SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 186 - Apr/27/23

Apr/27/23 6:45:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, they should be proposing something. When I look at the section on housing in the budget, I do not see anything new. I see nothing new for the regions of Quebec, nothing new for the Lower St. Lawrence, nothing new for the Gaspé. I would certainly like to support a national housing strategy, but the money has to be made available. It is not just major cities that are affected. Housing, affordable housing and social housing, is not going to get built by re-announcing amounts of money that have already been announced. There is a need for housing across Canada. The need is great in Quebec and in the regions. However, the money is not there, so it is difficult to support it.

128 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Apr/27/23 6:46:04 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, I am glad that the member mentioned indigenous issues. I am wondering if she could share her thoughts on a concern I have that this budget did not do enough for indigenous housing. While it says that $4 billion over seven years will go to urban, rural and northern indigenous housing, that will not start until 2024 and will go over seven years. What are her thoughts on that policy?

71 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud

Apr/27/23 6:46:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her extremely important question. I have two first nations communities in my riding, so I am well aware of the issues. I know that they too are facing housing challenges. This is nothing new. It has been an issue for a long time. We keep bringing it to the attention of the federal government, which throws us a few crumbs in the hope that they will solve all the problems. It is definitely not enough. As my colleague mentioned, we will not see any of that money before 2024. I think the government could be more proactive in addressing the country's housing needs, in both indigenous and non-indigenous communities. The need is great. We are seeing it more and more. The government could certainly have done more with this budget.

139 words

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, BQ)

Apr/27/23 6:47:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague to keep talking to us about the environment, in connection with the budget.

22 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud

Apr/27/23 6:47:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for giving me the opportunity to continue talking about that, because it is extremely interesting. I was talking about how many megatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions Canada produces. It was 670 megatonnes in 2021. Our levels are obviously lower than they were in 2005, which is good, but it is important to remember that, when we say we want to reduce our greenhouse emissions by 40% or 45% by 2030, it is compared to the number for that base year. When we look at the overall picture right now, we have only reduced our emissions by 8.4%. We have a long way to go, and 2030 is not that far off. We often hear the Minister of Environment and Climate Change say that we are a quarter of the way there and that everything is going well. When we are at 8.4% and we are trying to reach a target of 45%, I think it is a bit of an exaggeration to say that we are a quarter of the way there, particularly when this budget is focusing on technologies that have not yet proven to be effective. It is being said that these technologies will be ready in 10 years and that they will start giving results in 10 years. By then, 2030 will have come and gone. What are we actually relying on to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions? I think that investing in these technologies is an underhanded way of continuing to give public funds to oil and gas companies. We are telling them to continue to produce but to pollute less as they do so.

280 words

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Apr/27/23 6:49:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is with great enthusiasm that I join the debate this evening to talk about the budget implementation act and go over some of the comments I have heard today about the budget. I know the member for Edmonton Griesbach talked about Mouseland and Tommy Douglas, and I am going to get to some of those points later on. First off, on the budget, one of the main reasons I will not be able to support this budget because the extra spending is going to cost the average family an extra $4,300 a year, all on more spending. Conservatives, as an opposition party, laid out some of the things that we would like to see in this budget, so that we could go forward and work together. One was no new spending. I think that the inflationary fire has burned out of control for long enough, so we had asked, before the budget came forward, for no new spending. Another thing we had asked for as Conservatives in opposition was no new taxes. Although members may have heard this before, I ask the members opposite on the Liberal side to please not increase the carbon tax on April 1. On this side of the House, we have heard from all of our constituents that the carbon tax is adding to the price of groceries, home heating, driving one's vehicle to and from work, and driving one's kids to hockey. We have three kids. I know our van is costing more to fill up when we are going to hockey for our three kids. It is just adding to the pressures of a family trying to make their budget last to the end of the month. That was not listened to either. Another thing we had asked for, and our leader put this out in his policy declaration when he was going out for leader, was a two-for-one. If we are going to bring in new spending, perhaps we can find savings elsewhere so that we do not have to increase the deficit. I remember this, and I have said it in a few of my speeches. I remember during COVID the Prime Minister went on national TV and said that the government was going to go into debt so Canadians did not have to. I do not know if he knows how economics work, but there is no other way for the government to then get out of debt than by taking more money from the Canadians who earn it by going to work. There is no government in the history of the world that has ever earned a dollar. It only gets a dollar by taking it from someone else who has earned that dollar. My friends across the way and our friends in the NDP do not seem to understand that this is how governments get money. My friend from Lakeland said it very well. This government does not have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem. We have seen it for years and years. I can remember back to the 2015 campaign, and my friend from Winnipeg probably can as well, when they said, “We will balance that budget in 2019.” I remember that. That was a campaign promise in 2015 by the Liberals. I also remember another promise by the Liberals in the 2019 campaign. They, hand over heart, said that they would never increase the carbon tax over $50 a tonne. I remember that. We talked to people in Saskatchewan. We have not wanted a carbon tax ever, but some people who were going to support the Liberals said that, no, they are not going to increase it past $50 a tonne. I remember having these conversations and thinking we will see. The 2021 campaign rolls around and, lo and behold, they believed it, but now we see that it is at $70 a tonne. It is affecting people's everyday lives now. In 2030, if the Liberals are still in government, that is going to be 41¢ a litre on gas, when the carbon tax gets to $170 a tonne. I do not know about many people, and I do not know if the members opposite have talked to their constituents, but I think that the price of gas has increased substantially over the last few years. I do not know anyone who can afford an extra 41¢ a litre when they fill their vehicle, whether they are going to work or taking their kids to sports or driving to school. I know that where I went to school at the University of Regina, kids drove back and forth from out of town, from Moose Jaw, from Indian Head. They drove in. That is going to be a thing of the past because I do not know a lot of students who can afford an extra 41¢ a litre on their gas. There is something else that I wanted to touch on. I listened to the member for Edmonton Griesbach. He talked about the late, great Tommy Douglas, and there are some great things there. I see the member is coming into the chamber, and I know that he talked about—

881 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/27/23 6:54:28 p.m.
Watch

This is a very simple rule that has existed for a while. There should be no mention of who is in the House or who is not. The hon. member for Regina—Lewvan.

34 words

Mr. Warren Steinley

Apr/27/23 6:54:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am excited that more people are here to listen to the second part of Mouseland. Tommy Douglas said that mice should vote for mice because if mice vote for cats, cats only govern cats. In 2010, there was a Mouseland part two. It was delivered by Premier Brad Wall in a 2010 convention speech. I would like to read Mouseland part two for my NDP colleagues. Brad Wall stated: It seems a great change had taken place in this magical location known as Mouseland. For many years, life in Mouseland had been going downhill because mice aren't exactly the most productive species in the animal kingdom. They don't really produce anything except droplets. What they do is wreck things that others have produced, like the time they got into the potatoes, spud coal. Now, for years, all the other animals had been sick and tired of the mice wrecking everything so a lot of them just left to Alberta. There was one mouse ... who had been around for a long time ... a long, long time. He was one of the mice who had made life difficult for the other animals, he was one of the mice who had wrecked the potatoes. But one day he even got sick of the other mice, so he packed up and moved to the land next door [known as Alberta]. The funny thing is when he got there, he told everyone, he wasn't really a mouse. He put on fake cat ears and fake cat whiskers and told everyone he was a cat. Now, no one there really believed him but there weren't very many mice in the new land next door. Not enough to wreck anything anyways so they decided to let him stay. Now, as I was saying, after he left, a great change took place in Mouseland. The cats and the other animals had finally had enough of the mice wrecking everything and told the mice they weren't allowed to run things anymore. In fact, the place wasn't even called Mouseland. They discovered, that place called Saskatchewan. All of the animals liked this new Saskatchewan with the mice no longer chewing up all the food, there was more food for everyone. The animals stopped moving away. In fact, new animals started moving in from near and far and for the first time that anyone could remember Saskatchewan was growing. Lots of animals who came liked to dig holes in the ground and as it turned out there was buried treasure everywhere, oil, potash and uranium, and so there were lots of new jobs digging holes and lots of new jobs for all the other animals doing things they liked to do. Things were even better jobs for the mice. There was more cheese for the mice, so they didn't have to chew on other animal potatoes anymore. Things were going so well in the new Mouseland called Saskatchewan that the mouse who had moved next door decided that he wanted to move back home [and take over]. So, he took off his fake cat ears and fake cat whiskers and he came back and announced that he was going to be the new leader [but the changes that had happened in Mouseland caused people to not want to go back to the way thing used to be. They considered it] ...the bad old days of the mice wrecking everything and driving the other animals away. Even the mice didn't seem too sure [they wanted to go back to the way Mouseland was. They weren't sure they wanted a fake cat from next door, Alberta, to come back and lead them]... Some of the mice liked the new Saskatchewan with its new abundance of cheese, some of the other mice didn't really trust him. They weren't so sure he really even was a mouse anymore. [After all, those fake ears looked pretty real.] ...as a result, the new mouse who now looked like a cat didn't have many mice [supporting him]... everything had changed, the old Mouseland and had changed to the new Saskatchewan and one day soon, all the animals would make a great choice. Did they want to follow the mouse who looked like a cat going back to the old Mouseland days or did they want to keep moving forward in the new Saskatchewan and that chapter has yet to be written. Premier Wall gave this speech in 2010. What happened is in 2016 and 2021, he decided to move forward with a new Saskatchewan.

771 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport, Lib.)

Apr/27/23 6:59:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I enjoyed storytime. I hope my colleagues enjoyed storytime. The whole time, I was searching for a reference to the budget, to the implementation act, to renewable energy or to any of the challenges that are being faced by the great province of Saskatchewan. As my colleague knows, my father used to live in Saskatchewan. I visited often. We have some mutual friends over there. There is a lot in budget 2023 for Saskatchewan, particularly because prairie provinces are leading on sustainable energy, electrification, and extraction of critical minerals for batteries and for many other technologies. We have an opportunity to build a clean, prosperous and sustainable made-in-Canada economy for ourselves, the future of Canada, our children and our grandchildren. Can the member opposite elaborate, perhaps with another story, on how many great things there are in budget 2023 for Saskatchewan?

145 words

Mr. Warren Steinley

Apr/27/23 7:00:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would take that comment and question as coming from a mouse because they believe that the government is always the answer to fix everything. Saskatchewan was doing much better before the Liberals took power. They brought policies forward to try and make, in the government's eyes, Saskatchewan fall behind. We were doing fine with oil and gas extraction. We were doing fine with carbon capture. In fact, we have the ingenuity to move forward. The thing is that sometimes the government does not understand that it just needs to get out of the way so we can unleash our economic potential.

105 words

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

Apr/27/23 7:01:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I certainly think that speech should be watched by all Canadians. We are in very serious times. We are dealing with a war in Ukraine that has upended inflation. We are dealing with a climate crisis. I find it telling that the Conservatives are telling us toxic nursery rhymes about how much they hate mice and how much the world would be better if we all hated mice. This is a party that believes the world is flat and does not believe there is a climate crisis. This is a party that believes that its leader is entitled to a chef and groundskeeper, that is paid for by the taxpayer, and he lives in a mansion, when he has a house that is only half an hour away from Ottawa. What I find concerning is that the Conservatives want to present these toxic fairytales, rather than talk about the serious issues we need to address in this nation and whether this budget is doing that. There are some great things in this budget. There are real problems in the budget, but if the member is happy reading nursery rhymes, then he is probably very happy in the Conservative caucus.

201 words

Mr. Warren Steinley

Apr/27/23 7:02:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is the problem with the NDP. The old NDP does not exist anymore. His party is the one that started storytime with Mouseland and he thought it was really funny when his colleague talked about Mouseland and Tommy Douglas. The NDP has always been the party of “do what we say, not what we do”. That is why it is drippingly ironic that he talks down on something that his party member did. This is a very interesting time to be an NDP member because he will talk about how the Liberals are leaving people behind, but then that member will support the Prime Minister and his party every step of the way. The NDP will do anything to make sure the Prime Minister stays in power.

132 words

Douglas

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)

Apr/27/23 7:03:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend the member for Regina—Lewvan on having done a great job reading somebody else's speech. It is always interesting when people choose to use the words of others, rather than their own words in this place. I thought maybe the member for Regina, of all places, might have a better handle on the Mouseland story, in which, of course, the mice are working people. I take his criticisms of mice running government as being quite demonstrative of the Conservative position over the years in respect of working people and whether they should be allowed to control their own destiny, which is the point of the Mouseland story. I know he talked a lot about inflation. He talked about fat cats. Perhaps he will know that 25% of every inflation dollar spent by Canadians in this economy has gone not just to the oil and gas industry but to the profits of the oil and gas industry. That has not been shared with workers. That $18 billion in extra expenses by Canadians has gone to the oil and gas sector, and only $650 million of it actually went into the pockets of workers. What does he think about that?

207 words

Mr. Warren Steinley

Apr/27/23 7:04:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, obviously the member did not listen to the actual story I told. It is always an honour to bring forward the words of someone like former premier Wall into this House because he was a great premier. The fact is that the Mouseland that we talked about was about bringing people together. They always want to divide and conquer, and that is not what we are going to—

71 words

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

Apr/27/23 7:04:52 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-35

Madam Speaker, I am going to bring the discussion back to the budget. This budget is certainly not as strong a budget as one that an NDP government would table, but I am supportive of portions of it, and those portions are very important to Canadians. Because of the NDP, this budget includes structural, social supports that will increase the well-being of Canadians forever. It will strengthen the health and safety of Canadians with the biggest investment in health care in over 50 years. I am talking about the dental care program. NDP members of the House are proud of their work to bring a universal dental care program to Canadians. Already, the Canada dental benefit has helped more than 240,000 children in this country. In 2023, by the end of this year, coverage will start for uninsured Canadians under 18, persons with disabilities and seniors who have a family income of less than $90,000. This is important. There were 700 people in my riding in the month of March alone asking for more information about this dental program. Seniors who were in my office just a few weeks ago talked about the pain they have been in for over two years and could not afford to have a root canal and dental surgery. This is a very important program for Canadians. I would note that the largest day surgery for kids in this country is for the treatment of cavities. It is just not fair. If there was preventative care, we would have a lot fewer surgeries, and we would have a lot fewer children having to go through those surgeries at such a young age. Second, there are the investments in health care in this budget, which we can thank the NDP for. There is an immediate $2 billion Canada health care transfer to address immediate pressures on our health care system. Canadians want this. We are an aging population. Canadians are worried whether they are going to be able to access care. I am from Port Moody—Coquitlam, Anmore and Belcarra in B.C., and residents are in my office many times asking about health care and finding a doctor. People are concerned. They want to know that when they need health care, it is there for them. I am happy to see those transfers here, and this budget is important for those transfers. I want to take a moment to talk about the feminist lens on this budget and how important health care is to women in this country. It underpins the economy and has for a very long time. We talk about the fact that nursing is a very gendered profession. We know that long-term care and child care are very gendered professions. I also want to take a moment for a shout-out to my NDP colleague for Winnipeg Centre who is fighting right now for decent wages for health care workers as we work through Bill C-35. It is because of their gender that women have been underpaid, undervalued and under-respected in the health care system in this country, and it continues today. As well, I will take a moment here to shout out to immigrant women who underpin the economy and have underpinned the economy in the health care sector and in child care. They are undervalued, underpaid and under-respected. I really hope that this government will take some action on making sure that there is status for all of these immigrant women who have come here to support the Canadian economy, but have not had access to the benefits and status that they deserve. We would be supporting this budget on those things alone, which are so important. However, I want to add the piece on murdered and missing indigenous women and girls, again, to put that gender lens on this very important budget. This budget makes important investments in implementing the national action plan to end the tragedy of missing and murdered indigenous women and girls, including increased funding for indigenous-led projects, for safer communities, helping families access information about their missing or murdered loved ones, ensuring that families and survivors are at the centre of implementing the national action plan, and establishing a standing federal, provincial, territorial indigenous table on murdered and missing indigenous women and girls, which will provide a specific forum to take action on areas of shared roles and responsibilities, including prioritizing a red dress alert system. This was also an initiative of the NDP member for Winnipeg Centre. This budget should be supported because we need to support indigenous communities and murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. I will mention today on this budget that the member for Nunavut was in the House yesterday talking about the need for more investments for indigenous, Métis and Inuit women in this country. It is not acceptable that this budget has not prioritized more housing. For all of these investments, the NDP will be supporting the budget, but it does not mean that we are satisfied with it. Despite NDP wins, the Liberals continue to drag their heels when it comes to making other important investments. I refer again to indigenous housing. There is a serious lack of investment in housing for indigenous communities in this budget. The Liberals have not tackled the housing crisis at all in this budget. They have not taken it seriously. It has been mentioned in this House that reforming employment insurance and modernizing the system is missing in this budget, as is truly addressing disability poverty. As the critic for disability inclusion, I will share this message with the government as I am standing in the House today. It was devastating news to the disability community that the Canada disability benefit did not have financial supports for them in this budget. As I talk about what is missing in the budget, I want to revisit the feminist lens on employment insurance. Employment insurance reform is not in this budget. When employment insurance was first visualized and imagined, the employment rate for women was less than 50%. Employment insurance was built for men; it was not built for women. Now employment rates for men and women are the same in this country, yet women continue to be discriminated against through the system, and it is just not acceptable that a feminist government would not have brought modernization to employment insurance. I want to go to poverty and disability poverty. We know that almost a million people in this country with a disability are living in poverty. I know there is a one-time grocery rebate in the bill, and the Liberals talk about how it is something that the disability community should be able to rest on. That is not true. It is not acceptable. A one-time grocery rebate is not a structural change in addressing poverty in this country, but the Canada disability benefit is. The government needs to get serious about that income support and reducing poverty among persons with disabilities in this country. We see it happening in our communities every day. More people have to go to food banks. There was a study out recently on women with disabilities and their ability to earn an income in this country. They are disproportionately marginalized from adequate employment because of their gender and the intersection with their disability. The government needs to get serious about the Canada disability benefit and lifting people with disabilities out of poverty. I am going to close with the biggest gaping hole in this budget, which is housing. I have mentioned the investments in indigenous housing, but as my colleague, the member for Nunavut, has said over and again in this House, it is only a tiny chip on what we need in this country with respect to housing. I would say, as the government is sitting here, that housing also needs infrastructure. We have this market-driven lens on housing that is all about how many units of housing we can build and ensuring that the developers are making money. I understand we need a housing supply in this country, but we need infrastructure investments as well so we can get adequate housing built all across the country. I will close by saying that Canadians will benefit from this budget. The NDP will be supporting it, but let us get real about housing and indigenous housing in this country.

1417 words

Mr. Chad Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, Lib.)

Apr/27/23 7:14:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I really appreciate the member's focus and concentration on housing. I would have to differ, though. The national housing strategy has given weighted importance to our affordable housing programs and providers. Many of the programs are specifically for municipalities and municipal non-profits, as well as non-profit housing providers. There is the rapid housing initiative, the housing accelerator fund, the national co-investment fund, and the list goes on, in terms of the programs we have provided to assist non-profit housing providers with social housing units. I really appreciate the member's advocacy on this issue. Does she not see the benefit in many of the programs that her own riding and her community have benefited from as part of that? I think we are at year five or six at this point now. Those investments have been made all over Canada, specifically for non-profit housing providers. Has she not seen those benefits in her own riding and her own community?

167 words

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo

Apr/27/23 7:15:50 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is probably not a good question to ask me, because no, I have not. Even though there has been investment in my community, we have lost housing at a rate of 15 to one. Affordable housing has come down, and luxury condos have gone up. Up to 20% of those condos are sitting empty, and our homelessness rate is rising, our mental health impacts are rising and our opioid overdoses are rising. We cannot sit in this House saying we are doing A, B and C, when the results are not happening on the ground, and I will say that the National Housing Council just came forward with a report that said the national housing strategy is not working.

122 words

Mr. Dan Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC)

Apr/27/23 7:16:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, being from B.C., I know there are many issues the member and I share in many areas. I get lots of people asking about health care. I have asked another member of her caucus the following question, and being from B.C., I think it is important to hear her answer. John Horgan, the former premier, was actually the chair of the Council of the Federation. All the premiers had asked the government specifically not to fund new, expensive, untested and, in some cases, duplicated programs, like dental care, and instead to focus on health care and giving provinces what they need. We saw for the longest time the government did not give any of those things. How does the member square this expansion of a program, when B.C. already has a program for low-income seniors as well as for children under the age of 12? Why has she said that, instead of funding those important programs, now we have bigger government in Ottawa doing duplicative things that do not actually help people in her riding?

181 words

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo

Apr/27/23 7:17:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am not sure, but the member might have missed when I mentioned that just in the month of March, 700 people reached out to my office for information about the Canada dental program. Dental care is health care, and we need to keep people out of the hospital when they can have dental care to proactively look after their health. In the month of March, 700 people in my riding reached out for additional information, in need of dental care.

83 words

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, BQ)

Apr/27/23 7:18:23 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-47

Madam Speaker, currently, when big emitters pay the carbon tax, the money is put aside and is used to finance green projects in the province where the tax was collected. If oil companies do not propose any green projects, they lose that money at the end of the year. This approach encourages them to move quickly. With Bill C-47, the money would not be lost at the end of the year. Oil companies would keep the money for future projects, which would give them no incentive to hurry to implement green projects that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. What does my colleague think about that?

106 words