SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 178 - Apr/17/23

Apr/17/23 4:15:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, Conservatives put forth three items we were looking for in this budget, and, sadly, this budget fails to capture any of them. The provincial governments and mental health organizations are all saying that what the government has promised is not enough. It promised $4.5 billion for the mental health act transfer and walked it back. It cannot be trusted. The provinces are waking up to this and so are the mental health associations.

76 words

Mr. Maxime Blanchette-Joncas (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ)

Apr/17/23 4:16:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech, and I commend him. We have a very serious situation right now, and that is the housing crisis. It is indisputable. The entire country is being impacted. Where I live, in the Lower St. Lawrence, in the riding of Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, the vacancy rate in the city of Rimouski is 0.4%. This is a serious situation. There is not enough housing for people of all ages and all financial levels. In the key sector of health care, we are unable to bring in workers to take care of people, and this government's latest budget completely ignores the housing issue. There are investments for indigenous housing, but there is nothing, zero dollars, to create new housing for people who really need it. I would like to hear exactly what my colleague thinks about that.

154 words

Mr. Todd Doherty

Apr/17/23 4:17:25 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we are short millions upon millions of homes for Canadians. The goal of home ownership has gotten farther and farther away. As a matter of fact, the average down payment was $20,000 when the Liberal government was first elected, and it is now over $45,000. Canadians cannot afford that. Rent has gone up from $1,500 to almost $3,300 under the Liberal government. More needs to be done, and the Liberal government is not doing it. It needs to get out of the way and let Conservatives fix the problem.

95 words

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

Apr/17/23 4:18:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise in the House to speak about murdered and missing indigenous women and girls in this country. This budget has put forward $20 million over four years to support safer communities, almost $100 million of ongoing help for indigenous families to access information and $20 million a year after that, $2.5 million over two years to support the National Family and Survivors Circle and more. This budget is important to indigenous families. We know there is not enough, but there are good things in this budget to move forward on reconciliation. Do the Conservatives think this is not enough to support this budget?

107 words

Mr. Todd Doherty

Apr/17/23 4:18:50 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my riding of Cariboo—Prince George is right along the route of the Highway of Tears. I have sat with so many families that have lost loved ones: murdered and missing indigenous women and young girls, and young men as well, as a matter of fact. It is absolutely heartbreaking. We need to do more. My worry is that the government has pledged it, but will it follow through with it? We have seen the government continue to build up hope, then always fall short of actually delivering. That is my worry when I speak with my communities, first nations communities and small rural and remote communities, that the government makes big promises and boasts a lot, but does not follow through on what it promises.

129 words

Hon. Robert Oliphant (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lib.)

Apr/17/23 4:19:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is really a privilege to rise in yet another budget debate where we are taking time to analyze the budget. What also happens in these debates is that they reveal our visions, our values and our priorities. I want to begin by commending the Minister of Finance for her excellent effort in having listened to Canadians and having tested the waters with experts and individuals in communities across this country in an attempt to craft a budget. This is an art that takes into account both the moment in life we are living and also how we are able to move into the future. It was not an easy task. Obviously, our country is coming out of a period, with COVID, when we had extremely high expenses and kept the economy going and kept people going. We are now in a period of global recession with higher-than-normal inflation even while we have a period of very low unemployment. It is a risky time in the Canadian economy, and I believe that the Minister of Finance has crafted the fine art of targeting support for the most vulnerable, who are at the highest risk of problems during this recession, while also moving our economy into the future. Budget 2023, “A Made-in-Canada Plan: Strong Middle Class, Affordable Economy, Healthy Future”, is that kind of artistic endeavour of a budget that attempts to target supports to the most vulnerable while creating a cleaner and greener economy. It would deliver on tax fairness, strengthen our health care system, develop a clean economy, and help us to invest in clean electricity. In particular, I would like to focus on a couple of things in this part of the debate, and those are our proposed support for low- and modest-income families and individuals and our plan to build a stronger and cleaner economy for everyone. We have all just come back from two weeks in our constituencies. For me this was a time when I could meet with a number of people during the three Abrahamic festivals of Ramadan, Easter and Passover, when families gathered and there was much conversation and rich engagement. It gave me an opportunity to look at both the problems Canadians are facing in my riding and also the opportunities this budget would afford them. This is a post-COVID-driven, recession budget. Canada's economy is showing signs of recovery from the pandemic, and we are in a much better position than other countries around the world. In fact, we had the strongest growth rate among G7 nations in 2022. However, as with many economic recoveries, not everyone sees these improvements equally in their day-to-day lives. Inflation has been decreasing, and we have noticed that steadily over the past eight months. However, people earning low to modest incomes still need help with higher grocery prices, especially for fresh produce. Canadians are facing that. I face that. I go to the grocery store, just like everybody else, and notice the high cost of groceries. That is why we have been attempting to find ways, both directly, to deal with the high cost of groceries, and also indirectly, through a series of sustained long-term supports that are changing the world in which we live, at least in my riding. I want to tell members that, when I started in politics in 2008 and I represented an area in Toronto called Thorncliffe Park, I regularly saw kids going to school without parkas, mittens or a full stomach from breakfast. That has changed dramatically in the past 15 years. With the onset and the advancement of the Canada child benefit, with other supports and with the increased Canada workers benefit, I see the children going to school in Thorncliffe Park, and elsewhere in Toronto and in my riding, with full stomachs, the right clothes on and opportunity for advancement in the world, where they will be able to make a difference. I have often thought that the cure for cancer could be locked in the brain of a child who does not get advancement in the world. Through our targeted early childhood benefits, through the early childhood care benefit, through the Canada child benefit and through other targeted supports, that cure for cancer may be found in our lifetime, because it is no longer going to be locked in the brain of a child who does not get a chance to succeed. This is not just about the grocery rebate. We can talk about that, but it is also part of a targeted response that would make sure that at least 11 million Canadians with low and modest incomes would be able to benefit from a targeted benefit. Budget 2023 would also see, as we have said repeatedly in the House, the creation of the Canada dental care plan. I do want to acknowledge the work of the New Democratic Party on that important policy. It is one of the things the Liberal Party has wanted to do for some time and, with that encouragement, we have continued to develop it. In 2022, the plan was brought in. It will be improved in 2023 and it will continue to help Canadians have a fresh face and a fresh start as they continue in life. One in five Canadians delays seeing a dentist right now because of the cost. That will end, and that is the way Parliament should work. It is the way we should engage together as colleagues in this place. Since federal dental coverage for children under 12 was announced in 2022, applications for 970 children in Don Valley West have already been received and processed. That is almost 1,000 children, and almost as many families have received a benefit that is making a difference in their lives. Everyone in the House should take credit for that, especially those who will support this budget in the coming days. The economy and our lives coming out of COVID are profoundly affected by the COVID pandemic response but also by climate change, which continues to plague our planet. The world's leading economies are moving at an unprecedented pace to address climate change. We have to reshape our economies. We have to build net-zero industries for tomorrow. It is a goal of the government. Therefore, while we are doing targeted responses with respect to helping Canadians in a time of recession, we are also, at the same time, building for a greener future that will create better-paying jobs and will continue to help our economy evolve and change and keep pace with the world. We will create better jobs and we will get to net zero; those two things go hand in hand. It is the economic and social imperative of our time. Budget 2023 showcases Canada's potential to become a clean-electricity superpower with a more sustainable, secure and affordable electricity grid with better and cleaner electricity for all. Everyone would benefit. Resource industry workers who extract essential minerals would benefit. Engineers who design next-generation batteries would benefit. Auto workers, particularly but not exclusively in my home province of Ontario, would benefit. Secondary industries, including auto parts and all of the industries related to that, would also benefit. This is building an economy for the future, for Canadians of the future. The investments made by the government since 2015 have built on Canada's existing competitive advantages, which have made our country a destination of choice for investment in the global clean economy. However, we recognize that we cannot sit on our accomplishments so far. As a country, we need to keep pace and we need to never fall behind. Our government has a plan, and the plan is to make Canada a leader in clean and affordable energy. Budget 2023 makes a series of major investments to ensure that Canada's clean economy can bring prosperity, middle-class jobs and more vibrant communities across the country. We will continue to do that. Some members know that I was a member of Parliament, that I left and then came back. During my time out, I worked with the Asthma Society of Canada. What I wanted to do was push the problem of respiratory illness upstream. The reality is that asthma is related to climate change. If we do not invest in these technologies today, we will simply have more people demanding more health care, and more people dying. Every day in Canada someone will die of asthma. It is an environmentally driven illness, so we need to be invested in it in this place and across the country, ensuring that Canadians have a budget that will allow for the advancement of their dreams as individuals, with targeted responses, but also for an economy of the future. We will continue to do this, building measures that are widespread. We have heard in this debate many members who have offered different windows into the budget. I will attempt to answer members' questions on these or other issues, and I thank them. This is an opportunity for us to engage in an important debate and an important subject.

1539 words

Mr. Dave Epp (Chatham-Kent—Leamington, CPC)

Apr/17/23 4:30:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague across the way for his excellent speech. I do enjoy working with him on the foreign affairs committee. I know a great organization that is potentially going to benefit from his talents during his next time out. I have a question I want to ask. I had the opportunity to consult with my riding over the last two weeks. I had 13 meetings, and I heard much about the cost of inflation and how it was affecting families. In particular, I want to relate two comments I heard from the villages of Wheatley and Erieau. They have harbours, and they understand the concept of an anchor. A year ago, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance made a commitment that Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio was anchored to a solid fiscal anchor and would not rise. The folks in Wheatley and Erieau understand that anchors are not supposed to float, so my question to my hon. colleague is this. Next year, what will be the anchor in this year's budget?

181 words

Hon. Robert Oliphant

Apr/17/23 4:31:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington for his interventions and also for a good, collegial approach to our work. Canada is obviously part of a world economy. We see inflation as a worldwide phenomenon. We also see Canada's response to inflation being targeted and careful. I would describe this as a business-friendly budget, one that makes sure those who may be at risk of being left behind are not. Businesses will also have an environment in which they can flourish. We are not an island. Canada is part of a world economy, and we will always continue to be among the best G7 and G20 leaders in debt-to-GDP ratio. We will continue to build, knowing that we need at times to invest, at times to save. Right now, we do not want to leave anybody behind as we grow our economy in a greener future.

157 words

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

Apr/17/23 4:32:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we heard my colleague on the other side of the House talk about a clean, green economy. Why then is there not so much as a hint of any transition plan to end fossil fuel subsidies? When I talk about ending subsidies, I do not mean tomorrow morning. People who work in the sector are not going to lose their jobs. They are not going to end up on EI tomorrow morning. However, having a plan means that, in a specific number of years, not a single penny more will be spent on this sector, and the jobs will shift to another sector. Why is it not starting now?

111 words

Hon. Robert Oliphant

Apr/17/23 4:32:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, indeed, I actually believe we have already started on that practice. We have been engaged in it for the last seven and a half years. We have found a way to encourage investment in greener energies while continuing to support those who make their living in fossil fuels. That has been part of our goal. The Liberal government is a government for all of Canada. This is a government for every part of the country where the economy is still dependent on fossil fuels. I am still, as a person who drives a hybrid vehicle, dependent on fossil fuels. We will continue to transition away from fossil fuels as we move to cleaner sources of energy, but doing it making sure we do not leave people behind. That is what we will do.

135 words

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Apr/17/23 4:33:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the people we do not want to leave behind are our own children and grandchildren, and at this point, we are running over them as we continue to support fossil fuels. This budget expands subsidies for fossil fuels by accepting the notion that we can use fossils to create hydrogen. We do that with so-called abated sources. Those are basically weasel words for saying we are going to use fossil fuels to create hydrogen. At the same time, we are expanding access to carbon capture and storage as public subsidies to private sector interests to expand and continue fossil fuels. Could the parliamentary secretary explain how the Liberals can talk out of both sides of their mouth on climate?

122 words

Hon. Robert Oliphant

Apr/17/23 4:34:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I actually think we are very consistent. I want to thank the member for her earnest and always important contributions on climate change and on a greener economy. However, I would like to take the opportunity to get to a paragraph of my speech that I was not able to put in due to time. That is our proposal in the 2023 budget to introduce a 15% refundable tax credit for eligible investment in clean electricity projects. This significant investment is being extremely well received in the business community. It includes zero-emission electricity generation systems, emission-reduced natural gas-fired electricity generation, stationary electricity storage systems that do not use fossil fuels, and interprovincial and territorial electricity transmission equipment. We will continue to build the economy of the future while we help it in transition, leaving no one behind.

142 words

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings—Lennox and Addington, CPC)

Apr/17/23 4:35:25 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the government has touted this budget as a budget that will tackle the high cost of living. Observers could be excused for thinking this meant the government would actually take substantive steps to address the underlying factors that have caused the historic rise in the price of food, heating, gas and other everyday essentials. Unfortunately, Canadians did not receive such a budget, and as a result, their confidence in the competence of the government's economic management continues to dither. Instead of taking care of the issues of the day, the government has burdened future generations of Canadians with billions upon billions of dollars of unnecessary debt. It should not be up to Canada's sons and daughters to foot the bill for a government looking for a quick vote today. Canadian families are suffering. That is the bottom line. This we know; we hear it every day. I can recite countless examples locally of small business owners or farmers who have had to make extremely difficult decisions in order to stretch their dollars further. However, there is one group of Canadians often overlooked in these discussions, a group of Canadians that has been treated as an afterthought by governments and looked at as an easy source of money when it needs to be found: our armed forces and its members. Over the past couple of weeks, my office has been inundated by an alarming number of CAF members expressing grave concerns over numerous issues, most recently the replacement approved by Treasury Board of the post living differential to the Canadian Forces housing differential. The push-back on this new policy has been astounding. One person, who granted me permission to use their quote, wrote, “ Many are losing money. The sliding scale it operates on has newly joined members making more money than those that have been in for 12-15 years. This means as you work hard, strive to lead and progress you will actually lose money. In what world does it make sense that as you promote into higher positions you take a pay cut? You have members who will lose money because once they move up in ranks and strive for more, they no longer qualify for the CFHD benefit and the raise does not match what they were receiving from CFHD. I'm talking about a decrease in pay anywhere from a couple dollars to 500 dollars a month. The CFHD benefit goes away for people who live in the same area for 7 years or more. Sure, many members get posted. But the Navy folks on ship are only stationed on each coast. Things don't change for those folks after 7 years for cost of living. Well it does. It gets more expensive but let's take away an allowance.” I want to personally thank this person for being courageous enough to reach out to my office to share their concerns. If politicians never actually talk to our soldiers, sailors and airmen, regardless of rank, how will we ever know the issues they are facing and how can we begin to start working on them to solve the problems? While I am sure the objective of this government was to increase the draw of new recruits into the forces, it has done this at the expense of keeping the ones we already have. The 7,700 troops who currently receive the post living differential will not qualify for the Canadian Forces housing differential. For them, it is just another benefit axed. For members living together who do qualify, that benefit is halved, and at a savings of $30 million. I can promise everyone in this House and everyone watching that the long-term effects in talent and investment we will lose as a result of this will far exceed that amount. That is only what we can realistically monetize in training costs. The amount of damage done to morale cannot have a dollar value attached to it. It also unfairly targets the navy, as the new differential expires after seven years in the same address, and the navy is notoriously non-transitional in postings. The government needs to commit to communicating with our troops and ensuring that they will not be unfairly nickel-and-dimed to pay for over-budget programs like the Canadian Coast Guard Arctic and offshore patrol ships, AOPS, which just had its program cost quietly and unceremoniously increased by half a billion dollars, especially at a time when we are in a recruitment and retention crisis. The only solution for the reconstitution crisis is to take the stopgap that exists at the recruitment phase and put it into the retention phase so that there are more soldiers in and fewer soldiers out. The CFHD fails in that objective. What we need is better equipment. We need to start replacing our Victoria-class subs and our aging Auroras, expand our over-the-horizon radar capabilities and commit to spending 2% of our GDP on national defence. Our troops need better incentives, better pay, better housing, a fair and timely recruitment process and a quick and compassionate transitioning process. We also need to remember that the government’s solemn responsibility to our soldiers, sailors and airmen is not nullified as soon as they leave the CAF. At this point, I want to thank my two colleagues, the members from Banff-Airdrie and Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, for their excellent work in advancing veterans issues and being staunch advocates for our former CAF members. Canadians, regardless of job, have been struggling. This budget was an opportunity to provide relief to those who have been dealing with these costs since well before the last election. Instead, we have a government that chooses to run up billions in new debt while simultaneously turning a blind eye to the harsh realities facing everyday families the country over, including those in uniform. The country is facing crises on many levels. The government came out with a pay raise for our forces members and almost immediately negated that net increase by completely revamping their housing differential in the middle of a cost of living crisis, a recruitment crisis and a retention crisis. They expect our normally stoic forces members to be happy about this newest slap in the face. Struggling Canadians both in and out of uniform deserve better than a complacent government content with the status quo. When he retired, Jim Flaherty was, as many opined, a “steady hand at the tiller”. During the last economic crisis, the prudent and conservative approach he took showed Canada to be an island of stability in a global sea of uncertainty. It is crucial that the government of the day, regardless of its stripe, ensures economic stability and does not fall pray to the siren calls of political gamesmanship. It is for these reasons that I will be voting against the budget.

1162 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)

Apr/17/23 4:43:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I recognize that the member has spoken at great length about our armed forces and the supports they need, and I appreciate the intervention today, but I would like to ask her a question that relates more to her riding specifically. This budget has a lot in it for electrifying the grid throughout Canada and is about preparing for the future of electric vehicles. No riding in this country, at least currently, stands to gain more from that than her riding of Hastings—Lennox and Addington. In fact, she was there in the summer when Umicore announced that it was going to be building the largest battery manufacturing plant in North America in her riding. This budget has a lot in it to advance Canada and push us in the direction of that evolution. I am curious if she can at least comment on whether she thinks moving in the direction of electrification and supporting industries linked to the $1.5-billion manufacturing plant in her riding are a good idea.

174 words

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman

Apr/17/23 4:44:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there is no question that Umicore, the battery materials plant, is the first of its kind in North America, and I applaud the member opposite for raising it. I was there and I welcome that. It is expected to launch in the fall of 2025. I will certainly celebrate the small wins from the government and recognize that locally in Hastings—Lennox and Addington we celebrate when things go right. I would like to acknowledge that it is a good win, and members on either side of the House need to recognize and applaud when things go right, not just knock heads. They should respect each other.

110 words

Mr. Maxime Blanchette-Joncas (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ)

Apr/17/23 4:45:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her enjoyable speech. We see that she is very passionate about the Canadian Armed Forces and their importance. I share her desire to support our veterans, especially the members of the armed forces who protect and serve us every day. There were some things missing from the last budget. The omissions were rather striking. We are currently experiencing a housing crisis. There is a crisis going on across Canada and Quebec, affecting a number of regions, including my own, the Lower St. Lawrence. It is undeniable. There is also another crisis, the labour shortage. My colleague briefly touched on it when she was talking about the need for the Canadian Armed Forces to attract and retain service members. There is nothing in the budget, no key measures. The Bloc Québécois has proposed several, including tax incentives to allow experienced workers to work a few hours or days a week. There are other measures that could give some breathing room to people who want to join the workforce to help our business owners. I would like my colleague to share her point of view on the complete absence of measures to deal with—

204 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/17/23 4:46:45 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Hastings—Lennox and Addington.

9 words

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman

Apr/17/23 4:46:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is definitely no secret that Canadians are stretched in every possible regard, whether it is with housing or labour issues. The bottom line is that the budget that was presented is not responsible. It is a budget funded by Canadians suffering from inflation. Rather than providing real solutions, this NDP-Liberal government has unleashed an avalanche of uncontrolled spending. From my perspective, Canadians cannot afford business as usual. No democracy is perfect, but all are perfectible.

79 words

Mr. Taylor Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP)

Apr/17/23 4:47:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member mentioned at one point in her speech that this budget is “turning a blind eye to the harsh realities” of ordinary Canadians. One of the harsh realities that ordinary Canadians face is the fact that millions of them cannot afford to get their teeth fixed. This is something that my constituents speak to me about on a regular basis. I wonder if the same is true for her constituents. If so, how does she explain to those constituents who cannot afford to visit a dentist, or those who cannot afford to take their kids to the dentist, or the seniors who cannot chew their food that she will be voting against expanding our health care system to include dental coverage?

126 words

Mrs. Shelby Kramp-Neuman

Apr/17/23 4:48:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, after two weeks of meeting with people, businesses and families in my constituency, I can say that the consistent message is that Canadians need a break. Canadians need a responsible government to step up.

36 words