Ms. Lisa MacLeod: It's a pleasure to support my colleague from Niagara West-Glanbrook on his private member's bill. He has been a very effective finance critic for our party. He always brings to the floor of this Legislature progressive ideas on the fiscal front. This bill is no different.

In fact, I'd urge all members of the Legislature to support this bill on income-splitting, because it is a sign of the changing times in this country. It is really about fairness for all Ontario's families. As a mother who had the great fortune of staying at home with my little girl for the first year of her life, I can tell this chamber that there are few greater rewards in this life than time with our children: to help them grow, to care for them and to let them know that they are part of strong families.

Should one parent in a home choose to stay at home to care for their child, I would argue that they should not be penalized by a tax regime that does not take into consideration these circumstances. It is a fact that in Ontario and across Canada, single-earner families pay much, much higher income taxes than dual-income families. That hardly seems fair to me. That's why I support a more fair and equitable system. I agree with my colleague for Niagara West-Glanbrook that families should be able to income-split if only one member of the family is taking in pay. I would say "earning a pay," but that would be incorrect.

I know a lot of stay-at-home moms, and I will tell you that right now, they have earned our respect, and they deserve fairness. The jobs they do, and the jobs stay-at-home dads do, are as tough as any other job in this province. It is high time that this chamber and this government recognized that. This bill put forward by my colleague, the Fairness for Families Act, would correct the inequality that these families face in the tax regime. I think income-splitting that is extended to all Ontario families is common sense. It is the right thing to do.

I want to share excerpts from an e-mail sent to me by Natalie Gallimore from my city of Ottawa. She wants this chamber to know that there are several scenarios of why one parent may take in significantly less pay than another. She says:

"-one person has a very demanding job, with travel and long or odd, hours so most of the family/household responsibilities fall upon the other adult, who chooses to have less, or no, paid employment in order to establish a work-family balance;

"-the family decides to home-school;

"-one adult decides to go to school themselves;

"-there are disabilities or critical illnesses within the family (physical or mental);

"-there are caregiving responsibilities for older members of the extended family; and

"-there is a calling for volunteer or charity work."

I have friends and constituents who live all of those scenarios. My friend Charlene is a stay-at-home mother. She has three beautiful girls, and she cares for her disabled sister. Her husband, Bruce, is as involved in the community as she is. He's an economist.

I don't understand why they should be penalized by our current tax regime. Charlene's work is every bit as important as any other person's work in this province. We should be encouraging her and more men and young women to follow their calling, regardless of what it is, not to abandon it. This bill put forward by my colleague from Niagara West-Glanbrook will help them.

1540

With the exception of seniors who can now enjoy some income-splitting measures, Ontario's young families, those who are trying to put their children through school, through soccer and other extracurricular activities are being treated as unequal if one parent chooses to work inside the home. It is the single-income family under the age of 65 who suffers under this government's current tax policy, particularly when they are compared to dual-income families who are basically earning the same pay. I think we need to change that.

We need fairness, and I would argue we need fairness for all families. If a mother wants to stay at home to care for her children, or if a father wants to go back to school to improve his family's quality of life, why should they be paying more taxes than a family in the same neighbourhood, making the same annual household income, but who are dual-income earners?

This bill will level the playing field by amending the Taxation Act. It means families with equivalent taxable income would finally pay the same in provincial taxes. My friend Sara Landriault supports his bill. She feels this bill "will bring all working families on an equal economic level without discrimination, and that it will give parents the freedom to raise their children the way they see fit and not be financially discriminated against." I agree with her. Time and again I hear concerns, particularly from my residents in Nepean-Carleton. We boast one of the highest birth rates in all of Canada, and that's why these issues of fairness-and let's not forget parental choice-a re top of mind for me and for the constituents I represent. Under the principle of fairness and the spirit of parental choice, I wholeheartedly agree with my colleague from Niagara West-Glanbrook. I will be supporting Bill 88.

Like Sara Landriault asks, and I will conclude on this: "Why will the government allow me to income split if I am divorced but not while we are married? A true feminist believes in equality for a woman whether she is married or single." The fact of feminism, she says, is that "we should all be treated equally in all aspects of our life. Unfortunately, without income-splitting, women at home are not equal." I agree with Sara and I agree with the member from Niagara West-Glanbrook.