Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2016-11-29 13:10:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)",
        "fr": "M. Kevin Lamoureux (secr\u00e9taire parlementaire de la leader du gouvernement \u00e0 la Chambre des communes, Lib.)"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"4666162\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the Conservatives have decided to vote against this important piece of legislation, but not necessarily surprised. Their record on voting when it comes to seniors is not positive. The former Conservative government increased the age of retirement from 65 to 67. Our government reversed that and brought it back to 65. The Conservative Party voted against the increase in the guaranteed income supplement for some of the poorest seniors, the most vulnerable seniors in our country. Today, when we think about the future, when we talk about what is going to be taking place years from now and making sure there will be a decent rate of retirement, once again we have the Conservatives saying no.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"4666163\" data-originallang=\"en\">The Conservative Party has really lost touch with what Canadians are thinking. Why is the Conservative Party, from the member's perspective, so far out of touch with the reality of what Canadians really and truly want to see? Canadians want to see good, fundamentally strong pension programs. Political parties from every region of the country have got on board with this, except the Conservative Party of Canada here in Ottawa. Why?</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"4666162\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, je suis d\u00e9\u00e7u, mais pas vraiment surpris, que les conservateurs aient d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de voter contre cette mesure l\u00e9gislative importante. En effet, leur bilan dans le dossier des a\u00een\u00e9s n'a rien de reluisant. L'ancien gouvernement conservateur avait fait passer l'\u00e2ge de la retraite de 65 \u00e0 67 ans. Le gouvernement lib\u00e9ral a annul\u00e9 ce changement et il a ramen\u00e9 la retraite \u00e0 65 ans. Le Parti conservateur a vot\u00e9 contre l'augmentation du Suppl\u00e9ment de revenu garanti \u00e0 l'intention d'a\u00een\u00e9s parmi les plus pauvres et les plus vuln\u00e9rables du pays. Aujourd'hui, alors que nous pensons \u00e0 l'avenir, alors que nous parlons de ce qui se passera dans des ann\u00e9es et des gestes \u00e0 poser pour pr\u00e9parer des retraites d\u00e9centes, les conservateurs disent non, encore une fois.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"4666163\" data-originallang=\"en\">Le Parti conservateur n'a plus aucune id\u00e9e de ce que pensent les Canadiens. Le d\u00e9put\u00e9 pourrait-il dire pourquoi le Parti conservateur est \u00e0 ce point d\u00e9connect\u00e9 des d\u00e9sirs r\u00e9els des Canadiens? Les Canadiens veulent de bons r\u00e9gimes de retraite, des r\u00e9gimes fondamentalement solides. Des partis politiques de tous les coins du pays se sont ralli\u00e9s \u00e0 nous dans ce dossier, mais pas le Parti conservateur f\u00e9d\u00e9ral. Pourquoi?</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2016/11/29/kevin-lamoureux-5/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/kevin-lamoureux/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4032/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "9276542",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": "Initiatives Minist\u00e9rielles"
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Canada Pension Plan",
        "fr": "Le R\u00e9gime de pensions du Canada"
    },
    "h3": {
        "en": "Report Stage",
        "fr": "\u00c9tape du rapport"
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2016/11/29/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2016%2F11%2F29%2F"
    }
}