44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 22, 2022 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, it is really important because it underscores a problem we have in the federation when the Prime Minister refuses to meet with the first ministers to even discuss health care. Members may think it is brave of me to speak for the leader of His Majesty's official opposition, but I can tell them that he is going to meet with the premiers on health care. We would make sure that provincial jurisdiction were respected because it has been ignored under the Liberals.
Liberals are so confused, in fact, that they are still talking about Stephen Harper. What are Conservatives talking about? We are talking about the future for Canadians, their retirement, their paycheques and hope, and that is what we are going to keep doing. Liberals are stuck in the past.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/22/22 1:22:15 p.m.
- Watch
Order, please.
I am going to stand for a second and just remind everyone of the task at hand, which is debating the bill before us.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.
36 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, not once did my colleague talk about the greedflation that has taken hold in this country. We know in Canada we have the lowest corporate tax rate in the G7. How is that playing out? We have homeless people and people who cannot get dental care. We see big corporations like grocery stores, the big banks, big oil and big telecom all having record profits. Meanwhile, grocery store prices are going up, as are bank fees, fuel prices and telecom fees.
The member said that these are hard times and that it does not need to be this way. I agree. The Conservatives in Britain had the courage to charge their big oil companies a 25% excess tax on oil and gas profits. Where is the courage for these Conservatives? Where is the consciousness, because it is unconscionable that people cannot get dental care yet we have greedflation. The gatekeepers are truly the Conservatives standing up for these big corporations. It is 1% of the families in this country who hold 25% of the wealth. Meanwhile, 40% of families only hold 1.1% of the wealth. This is unacceptable, and it does not need to be this way.
When will the member deal with the greedflation that has taken a grip on this country?
216 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to take this question from the hon. member because he asked about courage. I am going to show that courage right now to him and to all Canadians. We are going to stand up against and we are going to call out the partners in crime who are pickpocketing Canadians, who are perpetrating greedflation, because as—
62 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/22/22 1:24:16 p.m.
- Watch
There is a point of order from the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am being heckled before I even make my point of order.
The member just said “partners in crime”. Is he suggesting that the Liberal government and the Liberal bench is participating in criminal activity, and to that extent, is the NDP partnering on that crime? That is extremely offensive, and the member should remove that comment immediately.
62 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we have had very interesting conversations in here today about people using turns of phrase. I find it interesting—
22 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
It is on this point of order. I had not even finished my comment, so I am not sure if the member has a guilty conscience, but I did not accuse the Liberals of committing a crime.
37 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
He referred to the NDP as “partners in crime”.
11 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/22/22 1:25:24 p.m.
- Watch
Order. I have not recognized the member.
Now, I will recognize the member, but I will also say let us keep the tone down for a few moments while we look at this point of order.
The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands has the floor.
47 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes referred to the NDP as “partners in crime”. In doing so, he is suggesting the Liberal bench, the government and the Liberal members of Parliament, are engaging in criminal activity. He is also extending that to suggest the NDP are partnering in that criminal activity.
I suggested to you moments ago that you make the suggestion to the member to remove that comment. You asked him if he wanted to do that. Instead, he doubled down on it. I would suggest you ask him once again—
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/22/22 1:26:19 p.m.
- Watch
I did not have the opportunity to say anything because I recognized the member on the same point of order.
I will suggest to the member to maybe retract that and find another line of phrase. Trying to suggest we are in the pockets of others is probably not correct.
The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni is rising on the same point of order. I do not want this to go on forever.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, what is truly criminal is that these big corporations are hoarding all the profits while people—
24 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/22/22 1:26:54 p.m.
- Watch
We have really descended way too far into debate, and I apologize to the House for letting this happen.
I will ask the member to stand and maybe retract the words. I know, they all said the same thing. Everybody is saying the same thing, so I am going to ask the member to maybe rephrase it and answer the question appropriately, because we are still in questions and comments.
The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes has the floor.
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the greedflation Canadians are experiencing is from the Liberal government harvesting money from Canadians, on the backs of hard-working Canadians, with higher taxes. Its coalition partners, its partners in collection, are punishing Canadians.
If they want to give Canadians a break, if they really want to deal with greedflation, they could cut taxes. Canadians would keep more money in their pockets and the amount of wealth in this country would increase for people other than the government and its partners in collection.
85 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is my first opportunity to speak today on Bill C-31, so I want to put on the record that I support it and wish it would go further.
I want to ask my hon. colleague from Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes this. He made the claim that health care is provincial. I wonder if he is familiar with the 1982 case, Schneider v. The Queen, in which the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that our Constitution does not say that health care is provincial. It does not speak to health care and it is one of those areas of mixed jurisdiction, federal and provincial. The criminal law power, which is federal, is the source and the derivation of many federal law and federal government decisions to protect our health.
Lastly, the Canada Health Act is the federal statute that governs our universal single-payer health care system, which we must fight to the death to protect, because without it a lot of people will die.
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, there was a lot going on there. What I will say is this. The current government is not collaborating with the premiers. It is not collaborating with the provinces. It is not delivering on a dental care program. What it is doing is fuelling inflation, failing to own up to the mistakes it has made and failing to address the consequences of inflation that are crushing Canadians every single day and making food unaffordable.
People having to choose between heating their homes and feeding their families is unacceptable. Canadians deserve better. It is time for the government to cut taxes, to cap its spending and, frankly, to deal in hope instead of the division and anger we saw from the member for Kingston and the Islands.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Humber River—Black Creek.
I am honoured to be here today to speak to Bill C-31. This bill means a lot to the community that I represent, and I know that it means a lot to many members in this House.
I grew up in a community where many people struggled to pay the bills. This is not a new phenomenon in my community, but something that occurs all the time. In my constituency, we see people who drive Uber and who check out groceries. I have had many conversations with people in my community, and I know from them that people are struggling.
In my neighbourhood, there are people who struggle with vacancy decontrol and landlords who want them to leave so they can bring new people in and raise the rent. My constituents are also very concerned with home ownership. It is a very important issue to people in my community.
However, make no mistake: The people of Don Valley East and the people in my neighbourhood where I grew up are hard-working people, and they believe in the Canadian value that we are so much better when we actually work together as Canadians, when we stick together. It is part of our value set as Canadians. They are also very thankful for the type of country we have where, if one works hard, hard work can pay off, where we have great quality schools and a strong health care system, and where one can speak freely about issues and live the way one wants to live.
Speaking on Bill C-31, I was a bit offended by what I heard from the opposition. I want to remind people back home in Don Valley East and people in this House that we are talking about a dental plan for children under 12. We are talking about a $500 subsidy to help people pay the rent. That is what we are talking about, and with what we are hearing from the opposition about all of these different issues, I want to bring it down to this one point. What we will vote on with Bill C-31 is whether we, as members of this House, should come together to put in place a program to support children when it comes to dental care.
Should we put in $500 to help people? I have heard a few people say that $500 dollars will not do a lot. I can tell members that in my community, $500 goes a long way when it comes to paying for groceries, bills and helping with household income. It is a huge amount.
I have been here for a year, but I have watched this government over the last several years govern, and from the very beginning, back in 2015, addressing affordability and making life easier for Canadians has always been part of the mantra of the government. It is why my riding of Don Valley East has supported the government since 2015, because we are feeling the high prices of gas, the cost of living and the cost of groceries.
In fact, recently I did a survey in my community, and I was pretty surprised. It is the first survey I did, and I sent it out to everyone in the community. We got about 5% people who sent the survey back or went online to fill it out, so we had about 1,800 actually fill it out. However, 44% of the respondents said that affordability was one of the top three issues that they faced as constituents, and over 70% said that they had experienced some form of affordability issues over the last year. To me, this is very telling of where we are as Canadians today.
We have gone through so much with COVID over the last three years, with the global economy and now the war in Ukraine. Everything has shifted in this country, and things have become a lot more challenging for Canadians to purchase.
I do the grocery shopping in my house for my family and also for one of my family members who cannot go to the grocery store. I do it every week for that particular family member and my family. I have noticed the price of flour, baked goods and other things go up, as we all have. However, the opposition will point fingers at this government and say, “You are responsible for the price of these baked goods that have gone up.” Despite popular belief from that side of the House, we are not baking cakes and bread or growing grain or wheat on this side of the House. We are putting in place measures to help people take on some of these challenges that have been impacted by global affairs.
We know that when COVID hit, there was a huge shock to our system and to the economy in this country. We lost three million jobs in Canada. There was a 17% decline in our economic output. Our GDP fell by 2.1%, and even the exchange in Toronto fell by 37%. These were huge numbers. The system was disrupted and we lost a trillion dollars from those markets.
When we look at the war in Ukraine today, we know that prior to the war, 10% of all global wheat supply came from that region. We also know that 15% of corn came from that region, as did 15% of world barley production. Eighty per cent of sunflower oil came from that region too. When we see the cost of baked goods, the cost of wheat and the cost of products in grocery stores going up, there are many different factors in place.
The question in the House really is, where do we go from here? What do we do? How do we respond to it?
There are two approaches that are emerging in the House, one from the opposition and one from the government. As I said, the approach by the government has been here for the last seven years, and it is about looking for ways to create more opportunity and invest in people. The members opposite vote down bills like this that would directly support a child of 12 years old or under. To me, it is quite remarkable.
I want to go back to Bill C-31 just for a minute because Canadians need to know that when members of the official opposition have an opportunity to vote on this bill, they will have the opportunity to support a bill that would allow young people under 12 to have basic dental care and that would put $500 more in the hands of Canadians who need it to pay bills and pay rent. The Conservatives are going to have a very clear option, and the vote that will eventually come to the House will really define the two approaches the opposition and the government have. They are two opposing approaches to how we look forward and build a stronger country to support all people in this great nation of ours.
This bill would provide $500 to nearly two million low-income renters in this country and would provide $1,300 over two years to 500,000 children. This is a huge step in the right direction for this government and for those who support this bill.
When this government came into power back in 2015, it took many steps to look for ways to create more opportunity for Canadians. It lowered taxes for the middle class. It increased the Canada child benefit. It helped seniors by increasing old age security. Remember, the previous government, at one of those critical decision points that define governments or define parties, raised the eligibility for old age security to age 67 rather than its current age of 65. Of course, the best example I could give is what has taken place over the last year with the introduction of $10-a-day child care.
At the end of the day, we are investing in children and investing in families. We are looking for ways to strengthen opportunity for Canadians. We are looking for ways to better position Canada so it can continue to have a trajectory that provides a bright future for all Canadians. I am very proud, on behalf of the residents of Don Valley East, to stand in the House to fight for children and make the right decision to support kids who need help and families that need help during these difficult times.
1439 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, respectfully to my hon. friend, there seems to be a bit of a confused sense of who is responsible for what. He says the federal government does not impact the price of gas or groceries and does not prepare cakes; it is not the one making and setting the price for this. This seems to ignore the fact that the federal government is responsible for fiscal policies and, indirectly, for monetary policy that clearly shapes the price of goods.
Let us talk about a more direct case of responsibility, that is, the price of gas. The government has what the finance minister calls the carbon pricing scheme, or what we call the carbon tax scheme, perhaps. She has said, and it has been said by other members, that this exists to raise the price of gas. That is the whole logic behind those who defend this policy. They say that we need to raise the price of gas because, allegedly, that is going to be good for the environment. However, the government could make a simple choice and not raise taxes on gas.
Will the member acknowledge that the price of gas, if nothing else, is actually something the government has a significant impact on and support our proposal to have no new taxes?
216 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
