44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 1, 2022 10:00AM
- Nov/1/22 11:52:14 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I understand that the NDP will be voting in favour of this motion. The first clause in the preamble says, “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living”.
Could the member comment on what cost of government he thinks is driving up the cost of living?
53 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 1:19:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am looking for a little clarification and perhaps the member could help.
The very first clause in the motion says, “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living.” When I asked the New Democrats about this, they said that this referred to oil subsidies. However, what I heard the Leader of the Opposition and the finance critic say this morning was that more and more government employees were being hired and that was what they were being critical of.
I want to ensure that the NDP knows what it is voting for here. With respect to the first clause in the motion, could the member confirm whether we are talking about oil subsidies or are we talking about the hiring more and more federal employees?
133 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 1:47:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sorry that I disappointed the Bloc by not bringing up health care transfers because that is the only thing its members ever really want to talk about in here.
I will say that my concern for the NDP was laid out very clearly. I am concerned that the NDP would vote in favour of a motion that has a whereas clause basically saying that we have too many public servants working for the government. That is my concern.
I did not say they had to haphazardly follow the government like a lapdog, as the member suggested. I laid out exactly what my concern was. The member is trying to suggest I am doing something other than that, and that is simply not the case.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 2:23:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition were truly concerned about the cost of living for Canadians, he would be supporting our measure to support families with the cost of dental care for their kids and help with our support for low-income renters as well.
I am also astonished that the Leader of the Opposition has been silent on the matter of the use of the notwithstanding clause pre-emptively to suspend people's fundamental rights and freedoms. I call on the Leader of the Opposition to stand up for workers' rights, to defend people's rights and freedoms, and condemn the pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause to suspend workers' rights.
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 2:25:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know we are all astonished to hear the Leader of the Opposition miss an opportunity to stand up for the rights and freedoms of workers. That is something we expect him to continue to do, alongside all of us in the House, in condemning the pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause.
On top of that, he is also talking about cuts to EI. When he criticizes us for being there and ensuring that EI and CPP are there for workers into the future, he calls that tax increases.
We are going to be there to support people paying for EI. We are going to be there to support people with their pensions. We are going to be there for dental and rental; he is not.
129 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 4:15:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have been trying to clarify something with respect to this motion, because I have been getting different and conflicting answers from Conservatives and the NDP today. The very first clause in this motion, the first “whereas” clause, says “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living”.
What we heard the Leader of the Opposition say today is that he was referring to the fact there are more public servants now, more public sector jobs, than there were before the pandemic. He was essentially criticizing those public sector jobs. The NDP seems to claim it has to do with subsidizing oil, which is what the member for Courtenay—Alberni said. I am wondering if this member can clarify for me item (i) of this motion, where it says, “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living”. Is that indeed talking about the fact that there are more public sector jobs now than there were prior to the pandemic?
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
