SoVote

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

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

Mr. Charlie Angus

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

Give us somebody besides Pierre.

5 words

Mr. Charlie Angus

Apr/27/23 8:55:07 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I certainly would never unmute myself deliberately to intervene in someone else's statement, but I was so excited to be part of that conversation that I did not notice I had pressed the unmute button, so I just want everyone to know that I did not do that deliberately. However, if I were to do it deliberately, I would let you know that I did it deliberately and take responsibility for it, so I want to take responsibility for not taking responsibility.

92 words

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/27/23 8:55:32 p.m.
Watch

I appreciate the clarification from the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay. It always makes it exciting on these long evenings. Continuing debate, the hon. member for Essex.

29 words

Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC)

Apr/27/23 8:55:41 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-47 Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, as always, it is an honour to stand in this place to represent the great folks of Essex. We are here this evening to speak to Bill C-47, the budget implementation act. We have heard a lot of discussion, and I have been listening keenly to both sides of the aisle, as to what truly is the direction for Canada and the path forward to sustainability and success. While I was drafting out my talking points today, I got thinking about local examples. The first one I am going to start with is a young woman from Essex County who goes to school at St. Clair College. She has a part-time job and lives at home with her parents. She drives back and forth about 30 minutes to school. Her part-time job is at a veterinary clinic, and she wants to be a veterinarian. Her parents have paid into RESPs along the way. I found out this morning from this young lady that she has to pay $942 this year in income tax. She makes under $15,000 in her part-time job to pay for some of her schooling. I guess the question is this: How is that even possible in Canada? We talk about affordable housing. We continue to talk about making things easier for Canadian families. How can a young woman who is 20 years old, who goes to school full time and has a part-time job, have to pay $942 in taxes and be expected to save any money at all for a home going forward? Saturday morning I had breakfast with the mayor of Kingsville in a local greasy spoon that serves one of the greatest breakfasts in Essex County. We met the owners of the restaurant. The amazing woman told me that they have lost about 85% of their senior customers because they can no longer afford to eat out. Then she went on to cry as she told me that she was in a local Zehrs, which is a grocery store, and ran into a senior who was trying to figure out what she was going to eat that night because she was looking at Kraft Dinner. Then we look at this budget, and we are supposed to celebrate a $234 one-time payment per person. Last night I went to the local grocery store here in Ottawa and bought half a bag of groceries for $36, that was just for myself, so this one-time payment might be great for one month, yet the government wants to celebrate it. I want to speak about the 2023 federal budget submission of the Windsor-Essex Chamber of Commerce. I will go through it quickly. The first point it makes is with respect to the employment insurance rate freeze. It stated: the bill for these emergency programs is being unfairly placed on businesses. Businesses have for years been concerned with the fact that employers pay an additional 40% on-top of matching the employee contributions. The $0.05 increase per $100 of earned income means that employers are paying even more. The additional $0.05 increase to take effect in 2024 and 2025 means that employers are going to be bearing the burden over years for programs not beneficiary to them. It speaks about the capital cost allowance for vehicles, stating: The current amount of $30,000 is well short of the current average vehicle price in Canada, which is approximately $54,000 for a new vehicle and $36,000 for a used vehicle. This low limit prevents businesses from properly being able to account for the depreciation of the asset, which is the primary goal of the CCA. They talk about allowing international students to participate in the Canada summer jobs program. In my riding of Essex, we got about $720,000 less this year for the Canada summer jobs program. There are a lot of folks have benefited from that program who are not too sure if they are going to be able to keep their doors open, such as those at the Kiwanis camp down in my area. They talk about the delay of the CEBA loan repayment over one year. They talk about bringing in a new workforce and increasing the pace of immigration, which is something that Conservatives have been calling for and talking about for a very long time. There are the non-Canadian housing purchasing ban, immigration with accreditation and covering transition costs. We hear an awful lot about housing in this House, ironically. For that young woman I was talking about, or perhaps a young man who is working full-time who cannot find a home, and if he can find a home, he cannot afford it, the government loves to pound the drum that it is doing so much for housing. The problem is that the government cannot even plant a tree, so maybe the problem is the lumber to not build the homes. Nine in 10 young people do not believe they will be able to afford a home, and that is unacceptable. When I ran for this place in 2019, I said that I would do my darndest to ensure that I leave the world a better place than I found it. I am the eternal optimist, and today I stand here to say that I am a bit of a pessimist. Because of the failures of the government, it is certainly not in a better place in 2023 than it was in 2019. With respect to skilled labour, the government has been, again, pounding the drum. With respect to the Volkswagen plant, it is fantastic. In housing, this is excellent and, quite frankly, a great investment. It is wonderful, as are the five and a half billion-dollar battery plant in Windsor and the Gordie Howe International Bridge. However, there is something really interesting about this when we talk about all these investments. By the way, regarding the Volkswagen plant, they talk about 3,000 workers. The truth of the matter is, that it is probably closer to 1,000, but in the event that it is 3,000, that would be great. Here is what is really ironic. Where are the skilled trades people going to come from? If the government truly cared about skilled trades, why did it not take my private member's bill, Bill C-241, and put it into this budget? It would have been done overnight, and then we would have people who are mobilized across Canada. I want to talk really quickly about the doctor in Michigan. Dr. Amster lives in Michigan, and he has 1,200 patients at his family practice in Amherstburg, which is in my riding. His current C10 work permit expired on March 28, and nobody will give him a renewed work permit. Tomorrow morning, I am very excited to host grade 11 and grade 12 students of Cardinal Carter, where I went to high school. What do I tell them? How do I explain to them that what we are doing here is fighting for their future when the budget, quite frankly, falls so short for them?

1202 words

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

Apr/27/23 9:05:30 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-46

Mr. Speaker, as members likely will detect, there are a number of flaws in the member's comments. The one that comes to mind is that he started off by talking about the grocery rebate, and he is being critical because it is not giving enough. The Conservative Party supported the passage of Bill C-46. Bill C-46 ensures, through legislation, that we will be able to give that grocery rebate. To the very best of my knowledge, not one Conservative MP came to the government saying that we should be increasing the rebate amount. The Conservatives had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to have their support for the rebate. In fact, one of the reasons that particular clause is in the budget debate is that we did not know we could even get the Conservatives to agree. We are grateful for that. If the member believes it is not enough, why did not one Conservative MP came over to make the suggestion to increase the grocery rebate?

170 words

Mr. Chris Lewis

Apr/27/23 9:06:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will answer a question with a question: Is that question good enough for the senior standing in a Zehrs grocery store crying because she cannot figure out what healthy food she can eat? If the member thinks that a one-time payment of $284 is sustainable, then that is pretty darn disgusting. Our seniors deserve more than this.

61 words

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)

Apr/27/23 9:07:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was just reflecting on some of the comments that the member for Essex made about the importance of a skilled workforce, and I could not help but recall that when I worked for the Manitoba government, Manitoba had the provincial nominee program, which was a very successful program and worked very well to attract skilled workers to Manitoba. At the time I was there, that program was on track to start bringing in over 10,000 skilled immigrants every year to the province of Manitoba, but the Harper government put an arbitrary cap of 5,000 on those who could come under that program. It was puzzling at the time. I wonder if the member has a sense of the deficit of skilled workers in Manitoba today because of the decision of that government then.

138 words

Mr. Chris Lewis

Apr/27/23 9:08:04 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, it has honestly been really good to work with the New Democratic Party on trades. Of course, NDP members did support Bill C-241, so they understand it, unlike all but one member of the Liberal Party. I have been across Canada, from the east coast to the west coast and everywhere in between, and do I ever know that there is a major deficit of labour. I do not think that there is any one of the 338 members in the House who would disagree with me on that front. However, it is really unfortunate that when we have major hangups in the immigration system, all these skilled trades that are coming through are being backlogged, put into a file and not being dealt with to support our industries and businesses. It goes back to the government. My question for the member would be this: If it is that detrimental, and if NDP members have all the answers, why do they continue to prop up the Liberals?

170 words

Mr. Philip Lawrence (Northumberland—Peterborough South, CPC)

Apr/27/23 9:09:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's speech, and it was great. Also, I must say that his mother is a very good cook, so a shout-out to Helen out there. We have the GST rebate, which the Liberals call, in a gimmicky way, the “grocery rebate”, but is not the real solution to making life more affordable getting control of this government's out-of-control spending, because the more this government spends, the more life gets unaffordable for Canadians?

85 words

Mr. Chris Lewis

Apr/27/23 9:09:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague, and I am sure mom is watching tonight. She makes excellent chocolate chip cookies. This is all about, and can only be about, a vision for the future. Everything we do today in the House has to ensure that life is more affordable and that spending is reined in. However, that same spending that we are doing is enabling and allowing our young men and women in the workforce to go forward to start their own lives.

84 words