44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 18, 2022 10:00AM
- Oct/18/22 12:41:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, unfortunately I only have a few seconds and there is so much I could say. The bottom line is that Canada needs to show leadership. That is what I said in my speech. We should take a page out of Prime Minister Harper's experience and speak directly to Mr. Putin to say that it is time to get out of Ukraine.
64 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/22 2:42:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, certainly, Canada has worked very hard with our allies around the world to augment the production of oil and natural gas. We committed to increasing production by 300,000 barrels by the end of the day to help our allies in Europe.
With respect to domestic energy security, here are the facts. When the Conservatives were in government, foreign oil imports were double what they are today. In fact, they have declined 80% from when Stephen Harper was the prime minister of Canada.
The facts speak for themselves. Under this government, more Canadians are using Canadian and North American energy. The leader opposite may not like it, but a fact is a fact.
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/22 2:44:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, let me just say that a fact is a fact. The projects that he is talking about were assessed under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012, in which Stephen Harper took out all of the environmental protections. One of the big reasons why these projects did not proceed is because they completely gutted the environmental assessment process.
We have put in place better rules to ensure that good projects are going to get built in this country, and we are certainly moving in that direction.
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/22 2:59:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that EI contributions are how they insure themselves in case they lose their jobs. Mr. Harper understood that too, which is why the EI contribution rate was higher in every year that he was prime minister than it is this year and than it will be next year.
Here is what The Globe and Mail had to say about the EI debate we have been having in Parliament: The finance minister's “math is impeccable”. As for the Leader of the Opposition, The Globe and Mail said this about his EI claim: “his claim is misleading”.
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/22 5:19:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the question is slightly rhetorical because I think the member already knows my position on this.
I totally agree and support what she is saying. I am reluctant to say members cannot read speeches because some people rely on that and prefer it. I can understand that. However, where the member is going with this is that she is basically saying that whatever anybody delivers in here needs to be something of substance and coming from a place of informed opinion, as opposed to just grabbing something that is handed to them and reading it.
One of the other stall tactics we see is not just putting up as many speakers as the party can. After a whole wack of speakers have spoken, then the opposition will put forward an amendment, which basically resets the roster and everybody can speak to it again. I used to be frustrated when I would see and hear about what Stephen Harper was doing. I admit that I was not as informed about the realities of how this place functioned at the time. I now understand it and I see what happens. I really hope that we can amend the Standing Orders to better reflect and put to rest that method of debate.
211 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised. The member for Yorkton—Melville actually raised her hand.
I challenge any other member. Are there any other members, outside of the member for Yorkton—Melville, who really believe that there are no benefits for their constituents if this legislation passes? I can understand why that particular member will, in fact, vote against the legislation then.
If Conservatives believe that this is legislation that is going to help their constituents, I would suggest to them that they might want to do what they did on Bill C-30. There is no shame, and I will minimize the mocking.
There is no shame in recognizing, as they did with the GST rebate, that this is a good way to provide support for Canadians from coast to coast, including the residents of Yorkton—Melville. I would include them. I would not write them off as quickly as their local member of Parliament has done on this legislation. Again, this legislation is providing financial support at a time when it is needed, and that is why the Conservatives should revisit their position on it.
We had a member stand up, one who spoke prior to me, and he asked about working with the provinces. What provinces have agreed?
There was a time, and this is hard to believe, in which I was a member of the Manitoba legislature for about 20 years and, for a part of that, I was the health care critic. I can honestly say that, if we were to canvass the provinces, over the last 30-plus years, the one demand they have always had is to give more money. They have always asked for that. There is no change in that.
If the Government of Canada did not take upon itself the responsibility of listening to what Canadians wanted to see, our health care system would be very different. This government has put so much emphasis on mental health, as an example. We just finished going through a pandemic and every member of the Liberal caucus will say that long-term health care conditions are of great concern to all of us, at least to those on this side of the House.
Mr. Adam Chambers: Where are the mental health dollars that have disappeared?
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: The member asks about mental health dollars. I can tell the House that there have been hundreds of millions of dollars that have come from this government into mental health. That is in comparison to Stephen Harper, from whom there was virtually zero.
For the first time, we have a real, active, lively debate in regard to long-term care. We have a Minister of Seniors who is taking the issues of seniors and bringing them to the floor of the House. How many times have we heard her stand up in question period and talk about all of those wonderful things that we are doing for seniors? She talks about the increases to the GIS, the increases to the OAS for those 75 and above of 10%. All of these measures are helping our seniors.
Conservatives say, “Who is paying for it?” If they do not understand who is paying for it, they need to revisit the role that governments play in society. At the end of the day, I guess I would suggest to members opposite—
568 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
