SoVote

Jun/5/23 9:05:55 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-47

Madam Speaker, I will give a very honest answer. Strangely enough, no one talks to me about dental care in my riding. As many people know, children in Quebec have some coverage. I know the Quebec government has extended coverage to include some people who need surgery but cannot have it because they need dental care before they have their surgery, so it has extended its coverage. The Quebec government made that decision without waiting for Ottawa to decide what it was going to do. Quite honestly, people are not talking to me about that. Seniors want to talk about the loss of their purchasing power, about having to make difficult choices between groceries, care, rent and leisure activities. They tell me they are feeling so squeezed financially that they have no room to manoeuvre after working their entire lives. Many seniors who are now 65 or 70 years old do not have a pension plan, even though they worked hard. I am thinking of people who worked as restaurant waitresses, or people who worked hard physically, in factories, for example, and did not have access to a collective agreement that guaranteed a pension plan. Today these people are worried and do not understand why the government did not think of them when drafting Bill C‑47.

218 words

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Jun/5/23 9:07:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be able to rise and ask a question of my colleague from Salaberry—Suroît. In her speech, she once again demonstrated her empathy and warmth for her colleagues by highlighting the work of our colleagues from Manicouagan and Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou. She also highlighted the work of our colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue, who will be leaving in the middle of the night tonight to drive long hours to his riding so he can support his constituents. That is quite admirable, and I congratulate him for that. A few seconds ago, in response to our NDP colleague's question, my colleague talked about the lack of measures to help seniors financially. The OAS has not been increased for seniors aged 65 to 74. This is an injustice that the Bloc Québécois has been denouncing for a long time. This class of seniors is not getting that assistance. These people are being deprived of this increase, but we believe they are entitled to it. What is more, when they have to go back to work so they can make ends meet and fight the rampant inflation we are seeing today, they are penalized, because their pension income is cut. The Bloc Québécois is really troubled by all this injustice. My colleague mentioned it briefly. I also wanted to ask her whether her constituents are approaching her about this. Mine are. Are people talking to her about the housing crisis and the fact that the government has done nothing in this budget to respond to the urgent housing crisis in Quebec?

285 words

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille

Jun/5/23 9:09:05 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-47

Madam Speaker, I would say to my colleague that seniors talk to me about housing, but they mostly talk to me about having the opportunity to work without being taxed, without changing four quarters for a dollar. The budget could have included measures to make seniors' work more valuable, to prevent them from losing their guaranteed income supplement or prevent them from paying too much in tax. Indeed, seniors perhaps would have wanted to work a bit to stay socially active and improve their living conditions, but there are no tax measures in Bill C‑47 to encourage seniors to go back to work.

105 words

Hon. Mike Lake (Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, CPC)

Jun/5/23 9:09:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it has been an interesting debate tonight. There were a couple of things that I heard from the Liberals and the NDP, one of which I expected to hear a lot about and one which I did not. What I did not expect was a couple of NDP members doing victory laps over the Alberta election results time and time again. As I watched the election results, I was struck by the fact that a Conservative government, having gone through a pandemic and a leadership change, unsurprisingly lost a couple of percentage points and formed a strong majority government. The NDP may want to celebrate the fact that it gained about nine percentage points at the expense of the Alberta party, but hopefully all of us can hope for the very best for the Danielle Smith government in Alberta, because that would be really good for Albertans across the board. I, for one, congratulate that government and hope that it succeeds on behalf of all Albertans over the next four years of its very strong mandate. What I expected to hear and have heard a lot of today, over and over again, is Liberal fearmongering about cuts that some potential Conservative government might threaten or initiate or whatever the case might be. It caused me to look back at history. It is important to look at where there have been cuts, because maybe we can learn from situations in the past when we have seen actual cuts. I had to go back a long way to find real cuts to health spending, social services spending, education spending and the transfers that fund those things. I went back to 1993, 1994 and 1995, when we saw cuts at the very start of a newly elected Liberal government, but then it was astonishing to see the cut that occurred in 1995-96. In the 1995-96 Liberal budget, $18.4 billion was spent on health care, social services and education, and then in 1996-97, the very next year, we went from $18.4 billion to $14.7 billion, a reduction of almost $4 billion in important transfers for health, social services, education and those kinds of things. The next year, 1997-98, we went from $14.7 billion to $12.5 billion in those transfers. I mention those figures because, as a result of the spending during the reign of a fiscally incompetent Trudeau government, a government that ran 14 deficits in 15 years while it was in power, we saw a crisis in energy, a crisis in housing and a crisis in inflation. I do not know if that sounds familiar to anybody around here. There were 14 deficits in 15 years in the 1970s and 1980s, and that led to these devastating cuts in 1996-97 and 1997-98, going from $18.4 billion for health, social services and education to $12.5 billion two years later. That was a Liberal government dealing with the devastating effects a generation after another Liberal government, a Trudeau government, had absolutely zero idea of what to do to run an economy. I fear that we are in the same boat now. We have heard Liberal speaker after Liberal speaker get up and ask how Conservatives can vote against this thing, and they will cherry-pick one thing, or be against this other thing. All of the things they talk about sound great, but I hearken back to the debate on May 1 in the House of Commons, and one comment, though there were many comments like this, struck me. The comment was in response to a question during question period from a Conservative member of Parliament. The Liberal finance minister, talking about the grocery rebate, said, “The grocery rebate is going to deliver support to 11 million low-income Canadians who need it.” How have we come to a place in 2023 when the finance minister is bragging about the fact that we have 11 million low-income Canadians who need support to buy groceries? How are we at that place in 2023? We look at the government's own budget documents and we take a look at the numbers in these documents and we think about those important transfers we are talking about and other programs. The Canada health transfer is set to be, in 2023-24, $49.4 billion. Do members know that the projected cost to service the debt will be in the same year? It is $43.9 billion, so because of the fiscal incompetence, and there is no other way to say it, of the government that has been in power for eight years, we are going to spend as much in interest as we are going to spend on health care in this country as a federal government. There is no other way to say it: That is absolute incompetence. When we take a look at the Liberal budget, one of the things that strike me is that they cut their deal with the NDP, and we hear the NDP talk about the different things that they were able to negotiate into this Liberal budget, but I will tell members one thing that was negotiated out of the Liberal budget. This is the state of where we are. We in this place oftentimes can agree that there are certain things that need our attention. We might have different ideas on how we address those things, but we can agree there are certain things that require attention. One thing that we all agreed on during the last election campaign was the fact that there is a mental health crisis in this country. We all had different platform ideas that we put forward. We ran an election. Canadians looked at those promises we made, because we make promises in election campaigns, and I would think Canadians would expect us to keep those promises. Admittedly, we made promises that were different from those of the Liberals and the NDP on mental health, but we all had substantial promises in there. The Liberals promised, on page 75 of their election platform, very clearly in a black-and-white five-year costed layout of their election platform, a $4.5-billion investment in mental health called the “Canada Mental Health Transfer”. That was something the Liberals promised. Every Liberal in this House went to doors during the election campaign and promised things to Canadians, many of whom would have been struggling with their mental health, especially as we were still in the midst of a pandemic. We were moving hopefully toward the end of it, but at that point in time people were obviously very significantly affected. Canadians struggling with their mental health had a Liberal member of Parliament or a Liberal candidate go to their door and promise they were going to spend $4.5 billion on a Canada mental health transfer. What happened next? Immediately the Liberals signed their deal with the NDP. No NDP member has actually yet taken credit for negotiating this out of their agreement, but clearly it must have been something that the NDP said. They must have said that they wanted to put NDP priorities on the agenda instead of the Canada mental health transfer. No one has talked about why that was negotiated out, but it is very clear that the Liberals have decided that this promise they made is no longer important and that there are other priorities, or, if it is still important to them, that they have come to a point where the fiscal situation is so bad that it was in their cabinet meetings. I do not know if the leader of the NDP is in the Liberal cabinet meetings or if the House leader of the NDP is, but the Liberals had to go into these cabinet meetings. They had to have conversations and say that things are really tough here and that they had decided to fund some program, one of the many programs they are listing, but they were no longer going to be able to afford this thing they promised on page 75 in their election platform. I do not know what those conversations looked like; all I know from taking a look at the budget we are debating tonight and from taking a look at the numbers we are talking about tonight is that we are going to be in a situation where Liberal governments and this coalition, however long it lasts, are going to be having conversations like that, because they have come to a point where life is just not only unaffordable for Canadians but unaffordable for the government. It becomes unsustainable at some point. It is just like when we were dealing with the results of Trudeau Liberal incompetence in the mid-nineties because the Trudeau government of the seventies and eighties had run up all of those deficits over all of those years. I fear we are going to be in the same situation moving forward. During questions and comments, I hope some Liberal will rise up and explain that maybe my concerns are somehow misplaced. Hopefully there will be some explanation and some understanding tonight of the situation we are in.

1548 words

Mr. Arif Virani (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, Export Promotion, Small Business and Economic Development, Lib.)

Jun/5/23 9:20:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what is important about what was outlined by the member opposite in his statement is that concerns about mental health are equally shared across all parties. However, what was not mentioned in the comments referenced by the member opposite is that part of what this budget includes is a formalization of an agreement that includes $190 billion in funding for health care and—

66 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jun/5/23 9:20:42 p.m.
Watch

One moment please. The hon. member's phone is right by the microphone and is causing problems for interpretation. I want to remind members to make sure their phones are not near the microphones or sitting on their desk vibrating while they are trying to make a speech. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

52 words

Mr. Arif Virani

Jun/5/23 9:20:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what I was saying is that the funding agreement with respect to health care is about $190 billion over the next 10 years. It is approximately $46 billion of new funding. One of the aspects of that funding includes certain conditional priorities, and one of those priorities is exactly what the member was referencing: access to timely, equitable and quality mental health, substance use and addiction services. I would just point that out, to flesh out the record in terms of the context of this debate. The member's party is steadfastly committed to voting against this budget. This budget includes $158.4 million over three years to support the implementation and operation of a 988 number that would be a suicide hotline in this country, which would serve the mental health needs of Canadians. Does the member seek to revise his voting position in that regard?

149 words

Hon. Mike Lake

Jun/5/23 9:21:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I can assure the member that, if he carves out that particular element and removes the $60 billion in new spending; if he removes the more than $40 billion in deficit spending, which this country cannot afford right now and which is driving up the cost of everything, and we see the devastating results of that; and if the member wants to go back and say that he thinks they should carve out the 988 suicide prevention hotline, I would be very happy to support it.

88 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Jun/5/23 9:22:21 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have to say I would be hesitant to accept that the Conservative Party would support that carve-out, only because of the shenanigans that the Conservatives have gotten up to in the last two days, during which they have not let anything be passed. They have not even let us have a debate on wildfires, which is so urgently needed. However, I want to agree with my colleague on one thing in his speech. I will give Stephen Harper credit for one thing when he was the prime minister of this country: He did tell us who he was, when he was going to cut things and how he was going to decimate the charitable sector, the foreign aid and all of those things. He made it very clear he was going to do those things, and then he did them. However, the current Conservative opposition party refuses to tell us what the Conservatives would cut. The member refuses to tell us which things in this budget he would cut. Is it dental care? Is it housing? Is it health care? Is it a futures economy? Which one of those things would the member cut?

198 words

Hon. Mike Lake

Jun/5/23 9:23:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, let me say first that, soon enough, the member will be able to refer to us as the Conservative government and she will not be spreading misinformation. I have heard the New Democrats talk about the Harper era during the whole debate tonight, and here are a couple of things from the Harper era. The member was wrong on most of her facts, but the reality is that, during the Harper era, there were a few things we did promise and deliver. We promised regular increases. In fact, almost every single year, we increased spending on the Canada health transfer by six per cent. Members would not know that by listening to Liberal talking points. Something that clearly differentiates the current Liberal government's approach from ours is that when we dealt with a global economic meltdown, a part of that, every step of the way, was a road map to get back to a balanced budget, which we delivered in 2015. We have not seen one since.

170 words

Ms. Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné (Terrebonne, BQ)

Jun/5/23 9:24:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will quickly ask my colleague my question. While the government is currently lending Trans Mountain $3 billion, which aligns with the Conservative Party's loyalties to fossil fuels, the Conservative Party has been droning on ad nauseam for months about the need for fiscal restraint. How does it manage to reconcile the two?

57 words

Hon. Mike Lake

Jun/5/23 9:25:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member and I probably have very different positions on oil and gas and on pipelines. However, one thing we agree on is that there was no need for the federal government to own the Trans Mountain pipeline. In our view, of course, the private sector should have been able to build that pipeline. Quite frankly, it is ridiculous not only that the government got itself into the situation where it had to buy a pipeline but also that the pipeline has gone tens of billions of dollars over budget, which is an absolute travesty.

98 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Jun/5/23 9:25:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, of course, it always a delight to stand in this place representing the incredible constituents of Edmonton Strathcona. This is the first day I have been in the House since the Alberta election, and I did want to send my congratulations to Rachel Notley. Of course, it was not the outcome we wanted, but I think it is important for all of us in this place to recognize the significant wins in Alberta. In Alberta, we elected the very first Black woman as an MLA. We elected the very first indigenous woman as an MLA. We elected members in Sherwood Park. We elected members in every seat in Edmonton and in so many more seats in Calgary. Almost every urban seat in Alberta went to the NDP, including seats that had been held by ministers and that flipped over to the NDP. It is something I think Rachel Notley, and all Albertans, should be extremely proud of. There are things on which we have more work to do. I am not very proud of the fact that Albertans elected a member who compared trans children to feces. I am not very proud that a Conservative with those views was elected. It is appalling and disgusting during Pride month. However, there is work to do, and we will continue to do that work. However, this is not actually why I am here tonight, but I did want to raise that, because, frankly, some of those things are indicative of the changing political landscape in Alberta and the belief of Albertans in the importance of taking care of each other, and I think that is very important. What we are actually here to talk about is the budget implementation act, and I want to talk a little bit about why this is so important and why I am supporting it. This is not a perfect piece of legislation. This is not a perfect budget. This is not the budget I would have written. However, I am so proud to be part of the New Democratic Party, which pushed for some of the things that are in this budget, and I am going to outline a few of those things. In Edmonton Strathcona and across the country, families are struggling with the cost of life, with affordability. We cannot go into grocery stores and communities and talk to people on their doorsteps without them telling us about how difficult this is, how challenging it is for them, how difficult it is buy food, to pay their rent, to find housing, to be able to pay for their lives and to be able to thrive in their communities. As a parliamentarian, my primary job is actually to make life better for Canadians and my constituents and to find ways to support them. I cannot tell members how proud I am that dental care is something that Canadians are going to have access to when the bill is passed, and not just for children, but for everyone under 18, people living with disabilities and seniors. Oh my goodness, seniors in this country will have access to dental care, which is something that should have been in place decades ago. However, I am just so proud that I get to be part of the New Democratic Party, which pushed for this happen in 2023. We have talked about the GST rebate in the House, which is that added help that so many families need. I will agree with other members who have raised this; I would like us to live in a country where that is not necessary, but right now, the reality is that there are Canadians who need that extra help, who need that extra piece to get them through. If we can provide that support to Canadians at this moment, when affordability is so challenging, why would we not do that? On urban, rural and northern indigenous housing, I learned so much from my colleague from Iqaluit, the member for Nunavut. She is such a champion in the House, and she is a person who speaks so strongly for her constituents. She has made it very clear that there is not enough money for the need in northern indigenous communities. However, I will say that this budget implementation act is important, and it is important that New Democrats recognize it and recognize that our job is going to be to continue to push the government to do more, continue to push the government to make sure that rural, urban and northern indigenous communities have the funding they need for adequate housing. We would not accept less in any other communities, and we should not accept it in indigenous communities. I am proud of what we have done for students. Do members know what I am really proud of? I am proud that there is legislation that will prevent scabs from being used by corporations. That is important. That is important for workers, so that workers know that they can actually work, that they can actually negotiate, that they can go to the negotiation table with their employers and get a fair deal. That is vital to workers. It is in the bill, and I am so proud of the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his work on making sure this happened. Of course, there are many things in this bill, but the other thing I am extremely proud of is the investment in a future-facing economy. The member for Timmins—James Bay has done so much work, but, more importantly, workers in Alberta have done so much work. Workers in Alberta have been calling for this investment in them. I have said this many times in this place. I come from a line of oil and gas workers. My dad was a trucker and my dad worked in the oil fields. He worked in Alaska and in Alberta. My brothers work in the oil and gas sector. My husband works in the oil and gas sector. I recognize what that sector has done for Canada. I also speak to people in my constituency. They want assurances that there is a future for them, for their children and for their families, and that there are going to be jobs for them, that there is going to be a place for them in a futures economy. If we do not have investment in Alberta, that is not going to happen. I am thrilled that this is here. I am thrilled that this is being led by Alberta workers. I will finish today by saying how ashamed I am of some other members of the House from Alberta, how ashamed I am that some of the members have done everything they can to stop the processes of this Parliament going forward. The leader of the official opposition has benefited from a publicly funded health and dental care plan for over 20 years. Every one of us in the House benefits from dental care and a health care plan, but the Leader of the Opposition started today by proclaiming that he will use every procedural trick in the book to stop hard-working families from accessing desperately needed dental care. That is shameful, when seniors, people living with disabilities and children, his children, have access to dental care, and when he has access to dental care. The 25 New Democrats in this place have done more for Canadians in this Parliament than the 115 Conservatives have. I would ask them to tell me one thing they have delivered for Canadians, one thing they have been able to deliver. All they do is come here and obstruct. I, for one, want to work to make this country better for Canadians. I want to make sure this world is better for everyone, so when I come to this place, I look around this room and think of who I can work with. How can I get things done? What can I do to make sure that life is better for my constituents? That is my job. That is why I come here. Every member of this 25-member caucus does that. That is why Canadians are getting dental care. That is why Canadians are getting housing support. That is why Canadians are getting the grocery rebate. It is not because the Conservatives are throwing shenanigans all over the place; it is not because they are making a mockery of Parliament. We are allowing things to get done, and I am so proud of that. We talked about Harper a lot tonight, and I will say again that he did tell people when he was going to cut things. He did tell us when he was going to destroy our social safety net. The current opposition refuses to tell us when it is going to do that. I will say it again: This bill is not perfect. There are things I would like to change in this bill, but there are more than enough things in this bill that are going to help Canadians, help with the affordability crisis and help people who are struggling in our country right now. I will come into this place every single day ready to work and to do more and more to get the help for Canadians, and I certainly hope the Conservatives stop their shenanigans and get on board.

1574 words

Mr. Arif Virani (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, Export Promotion, Small Business and Economic Development, Lib.)

Jun/5/23 9:36:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member opposite started her speech by acknowledging what just transpired with the provincial election in Alberta. I want to turn to that for a moment. She acknowledged some landmarks being achieved in terms of the first female, Black member of the provincial legislature in Alberta, which I believe is something she mentioned. That is worth applauding. I wanted to draw her attention to aspects of the budget. She outlined a lot of what is in the budget. There is a lot in there. Specifically, there are references to funding and supports to deal with some of the challenging divisions that we continue to see in Canadian society. The budget includes $25 million for supporting Black Canadian communities initiative, which is about empowering Black organizations. Another $25 million will go to supporting the anti-racism strategy and dealing with some of the pernicious issues that relate to anti-indigenous racism, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. In the wake of the almost two-year anniversary of the Afzaal family being killed in London, Ontario, could she comment on the equity initiatives in the budget and her position on them?

189 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

Jun/5/23 9:37:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, anything that we can do to help with some of those equity initiatives is very important. I have a bit of a concern. For example, one of the things brought forward in this budget is the recognition of the need for a national plan for murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. I would also say that the government has promised money since 2019 and has not followed through with spending. That is my biggest concern with the Liberal government. It has the ability to say the right things, but it does not do the hard work. It does not do the work necessary to implement things, to spend the money and to get the programs out to the people who need them the most. I feel that the role of the New Democratic Party is to hold the government's feet to the fire.

147 words

Mr. Greg McLean (Calgary Centre, CPC)

Jun/5/23 9:37:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I welcome my colleague back to the House after the time she spent in Alberta during the provincial election. Let me ask her something. She has thrown a whole bunch of shame around the House. At the same time, the government has presented a budget that is plunging Canada further into debt, inflation and uncertainty as far as what Canadians can expect their hard-earned dollars to buy going forward and how much they are going to pay in taxes. We also have to balance the fact that we are going to have to impose further taxes on the next generation. How does she balance the shame against the shame she is foisting upon the next generation?

119 words

Alberta

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Jun/5/23 9:38:29 p.m.
Watch

Before I give the floor back to the hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona, I will just remind the hon. member that we do not mention if people are or are not in the House, directly or indirectly. The hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona.

43 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

Jun/5/23 9:38:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, to be clear, I was only throwing shame at one party in the House of Commons. I was not passing it around equally. I have children; I have teenagers. One of the things I want desperately is for them to want to stay in Alberta. I want them to want to raise their families in Alberta. I want Alberta to have a strong economy, a strong health care system, a strong education system and a strong system that makes our communities thrive. Frankly, I think this budget does so much more to help people with affordability issues. It does so much more to help Canadians than the Conservatives asking the Speaker to read 900 amendments into the record today.

121 words

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille (Salaberry—Suroît, BQ)

Jun/5/23 9:39:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on her speech. Anyone can see how passionate she is and how much she cares about her constituents. I was also glad to hear her say that, even though the election in Alberta did not necessarily go the way she would have liked, she still respects the democracy that was expressed in Alberta. They elected a premier who, while not her choice, was nonetheless democratically elected by Albertans. That is good, because the Bloc Québécois believes that it is important to respect democracy, as well as the authority and jurisdiction of the Quebec National Assembly and the legislative assemblies of the other provinces. Alberta's democracy has spoken. I would like to ask my colleague a question. Governments express their priorities through the budget choices they make. I am having trouble understanding something, and I hope she can explain it to me. How can she support a budget that contains no measures to support seniors, no increase in the OAS benefits for seniors aged 65 and over? The government is creating two classes of seniors. By supporting the budget, my colleague is endorsing the idea that seniors under 75 do not need assistance.

205 words

Ms. Heather McPherson

Jun/5/23 9:40:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague's question is a good one. I would go back to what I said in my speech. This is not a perfect piece of legislation, and it is not what the New Democratic Party would have brought forward. However, when I look at seniors in my riding, I know how much it is going to help them to have dental care be part of our reality in Canada. I know how much it is going to help seniors to have investments in housing. Those things are going to help seniors in my riding deeply. It is impossible for me to turn my back on those seniors at this time.

113 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 206