SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 203

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 31, 2023 02:00PM
  • May/31/23 2:34:39 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will do one better than a former CSIS agent. Current leadership across our intelligence agencies and across the public service continues to say that the best way to move forward is not with a public inquiry, which would have to happen behind closed doors. Many who testified at committees expressed that perspective. To remove it from the political realm, we asked an unimpeachable man of integrity, a former governor general selected by Stephen Harper, to look into these matters deeply and to make a determination as to whether a public inquiry was the right mechanism. He said—
101 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/23 7:26:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-35 
Madam Speaker, what a pleasure it is to rise and speak to such important legislation. I suggest that what we are talking about this evening is historical legislation. If we take a look at it from the perspective of the Canada Health Act, the Canada Health Act has ensured that we have the health care system we have today. That is the way I look at Bill C-35. Bill C-35 is a very powerful statement. It is a statement to all Canadians, no matter where they live from coast to coast to coast, that says the government recognizes child care is of the utmost importance. Having a national program will make a difference in a very real and tangible way. Bill C-35 would put into place an act to ensure early learning and child care is there not only today but for future generations. It ensures that the federal government recognizes that it has a very important role to play. Not only will it be providing money, but there will be a higher sense of public accountability and transparency. It will ensure there is an affordability element to child care, no matter where one happens to live in Canada. This is something that I believe will make a positive difference, and we have already seen some early results. When the minister talked about the bill an hour or so ago, she talked about the number and percentage of women in the workforce today. There are record numbers in North America. We have more women entering into the workforce than we ever have. That is going to continue to grow. We know that, because we can look at the province of Quebec to see how successful its program has been. We have taken what has happened in the the province of Quebec and amplified it to apply across the country. Everyone wins. I do not quite understand the Conservative Party's position. It was long ago when we attempted to do this before. That would have been 20 years ago. Unfortunately, the first thing the Harper government did was rip up the idea, the agreements and the thoughts on this. As a result, it set back a generation or two of people who would have received good-quality child care, not to mention what I suspect would have been better wages and resources for child care workers. Because there was no legislative component to this, Stephen Harper had a very easy time destroying it. Let us flash back to just a couple of years ago, when there were 338 Conservative candidates running around in the federal election. What was the Conservative Party saying then? We did not have full agreement from all the provinces at that time, but even at that point, less than two years ago, the federal Conservative Party was saying that it did not support this and that it would also rip it up. If we contrast the Conservatives with us, it is night and day. They do not support affordable, quality child care. What we have done since the election is accomplish an agreement with all of the provinces and territories, along with indigenous communities. That means provincial and territorial parties that are not only Liberal. They are Conservative and NDP. When I say “Conservative” I mean Progressive Conservative. I should qualify that because the current Conservative Party is a very far right Conservative Party. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, the member who is laughing understands exactly what I am saying. One only needs to read her comments. I think it is a positive thing that we have been encouraged by the Conservative Party to bring in this legislation. However, from my personal perspective, even if the Conservative Party was supporting the concept of affordable, quality child care, I would still be advocating for legislation of this nature because it is good legislation. If the Conservative Party was not so far to the right, I would be advocating for it, but with today's Conservative Party, it even becomes more important to have this legislation. I listened to the shadow minister. We do not call them critics; we call them shadow ministers. It is kind of scary when we stop to think about how the Conservatives are going to vote on this legislation. If we listen to the critic, we would think they are going to be voting against it. I look at that, as I know many of my colleagues do, and ask who they are actually listening to. Obviously it is not their constituents. Instead, they try to give a false impression that this is broken. They then go on to talk about all the day care and child care problems, being very critical of the provinces, which have the responsibility of providing child care systems. I wonder if they have the support of the provinces to rip up things of this nature that we are proposing. I wonder if the provinces are aware of just how critical the Conservative Party of Canada is in regard to the performance of provincial governments across this country and those in the territories, because that is who its members are criticizing. We finally have a federal government, a national government, that has a vision of progress, of moving Canada forward on child care, yet we have a Conservative Party that has an attitude of “No, not here in Canada”. It does not want money being spent, which we hear constantly coming from the Conservative Party. Yes, there is a cost to this. I recognize there is a cost going into the billions of dollars, and I think that is what offends Conservative Party members at the national level. However, let me suggest that if they open their eyes and try to get a better understanding of both the social and economic impact of a progressive policy of this nature, maybe they will do one of their traditional flip-flops, support the legislation and go against what they campaigned about on this issue. We all know the flip-flop they have taken on the price on pollution. Here is another good flip-flop for them, but a flip-flop in a positive way, where they would be supporting a national child care program. That would be encouraging to see the Conservative Party do. Let us think of the economic advantage. We would have more people in the workforce. We would be making a more equal playing field. Many more women would be able to plan a career and not need to worry about the cost of day care, child care or early learning. These are the advantages. When they get into the workforce, they will be paying taxes, taxes that in all likelihood they might not have been paying because they did not have affordable child care. It is healthier for the economy. There are parents who have their children in $10-a-day child care. We talk about other issues in Canada, things like inflation. This is helping families today in a very real and tangible way by putting thousands of dollars in their pockets, yet the Conservatives do not like the idea. They need to really start thinking about how society would benefit. It is not just the family who would benefit; it is everyone. All of us benefit when we have programs of this nature. Bill C-35, in essence, ensures we will continue to have a national child care program and a national commitment to financing and contributing to the care of children. That is a good thing. I hope the Conservatives will flip-flop on this issue and support it. I see the member is already standing to ask a question. I hope she will give a commitment to support the legislation. That is the question I would pose to her. An hon. member: Bring it home.
1325 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/23 10:58:28 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-35 
Madam Speaker, I was just reading a report done by CCPA called The Harper Record. It says: Giving financial incentives to businesses to create spaces has been tried before and failed. It was such bad policy that even members of the minister's hand-picked advisory group raised objections and was roundly criticized when the government's policy folks conducted cross-country consultations on how it could be made to work. The report goes on to say, “The fallout from Harper's child care policy will be felt for years to come. Federal transfers specifically designated for early learning and child care were reduced by almost 37% in 2007-08...In 2006, only 19.3% of children five and under had access to...child care”. The NDP and my colleague, the member for Winnipeg Centre, had pushed the government and drove the agenda to get $10-a-day child care nationally. This bill before us would address some elements of accountability with reporting, so we can have—
170 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/23 11:27:58 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-35 
Madam Speaker, that question clearly exposed the massive philosophical gulf between Conservatives and New Democrats. New Democrats think that child care decisions should be made by a 10- to 18-person council, with no democratic legitimacy, appointed by the minister. She has confidence the minister is going to choose the best experts. I think the best experts are parents. We should let parents be their own child care advisory council for their own kids and make their own decisions. We should focus on empowering parents to make such decisions. The member is now heckling me about the Harper plan. The Harper plan was fantastic. We gave money directly to parents, and parents had more resources— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
121 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/23 11:30:00 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-35 
Madam Speaker, of course a Conservative would get up and say that Stephen Harper's plan was by far the best, because it was, as they clap right now, the plan that literally sent cheques to millionaires. Congratulations to the member opposite. He is absolutely right. That is a program that Stephen Harper would love, and I can definitely understand why the Conservative Party of Canada would get behind that program.
71 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border