SoVote

Jan/31/22 4:55:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have also heard heart-wrenching stories of people having government payments removed. Actually, they are phoning them, saying they owe some money. I look forward to working together with the member in having seniors and their needs addressed.

41 words

Mr. Fraser Tolmie (Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, CPC)

Jan/31/22 4:55:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to stand in the House and to speak on behalf of the people of Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan. I thank my wife Cassandra, our two beautiful daughters who are watching today, and my family for its love and support. One person who was unable to see me elected was my grandmother. She was instrumental in inspiring me in not only my service as an officer in the Royal Canadian Air Force, but also my service as a city councillor, as a mayor of the City of Moose Jaw and now as a member of Parliament. I am the son of Scottish immigrants who came to Canada to make a better life for themselves and their family. My parents experienced challenges and turmoil with the loss of an infant. It affected their emotional and mental health. As a result, I grew up in a single-parent home where my mother struggled to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table, and suffered from bouts of depression. Growing up below the poverty line for the greater part of my early childhood and early teenage years, I know what it is like to receive a handout. I know what it is like to see nothing under the Christmas tree. Despite what was or was not under the tree, I was always loved. I spoke of my grandmother helping to shape my future by telling me stories of the past. As a young child I would spend my Saturdays with her hearing about my Scottish heritage, my family overseas and the difficulties of enduring the Second World War. She was the greatest storyteller I have ever known. One story had a profound impact on me. It is a constant reminder to me to honour the past and of the responsibility we have to the next generation. My grandmother had to evacuate from the city of Glasgow. She had all of her belongings in one suitcase and the most precious thing in her other hand: my mother. As she waded through the waves of airmen, seamen and soldiers in the train station in Glasgow, an Australian officer came along and escorted her onto the train. As he placed her on the train, he looked at two British soldiers and said to them that if the air raid siren went off, he wanted them to help this woman and her child to the air raid shelter. Not 30 seconds went by and that terrifying sound went off, and those two British soldiers bolted. As my grandmother struggled and my mother started crying, that Australian officer came back and escorted my grandmother to the air raid shelter. They waited out the bombing, and afterward the train was cancelled, so that Australian officer escorted my grandmother and my mother to my great-aunt and great-uncle's tiny flat in Glasgow. They invited him in for tea and shared rations. As he looked around at the size of that flat, he looked at my grandmother and asked if this was what her man was fighting for. I can tell members that it was not what my grandfather was fighting for, it was who and it was for a way of life. This son of Scottish immigrants believes in a better future and opportunity for all Canadians. We are here today debating the throne speech. I want to focus on issues not included in the speech. They are issues important to my riding, such as energy, agriculture, infrastructure spending and honouring our elders. Energy is an important industry in Saskatchewan and it is uniquely positioned to help Canadians recover from the pandemic, yet all the government can talk about is killing ethical energy produced in Canada along with the livelihoods of thousands of Canadians. Another livelihood under attack is agriculture. Agriculture is among the largest industries in Saskatchewan. In my riding it is the largest single employer. It is also a sector largely ignored by the Liberals and left out of the throne speech. A study conducted by the University of Regina says Saskatchewan has experienced a history of drought, including the years 1910, 1914, 1917 to 1921, 1924, 1929, 1931 to 1939, 1958 to 1963, 1967 to 1969, 1974, 1977, 1979 to 1981, 1983 to 1986, 1988 to 1992, 2001 to 2003, 2009 and now 2021. Policy should be there to help us, not punish us. A carbon tax has not solved, and will not solve, the problems farmers are facing today. The solution to their challenge is obvious to them, but not to the Liberal government: It is irrigation. Completing the Lake Diefenbaker irrigation project would create jobs, save livelihoods and generate a financial return. There is a difference between investing in infrastructure projects important to communities that are part of our economic engine and wasting money on projects that are dictated by the Liberal government without consultation. After a year of drought and plummeting income, agriculture does not even warrant a mention from the Liberal government. No one should be surprised by this omission. Let us take a moment to talk about useful and necessary infrastructure projects for local communities. As mayor, I witnessed first-hand how useless the federal government's infrastructure plans for communities have been. Moose Jaw is in the middle of a 20-year project to replace cast iron water mains, which will cost local taxpayers over $120 million. Water is essential to the livelihood of a community. Instead of listening to what the city needed, the Liberals tried to give the city, with a population of 35,000, $15 million for a green transit system. The transit system is already underused and does not meet the community's needs. Moose Jaw needed its 100-year-old cast iron water mains replaced. The current government forgets that water is essential, whether it is drinking water for cities or first nations or irrigation to combat droughts. The international coalition to combat climate change is actually an international coalition for justifying inflation, creating global instability and not actually lowering emissions. The Liberal government is selling us out to other nations that do not have our best interests at heart. What is needed is alignment and collaboration with municipalities and provinces that know where their infrastructure dollars need to be spent. Local solutions are needed for local problems. During my five-year tenure as mayor, we brought in over one billion dollars' worth of investment, creating jobs and prosperity for the community, and we tackled essential infrastructure. That is what is really needed. The Liberal government has lost its way. It has stopped listening to the people who matter and started putting itself first. People feel it is giving up on the next generation, leaving it with more debt and more problems to solve. My parents came here to make better lives for themselves and the next generation. However, seniors today are having that dream taken away from them. They are being asked to sacrifice more and leave less behind. Because of inflation, the equity people have built up in their homes or farms is under attack. Their legacy is being taken away from them. Every generation must be responsible for the time it has been given. This generation is faced with making life better for the next generation. Voters have entrusted me with a gift. My commitment is that I will be an advocate for my constituents who are being left behind by the current government and this throne speech. Ethical energy workers need to be rewarded for complying with surpassing new federal standards. Agriculture producers deserve recognition for what they contribute. Communities deserve a say in how infrastructure dollars are spent. Veterans and seniors deserve more. The stories of our past play an important role in shaping our future. We owe it to the generations that have gone before us to do better for the generations that follow us. We can do much better.

1333 words

All Topics

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Jan/31/22 5:05:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his remarks in the House today, certainly regarding his Scottish lineage and a lot of his family background. He mentioned agriculture. As a member who sits on the agriculture committee, I want to inform him of some of the investments the government has made. Perhaps he can take those back to his constituents and provide a clearer picture of what the government has done. With respect to business risk management, it was the Harper Conservatives who cut this program under the leadership of the then Minister of Agriculture. We have actually installed and increased those programs. Let us talk about supports during the drought that happened in western Canada. We worked with prairie governments to establish programs to help support farmers across the prairie provinces. As it relates to irrigation, we have been there helping to support projects. Although the member may not agree and concord with the government on every aspect, he needs to be fair and honest with his constituents that the government has been there to support projects not only in my area or my riding but indeed across the country, including in his home province of Saskatchewan.

202 words

Mr. Fraser Tolmie

Jan/31/22 5:06:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to point out that I really do like the member's tie. It does sit well with the Scottish heritage that I have. I appreciate that. The province of Saskatchewan relies on agriculture. It is our main source of income. We have felt left out and unheard when we have tried to speak with the government in power. If there is a bridge that could be built, then I look forward to doing that. My first and foremost job here is to advocate for the people who elected me.

94 words

Mr. Richard Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay, NDP)

Jan/31/22 5:07:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his first speech in the House. I could go on about the Scottish heritage. I just hope the member likes my tie as well. I come from a riding that depends on agriculture. I grew up on a small orchard in the South Okanagan Valley. It depends on irrigation above all, so I hear concerns about that. I hear his concerns about municipalities and the difficulty that Canadian municipalities have in funding some of these projects that are necessary. While I would probably completely disagree with the member on the mitigation of climate change and how essential that work is, I would hope to find agreement with the funding of adaptation. Irrigation is probably an important part of that in our ridings. I have had some trouble getting irrigation money from the federal government. I am wondering. Would the member support a new funding program, especially for climate-related disasters, that would let smaller communities off the hook when it comes to the 20% funding requirement for those projects?

176 words

Mr. Fraser Tolmie

Jan/31/22 5:08:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will give the member third-best tie. I have to put myself in second. It is very interesting. It is something I have been advocating for in my area. The city of Moose Jaw is 20 kilometres away from its water source. Farmers rely on water, obviously, for growing crops. This is a challenge in my region. I am not surprised that it would be a challenge in other regions across this country. I am open to suggestions and would be willing to have a conversation with the member later on, sharing the stories of how I have been advocating in our region for a water source within the community, not only for potable drinking water but also for agriculture.

123 words

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Jan/31/22 5:09:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague, who talked about all the things on which the Speech from the Throne is silent. There are silences in several sections of the throne speech. There are some repetitions, but there are also silences. I am concerned about the latter, particularly as regards agriculture. Speaking for my riding, I would say that the throne speech is silent on the French language. It talks about bilingualism, but it does not mention the French language. I suggest to my colleague that we combine our silences so that we can speak out more strongly in response to the throne speech.

105 words

Mr. Fraser Tolmie

Jan/31/22 5:10:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I spent a number of years in la belle province when I served in the military. Yes, there is a lot of silence. Our job is to speak up and address those silences that have come with the throne speech.

42 words

Mr. Kody Blois

Jan/31/22 5:10:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, on a point of order. The member opposite who was just providing remarks certainly talked about the importance of irrigation in agriculture. I have before me a Government of Canada document that relates to the investment of $1.5 billion—

43 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/31/22 5:10:42 p.m.
Watch

Order. That is a part of debate. If the member wants to move a motion, that would be different. I could maybe entertain that. Resuming debate, the hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé.

34 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Jan/31/22 5:11:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia. It is a pleasure for me to address the House in relation to the throne speech. However, I will confess that it was not a pleasure to read it, because it contained almost nothing. My introduction will be fairly brief because I have a lot to say. I have plenty of content, and the Bloc has plenty of proposals. The throne speech may be vague, rambling and meagre, despite the fact that it took over 60 days to write it, which really boggles the mind, but the Bloc Québécois has things to propose. We are humbly putting those proposals on the table. The throne speech encroaches on many areas under Quebec and provincial jurisdiction, including housing. Some of the measures in the throne speech may be worthwhile, but the government needs to be careful when it comes to jurisdiction. It talks about fighting inflation and creating a child care program. I congratulate the government for transferring funds unconditionally to Quebec. That is commendable. However, there is still work to be done elsewhere. If the government really wants to fight inflation to help those most in need and those bearing the brunt, I have one little word to say. I said it earlier when asking a question: “seniors”. People over the age of 65 who no longer work, who are receiving old age security and the guaranteed income supplement, need a decent increase to their income, not an insult to their intelligence and integrity. If the government is going to give an increase of $1.25 a month, it might as well not give one at all. I am having a hard time with this. Other members spoke about this issue earlier and kept remarkably calm. I tip my hat to them, because the more time goes on, the more I struggle to keep calm when I am talking about seniors. This situation is revolting and needs to be fixed as soon as possible. The majority of members in the House would support this increase. I will therefore ask the government to make a formal commitment to this. Other intrusions into areas of provincial jurisdiction include police reform, mental health, natural resource management, and the prevention of violence against women. We all agree on these general principles. I do not want anyone to think that we disagree with the actions. When it comes to Quebec's jurisdiction, however, the role of the federal government, which collects half the income tax but does not assume half the responsibilities, is to sign a cheque and send it to the person responsible for managing it. It is essential not to add any more layers. That is fundamental. Rather than meddling in areas where it does not belong, I suggest that the federal government provide adequate transfer payments, in particular in health care. I will come back to that later. I also suggest that it look after its own affairs. I believe my colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia will also talk about this. With respect to gun control, for example, we are not just talking about domestic regulation, but about increasing and improving border controls. What is happening in our cities in Quebec is awful. It is a national emergency that must be addressed immediately. Managing international borders actually is the federal government's jurisdiction, so let us co-operate on this issue. There are a lot of things missing from the throne speech. It is a vague document that does not say much. It says nothing about health transfers. I mentioned this earlier. All of the provinces and Quebec are unanimous. This is not a matter of separatists wanting to pick a fight. I do not want to hear anyone say that to me later. Please, let us elevate the debate. All of the provinces and Quebec are asking for an increase in health transfers and for the government to pay its fair share of the costs. Let it do this unconditionally, please. We are talking about the energy transition and green financing. Let us take concrete action. Let us also talk about the need for employment insurance reform, which was missing from the throne speech. Right now, there is someone who has to wait 12 weeks because a public official thinks that there may be fraud involved. The person waiting is a father or mother who is not getting any cheques, who cannot pay rent, who has trouble getting groceries and who has to wait 12 weeks because an official thinks that someone may have committed fraud. We need to pay these people. It is okay if the investigation takes three years, public officials can eventually get the money back, but in the meantime people need support. Employment insurance is not something people should have to beg for; it is not a privilege, it is an insurance plan that workers contribute to. I am getting angry because these are frustrating situations. I am thinking about people with a severe illness. It is terrible. Why not increase the period of benefits to 50 weeks? I have already talked about seniors. Obviously, when I rise, my colleagues think that I am going to talk about agriculture and agri-food. What is there in the throne speech about that? Absolutely nothing. I would like my Liberal colleague to enlighten me about that, because I do not understand it. Is it because they do not have any ideas? Is it because they have no vision? I certainly have a vision. I am not being pretentious, because my vision was developed through teamwork. It is not the vision of the hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé, but rather the Bloc Québécois’s policy: We have a vision of the future and concrete proposals to make. What I would like to hear in a throne speech is the government’s vision. After that, we could work with the Conservatives’ and the NDP’s visions for the future of farming, and we could sit down together, as we manage to do in the standing committee on agriculture and agri-food. We could work together to find something feasible. Instead, after a 60-day wait, we have been given a document with nothing in it. I tossed my paper but that is okay, because there was really nothing of substance written on it. That was my summary of the throne speech. It boggles the mind. As usual, my time is swiftly running out. I will therefore address three topics. Food sovereignty is a priority. Everyone is talking about it, everyone is making speeches with tears in their eyes, and so on. However, we need to act; we need to promote buying local. Earlier when I rose, I removed my mask, which was made by the Prémont company in Louiseville. It is a Humask brand mask, made locally in Quebec. Before the holidays, my party was forced to move a motion in the House calling for the masks that are provided at the door in Parliament not to be made in China. I will refrain from saying the word that springs to mind as I think back on that ludicrous episode. Let us talk about food sovereignty. We have to protect our people and keep our promises. I talked about the empty throne speech, but fortunately, there were a few lines on this subject in the mandate letters of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. That reassures me, and we will work on that with my Liberal friends. Our goal is to support people under supply management who were sacrificed in CUSMA and pay them the compensation they were promised. These people expect this to happen immediately. Supply management must not be compromised any further. We know the solution to this problem. We know what to do. We will reintroduce a bill on this and ask once again for the government's support, which I greatly appreciated in the last Parliament. These are things we can do. The second point I want to make about agriculture and agri-food is the environmental partnership. A Conservative member brought up this topic earlier. We must support the people who work the land and who are actively working to protect the environment. We must provide financial support, for what it is worth, in the form of a sort of “agri-investment”. We should give these people the money they need to invest in their own businesses. The third point I want to make has to do with the reciprocity of standards. International trade is here to stay, but the government could show some basic respect to producers and subject imported goods to the same standards as goods produced here. The government will have to allocate resources at the border and conduct inspections. Let us respect Canadian producers and take real action. We are here and willing to work together. The door is wide open.

1530 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Jan/31/22 5:21:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to address the issue in terms of both the environment and the masks. When I think of the environment, whether it is our farmers or consumers, Canadians as a whole have an interest and want to do something, and all contribute in some way or another to a healthier environment. We need to do what we can to encourage that. Quite often, it is the other way around, where we are encouraged, all parliamentarians at different levels of government, to do more for the environment, so I applaud those Canadians for reaching out. In regard to the masks, and this is what my question is based on, it is important to recognize that prepandemic, the number of masks that were being manufactured in Canada was negligible. Today, there is a healthy PPE industry that will survive, not only in the weeks ahead but in the months and years ahead, because of many initiatives that this government has brought forward. I wonder if the member can provide some comment on how important it is that we keep some of those industries.

184 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Jan/31/22 5:22:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, of course it is important to keep these industries. The fact that we were manufacturing fewer masks locally before the pandemic is one of the lessons to be learned. That is why I am talking about food sovereignty. I am not talking about stopping international trade, but we must have a minimum of local production. As for the masks that were handed out to us at the doors of Parliament at the start of the session last November and December, I am very sorry for my colleague, but there is no excuse for the fact that they were not locally made. I am still not over it. We had to get a motion passed about it.

119 words

Mr. Brad Vis (Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC)

Jan/31/22 5:22:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé for the good questions he asked this morning about the crisis taking place in my riding, in British Columbia. I agree with him today that there was not much in the throne speech about the housing crisis across Canada. Can the hon. member give us some ideas for improving the situation of young Canadians with regard to the housing crisis?

72 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Jan/31/22 5:23:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague. I am happy to hear that he appreciated my comments this morning. This shows that we can work constructively. I commend him on his excellent French. He made a tremendous effort to ask his question in French. From what I understand, my colleague wants us to talk about housing, which is, indeed, an important issue. I think that the idea of taxing foreigners has potential. However, as I mentioned earlier in my speech, the government needs to be careful with such taxes because there is a potential overlap with Quebec's and the provinces' jurisdictions. I am not saying that we should do nothing, but the government must work with the level of government responsible for the issue even if that means transferring the funds.

132 words

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

Jan/31/22 5:24:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague and I sit as members of the agriculture committee, and I do very much enjoy working with him. In the times we find ourselves in, many Canadians across the country are demanding bold action in so many areas, including in confronting our climate crisis, our housing crisis and the growing inequality we see. For so many of these areas, we see a government that is prepared to only advance half measures, and a lot of the anger and frustration that we see out there are symptomatic of that. People are not seeing our major concerns being addressed. I know my colleague addressed some of this in his speech. I am just wondering if he can elaborate a bit further on how we find ourselves in a moment that does demand bold action and how that is what Canadians right across the country are expecting to see from their elected federal members of Parliament.

157 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Jan/31/22 5:25:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I also appreciate the work that he does. He spoke about how people are fed up, which is only natural. Things are difficult for everyone, and these reactions are understandable. My colleague asked me to talk about bold action, so I would like to talk about one of the key measures among those I spoke about earlier, which is support for environmental measures. The government should not hold back from supporting farmers. Everyone in the House knows that farmers south of the border get twice as much funding, often through direct subsidies. The ratio is even more bigger when we compare ourselves with Europe. People here work very hard and are subject to significant restrictions. They need our help. The government should compensate them for taking tangible environmental actions, such as renovating a building or restoring riparian zones that are no longer being farmed. There needs to be some economic value, and it needs to be tangible to encourage people to keep taking action.

173 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

Jan/31/22 5:26:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to wish you a happy new year. I believe this is the last day we are allowed to do that. I am really happy to be here and to get back to the work of Parliament. We have been looking forward to coming back, albeit under unusual circumstances, in a situation that we have not seen very often on Parliament Hill in recent years. Let us get back to the throne speech, which I think is always a great opportunity for opposition members to see whether any priorities or proposals from opposition parties are included in the government's roadmap. As I was driving to Ottawa, I listened to a podcast where the host talked about the meaning and importance of a throne speech. Strategists commented on their own experience. It seems to be a common and well-known practice to insert opposition party priorities here and there in a throne speech so that those parties will be consistent in their position, vote in favour of the throne speech and not bring down the government. I was all set to “CTRL+F” the speech to see how many times the government talked about things like climate change, the environment, green finance, health, seniors, agriculture—which my colleague talked about—and employment insurance reform. I did not get a lot of hits. To be honest, I was very let down by how pointless the document in front of me was. I think a throne speech should convey the government's overall plan for carrying out the mandate it was given in the election. This government was bound and determined to have an election despite the pandemic and the risk to people's health. The people voted for the status quo. They made their wishes clear. They gave the Liberal Party another minority government, so the government should obviously act accordingly and come up with a pretty substantial roadmap. There is a lot of work to do. What we have here, though, is woefully short on substance, ideas and direction. It is a mere catalogue of general statements. This was why we had an election? This is what is supposed to get us through the next four years? Given the sparse priorities scattered throughout the speech, I have my doubts. As I said, we are returning to the House under rather unusual circumstances, and I would be remiss if I did not address the subject. I understand that everyone is frustrated, for a variety of reasons, after nearly two years of this pandemic. We are all fed up, and honestly, no one more so than me. However, seeing these divisions in society is deeply troubling to me. I do not always agree with what the government does, how it does it or the measures it chooses to bring in, but I believe that, as elected officials, it is our duty to some extent to show solidarity and call for unity when we see such divisions. Health measures have been put in place for a reason, specifically to protect our health and to protect the most vulnerable and frontline workers. In my humble opinion, these measures are still necessary. If we want to defeat the virus, vaccination seems to be the best solution. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees. I will give an example. Previously, when I addressed a somewhat delicate issue such as gun control on social media, I expected to receive my share of negative or more aggressive comments. Some issues are more divisive than others. However, now it is almost impossible to discuss anything without receiving a barrage of negative comments. I am not complaining, I am just saying that it is troubling to see such hostility, sadness and distress among the public, and not just on social media. We have seen it here in person on Parliament Hill over the past few days. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to thank the many security officers who were on the Hill over the past few days to ensure everyone's safety. I have to thank them. I believe that this call for unity and solidarity should be part of the government's plan. This also applies to my opposition colleagues. I truly believe that it is our role to inform the public as best we can, but above all to reassure the people we represent, to answer their questions, recognize their distress and provide the assistance they need. Currently, throughout Canada and particularly in Quebec, there are people who would normally be receiving EI benefits. I appreciated my colleague's passion in pointing this out. For weeks, dozens of people have been calling my constituency office every day. I imagine my Quebec colleagues have experienced the same thing, because hundreds of people have had their cases frozen and are no longer receiving benefits. These people need help, as they no longer know who to turn to and are at the end of their rope. These people called Service Canada many times and were told to call back later or apply for social assistance if they were not happy. People were told that they had to prove they were no longer able to pay their bills and they had applied to use a food bank, for example, for their file to be processed quickly. Clearly, there is a lack of resources at Service Canada. These are honest workers, mostly seasonal workers in my riding who have worked all summer, who are entitled to receive these benefits and who count on receiving them. However, Service Canada is having a hard time processing all that. The government was able to put a system in place rather quickly to deliver the CERB to people who needed support. I find it hard to believe that they cannot bring in something similar or at least more resources. My Bloc Québécois colleagues and I have lobbied the government and intervened in the media to change things and ensure that this problem is resolved right away. It makes no sense to leave people like that, without money for weeks on end. Processing delays are still too long, unfortunately, but I was pleased to read in the paper this morning that more resources will be assigned to Service Canada and that public officials may be able to make an extra effort to work with the MPs in every region of Quebec and resolve this issue quickly. I think people deserve to be treated with dignity. I was also disappointed to see that the Speech from the Throne did not mention employment insurance in general or EI reform. The problem we are discussing right now is an ongoing problem and it needs to be resolved quickly. However, there are many other flaws in the EI program, including the spring gap problem, that the people of eastern Quebec have been waiting to see resolved for a long time. It is a little disappointing that the government is not making this a priority. When I looked, I did not see a lot of words indicating that the government was going to do this reform or even initiate it. The Bloc Québécois has to keep coming back and putting this back on the table, which is what my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville is doing on the parliamentary committee. We have no choice but to address it, because the problem has persisted for so long. I know the pandemic makes it hard to govern normally and introduce major reforms or start big projects, but I would like to compare this situation with that of a politician I admire a lot. Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, was elected during a serious economic crisis. That did not stop him from being a visionary and wanting to take on big projects and major reforms, which is what he did. If he did that, then I refuse to believe that members of the House of Commons cannot also start working on other problems that our constituents have been facing for so long. There are so many more things I would have liked to talk about, but this is the biggest issue my constituents are dealing with right now. Earlier I mentioned the collective sense of frustration and the fact that people are fed up with the pandemic in general. I hear from so many people about employment insurance, people who are really on the brink. One mother contacted me about her son, who is contemplating suicide because he does not know what else to do. He has to move back in with his parents, he is not making any money, he does not have a job right now because he is a seasonal worker. He needs these benefits. People are in distress, and this is the public sentiment we are seeing. I think it is our responsibility to give them solutions. We promised them this. We were elected to do this. I will end by saying that this is not just about EI. We are fighting multiple battles. My colleague mentioned some of them, such as the rising cost of living, which is having a devastating effect on seniors, who are not seeing their benefits increase accordingly. I am also thinking of health care workers, who are holding the health care system together, at least in Quebec, and who could really use a financial helping hand. It should not be that hard to transfer the money that has been requested for so long by all the premiers of Quebec and the provinces. These are the battles that we will continue to fight. I am reaching out to the government and the opposition parties and asking them to fight these battles alongside us for the people we represent. I am showing good faith, and I hope they will do the same.

1659 words

All Topics

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Jan/31/22 5:36:23 p.m.
Watch

First of all, Madam Speaker, I want to tell my colleague not to worry. The Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion is working actively on EI reform. My colleague mentioned that she does not necessarily support the COVID‑19 measures taken by the Government of Canada to protect public health. Can she specify which ones she does not support?

63 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud

Jan/31/22 5:36:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. Perhaps my remarks were misunderstood. I may not agree with everything the government does in general, but at least we agree on one thing: The health measures in place right now are legitimate. I always say that as much as I can to anyone who will listen when I am interviewed on television. Yes, everyone is fed up, but the measures are in place so that we can get through this pandemic together. We believe that vaccination is the best way to do that, so I encourage everyone to comply with the health measures. I was speaking with my colleague earlier. My father is a truck driver and is one of the 90% of truck drivers who are vaccinated. He does not necessarily support the movement going on outside right now, but we in some way understand the collective frustration. I think these people have a right to be heard and to demonstrate, but it is important to remember that health measures are in place for a reason: to protect our health.

182 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 20