SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 160 - Feb/14/23

Feb/14/23 4:02:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there does seem to be a bell ringing. I had heard that the member might be interested in sharing his time. I wonder if perhaps the ringing bell distracted him from that fact.

35 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/14/23 4:02:35 p.m.
Watch

While I wait for the bell to leave, I would remind all members to have their phones on vibrate or turned off. The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs.

32 words

Mr. Darrell Samson

Feb/14/23 4:02:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his suggestion. It is all about timing. I had this planned for halfway through my speech, but I will make sure that he has his opportunity. I will be sharing my time with the member for Elmwood—Transcona on this very important motion, which we as Canadians need to be discussing. There is no question that grocery prices are very high. The price of gas is higher than normal too. Many of our costs are very high, but the same thing is happening in other countries. In the United States, as people are telling me, the prices are even worse than in Canada. We have to find ways of supporting Canadians. What started all this? I think we have to contextualize the situation. By that I mean that the pandemic was a two-and-a-half-year challenge for the world. I tell my kids all the time that the reason they pay taxes is to ensure they have services when they need them. If they are paying a certain per cent in taxes, some of it goes toward paying for hospitals, some of it goes toward paying for roads and some of it goes toward paying for schools. That is how we are contributing to the success of the country. However, when we are in a global challenge with over three million people losing their jobs in a short period of time and with people going home to face their family and say they do not have a job, then we are in a major crisis, and people expect their government to be there for them because they have been there contributing. That is exactly what happened during the pandemic. I have never been prouder of being a member of Parliament than I have been during the last two and a half years. For 67 nights in a row, we worked together as members of Parliament when the Liberals were looking at different policies and programs we could bring to support Canadians. It was challenging, because when we bring in a program, it might work for 90% of people but not for all. That is why we had to do lots of tweaking in our supports. There were many programs. We helped individuals with the CERB, with the wage subsidy for businesses, with the bank account for businesses and with rental assistance. Then there were all the organizations. We were able to give $20 million to the legions so they could do great work to support our veterans as we moved forward. That was one challenge. The second challenge, of course, is the invasion of Ukraine. There is no question that it is playing a very big role in the challenges relating to the cost of living and inflation right across the world. That is adding to costs in the supply chain too. Those two challenges are facing every country, including Canada, and Canada has done extremely well with them, if I can say so. We were one of the most successful in the G7 coming out of the pandemic, which was extremely important. We have over 117% of the jobs we had prior to the pandemic, and now we are seeing inflation come down, from 8.1% in June to 6.2% as we speak. I know that is still way too high, but we are going to work to improve on it. The central bank is increasing interest rates to drop inflation, and I know that is putting more stress on Canadians. We have to be there, and we have to do more. That is why, in the fall, we brought forward some major initiatives that are helping Canadians with affordability. First of all, there was the doubling of the GST rebate. Members have to understand that 11 million people benefited from this initiative. Half of our seniors benefited from it, which is extremely important. They received a doubling of their GST rebate for two payments. There was an enhancing of the Canada workers benefit, which is very important as well. This is for low-income Canadians working very hard each and every day. This will help them. They will receive up to $2,400 per year, helping another 4.2 million Canadians. There is the 10% increase to the OAS for those aged 75 and older. That is extremely important. That is helping about three million seniors, which is a large number of seniors. Some people ask why 75 years old. Well, people are more vulnerable at 75. There is a more of a chance that they will lose their partner or spouse. The cost of living challenges are higher, as they only have one salary. We have to be there for those seniors, and we have been. In addition, rent for low-income Canadians was topped up by $500. That is another very important initiative for those who are struggling. About 1.8 million Canadians benefited from that initiative as well. Members know as well as I do that child care fees being dropped this year to 50% is a major help to Canadians with young families. It is helping with affordability. Do not forget that parents who were paying $1,800 a month for three kids are today paying $900 a month. That is a savings of $900 a month. That extra $900 a month can help with affordability, which is crucial. It can help with mortgages, which are much higher because of increasing interest rates. That was a very important initiative that we were able to bring forward as well. There is also dental care for families making $90,000 or less. Children 12 years of age and under can benefit from that now. That is supporting families. When families brought their kids to a dentist, they used to pay more. Now they will have more money for food. People forget about the indexing of inflation, but that is extremely important. Let us take the CCB. By increasing the CCB to meet inflation, people basically still have the same income. The GST credit increases with inflation too. For seniors who are retired, the CPP will be increasing with inflation to help them, and so will the OAS and the GIS. Those are major initiatives that we were able to pass, some of which were not supported or voted for by the Conservatives. However, that is not what is important. What is important is they were passed and Canadians are benefiting from them. I want to talk about the Canada workers benefit for a second. I mentioned it, but it is important to note that we now have advance payments. Because of the high cost of living and affordability, instead of people having to wait 12 months to do their income taxes and receive their money, we are now going to give it through four payments based on their salaries from the previous year. That is allowing people, every three months, to have more money to pay for the challenges they may be facing. With the child care benefit, along with economic gains there are social gains in supporting Canadians. More women are now able to join the workforce. As we know, there are about 1.5 million vacant jobs and we need to find workers to fill them, so more women will join the workforce. Today, 82% of working-age women are working. That is the highest rate ever recorded in Canada. I will conclude with student loans. Students do not have to pay interest on the federal portion of their loans, which is a big help for students, because we know the cost of education at the post-secondary level, such as at universities, is very high.

1293 words

All Topics

Mr. Kelly McCauley (Edmonton West, CPC)

Feb/14/23 4:11:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member talked a lot about the workers benefit. In the update, the Liberals changed the rules. Yes, it is prepaid, but what if it turns out someone was not eligible after the fact? Normally the money would be clawed back, but they changed the rules so that the government will not be clawing back that money even if people were not eligible for it. The Parliamentary Budget Officer states that over $4 billion of taxpayers' money will be written off in advance by the government. Let us consider the fact that this is a politically motivated decision and that the CRA said not to go after the $15 billion in overpayments for the wage subsidy. Along with the other $4 billion, does the member support this waste of taxpayers' money that the government paid out to ineligible people whom it will not go after?

147 words

All Topics

Mr. Darrell Samson

Feb/14/23 4:12:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, eligibility is very important. That is why we should be talking about it. We are now saying that people have to meet all the criteria. That puts the onus on the individuals applying, but also on the public service to make sure the criteria are being respected. We are going to work closely to support Canadians.

58 words

All Topics

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

Feb/14/23 4:13:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is awfully pleased. He is very satisfied with his government's actions and spent 10 minutes talking about how everything is fine, move along, nothing to see here. One subject he did not talk about was seniors. We know seniors were among those hardest hit by the pandemic and that it was very hard for them. The health transfer negotiation was kind of a slap in the face for them. The provinces asked for $6 billion but got less than $1 billion. We know that problems with the health care system affect seniors more than anyone else. The government indexed old age security benefits for seniors over 75, as though groceries did not cost them the same as they do seniors between 65 and 74. Those in Longueuil pay the same prices. At Provigo, a pound of ground beef costs the same whether the consumer is 68 or 78. Does my colleague think seniors between 65 and 74 should get an OAS raise too?

170 words

Mr. Darrell Samson

Feb/14/23 4:14:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. He always has very good questions. In my speech, I explained why we prioritized seniors 75 and older. However, my colleague did not mention that doubling the GST credit gave 50% of seniors more money. We have also indexed old age security, the Canada pension plan and the guaranteed income supplement to ensure that people can continue to enjoy the money they have today. We have been there for seniors and we will be there for seniors in the future as well.

92 words

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

Feb/14/23 4:15:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, one of the concerns I have with this motion is that it ignores the role of greedflation in inflation. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and Canadians for Tax Fairness have shown that corporate greed accounts for up to 25% of inflation here in Canada. This is at a time when we are seeing Canadians struggling. I spoke to a taxi driver the other day. We were talking about how many people are using food banks, and he said something that broke my heart. He said he is hungry but cannot go to the food bank because he is someone who gives to the food bank. It is unacceptable that in a country as wealthy as ours, people are going hungry. It should not be everyday Canadians who are paying the price. It should be the corporations that are profiting off these crises. We want a windfall profits tax on insurance, oil and gas, and big box stores. Will the member push his government to ensure that we make big, greedy corporations pay for the support Canadians need so that it is not struggling Canadians paying the price?

190 words

Mr. Darrell Samson

Feb/14/23 4:16:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, what she is sharing is really important. We have seen, during the pandemic, some large corporations making humongous profits, and that conversation needs to be had. We need to find ways to ensure that these corporations are sharing their wealth with Canadians. Our government has focused on the most vulnerable, and we will continue to focus on the most vulnerable. However, to be honest, I agree we need to do more work in this area.

77 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)

Feb/14/23 4:17:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise, with thanks to the member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook for sharing some of his time. I think it was another colleague who said earlier that he had some rather mixed feelings about today's motion because there is a lot that is true in it, particularly the first parts that name and provide some useful facts and figures about the very difficult situation Canadians are facing. We know that many Canadians right now are concerned about losing places to live, whether because the interest rate on their mortgages has gone up and they are not sure their family incomes can absorb the additional costs, because rents continue to climb, or for various other reasons. Certainly one important reason is the continuing corporate presence in the Canadian housing market. In Winnipeg, for instance, we just saw Lions Place be offered up to a private developer who has a history of taking over buildings where there used to be affordable rents, doing some superficial renovations and then jacking up the rents. That activity is going on. It is happening and it is a real challenge, putting pressure on the cost of rent. We know that Canadians are struggling with the 11% increase in the cost of groceries and that that puts pressures on household budgets. It is not an optional extra that people can choose to do without. It is a cost that they either have to absorb or, as the member for Victoria was just pointing out, go hungry because they do not have any good alternatives. We are facing a really difficult moment. Where I take issue with the motion before us is that it would lay all of that problem at the feet of government and suggest that it is sufficient just to cap government spending, cut waste, fire high-priced consultants and eliminate inflationary deficit and taxes that have caused a cost-of-living crisis for Canadians. There is, again, some truth in that. I am in favour of cutting waste, for instance, but I think my Conservative colleagues and I might have some differences of opinion as to what constitutes a proper cutting of waste, that is, what is truly wasteful and what is not. As an example, I have been doing a lot of advocacy alongside folks outside of Parliament, like campaign 2000 for a CERB low-income repayment amnesty. I think it is wasteful to chase the poor for money they do not have because they took the government at its word, during a global crisis of unprecedented proportion, that if they needed help they should apply for it. When it turned out that they were not quite eligible because they were not poor in the right way, the government then said that they owe all of that money back. It will pay people to hound them even though it knows they do not have the money, and it will never get that money back. It is going to throw good money after bad. That is waste. If that is what the Conservatives mean by cutting waste, I will show up any day of the week for that. I suspect it is not what they mean, because I have heard them talk about other things that I value and that I think are good investments. For instance, when we talk about pharmacare on this side of the House, that is a cost. Capping spending is not going to allow us to have a federal pharmacare plan, but do members know what a federal pharmacare plan would do? Ultimately it would save money for Canadians and reduce the cost of accessing prescription drugs in Canada, not just in individual budgets but in government budgets too. The latest reports, prepandemic, on pharmacare in Canada said that Canadians were paying about $24 billion a year on prescription drugs. That was a combination of government expenditure, private insurance plan and out-of-pocket expenditure. The findings of many different studies over time, including in this particular example, was that a national pharmacare plan would cost about $20 billion a year. Depending on who pays and what ledger it is on, Canadians stand to save at least $4 billion a year on the prescription drugs they are already buying. To me, it is not the right approach to say the federal government should just arbitrarily cap its spending when there are investment opportunities that could reduce costs to Canadians overall. I think we should be more discerning in our judgment around this place, in a way that this motion simply is not. We have seen a lot of change and we are going to see more change in the economy over the years to come, particularly in regard to energy. We are seeing that happen already. Many of our allies are trying to lower their dependency on fossil fuel. That is happening, whether Canada wants it and gets on board or not. It is happening for the sake of both the climate and energy security. I do not think anybody in this place needs a lecture on that after the last 12 months, not only with Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine and what has happened to global energy supplies but also the real pinch from Russia's supply of oil to Europe and other parts of the world, as well as the power that that has given it. There are many reasons the world is trying to lower its dependency on fossil fuel for basic things that we cannot do without, such as heating our homes. Canada's choice is whether it shows up to that or not. Back in the 1970s, Peter Lougheed made real investments, as did the federal government, to create the oil and gas industry that exists in Alberta today. That was not at all a spontaneous creation of the free market. There was a lot of very deliberate policy work and financial investment by governments in order to create the oil and gas economy of the late 20th century. Those who say otherwise would be kidding themselves and anyone who listens. Before us is another moment of policy and financial investment to create a new energy economy for at least the next 50 years. Canada has to decide whether it wants to get on that train. We are not going to do so for free. Arbitrarily capping spending right now just takes Canada out of the game at a time when our biggest continental partner, the United States, is finally getting into the climate change game in a meaningful way. It is doing this with the Inflation Reduction Act. A lot of companies that are in the new energy economy and are also making incredible amounts of profit are sizing up the places where they want to invest. We should value that investment as much as we value investment in the oil and gas sector, but Canada does not. It has not shown up for other industries, particularly new energy industries, in the way that it did for oil and gas in the 1970s and continues to do today. Mr. Speaker, just think of the over $20 billion that the federal government found overnight to get into the pipeline business, something it has no business being in in the first place. Do not tell me money is lacking for other important things. Of course there is money. The Liberals have proven that by going out and spending on things like pipelines, which they should not have done. We are in this moment where we are trying to address critical challenges for individual Canadian households, and at the same time, many businesses that are still reeling from the effects of the pandemic. The world is preparing and laying the foundations for the next-generation economy. It is important to my children and to the children of people in this place and across the country that Canada get that right. This will make good-paying union jobs available to the next generation of Canadian children in the same way that those jobs were available for oil and gas workers in Alberta. We want to make sure that those jobs continue to be available. Some of them will be in oil and gas, but there are going to be fewer of those in the future. This is not because the Canadian government of any stripe decided that was going to be the case. It is because many governments the world over are deciding that must be the case, if we are going to have a planet to have an economy on in the first place. They are not wrong about that. Canada needs to get with the program, and we are only going to be able to do that through serious investment. I will close because I know my time is running short. I thank the Speaker for his diligence. I will just mention health care. I do not know that we need to do much more than that, but the idea that we are going to solve the very real problems in the health system without investment is false. In this time when people are struggling to get access to care, government will need to make investments. Provincial governments have been willing to pay through the nose for private agency nurses, overtime work and sending people to the United States to get treatment. That is not a health system. We need to build it, or rebuild it, here. That will require investment. It is worth paying for. This is why it is not the time to endorse a simple spending cap.

1615 words

All Topics

Mr. Frank Caputo (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, CPC)

Feb/14/23 4:26:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. Before I begin my question, I want to recognize the life of Cliff Branchflower, the former mayor of Kamloops, who passed away earlier this week. I wish his family the best at this difficult time. My colleague mentioned that we are going to have decreased oil and gas jobs in the future, not because the current government wants it but because all governments really want that. Here is the thing. As it stands right now, it seems as though the current government wants fewer oil and gas jobs and wants fewer of them in Alberta. His point is that we are all going to get off oil and gas. However, when we are considering how much oil and gas is required today while we are weaning off it, does my colleague not agree that those good-paying jobs that could be located in Canada should stay in Canada as opposed to countries that do not have respect for wages and human rights? That is where those jobs are going right now. Why are they not staying in Canada?

198 words

All Topics

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Feb/14/23 4:28:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would say this is an example of the one-two punch the oil and gas industry gets in this House between the Liberals and Conservatives. The Liberals spent over $20 billion on a pipeline, and the Conservatives get up and say that the Liberals are not supporting the oil and gas industry. They can debate whether they want to or should support the oil and gas industry with massive government expenditures, but I would say the Liberals have been trying really hard to do so. I do not think they are failing to try. In fact, I would criticize the Liberals for the extent to which they are doing that. I think of the opportunity cost of that $20-billion investment. We are told that we cannot have a western power grid that would help share hydroelectric energy from British Columbia and Manitoba across the provinces. This is because we do not have the money to build it. Then they turn around and build a $20-billion pipeline. We cannot afford to be sinking that much money into new oil and gas infrastructure when we could be spending it on different types of infrastructure that would also create really good-quality jobs here in Canada. The point is to create those jobs in a way that is going to be sustainable over time. I would say that the Liberals have placed their bet on the oil and gas industry, and we think that is the wrong place for that bet when it comes to the next generation of Canadian workers.

263 words

All Topics

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ)

Feb/14/23 4:29:46 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated my hon. colleague's speech. I agree with him. The Liberals are putting more money into the oil and gas industry than the Conservatives did before them. I believe that is unheard of in Canadian history. The oil industry has never had so many subsidies. Unfortunately, I have a question and I am not sure my colleague will be happy that I am asking it. At this moment in time, when we are fighting climate change and the government has never put so much money into subsidies for the oil and gas industry, how can his party support the government when it is time to vote on a budget like that?

117 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Feb/14/23 4:30:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge the decision that Canadians made in the last election. We are here to try to achieve progress whenever possible. I do not think that holding an election tomorrow will resolve the issue of the Liberals and Conservatives giving significant support, on behalf of Canadians, to the oil and gas sector. That is something we want to resolve. We are working with people in Canada and Quebec who want to change that, but we are not yet there. We are in a position where we can have a federal dental care program, which we believe is a good thing. We will achieve gains wherever we can and we will continue to fight wherever we must.

118 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/14/23 4:31:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would be inclined to ask a quick question regarding what the member thinks about the NDP-Liberal B.C. agreement on LNG. I could possibly ask him what he believes Rachel Notley has to say about the purchase of the pipeline. However, I would rather pick up on what he said in his speech about how government can actually spend where there is a very high return. Could I get his thoughts on the national child care program and its net benefits, which were clearly demonstrated in the province of Quebec?

94 words

All Topics

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Feb/14/23 4:32:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am very familiar with the arguments in favour of a national child care program. I recall making them as a candidate in 2015, against Liberals who said it was a bad idea and it was not the federal government's business to invest in child care. I am very glad to see the government come around on that, and I am glad to see some of the positive effects that were anticipated by New Democrats and others who knew better. I welcome the Liberals to the party. I hope they will join us on some other things while we are at it.

105 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/14/23 4:32:27 p.m.
Watch

Order. It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Calgary Centre, Carbon Pricing; the hon. member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship; and the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Foreign Affairs.

63 words

Adjournment

Mr. Tony Baldinelli (Niagara Falls, CPC)

Feb/14/23 4:32:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, when our Conservative leader first spoke before the fall economic statement was introduced last November, he made two very clear and simple demands on behalf of our Conservative Party. First, we wanted the Liberal government to stop the taxes. This included cancelling all planned tax hikes and the tripling of the carbon tax. Fast-forward a few months to February, and it is clear that the current Liberal government is on track to do the exact opposite. Taxes went up on Canadians this past January, and this April it is only going to get worse. Late last year, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation sounded the alarm about five incoming Liberal tax hikes in 2023. These hikes include increases that Canadians will see at the gas pumps, an alcohol escalator tax, increases to the Canada pension plan, hikes to employment insurance contributions and increases to payroll taxes for anyone making $40,000 or more this year. This April 1, gasoline is set to go up by 14¢ per litre, and alcohol taxes are automatically set to rise by 6.3%. This is no cruel April Fool's joke. This is the damage done by bad Liberal fiscal policy. Locally, across Niagara, these taxes, particularly the alcohol escalator tax, will punish many wineries, craft breweries and distilleries, as well as anyone who enjoys consuming these wonderful Canadian-made products while visiting Niagara, which is the number one leisure tourism destination in all of Canada. The second demand of our Conservative leader was for the Liberal government to stop the spending. Any new spending by Liberal ministers in the government must be matched by an equivalent savings. The government must cut wasteful spending and stop the inflationary deficits that drive up the cost of everything for Canadians. Again, fast-forward to this month, and the Liberals are failing to make good on this demand. In fact, as time goes on, more and more wasteful and reckless Liberal spending is being uncovered. In the fall, there was the $6,000 luxurious hotel room that our Prime Minister stayed in for a one-night stay in Europe. Then, there was the $54 million wasted on the disastrous ArriveCAN app. Recently, the Auditor General blasted the CRA for its lack of rigour in trying to identify and recoup a minimum of $27.4 billion in suspected overpayments of emergency aid benefits, including $15.5 billion for the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In response to the comment from the Auditor General, the government's own CRA commissioner had the gall to inform Canadians that “it wouldn't be worth the effort” to review and try to recover every dollar of the $15.5 billion in CEWS overpayments. That insufficient response from the CRA commissioner did not get by our Parliamentary Budget Officer, who recently said it was “a bit disconcerting when you hear that and the government is faced with a deficit.” For these reasons and more, Conservatives are asking the House today to call on the Liberal government to cap spending, cut waste, fire high-priced consultants and eliminate inflationary deficits and taxes that have caused a cost-of-living crisis for Canadians. Simply put, after eight years of the current Liberal government, Canadians pay more today for their goods and services and are getting less. Groceries, gas, home heating and more are getting more expensive by the day because of the reckless Liberal spending habits. After eight years of the Liberal Prime Minister, the cost of groceries is up almost 11%. After eight years of the Liberal Prime Minister, half of Canadians are cutting back on groceries. After eight years of the Liberal Prime Minister, 20% of Canadians are skipping meals. In Niagara, a recent report found that almost 39,000 people are being assisted by local food banks across the region. Those serving on the front lines are witnessing people struggling who have never struggled before. Under these deteriorating conditions, Canadians work harder to try to get ahead, but they take home less money because of higher costs for the things they need to buy and the higher taxes they will have to pay. Just yesterday, in fact, we had new data provided by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, which reported that nearly four in 10 Canadians are now borrowing money to pay for groceries, shelter and other daily expenses. According to the report, “many Canadians are facing the biggest financial challenges of their lives. More are borrowing money to cover their day-to-day expenses, including by using high-cost loans.” It is no wonder Canadians feel like everything is broken and they have lost control. Many are falling behind, even as they try hard to get ahead. It comes as no surprise that the same reckless Liberal spending habits, which have played a big role in driving up inflation, have also caused our national debt to soar. Debt interest payments have become so big under the Liberals that the costs are projected to be larger than what the federal government spends on the budget for the Department of National Defence. We should remember that the next time we have to scramble our outdated and under-equipped CF-18s and watch the Americans shoot down airborne threats over our territory. It is getting so bad that some former Liberals are finally starting to acknowledge it. One random Liberal is former finance minister Bill Morneau. He has said that the government probably spent too much during COVID. Meanwhile, former Liberal deputy prime minister and finance minister John Manley said that the Liberal Prime Minister's fiscal policy is making it harder to contain inflation. There are direct consequences to the Liberal government's recklessly spending the cupboards bare. Will the government be able to live up to the expectations it set for its new federal tourism growth strategy? The tourism minister has spent the last several months asking the industry to think big on ideas to expedite economic recovery from the devastating impact of COVID-19, yet fear is now beginning to grow in the tourism community that the Liberal government is once again failing to understand that the industry is still in recovery mode. It appears that, once again, the Liberal government is setting itself up to over-promise and under-deliver. That is a great shame for tourism communities across the country, such as mine in Niagara, which welcomes visitors from around the world. As well, what is to happen to the wine sector support program, which was put in place because of the Liberal government's ineptitude on trade policy? The two-year, $166-million program has ended, yet the industry has asked for it to be extended, and there have been no updates about its renewal. Last year's budget showed that the government would raise $390 million over five years in new revenue by now applying the excise tax to 100% Canadian-made wines. Where are those funds going? For months, Conservatives have been warning the government that its out-of-control spending would lead to an increase in interest rates. The government responded by telling Canadians not to worry and to go ahead and take out big loans since interest rates would remain low for a long time and there would not be any negative consequences. Well, after eight years of the Liberal Prime Minister, 45% of variable rate mortgage holders now say they will have to sell or vacate their homes in less than nine months due to the current interest rate levels. After eight years of the Liberal government, everything feels broken, and Canadians are having a harder time not only getting by, but simply hoping to try to get ahead. After eight years of this Liberal recklessness, Canadians have to work harder, work longer and even work multiple jobs just to take home less earnings and to get by. Enough is enough. While Liberals are expecting Canadians to pay for their reckless spending habits, Canadians can count on Conservatives to provide them with the sound financial planning and path ahead when they elect us into government after the next federal election. Canadians must realize that as the Liberals make more and more promises for a better tomorrow to distract us from the issues of today, none of the problems they have created, which Canadians now face, are getting fixed. Canadians need real solutions to these real problems that they are facing right now, and only a Conservative government can deliver on this for Canadians.

1428 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/14/23 4:41:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Conservative Party says that if we are going to spend the money, we have to find the money in order to do so. Now, we just made a major announcement for the future of the national health care system, $190 billion over 10 years, and there are hundreds of millions flowing this year. The Conservative leader has now endorsed it. He has said that Conservatives will not cut back on that commitment. Can the member now share their plan? When they talk about money being spent only if money is coming in, in terms of programs, what programs would the Conservatives be cutting as a result of the commitment that the Conservative Party leader has made?

122 words

Mr. Tony Baldinelli

Feb/14/23 4:42:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in my remarks earlier, I talked about the Auditor General, who found that $4.6 billion went to ineligible individuals, and we estimated that at least $27.4 billion in payments to individuals and employees should be investigated further. Among the individuals who received money and should not have, $1.6 billion went to people who quit their jobs; $6.6 million went to people who were in jail the whole time; $3.3 million went to people who did not live in Canada; and $1.2 million went to dead people. Why do we not start there?

100 words