Hon. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member brought up environmental issues in her speech. Does she think the government should work with members from all parties to ensure that our economy can adapt to the new environmental challenges before us?

We have feedback loops that are on the precipice of actually coming to pass. They would have a huge impact on our environment and on our economies.

Ms. Linda Duncan

Mr. Speaker, as the environment critic I was looking forward to working with all the parties and to implementing a new green economy. Regrettably, the budget does not allow us to do that. We will simply be tinkering at the edges.

One of the tools I mentioned was that in parallel with the budget's fiscal and taxation measures, we must have regulatory measures that would move us to this new economy. Regrettably, from rumours we are hearing, that trigger for better investment and for a cleaner economy will not be available to us either.

Mr. Harold Albrecht (Kitchener—Conestoga, CPC)

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the economic action plan presented by our government on January 27.

Before I begin, Mr. Speaker, I would like to indicate that I will be splitting my time with the member for Peterborough.

I would like to take a moment in my first speech in the 40th Parliament to thank the people of Kitchener—Conestoga for their continued faith in me and sending me back to Ottawa to represent them. I would also like to thank my wife, Betty, and our children, Gavin, Benj and Arja, as well as their families. I am incredibly blessed and could not do what I am doing here without their love and sacrifice.

This afternoon I speak on behalf of the residents of Kitchener—Conestoga. As was mentioned earlier this week by my colleague, the hon. member for Kitchener—Waterloo, we undertook, along with the hon. member for Kitchener Centre, a series of round tables with community leaders. From local governments to non-government organizations, from local businesses to multinational corporations, from agriculture to engineering to recycling, a diverse group shared its views. Each of them brought forward very valuable ideas as to what they felt were the most crucial economic issues needing our attention.

Participants were unanimous that expedited infrastructure spending, investments in housing, access to credit, support for new and traditional industrial sectors and building sustainable labour markets were the most credible choices to provide stimulus. There was some divergence over the relative priorities within that list. Municipal government representatives focused their conversations on the importance of infrastructure renewal and an expedited process for approving projects as a means to inject stimulus. Business leaders focused on the tightening of credit as a threat to Canadian business and jobs.

The sessions were remarkable for the lack of tunnel vision participants brought to the table. There was near uniform agreement that in the Canadian economy a balance of all these priorities must be found.

There was significant conversation regarding what should be included in the umbrella term “infrastructure” for funding purposes. Beyond the traditional roads, bridges and crossings, there was broad support for the inclusion of other necessary investments, including green energy initiatives and broadband access for rural areas.

A report from these prebudget consultations was then compiled and presented to the Minister of Finance. It is very obvious that our finance minister was listening because many of the suggestions that we received from these participants have been reflected in this government's economic action plan. Let me say that this plan presented by our Minister of Finance on Tuesday has been received very well in my constituency.

I am happy to say that my Waterloo region colleagues and I were not the only ones to engage Canadians in consultations regarding the unique challenge facing Canada's economy. The budget that we debate today is the result of the most comprehensive and inclusive prebudget consultations in Canadian history. I would like to extend my congratulations and thanks to the Minister of Finance and his parliamentary secretary, the member for Macleod, for their continued fine work and leadership on behalf of all Canadians.

Canada is being hard hit by a global recession that started in the United States. Businesses in my riding are being impacted negatively, manufacturing job losses have increased, and the demand for EI benefits and retraining opportunities have increased.

Our economic action plan addresses the need for extended EI benefits and enhancing the availability of training opportunities for those who have lost jobs.

By extending the work-sharing agreements by 14 weeks, more Canadians will be able to continue working. The $1.8 billion directed toward increasing the availability of training opportunities will go a long way toward addressing the needs of many who have lost jobs in sectors which are very unlikely to ever return to the levels of employment opportunity they once experienced.

The strategic training and transition fund would support the needs of individuals who do not qualify for EI training, such as the self-employed or those who have been out of work for a prolonged period of time.

Other initiatives such as those targeting student summer jobs and the initiative for older workers will address specific demographics of those affected by this economic downturn.

The apprenticeship completion grant of $2,000 will help to address the critical need for skilled labour, a problem which will only get worse unless young Canadians are encouraged to enter these worthy professions, and community colleges are equipped to train them.

That brings me to the commitment of our government to provide $2 billion for the acceleration of new projects at our post-secondary institutions. Mr. John Tibbits, the president of Conestoga College, has been persistent in his call for greater emphasis on skilled trades training. Mr. Tibbits has the honour of being the leader of a college that for 9 of the last 10 years has been named the number one publicly-funded college in Ontario.

Mr. Tibbits had the following to say about our economic action plan, “We're very pleased with the Federal Budget. Our Federal Members of Parliament have listened to our concerns through pre-budget briefings. The budget responds directly to those concerns”.

I am very proud to say that Conestoga College is situated in my riding of Kitchener—Conestoga.

One of the points I noted from our consultations was that, regardless of their sector, participants clearly recognized the long-standing need for municipal infrastructure renewal. This government understands that and will accelerate and expand recent historic investments in infrastructure with almost $12 billion in new infrastructure spending over five years. This provides Ontario with its share of $4.5 billion over two years for roads, bridges, buildings and broadband, and accelerates payments for infrastructure projects in Ontario.

I am happy that our government has provided more than $1 billion over five years for the southern Ontario development agency program to help workers, communities and businesses in the region. In fact, Stratford mayor, Dan Mathieson of the Southwest Economic Alliance, said, “This budget is good news for southwest Ontario. It is good news for our communities, for our citizens and for our economy”.

We have heard from many sectors that are giving their strong support to this play. The mayor of Kitchener said, “It is good news for the municipalities. That is probably an historic event in terms of the acknowledgement by the federal government that there is going to have to be a partnership as we deal with the infrastructure deficit that municipalities have been talking about for some time”.

Our government is doing the right thing by cutting taxes and improving access to capital for the financial system. Since coming to office the government has provided $78.3 billion in tax relief to the people and businesses of Ontario. Budget 2009 will provide an additional $9.1 billion in tax relief. We have also made $13 billion in additional financing available to crown corporations, such as CMHC, Export Development Canada and the Business Development Corporation, and increased their flexibility and capacity to provide capital to small business.

Our government will also provide Ontarians with $1.3 billion through a temporary home renovation tax credit which will provide meaningful tax relief to help Canadian homeowners make improvements to their property while promoting broad based economic activity.

There is an additional $407 million in support for first-time homebuyers through the $5,000 first time homebuyers tax credit to assist them with the costs associated with the purchase of their first home. The $5,000 increase of RRSP withdrawal limits will also assist first-time homebuyers in purchasing a home.

Budget 2009 also provides $225 million over three years to Industry Canada to develop and implement strategy on extending broadband coverage to communities that are not currently served, beginning in 2009. Canada is one of the most connected nations in the world with the highest broadband connection rate among the G7 countries. However, there are still gaps in access to broadband, particularly in rural and remote areas. Our government is committed to closing the broadband gap in Canada by encouraging development of rural broadband infrastructure. Much of my constituency is comprised of rural areas, some of which do not yet have access to broadband Internet.

I have heard concerns about this gap since my election and I was very pleased to see this addressed in this year's economic action plan.

Another provision which brings great benefit to the Waterloo region is the $50 million grant to the Institute for Quantum Computing. The institute is a world leader in research and teaching in the field of quantum information, a discipline that opens opportunities for the development of new technologies and opportunities for the creation of jobs.

Canadians sent the Conservative Party, led by our Prime Minister, to Ottawa with a strengthened mandate to steer this country through a worldwide economic crisis. They did so knowing that this is a government that is not afraid to make hard choices and it is not afraid to lead by example.

This economic action plan is what we need in these uncertain times. For all of us who have been sent here to represent our constituents in the House of Commons, we can never forget that we are here to represent those who have entrusted us with the serious responsibility to examine the issues and then to make the right choices.

It is my sincere belief that the budget represents the best possible plan to lead Canada through the troubled waters of the economic storm and that as we work together as a nation we will emerge even stronger than we are today.

May God keep Canada glorious and free.

Mrs. Bonnie Crombie (Mississauga—Streetsville, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the member's attention to an article in The Mississauga News yesterday which reads:

Not only is the cheque not in the mail for Canadian municipalities, but the instructions for writing the cheque aren't even written yet.

Even though federal politicians trumpeted the billions in infrastructure dollars for cities in the federal budget announced Tuesday, municipal officials are still trying to determine just how the money will be dispensed.

It is unclear to what degree matching funds from the provinces and cities will be required, whether money will be distributed on a per capita basis or through applications, and exactly what kind of projects will be eligible.

What assurances do we have from the government and that member that the $12 billion infrastructure money will flow to those communities that need it, like my own community of Mississauga--Streetsville? In Mississauga, we have already put together a long wish list of projects that include the revitalization of Civic Square, fixing fire halls and libraries, repairing roads, covering extra costs and the long-awaited rapid transit system.

Mr. Harold Albrecht

Mr. Speaker, that was a pretty long list and I am not sure I will be able to cover all of her questions.

In our budget consultations in my riding of Kitchener--Conestoga, we met with many of the mayors who represent the Waterloo region. Each mayor was very confident that as we sit together and work in partnership, as I said earlier, we will be able to meet the challenges in front of us.

As it relates to the timing of this, all of us in this chamber know that for the budget to be implemented it needs to be voted upon by members in the House to give it support. I thank the member opposite for indicating that her party will be supporting it.

Mr. Bruce Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of his remarks, the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga did a magnificent job of listing the challenges that are facing small businesses, workers and families across his riding and, of course, across Canada.

Thunder Bay--Superior North has serious problems in the forest industry and the budget has absolutely zero in it other than a tiny amount for marketing and research and development money for forestry. There is nothing for loan guarantees and nothing for targeted investments. We have a mill in Marathon that is at risk. Terrace Bay and Schreiber have lost one paper machine. Nipigon, Red Rock and Dorion have lost two mills. Greenstone has lost two mills and the forest work that goes with it. The list goes on.

I am an NDP member and a proud one, and I am a small business person. I would like to ask the hon. member why we seem to be about to replicate the worst deficit in the history of Canada under the Mulroney government of $42 billion to $45 billion. We are headed that way now. Why are we giving $60 billion in tax cuts to large corporations but only $1 billion to EI workers who are in desperate trouble?

Mr. Harold Albrecht

Mr. Speaker, the member noted in his remarks the challenges facing the forestry industry. I would like to point out that there are all kinds of initiatives in the budget that are targeted toward helping the forestry industry.

As well, there are EI benefits that will help retrain individuals and provide funding for those who would not normally qualify for EI benefits, those who may have been out of work for prolonged periods of time.

However, as it relates to the forestry sector, let me point out some of the initiatives that our budget includes. We are supporting the forestry sector with $80 million over two years for the transformative technologies program. It is important that the money we invest not just simply go toward continuing to do business as we have always done it, but that it go toward investing in technologies that will make all of our industries more competitive and more efficient. That is why we have extended the capital cost allowance for all manufacturing and these kinds of industries.

I would return a question back to my colleague. How can he not support many of these initiatives that we have put in for the forestry sector which will clearly help the forestry sector through this difficult time?

Mr. Dean Del Mastro (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, CPC)

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to speak this afternoon in support of this budget, a tremendous economic action plan for Canada, a great action plan, very timely and something that I think is roundly celebrated by Canadians east to west and north to south.

On December 22, I had the honour of hosting an economic round table in Peterborough and I had a number of local stakeholders come in and make specific recommendations on things that they would like to see in our budget. A number of the recommendations were not just outstanding recommendations that were incorporated in this budget, but they demonstrated that our finance minister and our Prime Minister were listening when we were handing in reports from everyday Canadians and incorporating those suggestions right into the budget.

I just want to refer to some of the suggestions that I heard.

Bryan Cathcart from Cathcart Trucking came forward and spoke on behalf of small business. He recommended reductions in small business taxes. I refer to the budget brief and I look at supporting small business. I look at, for example, increasing the amount of small business income eligible for a reduced federal tax rate by 11% to $500,000 from the current limit of $400,000. This is real money back into the pockets of small business so they can employ people, continue to be prosperous and invest in our communities.

Increasing access to credit was mentioned by a number of people who were there, including Jay Amer from the GPAEDC who spoke about our small businesses having a difficult time getting the credit they needed to conduct and grow their business. We look, for example, at the Canada small business financing program and the Business Development Bank of Canada, those extensions that we made specifically in this budget tremendously improved their ability to support small business. We see that once again that on this issue the government was really listening.

We had seniors' representatives there as well. Ralph de Groot, who is a retired superintendent of the RCMP, came forward and made specific recommendations with respect to the tax burden that seniors are facing in Canada and talked to us about how we might be able to help seniors so that they can meet their bill commitments and live the way they have become accustomed. We see in this budget that one of the major moves is to increase the age credit by an additional $1,000. Our government increased the age credit from $1,000 to $2,000 in budget 2006 and now we have increased it by another $1,000 effective in 2009.

What does this mean? How will this benefit seniors? What did Mr. de Groot's advocacy win for seniors? This benefit will benefit 2.2 million seniors who will now be eligible to receive up to $961 in annual tax savings. That is a lot of money for seniors in my community and that money will help them. In effect, $961 is what many of them make in any given month.

We have already introduced pension income splitting, something that was incredibly popular among seniors in my riding. We also changed the age limit from 69 to 71 on RRSPs. We further reduced the mandatory amount that must be withdrawn when converting RRSPs to RRIFs, something that seniors have been really concerned about, especially given the decline in the market. They wanted to be able to leave their money in and we are allowing them to do that. Once again, the concerns brought forward by Ralph de Groot were listened to in our budget.

The Peterborough Real Estate Association came forward. Barb Criegern and Carolyn Mills talked about the need for the government to assist homeowners and to assist real estate through what could be a difficult time. They talked about retrofit programs. Obviously the new home renovation tax credit, which this government brought forward, is something I am immensely proud of.

We now have a program where Canadians can improve their homes: green retrofits, improvements to their kitchens, maybe they have a new addition to the family so they need to renovate a bedroom, or maybe they want to finish a basement. For all of these things the government will now play a part, if they make that investment soon.

Those things will stimulate our economy because we know those inputs, whether it is lumber or drywall, are all made in Canada, which is a real stimulus to the economy. At the same time, the government will have a hand in helping everyday Canadians pay for renovations on their homes, to update their homes, to make them more efficient, to make them greener and to make them much nicer.

We have a lot of old housing stock in a city like Peterborough. This will help us retrofit those homes and really assist those homeowners.

They talked to me about the ability to leverage the RRSP investments toward the purchase of a home. That was specifically mentioned in the budget. One used to be able to take $20,000 of one's RRSP and draw that down to put toward a down payment on a home. For years, the Real Estate Association has been coming forward asking for it to be indexed and moved to $25,000. There is a specific member of our caucus who has worked very hard on that. That indexing is in the budget. This will help people buy homes and it is something that is roundly celebrated by real estate agents from coast to coast.

We now have the first-time home buyer's tax credit. Barb Criegern and Carolyn Mills of the Peterborough Real Estate Board talked at length about how we could assist first-time home buyers. That is a big market and it has the ability to really keep homes moving. If we can continue to assist people to move from rental to ownership, especially at this time of historically low interest rates, anything we could do in that regard would certainly be helpful.

The new tax credit of $5,000 tax credit with a net value to them of $750 is in the budget. This is the government helping first-time home buyers to enter into the real estate market at a time when we need people entering into the housing market so we can keep the economy rolling.

Judy Heffernan of the Peterborough Community Futures Development Corporation and Jay Amer talked to me specifically about the eastern Ontario development program. They had a recommendation to double the funding of that program because it had leveraged so much support and created so many jobs. That was a $10 million-a-year program. They were advocating to take that from $10 million and move it to $20 million. Our government did substantially more than that.

We have created the new southern Ontario development agency. That is a $1 billion investment over five years, and it is about time. Regional economic development has existed from coast to coast to coast but not in southern Ontario. It has been an item of fairness for us. We looked at it and thought about how much more investment we could leverage and how many more jobs we could create in southern Ontario if we had a fund like this. They were looking for another $10 million, but they received $200 million per year. We outdid their expectations by about 20 times.

However, that is not all we did. We also re-extended the eastern Ontario development program, so that $10 million fund is still in place for the next two years. We have the new SODA program, the southern Ontario development agency. That is going to create jobs and investments. We still have the eastern Ontario development program and that will be administered by the CFDC in Peterborough, Judy Heffernan and her associates, who do a tremendous job in attracting investment and creating jobs in Peterborough.

The president of Sir Sandford Fleming College, Tony Tilly, came to talk to me about a new skilled trades centre of excellence that the college would like to build. However, it really has a difficult time accessing the money that it needs to build the infrastructure. I have had conversations with the presidents of Brock University and the University of Windsor. I know the member for St. Catharines is here, a real advocate for Brock University.

What have we been able to create in the budget? What have we been able to lobby for? We did not only invest billions of new dollars in infrastructure, and that should never be diminished. We also created a new $2 billion fund for post-secondary institutions and that $2 billion will build the facilities that will create the great minds of tomorrow. This new skilled trades centre for Sir Sandford Fleming College will train the tradesmen of tomorrow. This is going to build the strong economy that Canada is going to need.

I could talk about this budget for hours because there is so much in it that is good for my community and every community from coast to coast to coast. However, I see that my time is up, but I appreciate the opportunity to speak in emphatic support of this great budget.

Hon. Larry Bagnell (Yukon, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, what is the vision in the budget? A member from Nunavut yesterday asked about great vision, great potential projects that would get the north off diesel energy.

The Conservative member suggested we have put forth the facts on science. Therefore, I want to put forward the facts set out in annex 3 of the budget: cuts to the granting councils in 2009-10, $17.7 million; in 2010-11, $43 million; and in 2011-12, $87.2 million. I want to get those on the record. The member said that improving infrastructure for science was good. This morning two professors complained that it was no good if at the same time the research professors and research staff who would use that infrastructure were decimated.

Mr. Dean Del Mastro

Mr. Speaker, the budget makes several very significant investments into science. For example, the board of Genome Canada has come out today specifically applauding budget 2009 for the commitments it makes in support of Genome Canada. Hundreds of millions of dollars per year over the next several years will go in support of that very important institution.

We are supporting scientific research in our country because we want to be a leader in the world.

Ms. Nicole Demers (Laval, BQ)

Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to hear the speech given by my hon. colleague from Peterborough and, if I understood correctly, there is a consistent theme running through this budget: only those who are rich, who already have money, stand to benefit from it.

Older people who unfortunately have to rely on the guaranteed income supplement do not have RRSPs or RRIFs. Nor can those older people enjoy a tax cut of $900 a year, because they do not pay taxes. This budget does nothing for such people.

People who do not have adequate housing, who live in tents in Edmonton—as the hon. member should know—cannot benefit from the government's renovation program.

How does it intend to help our poorest citizens, men and women alike? I am speaking on behalf of all Quebeckers and all Canadians. There is more to Canada than just Ontario.

Mr. Dean Del Mastro

That is right, Mr. Speaker, Canada is not just Ontario and that is why our government does not discriminate between regions. This is why the new southern Ontario development agency is such a great advancement made by the government because of its fairness for Ontario.

The member specifically mentioned seniors and talked about housing for seniors. I reference page 14 of the budget in brief. The member can look at where it specifically details $400 million over two years for the construction of social housing units for low-income seniors. This is on top of the 7% increase last year in the guaranteed income supplement. It is on top of the amount of money that we have allowed seniors to earn before we claw anything back from pensions.

Last, we know that the over 800,000 Canadians have removed been completely from the federal tax rolls, the overwhelming majority of those are low-income seniors. I know the member does not want us taxing low-income seniors, and we are not.

Ms. Linda Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the member is asserting, that the budget continues moneys for research, I have heard from two senior researchers, one working in the area of neuroscience, the other in Arctic research, who say what is happening is the money for actual researchers and students is being yanked and given over for the purchase of equipment and buildings in the Arctic, neither of which are very useful if there are no people to use them.

Mr. Dean Del Mastro

Mr. Speaker, college and university infrastructure is useful. I know the member has the University of Alberta in her riding. There are $2 billion for new infrastructure for colleges and universities. The member should vote in support of the budget because it will help people out right in her own riding.

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ)

Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel.

I am pleased to participate in this debate. First of all, I wish to state that this budget is completely unacceptable and that Quebeckers agree on two things. The budget does not respect the consensus of the National Assembly of Quebec, which passed a unanimous motion containing several points. I would like to remind members that the motion addressed several points, including two very important ones: maintaining the equalization system—that is, not changing the formula—and not proceeding with the implementation of a pan-Canadian securities commission. The unanimous motion of the Quebec National Assembly is supported by a great number of people and there is a broad consensus in Quebec on this matter.

As the member of parliament for a riding hit hard by various cuts to the manufacturing sector, I note that this budget does not contain significant measures to support workers who have lost their jobs and who must make great efforts to find employment in a sector and an area where, every month, a plant closes or finds itself in trouble.

I would like to mention that, since 2005, the riding of Beauharnois—Salaberry has lost almost 3,000 jobs concentrated in a regional county municipality where the economy was based on a manufacturing sector with good, well-paid jobs and unionized workers. Their wages were spent on goods, houses, renovations, and taxes and kept the economy rolling in our area. In our city, the closing of the Goodyear plant alone eliminated wages worth $85 million last year. To have a better idea of what this means, imagine motorcycle and watercraft vendors, renovators, builders, retailers as well as all merchants and contractors affected by the elimination of $85 million in wages. And I have only mentioned Goodyear.

Just two weeks ago, Rio Tinto Alcan announced the early closure of its factory. The community was preparing for the closure of the Beauharnois factory, but only in two years' time—the time it would take for the community, economic development players and elected officials to come up with solutions that would enable workers to find other employment. But now, everyone is caught a bit off guard by Rio Tinto Alcan's unacceptable decision. Good, salaried jobs are being lost in the city of Beauharnois. This city has seen its factories leave one after the other and in the past two weeks has learned that 250 workers will be out of work.

I do not want to make a defeatist speech because our region is bursting with very dynamic stakeholders, players and elected officials who are capable of attempting to re-ignite the local economy, of rolling up their sleeves and of trying to entice investors and promoters to our area, which has its assets. It is the only municipal port in Canada; there is a highway and there are trains. We are well-situated, but it will take us more than one or two years to build the infrastructure and attract new businesses.

While we are waiting for the elected officials and the economic development players to do their work, we must support the workers who have lost their jobs because they had decent salaries that allowed them to buy consumer goods and meet their financial commitments.

Following the recent Rio Tinto Alcan closure, 50 of the 250 workers were hired by an agency.

The unionized Alcan workers in Beauharnois made that compromise so that the plant would not have to close its doors for another two or three years, as they were promised. They were willing to make those compromises in their collective agreement and, unfortunately, agree to an agency. Since then, there have been two classes of workers in the plant.

Despite the union's compromises—as I said—nothing stopped Rio Tinto Alcan in Beauharnois from reneging on its commitments and hastily closing the plant. Some 50% of the people hired by the agency were former Goodyear workers. These workers have now been through two major layoffs in two years. That is very tough for people to handle.

I do not know whether the members are able to close their eyes and imagine what they would do if they lost their jobs tomorrow. They would no longer be getting paid, and they would have to wait two weeks before collecting employment insurance benefits. We make reasonable money, so we can save a little. But for factory workers, even those taking home a good wage, it is hard to save money.

Nowadays, in my riding, workers call to tell me that, unfortunately, they did not work enough hours to qualify for employment insurance benefits. That is why I think that the unemployed are one of this budget's glaring omissions. The government may be using other measures or services to stimulate the economy, but the unemployed have nevertheless been forgotten and they need support during this crisis.

I would like to provide two specific examples in an attempt to reach the members opposite. We hear a lot of numbers and statistics, but this is about human beings, about people who are appealing to us, the members who live in ridings that are economically dependent on manufacturing.

I want to share some stories with you, but I am not going to make the same mistake that the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke made before the holidays, when she read emails from her constituents. She read them in their entirety, even though they contained racist, discriminatory, completely unacceptable, unparliamentary language. In spite of all that, the member took the liberty of reading them in this House. Needless to say, the disparaging comments in the emails were directed at the Bloc members. I will take the high road and summarize the emails I received, because Bloc members also get blasphemous emails criticizing the Conservative government and members. But because we behave responsibly and respectfully in this House, I will not follow that member's example. I hope the Speaker will soon make a ruling prohibiting such unparliamentary practices.

I would like to tell you a story about employment insurance that touched me deeply. A single mother came to my office to tell me that she did not qualify for employment insurance because she was missing five hours, just five hours. I had to tell her that for years, the Bloc and many social stakeholders and unions in Quebec have been calling for changes to employment insurance, but that the Conservatives have unfortunately turned a deaf ear.

I have a message for the government, because of the stories I have heard, like this single mother's and another woman's too. When this woman, who had recently given birth, went back to work, she was unfortunately laid off, but she did not qualify for employment insurance because she did not have enough hours. That is too bad, but it is women who give birth. We are still being discriminated against because the Employment Insurance Act is not geared to women. They do not go back 104 weeks to see how many hours this woman accumulated; they just look at how many hours she worked. It is one more injustice.

If the government really wants to support the unemployed, it should act quickly to change and improve the employment insurance program.

Mr. Robert Carrier (Alfred-Pellan, BQ)

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Beauharnois—Salaberry for her wonderful speech. I would like to remind her of one point that has been forgotten in the government's economic action plan, in the budget, and that is the issue of seniors who receive the guaranteed income supplement because they do not have enough income. Legislation provides for a guaranteed income supplement; however, the supplement given by the government is below the poverty line set for Canada. These seniors are living below the poverty line. I think that the government could have at least planned to increase the guaranteed income supplement in its budget.

What does my colleague think about this in terms of the constituents in her riding that she knows?

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. We have heard many accounts from seniors in our ridings. Seniors' advocacy groups and organizations in Quebec have been asking for an increase in the guaranteed income supplement for some time. I think seniors know they can count on Bloc Québécois members to demand that this injustice be rectified.

I would like to draw the attention of the House to the fact that another consensus is emerging in Quebec regarding this budget, specifically, concerning farmers. I represent an agricultural riding and I can say that the consensus is that this budget does not meet the needs expressed by farmers in Quebec.

Ms. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member was sharing some stories about her riding and I would like to take the opportunity to talk about my riding of Halifax.

There is a community in Halifax called Spryfield. It is a very large community, with urban sprawl and some inner city pockets. There is no licensed child care facility in the entire community of Spryfield. I met with the director of the YWCA Halifax and she asked, “How can we expect the economy to work when our women can't?”

I am wondering if the member would share with us her thoughts about child care as an economic stimulus?

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille

Mr. Speaker, child care is a big topic of debate in Quebec. We have created a child care system that is accessible for women and that we pay for through taxes. All women, all families—men, too—deserve to have adequate, quality child care facilities for their children. I encourage my colleague to exert pressure and to bring forward a motion or bill towards that end. As long as Quebec's jurisdictions are respected and full compensation is given, she will have the Bloc Québécois on her side.

Mrs. Bonnie Crombie (Mississauga—Streetsville, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, I too want to thank my colleague from the Bloc for her passionate description of the needs of the most vulnerable and how they are not met in this most recent budget. I wonder if the member can help me understand why the government would choose to add five weeks at the end of the EI period rather than eliminating the two week waiting period which would serve to get money into the hands of the needy more quickly.