SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 57

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 25, 2022 11:00AM
  • Apr/25/22 4:44:32 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Terrebonne. I would like to extend my warmest thanks to all the volunteers in the riding of Salaberry—Suroît, because in Quebec we celebrate volunteerism and volunteers from April 24 to April 30. This year’s theme is “volunteering changes lives”. It is true that volunteering changes lives. It changes the lives of those who receive from volunteers, as well as the lives of those who give of their time. I would like to say a big thank you to all volunteers in the riding of Salaberry—Suroît, whatever sector they work in. There are so many sectors in which people can feel fulfilled and thrive while giving time to others in need, to young people, to all those who benefit from the generosity of others. I would like to wish all of them a happy National Volunteer Week. Of course, the budget contains things I am particularly interested in, specifically anything to do with seniors. I devoted my professional career to caring for seniors, whether in the community sector, where I managed a volunteer action centre, as a social worker in the home care support department, where I helped seniors and their families live at home longer, or as a manager in a long-term care facility. Most recently, prior to my re-election in 2019, I was in charge of housing. I managed spaces in private, non-unionized, long-term care facilities, in intermediate and family-type resources. I have dedicated my career to seniors and when I find myself in my riding, I am drawn to help them. My phone is definitely ringing these days. It has been ringing off the hook for almost a year now because seniors are angry; they are angry that they can no longer make ends meet. Facing the higher inflation rates since the pandemic, seniors have been calling and writing. They find it unreasonable that they have to go back to work in order to be able to afford rent or medication. I find this completely revolting, and we had expectations this budget would address that. The FADOQ, with 500,000 members, is the largest seniors' group in Quebec, and it has called on the government to increase old age security starting at age 65. The government, however, has not indicated that it plans to do this nor did it put it in the budget, even though the House expressed a clear desire to do so. On March 8, 2021, the House voted on a motion to increase old age security by $110 a month for those aged 65 and up, with 183 parliamentarians voting for and 147 voting against. It was government members across the way who voted against the motion, telling seniors that they still have some energy left to work and then they will get their increase at age 75. They created two classes of seniors. We are talking about three million 65-year-old seniors in Canada, seniors who worked their whole lives, who contributed to society, and who unfortunately need an increase but are not entitled to one. I hear my colleagues say that they increased the New Horizons program and that they have done this and that. That is not what seniors need. They need to receive enough money every month to cover all the expenses they have to pay to live in dignity. In Salaberry—Suroît, one in five people, or 20% of the population, is 65 or older. One of our seniors works bagging groceries. He is 68 years old and he works at my IGA in Ormstown. He made me promise to share his message with the government: “Ms. DeBellefeuille, this is crazy. I have no choice but to come bag groceries at the Ormstown IGA because I can no longer cover the cost of living, even though I worked hard my whole life”. I am here for him today because I speak on behalf of my constituents. I am their voice and I am here to make this message loud and clear: We are furious about how this government is treating seniors who worked hard their whole lives. The other issue in this budget that really speaks to me as a former public health care worker is health transfers. People often think that the Bloc Québécois's demands need not be taken seriously, but our demands are based on unanimous demands of the Quebec National Assembly, all the premiers of every Canadian province, the population as a whole and important groups. I will list some of them because a number of unions came to Parliament Hill on April 4, which is something that has not happened in quite a while. They talked and they asked for what the provincial premiers are asking for, what the Bloc is asking for and what the Quebec National Assembly is asking for. The FTQ, a major union, was there along with the CSQ, the FIQ, the CSD, the Fédération des médecins omnipraticiens du Québec, the APTS, the Fédération des médecins spécialistes du Québec, the hematologists, the oncologists and the CSN. That means a lot of people think like we do. We are seeing that the House, civil society, physicians, Quebec's health care workers, Quebec politicians and community groups feel the same way, even if the government does not. There is only one party that believes it is unreasonable to transfer the money that is in Ottawa to the National Assembly and the Quebec government so Quebec can manage it according to its priorities and expertise. I have to say that it is the managers, the professionals and those involved in the day-to-day work on the ground who have the expertise and experience in health and social services. They are the ones in touch with the needs of our constituents in every riding. I am expressing our disappointment not just with the fact that there is no money for health transfers, but also that if there ever is money one day, it will have strings attached, which is completely unacceptable. Quebec and the other provinces are capable of analyzing their own needs and putting everything required in place, including planning, organizing and providing services according to the needs of their communities. However, Quebec and the provinces do not have the means. Considering our aging population, I would say that in the next 15 years, there will not be enough money to properly plan, organize and deliver services to everyone who needs them in our public health care system. We value our public health care system, and it needs to be funded properly. This means transferring the money that is sitting in Ottawa, the money that Ottawa would like to have a say in. Ottawa wants to tell us what to do and how to do it because it lacks confidence in the provinces when it comes to properly managing the transferred funds, even in an area that falls under provincial jurisdiction. I have only two minutes left to once again explain how sad it makes me that the budget talks about increasing the maximum length of EI sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 26 weeks in the summer of 2022, allowing sick workers to fight illness. Members will recall that I introduced a bill in the previous Parliament to increase those benefits to 52 weeks, and the member for Lévis—Lotbinière has brought it back again in this Parliament. For two years, the government has insisted that it will change the number of weeks, but only to 26 weeks and only effective July 2022. That is not enough. Someone who has colon cancer will need 36 weeks to recover. That is a documented fact. I do not understand what is stopping the government from giving 52 weeks to sick workers who need it. In closing, I can say that I would have liked the budget to include confirmation of a coming into force date for Bill C‑208, on the next generation of farmers. I say that because people in my riding are asking me about it. Farmers are being reminded once again that not only has the Liberal government abandoned them, but it also does not respect the democratic will expressed in the House of Commons. It is frustrating to vote on a bill and pass it, only to see the government refuse to implement it. The House can count on me to take every opportunity to point out that this is unacceptable.
1481 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 4:54:27 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, for almost 20 years, I was a provincial member of the Manitoba legislature, and there was never a year that would go by in which provinces across Canada would not ask for more money with regard to health care. That is just the reality of things. Every year, provinces unanimously asked for additional funds, and why not? What the member does not reference is that under this administration, we have signed health care accords with all of the provinces. We are now giving out record amounts, historic amounts, of cash to the provinces through transfers. In this budget alone, we are seeing a $2-billion top-up to help with emergency backlogs for surgeries. We have allocated support for long-term care, something that even the people of Quebec and other provinces want to see. There is also more money for mental health, and we are looking at ways to ensure that pharmaceuticals are cheaper. Would the member not recognize that Ottawa, according to the Canada Health Act, has more of a role to play than just being an ATM machine? We need to work together with other administrations to ensure that Canadians have the best quality health care that we can provide.
205 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 4:55:47 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Winnipeg North for his question. My speech seems to have angered him, and I am not really sure why. I can say one thing. I have been a manager before. If I am asked to organize long-term services and ensure that seniors are well taken care of in long-term care facilities, I know that there needs to be predictability. Planning, organizing and providing services requires predictability, and that means that funding needs to be recurring, not a one-shot deal. It takes planning and forecasting. I am not denying that the federal government gave money to the provinces to help them deal with challenges during the worst of the pandemic, but now the pandemic is winding down, and the provinces are calling for the funding they need to reorganize their top-notch services for the patients who need it.
148 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 4:56:56 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, we have talked a lot in the House about supporting the people of Ukraine and the need to increase investments in our military. One of the critical things that I think we can do to stand with our partners and allies around the world is to supply them with a surer, clearer supply of Canadian energy resources to displace dependence on Russian oil and gas. We can play that role in Canada. About 75% of Russian gas exports go to Europe, and there is not going to be any way of delivering serious, intense economic sanctions against the Russian regime unless and until we are willing to seriously engage with the energy security issue. I wonder if, as part of the budget, the Bloc has thoughts on what we need to be doing to displace Europe's dependence on Russian oil and gas.
145 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 4:57:49 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the member knows my answer. We clearly know that the solution for supporting European countries is not to develop new pipelines to supply Europe. The war would likely be over before the pipelines could even be built. That is not a solution. Investing in carbon capture and storage is not a solution either. We really need to move into energy transition mode. We need to support the people of Saskatchewan so they can shift gears and develop an alternative, diversified economy that is not based solely on oil. I invite my colleague to listen up and make way for the energy and ecological transition.
108 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 4:58:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for her service to seniors and the community. I really respect the work she has done in the community and also her comments today around seniors and the vulnerable. I agree fully that money is lacking and is going to be lacking to deliver needed services. With the cost-of-living crisis and people paying more for groceries, rent and gas, one of the problems that we in the NDP see is the big tax avoidance from corporations. They are getting richer as those in our communities are getting poorer. The Liberals have long promised to overhaul the outdated tax rules to combat aggressive tax avoidance, but this does not seem to be in the budget. Does the member think this budget should have proposed concrete improvements to the tax avoidance rules that corporations use to avoid paying their fair share?
149 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 4:59:48 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague from Joliette has proposed countless solutions to curb tax avoidance. That fact that it is legal, in a G7 country like Canada, to hide money in tax havens to avoid paying taxes is a serious problem. It is being done in plain sight, for all to see. I therefore agree with my colleague that the government must listen to the recommendations made by my colleague from Joliette, who gave them a winning formula to put an end to tax havens.
84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:00:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would first like to thank my colleague for sharing her time with me. This year, I was fortunate enough to be one of the privileged members of Parliament who participated in an in camera review of the budget before other members and prior to the minister's speech. It was an opportunity for us to understand it and analyze it. When I walked out of the room, a little earlier than expected, the first thing that came to my mind was that this was a missed opportunity. It is a missed opportunity to address real problems and, in the process, to create a sustainable economic recovery. Let me briefly go over the context in which this budget was tabled. First of all, there is a labour shortage, a supply chain shortage, and a customer shortage, since people no longer want to return to performing arts venues, movie theatres and so on. The hospitality and tourism sector is still suffering, and I would remind members that the measures to help it will end next week. Second, we have an inflationary context. Just this morning, the Governor of the Bank of Canada revised current and projected interest rates upward. Third, we are in a climate crisis. Given these three overarching factors, the Bloc Québécois made five demands: higher health transfers, which my colleague talked about; a better standard of living for seniors; measures to fight inflation, including short-term protection measures; measures to encourage sustainable finance; and, lastly, indigenous housing. Of these five measures, only indigenous housing is in the budget. We are happy about that. Unfortunately, none of the other four proposed measures wound up in the budget. My colleague did a great job describing the government's approach to the Canada health transfers and seniors' standard of living. As for the fight against inflation, unfortunately, the budget contains very few measures to help people get through what is likely to be a longer period than expected, as the governor said this morning. In 2022, we are going to see high inflation. Given the need for economic recovery and a green transition, I have to say again that this budget is a missed opportunity. First of all, the budget proposes numerous measures for housing, especially for affordable housing. A few days ago, the Gatineau newspaper Le Droit reported that affordable housing means a one-bedroom apartment costing $1,950 a month. I wonder who here would agree that this is really what is needed. Imagine a single mother of three who does not want to transfer her children to another school and who is offered affordable housing at $1,950 for a one-bedroom unit. I think most of us would agree that this is not necessarily what will most help those suffering from inflation. Second, the budget proposes dental coverage. Clearly, this encroaches on an area of provincial jurisdiction. As we keep saying over and over again, we do not want measures that encroach on provincial jurisdictions. It is also important to remember that the proposed coverage is meant to help children aged 12 and under, but Quebec already has a program that covers children aged 10 and under. We therefore thank the federal government for wanting to help 11- and 12-year-olds, but that is not exactly what we were asking for. Finally, on the environment, the budget proposes some good measures, such as electric vehicles. At the same time, however, it is completely undoing its own environmental efforts, particularly by increasing funding for an extremely expensive technology that is not even proven: carbon capture and storage. If this technology were reflected in gas prices, the consumer price index I mentioned earlier would be even higher. This response to the climate crisis is disappointing, especially since only a few days earlier, the government had approved the Bay du Nord project, which will involve the extraction of almost one billion barrels of oil over the next few years. We expected a bit more ambition and vision in this budget. As far as the five Bloc measures are concerned, sustainable finance was not addressed either. There are very few measures in the budget. Once again, we saw very little with regard to fighting inflation. There are several measures that could have been proposed to fight inflation, such as social housing instead of affordable housing, as I was saying, as well as measures to fight monopolies and cartels. We know that that helps boost consumer purchasing power. The government could have brought in tangible measures to deal with the semiconductor shortage that has been mentioned and that is causing a major problem for the supply chain. As I was saying, there is a shortage of products in the supply chain. The budget contains a lot of proposals about creating working groups and task forces, but it is weak on tangible action. The proposals in the budget are sorely lacking in vision in areas that are very important. The proposed measures intrude considerably on provincial jurisdictions. In a nutshell, the federal government is putting money into areas where Quebec has already made investments. It is rather rich that the new areas in which the federal government is innovating with this budget, such as electric vehicles, dental insurance, or even the day care system that copies the Quebec model, are all already covered in Quebec. It is unbelievable that the budget proposes to interfere in provincial measures that already exist in Quebec. What this means is that Quebec is already doing quite well. I have a question for the Quebeckers watching me today: Why are we still part of a country that is undermining us?
950 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:08:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I look at it as a way in which the Province of Quebec and the people of Quebec recognize its true value. For example, the member referenced electric vehicles and, yes, there is a tax incentive provided by the Province of Quebec for electric vehicles. Now there is one nationally. By having a national and provincial incentive, it means that those who want to see fewer emissions will be that much happier to see that both levels of government recognize that. I only wish that the Province of Manitoba would do likewise. Would the member not agree that having ambitious goals, whether they are federal or provincial, that address what the population wants to see is a positive thing?
121 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:09:03 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. I also thank him for agreeing that we are doing quite well in Quebec. We are already supporting the purchase of electric vehicles. That measure was financed by Quebeckers' taxes. Hydro-Québec has done a lot of work. As usual, Hydro-Québec financed the work with our own money and without the federal government's help. I would say that Manitoba may need it, but Quebec does not. Why propose a budget containing measures that Quebec does not really need?
94 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:09:35 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I heard my colleague from the Bloc mention carbon capture and storage as part of the budget, and it is one of the few budgetary items that I will admit is a good investment by the government. Unfortunately, it does not have enhanced oil recovery as part of it. However, one of the arguments we hear from the Bloc and the NDP quite often is, “We cannot measure it, so it is not effective and we should not do it.” I toured the Boundary Dam Carbon Capture Project facility a couple of weeks ago, and there is nice big sign out there that tells us how much CO2 it has sequestered. It is just shy of 4.5 million tonnes of CO2 that it has sequestered since the facility started up. If it is all about emissions, for my colleague from the Bloc, I would be happy to say that maybe carbon capture and storage is actually a great idea and something we should consider doing more of in the future.
175 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:10:26 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague, with whom I have the pleasure of sitting on the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. My response will be brief. No, I do not think that carbon capture and storage is the solution. The problem is not just emissions, but production as well. We want to halt production. We do not want as much oil to be produced in the coming decades, so that demand decreases and our children and grandchildren can have a future without oil and gas. Carbon capture and storage only rewards increased production. It is not the solution.
99 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:11:11 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sorry about this, but I am going to speak in French, because it is important to try. The federal government has reduced its share of funding over many years, leaving hospitals with a shortfall of several billions of dollars. Does the member think that the federal government should restore its share of the funding and increase health transfers to the provinces?
65 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:11:59 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my esteemed colleague for making a real effort to speak in French. I encourage her to continue speaking French in the House because the French language is very important in Canada. I completely agree with her. I think it is quite unfortunate that the government is not increasing the Canada health transfers. For once, the provinces all agree, which is quite rare. The government must increase these health transfers, and we are calling for the transfers to be increased to 35%, which is not even the level of funding that would be required to address all of the problems on the horizon in health care. Our population is aging, which makes this increase absolutely necessary. All professional associations in Quebec and all of the provincial governments agree that the federal government must increase the Canada health transfers.
143 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:13:00 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook. I am rising today to participate in this very important debate. On an annual basis, when we have a chance to speak about the budget and the plan the government has going forward for the people of Canada, it is a critical time to participate in debate in this chamber and discuss some of the issues contained in the budget and some of the policies that are being focused on. There are about five or six areas that I am going to touch upon, but I am going to start with one that is very close to the residents I represent in Parkdale—High Park. It is the issue of Ukraine. We are now past the second month of the conflict in Ukraine, and we heard the Minister of Finance deliver a budget that she was very emotional about as a woman of Ukrainian heritage. What we have done to support Ukraine with sanctions, humanitarian aid and military aid is extensive. What this budget included very specifically is something that a lot of my constituents have talked to me about. They talked about further military aid and further economic aid to prop up the economy as it comes out of and exits this period of Russian unlawful and illegal aggression. Those are very significant initiatives, and I wanted to start by highlighting them. The second piece dovetails with a commitment we made going back to the campaign and that we concluded just before the tabling of this budget. It is what we are doing to assist people who are raising families in this country. The people who are raising families in my province of Ontario unfortunately had to wait a little longer than the rest of the country because of the obstinacy in some respects on the part of the Government of Ontario. However, lo and behold, even the Government of Ontario got across the finish line, and now we have concluded a deal that will allow affordable child care to be provided to families with children under six in licensed facilities in every province and every territory in this country. This is a terrific day for Canada and a terrific day for families. What does this mean for my constituents? It means direct assistance. Already, in the month of April alone, the cost of child care has been reduced by 25% in licensed facilities. This is just in the past month. By the end of this year, it will go down 50%. The Speaker's riding is in the beautiful province of Montreal and my riding is in Toronto. All of us have very expensive child care, particularly those of us in cities. The cost of child care is between approximately $1,500 and $2,200 per child per month in my riding. That is staggering. To take that in half by the end of this year is equally staggering. To take it to $10 a day by the end of four years is dramatic. That is what we are doing to help serve Canadians. Who does this help? It helps children with their early childhood development, but it also helps women. I specify women because we know the choice is still made in 2022 that one parents has to stay home, and too often and more often than not, it is the woman who is compelled to stay home. It is the woman who is deprived of the ability to stay in the workforce or return to the workforce. That does not help women, does not help their empowerment and does not help Canada's economic bottom line. This policy will, and it is contained in this budget. We are also addressing what we have heard about, rightly, regarding the growing income disparity we have seen during the pandemic and even after the pandemic between the haves and have-nots. What I am talking about is large financial institutions. This is about banks in particular, but includes large insurance companies. There are provisions in this budget that address exactly that. We have proposed that where profits of over $1 billion were made, there will be a 15% tax on any profits above $1 billion in the 2021 taxation year. On top of that, we proposed, and are implementing through this budget, an increase in the corporate income taxation rate from the current 15% to 16.5% on banking income that is above $100 million. That is critical because it helps produce some of the fairness we are seeking to achieve in Canadian society, since some have done very well during this pandemic and some have done very poorly. We are also initiating more investigations and prosecutions of those who use aggressive tax planning to exploit loopholes. There is $1.2 billion dedicated to the CRA to promote just that. Who else are we helping? We are helping people with their broader health care. I am talking about oral health and dental health, which are also contained in this budget. It is momentous. We know that today 33% of Canadians do not have dental insurance. I, like every other member of this chamber, benefit from the fact that we are provided dental benefits, along with other benefits, as members of this chamber. Not every Canadian is so lucky. What we are doing is correcting that situation via a significant financial investment that will go toward the dental health of Canadians and helping with their overall health. How are we doing this? Children under 12 are targeted in 2022. By 2023, it will be children under 18, seniors and those living with a disability. By 2025, there will be full implementation. What does that mean? It means that $5 billion will be spent over five years to ensure the dental health of families with an annual income of less than $90,000. We are targeting this help to those who need it the most. Members have heard me speak many times in this chamber over the past seven years and know that I am committed to a basic premise, which is about promoting equality and combatting discrimination. It is something that I spent 15 years doing as a practising lawyer. It is something I continue to do as a member of Parliament. I am very pleased that this document, this budget that has just been tabled, outlines the next steps in that important fight. How are we doing this? We are reinvigorating the anti-racism strategy, which was launched in my riding by the former minister of heritage during the 42nd Parliament. That national anti-racism strategy is getting another funding injection of $85 million over four years. That will also include a national plan on combatting hate, hate that we have seen too much of, not just during this pandemic but even prior to the pandemic. It has spread online through things like misinformation and disinformation. We are also dedicating two special representatives: one on combatting Islamophobia and one on combatting anti-Semitism. Both roles are critical. Both roles will continue, in perpetuity, going forward with the funding we have announced. Last is something that is very germane to my riding, because one of the lead proponents of this initiative is a U of T law professor who is my constituent. That man is named Anver Emon. He started something called the Muslims in Canada archives. What is that all about? Why am I talking about the Muslims in Canada archives in the middle of a budget speech? I am talking about it because if we want to address Islamophobia, we need to do short-term things, like promoting people's safety at mosques, and we also need to do medium- and long-term things. How do we do that? We change the narrative. We disabuse the stereotypes. We change the perceptions and generalizations, giving positive imagery to replace negative imagery. We get rid of the tropes and stereotypes, and we replace them with positive history about Muslims and their contributions in this country. That is what the Muslims in Canada archives will do. That is what is being funded by this budget, to the tune of $4 million, so that, whether Muslims live in Quebec, Alberta, the Maritimes, Ontario or anywhere else in this country, their stories can be told, shared and spread throughout the community so we can cure the pernicious impacts of Islamophobia. It is something I am very proud to stand by, and that is what is in this budget. There are two large components to this budget: the housing component and the environmental component. In the last couple of minutes I have, I will just draw on a few specific points under each heading. On the housing front, I am very pleased to represent six different co-ops in my riding of Parkdale—High Park. What I am even more pleased by is that in this budget, for the first time in several decades, we are injecting new funding to further expand the breadth of co-op housing that exists in this country. This is critical for people who desperately need and deserve adequate housing. That is on top of the rapid housing initiative investments and on top of the housing accelerator, which will build more units. It is a critical thing to address a very basic need. On the environment, we are talking about a number of things that dovetail with our emissions reduction plan, but what I will focus on in the brief time remaining is ZEVs. I am pleased at this point that when we turn on the television, we see things like Ford trucks being advertised that are going to be electric. I am pleased that people are talking to me more about charging stations and vehicle charging infrastructure. That shows that the idea is taking hold. We are transforming an industry. We are transforming work for those who work in the industry through things like the just transition. We are also transforming things in terms of the quality of air in the environment that we all have for our families, for our children and for our children's children's families. That is critical in terms of getting to net zero. We are doing that with yet another commitment to furthering zero-emission vehicles in terms of providing the critical minerals for the batteries that they need, providing the charging infrastructure and continuing the rebates for those cars. I started off by talking about the Government of Ontario. I will return to talking about the Government of Ontario. On June 2, there is an election coming up. What is unfortunate is that there was a previous government that coupled our rebate on zero-emission vehicles with its provincial rebate, but that was summarily dismissed by the government of Doug Ford during his first couple of months in office. It has not been restored, and he is not even campaigning on restoring it. We all need to get to net zero. Doug Ford's constituents, like mine, are longing to purchase a zero-emission vehicle but could use some help in doing so. I think it is incumbent upon all provincial governments to join us in providing similar rebates so that we can get to that net-zero future together. That is what is contained in the budget. I am happy to defend it in this House.
1916 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:23:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the hon. member spoke about certain actions with respect to anti-Semitism and Islamophobia and the appointment of special envoys. Certainly, in the Conservative caucus, we are very supportive of action on those issues. Last summer, dozens of churches were either burned down or vandalized in western Canada, including the complete destruction of a Coptic church in Surrey, for example, and the burning down of a 100-year-old historic francophone church close to my house. We are seeing increasing acts of violence targeting churches and other people of faith in this country. Unfortunately, we did not see a single statement from the Prime Minister on any of those actions. In fact, his former senior adviser Gerald Butts called this violence “understandable”. I wonder if the member could explain to people who are wondering what the government is going to do about acts of violence targeting the Christian community. At least will it issue a statement? Let us start with that.
165 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:24:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not surprised to see the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan on the first day back after Easter participating in the debate. I will say, unequivocally, that any act of violence toward a place of worship, regardless of the religion or faith, is unacceptable. That is point blank. I will say, proof positive to that, when the Our Lady of Lebanon church in my riding shockingly had the statue of the Virgin Mary beheaded on Queen Street, I was there, with members of the official opposition, to participate in the prayer service with the congregation that dealt with showing solidarity after an attack on the Christian community. I would also say that there is a lot of angst among my constituents, and among Canadians writ large, about the role of the church in terms of indigenous residential schools. What we are seeing from the current Pope is a step in the right direction toward healing that rift. That is a step that needs to be taken by the church and by Canadians together so that we can overcome these types of acts of violence.
189 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:25:03 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, at the end of his speech, my colleague talked about the importance of breathing clean air and how important that is to our health. Let me make another connection. The Government of Canada provides the most subsidies for fossil fuel, including oil and gas extraction, which generates huge amounts of air pollution, which in turn results in high rates of heart, lung and kidney problems and other health issues. Does my colleague not think that human health should come before the oil and gas industry?
87 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:25:45 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her question. This is such an important issue. I would point out that, in our latest campaign platform, we made a very clear promise to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies by 2023. Previously, our goal was 2025, but now it is 2023. That is a meaningful target. We are taking the situation seriously. We will eliminate this kind of subsidy because we have to for the sake of our environment and the air, as she said.
82 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/22 5:26:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I just want to say to the member that I was very pleased to hear words around promoting equality, addressing fairness and fixing some of those long-standing inequities in our economy. I am happy for the day care. It is coming. One of the things I would say, though, is that I see the Liberals taking many victory laps on day care. Twenty-five years is a long time for women to wait for day care, and the reason we are getting it right now is because the economy needs more women in it. I just want to express that I am disheartened that it took 25 years to get here. The other piece that the Liberals are wanting to address in the economy is to get people with disabilities working. I am really pleased that there is going to be support for them, but we need support on the Canada disability benefit or income supplement for those who cannot work full-time or those who cannot work at all. Why did the budget for 2022 not include money for the Canada disability benefit?
187 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border