SoVote

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

Apr/27/23 8:05:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that anybody on this side is saying that it is a bad deal. We want to know what the deal is. The government has invested $13 billion into Volkswagen, a foreign-owned company. We do not know the details of the arrangements that were made. If we are going to spend $13 billion of Canadian taxpayer money, at a minimum, we should know what that deal entails and what we are getting as a result of it. Members will have to excuse me for being a little cynical because the government made multi-million dollar investments in a vaccine factory that is now gone. There was a very public announcement made. We have to see the details to determine whether it is the right deal for Canadians. More importantly, they have to be open and transparent about it, which they are anything but on this deal.

152 words

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Apr/27/23 8:06:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. We have been serving together on the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics for some time now, and I tend to really value his judgment. I would like to ask him the following question. In his opinion, with all the experience he has, is this a good budget or a bad budget?

64 words

Mr. John Brassard

Apr/27/23 8:07:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his question. I tried to lay out, as best I could, the reasons I cannot support the budget. There are many of them, not the least of which is the carbon tax and the disproportionate effect it has on the people and the businesses I represent in Barrie—Innisfil. One of the things that is extremely concerning for me, which was not really in the budget, related to the Canada summer jobs program. We saw that cut by a third this year, yet we see contracts, to companies like McKinsey and others, to the tune of $21 billion in total contracts. Why are we taking away from the future and work experience that young people are getting to apply down the line, yet outsourcing and putting a priority on government contracts for friends and connected insiders of the Liberal Party? I am really disappointed in the Canada summer jobs program and the cut in funding. I know many of those people who would benefit, particular the kids, are really disappointed.

180 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)

Apr/27/23 8:08:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member and I agree that the current government bears a lot of responsibility for the state of the current housing market, which is the worst that it has ever been. I think we differ in some of the ways in which we say the government is responsible for that. I hear the Conservative leader talk a lot about how government spending is responsible for inflation in the housing market. As New Democrats, we look at housing and we see the role of massive private investment, corporate landlords that are gobbling up buildings with affordable units, superficially renovating them and jacking up the rent. We see real estate investment trusts doing the same. We see a lot of investor activity that is actually driving up prices in the real estate market. I do not see how government spending is playing a role. We know that, in fact, the government is not building enough non-market housing options, and we need to build more in order to address supply. Can we hear the Conservatives talk about private investment activity in the housing market, the role it is playing and the things the government can do to curtail that as a way of actually getting out of the housing crisis, or are they going to continue to talk about government spending as if that is what is driving the housing crisis when it is not?

238 words

Mr. John Brassard

Apr/27/23 8:09:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think the challenge in the question is we hear a lot of announcements about spending, but see very little in the way of actual builds. I have got a great example of that and it deals with the rapid housing initiative. The member for Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte and I sent a letter to the housing minister. There was a rapid housing initiative, a critical project in Barrie, that was supported by Redwood Park Communities, the City of Barrie, Barrie Police Service and the County of Simcoe, about renovating the Travelodge hotel and making it into affordable housing units. We supported this initiative. We did not even hear back from the Minister of Housing. I think the County of Simcoe heard back to say the application was being rejected. I do not know what the basis was, but that is an example of great announcements, but very bad and poor delivery.

156 words

Mr. Peter Fragiskatos (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue, Lib.)

Apr/27/23 8:10:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to join the debate tonight on the budget implementation act, BIA, as we always do around this time of year. First of all, let me simply say that budget 2023 is one that delivers for the country and for communities. We cannot talk about the BIA without talking about the budget. I will spend time tonight talking about climate change and how the government is responding to that threat. Rick Smith, the president of the Canadian Climate Institute, a respected organization on the environmental side, that is known across the country, said that this “is the most consequential budget in recent history for accelerating clean growth in Canada”. I could fill this speech with the responses of stakeholders right across the country but that really, I think, puts into sharp focus what the budget helps to advance. Certainly the BIA takes that vision and puts it into place in a number of different ways on the climate change side, as it must. It must because it is the central challenge of our time. We have just overcome the pandemic. We have not overcome it entirely, of course, but what we lived through was the challenge of the moment. The challenge of our time still remains climate change. It is a moral issue, it is a security issue and it is also an economic issue. In my time tonight, I want to focus on the economic aspect and relate it back to the region that I am from, southwestern Ontario and specifically the city of London. The budget, I think, stands out for a few different reasons. First of all, for me at least, it really stands out because it actually invites the private sector in as a partner, rather than keeping them out as some, maybe on the left, if I can just be general about it, have pushed for, not thinking that there is a role for the private sector. There is in fact a role for the private sector. We have to encourage that. We can encourage it through various policy mechanisms like the government has done in this budget. There is a 30% refundable tax credit, for example, that really is historic in this country. It does prompt an agenda that leads to industrialization on the green side. I do not think it is out of place now in democracies, including our own, to talk about a green industrial revolution that is taking shape in front of us. Things like this refundable tax credit that I just mentioned do help in that regard. It can be applied toward investing in new machinery that will be used in the manufacture of clean tech, that will also be used to process and recycle critical minerals. How blessed we are to be a power. I do not think it is out of place to use that word. We are a power when it comes to the issue and the question of critical minerals; lithium, cobalt, manganese, nickel and graphite. All of these are found in abundance in Canada. A friend of mine put it well the other day. He said that Canada has been blessed with natural resources: under the earth we have wonderful resources and above the earth, in terms of human potential and human talent; we ought to bring the two together. I think this budget allows for that. This is another crucial point: Accessing the credit will require companies to pay their workers a strong wage. I think that is absolutely vital if we are going to, as a government and as a country, put measures on the table that incent companies to get involved. It is quite lucrative, a 30% refundable tax credit. Then there is an onus on them to do right by their workers, at least in terms of ensuring good wages and good working conditions. This is, as the Minister of Labour himself put it, a worker's budget in many different ways, but this proves the point as well. In southwestern Ontario, the region I am proudly from, policies like this can help to add to the green transformation that is already taking shape. I point to the community of Ingersoll, just down the road from London, and CAMI, and the incredible work that is happening there to ensure electric vehicle production and delivery vehicles in particular that are being manufactured with the help of this government. It is employing people. It is adding to the economy and, as I say, it is something that speaks to the green transition that is taking shape in the region. Battery production in Windsor is a project that will unfold between LG Energy Solution and Stellantis. I want to commend my colleague, the MP for Windsor—Tecumseh, for all the work he did to help secure that investment. It was a number of months ago now, but it is still fresh in the minds of those in Windsor who saw an auto sector not collapse but certainly take an enormous hit and have devastating effects on the community of Windsor and the surrounding area. Something like this injects hope again. Of course we have the example that was announced last week. It was spoken about at length in this House, with merit. It is what happened in St. Thomas with the investment from Volkswagen. That is truly historic for the region certainly and for the country. Before talking about its significance, I want to thank those at the federal level and the provincial level for making this happen. We need to do all we can to keep up with what the Biden administration is doing, and the Inflation Reduction Act makes it absolutely necessary for governments to show an interest by putting money on the table to get companies to locate to their area and provide jobs through production. I give thanks to the Prime Minister; the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry; Premier Ford; Minister McNaughton, the minister of labour at the provincial level; Minister Fedeli, the minister responsible for economic development in Ontario; my colleague, the member of provincial parliament, Rob Flack; and the member of Parliament for Elgin—Middlesex—London, who did a great deal to advance this on behalf of her community. I thank Mayor Joe Preston and St. Thomas City Council as well. St. Thomas is just down the road from London and will certainly benefit. There are 3,000 direct jobs to be created when the plant opens in just a few years and up to 30,000 indirect jobs. Think of the construction possibilities there in a plant that will occupy a space the size of close to 400 football fields. Over a 30-year period, it is expected $200 billion in overall economic impact will be seen. This is crucial, and I will end on this point. In the 2000s, the London region and the wider southwestern Ontario region was devastated by plant closures. Ford in Talbotville, which is near Thomas; Electro-Motive Diesel in London; McCormick-Beta Brands, which produced candy; Kellogg's; Heinz in Leamington; Smucker in Dunnville and Dutton; and Lance Canada, which produced cookies in Cambridge, all closed. It was devastating. Thousands of jobs were lost. Families were not only impacted in so many situations, they were absolutely devastated. Social consequences including a rise in mental health challenges and addiction challenges followed. I cannot say enough about how harmful that was, but now we have hope, an opportunity to turn a corner, and we are doing exactly that. I am thankful for the opportunity to articulate the interests of my community tonight and the surrounding region. I look forward to questions on what I think is a great BIA and a great announcement in St. Thomas.

1304 words

Mr. Gérard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC)

Apr/27/23 8:18:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is always good when a member of Parliament talks about his riding on the national level and provides concrete examples. On the other hand, we need to recognize this budget that the member will support has no plan to get back to a balanced budget. We need to remember in 2015 this party was elected saying that there would be three small deficits, a $10-billion maximum and then a zero deficit in 2019. This promise was put aside; it was put in the garbage. Is the member concerned about the fact that we have deficits and debts that one day we will need to pay back? When does he think the government will pay it back? We are living beyond the budget that we have now.

130 words

Mr. Peter Fragiskatos

Apr/27/23 8:19:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for my colleague. However, we disagree on this issue. Canada's fiscal situation is a very important reality for the House and for our country. Canada right now, if we look at the G7 countries, has the lowest deficits, has the lowest debt, if we use the debt-to-GDP ratio as the key metric, which we should. The IMF is clear on that, that this is the key metric to look at. I would look back to previous Conservative governments which, far from balancing budgets, have only run up deficits and added to the debt. It has been a fiscally responsible approach and we will continue with this. We have a very proud record to look at.

127 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Apr/27/23 8:21:00 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, I would like to ask the hon. member, in the budget implementation act, what he has seen that invests in indigenous peoples.

23 words

Mr. Peter Fragiskatos

Apr/27/23 8:21:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have not had a very good chance to get to know the hon. member, but I know that she is held in very high regard by members throughout every party in the House. I have only heard good things about the committee work that she has contributed. I have to say that every question she has put forward, including this one, have been ones that are thoughtful. If one looks at the overall budget and looks at the BIA as well, they will see a government that continues the effort to advance the reconciliation agenda. We do so by looking at the partnership that exists between the federal government and indigenous communities, who are leading the way in so many different ways. In fact, one of the reasons that Volkswagen, I think, ended up making the decision to invest, as they did in St. Thomas, is the approach that the overall country and certainly this government have taken to reconciliation, one that puts partnership front and centre. Other democracies certainly had the ability to attract the investment, but might not be doing what Canada is doing on the reconciliation side. That is something that bears emphasis. There is so much in this budget that pushes the reconciliation agenda further and we need to continue with that.

219 words

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

Apr/27/23 8:22:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am happy that my hon. colleague raised the green investor revolution. I think those were the words he used. The example he provided was the investment that was recently made into the Volkswagen plant and what will happen in St. Thomas, which is very similar to the investments our government has made in Hamilton as it relates to ArcelorMittal Dofasco and the $400-million investment we have made to get them off coal and begin their process of making green steel. I know what that means to my community in terms of employment, tax assessment, all of the spin-offs that come with it, and, of course, there is the environmental benefit. I am wondering if he could comment on the same in terms of what that investment in St. Thomas means for his community.

138 words

Mr. Peter Fragiskatos

Apr/27/23 8:23:29 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from someone who understands his community very well. He served as a city councillor and knows what it means when an investment comes to a community and the spinoff effects that it can have. He mentioned the Dofasco case. I expect nothing but good things to come from this investment for local businesses in London that already have relied on automotive, as we see transitions from the current situation in terms of the combustion engine toward electric vehicles. Certainly, there will be new businesses that sprout up and existing ones that are able to tap in and be part of that supply chain, not to mention, of course, the workers, who will be able to work at Volkswagen. So many and London will benefit directly. I am so excited for what is ahead.

139 words

Mr. Tony Baldinelli (Niagara Falls, CPC)

Apr/27/23 8:24:31 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-47

Mr. Speaker, before budget 2023 was presented, our Conservative leader made three demands of it: one, that it end the war on work and lower taxes for workers; two, that it end inflationary deficits that are driving up the cost of goods; and three, that it remove gatekeepers to increase the building of homes in Canada. Sadly, none of these three Conservative demands were met, and for that reason I will not be supporting Bill C-47, the budget implementation act, 2023. Simply put, all the budget will do is drive up the cost of the goods and interest and taxes paid by the fine residents in my riding, in the communities of Fort Erie, Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake. Canadians are struggling because of this incompetent Liberal government, which has become addicted to overspending. Here are just a few quick statistics that will surprise those Canadians watching. Those who are watching should please make sure they are seated. I am not making this up. After eight years, this Liberal Prime Minister has added more debt than all other prime ministers combined. Yes, that is since Confederation in 1867. Canada's federal debt for the 2023-24 fiscal year is projected to reach $1.22 trillion. If that is not jaw dropping, get this: That federal Liberal debt counts for nearly $81,000 per household in Canada. Budget 2023 simply provides no path to balancing Canada's budget projections. The deficit for 2022-23 is up to $43 billion. That is only $6 billion less than what we will spend on health care this fiscal year. Even the government's own projections have changed since last November. In her fall economic statement, the Minister of Finance projected a $4.5-billion surplus for 2027-28, yet here we are six months later and this surplus has been completely erased. In its place, budget 2023 now projects a $14-billion deficit in 2027-28, with interest payments on our national debt reaching $50 billion. These depressing figures make it hard to be hopeful for future generations of Canadians. They also highlight the degree of fiscal mismanagement by this Liberal Prime Minister and his government. For millions of Canadians, it is even more challenging to live through. Many residents and families in my communities, especially seniors and new Canadians, are struggling mightily with the high cost of inflation on their shelter and groceries, and even higher federal taxes are being implemented. In fact, “Canada's Food Price Report 2023” predicts that a family of four will spend up to $1,065 more on food this year, which is $598 more than the $467 from the so-called grocery rebate they will receive. Members should not be fooled by the Liberal spin. This overhyped rebate is not actually a relief measure at all. It simply gives money back to Canadians that this government already clawed from them through its big tax hikes. This rebate will do nothing to solve the cost of living crisis. On top of that, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has recently shown that the carbon tax will cost the average family between $402 and $847 in 2023, even after the rebates. Further, it is only going to get worse in the near future. By 2030, carbon taxes could add 50¢ per litre to the price of gasoline. In addition to these fiscal troubles, I am also concerned about what is missing in budget 2023. There is zero mention of the critically important wine sector support program. This program was designed by Wine Growers Canada and adopted by Agriculture Canada as a trade legal program to protect Canadian wineries from having to pay the expensive excise tax. This program expired last summer, and Canadian wineries, including those in the Niagara region and in my communities of Niagara-on-the-Lake and Niagara Falls, badly need this program, or they risk potential job losses and closures. In last year's budget, the government showed that it would be receiving $390 million by now taxing our wine sector. Where are those funds going? Our grape growers and wineries deserve answers from the government which created this mess through its introduction of the escalator clause on alcohol in 2017. Do not even get me going on the negative impact the escalator clause is causing to our sector. However, this Liberal sleight of hand does not just apply to Canadian grapes and wine. It also touches upon the 2,800 tourism-related businesses and the 40,000 workers in the tourism sector in Niagara. In 2019, Niagara welcomed more than 13 million visitors and generated $2.4 billion in receipts as Canada's top leisure tourism destination. As many members of this place will know, this week is National Tourism Week and the theme is “Canada: Powered by Tourism”. If members were to examine this budget and the government's commitment to tourism, they would be hard pressed to see its recognition for a sector that at one time reached $105 billion nationwide and was responsible for one in every 11 jobs created in Canada. Throughout National Tourism Week, I have been meeting with many tourism stakeholders and receiving their feedback and reaction to budget 2023. In short, the Indigenous Tourism Association of Canada is disappointed in the 2023 budget and the empty promises, the lack of funding and the money it has cost to build the federal growth strategy. In fact, it has told me its members are still waiting for the millions of dollars in funding that was promised to them and identified by the government in last year's budget. I have also met with representatives of the Tourism Industry Association of Canada, who expressed their concerns that despite improvements over the last 12 months, tourism businesses continue to struggle financially and are carrying significant debt loads. There is also an increasing sense of impatience and concern from the industry by the lack of commitment from the government to provide a firm timeline to introduce the highly anticipated, long-awaited and overdue federal tourism growth strategy. I also want to note two concerns that I have flagged after reading budget 2023. My first concern is on the commitment of spending $50 million on Destination Canada over three years, starting in 2023-24, and yet there is no detail on how these funds are to be allocated. If members were to look at the government estimates, they would see the Liberals have committed $111 million to Destination Canada this fiscal year. Are any of the $50 million pledged by the government included in that budget? If so, it is a bit disappointing, considering that $156 million was spent last year to attract major international conventions, conferences and events to Canada. As well, what of the $108 million committed to the regional development agencies over three years starting in 2023-24 to support communities, small businesses and non-profit organizations in developing local tourism projects and events? Again the Liberals' sleight of hand is at work here. When we look at the line items provided in the budget for the three years, we see that the government only shows a total of $93 million being allocated. Where is the remaining $15 million? Is this money not being spent from last year's budget from the regional relief fund, or are some of those funds dedicated to indigenous tourism from last year now actually going to be counted for this year? It is not good enough for the Minister of Tourism to tell the people of Canada's travel and tourism industry that they should simply be happy they were included in this year's budget. The bar needs to be set higher, especially when it comes to discussing an industry that was disadvantaged for nearly three years by the COVID-19 pandemic and the federal restrictions such as ArriveCAN that were implemented. After eight years of this Liberal Prime Minister, the future of Canada's travel and tourism industry is at risk because of higher costs and taxes imposed by this reckless and expensive Liberal government. It is for those reasons and more that I will be voting against this legislation.

1374 words

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

Apr/27/23 8:33:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was very impressed with the recent announcement that we made for funding for the Great Lakes action plan. It was $420 million to assist with cleaning up the Great Lakes. As a member whose riding borders the shoreline of Lake Ontario, I know how important that investment is in terms of cleaning the environment and cleaning the lakes. That is in large part due to my friend and colleague from Niagara Centre who worked very hard over many years to make that investment happen. I certainly took into consideration some of the constructive criticism the member provided as it relates to the budget, but can I ask his opinion in terms of what would be considered a historic announcement? He is from the vicinity there, the region of Niagara. I know his constituents enjoy Lake Ontario and probably some of the other Great Lakes. What are his thoughts on that investment? Could he support something like that?

160 words

Mr. Tony Baldinelli

Apr/27/23 8:34:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague's questions about the work that the colleague from Niagara Centre has been doing. However, the member for Niagara Centre has been working on that for eight years. Only now, and after pressure from the United States that it was going to stop funding certain aspects of that money that is included in that $420 million, has this government finally realized it needed to act. In fact, the government and its bureaucrats are still fighting with regard to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission in effectively transferring it over from the Department of Fisheries to the Department of Global Affairs. Why is it taking two years for that to happen? That needs to be rectified, and rectified now.

124 words

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

Apr/27/23 8:35:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals believe the budget will balance itself, and the Conservatives believe they can pump out so much oil into the atmosphere that the climate will balance itself. I want to ask my hon. colleague about the huge subsidies going into the TMX pipeline. Joe Biden has said that within nine years, 67% of all vehicles in the United States will be electric. That is going to have a huge impact on creating stranded assets. TMX costs over $30 billion right now, but here is the kicker: In order to be viable, the money gets paid back in toll charges for each barrel of oil shipped, and the Liberals have limited the cost to any oil company to 22% of the cost. That means for every barrel of oil shipped, 78% of the cost will be subsidized by the Canadian taxpayer. Given the massive profits big oil is making, why are Canadians being told they will pay 78% of every barrel of raw bitumen shipped through that pipeline?

170 words

Mr. Tony Baldinelli

Apr/27/23 8:36:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned U.S. President Biden. The largest thing the government had to respond to was the Inflation Reduction Act tabled in the United States. We are talking $390 billion over 10 years. Let me note some of the comments we received when I was at the international trade committee on what it takes to respond to that. Catherine Cobden, the president and CEO of the Canadian Steel Producers Association, and Meg Gingrich, with the United Steelworkers union, said the IRA was a game-changer. In fact, it provided a double advantage to those in the United States because it did not have a carbon tax attached to it that companies in Canada now have to pay. The actions the government has taken are still insufficient because those industries still have to pay that tax. In fact, Meg Gingrich, with the United Steelworkers union, was advocating that the carbon tax not be increased.

156 words

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

Apr/27/23 8:37:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is wonderful to see a member of Parliament who knows his riding well and who makes everything about his riding, which is really about wine and tourism. From what I can see, he is right. The carbon tax raises the cost for people to drive to Niagara and visit the wineries. In this particular BIA, the government is raising the cost of security at airports, so the average airport ticket will be higher. There is a lack of investment because the government is pulling out from the wine sector, and there is the extra excise tax. If there is no more investment in wineries, there is less tourism and fewer places for people to go. Can the member bring this home and talk about exactly why this particular budget fails on so many of those fronts?

139 words

Mr. Tony Baldinelli

Apr/27/23 8:38:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the government, through the excise tax, placed a new tax on our Canadian grape and wine sector. In fact, it showed in last year's budget that it would be generating $390 million because of this new tax. What happened? Because of its escalator clause, we were forced to pay this tax. It promised a compensation program, a replacement program, but that replacement program of two years and $166 million has now ended. Where are the funds going that it is collecting? They should be going to our grape and wine sector.

94 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC)

Apr/27/23 8:39:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is always a deep honour to rise and speak in this place. There is something uniting Canadians right now, and it is not a good thing. It is this emotion, this sense, this pulse that is kind of humming through Canadians. The beat goes like this: spend more, get less; spend more, get less. It is at the heart of family disagreements. It is at the heart of people feeling hopelessness. It is spend more, get less; spend more, get less. I have to tell members that when I read through the bill we are debating tonight, it reads, “spend more, get less; spend more, get less”. I know so many families in my riding that feel this day in and day out. They are living what is in this bill. They are living that increased thump of anxiety with their expenses climbing, as they are spending more and getting less day in and day out. It is this black feeling of despair. They are looking to us in this place to end the cycle, and it has to start here with this bill. This bill spends more and gets less, and we have to stop it. I know there are so many people of all political stripes in this place who care deeply about the issues that affect Canadians, but we also have to look at the track record. If anybody came to us and said, “I want a bunch of money, and I am going to spend more, but you are going to get less,” we would say, “No, you cannot do that. You need a better plan. You cannot spend more and get less.” However, that is what the government has done for so many years. We have given it so many chances, but it has spent more and we have gotten less. On housing, the government has spent so much money, and we have gotten so much less. Canadians are spending double on rent and double on their mortgage, and there is no big increase in affordable housing stock. We cannot afford to keep spending more and getting less housing when housing is at the core of so many of the social crises facing our country. Without affordable housing, people fall into crime, they fall into addiction and they fall into that thump of anxiety: Where am I going to live? How am I going to pay the bills? It is spend more, get less. On firearms violence, we are spending a lot more. We are buying back a bunch of firearms. I do not see violence going down. I see gang violence going up. We are spending more; we are getting less. We are spending a lot more money on the media and not getting more journalists investigating the things we need to see in this place. We are getting fewer journalists, less freedom and less transparency. On so many things, in every area, it is spend more, get less; spend more, get less. Then what happens? We get more inflation. Our debt goes up and we have to pay the cost on that debt. Then what happens to Canadians as we in this place keep trusting managers who have failed to get more while spending less? When we spend more and get less here with managers who have not figured this out, we get fewer government services, fewer new Canadians' applications being processed, less service on the phone with the CRA, fewer passports and the biggest government strike in two generations. We are spending more and getting less. Then what happens? What Canadians see, because of that inflationary pressure and because of that debt, is higher taxes and more anxiety when people are trying to figure out if they will be able to pay to fill up their car. We all care about climate change. We all, in this country, want to do our part. However, if we keep spending more on things that are not lowering our greenhouse gas emissions and are not even measuring them, we are spending more and getting less climate action. I do not have an LRT in my riding. There are 50,000 people in my riding who would love to take the train and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, but they are spending more and getting less, over and over. For so many things, like car payments, we are spending more and getting less. On education, young Canadians are spending more and getting less. We are spending more on debt and getting less. On labour, I went out for dinner last week to a pub in my riding, and while I was waiting for a tow truck, the server, the only one in the entire restaurant, said she issued 40 T4s last year because she could not get labour. She is spending more, getting less; spending more, getting less. We have to stop it. I know there are partisan differences in this place. I know there are. I know we all want to solve problems differently in different ways. I know in our hearts that we understand our role, and there are times when the government needs to step in and deliver services. However, we cannot keep spending more and getting less, because we are mortgaging Canadians' futures when Canadians have to spend more and get less today. Let us think about a young Canadian doing that. How are they going to care for their parents 20 years from now, who have never been able to save for their retirement? I am having that conversation with my kids right now. I am having a conversation with my parents. When we are spending more and getting less, we are spending more and getting less not just now but for the future. That is what we are doing in this country, in this place. We have not stopped and said the management here is not working. The other thing that concerns me is that the government is doing a lot of things to try to distract from the fact that it has not gotten its team together to crack down on spending more and getting less. It is distracting Canadians. I was reading some of the coverage on the labour strike happening right now. A couple of the ministers walked out and told Canadians not to expect to get their passports because of the labour strike. The buck stops with them. They spent more and are getting less labour. They spent more and we are getting fewer services. However, they pointed the fault not at themselves but at their employees, who are also spending more and getting less. That is why they are striking. We need to be standing up for every worker in Canada in the private sector and public sector, every Canadian. When we keep spending more and getting less, we are not doing our jobs here. We are not holding the government to account and saying that we can do better. We cannot let it keep dividing us with these sorts of tactics. They are not productive. Again, everybody in this place has a responsibility to do that. There are some people who are spending less and getting more, and that is a big problem when everyone else is spending more and getting less. That is why it is so important for us to hold the Prime Minister to account when he has big ethics breaches. He has had some pretty big ones that show a big lack of judgment. When everyone else is spending more and getting less, he should not be spending more of our tax dollars and getting more for himself personally. I have a big problem with that, and so do many other people in my community, because it says that the government is not serious, from the top down, on fixing the structural problems causing us to spend more and get less. We can feel the anxiety from Canadians. For that reason, I implore my colleagues here not to support this bill. We need to make the government go back to the drawing board. The NDP cannot allow the government, a failed management team, to keep spending more and getting less.

1379 words