SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 233

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 17, 2023 10:00AM
  • Oct/17/23 4:17:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his good questions and good work. One day, before I retire, I hope to answer completely in French. We agree that we need to balance the budget. If the member is asking us why we are blaming the Liberal government, it is because of eight years of failure. After eight years, it has driven the car in the ditch. I do not know who else to blame.
74 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:17:43 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I often enjoy my debates with the hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South. He likes to reference his economic theory. He did some of that today in talking about the out-of-control housing crisis we have, what I affectionately call the crisis of capitalism. I would like the hon. member to reflect on this. In 2013, in Hamilton, the average house cost was $350,000. The high end of a unionized carpenter's salary was $42 an hour. Fast-forward 10 years and the high end for a unionized carpenter's salary is $48 an hour, but the same home the carpenter builds has now doubled in price, to over $700,000. That is what we are looking at now. The reality is that the surplus value of the labourer's work, the money he or she is building and wealth he or she is creating in this country, is going somewhere, but who is not going to? It is not going to the worker. My question for the hon. member is on his economic theory. When he looks at the crisis of capitalism and the housing crisis, would he at least have the courage today to stand up and talk about where the surplus value of labour is going? It is not going to the working class but to Bay Street, the banks and big developers.
231 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:19:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will tell the member exactly where that money is going: It is going here, to Ottawa. That is where the money is getting burned. It is not a crisis of capitalism. By the way, I enjoy the debates with the great member as well, and I get passionate about them, so my apologies. The money is being burned in Ottawa. We have far too many resources going to unproductive government, away from the productive cycle of the private sector. Wealth is only created in one place, and that is with the workers of Canada. I could not agree with the member more. The workers are getting cheated and ripped off by the government. We need the next prime minister, the member for Carleton, to fix this and bring prosperity back to our land.
136 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:20:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to comments made yesterday by the member for Winnipeg North on the question of privilege raised by the member for Calgary Nose Hill on Thursday, October 5. Yesterday, in his remarks, the member for Winnipeg North misled the House. I would like to quote a few of his statements concerning the question of privilege raised by the member for Calgary Nose Hill. The issue we are discussing has to do with the government's written responses to questions about the Prime Minister's travel. I submitted those three questions to the government myself, in writing. Yesterday, the member for Winnipeg North spoke about the last two questions that I asked. I would like to quote what the member for Winnipeg North said yesterday: The crux of the questions posed is based on the notion of “total costs incurred by the government”. The government takes the view that “the government” includes all core departments of the public service and not independent arm's-length agencies, such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. This is what the member for Winnipeg North stated and alleged yesterday. I will continue with the quotation: The fact is that neither of these questions specifically asked for that information. It is not for the government to make assumptions about what the member means to ask when submitting an Order Paper question. The government simply responds to the precise question that was asked. I feel that the questions were well formulated, that they were entirely in order and that the government was asked to provide all the information requested. The proof is in Question No. 1180, which I asked on January 31. I will read the questions that were asked and the specific requests that were made at the time: (a) what were the total costs incurred by the government for (i) accommodations, (ii) per diems, (iii) other expenses for the flight crew and government officials who travelled to Jamaica in connection with the Prime Minister's trip.... That was the wording of the question asked on January 31. I will now read Question No. 1417, which I asked on April 19 and to which the member for Winnipeg North referred yesterday: (a) what were the total costs incurred by the government for (i) accommodations, (ii) per diems, (iii) other expenses, for the flight crew and government officials who travelled to Montana in connection with the Prime Minister's trip.... Other than the destination, both questions are identical. The difference is that, in its answer to Question No. 1180, the government included all the costs, including those incurred by the RCMP. This leads me to conclude that the government deliberately omitted the costs incurred by the RCMP in its answers to the two subsequent questions. All three questions were written in the same way. I thought this was extremely important information for the House to consider, especially given that the answer to Question No. 1180 was signed off on by the members for Winnipeg North and Hull—Aylmer. The people saying that the questions were not properly written, specifically the member for Winnipeg North, actually answered the first question properly. They should have answered the other two in the same way by including the costs related to the RCMP's participation in the other two trips.
566 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:24:11 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are facing an affordability crisis. Everything costs more, from the grocery store to the gas pumps. Mortgages have doubled, rents have doubled and down payments have doubled. The dream of home ownership is dead for nine out of 10 Canadians. Liberal inflationary spending has caused food prices to skyrocket, and one in five Canadians is skipping meals because they cannot afford to eat. Families are struggling to make ends meet. Food banks are overwhelmed. In my community, food banks are at risk of bankruptcy because of a surge in demand, and 33%, or one-third, of food bank users are children. Overdose deaths have increased 300% in B.C. The leading cause of death among 10- to 18-year-olds is drug overdose. This is heartbreaking, and the people in my province need some good news. Unfortunately, StatsCan reported today that inflation remains high. After eight years of reckless spending, Canada's national debt sits at $1.2 trillion. Think about that for a second. That means debt servicing costs will be almost $44 billion this year alone. These are tax dollars that could have been used to invest in addiction recovery services or to help address the housing crisis. Instead, those tax dollars will go to rich bondholders. At a time when everything feels broken, the Prime Minister has spent the cupboards bare and has no plan to bring the nation's finances into a better position to respond to the real needs of Canadians. This is because of years of blatant disregard for fiscal prudence and monetary policy. We now have a tired, desperate NDP-Liberal government that is out of ideas. It has resorted to recycling broken campaign promises and adopting Conservative policy, albeit watered down. Its housing accelerator fund has not built a single home. It is nothing more than a housing hoax. The Prime Minister has added more debt than all other prime ministers combined. There is no plan to balance the budget and no plan to get his inflationary deficits under control. This is the Prime Minister who thinks budgets balance themselves and asks Canadians to forgive him for not thinking about monetary policy. His laissez-faire attitude toward public finance has put the well-being of far too many Canadians in crisis. Government spending has driven up inflation rates, and those rates have put Canada at the brink of a mortgage default crisis. That is why the leader of the Conservative opposition brought a common-sense motion to the House today. Our motion calls on the Prime Minister to table a fiscal plan that includes a pathway back to a balanced budget. He must do so before the Bank of Canada announces its next rate decision later this month. This motion is urgent and necessary. The government must start spending within its means, something that Canadian families do every day to balance their own household budgets. In June, the Minister of Finance took to social media to declare victory over inflation. She told Canadians the Liberal plan to tackle inflation is “working” and that the Liberals were making “real progress”. Since then, inflation has gone up 43%. She fails to learn the lesson that excessive government spending and cruel tax hikes are the reason she is losing the war against inflation. After eight years, it is clear that the Liberal fiscal plan is not working and that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. Common-sense Conservatives have a plan to reverse these deficits so we can bring down inflation, bring home lower prices and bring homes that people can afford. We will cap government spending, cut waste and bring in a dollar-for-dollar law that requires the government to find a dollar of savings for any new dollar of spending. That is common sense. We will also axe the punitive carbon tax. When we tax the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who ships the food and the store that sells the food, we are taxing the hard-working Canadian family struggling to pay for that food. The Liberal government has failed to reach any of its emission reduction targets, so all of this financial pain is for no environmental gain. Liberals and their enablers in the NDP justify their position by suggesting that the carbon tax is not high enough. Speaking about the carbon tax, the Liberal member for Halifax said, “Ultimately they don't want to pay for it, but that's what changes behaviour, so if we rebate them everything they've paid for the pollution price, it defeats the whole purpose. There needs to be a bit of pain there. That's the point of it.” How out of touch can they be? Other Liberals, such as the member for Avalon, finally admitted that the carbon tax is causing harm to Canadians. When asked about the political consequences the Liberals will face because of the carbon tax, the member for Avalon said: I think it's hurting them a fair bit. Everywhere I go, people come up to me and say, “We're losing faith in the Liberal Party”. I've had people tell me they can't afford to buy groceries. They can't afford to heat their homes.... It is too little too late. That member voted to implement the carbon tax, and his party continues to punish Canadians with it. On housing, the Prime Minister does not think it is his responsibility, but the buck stops with him. It used to take 25 years to pay off a mortgage. Now it takes 25 years to save for a down payment. Vancouver is the third most unaffordable housing market on the planet. In my community, mortgages now cost thousands of dollars more per month, forcing people out of home ownership. We are not building homes quick enough to keep up with demand because big city gatekeepers impose unnecessary delays and red tape. A C.D. Howe study determined that gatekeepers and regulations add nearly $1.3 million to the cost of an average home in Vancouver. Meanwhile, CMHC bureaucrats in Ottawa are rewarded with millions of dollars in bonuses for a lackluster performance. Conservatives know we need to build homes, not bureaucracy. We will reward cities that are getting homes built with additional infrastructure dollars and a building bonus, and we will withhold transit and infrastructure funding from cities until sufficient high density housing around transit stations is built and occupied. We will cut the bonuses and salaries for ineffective bureaucrats, and if needed, we will fire the gatekeepers at CMHC if they are unable to speed up approvals for housing programs to an average of 60 days. We will list 15% of the federal government's 37,000 buildings and all appropriate federal land to be turned into homes people can afford. Conservatives will turn the hurt the government has inflicted into the hope Canadians deserve. Canada should be a place where our citizens can afford to buy a home, put food on the table and save for the future. This is common sense. Only Conservatives will bring it home.
1199 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:32:21 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-56 
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives, at times, just want to put their heads in the sand and stick with their slogans and bumper stickers, quite frankly. The member talks about inflation. Back in June of 2022, inflation in Canada was at around 8%. In the United States, it was at 9%. Today it is 4% and 3%, or just under 4%. Let us put it that way. The Conservatives will go around Canada and say that Canada is broken. Does that mean the whole world is broken? The Conservatives are so extreme. They like to get those slogans on the bumper stickers. Does the member not believe she is misleading Canadians when she tries to give this false impression? Yes, inflation is hurting. That is the reason we bring forward good legislation, such as Bill C-56, which is legislation the Conservatives is filibustering. Why?
144 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:33:21 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleagues, this caucus and our leader are out there talking to Canadians every day. They tell us a very different story than the story this member wants to portray. When they tell us they cannot pay their rent and they tell us they cannot pay their mortgages to hold on to the home they bought some homes ago, they have tears in their eyes. This is real. The food banks facing bankruptcy in my community are real. The demand is so high they cannot keep up. Liberals are the ones with their heads in the sand. They are the ones who do not know the reality on the ground. They better wake up.
117 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:34:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am going to repeat a question I asked my Conservative colleague earlier, because I may not have worded my question correctly. The fact is, we are not at all opposed to the idea put forward today by the Conservatives, which is to ask the government to offer some predictability, act responsibly and introduce a plan for returning to a balanced budget. However, the Conservatives want to give the government about eight days to do this. They are demanding that it be done by October 25, when we know that this government is not necessarily the quickest at getting things done. Does my colleague think that we could perhaps give it a little more time, for example, until the next fall budget update? Are the Conservatives really insisting on this October 25 deadline as a way to once again play political games and blame the government for what it has not yet done?
158 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:34:58 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to see when members of the House from other parties are able to come together with the Conservatives and agree on something. That is always a pleasure. With respect to timelines, the government has had eight years to get this right. It certainly has been many years that we have been telling the government that the way it is going about things, with its unnecessary flagrant spending, is going to result in inflation, and what we have now is rampant inflation. The PBO agreed with us that 40% of its spending during COVID was not COVID related. The government also drove up debt before COVID even happened. It cannot run with that cover anymore.
120 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:35:59 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about the carbon tax, as Conservatives are wont to do. Of course, in British Columbia, the federal carbon tax does not apply at all. We have had a provincial carbon tax there since 2008, brought in by a small c conservative government. Over the past three years, in her riding and my riding, the gas prices that people complain all the time have gone up about a dollar. The carbon tax has gone up five cents, so 95¢ of that increase is something else. What is it? It is corporate greed. The price of oil has gone up and the oil companies that are producing that gas have had a windfall profit of billions and billions of dollars. The CEO of Shell Canada said that, if they were taxed more, they would be turning money back into the Canadian economy to help people who are suffering. The government is afraid to do that, and the Conservatives do not want to talk about it. The Conservatives in the U.K. have done just that. I am just wondering if my colleague could comment on the fact that Conservatives and Liberals do not like to talk about the revenue side of the fiscal situation. We should have a windfall tax to bring money to Canadians, to help all Canadians in this time when people are suffering. A windfall fax on groceries and on gasoline would do just that.
242 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:37:31 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I just love the way socialists talk about taxes. They always find a way to somehow reach into someone else's pocket to find money to spend. We believe in free people who live with free markets and free choice. We are the party of freedom. We will give freedom back to Canadians, and we will do it in a more prosperous economy where a rising tide floats all boats. We will see people with powerful paycheques and homes they can afford. Yes, we will use the God-given resources that Canada has and create prosperity with it.
100 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:38:22 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in the House on behalf of the people of Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook to speak to the opposition motion. I would like to point out that my voice is not very strong today, so it is going to be much quieter. The Conservatives, in their motion, are making reference to the fall economic statement. Of course, they know that every November the fall economic statement comes forward. Our government will move forward with much of the legislation, but I am very happy that, as a result of the opposition motion, we will hear all of the good things they have to suggest. We will see if any of them work, and then we can fine-tune them if there is something valuable for us to use to support Canadians. However, let us talk about the framework of our Canadian economy today. Members must keep in mind that the economy just a year ago was at 8.1% inflation. Today, as we speak, it is down to 3.8%. Already we have seen a quick drop in inflation. Now it is about keeping it going downward. Canada's economy is strong. We have the lowest deficit in the G7 and the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7 as well. Last week, it was once again confirmed that we have maintained a AAA rating, which is extremely important. That shows our strength to the world as well. Both the OECD and the International Monetary Fund have clearly indicated that Canada will have the strongest economy in the G7 in 2024. As we are trying to cool the economy, it is obvious that the economy is extremely strong. Over the month of September, over 64,000 jobs were created. The unemployment rate is down to 5.5%, which is exceptional for our country. The lowest was 5.2% a couple of years ago, before the pandemic. We have not only recaptured the million jobs Canadians created prior to the pandemic, but also created another million since the pandemic. Those are impressive numbers. That is why we are able to support the most vulnerable Canadians. That is why we are able to support and invest even more in the public health care system. We know the Conservatives believe in the private sector in that section. As well, we have invested in the future prosperity of the country. It is a two-way street. It is a balance between supporting and investing in Canadians long term and investing in capturing more revenue. Affordability is an issue. There is no question about that. There is no denying that. My kids, going to the grocery store, send me a text or a picture, saying, “Look at the price of this.” We could use the example, as has been used in the House, of the price of lettuce. We understand that. That is why our government has come forward with many initiatives, and more initiatives are being spoken about and brought in through bills as we speak. The child care benefit brings $5 million a month to families in Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, which is $60 million a year. The same thing is happening in the riding of my colleague who is speaking across the floor. In his riding, young families are benefiting from the $60 million in support from the child care benefit. The early learning initiative, which we brought in last year, was a big investment. Early learning is in 50% of the provinces, bringing the cost down to $10 a day. The rest will follow in the next two years. That is not only a very important investment for young families, but it also allows for more women in the workforce, as well as more flexibility for families. We have doubled the GST payment for two quarterly payments, helping 11 million Canadians. There was a one-time grocery payment that helped 11 million Canadians. We brought forward the dental plan, and so far we have seen 350,000 children benefit from it. By 2025, we will have more. Mr. Speaker, I thought I had already mentioned this, but I will be sharing my time with the member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill. I want to finish with another big, important framework bill that we brought forward for people with disabilities— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
740 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:43:40 p.m.
  • Watch
Let us take a moment to allow the hon. member to take a drink of water to get his voice back. I would just remind folks that the member is having a hard time talking, so I will ask members to try to not hold him back too much. We are so used to vibrancy and energy from the hon. member.
61 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:44:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, another initiative that we are bringing forward, as we speak, is the investment in housing and removing the GST on new rental construction. That is essential. We already have five provinces, including Nova Scotia, that have joined this initiative. It will drop the cost of a building for affordable housing, for example, from $10 million down to $8.5 million. That is $1.5 million in savings. That is why these contractors and developers are jumping to get these projects going so they can benefit from those investments. I want to share some quotes. Tim Richter, CEO of the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness, said that the federal government is being very serious about taking measures to ensure it is answering the housing crisis. Carole Saab from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities said, “This is an important and very welcome decision that will have an immediate impact.” The executive director of The Federation of Community Social Services of BC said, “Big kudos to the federal government. Removing the GST on new rental construction is probably the biggest thing it could do to stimulate construction.” As I indicated, those are very important for developers and for Canadians. It is also very important to talk about how we can help Canadians. We brought forward the new tax-free first home savings account to save up to $40,000. People saving for their first home can put away $8,000 a year for five years for a total of $40,000, or over 15 years. This is like an RRSP. People do not pay taxes going in or on the way out. This is a win-win-win for Canadians. We already have 150,000 young people who have taken advantage of this program within the first six months. I say félicitations. It is excellent. Since 2015, we have found housing for nearly two million people. We have invested $4 billion in the housing accelerator fund. We have already seen houses being built, and up to 100,000 more units will be built soon. We just signed an agreement with the City of London, Ontario, where 2,000 housing units will be built in the next three years. There will also be 1,700 units built in Vaughan, Ontario, and 2,600 units built in Halifax in the next three years. Those are big, successful numbers for the quick construction of housing. I want to finish with something very important. Today, I witnessed, sadly, the Conservative Party members voting against tweaking the Atlantic accord that would allow Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador, with the fastest winds in the world, to invest not only on land wind farms, but in offshore wind farms. We have none in Canada right now. The sad thing about it is I saw a tweet from my colleague, the Premier of Nova Scotia, this afternoon and he is a Conservative. Let me read what he said. He said, “Bill C-49 is a necessary first step in unlocking our energy potential. There will be many steps along the road but we are hopeful that Bill C-49 passes so we can get started.” It did pass, but without the support of the Conservatives, which is sad. A quick example of offshore wind is next to Sable Island. We can construct, based on the information, 1,000 turbines that would supply 6.5 million Canadians with energy. That is almost twice as much as what all of Atlantic Canada is using today. This is potential. This is growth. This is revenue. The Conservatives often ask how we are going to pay for it. We are going to bring in more revenue so we can continue to support Canadians. We will not be making the cuts to our veterans, by closing nine offices and firing 1,000 employees.
651 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:49:05 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is quite a spectacle to watch my friend from across the floor speaking. His blood pressure must be right through the roof. He is talking about all the wind farms to go around Sable Island. How many non-indigenous fishermen's organizations were consulted in the forming of the bill? I have spoken with many of them, and they are very discouraged with their involvement in the forming of the bill. They are going to want to get into committee. How does the member feel about the point of view of all those fishermen in his province?
100 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:49:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, what gets my blood pressure going up is when you people vote for something that is really important to Atlantic Canadians. That is what is bringing the pressure up. I just do not understand how, when we have an opportunity— An hon. member: Answer it. Mr. Darrell Samson: I will answer it. If you had voted for it, it would have gotten into committee—
68 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:50:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Order. It is through the Chair. The hon. member knows very well whom he is supposed to be talking to. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix.
44 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:50:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will have to sing a song to calm things down in the House. I really appreciate all of the passion and conviction of my colleague opposite. I would like to come back to something essential. The Canada emergency business account, or CEBA, has repayment terms that force businesses to pay back the subsidies they got during the pandemic. The deadline is coming up. In my riding, there are a lot of SMEs that are on the verge of bankruptcy and shutdown because they are required to repay this amount when they are not ready or able to do so in the current economic context. Does my colleague not agree that the deadline to pay back the CEBA should be extended or that, given the circumstances, every business should have the opportunity to come up with a plan with the government to pay back the money when they can without losing the subsidy?
155 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/17/23 4:51:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is a very important question, because we are talking about small businesses all across Canada. It was tough, but the government was able to give them up to $60,000. They could keep $10,000 of the first $40,000. Of the remaining $20,000, they could keep another $10,000, so that means $20,000 was available. We also made changes that allow small businesses to defer their loan repayments for a year, so plenty of tools have been offered. I do not know whether this meets the needs of all businesses, but it does meet the needs of some of them. I am sure of that, based on the discussions I have had.
118 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border