44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 18, 2023 10:00AM
- Apr/18/23 4:41:12 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 Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Public Services and Procurement; the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, Taxation; the hon. member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:41:45 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-5
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to the reckless budget brought down by the Liberals and supported unreservedly and unsurprisingly by the NDP.
In fact, the budget is truly a product of the office of the Leader of the NDP. I think it is fair to say that people underestimate him. Canadians now know that he is the one truly responsible for the government's budgetary decisions. We might even call him the right hon. member for Burnaby South.
It has to be a bit embarrassing for the Liberal members to sit in the House day after day and see their party being completely controlled by the NDP leader. They should not be surprised because since 2015, the Prime Minister and his ministers have demonstrated through their behaviour that their level of incompetence should have served as a warning.
For example, in 2013, the Prime Minister told anyone who would listen that he was not worried about budgets because, as he explained, budgets balance themselves. We know how that turned out.
After such a comment, we might have expected that many Liberal candidates would be reluctant to run under his leadership. No, on the contrary, they all took the same stance and eagerly repeated whatever he said.
That was certainly not the first time that the Prime Minister made odd and dangerous comments, but, for Canadians, that was certainly the most memorable one.
Some believed that although the Prime Minister was incompetent and did not have the experience required to steer the ship, at least he was surrounded by ministers and wise advisers who could tell him how to be sensible and would control his impulses. This hope quickly evaporated when his Minister of Finance increased our country's national debt to unprecedented levels. Yes, the Minister of Finance defended the federal government's record deficit of more than $381 billion arguing it was affordable, given the low interest rates.
I would like to say more about that, but I want to speak about what would be important to address in a budget, and that is my Bill C-325, which I recently introduced.
Bill C-325 would strengthen the conditional release system by creating a new offence for the breach of conditions, requiring parole officers to report breaches of conditions and restoring the former version of section 742.1 of the Criminal Code, which was repealed in 2022 by the Prime Minister's Bill C‑5.
The government's Bill C-5, which has passed, allows criminals convicted of aggravated sexual assault, for example, to serve their sentences in the community. I hope that this monumental error will be corrected, and that the Bloc Québécois and NDP members will support my bill.
These violent criminals should not be serving their sentences at home watching Netflix. They should be behind bars. The Bloc Québécois did support Bill C-5. They voted in favour of it, but after seeing what happened next, they realized that there were problems. Consider the case of Jonathan Gravel, a 42-year-old man who managed to avoid prison after committing a violent sexual assault. The Bloc Québécois now realizes that this needs to be reversed, because it just does not work.
Even a Crown prosecutor in Quebec, Alexis Dinelle, slammed the government for reopening the door to sentences served in the community for this type of crime. He said, and I quote, “Right now, [the Prime Minister] and [the Minister of Justice] probably have some explaining to do to victims of sexual assault. I cannot stay silent in the face of this regressive situation”.
What this federal law does is give men who have been convicted of aggravated sexual assault the possibility of serving their sentences at home. For example, according to La Presse, Sobhi Akra wants to be able to serve his sentence from home after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting eight women. That is outrageous.
My bill also proposes to create an offence for breach of conditions of conditional release by criminals who have been convicted of crimes such as sexual assault, murder or assaulting children, for example, and who fail to meet their parole conditions when they are on parole. Right now, it is not an offence for such criminals to violate the conditions of their parole.
For example, I am sure everyone remembers Eustachio Gallese, who murdered Marylène Levesque three years ago. One of his parole conditions involved being treated by a psychologist. However, he was not reincarcerated when the Parole Board learned that he was seeing prostitutes and violating the conditions of his parole. His release was not revoked and nowhere in his record does it indicate that he was failing to meet his parole conditions.
With my bill, people like Eustachio Gallese, who are out on parole, will no longer be able to make a mockery of our justice system and will have to take the conditions of their parole seriously. It will help save the lives of people like Marylène Levesque.
As we know, the main role of parliamentarians is to ensure the highest level of public safety for Canadians. We must correct the monumental error in the law stemming from Bill C‑5 and strengthen management of the parole system.
Let us get back to the budget.
Canada's finances and public funds are not toys for the Prime Minister and his rich friends to play with. Canadians have worked too hard and sacrificed too much to allow these people to destroy the quality of life of our future generations.
We know that the Minister of Finance studied at Harvard. We also know that this university does not teach these kinds of financial strategies to its students. Like the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance clearly missed a lot of classes at university.
When the budget was tabled by the government, we heard different reactions. One came from Mario Dumont, a well-known commentator and former Quebec politician who hosts several shows in Quebec, on TVA. This was his initial reaction upon seeing the budget:
What is most shocking is that, during those months when the Canadian public service was growing by leaps and bounds, service delivery was the least efficient it had ever been. Need I remind anyone of the passport crisis? ...When you read the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report and compare it to what is happening on the ground, one conclusion is obvious. Canada is bloody badly managed. A private company that is so poorly managed would be sent to the slaughterhouse.
From what we can see, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance have no idea what sound financial practices are, and, with the support of the NDP leader, they are dragging this country into financial chaos. While the Prime Minister is destroying the country's finances, Liberal members on the other side of the House are sitting back and watching our children's future slip away. That is the Liberal legacy under this Prime Minister: a total failure to manage our country's finances that puts Canada's future in a very precarious position.
Our legacy will be to clean up this mess and restore sound fiscal policies for the good of our citizens, because when we talk about the future, we are talking about our children and grandchildren. We may tell ourselves that everything is fine right now, but when we look at the interest on the current debt, when we do the projections and calculations, we can see that we are talking about $21 billion in additional interest payments. It is not hard to see that this will become unsustainable over the next few years and the funds available for government operations will be subject to that interest. That means there will be less money and we cannot just keep borrowing, which will only make things worse.
That is why we on this side of the House will always seek to work in a reasonable way in order to maximize the public purse and strike a balance to ensure we do not end up in a situation where our grandchildren will pay the price later on.
1394 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:50:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague talked about a lot of things, including the importance of addressing the violence playing out on our streets, and yet the Conservatives continue to oppose all the gun control measures we are proposing.
However, let us talk about our budget. My colleague spent a lot of time talking down the Canadian economy, when we know that it is much more resilient than that of our peers. We brought Rio Tinto to Sorel and Moderna to Laval. We also brought 5,000 new jobs to Bécancourt, and this is just in Quebec.
When my colleague talks about the importance of reducing government spending, is he talking about the $2 billion that is being invested in health care for Canadians? Since the Conservative leader has confirmed—
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:51:27 p.m.
- Watch
I must give the member an opportunity to respond and leave time for other members who would like to ask questions.
The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute‑Saint‑Charles.
32 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:51:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, do I have the same amount of time to answer my colleague's question as she took to ask it?
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): You have one minute to respond.
M. Pierre Paul‑Hus: Madam Speaker, a government has to make choices. It must create a list of priorities and decide what to do. Since 2015, the Liberal government has chosen to constantly increase spending without having any controls. That is the problem.
Is everything a priority? Of course. If my children want ice cream every day, do I give it to them every day? No. Everyone has to learn about control sometime. The $21 billion handed over to consulting firms is one example of something that needs to be controlled. This is an example of potential savings, because the public service has grown by 30% at the same time. How can we have 30% more public servants, whom we obviously pay, while at the same time paying $21 billion to contractors? That does not work.
175 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:52:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we know the Conservatives' position in terms of the budget, the cuts they would make if they were in power, major budgetary restrictions and balancing the budget. This evening, 150,000 federal public servants will quite likely go on strike.
I would like to ask my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles the following. If he were the minister in such a situation, would he accept the federal public servants' salary conditions to avoid a strike?
79 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:53:15 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is the government's responsibility to manage its public service properly. There is a strike mandate right now because this government did not do its job of managing the public service properly. It hired 30% more public servants, it awards external contracts, and in the meantime, working conditions are being mismanaged.
I cannot necessarily respond directly to my colleague's question because I do not have all the information on the demands. The fact remains that good public management means knowing how to work with the resources on hand, hiring the necessary number of people to complete tasks on budget, and ensuring that employees are paid properly.
However, if the government hires people, spends money elsewhere and cannot afford to pay them more, then there is a problem.
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:54:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I just want to ask my hon. colleague what his thoughts are on the fact that the Liberal government is continuing to deficit-spend, even though it promised, way back in 2015, that it would run only four modest deficits of $10 billion, which it has never even come close to. Budget 2023 is $43 billion.
I am wondering what my colleague has to say about that.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:54:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question. We remember very clearly that the Prime Minister did some marketing during the 2015 election campaign. He said that the Liberals would generate small $10-billion deficits in order to heavily invest in Canadian infrastructure.
However, during that government's first four years, it ran $100 billion in additional deficits. A few billion dollars were invested in infrastructure, because nothing was forthcoming. It was all smoke and mirrors. They said there would be small deficits to allow investments in infrastructure. No one can object to that. However, ultimately, $100 billion went up in smoke. That was the result after the first four years. Now, we are way past that point.
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 4:55:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sure that all of my colleagues will be delighted with the words I have chosen for my speech. I am sure they all want to hear it, as do the majority of Canadians. It is important to be able to repeat things that have been said here and to be able to listen to them carefully, because sometimes they come back to haunt us.
I am going to start with a quote from someone who said, “let me be very clear. We are absolutely determined that our debt-to-GDP ratio must continue to decline and our deficits must continue to be reduced. The pandemic debt we incurred to keep Canadians safe and solvent must [and will] be paid down. This is our fiscal anchor. This is a line we will not cross. It will ensure that our finances remain sustainable.”
That sounds good. That is great. It seems serious. Who said that? It was not an analyst on television or an economist. It was the Minister of Finance. She did not say that a long, long time ago; she said it when presenting the 2022‑23 budget just a year ago. Let us look at this quote and analyze it a little to see what it means.
The first statement is, “let me be very clear. We are absolutely determined that our debt‑to‑GDP ratio must continue to decline”.
She was talking about the 2023 budget. One year later, has the minister demonstrated resolve? It seems not. According to the 2023‑24 budget, the debt‑to‑GDP ratio will increase from 42.4% to 43.5% in 2023‑24. It will also be greater than 42.4% in 2024‑25. In the two years since this statement was made, the Minister of Finance was unable to maintain her resolve not once, but twice, with regard to her fiscal anchor, which was to ensure that the debt‑to‑GDP ratio would continue to decline.
The facts presented in the budget are simple. Canada's federal debt for 2023‑24 is expected to reach $1.22 trillion. These are not numbers we are used to saying. One trillion is a thousand billion. When we talk about $1.22 trillion, that means 1,022 billion dollars. That is nearly $81,000 per Canadian household.
Canada's budgetary projections show no path to balance. The deficit for 2022‑23 is $43 billion. In 2023‑24, the deficit will reach $40.1 billion. The fall economic statement projected a surplus of $4.5 billion in 2027‑28. The 2023 budget projects nothing but deficits. The current projection is a $14‑billion deficit in 2027‑28. That was the year we were supposed to have a balanced budget, according to the Minister of Finance. As I was saying, she lacked resolve.
Let us continue with another sentence from this statement by the Minister of Finance. She said that the pandemic debt we incurred to keep Canadians safe and solvent must and will be paid down.
That is firm, clear and precise. I may have a quick lesson for the Minister of Finance. To pay down a debt, people have to start by paying it down. To pay it down, they have to stop borrowing money. To stop borrowing money, they have to stop adding new spending.
The reality of budget 2023‑24 is that public spending has again increased by more than $120 billion over pre-pandemic spending. In 2019, federal program spending was $323 billion. In 2023-24, expenditures will reach $447 billion. That is a far cry from paying back pandemic debt. We are spending even more money than we spent before the pandemic.
The budget makes no mention of paying down the pandemic debt. Things have certainly changed after just a year. The words “pay down” seem to have disappeared from the Minister of Finance's vocabulary, even though he had given us a bit of hope last year. Unfortunately, it seems that nature has resumed its course. It probably came galloping back following a meeting between the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister, the biggest spender in the history of Canada. Indeed, it is good to remember that the Prime Minister has accumulated more debt than all the other previous prime ministers of this country combined.
He has no plan for balancing the budget and bringing his inflationary deficits under control. Inflationary deficits are the reason behind the rising day-to-day costs of the goods we buy and the interest rates we pay.
I am going to read out another statement related to what I was talking about earlier, and this one really important. In the 2022 budget, when speaking about the debt-to-GDP ratio that I mentioned earlier, the Minister of Finance said that this was the fiscal anchor, the line that should not be crossed in order to ensure that our finances remain sustainable. We are in trouble.
As I said earlier, the Minister of Finance herself has crossed this uncrossable line twice, for both the coming year and the next year. She made it clear that exceeding the current debt-to-GDP ratio would make Canada's finances unsustainable. According to our own finance minister, the Prime Minister's debt and inflationary deficits keep rising.
In 2021-22, debt servicing costs were $24.5 billion. The Prime Minister's inflationary spending caused interest rates to climb, which increased the cost of debt servicing in Canada. Who is going to pay for all that? Not I, but rather our children and our children's children, in short, everyone will to some extent. Even today, the cost of repaying the debt is so high that we will no longer be able to pay for all the promises and all the spending that the government keeps adding.
In my opinion, the finance minister has lost all credibility because she probably abdicated her responsibility to ensure Canada's finances were viable, healthy and above all realistic for future generations. This is evident and has been demonstrated.
It is not too surprising because the Minister of Finance was probably following her Prime Minister's example. We have had the chance to talk about this several times since the beginning of the budget debate. In 2015, the Prime Minister was elected after making his grand promise to run small deficits, very small deficits. He promised to run a deficit of $10 billion the first year, $10 billion the second year, $6 billion or $7 billion the following year and then go back to a balanced budget. The Prime Minister made that promise in order to get elected, obviously. He said it because interest rates were low. He said that interest rates would never go up, that we were in a good period, that everything was going well and that we could afford to borrow money. That is not what happened in the least.
Let us not forget that the Prime Minister said that budgets balance themselves. The Minister of Finance probably thought that a return to a balanced budget would happen on its own. Unfortunately, the reality of the economic situation we are experiencing around the world caught up with her.
Here is the Prime Minister's latest and probably worst statement. In front of a group of young people, the Prime Minister tried to justify his propensity for borrowing by urging young people to use their credit cards at 19% interest to pay their rent and invest in their education. That was the Prime Minister's wise counsel to a group of young people who came to hear him speak. It is not surprising today that the finance minister has put us in a situation where our federal finances are no longer viable. The only way to fix the situation is to elect a responsible Conservative government in the next election.
1354 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:05:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will try for the fourth time to get an answer to my question. We see the Conservatives pivoting. All the Conservatives agree not to touch the $2 billion we will invest in health care. We also put very clear and specific measures in the budget to cut government spending by $15 billion. This includes vendor contracts. It includes cuts to the public service.
Since those are the facts, here is my question for my colleague. What would the Conservatives cut? What cuts would they make to achieve their austerity goals?
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:06:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is rather ironic to hear such a question.
The member just told us that the budget contains $15 billion in cuts. However, there is no indication anywhere of where these $15 billion in cuts will be made. At this time, the Minister of Finance is leading the country.
Now I am being asked to do her job. I would be only too happy to do her job. Our Conservative team will be only too happy to do a good job by managing this country's finances in a fiscally responsible manner when we are elected and have the opportunity to be on that side of the House.
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:07:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I really enjoyed my hon. colleague's speech. What is interesting is that the Conservatives are saying that they will be a responsible government and that they will form the next government.
Now, my colleague did not specify exactly what the Conservatives would do to balance the budget. I heard one proposal from the Conservative leader. Earlier, my colleague quoted the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance, but I am going to quote his leader. During the Conservative Party leadership campaign, he said that he would cut $1 billion from CBC/Radio-Canada's budget, which is currently $1.2 billion. Not one Conservative member from Quebec has wanted to answer the question we have been asking for two days now. I would really like someone to answer me.
Does my hon. colleague agree with his leader's proposal? If the Conservative Party takes office here in Ottawa, will the member support his leader's proposal to cut CBC/Radio-Canada's $1.2‑billion budget by $1 billion?
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:08:42 p.m.
- Watch
The answer is yes, Madam Speaker.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:08:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I enjoyed my colleague's speech. I would like to hear him speak about the Liberal-NDP coalition given that the NDP got 17% of the vote in the last election and that the Liberals are implementing the NDP platform.
43 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:09:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is a very good question.
I think that if I were a Liberal right now, I would be asking myself some serious questions about who is really leading the Minister of Finance when the time comes to write a budget. What we see in the budget is $67 billion in new spending on new programs.
I am not the only one saying this. People have seen the budget and read it. The Parliamentary Budget Officer said it. It contains $67 billion in spending. That means even more borrowing, even more problems, even more inflationary spending that will ultimately increase costs for all Canadians, workers, mothers, everyone. That is the current reality.
That is what happens when a Liberal government forms a coalition with the NDP. In the end, everyone pays the price. Unfortunately, we do not trust anyone to deliver these programs, because we know that when it comes to program delivery, the current government's performance over the past few years has been feeble. Take passports, for example, or employment insurance. I could keep listing examples until I sit down.
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:11:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what I will try to do in a very short period of time is amplify the contrast between the Conservative opposition and what we have been doing here in government.
When we think of the budget, we need to recognize that the budget in its entirety is a reflection, based on what I mentioned the other day, of a great deal of consultation and a great deal of effort that has been put together in order to ensure that this is a budget that serves every Canadian from coast to coast to coast. It is very clear in terms of the manner in which it does that.
No matter how many times the Conservatives will say that there is no plan, there is a detailed plan. It is there in front of all of us. All one has to do is be prepared to do a bit of reading. There are many aspects of this budget that will continue to support Canadians, build our economy and build our society in a direction that I believe a vast majority of Canadians would approve of.
The Conservatives seem to be of the opinion that when the government spends money, it is not a good idea. I wanted to amplify the issue of child care. People will recall in the last election the Conservative Party said it did not support the national child care program the Liberals were talking about. We now have all provinces and territories onside. We are investing in child care and the Conservatives opposed that.
When we think of child care, it does mean that the government is spending money. A February report that came out said the participation rate for women between 25 and 54 is at an all-time high of 85.7%. I suggest that is the highest in North America. At the end of the day, a child care program that provides $10-a-day child care, what the Conservative Party opposes, will ultimately provide more opportunities and enhance the lifestyles of all Canadians as a direct result. That is investing in Canadians.
We can talk about the $198 billion over the next 10 years, which is a genuine commitment to financing our health care system, not only for today, but for future generations. It shows the federal government does have a role to play in long-term care, mental health and other issues that Canadians are concerned about. They are reflected in this budget. People understand and appreciate that health care is at the core of what our Canadian identity is all about. The budget reflects that desire.
We can talk about the inflation rate. The Conservative Party always seems to want to forget that this is a worldwide inflation situation. In Canada, we are doing so much better than virtually all of our peer countries, including the United States. We know we can do more. That is why we have the grocery rebate. It is a one-time grocery rebate because we understand the difficulty that Canadians are going through.
I see my time has already expired. I would suggest to members opposite that all they need to do is understand the budget, and then I am sure they will rethink their position and vote in favour of it.
548 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:15:11 p.m.
- Watch
I know the hon. member was looking forward to his full 20 minutes.
However, it being 5:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the amendment now before the House.
The question is on the amendment.
Shall I dispense?
Some hon. members: No.
[Chair read text of amendment to House]
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:16:58 p.m.
- Watch
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the amendment be carried or carried on division, or wishes to request a recorded division, I invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/18/23 5:17:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we request a recorded division.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
