44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 2, 2022 11:00AM
- May/2/22 4:13:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the member sees any hypocrisy when the official opposition members say that they would like to be able to have more debate on issues, and then they filibuster concurrence reports to prevent debate from happening and are voting against the government's Motion No. 11 to extend debate time so that members would have more time to debate. On the one hand, the government is providing the opportunity to debate and, on the other hand, the opposition members are saying that they want to be able to debate but are denying any opportunity for yourself. It is almost as if you want the chamber to self-destruct in terms of debate.
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 9:55:17 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, I know this is hard stuff to believe, but it is actually true. During the fall economic statement from last year, we had the Conservative filibuster and the games they play. I am giving a couple of examples of the games they play. One day, the government said it wanted to bring in Bill C-8 once again for debate. The Conservatives' reaction was to bring in a concurrence motion to prevent that debate from occurring.
I remember one day we wanted to debate the bill. What did the Conservative Party do? It moved to adjourn debate and the actual day. The Conservatives did not want to work for the rest of the day. They came in, they had question period, they did a few things after question period and then they were done for the day. Is there any member who is really surprised with the reaction we get from the Conservative Party?
We have a Conservative official opposition that sees good legislation. I am going to go through a number of the points in terms of the silliness we see from the Conservative Party, the type of legislation this is and how Canadians can benefit from it. There are a number of initiatives that are here.
The Prime Minister and Minister of Finance first started talking about the legislation and the need for a fiscal update in October of last year. In December the legislation was brought in, then there was an attempt for the government to get it passed through in January and February because we could not build a consensus in December.
There is stuff within this legislation that really matters. We heard some of those examples, in particular, raised by New Democratic members of the House earlier today. They are things I would have thought the Conservative Party would have been sympathetic to. I will give the example of a new tax credit that is being established for farmers. It would ultimately see farmers receive a credit. Why would the Conservative Party deny farmers where I am from, the Prairies, the opportunity to realize that particular benefit?
What about the whole idea of the tax breaks that were being provided for education supplies, for teachers and others? It is a substantial difference in the tax break that is being provided. Again, we can factor in the pandemic and going back into classrooms. Because of the Conservative Party's stalling tactics, it still has not passed the House of Commons.
Those are the types of initiatives that really affected individuals, not to mention businesses. Businesses want to be able to improve the quality of air through their ventilation systems in terms of using those tax breaks for those entrepreneurs or those businesses. The Conservative Party will say it supports farmers and it supports teachers. I am not sure of that, but it often will claim that. It says it supports small businesses, but again, it continues to stall Bill C-8: our fall 2021 update incorporated in this legislation.
It provides the government with the opportunity to deal with one issue that we hear a lot about. Housing is a big concern. This is the first time we have seen a national government in Canada deal with the issue of housing over the years. Not that long ago under this administration, we brought in the national housing strategy. We put in historic amounts of real dollars to support things such as non-profit housing units, emergency shelters and so much more.
Within this legislation, there is a special annual tax on underutilized residential properties from foreign investors. Part of the purpose of bringing in that tax is to recognize the impact that these investments from foreigners are having on our housing industry. I am happy to say there are even further measures taken in the more recent budget that we just passed last week.
The Conservatives on the one hand will talk about the importance of housing, but in reality there is only one party, with the support of another, that is ultimately recognizing the need to see action, and Bill C-8 does that, too. It does not answer all of the problems around the issue of housing, but at least it shows that the national government is prepared to provide leadership on the issue. We recognize that, in dealing with the housing crisis in Canada today, all levels of government and other stakeholders need to come up. We are demonstrating that very clearly, going back to Bill C-8, the fall economic statement, and the last federal election, when we made a commitment to deal with the issue of housing. Bill C-8 is a part of that.
What about the $1.7 billion allocated for rapid tests? We can flash back to last December. We had provinces such as Quebec that, at the beginning of January, instituted a curfew. Other provinces were going into lockdowns again. It was because they needed and recognized the need for rapid tests for the next wave of the coronavirus that came around. We ensured that we would have the supplies that were necessary to distribute to our provinces and territories and others.
I recall, back in December, Ottawa still had a stockpile of rapid tests. It was not until December of last year that the demand for and usage of them increased dramatically. In Bill C-8, we had to ensure that the federal government had the access to spend the money that was going to be necessary in order to acquire those millions of tests. In that very short window, through the fine efforts of our departments, ministries and others, we were able to acquire literally a hundred million-plus new rapid tests as a direct result of the need here in Canada. It required $1.7 billion, and that was even before we started to get into mid-January. This is something that was incorporated in Bill C-8, yet the Conservative Party still did not believe that it was worthy to pass.
We had other things in regards to the proof of vaccination initiative. Many provinces looked to Ottawa to support those vaccination initiatives. Not all provinces have actually cancelled the use of those vaccination initiatives. In fact, provinces including my home province were asking Ottawa to assist in financial support for those programs, and that is exactly what Bill C-8 would do.
The pandemic, in the minds of many Conservatives, is ancient history and it virtually evaporated in December of last year. However, for the rest of Canadians and provincial jurisdictions, including some Progressive Conservative provincial jurisdictions, which are quite different from the Conservatives we see inside the chamber here, I will give members that much, still recognized the need for things like proof of vaccination cards.
They were utilized extensively. It took an effort to create them and they needed to be supported. For many of the initiatives to take on the pandemic, about 80% of new money spent came from Ottawa, as it was very important that Ottawa, working with Canadians and the many different stakeholders, took initiative to minimize the negative impacts of the coronavirus. That is why a number of programs were developed to support Canadians.
Bill C-8 is just one piece of legislation. There were other pieces of legislation that were introduced to ensure that we could minimize the negative impacts of COVID‑19 on Canadians and our economy. As the Conservative Party was focused on all sorts of things that were not necessarily related to COVID, the coronavirus or any other important public policy issue, we continued to be focused on legislative and budgetary measures that would improve Canada's positioning going out of the pandemic.
That is one of the reasons why, when we compare Canada's performance with that of other nations around the world, we have done exceptionally well. We can talk about the overall vaccination rates. Canada has virtually led the world, in good part, in getting people vaccinated. Look at our federal civil service, which is at 99%. We have seen strong leadership in many different ways on the vaccination front. I believe that is what has put Canada well ahead of so many other countries. It is because of the success of getting vaccinations and delivering them to the provinces and territories. We saw a high sense of co-operation with their distribution, and ultimately we got shots in the arms. That is one of the measures that was taken that put Canada in the great position that we have found ourselves in today.
We also have exceptionally low unemployment rates. We have seen well over 115% of the jobs come back that were lost during the pandemic, which is far greater than our neighbour from the south, the United States. Even in the area of inflation, Canada's inflation rate remains substantially less than that of the United States and many countries in the European Union, and is less than the average of the G20.
We have implemented programs of support for small businesses, whether through Bill C-8 or other initiatives, such as the rent subsidy, the wage subsidy and the wage loss subsidy. These types of programs have made a real and tangible difference for our small businesses in Canada. As a direct result, Canada was in a far greater position than many other countries to get and keep jobs.
Programs such as the CERB enabled us to ensure that people had money in their pockets. However, we recognized that, as much as CERB was a fantastic program that served nine million Canadians, the pandemic was not over. Bill C-8, the fall economic update, also introduced the need to make other modifications, such as to the Employment Insurance Act, given the importance of seasonal workers.
With all of the initiatives that I have just referenced, my question and challenge for the Conservative Party is to tell me what aspect of this legislation is so upsetting that it justifies the type of filibuster we have witnessed by the Conservative Party on this legislation. What aspect within this legislation justifies this behaviour on Bill C-8?
I am afraid to say that if it were not for the motion we have today before us, there would still be at least another couple of days of debate on this motion. The Conservative Party has made it very clear that it wants to frustrate the government's legislative agenda as much as possible to stop legislation, no matter what it is, from passing so that it can criticize us for not passing enough legislation. There seems to be a bit of hypocrisy, possibly. That is what comes to mind. It is almost like extending a hand to help someone up and then sticking out a leg to trip them after they are on their feet. That seems to be the type of game the Conservative Party is playing. Let us pass Bill C-8.
1838 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
