44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 23, 2023 10:00AM
- Nov/23/23 3:43:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member for St. Albert—Edmonton spent a lot of his time talking about the quadrupling of the carbon tax, but absent from the conversation was the quadrupling of the rebates that go with it. I mention this because we all get emails in our inboxes from constituents who have been misled by those kinds of statements. Can the member make clear whether he believes that rebates also go back to Canadians?
Secondly, can he speak to any concern he might have with the fact that the carbon tax went up 2¢ a litre last year, and the profits of the oil and gas industry went up 18¢ a litre as it gouged Canadians at the pumps. That is what is truly driving affordability. Does he care about that at all?
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 3:43:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, with respect, the member should get his facts straight. A good place to start would be to review the report of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. It established that more than 60% of Canadians lose out with the carbon tax. In other words, they pay more than they get back from the rebate.
What needs to happen, and what Canadians are asking for, is that we axe the tax, and that is something Conservatives are going to do to keep—
82 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 3:44:27 p.m.
- Watch
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Red Deer—Mountain View.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will first say that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge.
I am honoured to speak to this programming motion, Government Business No. 30, and its amendment today.
Before I start, I would like to pay tribute to a great constituent by the name of Dot Thompson, the spouse of the late member of Parliament Myron Thompson, whose funeral I attended this past weekend. The two were inseparable and always had the community of Sundre in their hearts. Myron was an unforgettable MP who served on town council, was the high school principal and, through his athletic prowess, taught many youth how to play ball. Sundre was lucky to get him as his New York Yankees professional ball career was put on hold as he played backup to Hall of Famer Yogi Berra.
I am sure that Myron Thompson would have seen many pieces of legislation over his time with bills like Bill C-56, an act to amend the Excise Tax Act and the Competition Act, as well as motions that would have found their way to the floor of Centre Block for discussion. During his 1993 to 2005 era, there were many “suggestions” that the official opposition had lifted by the Chrétien and Martin Liberals in order to minimize the economic damage that had occurred from the era of stagflation caused by Trudeau, the elder.
Sadly, that Liberal government chose to drastically cut the transfers of health funding to provinces, which has haunted our provincial health care services for decades. Handcuffing the provinces was an easy fix to change the federal government's bottom line, but downloading the costs onto other levels of government simply took the heat off the feds and pushed it onto the provinces and their local authorities.
I am well aware of how federal neglect and financial shell games work because I was a hospital board chairman during those dark days. The federal Liberals of the 1990s artfully joined with the Friends of Medicare to back provinces into a corner when they were forced to rationalize services. There is no better example than the daily attacks on former premier Ralph Klein when he was faced with the economic reality of federal cuts to health transfers. The effects of that federal action are still evident, but, thankfully, no government has returned to the era of cuts to health care transfers since the Chrétien era.
The reason that I give this historical reference is that there are different paths governments can follow when trying to work their way through, or out of, a crisis. They can download the problems onto other levels of government; they can analyze policies of other parties in the House and, as is usually the case, claim them as their own; or they can at least acknowledge that the official opposition takes its responsibilities to Canadians seriously and that by usurping the learned advice, the government is ignoring the views of a large number of Canadians.
I will get to some of the specifics in the legislation in a minute, but, as many have stated, it is the heavy-handedness of the government and its inability and unwillingness to work with other partners, unless they are willing to rubber-stamp initiatives in exchange for propping up a minority government, that are at issue here.
What we are seized with today is the government's programming motion, Government Business No. 30. Programming motions have the effect of not only limiting debate in the House, which to many is an affront to democracy in itself, but also dictating instructions to the committee as to how it will deal with this legislation once it gets to committee. Issues related to Government Business No. 30 have to do with the expanded scope that the committee must consider. I will read from Government Business No. 30, which says:
(c) if the bill has been read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance,
(i) it be an instruction to the committee, that during its consideration of the bill, it be granted the power to expand its scope to,
(A) increase the maximum fixed penalty amounts for abuse...,
(B) allow the Competition Bureau to conduct market study inquiries...,
(C) revise the legal test for abuse of a dominant position prohibition order to be sufficiently met if the Tribunal finds that a dominant player has engaged in either a practice of anti-competitive acts or conduct....
If those points were important, perhaps they could have been in the bill in the first place.
Also, we will then start with a marathon sitting of two days, after the motion's adoption, to gather witness testimony, with amendments to be submitted within 12 hours at the end of the marathon sitting. Then, at the next meeting, once that time is up, no further debate or amendments will be entertained. Finally, after a few other points, we will have closure after the bill is reported, which will once again be guaranteed.
The Conservative amendment tries to infuse some credibility by at least ensuring that the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry and the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities will be ordered to appear as witnesses for no less than two hours each. At least some level of accountability will be salvaged if this amendment is adopted.
By forcing Motion No. 30 to the committees through the House process, the Liberals avoid the other option, which is to force a programming motion through the committee. They always say that committees are masters of their own fate, which is true, until, as we see with Motion No. 30, it is not. Programming motions are usually enacted when the government knows it has messed things up royally.
Our responsibility as legislators is manyfold. First, we must thoroughly analyze legislation to minimize potential unintended consequences. As a country that boasts six time zones, the need to have regional voices heard is paramount in order to head off such negative consequences.
Second, it is important that Canadians get an opportunity to have input as well. Those who live in the real world understand how legislation will, good or bad, affect them.
Third, and this is so evident presently at our natural resources committee, once federal legislation has been challenged, once the regions take on their responsibilities to protect their citizens through such initiatives and once such legislation has been deemed unconstitutional, the government must stop using the challenged parts of legislation in its development of new legislation. This procedural motion, Motion No. 30, is to be determined through a vote in the House. Since the Liberal government has found various willing dance partners, that has been virtually assured.
The only time I saw this process sidetracked, ironically, was when the Liberals had a majority government. It became quite evident at the time that the Liberals never really showed up for duty on Monday mornings. The Mulcair NDP managed to create a second reading vote on a prized Liberal bill. It was quite the scramble, but the vote ended in a tie. Because it was at second reading, the Speaker voted with the government so it would live to fight another day, and, oh my, it did fight. It produced a motion that would have stripped the opposition of all tools to do its job of holding the government to account. That motion dictated how things would transpire in the House and would have been one of the most egregious motions ever moved in our Westminster system of government.
When the vote on that motion was to take place, once again, the members of the NDP were milling around and were in the path of our whip Gord Brown. There is a tradition we see all the time where the whips walk toward the mace, acknowledge each other and then, once their members are settled, take their seats to start the vote. The confusion in the aisle caused one of the most unhinged actions I have seen anywhere. The Prime Minister rushed through the crowd, grabbed our whip by the arm and told him to get the “f” in his place. As he did that, he swung around and hit a female NDP member in the chest, which forced her to leave the chamber. That bizarre action caused a question of privilege that continued for days, whereby the juvenile actions of the PM were constantly on trial by his peers. In order to prevent the continued series of questions of privilege, the government relented and withdrew the egregious motion.
Now, with voting apps being used, perhaps the Prime Minister can avoid such a conflict in the future. Of course, maybe by now the government is also aware that there is a time-out provision whereby the vote would take place whether the whips walk down the aisle or not. Hopefully this motion can be defeated without the theatrics.
1508 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 3:54:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, truly, we cannot make this stuff up. At the end of the day, the Conservatives will whine and cry about wanting to have more debate time, but in reality, what do they do? They behave like a bunch of juveniles.
At some point, the members will stand up and move, seconded by so and so, that a person be heard, which will cause the bells to ring for half an hour, instead of voting. Sometimes they will adjourn debate in an attempt to prevent debate from taking place. Most common more recently, it is concurrence motion after concurrence motion.
Why all these games? It is because they do not want to debate legislation. They want to filibuster. They want to prevent. This is the far right wing of the Conservative Party pushing the Conservative Party to be destructive, and the members are very successful.
We are looking at a very extreme right-wing Conservative Party today. Why is the Conservative Party neglecting the vast majority of Canadians in favour of the far right?
175 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 3:55:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member can continue to insult. Nothing in what I said indicates in any way, shape or form that I approve of any of his far right allegations. It is something the Liberals chose to talk about today, as they felt this was one of the good things they could do during question period. We have heard it all day. It is just as ridiculous now as it was earlier in the day. Quite frankly, perhaps the member should consider the role and actions of his Prime Minister, because, believe me, everything I said was accurate.
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 3:56:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to ask a serious question of the member. I was here in the House when, under the Harper regime, we saw housing prices double over nine years. They doubled again under the Liberals, but the Conservatives were just as bad.
They have been worse. The Conservative record is far worse when it comes to affordable housing units. Between the two parties, the corporate coalition of Liberals and Conservatives, over a million affordable housing units have been lost over the past 17 years. Some 800,000 of them, or 80%, were lost under the Conservatives' watch.
Conservatives say that finally the Liberals are interested in housing, so I do not understand why they would block a bill to create more housing units and why they would block it so ferociously, in the same way they blocked dental care and the same way they blocked all of the NDP efforts, including to ensure a doubling of the GST credit to put more food on the table. Every single affordability measure the NDP fights for and succeeds in getting, Conservatives block.
Has the member spoken to the constituents in his riding who want to see these measures, including dental care?
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 3:58:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, have I spoken to them? Yes, I absolutely have. As a matter of fact, this morning people from FCM, from my riding, were visiting with me and we were talking about all of these issues. We were talking about homelessness issues. We were talking about affordability in housing. We were talking about all of the different initiatives that have been part of governments for years. I speak to constituents constantly about the issues of affordability. I am not sure exactly where the member was going, but, believe me, that is always uppermost in our minds.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 3:59:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his speech. He has identified himself as an MP who is not on the far right like his leader.
He talked a lot about inflation. In Canada, the drop in inflation over the record high of 8.1% in June 2022 must be good news for him. However, more needs to be done, without filibustering committees, to get bills passed. Having more affordable housing would be good for his riding. We were able to meet the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. He met different people.
How is the member for Red Deer—Mountain View going to face these organizations that are going to receive the GST rebate and tell them that he is voting against the measure?
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:00:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that was one of the discussions I had when a number of members of the FCM were with me this morning, and I know how important it is. Communities have some very good initiatives that they are already incorporating. It is more a case of how we take the good ideas we see from our municipalities and help incorporate them into major ideas that help the provinces and then help the federal government. Believe me, thinking that—
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:00:39 p.m.
- Watch
I have been very generous with the time.
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge.
19 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:00:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, after eight long years of the Liberal Prime Minister, costs have shot up and millions of Canadians are struggling to make ends meet. Housing costs have doubled, rent has doubled, mortgage rates have doubled, grocery prices are soaring and the lineups for food banks are shocking.
I received an email from Tyler, who bought a home a couple of years ago. His mortgage has gone up from $1,600 to $4,000 a month. He says he has no other choice but to sell his home and downgrade to make his life livable.
Candis is from Maple Ridge, and she has seen her payments double also. She can no longer afford new clothes for her children and needs to take them out of sports to try to make ends meet.
Then there is Shaffy. I met him at Seaspan Shipyards in North Vancouver. He is a welder. He showed me on an app that his mortgage is $7,528 a month. He told me that he is not living in a palace. It is a 40-year-old four-bedroom home in one of Vancouver's suburbs. He is being forced to work 10-hour shifts seven days a week and has no freedom. He said he cannot give his body a rest or he is going to lose his home.
These are not just stories. These are real lives, and the same thing is happening across Canada.
The blame rests fully on the members of the Liberal-NDP coalition for their incompetence and ultimately, I would say, their lack of concern for Canadians. They have shown they lack a basic understanding of economics or how to run a country. I will take that back. They are good at running a country into the ground.
It was not that long ago that our nation was one of the richest in the world, but under the Prime Minister, our rankings have been dropping. Country after country is passing us in GDP and per capita ranking.
I met a tourist on the way to Vancouver Island about a month or so ago. He has come to Canada numerous times over the past 40 years. He asked me what has happened to Canada. From his perspective, it just seems to be in decline. Unfortunately, he is right. What has happened to Canada is eight years of being run by an incompetent Liberal government that is joined at the hip with the socialist NDP and Bloc.
Why has everything become so unaffordable? The Liberals went on a crazy spending orgy, doling out hundreds of billions of dollars. The definition of that word is “excessive and indiscriminate indulgence in a specified activity”. We will call that spending.
The Prime Minister has added more debt to Canada than all the prime ministers before him, for 150 years. The Liberals have been absolutely careless with finances and have been racking up, for all intents and purposes, the credit card debt. This has caused great problems and chaos, but they have made sure that their friends, buddies and insiders have gotten their share.
I think of the ArriveCAN app scam, where millions of dollars were spent, essentially given to a two-person company in the basement of a house for no work, other than sending a few emails out. Something that should have cost a few thousand dollars has cost millions of dollars. There has been scandal after scandal. It has almost become part of the narrative.
Last week, we heard about the billion-dollar green slush fund. The chair of Sustainable Development Technology Canada had to resign and is under investigation by the RCMP because money was going directly to her company and to her.
These are some of the buddies we are seeing. This is happening, and I do not have time to talk about all the different situations and the people who have become rich off the Liberals. The Conservatives will turn over these stones. That is our objective here in Parliament, as it will be if we are elected to government.
The message from the Liberals for a long time was essentially that interest rates were low so what was the danger of borrowing. With this borrow and borrow and spend and spend, what has happened? For one thing, interest costs have escalated. We are now spending $51 billion on interest payments alone this year. That is more than we spend in health transfers. It is twice as much as we are spending on the Canadian military. One of the very few things the Liberals decided to cut back on is the Canadian military, at a time of great danger. Look at what happened with Russia attacking Ukraine and the situation with China. With all sorts of threats, the Liberals decided to cut the one important piece they should be increasing, but that is typical for them.
Canadians are suffering by the Liberals' indulgence in spending, their addiction. We keep hearing the word “investing” and that the Liberals are investing in this and that. It is not their money; it is taxpayers' money. Their actions have led not just to increased interest charges but to a significant rise in inflation. Anybody who goes to the grocery store can attest to that. People are not eating as nutritiously as before because of this.
I met with a number of university students last week, and they said they are having a hard time making ends meet. They are using food banks. I talked to the president of a university, who said there are lineups and that the use of food banks has gone up dramatically. Two million Canadians a month are going to food banks. This is not good, and the Liberals and the NDP need to be accountable for this. They can try to blame Harper from eight years ago, but it rests fully square on their shoulders.
What is happening here? The Liberal brain trust, as we see in the bill, has begun to panic. To the Liberals, this is about politics, power and money. As inflation has gone up and costs have gone up, guess what has gone down. It is their poll numbers, and that is causing a bit of panic on the government benches.
What have they been forced to do? They have raised interest rates, which is a time-tested way to lower inflation. However, what they have succeeded in doing is escalating the cost of carrying a mortgage. Half of mortgage owners will be renewing their mortgages in the next two years, 70,000 per month, and it is hitting them hard. This is happening everywhere in Canada, especially in areas with the biggest mortgages, such as metropolitan Vancouver, Toronto, Victoria and other large centres. People are losing their homes and losing their quality of life. This is real and it is painful.
One of the Liberals' solutions is to extend mortgages to 90 years or 100 years so their great-great-great-grandchildren can pay off the mortgage and people can keep their homes. That is not a solution.
The Liberals have realized the big mess they have created and the political urgency, and what they have done is taken a piece of Conservative Party policy, put on their superhero outfits and told people not to fear because they are here to help with solutions. They took one of our solutions, which was to take away the GST from purpose-built rental housing, but there is a lot more they need to do.
1261 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:10:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the one thing I did not hear the member talk about was a carbon tax. I know he is a really big fan of the carbon tax, because when he was in the provincial legislature in B.C., he not only voted in favour of it, but he also spoke very highly of it. He said:
It means that every dollar collected from B.C. carbon tax is given back to the taxpayers in the form of tax credits or tax cuts. Our carbon tax appears to be working.
He said:
We view this tax as a tool to change behaviour and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
If a Liberal had said that, he would have been heckling.
An hon. member: Maybe he was a Liberal back then.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Madam Speaker, maybe he was a Liberal back then. I do not know. Maybe he could inform me why he is against the carbon tax. Why is he hypocritical?
161 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:11:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am proof that there can be redemption. If I can see the light, there is hope for the Liberal Party. It is absolutely clear from one end of Canada to the other that it is a disaster. I totally endorse the removal of the carbon tax from coast to coast to coast.
55 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge and his Conservative colleagues are asking Canadians to believe in a fairy tale. They want people to believe that all these problems with housing magically started over the last several years or at least since 2015. In fact, it goes on a lot longer, with the current government, the Harper government before it, the Chrétien government and the Mulroney government. What we are seeing today is the natural conclusion of 40 years of neo-liberal economic policy. This did not happen overnight.
Similarly, when the Conservatives go after the carbon tax but completely ignore the fact that corporate profits are at the highest level ever, which is a key driver of inflation, it is a shame to their constituents and a shame to the political discourse in this chamber.
I have a question on Bill C-56. Does the member at least agree that these measures strengthen the Competition Act and remove the GST? Will he support them? Will he agree that the motion today is thanks to the hard work of the NDP driving the Liberal government to do better, and in fact that the Conservatives have been, again, sitting on the sidelines doing nothing?
208 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:13:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of our Conservative members introduced a private member's bill on competition, because we need to have competition in the airline industry, in the banking industry, in telecommunications, in every industry.
Canadians are suffering. We support competition. We need to have competition.
45 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:13:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the hon. member is a colleague from British Columbia, and we know that in British Columbia we have some of the highest housing prices in the country. We know that rent has doubled, and housing costs have doubled.
In this legislation that we are debating today, two of the biggest issues that we are dealing with are inflation and the cost of housing. Inflation has caused interest rates to increase which has then caused interest rate payments to be higher for people.
Could the member tell us if this legislation would address inflation or interest rates?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:14:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, no. This is just a bill of part measures.
It has a couple of pieces that are good, but it does not really address inflation. One of the causes of inflation is that the Liberals have not changed their reckless spending. They have a $15-billion plant that is costing every Canadian family $1,000 to employ 1,600 temporary foreign workers.
The Liberals are still out of control with their spending, and things are only going to get worse, even if they take little pieces here and there. Rather than Canadians having little pieces of what the Liberals are bringing out of Conservative bills, what they need to do is actually vote for the real deal, and see lives positively changed.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:15:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, before I get started, I really want to thank the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge for answering my question. He could have tried to skate around it, but he hit it right on. I question the sincerity in his answer, but at least he answered my question. He did not skate around it. I appreciate that, and I just wanted to put that on the record.
Here we are talking about this very important piece of legislation that has to do with affordable housing and the groceries act and how we can amend other acts in order to improve those two challenges that Canadians are facing right now. However, I have heard at least two Conservatives in this debate. Just moments ago, the member for Red Deer—Mountain View was talking about time allocation and concerned about limiting debate on this, but then he never even talked about the bill. The member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge never even talked about the bill. My original question for him, had I not been waiting to ask him this question on the carbon tax in B.C., was going to be whether he had actually read the bill because what he was talking about had nothing to do with the bill. He did not even reference all the measures that are in the bill. An NDP member asked him a question, and he still did not answer it.
I find it very fascinating that here we have the Conservatives with their full outrage jumping up and saying, “You're not letting us debate” and “You're allocating time.” Meanwhile, with the time that is allocated to discuss this bill, they are not even talking about it. I can only imagine it is not all that important to them if they are not even using the allocated time to actually discuss it.
I am noticing a trend. When we introduced the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement a few weeks ago, the Conservatives were taking a very similar approach. They talked nothing about the bill and did not seem to have a position on it. However, after it had been tabled for quite a while and there had been a prestudy in committee and it had been going on for quite a while, all of a sudden they decided, “Oh, I think we found something that we could use to justify why we are going to vote against this. It mentions a carbon tax in the preamble. Yes, this is exactly how we will vote against this.” Suddenly, the next week, they focused on this narrative and then they voted against it, but they did not mention it once before that.
I wonder who the award goes to in the Conservative Party for finding that red herring for them. It is absolutely shameful. I say this in the context that this is what is happening with the bill before us. I would love to know if they are going to vote in favour of it or if they are still in the process in the backrooms over there trying to figure out what words they can find in it to justify voting against it.
In this debate, I will try to focus a little bit on what I have heard. I have heard the member for Red Deer—Mountain View and a couple of members earlier talk about the price on pollution, or the carbon tax, and I will take the opportunity to set the record straight on some of that stuff.
Eight out of 10 Canadians are better off with the rebate they get back after the price on pollution. Now, I should clarify, in all honesty, that the two out of 10 Canadians who do not are probably the most well off and probably the base that the Conservatives are banking on and so they spread this misinformation to try to suggest that this is not the case. However, I will give members the facts. This has just recently been published.
The average family of four in Alberta gets $1,544 back per year. The average family of four in Manitoba gets $1,056 back. In Saskatchewan, it is $1,360. In Nova Scotia, it is $992. In P.E.I., it is $960. In Newfoundland, it is $1,312. In New Brunswick, it is $368. In Ontario, my home province, it is $976. As a matter of fact, when we look at the four provinces that are fully under the federal backstop because they have not implemented their own program, the average family spends about $500 on the price on pollution and gets back $804. Eight out of 10 Canadians are better off as a result of what they are getting back.
The parliamentary secretary to the government House leader raised this in a question earlier. Why do they never talk about the rebate? The rebate is such a fundamental core part of this.
Conservatives are more interested in spreading misinformation by suggesting that this is a tax, by suggesting that it contributes to inflation, which we know it does not, and then, most recently, by suggesting that it somehow impacts the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement.
That was probably the biggest mistake they made. What they did was make a concerted effort to obviously find this little bit in the agreement and say, “Aha, we found it. In the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement, we found it. It says 'carbon tax' in the preamble. Let us use it.”
The genius who discovered that probably did not take the time to look. Had they done that, they would have discovered that Ukraine has had a price on pollution, a carbon tax, since 2011. Ukraine needed to do that because as part of its efforts—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
984 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/23 4:22:10 p.m.
- Watch
This is not a conversation. When the hon. member finishes speaking, hon. members can ask questions.
The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
