SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 218 - Jun/21/23

Mr. Blaine Calkins (Red Deer—Lacombe, CPC)

Jun/21/23 8:57:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, could my valued colleague from Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke just remind Canadians why a carbon tax is a tax on everything, why 61¢ a litre for the cost of fuel is going to make life even more unaffordable? Would she remind them that the policies of the current government are a disaster for inflation and that we need to get back to balanced budgets?

68 words

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

Jun/21/23 8:58:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the cost of fuel impacts the cost of everything. In fact, it takes fuel to manufacture fertilizer. Then they have to use energy to force the fertilizer, spread it across and ship it to the different farmers. Then it costs money to spread the fertilizer. It costs energy that comes from people's money to plant the crops. It takes energy to harvest the crops, ship the crops to the processors, process the crops into food and ship the food to stores. All this costs energy. When the Liberals drive up the taxes on energy, Canadians starve.

100 words

Mr. Michael Coteau (Don Valley East, Lib.)

Jun/21/23 8:59:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an honour, as always, to be in the House of Commons to speak to this opposition day motion. I will be sharing my time with the member for Richmond Centre. What the House will be hearing from for the next 10 minutes is pretty much a direct contrast to what we heard for the last 15 minutes from the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke. I am pleased to speak to this motion, because this allows me to reinforce the objective of the 2023 budget that just recently passed. We know that the Conservatives voted against that budget because they saw that the investments we were making were the opposite of the direction they feel this country should be going in. They see it as a waste of money. I have always seen this budget as an investment in people. I am proud to stand in the House of Commons and speak to this motion, because it allows me to speak about the direction of the Liberal government. There is no question that we have a challenge in Canada. I think we could all agree, on all sides of the House. There is an affordability challenge. Anywhere one goes in the country, many people are struggling. We see it every single day. If one were to go into my community, one would see that people are challenged. We agree on that. What we disagree on is how to respond to that challenge. When we can take resources and invest in children, families, health care, education, seniors and the people of Ontario, it is the best investment we could make. When we invest in our economy and infrastructure, and when we support the belief that polluting is not good for our environment, and therefore not good for our economy, these are the types of things that help define who I am and what brought me to this House. I have been elected for 20 years. It was not all in this House; I have only been here for two years. I was elected to the school board, and I was elected to the Ontario legislature. I have seen the two different responses happen over and over again. One could be at the local municipal level and see Conservative ideology jump in, of course at the Ontario legislature and here. This is nothing new to me. The Conservative game plan is always the same. If they are in opposition, they attack the way in which government is spending. They will criticize and do something to portray that there is a better way going forward, that they could offer a better solution to the challenges that we have. However, we can just look to the past and remember Harper's time in government. When we went through one of the worst economic challenges, back in 2008 and 2009, we saw how the Conservatives responded, and we paid a huge price for it. On that side of the House, people forget that Stephen Harper ran the largest deficit in the history of this country. I do not know if Conservatives remember that. Maybe they have forgotten. Stephen Harper ran the largest deficit in the history of Canada, up until COVID. This is 100% true. One just has to check the records. It seems that Conservatives have forgotten this. During that time, when we were going through our worst economic challenge, back in 2008-09, the Conservatives responded by cutting, not investing. I was around. I was at the school board and then the Ontario legislature, and I saw the cuts that the House made. I will give a couple of examples. They made the largest single cuts in the history of this country for literacy and basic skills. It is hard to imagine. When 42% of our country was struggling with some form of literacy back in 2008-09, the Harper government decided to make the largest cuts ever to literacy and basic skills. Even the statistics by the Conference Board of Canada, a decade ago, said that a 1% increase in literacy and basic skills was like a 2.5% increase in our economy. I do not think there is anyone in the House who could deny the correlations among literacy, education and economic output. No one could deny that. However, the Conservatives made cuts. Let us talk about immigration. In 2011-12, during that challenging time, the Harper government decided to cut health care services to immigrants. Anyone in Canada knows that part of our economic success in this country has been from bringing newcomers into the country, having them working in the economy and boosting the economy. It is what has made Canada great since its inception. However, during those economically challenging times, the former Harper government decided to do what was unthinkable: cut health care services to immigrants and refugees. That was the response by a Conservative government. Our approach has always been different. Liberals in this country invest in education. They invest in the economy. They invest in people. I want to remind anyone who is watching that, during COVID, the Conservatives voted against investing in people. Think of their rhetoric today. They do not want to invest in people. They would rather take the approach of cutting taxes and giving money to big corporations to generate more wealth and more economy. It is based on 1978 Reagan economics, the 1980 Reaganomics ideology, which is so old. It does not work. We know it does not work, because we have seen that. We have seen it fail in the United States and we have seen it fail in Canada. What we decided to do as Liberals is to invest in people. We decided to make sure the young people in our country today have the type of investments necessary so that, when they get older, they can actually contribute to the economy. I brought this up during debate on the fall economic statement. We heard the rhetoric from the other side of the House, rhetoric that said we should not invest in dental care for children. We heard rhetoric around not investing in child care. How about a $500 rebate to help with the affordability issue of housing or different types of incentives that help Canadians, like the grocery rebate? People were debating these, saying they are not good. I will tell members that when people are down, when people are feeling like they are struggling to get by, what they need is investment so they can go ahead and build themselves up to contribute to our great economy. I want to talk about some of the changes we have seen over the last few years. Since COVID, we have seen an increase of almost 900,000 jobs in this country. Correct me if I am wrong, but something must be working if 900,000 jobs have been created since the pandemic. I will go from saying 900,000 to almost a million jobs. If almost a million jobs have been created in that time period, how can anyone on that side of the House argue that the strategy that has been put in place is not working? With a million folks working in the economy, and taking down interest levels from 8.5% to 4.4%, we are doing the best compared to other jurisdictions around the world. Almost a million jobs and cutting the inflation rate by half suggests that something is working, and our economy, the numbers, say everything. The Conservatives will twist things; it is part of the strategy they use. Conservatives will use any tool necessary to divide Canadians in order to seize power. Rather than running on ideas, beliefs and approaches, what Conservatives do is to pick and poke at anything that is frustrating a person out there in Canada, and they leverage it in such a way as to divide Canadians. Once they divide Canadians, they use that to get back into power without offering any solutions. I challenge the Conservatives' approach to building our economy. I will always stand here as a Liberal and speak about how we can invest in people, in this country and in families, and support our seniors and students. I believe without question that the approach we have taken by investing in people will be the approach that will help build Canada up to even stronger economic outputs in the future.

1410 words

Mr. Marty Morantz (Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, CPC)

Jun/21/23 9:09:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's speech. He said something to the effect that Liberals do not cut anything, that they never cut anything and they always make investments. I wonder if he is aware of the most draconian budget in Canadian history, by a government that did not just cut program spending but actually also cut health transfers and education transfers to provinces. It was delivered on February 27, 1995, by then finance minister Paul Martin. I wonder if he could advise us whether he is aware of those cuts.

95 words

Mr. Michael Coteau

Jun/21/23 9:09:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, if one goes out there and speaks to the average Canadian, they will tell us they appreciate the work of Jean Chrétien. He is probably one of the most loved prime ministers we have had in this country, so he must have been doing something right. It is wrong for the member to take one specific incident and apply it to everything Liberals do. I can take hundreds of incidents when Conservatives have made cuts and made them part of the way they actually run government. That is just their ideology; it is what their approach has always been, and I do not think it is something the member can actually use as a comparable.

119 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Jun/21/23 9:10:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, today I stood with the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, and its members talked about the emergency we find ourselves in in Canada. We are short 15,000 volunteer firefighters. They have seen a rapid decline, while the government has been in power, of 29% of volunteer firefighters. We know they are dealing with inflation. They have not seen an increase in their firefighter tax credit since 2013, which is a decade. They are asking for $30 million to be spread out over the 90,000 firefighters each year. We are talking about less than a 5% increase in overall firefighting costs since 2013. We know public servants have seen it, and we have seen it with the private sector. Liberals continue to find billions of dollars to finance corporations. Does he not agree the government should be increasing the volunteer firefighter tax credit to help with recruitment, respect for firefighters and retention of firefighters?

157 words

Mr. Michael Coteau

Jun/21/23 9:11:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am happy the member opposite brought up firefighters and acknowledged their value in our country, our provinces and our municipalities. In fact, I was proud to work with firefighters for many years to look for ways to increase the number of types of cancer for which firefighters or their families would be able to claim some type of compensation should a firefighter be afflicted with cancer. I know there are members on this side of the House who have been championing these issues. Firefighters in Canada are valuable, and without question, as a government and as members, we should continue to look for ways to support them and invest in them.

114 words

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Jun/21/23 9:12:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I really appreciate that the member for Don Valley East spoke about needed investments. I know he is a supporter of investing in people with disabilities. We are on the verge of seeing Bill C-22 receive royal assent, but we still do not have any money in the budget to deliver the Canada disability benefit. Can he speak about what he can be doing over the coming months to ensure that in next year's budget we see a historic investment in Canadians with disabilities being lifted out of poverty through the Canada disability benefit?

98 words

Mr. Michael Coteau

Jun/21/23 9:13:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am a fan of much of the advocacy work the hon. member does. The question was what we should do over the next few months to build more supports for people with disabilities, and it is to do exactly what we have been doing in the last year. It is to identify the issues that are important to us, build it into a budget, consult people and come back to the House and vote for a budget that actually invests in people.

85 words

Mr. Wilson Miao (Richmond Centre, Lib.)

Jun/21/23 9:13:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am privileged to rise in the House today on behalf of the people of Richmond Centre, and I am grateful for the trust and support from my constituents that allows me to be their representative in the chamber. Before I speak to the opposition motion, I have very exciting news I would like to share with Canadians. On July 1, as we know, it is Canada Day. However, the first-ever Chinese Canadian museum in Canada will officially open for exhibition in Vancouver's Chinatown. This July 1 is also the 100-year anniversary of the enactment of the Chinese Exclusion Act. As a Chinese Canadian, I am proud of my Chinese heritage. Chinese Canadians have made remarkable sacrifices and shaped our national fabric. We are excited to see our rich history and foundational contributions to Canada showcased at the newly opened, first-ever Chinese Canadian museum. We shall not forget the story of the determination of Chinese Canadians. We must continue our commitment to reconciliation and continue our efforts to build a stronger and more inclusive Canada for everyone. An hon. member: Oh, oh!

188 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jun/21/23 9:15:18 p.m.
Watch

Order. There seems to be a member online who has his mike open. I think we have remedied that now. The hon. member for Richmond Centre can continue.

28 words

Mr. Wilson Miao

Jun/21/23 9:15:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this government has been working on creating a more inclusive Canada since day one. I am pleased to note the opposition party is as focused as our government on cost of living issues. In the current global inflationary environment, it is appropriate that we are discussing the issue of the rising cost of living, but it is also important to bear in mind that this issue has been top of mind for our government since long before the global pandemic struck and before Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. In fact, making life more affordable has been a central focus of our government's effort from day one. The measures we have introduced to make life more affordable include reduced child care costs, the Canada child benefit, the Canada dental benefit and tax relief through an increased basic personal amount. Through climate action incentive payments, our government is keeping affordability in mind as we fight climate change. Since 2015, close to 2.3 million fewer Canadians are living in poverty. Income inequality has continued to fall. The labour force participation rate for women aged 15 to 64 years is at record highs, and young Canadians have access to a greater number of good-paying jobs than before the pandemic. There are 890,000 more Canadians employed than before the pandemic, which is more people than the entire population of New Brunswick. These are strong fundamentals, but we know there are challenges ahead. We must contend with a slowing global economy and elevated interest rates around the world, and we will continue to take action to do so. We are fortunate that Canada's inflation rate is lower than that of our G7 partners, such as the U.K., Germany and the United States. Also, inflation is down from its peak last year, but it is still high. This means that, despite Canada's strong recovery from the pandemic, and despite all the new supports we have provided, there are still too many Canadians who are struggling with the impact of the recent ongoing wave of global inflation, especially lower-income Canadians, who are more exposed to the impact of rising costs. This is precisely why, by introducing the one-time grocery rebate in budget 2023, our government is providing much-needed relief to those who need it most and helping to ensure they can continue to put food on the table. We know that it would not be reasonable to provide this support to everyone, as it would put pressure on prices for everyone and complicate the Bank of Canada's effort in addressing inflation, so the new, one-time grocery rebate will deliver targeted inflation relief to 11 million low- and modest-income Canadians and families who need it the most. The grocery rebate is being delivered to eligible Canadians on July 5 by direct deposit or cheque. I ask those who are watching to please make sure to check their account or mailbox. The royal assent of Bill C-46 has made this benefit a reality. The passage of Bill C-46 is also allowing us to deliver a one-time top-up to the Canada health transfer for provinces and territories, which is worth an additional $2 billion. This will allow them to reduce wait times for surgery and support emergency rooms across Canada. This funding is to be used to improve and enhance the health care Canadians receive and is not to be used by provinces and territories in place of their planned health care spending. However, as announced by the Prime Minister in February, we will be providing nearly $200 billion in additional federal health funding to provinces and territories over the next decade. Our actions show that health care is a top priority for our government because health care is a priority for all Canadians. Canadians are proud of our universal publicly funded health care system. It is at the very heart of our identity as a country. Dental care is an important component of our health, too, but seeing a dentist can be very expensive. That is why our government has committed to fully implementing a permanent Canadian dental care plan by 2025. Currently, the Canada dental benefit is providing eligible parents and guardians with direct, upfront, tax-free payments to cover the costs of dental care for their children under 12 and has supported more than 305,000 children to the current date. However, it is not just children who need affordable dental care. That is why budget 2023 delivered a transformative investment to provide dental care to Canadians who need it, with $13 billion over the next five years and $4.4 billion ongoing to implement the permanent Canadian dental care plan. The plan will provide dental coverage for uninsured Canadians with annual family incomes of less than $90,000, with no copays for families with incomes under $70,000. The plan will begin to roll out by the end of 2023, which will both improve the health of Canadians and make life more affordable. Of course, it is not just the cost. There are also other factors that may prevent Canadians from accessing dental care, such as living in a remote community or requiring specialized care due to disability, which is why budget 2023 proposed funding to establish an oral health access fund. This fund will complement the Canadian dental care plan by addressing oral health gaps among vulnerable populations and reducing barriers to accessing dental care, including in rural and remote communities. Our government is investing in health care because it matters to Canadians. It matters to their children, parents, seniors, friends and neighbours. Investing in health care is critical to building healthier and safer communities across Canada. Whether they are ensuring they have money to put food on the table or the health care they need when they need it, Canadians can be sure of one thing: Our government will continue to support them. We will continue to be there to provide more help to those who need it most. We will continue to make life more affordable. We will continue to support the middle class. We will continue to build a stronger economy, and we will continue to make sure no one is left behind.

1050 words

Mr. Marty Morantz (Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, CPC)

Jun/21/23 9:24:06 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that seemed like a very well-reasoned, well thought-out speech. However, the motion that we are debating right now has a question, and the question is whether or not the government should be called upon to table a plan to return to balanced budgets. I wonder if the member would agree that governments, no matter what their political stripe, should strive to at least create a plan to have balanced budgets?

74 words

Mr. Wilson Miao

Jun/21/23 9:24:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is my understanding that we are still paying the debt from the Great Depression, and it is important for us to understand what the biggest priority is right now to serve Canadians in need. We understand that prices have been inflated after the pandemic for many reasons, and we are here to debate how we can deliver more supports and resources to those in need across our country. It is always top of mind with our government to understand the needs of Canadians. That is why we implemented the CCB, the dental care plan and other supports to help Canadians get through this hard time.

108 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Jun/21/23 9:25:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member talked about getting help to people, but what has the government done? When it comes to seniors, the government increased the OAS by 10%, but only for those who are over 75. It created two tiers of seniors. The Liberals decided to neglect those seniors who are between 65 and 75. This is despite the fact that over a third of women over 65 are living in poverty. That is actually shameful in a country like this. The PBO costed out expanding it to include those seniors who are between 65 and 75, and it would cost $1.4 billion. Guess how much that is. It is a half-point increase in corporate tax. What did the Liberals decide to do? They decided to choose corporate welfare instead of taking care of seniors, leaving the third of women who are over 65 hung out to dry. The GST rebate that people are going to see in July is to help just with inflation and groceries, never mind this increase that is needed. When will the government decide to increase corporate taxes to take care of those who need help the most, including seniors over 65, women and single women, one-third of whom are living in poverty in this country? It is unacceptable, and it is an injustice.

222 words

Mr. Wilson Miao

Jun/21/23 9:27:07 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his concern. I have full respect for seniors across Canada. Here is a little background about seniors in my riding of Richmond Centre. We have the highest poverty in our seniors community. Before I was elected, this was already the case. Understand that our government has also implemented the new horizons program to support seniors in need, adjusted the age from 67 back to 65 and supported our seniors with a one-time GIS support. These are things that our government is considerate of in helping and supporting seniors in Canada.

99 words

Mr. Greg McLean (Calgary Centre, CPC)

Jun/21/23 9:28:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the member about something he said in his speech right at the end. He said that they will leave no one behind. That is what the Liberals said in 2017 when they talked about the just transition for the coal workers. I have looked at that program very thoroughly, and every one of those coal workers got left behind. We know we have to transition off coal, and we have been transitioning off coal. However, the Liberals said they had $185 million for coal workers. They spent $58 million of it, and all of that went into a slush fund for government revenue. If members take a look at what happened to the actual workers, they will see that unemployment in those cities went up by 10% and the value of people's houses went down by two-thirds. Can the member across the way tell me how that actually translates into not leaving anybody behind, like the Liberals promised to do? It is completely false.

172 words

Mr. Wilson Miao

Jun/21/23 9:29:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if I can really listen to opposition members saying this because, when they were in government, they cut off a lot of support for Canadians. Although, yes, there was a lot of tax being cut, let us keep in mind that there are a lot of families who also suffered from these tax cuts. What I meant, personally, by saying that no one is left behind is that we are there to listen to all Canadians and to understand their needs so that our government can address the solution directly. This is important because we want to make sure that all Canadians are being served.

111 words

Mr. Marty Morantz (Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, CPC)

Jun/21/23 9:29:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to take a moment to thank the great folks of Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley for placing their trust in me to represent them in this austere chamber, as we have reached the last day of the session. It has really been the honour of a lifetime, I have to say. The topic we are discussing today, at the end of the day, is a fairly simple concept. The motion is just asking the House to call upon the government to table a plan to return to balanced budgets. I have been listening patiently to the speeches from opposition parties tonight, and other than in the Bloc, it is difficult to find a member in the Liberal or NDP caucuses who can even really say the words “balanced budget”. It is almost like it is sacrilege to even raise the topic or it is somehow a partisan argument to say that governments should strive to balance their books. It is like they are allergic to the concept. However, it has not always been that way. Liberals have not always been this way, and the NDP has not always been this way. I remember back in the early 2000s, in my home province of Manitoba, when Gary Doer was Premier of Manitoba. He was Premier of Manitoba for just over 10 years. It is interesting. I know the members of the NDP caucus are fans of Gary Doer, and many Manitobans are still to this day fans of Gary Doer. In fact, he was appointed as the Canadian ambassador to the United States by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a very well-respected parliamentarian. Do members know what Gary Doer did for 10 years between 2000 and 2010, every year? He brought in balanced budgets: 10 of them. Another interesting thing about Mr. Doer, and the reason I am talking about him, is that one of his MLAs was a lady by the name of Jennifer Howard. Jennifer was a very popular MLA. She was part of that government that brought in 10 balanced budgets, and she voted every year, 10 years in a row, for all these balanced budgets. Today, Ms. Howard is the chief of staff to the leader of the NDP, so I am hoping that at least Ms. Howard might have a conversation with the leader of the NDP and talk to him about the real history of the NDP and the sense of fiscal responsibility that the NDP has had throughout its history. When it comes to the Liberal Party, we do not have to go back very far to find the desire to have balanced budgets. I mentioned earlier in one of my questions that Paul Martin recognized this. Unfortunately, he was forced to recognize it. The Government of Canada had hit the wall by 1995. It could not borrow any more on international markets; news media sources were calling Canada an economic basket case. The government had no option to get things under control, so contrary to the partisan spin many of the Liberals like to say, that Liberals would never cut anything, the fact of the matter is that the deepest cuts in Canadian history were made by finance minister Martin and Prime Minister Jean Chrétien in 1995 cut transfers to provinces. I remember it very well, because Gary Filmon was the Premier of Manitoba, and he was all of a sudden looking at billions of dollars in shortfalls to fund health care in Manitoba, and provinces across the country were scrambling. To be fair to Paul Martin, I do not think he did it because he wanted to. He did it because he had to, but the problem is that it should have never gotten to that point, and that is the point of my speech. We have the chance to right the ship. All we are asking the government, and it is a very reasonable request that I do not see how one could say is partisan in any way, is just to come up with a plan to say how it is going to balance the budget. It is actually not so remote, even for the current government, at all, or for the finance minister, because in November she tabled the fall economic update. In the fall economic update, she projected a balanced budget, in fact, a $4.5-billion surplus in the 2027-28 fiscal year. Obviously, the Liberals had a plan to bring the budget back into balance. I really think this was a very reasonable request. I want to talk a little more about the motion. It basically says that budget 2023 adds more than $60 billion of new spending, or $4,200 per family, and that inflation in Canada increased following the introduction of the $60 billion in new Liberal spending. I should have mentioned earlier that I will be splitting my time with my esteemed colleague, the member for Calgary Centre. I apologize for not mentioning that earlier. The reality is that members opposite will make the argument that inflation has come to our shores. It is not the government's fault, it is a worldwide phenomenon that Canada is certainly not immune to. The problem with that is that many economists have now confirmed that inflation is homegrown. In fact, one of them is the Governor of the Bank of Canada. We had the opportunity to question him in the finance committee. I asked him if government spending had been less, would inflation have been less. He said that, yes, inflation would have been less. Clearly, fiscal policy has an impact on inflation, as does monetary policy. I know members opposite do not want to take it from me. They view all Conservatives as coming at this from a partisan perspective, but maybe they will take it from the IMF, which just released a report. The International Monetary Fund, which Canada has a member of since 1944, put out a report that urged Canada to bring back a debt anchor—

1017 words

The Speaker

Jun/21/23 9:37:27 p.m.
Watch

I am just going to interrupt the hon. member. I am going to ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to step outside. I know it is the year-end and people are having a fun time in the hallway, but the sound is echoing into the chamber and it is making it difficult to hear everything the hon. member has to say. I am sure everyone is listening with bated breath. The hon. member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, who has two minutes and 22 seconds remaining.

90 words