of the motion have to be present here in the chamber in order to be a seconder?

(1605) The Deputy Speaker : I am not sure if he absolutely has to, but he is here. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga. Mr. Harold Albrecht (Kitchener—Conestoga, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, repeatedly throughout my colleague's speech, she inaccurately referred to this as the “do-nothing budget”. I have not had the chance to read all of the 400 pages in this budget, but as the chair of the environment committee, I did quickly go to the

section on the environment to see what initiatives our government is proposing in this budget. I do not have time to read anywhere near all of them, but I am going to read a few of them. The budget would protect Canada's national parks by providing over $390 million to make improvements to highways, bridges, and dams located in our national parks. It would support conservation by investing an additional $15 million in recreational fisheries conservation partnerships. It would support projects that would support the conservation of recreational fishing habitats.

I could go on and on about environmental initiatives, but I know that my colleague is very supportive of unions, so I have a question for her. I would like to give her a quote from Canada's Building Trades Unions, which said, “After years of being a mere add-on to post-secondary education, apprenticeship is being noticed by our federal government”. It went on to say, “The way apprentices are being treated has changed and they are now, thanks to measures introduced in the 2014 budget, treated more like their colleagues in college and university training”.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague if she would support the unions in their call for the support that we are giving to the trade unions by giving support to apprenticeship training, which is one of the most lacking areas of training in our country. If we are interested in improving the lot of middle-class Canadians, why would she not support this budget? Ms. Peggy Nash : Mr. Speaker, I cannot let the comments on environmental measures go by without expressing my serious concern about the demonizing of environmental groups that the government has engaged in.

Whether by calling them radicals or terrorists, it is certainly adding to the chill in the environmental community. These organizations do a lot of good work in advocating for a sustainable environment, and there is genuine concern about the approach of the government with respect to charities. I am also a strong supporter of apprenticeships. I am not sure that what is being proposed by the government will create one more apprenticeship in this country. What it does do is offer the opportunity for people who are already in apprenticeships to take on more debt.

We already have a challenge of household debt in this country. What would be good would be to expand the apprenticeship programs, but then the government would have to co-operate with the provinces, and the current government seems completely incapable of sitting down, having a reasonable discussion, and coming to a compromise with our provinces and territories. Hon. Judy Sgro (York West, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on her comments on the budget. I know how passionately she cares. There are 400 pages in this book.

There are some good things in it, but I would say that about 375 pages are reannouncing things from the past or promoting things that are going to happen if everything falls into place in 2016. There is very little in here that is going to do anything much today. I would like to ask my colleague a question on the issue of the infrastructure needs in our cities and throughout the country. We have certainly had a very difficult winter. Our cities have had a lot of problems when it comes to aging and crumbling infrastructure.

Never mind the bridges; I am just talking about the issues throughout the country and in Toronto in particular. We recently had an estimated $275 million in damage from the ice storm. I see nothing in here, no comment at all, about helping cities to deal with those challenges they are facing. I would like to hear some comment on the infrastructure gap that Canada continues to face and the on the very small amount of money in this budget for infrastructure. It is really dealing with two important bridges that we want to see go forward, and some small craft harbour points; that is all that is there.

I would like to hear the member's position on the infrastructure issue.

(1610) Ms. Peggy Nash : Mr. Speaker, I certainly share my colleague's serious concern about of the lack of actual infrastructure spending. There is a real shell game going on in this budget with money that has been previously announced and is being reannounced, and we still do not know the details of many of the programs. Then there is infrastructure money that we are told will be spent in the future; what we really need is infrastructure spending now. We saw a major problem with our hydro in Toronto.

People in our area were without hydro for more than a week, which created serious hardship for many over the holiday period. There were very cold days, and a lot of people with mobility problems and seniors were challenged by this situation. We have problems with hydro infrastructure, roads, water, and sewage, but I think the number one infrastructure issue in Toronto, and I thank my colleague for raising it, is gridlock. It is identified by the Toronto Board of Trade as our number one economic issue. It costs our economy in Toronto alone about $6 billion.

It is an investment that we should be making now to improve our transit infrastructure, not to mention all the other infrastructure needs we have. The government is failing our large cities by not investing in our infrastructure now. It is really shocking that it is abandoning our major urban centres. Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the hard work of my colleague opposite. I used to have her role as the official opposition finance critic and I know it is always challenging.

She certainly gives great credit to her assignment. I have three questions. The member suggested that this is an austerity budget. That is a term in Europe that has become associated with governments that are significantly reducing their program spending, often by 10%, 20%, or 30%, to deal with massive fiscal calamity. However, in this budget, program spending is actually relatively flat. There is actually no reduction, because transfers to persons and provinces continue to grow at a very significant pace.

Would she not agree that it is inaccurate to characterize that as extreme austerity when, in fact, we continue to see massive increases in transfers to province--an increase of $65 billion over the past seven years, for example? Second, she suggested criticism of one of the most exciting elements of the budget, from my perspective, that being the new apprenticeship loan. This is a measure that apprentices, the polytechnics in Canada, the career colleges, the community colleges have long asked for.

Because apprentice training periods are typically about eight weeks, they were excluded from access to the Canada student loan program. Why would she and the NDP be against giving apprentice students access to the same financing option, if they choose, that regular post-secondary students have? Why should they be treated as second-class students? Why does she disagree with all of the colleges and the apprentice organizations themselves, which called for precisely this measure?

Third, in question period the other day, one of her colleagues opposed our shutting down of the current investor immigrant program, which effectively gives away Canadian permanent residency to people who provide a five-year fully-guaranteed $400,000 loan that they get back after five years, which very typically results in no real investment in Canada.

To be clear, the average investor immigrant pays in federal taxes, over the course of 20 years, $200,000 less than the average immigrant who arrives as a federal skilled worker and $100,000 less in federal taxes than someone who arrives as a permanent resident through the live-in caregiver program. Why would she support giving away Canadian social benefits to wealthy foreigners, many of whom continue to live in tax havens abroad while their dependants use Canadian social programs, and do not pay their fair share of taxes? With respect, the NDP should have demanded years ago that we shut that down. Ms.

Peggy Nash : Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his questions. I know he is a member in this House who always does his homework. In the brief time I have remaining, let me try to deal with each of the issues he has raised. I do not think he has ever heard me, in this place or in public, accuse the government of “extreme” austerity, but clearly the government is focused on austerity. We have seen cuts take place in program after program, and over the years tens of billions of dollars have gone out of government spending.

In our program growth, we are not keeping pace with population growth or with inflation. I think our programs are increasingly focused on an approach to Canadian families that is more in keeping with Leave It to Beaver from the 1950s than it is with the modern family of today. Therefore, clearly, we are on a path of austerity, but not to same degree as Europe. I give him that. I did not say I opposed the skilled trades student loan program; my criticism of it is that it is a very small measure to deal with youth unemployment.

I am a big fan of the trades and I would like to see a big expansion of skilled trades programs. This is a very tiny measure to that end. With respect to immigration, I know the member who asked the question is a former immigration minister and knows that dossier well. All I can say is do not get me started, because it is a huge issue in my riding, where families have to wait years for family reunification. There was the tragedy we have seen of many members of our Roma community losing their ability to stay in Canada and being sent back to very unsafe conditions when they were seeking refugee status here.

As well, we have very serious concerns about the ability of people to get their documents dealt with by the current government in a timely fashion. We have huge problems in our immigration system. We would have liked to have seen a more comprehensive approach to immigration, one that would actually help immigrants who come to this country and one that would get their cases dealt with in a timely fashion.

(1615) Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to budget 2014, tabled yesterday at about this time in the House. Last night on CBC's The National , Peter Mansbridge asked the Minister of Finance , “Are there those who are going to lose as a result of today's budget?” The minister's response was quite telling. The minister said, “That's an interesting question. I hadn't thought about it that way, Peter, and I can't think of any, actually”.

The Minister of Finance cannot think of any Canadians who will be hurt by the budget. [ Translation ] He tried to sell us the idea that it was a boring budget. However, this budget does nothing to help young Canadians who cannot find decent jobs, and it does next to nothing to help middle-class parents. [ English ] However, when we read the fine print of the budget, and I must assume that the Minister of Finance is aware of the details of his own budget, we see that this is a budget that actually does hurt many Canadians.

In fact, it hurts one of our most vulnerable groups, a group to whom we owe so much, and that is Canada's veterans. The Conservatives' latest budget actually hits our veterans squarely in the pocketbook. It hits them when they are at the medical clinic or at the drug store. For Canadians who bravely served this country and who are now retired and living on fixed incomes, the budget doubles the amount they must pay each month for their medical plan. Yet these cuts to our veterans did not get any coverage in the news last night. Perhaps it is because some of the language in the budget is so cleverly deceptive.

The change the Conservatives are making to the public service health care plan for retirees is one of the single largest items in the budget. By doubling the amount these retirees must pay for their health plan, the Conservatives hope to save roughly $7.4 billion over six years. That is $7.4 billion that is being taken from retired Canadians living on fixed incomes.That is not pocket change. For a measure as big and as important as this, Canadians expect that there should be a lot more detail in the budget to explain who will be affected and by how much, but Conservatives left those details out.

For example, there is no information in the budget about who qualifies for the public service health care plan as a retiree. However, if we go to the website of the public service health care plan, it has a list of who qualifies for this plan as a retiree. That list includes retired members of the Canadian Forces, our veterans, and retired members of the RCMP. It includes their dependents and their survivors. This is what these changes will mean for our veterans. For veterans who receive the most basic health care coverage, their annual contributions will go from $261 to roughly $550. That is double.

Veterans with the most basic family coverage will see their annual contributions go from $513 to roughly $1,080. That is an additional $567 per year these pensioners on fixed incomes will have to pay to cover their prescriptions. That is an extra $567 retired veterans will have to find so that they and their spouses will not lose their medical coverage. Yesterday we saw members of the government rise to give the Minister of Finance a standing ovation, over and over again, for his budget.

Those members ought to think back to last Remembrance Day, and they ought to think about those brave veterans of World War II, our veterans who still show up each year on November 11, in smaller numbers, and who are still so valued and so worthy of our nation's undying gratitude. I ask them to think of an 88-year-old veteran of World War II who is struggling with diabetes and a heart condition, a grandfather who still cannot talk about what he witnessed in that war. Do the Conservatives actually think this man is living so high on the hog that he ought to be forced to pay double for his medical benefits?

(1620) How about the brave men and women who have come back from Afghanistan, veterans who have been medically discharged against their wishes and now find themselves veterans instead of current members of the Canadian Forces? Should the government be making it harder for them to receive the care they need? What about the survivors, Canadian widows and widowers who are grieving for soldiers and police offices who are no longer with us? Why are the Conservatives balancing the