SoVote

Ms. Lisa Marie Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith, NDP)

Feb/8/24 1:23:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member could provide me with some insights. We are seeing right now immigrants being blamed for the overcrowded health care system and our lack of housing, when we know what is to blame is consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments that have severely underfunded our housing and health care systems. Our provinces and territories need money to provide health care in our provinces. As such, I am wondering if the member could please share some insights as to when we will see, in health care specifically, our provinces being provided with the funds necessary to provide the health care required. In particular, there was $4.5 billion promised by the Liberals in mental health transfers. We have yet to see that. Our health care system is overloaded. When will we see the appropriate investments being made?

142 words

Ms. Arielle Kayabaga

Feb/8/24 1:24:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to say in this House that immigrants are not to be blamed for any challenges our country faces. The challenges are already embedded here, and when immigrants come they also face challenges similar to those Canadians are facing, so they are not to be blamed for health care issues or housing issues. I appreciate my colleague's question, but I think she knows that health care is in the province, and the federal government has made the investments that continue to support provinces to do so. We have Conservative premiers across the country whom I have not seen at the table to be able to respond to those questions. I think the questions the member is asking are really good questions that I think the Conservative premiers across the country can answer as well.

141 words

Mr. Alain Therrien (La Prairie, BQ)

Feb/8/24 1:25:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, first I would like to say that I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Saint‑Jean. I am very pleased to rise today to speak to an extremely important issue, a sensitive issue if ever there was one, and I would say that the Bloc Québécois was pretty much the first to raise the integration capacity limit when we began talking about immigration thresholds. As we know, it was a sensitive issue back then. People called us xenophobic. They said we did not like immigrants, and they even called us racists. Obviously, at times all Quebeckers were labelled as such. However, we need to have a respectful debate in the House on such an important matter. I know that having a respectful debate with the Minister of Justice is like trying to catch a fly with chopsticks. We will still try in the future. By that I mean that the minister himself is not behaving in an extremely honourable manner, despite being called honourable. We would like a respectful debate. They kind of thought we were out to lunch at a time when, in the context of multiculturalism and a postnational Canada, people were praising mass immigration. We said that maybe people should listen to us and think about integration capacity. Since then, National Bank economists Mr. Marion and Mr. Durocher have said that population growth is too high compared to absorption capacity. That sounds a bit like what we were saying, that the demand for housing was much higher than the supply, that there were shortages. Some people say that a country's production, its GDP, is the most important thing. Obviously, if Canada's population continues to increase, the GDP will increase as well. Are we really richer? What actually reflects the wealth of a country, a people, the individuals who make up that nation, is GDP per capita. In Canada, GDP per capita has stagnated for the past six years. We are not getting richer. Why is that? Because our production capacities are not high enough in terms of fixed capital to enable newcomers to bring high productivity. We are limited. That has to do with integration capacity. Soon after that, CMHC said that there was a housing shortage. It said that 3.5 million units needed to be built by 2030 because of immigration, which is extremely important. CMHC said that immigration was leading to housing problems for the entire population. When we talk about housing supply and demand, we never talk in terms of the demand arising from one particular thing or another. “Demand” refers to the sum of people who want a place to live, a home. It is not broken down into parts. It hardly takes a Ph.D. in mathematics to see that the more people who come to this country, the more the demand for housing rises. That is a no-brainer. The point is to underscore or identify the upward pressure on demand, which leads to a problem that will eventually exacerbate the housing crisis. Immediately after that, CIBC said that CMHC is already behind the times and that five million housing units will have to be built by 2030. That is more than double the current supply. The University of Waterloo goes on to say that immigration lowers wealth and the per capita GDP. This information comes not from the Bloc Québécois or our leader, but from the University of Waterloo. Then TD Bank chimes in, saying that immigration is causing a sharp increase in demand which, combined with the central bank's interest rate increases, has caused supply to fall, resulting in a shortage of 500,000 housing units in two years. It is not the Bloc saying this. We are no puppeteers. We do not have puppets all over the place, with a complex network of strings that we would be pulling. We are not the ones saying this. It is TD Bank, National Bank, CMHC, CIBC. Finally, this government's own public service rang the alarm and warned that the immigration policy was making the housing shortage even worse. What was the government's response to that? The Minister of Immigration said that they were going to bring in immigrants who would build their own housing. Does he realize Bob the Builder is a cartoon, not real life? Does he understand that Bob's little hard hat is not real? That is not how things work. People cannot show up here with good intentions and say they will build their own house. They need land, for starters, and there is no more land around Montreal because of agricultural zoning. People have to find land, but land is hard to come by. They may have to go further afield. Where I live, some people have land, but they no longer have drinking water. That means infrastructure has to be built. What is Bob the Builder, with his uniform and his toolkit, supposed to do if there is no drinking water? He cannot build a house. He may have no choice but to build one outside the greater Montreal area, but if he wants to work in Montreal, he has a transportation problem, an infrastructure problem. What is he supposed to do, hop on a dragonfly? He has to get to work. These are all things that the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship and the federal government do not seem to understand. They are ideologues. That is the problem. They are out of touch with reality. They have absolutely no idea what the integration capacity is. Housing is part of integration capacity. Yes, we can play around with the supply a little, but the demand for housing has skyrocketed because of the Liberals' immigration policies. They also do not manage health care or education. They are not responsible for educating people or providing them with health care services. They have absolutely no idea what that involves. When it comes to French and teaching immigrants French, their policies are making the situation in Quebec worse. In order for immigrants to integrate, they need to speak French. Those are the realities that the federal government is unaware of. The Liberals should be consulting the provinces and Quebec about those things, but no, they will not. They cannot consult because they know everything. Ottawa knows best, apparently. Since they know everything, they do not need to talk to anyone. However, when it comes time to pay, they do not do so. They pretend they have a hearing problem and look completely taken aback. They are surprised that they have to pay. They have a $470-million debt because Quebec is welcoming their asylum seekers. I say “their” because those asylum seekers are the federal government's responsibility, but the federal government is not paying back its debt. I imagine that the immigration minister's accountant gets nervous when he sees him coming, thinking to himself that the minister may not be repaying his debts. I do not know. That is not the way to go about making a name for himself or the Prime Minister. He should be more careful. I have some impressive figures here. In 2023, Quebec had to create 1,150 French-language training classes just to educate newcomers. That is the equivalent of building 50 elementary schools in one year. Those are the kinds of integration issues we are talking about. These people must be integrated. They deserve to have a happy life, one filled with joy and happiness, one that will allow them to flourish. The government based its decision on McKinsey. The member for Beauport—Limoilou asked Mr. Barton the following: [Y]ou said earlier that you were concerned about the French issue. In the Century Initiative and the growth council reports, which of the recommendations address the protection, development and promotion of French in Quebec and Canada? Here is what Mr. Barton, from McKinsey, had to say: I think the focus, again on the growth council, was just on economics. It wasn't thinking about the social context. It was on productivity. Since then, economists have proven that productivity does not increase with increased immigration. With that, I want to leave the House with this thought. We have a responsibility. We must be compassionate towards the people who arrive here. We have a duty and a responsibility. We must welcome them intelligently. To do that, we must have the necessary integration capacity.

1433 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 1:34:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to hear my colleague's speech, especially since we come from the same area and share the same challenges. I imagine that, like me, he is dealing with a number of cases in his office of Canadians and Quebeckers who have married someone abroad and want to bring their spouse to Canada. I would like his thoughts on that. What does he think of the barriers we see every day in these people's files?

81 words

Mr. Alain Therrien

Feb/8/24 1:35:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member, who is from a neighbouring riding, for that question. Yes, we often get this kind of request. I would say we need to show respect for the people who are making these requests. We should be able to support these people as a condition for welcoming them, and I think this work is generally done quite well. Sometimes it takes a long time, but my office is often able to solve these kinds of problems and make people happier. That much is certain.

90 words

Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC)

Feb/8/24 1:36:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the number of public servants in the immigration department, does the hon. member have any idea how many there currently are and whether what he is proposing would create additional layers of bureaucracy that could contribute to a lack of efficiency in the system?

49 words

Mr. Alain Therrien

Feb/8/24 1:36:31 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, quite simply, Canada operates with two levels of government that often fight over jurisdictional issues. In the case of immigration, both levels of government are involved. To simplify this situation and cut out some of the public service without cutting services, which would be better, responsibility for immigration needs to be transferred to Quebec. I would go even further. If we want to have a more effective and more responsible public service, if we want to have the same number of services with fewer public servants and therefore save money, then Quebec's independence is a must.

99 words

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Feb/8/24 1:37:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will try to speak in French, but it is hard for me. I am sorry. In Alberta, more specifically in Edmonton Strathcona, we have a fast-growing francophone community. In fact, Edmonton's French quarter is in my riding and the people there add so much to the city. Does the member not think that we should focus on the objective of francophone immigration and adequate resources instead of targeting immigration levels?

76 words

Mr. Alain Therrien

Feb/8/24 1:38:02 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I must commend the hon. member on her efforts and the quality of her French. I humbly salute her. I have never been to Edmonton's French quarter. Maybe one day I will go if I am invited. I must say that it is important that the francophonie be preserved, especially in cases where it is concentrated in neighbourhoods, cities or regions. When we talk about adding resources so we can take in more people, what I want is for every immigrant who arrives here to be able to reach their full potential. If we want high integration capacity, we need a lot of resources. As I was saying earlier, resources are scarce. Those resources can only go so far. When we talk about land or infrastructure, for public transit or other purposes, the limitations eventually become fairly obvious.

142 words

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Feb/8/24 1:39:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is always a bit intimidating to speak after my leader. I will try not to disappoint him so that I can still come to his office when I want to filch some of his almonds. I was the first to speak last fall during a similar debate on the issue of immigration thresholds and the capacity of Quebec and the provinces to accept immigrants. As the first speaker, I began by expressing the hope that the speeches to come would present arguments rather than lob cheap attacks and insults. I even suggested a list of epithets I hoped not to hear in the course of the day, namely, the words “racist”, “xenophobic” and “anti-immigration”. Unfortunately, it appears I was a lone voice in the wilderness in expressing that hope. It is clear that, since October, the government, and the Minister of Immigration in particular, have not been open to that approach to debating this very important and sensitive issue. We would have liked to see some real openness. This morning, the member for Beloeil—Chambly, leader of the Bloc Québécois, used an expression that I have used myself, namely, that insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong. I am still trying to figure out the government's reasoning for opposing the content of our motion, which I think is extremely thoughtful, balanced, reasonable and focused on something important: the immigrant as a person. Our motion concerns the ability to properly accommodate, integrate and accept the responsibility we take on automatically as soon as we say “welcome”. The Bloc Québécois's voice is not the only one that has been heard since October. My colleague, the member for La Prairie, spoke about this a bit and I want to as well. Toronto also sounded the alarm by saying that its integration capacity has been far exceeded, that community organizations are at their wits' end, and that shelters are full and lack the funds needed to properly accommodate people. Suddenly, it seems like the issue is getting a little more of the government's attention. When Quebec speaks out, they turn a deaf ear. Toronto, on the other hand, is a little harder to ignore. My colleague from La Prairie also mentioned banks. They are generally not the first ones to say that we should perhaps reconsider what we do with immigration and review the thresholds. Economic circles are generally pro-mass immigration. However, they have started to say that too much immigration, without taking integration capacity into account, can have an impact. They have begun to worry about the harmful effects of a massive and uncontrolled influx of immigrants that would put pressure on a number of sectors. They focused on housing, and that is what we are hearing a lot about right now, but the problem also extends to the availability and quality of public services. Academics have also started talking about immigration and integration capacity. For example, Brahim Boudarbat of the school of industrial relations at the Université de Montréal said that, when the population increases, whether it comes from birth, permanent immigration or temporary immigration, the pressure on services and infrastructure increases accordingly. He said that sharp increases reduce the time we have to adjust and, as a result, lead to problems in terms of housing, child care services and hospitals, as we are now seeing. Furthermore, the speed of the increase does not allow us to adjust in real time and provide adequate and appropriate services to the people we are trying to integrate. As my colleague also mentioned, the CMHC has begun to say that there is a problem with the number of housing units. By 2030, we will need approximately 3.5 million homes based on the higher thresholds the government is anticipating. I understand that it may actually be even more than that. It is impossible to build 3.5 million homes overnight. That takes time. I would like to remind the House of something. The Bloc Québécois has never said that the housing crisis is caused by newcomers, and we will never say that. Newcomers are among the many victims of the crisis, but they are not responsible for it, just as they are not responsible for the lack of classes for children or for health care service delays. They are victims of these situations. If we are not responsible for managing the thresholds, we are ultimately responsible for the results, that is, a decline in the quality of services for the population as a whole and, above all, for the most vulnerable, namely immigrants. Earlier today or yesterday, more people added their voice on the issues of immigration, thresholds, intake capacity and integration. We are talking about regular people. Through a poll, Canadians and Quebeckers conveyed the message that there are in fact problems related to integration capacity. The Leger poll mentions the failure of integration, but we still have to temper the way this discourse is presented. People sometimes say that this is simply anti-immigration rhetoric. However, one thing that comes out of the polls is that Quebeckers recognize the benefits of immigration much more than the people of Canada, particularly when it comes to the economy, labour and the aging population. This led Jean-Marc Léger to say that the fact that Quebeckers want immigration levels to be reviewed is not because they are anti-immigration. On the contrary, it is because they want better services for these people. They want solutions for the people we are welcoming. In short, all these fine people—the banks, the mayor of Toronto, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, academics and the general public—started to say something more or less similar to what the Bloc is saying. That is quite a few people for the Minister of Immigration to insult instead of making arguments. I hope that as time goes by, the minister will calm down and come up with real answers. I was talking about housing, but that is not the only factor related to integration capacity. That is why we need to have a broader discussion to explore what we can do to improve our integration capacity. This includes issues such as language, a crucial factor in Quebec and a key aspect of integration capacity. We can also talk about infrastructure. It is all well and good to want to build housing, but if the zoning does not allow it, if there is no groundwater or insufficient access to drinking water and sanitation infrastructure, new housing cannot be constructed. Some towns and cities no longer have any land on which to build new housing. We need to think this through with the various stakeholders in the field. As far as health and education are concerned, even if we were to build hospitals and schools, we need teachers and health care workers. What is more, we need people who are much more specialized in immigration, especially when it comes to asylum seekers. In the case of children, those who arrive in Canada sometimes have more specific needs in terms of special education or social work. Unfortunately, they often arrive with trauma that requires much more individually tailored management. We therefore need to have these kinds of professionals available. It goes beyond the financial issue. It would be nice if the federal government paid back the $470 million it owes Québec, but that will not solve everything. In fact, showering Quebec with money is not going to make health care professionals, housing and French language training magically appear. We need to discuss it with the various stakeholders, but we have not done that yet. Despite the unanimous support for the Bloc Québécois motion last fall, the next day, the minister announced new thresholds that had obviously not been discussed with the provinces and Quebec, and we did not know where they came from. That is why we are introducing this motion with a specific request: We are asking that consultations be held with the Quebec and provincial counterparts within 100 days. Also within 100 days, we are asking the government to present a specific plan and provide accurate answers to justify the thresholds it is going to establish, including the discussions that lead it to come up with the numbers. That will provide concrete proof, this time, that government support for our motion, if we do get it, will not simply be, “talk all you want, I will turn a deaf ear no matter how I vote”. As I said at the outset, the main people targeted in the debate are the most vulnerable, those we want to take in. Although I do not think it will come true, I will repeat the wish I made last time: We must be able to debate this in a healthy, co-operative and comprehensive manner with all stakeholders, rather than get mired in a rash of insults that serve absolutely no purpose and certainly do nothing to help the people this motion targets, namely newcomers.

1550 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 1:49:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, once again, I very much appreciated my colleague's speech. I believe it is Montérégie Day today. It is very important to highlight our region and the importance of immigrants in our region. I am going to repeat the question I asked earlier. My colleague spoke about housing issues. I would like to talk about Quebeckers who are waiting for their spouses, who are abroad. These people do not have housing issues. Often, they even have a job waiting for them here in Canada. I would like my colleague to tell us about this situation. Apparently, Quebec has set a target, and people are stuck. There is a long waiting list because of Quebec's criteria.

122 words

Ms. Christine Normandin

Feb/8/24 1:50:29 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to come back to what I was saying, which is that the discussion on levels must be comprehensive and must also take place outside the provinces, because there is something called interprovincial migration. All of that has to be taken into account. The housing problem is critical, regardless of immigration categories. People who have always lived here are also struggling to find housing. Take, for example, the situation in Saint‑Jean‑sur‑Richelieu, which I mentioned in my last speech. In a newspaper article, it was reported that many asylum seekers who had entered the country through Roxham Road went to Montreal, but then ended up going back to Saint‑Jean‑sur‑Richelieu because the city was welcoming, rent was a bit cheaper and it was easier to find work. Sometimes they had developed local ties, but there was still a housing shortage for these people. It is even more urgent now. This week, it was announced that the vacancy rate in Saint‑Jean‑sur‑Richelieu is 0.4%. There are currently only 56 housing units available in Saint‑Jean‑sur‑Richelieu, which has a population of 100,000. It does not matter who the people looking for housing are; the problem exists. This needs to be taken into consideration when determining integration capacity as part of a comprehensive discussion with everyone, especially the people on the ground.

245 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 1:51:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, when I take a look at the larger picture of immigration, what we have seen over the last 15 or 20 years is a movement towards more provincial participation. To amplify that fact, one only needs to take a look at the provincial nominee program. Over 100,000 people will be coming, targeted, over the next year under that program alone. I wonder if the member could provide her thoughts in regard to the fact that when we talk about the supports that need to be put into place, provincial jurisdictions also have a role to play, given that they also have an interest in the immigrants who are coming to Canada.

114 words

Ms. Christine Normandin

Feb/8/24 1:52:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the provinces certainly do have a role to play in immigration, especially Quebec, because of the language issue. The problem is that despite the role Quebec already has, the system is clearly not working, since Quebec's minister of immigration, francization and integration is so fed up that she is threatening to hold a referendum to repatriate all immigration powers. This comes from a party that is not really known for wanting to talk about referendums. On the contrary, it campaigned on the fact that it would never speak of holding a referendum on Quebec's independence. Now that party has reached the point where it has to talk about having a referendum because this is not working. Even though there are powers for Quebec, Ottawa is clearly turning a deaf ear, and this is the result. Theoretically, the provinces and Quebec have powers, but in reality, if the government decides to do as it pleases, which apparently it is perfectly capable of doing, then we end up in the situation we are in. Everyone is shouting that the threshold has been exceeded, that the government is managing immigration irresponsibly and that newcomers are the ones paying the price.

201 words

Mr. Gérard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC)

Feb/8/24 1:53:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Saint-Jean for her speech, which was interesting as always. I think that 338 parliamentarians can say with one voice that our riding offices are overwhelmed with the backlog of immigration applications. There is a backlog of nearly one million applications. That is the reality after eight years of this Liberal government. Could the member tell us if she is seeing this situation in her riding? How is she managing the situation?

81 words

Ms. Christine Normandin

Feb/8/24 1:54:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I can confirm to my colleague that he is not the only one getting calls about immigration. All of our offices are being contacted, sometimes even by people who live in government members' ridings, if I may take a little shot at them, because they cannot get services from their own member and they know that the Bloc Québécois is good at its job. They are calling us and asking us for help with their problems because, once again, we are showing that the government is incompetent when it comes to managing immigration. One example is the backlog of one million applications. Every day, we get one phone call after another, proving that it is not working and that the government is missing in action.

131 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara (Vaughan—Woodbridge, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 1:55:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kings—Hants. I am pleased to rise today to discuss Canada's immigration system as it relates to asylum claims. As we are all aware, the world continues to face an unprecedented migration crisis. Canada is not alone in welcoming a significant number of people fleeing violence, war and persecution to seek refuge at our borders. Canada has made a commitment, grounded in domestic law and international conventions, to provide support to individuals who apply for asylum. The federal government is meeting its legal and humanitarian obligations, and we are continuing to provide support at a level that reflects the ongoing consequences of asylum claims across the country. Our government continues to work with our provincial, territorial and municipal partners to determine how we can support them better and support them as effectively as possible. To that end, we have put additional resources at their disposal. While the provinces and municipalities are responsible for housing and support for asylum claimants, we recognize the need for the federal government to play a role and for all levels of government to continue working together on finding solutions. We have been there throughout the entire process and we will continue to be there. Since its inception in 2017, the federal interim housing assistance program, or IHAP, has been providing funding to provincial and municipal governments on a cost-shared basis to alleviate housing pressures and boost capacity to better respond to the increased volume of asylum claims. IHAP reimburses direct housing costs, such as shelters, hotel rooms and other interim housing arrangements; triage and transportation operations; and indirect costs, such as meals. Amounts per area of jurisdiction are set following the submission of requests for reimbursement and allocated based on the available envelope. To date, the federal government has provided provinces and municipalities with nearly $750 million in IHAP funds to help alleviate housing pressures related to asylum seekers. Since 2017, nearly half of all federal IHAP funding has gone to Quebec to support the increased need for housing for asylum seekers. The Government of Canada is committed to working collaboratively with provinces and municipalities to implement permanent housing solutions. That is why, last July, the government contributed an additional $212 million through IHAP and extended the program in response to the higher volume of asylum seekers. Last week, my colleague, the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, announced an additional $362.4 million for the program. In all, a total of $150 million has been given to Quebec under IHAP during this fiscal year. This new funding will help the provinces and municipalities deal with a surge in demand for places in shelters. This will help stop asylum seekers from becoming homeless. I wanted to talk about Reaching Home, Canada's homelessness strategy, but I see that I am out of time.

487 words

Mr. Majid Jowhari (Richmond Hill, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 2:00:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, representing Richmond Hill has given me the privilege of learning about different cultures, joining in their celebrations and, most notably, enjoying lots of delicious food. I am delighted to rise today to acknowledge the beautiful celebration of the lunar new year, which is taking place on February 10. Many Canadians of Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese and other Asian heritage will celebrate the start of the year of the golden wood dragon. My riding is home to many of these vibrant communities. Over the past two weeks, I have had the honour and the privilege of celebrating this occasion with different community members, organizations and representatives, where we were able to enjoy lively performances, music, art and, especially, food. My family would like to wish all families lots of joy, good health and good fortune this new year. Long nian kuai le. Long nin fai lok. Saehae bok mani badeuseyo. Chúc mung năm moi. Happy lunar new year. San nin faai lok.

166 words

Mr. Kevin Waugh (Saskatoon—Grasswood, CPC)

Feb/8/24 2:01:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of the Liberal government, living has never been more expensive for Canadians. The temperatures in Saskatoon were below -30°C for 10 days straight in January, and now the bills are coming in from that cold spell. It is shocking how much the carbon tax is costing businesses. For one owner, 33% of their bill was carbon tax and GST on the carbon tax. That amounted to $1,127 for one month. For another, 35% of their bill was carbon tax. That amounted to $1,690 in one month. Now the Liberals plan to quadruple the tax with another increase coming on April 1. Common-sense Conservatives would build the homes, fix the budget, stop the crime and, more importantly, axe the tax.

129 words

Mr. Paul Chiang (Markham—Unionville, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 2:02:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as the member of Parliament for Markham—Unionville, I rise today to celebrate the lunar new year, the year of the dragon. This culturally significant occasion brings our diverse communities across Canada together in joyous celebration, reflecting on traditions and values that enhance our nation. In Markham—Unionville, the lunar new year holds a special place in our hearts, as we embrace the rich diversity of Asian cultures that contribute to our community's sense of belonging. From vibrant parades to festive gatherings, the spirit of renewal and hope resonates throughout our riding. On behalf of the constituents of Markham—Unionville, I extend warm wishes to all Canadians celebrating the lunar new year. May the year of the dragon bring abundance, happiness and good fortune to all of their loved ones. [Member spoke in Mandarin]

140 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 278