SoVote

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

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

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

Apr/27/23 8:49:11 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I totally disagree with the member across the way. She can say, “spending more, getting less” and try to make a tune out of it all she wants. The reality is quite the opposite. We are spending more, yes, billions and billions more, but we are also getting results. She gives the impression that spending the billions of dollars on dental care, and seeing that for 250,000 children under the age of 12, is not a result. Those are results. When we spent billions of dollars in child care, and we got all provinces and territories signing on and supporting the program, and therefore providing $10-a-day day care, reducing the costs for parents and ensuring that there are higher wages for child care workers, those are results. When we talk about investing the billions of dollars of additional money into health care, one is seeing tangible results. Premiers are going to be able to provide better health care services as a direct result of spending more. I think she has got the wrong tune. We are spending more and getting real results, something that Stephen Harper was never able to do.

198 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner

Apr/27/23 8:50:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this government has spent a lot on climate. Our greenhouse gas emissions are going up. We do not have substitute goods for high-carbon products and practices. We are not meeting our climate targets. They are not even measuring results of the program. On housing, we do not have affordable housing stock. On health care, people are waiting in emergency rooms. Everybody feels that tune, and they have got to stop trying to deceive Canadians.

77 words

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

Apr/27/23 8:50:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, well, yes, there is spending more and getting less. There is spending more and getting less at the gas pump. That is Imperial Oil. That is Shell. There is spending more and getting less at the grocery store. That is Loblaws. That is Empire. That is Metro. There is spending more and getting less with one's mortgage payment. That is CIBC, RBC and TD. I appreciate the member's concern on this issue. I just think that her arguments are misplaced. It is capitalism. It is corporate greed. If we start taking that on, we will get results for people.

103 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner

Apr/27/23 8:51:29 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have questions about Canada's grocery oligopoly. I do. However, the government has racked up so much debt. That money has caused an inflationary crisis, including food increases. With regard to energy, of course we need to address climate change. While we do that, why are we lining the pockets of autocratic countries? Why are we not investing in our own energy security? It is just that mindset that deflects away from the decisions that those parties have made in a supply and confidence agreement and how that affects real Canadians. It is just pinning it on striking labour workers, somebody's vaccination status, what their gender is, or corporate or whatever. The buck stops with them. They are in a coalition agreement, and they have a plan that spends more and gets less. It has got to stop.

142 words

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

Apr/27/23 8:52:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I certainly enjoyed the member's technique of punching her fist in her palm to keep time with her frustration. I often do that with the sound of my head banging on my desk as I listen to conspiracies, slogans and MPs who get up to read something for the first time because one of their staffers wrote it and they do not get the words right. I congratulate the member for being able to speak on her feet and think independently at times, although I do not always agree with her. I would like to go to her question about the Treasury Board president. There is the Nick Cave song that starts: Where is Mona?She's long gone The Treasury Board president said she released a public letter. That is not how one negotiates a financial agreement. She seems to think that this public letter would work. We have to get people back to work. These are workers who are getting hammered by inflation. I would like to ask my hon. colleague what she thinks we need to do to get the Treasury Board president to do her job.

193 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner

Apr/27/23 8:53:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, oh, boy, I agree. They have got to get back to the table. The government also has to stop trying to trial balloon things, saying that this strike is the union's fault, because what that does, and what it is trying to do, is pit public sector workers against private sector workers and against everyone. We have to unite as a country. There are a lot of people who do not want us to be united, and the government cannot be doing that. Yes, it has to fix this mess that it created. It has got to have a little more compassion. To my colleague, and I know that he and I have had long chats before, but I would just ask him this: Why is he propping up this government? It is not the jam of the NDP. It is not the jam of the NDP 20 years ago—

154 words

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/27/23 8:54:55 p.m.
Watch

I need to remind members who are on Zoom to keep their mikes off when it is not their turn to speak. As much as we want to have—

30 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner

Apr/27/23 8:54:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that was a bit of a hot mike for my colleague. We have got to be compassionate for Canadians and feel what they feel. We have got to stop spending more and giving them less.

37 words