SoVote

Feb/8/22 4:41:16 p.m.
Watch

There is no doubt that $5.8 billion is a huge amount of money in that sector. With respect to the exemptions, the situation was not the same at the time because we needed to develop this means of transportation and to have companies that would invest. Since then, the situation on the ground has changed dramatically and we therefore need to make the changes required to ensure that the people living there and Canadians benefit more.

78 words

All Topics

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

Feb/8/22 4:42:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this is about the fair treatment of Saskatchewan in Confederation. Saskatchewan deserves to be treated equally with the other provinces, and it has been denied that. This also privileges one big corporation. I want to give a shout-out to the members of the Saskatchewan NDP, who have been really strong advocates on this issue and who pushed for these changes. It is great to see the cross-partisan collaboration to push this forward. These unfair tax breaks for corporations are only one example of an outdated system that gives immense power to the big railway companies. They also continue to run their own private police forces, which allows them to investigate themselves when real accidents occurred. That happened in 2019, with the CP Railway derailment near Field, British Columbia, in which three workers were tragically killed. Does the member and his government think it is time to end these outdated special privileges for the big rail companies?

160 words

All Topics

Mr. Darrell Samson

Feb/8/22 4:43:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what this bill would do and why members of Parliament from all parties in the House today give their support to having those discussions and improving the taxation and revenues for all Canadians, including of course for Saskatchewan.

43 words

All Topics

Mr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC)

Feb/8/22 4:43:35 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as we are talking about the rail lines, I thought maybe it would be a good time to ask the member a question about opening up more access for our farmers to ship more of their grain and if they would consider building more pipelines in order to get more access to farmers on the rail lines.

59 words

All Topics

Mr. Darrell Samson

Feb/8/22 4:43:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the good thing about federation is that we work closely with all provinces and territories to find ways of moving our products. There are various ways of doing that and lots of efficient ways to do it. There are a lot of ways to do that while respecting climate change, so the answer to the member's question is yes.

62 words

All Topics

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.)

Feb/8/22 4:44:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to discuss the amendment to the Saskatchewan Act put forward by the Government of Saskatchewan. The relationship between federal and provincial partners has perhaps never been more important. As we continue to fight against the end of COVID-19, we are dedicated to a team Canada approach. The Government of Canada is committed to further building on this open and collaborative relationship with provinces and territories. COVID-19 has profoundly affected the physical and mental health, as well as the social and economic lives, of Canadians. Federal, provincial and territorial governments have been collaborating in these unprecedented times to support Canada's pandemic response. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, close co-operation between all governments has been integral to keeping Canadians safe. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Prime Minister has held 36 first ministers calls to coordinate the governments' response to COVID-19 at the most senior level. Discussion topics have included border measures, vaccine rollouts, testing and personal protective equipment. Importantly, these meetings led to the FPT Safe Restart Agreement, which was announced on July 16, 2020, and is an investment of more than $19 billion to help provinces and territories address key priorities, including testing, health care system capacity, vulnerable populations, procurement of PPE, child care and sick leave. The safe return to class fund announced on August 26, 2020, is an investment of up to $2 billion for provinces and territories to adapt learning spaces, improve air ventilation, increase hand sanitization and hygiene, and purchase PPE and cleaning supplies. The government also invested $2.2 billion to top up the Canada community building fund in 2020-21, along with other direct transfers to the provinces and territories. From day one of the pandemic, our government has provided eight out of every 10 dollars spent to fight COVID-19 and support Canadians. As the economy continues to recover from the pandemic, we remain committed to working with provinces and territories to build a more resilient economy. Our economic response plan has helped people and businesses weather the storm, including the people of Saskatchewan. In the Speech from the Throne, our government put forward new commitments to finish the fight against COVID-19, expedite the economic recovery, improve health care, advance indigenous reconciliation, make housing more affordable and accelerate the transition to net zero. The recent surge of COVID-19 cases in regions throughout Canada underscores the need for ongoing co-operation, vigilance in pandemic monitoring, preparedness and response. Thus far, the federal government has allocated more than three million doses of COVID vaccines to Saskatchewan. Several million rapid tests have also been shipped to the province. All of that was free of charge. In addition to this, in 2021-22, Saskatchewan will be receiving $1.3 billion through the Canada health transfers and $478 million through the Canada social transfer. The Government of Canada is committed to having positive bilateral relations with all provinces and territories. One I would like to touch on is our ongoing relationship and work with the Government of Saskatchewan. The truth is that governments will not always agree on every issue. However, there are a number of recent examples of agreements that truly benefit the people of Saskatchewan. In April 2020, our government announced a historic investment of $1.7 billion to clean up orphaned and abandoned oil and gas wells, $400 million of which has been provided to Saskatchewan. This investment will create up to 5,200 jobs while reducing environmental and safety risks in western communities. During the pandemic, and in response to a request for assistance from the Government of Saskatchewan in the fall of 2021, Canadian Red Cross and Canadian Armed Forces personnel were provided on the ground to support hospitals in Saskatchewan. The Canada-Saskatchewan Integrated Bilateral Agreement was signed in 2018 and resulted in the allocation of $896.3 million for Saskatchewan. Budget 2021 included a $1.5-billion investment to establish a clean fuels fund that will support private sector investments in the production and distribution of low-carbon and zero-emission fuels. In August 2021, the Government of Canada and the Government of Saskatchewan announced an agreement that will support an average of $10-a-day early learning and child care for Saskatchewan families by the end of 2025-26. In addition to significantly reducing the cost of child care, federal funding of close to $1.1 billion over the next five years will lead to the creation of 28,000 new regulated early learning and child care spaces. Our respective governments have also reached an agreement to extend the Canada-Saskatchewan Early Learning and Child Care Agreement. The Government of Canada will provide over $68.5 million over the next four years to increase access to affordable, inclusive and high-quality child care spaces. In 2022-23, the Government of Saskatchewan will receive $1.9 billion through major transfers in the Canada health transfer and the Canada social transfer. The Government of Canada is committed to continuing to work with Saskatchewan to build on this momentum and tackle other important issues, fostering greater innovation, improving supply chains and internal trade, and addressing housing challenges, among other things. As it pertains to the amendment to the Saskatchewan Act in question, I want to be clear on where we stand and the importance of such an amendment to our relationship with the province. At the end of the day, this issue is about fairness for the people and businesses of Saskatchewan. As many members will know, on November 29, 2021, the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan unanimously adopted a resolution requesting an amendment to the Constitution of Canada to repeal section 24 of the Saskatchewan Act retroactive to 1966. Section 24 provides an exemption on certain taxes for the Canadian Pacific Railway. This exemption was provided to recognize investments in building the railroad, a railroad that to this day we depend on, but we need to take into account when that initial agreement was made and how it has aged over time. In accordance with the section 43 amendment procedure in the Constitution Act, 1982, the Government of Canada will support Saskatchewan's amendment request when the parallel resolution is moved in Parliament. Under the Constitution, following resolutions of the Senate, the House of Commons and the legislative assembly considered, the amendment is made by proclamation of the Governor General. This is an important pillar and process of our democracy as our nation evolves. It is something that calls on all of us to work together in order to review requests specific to the unique circumstances of each province with the attention and care that they deserve. These are important decisions that we cannot take lightly, but ultimately we must do what is best for Canadians and what makes the most sense for the times we live in. Our government recognizes the importance of working closely with our provincial and territorial partners and respecting the unique perspectives we all bring to the table so we can make life better for everyone. Building on our common priorities and finding ways to collaborate, even when we have diverse opinions, is a critical part of making sure we move forward on the issues that matter most to Canadians.

1218 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Feb/8/22 4:53:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it was interesting to listen to the member opposite talk about how important federal-provincial intergovernmental co-operation is and seem to tout the government's record on that front. The facts and the reality on the ground in western Canada could not be further from the truth. I am glad that on this issue we can count on the Liberals' support on an initiative that has practical effects in western Canada, but when it comes to the environmental plan that the Saskatchewan government put forward, it met and in fact exceeded the targets that the Liberals put out. However, that was not good enough, because it did not follow their tax-on-everything mentality. Instead of even just having a conversation, they rejected it out of hand. In this new spirit of collaboration that we seem to have in the House today, which I am thankful for, will the Liberal member commit to a renewed conversation about how we can find other ways to work together for the good of the Canadian federation?

176 words

All Topics

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell

Feb/8/22 4:54:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in my speech I went over all of the ways we have been there as a government to support Saskatchewan throughout this pandemic. Also in my speech I talked about how, just in the last two years since the beginning of the pandemic, the Prime Minister or the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs met with provinces and premiers over 36 times. I ask the Conservatives, and let me just double-check, how many times the previous Conservative prime minister met with provinces and territories—oh yes, he decided he did not want to meet with premiers anymore. Forgive me if we take no lessons on intergovernmental relationships from a party that refused to meet with premiers.

118 words

All Topics

Mr. Mario Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ)

Feb/8/22 4:55:46 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we cannot discuss the Constitution without addressing the elephant in the room. Quebec did not sign the Constitution of 1982, which was imposed on it by the English Canadian majority. This considerably reduces the autonomy of Quebec’s National Assembly, for example on language policy. French is in decline across Canada, but also in Quebec. As the Bélanger-Campeau Commission found 30 years ago, there are only two acceptable solutions for Quebec: independence, or major changes to the Constitution that would create a confederation of independent states. I just want English Canadians to realize that we will be revisiting this issue, because Quebec and Quebeckers cannot survive as a people without full control of their social, economic and cultural development. That is what is called the right to self-determination. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about this.

146 words

All Topics

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell

Feb/8/22 4:56:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House we certainly know that the importance of the French language in Quebec and around Canada is paramount. This is why we support the government's initiatives to work with all provinces and territories, but in particular with Quebec, to promote language and to help reverse the decline of the French language in Quebec. However, this particular amendment is in regard to tax fairness, and we support that for Saskatchewan in this House today. I look forward to future debates with the member opposite about what more we could do to promote the French language.

102 words

All Topics

Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP)

Feb/8/22 4:57:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the entire discussion today is a reminder of how Canada's major railways have enjoyed immense power and totally unacceptable benefits and privileges for decades. This is still true, because they have often become corporate citizens that are not very good for their communities. Recently, a 31-year-old woman died on the outskirts of Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie and Mile End because there was no level crossing where there should have been one. Are the Liberals prepared to work with the NDP and the City of Montreal to ensure the safety of Montrealers and make CP put in the level crossings we need?

107 words

All Topics

Ms. Jennifer O'Connell

Feb/8/22 4:58:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I send my sincere condolences to the family and friends of the young woman that the member opposite spoke about. Rail safety is of key importance to our government. We will absolutely continue to work with all members in this House and with all communities to ensure that the safety of citizens is paramount. I look forward to the continuing conversation.

63 words

All Topics

Mr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC)

Feb/8/22 4:58:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, which is right beside the riding I represent and home to Canada's most notorious member. I am very happy to see our first Conservative motion in 2022 dedicated to my home province of Saskatchewan, the land of living skies. It is an even greater honour for me to speak on its behalf today. It is another reminder of where I come from and who sent me to Ottawa in the first place, so in my first speech since the last election, I will first take a moment to thank the constituents of Cypress Hills—Grasslands for their support. It is always humbling to receive their trust and to serve as their representative in this place. I also have to say I would not be here without my family's love and the support they have shown me throughout my time in office, and of course I could not go without mentioning the many volunteers who have also helped to get me here as well, and board members who have also worked very hard on our local EDA. Today, the official opposition is calling for the federal government to finalize a process already started by Saskatchewan in managing its own affairs. Back in November, the provincial legislature voted unanimously to amend the Saskatchewan Act under the Constitution. Since then, what remains is for a constitutional amendment to be authorized by proclamation issued by Her Excellency the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada. In other words, the House and the other place will need to pass it. It might seem like a simple housekeeping item, and it could be handled as that, if the government so chooses, but that does not mean this is not a priority. It can be resolved easily and quickly, but only if the Liberals are willing to do it. Instead, the government House leader waited for the last sitting day in December to say there would have to be a take-note debate in February. I hope all my colleagues here can see and appreciate how much time has already passed by and added up with this task we have taken on. We have not even started talking yet about passing anything through the actual parliamentary process. Of course, I can only hope the legislative agenda and procedure will run smoothly whenever that time comes. If not, how long is it going to take after it finally gets started? In a minority Parliament we have done some good work through collaboration among all parties, and there is no reason for it not to happen here again as well. If the House leader's plan is to have a take-note debate, which still sounds good enough to some people, I will draw their attention to what the guide on parliamentary procedure has to say about it. Take-note debates “solicit the views of Members on some aspect of government policy and allow Members to participate in policy development, making their views known before the government makes a decision.” Of course, the government can and should ask for input from different parties in Parliament. To be frank, I wish the Liberals did it a lot more often for developing policy and making decisions. This country would be much better for it. Hopefully this will become a new habit for them, but it is a bit confusing to see it happening on this file, if we should even really call it that. What policy are we developing, exactly? Are the government members signalling that they have not yet even made a decision on what they are going to do about it? Are they going to oppose the amendment from Saskatchewan? If they are going to decide to authorize this change, why bother with a process that is supposed to be open to different options? If they somehow are trying to drag this out for some reason, it certainly seems like they are, but why? Would they take the same approach if the former member for Regina—Wascana was still in cabinet? I could say more about that later. First, I want to focus on what is happening in Saskatchewan and in my riding. Apart from historical arguments, we can plainly see a situation in which a large railway company has not only tried to get out of paying taxes, but has tried to get taxpayers' money back after paying tax for decades. If this happened, there would of course be a huge business advantage over smaller competitors, but what is good for one company is not necessarily good for the market as a whole. When we consider everything together, it is not as surprising as it might sound that the Saskatchewan Party and the provincial NDP voted for the same motion. They have significant differences, but they share consensus here, because the case is closed. As with so many other things, there are real benefits if we promote competition and smaller local businesses. In this case we are dealing with short-line operators. They highly deserve a shout-out in this discussion, as well as our thanks and substantial support. My riding is home to two of them: the Great Sandhills Railway and the Great Western Railway. They have strengthened and served their rural communities very well. I have heard that 90% of a particular company's operating budget goes back into the rural communities where they are stationed. As one example, when Great Sand Hills bought its line in 2009, there were only seven employees there. Deciding to start with nine employees, they have since increased to 60 people. The positive effects of their investment and success on the many communities along the line they operate are undeniable. Business is growing, where larger operations without having a special connection to a place are more likely to let certain locations simply fade away, as is tragically the case with many small-town communities across this country. As a result, people can find more jobs now. They can buy homes and they can support local charities and initiatives. They can create or maintain their way of life in rural Canada. Short-line railways are proving to be efficient, environmentally responsible and safe, while at the same time reducing burdens on publicly funded transportation. What is not to like? These railways need all the help they can get to continue on with their important work. Knowing the current Liberal government, the answer might turn out to be that this all has to do with just Saskatchewan. For two elections in a row, the Liberals have failed to win a single seat in our province. The message from voters has been absolutely clear. Something is probably wrong with a national government that fails to connect to and win support from an entire region within our great country. It is nothing for the Liberals to be proud of, and it never should be ignored. However, in so many obvious ways over the years, the Prime Minister's team has shown that it will prioritize petty politics over what is best for Canadians. It is definitely not a way to gain anybody's support, if the Liberals will keep treating our province disrespectfully. The Liberals will often interfere with our provincial government's attempts to improve the lives of our citizens, whether it is declining a better rebate for the carbon tax or unfairly attacking the delivery of health care services during the federal election. Even though this might seem like a minor issue compared with other ones, it is a good opportunity for the Liberals to start treating Saskatchewan with respect. They should show us some goodwill and courtesy by delivering something for the betterment of our province. We really have to wonder if the Liberals would be handling this issue in the same way if it were another province trying to make a constitutional amendment. There is no limit to the favours the Liberals will give out to their supporters. That is precisely the opposite of responsible leadership. That is why, as a Saskatchewan caucus representing every part of our province within the official opposition, we are leading the charge here in Ottawa. We are calling for the government to resolve this issue sooner rather than later. It really does not have to be so complicated. It does not have to be very difficult. Let us get it all done. We have a good spirit of collaboration happening here today. My message to all the members across the aisle, and to the other opposition parties, is let us get this done. Let us do what is right for Saskatchewan, and let us show that we are willing to work in the best interests of the provinces here in Ottawa.

1483 words

All Topics

Ms. Leah Taylor Roy (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, Lib.)

Feb/8/22 5:07:05 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we have been focusing on Saskatchewan, and the member has been mentioning that he wants Ottawa to be more involved and more supportive. I wonder if the member could comment on the success of the supercluster in Saskatchewan, the plant protein-based supercluster. I have a personal interest because I am a vegetarian, and one of my favourite snacks, chickpeas from Saskatchewan, comes from Three Farmers. Can the member comment on how that has gone? That was a great joint collaboration between the federal government and the provincial government.

91 words

All Topics

Mr. Jeremy Patzer

Feb/8/22 5:07:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is great that every now and then we see some successes from some government programs, and we can clearly say that is one really good example of success. There have been some other issues. We saw the government hand out lots of money to a multi-billionaire from the U.S. to create a pulse-processing plant in Saskatchewan. I do not think he necessarily needed taxpayer money for that. Generally speaking, though, what the member has referenced here is a good thing, and if we are spending taxpayer money, I would like to see more targeted investment to make sure we get the best possible result for Canadians.

112 words

All Topics

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Feb/8/22 5:08:37 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the question I would like to ask was raised briefly by my colleague from Longueuil—Saint-Hubert a little earlier. Members are unanimous on Saskatchewan’s request, which seems very reasonable to us all. However, how is it that no one seems to realize that one of the country’s provinces has not signed the Constitution we are talking about? This is not news, it dates back to 1982. I find it odd that that does not bother anyone but us, and I would like to understand why.

93 words

All Topics

Mr. Jeremy Patzer

Feb/8/22 5:09:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I was not alive in 1982. I was not born until 1987, but I wish I could have lobbied a little more for all the provinces to sign on to the Constitution. I think we would be willing to hear and see Quebec do so, but a Conservative government would be more than happy to work with all the provinces, regardless of whether they had signed the Constitution or not, to make sure that all provinces are treated fairly within a united Canada.

86 words

All Topics

Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP)

Feb/8/22 5:09:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the heart of the issue is, of course, around tax fairness. We are seeing a situation dated long ago with a big corporation, CP Rail, able to get a tax exemption. As it stands today, big corporations are able to get all kinds of loopholes and preferential tax treatment from the government. It is time, I believe, and the NDP strongly believes, that we close all these tax loopholes, and big corporations should no longer be able to get away with not paying their fair share of taxes. Would the member agree that we need to close all the tax loopholes for big corporations, including the loopholes in which they can stash their money in offshore accounts?

119 words

All Topics

Mr. Jeremy Patzer

Feb/8/22 5:10:46 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, we want to make sure that tax dollars for Canadians are respected. We want to make sure that businesses are paying their fair share, of course, but in the same breath, we also want to make sure that we find the right balance between incentivizing growth and job creation by these corporations to make sure that their money stays in Canada. We can look at some specific, targeted measures to make sure that those dollars are staying in Canada, and I am all for taking a look at that.

97 words

All Topics

Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC)

Feb/8/22 5:11:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, having been born in Regina, I consider myself an honorary Saskatchewatonian. In my riding of Essex, Line 5 is very much threatened, and about the only way we are going to get new oil, if we do not have a pipeline, is going to be on rail cars and/or transport trucks, which will be a massive issue. The member spoke about getting grain up for the local farmers, and the member from across the way spoke about automotive issues, which I have in my riding as well. I wonder this. Does the member feel the same about the issue with regard to the pipeline itself?

108 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 26