44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 21, 2024 10:00AM
- May/21/24 4:29:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 6:36:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will have a chat with the member for St. Catharines later about that.
My question for the member is as follows. Conservatives have been going on for months now, talking about fuelling inflation with more, I think they called it, budget inflation. They keep talking about how inflation is going to skyrocket and get even more out of control as a result of the budget.
However, none of that happened. We have now seen four straight months where inflation has stayed within the Bank of Canada's target of 2% to 3%. Today's inflation numbers are the lowest that they have been in three years.
Why does the member continue to suggest that false narrative, that the budget is contributing to inflation, when reality suggests that he is completely wrong?
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 6:41:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am rising on a point of order to respond to the question of privilege raised by the member for Simcoe North on May 8, respecting the government's response to Order Paper Question No. 2221 and the testimony of the Department of Finance on the subject matter of Bill C-69, the budget implementation bill. Question No. 2221 asks for information about overpayments for the Canada child benefit. The member acknowledged in his intervention that the government did respond to significant parts of his written question. However, the government was unable to respond to a sub-element of the member's question, and I will quote that part. The question states:
...collected from taxpayers who received overpayments following or due to death of a child; and (b) what is the amount of money represented by the overpayments in (a)(i) and (a)(ii)?
There is a simple and straightforward response to this. The Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA, has an identifying code for why a child has become ineligible for the Canada child benefit. However, CRA does not have the reason codes for the overpayment. The reason for this is that the CRA does not have the information about a child's death, but the CRA cannot determine the reason for an overpayment or a recovery and how that relates to the child's death. The death of a child could form one piece of potentially multiple pieces that would result in an overpayment.
The question posed by the member on May 7 at the finance committee was about cancelled eligibility for the Canada child benefit and was not requesting information about overpayments. These are two different questions. In conclusion, the specific information sought in Question No. 2221 relates to overpayments. The answer provided to the member reflects the data available in the CRA systems relating to overpayments in the manner requested by the member. Where there were limitations to the provision of data, a rationale for the limitation was provided in response to the member.
As you can see, Madam Speaker, there was no intent to mislead the member or the House in the government's response to Question No. 2221. Moreover, information the member referred to in his intervention from testimony at the finance committee on May 7 differs from the information provided in response to Question No. 2221 since they are different questions. As I have previously stated in the House, the government can only answer the question posed in the Order Paper Question. It cannot assume that a member is making a different question. I can confirm that the government's response to Question No. 2221 was accurate, and we stand by it. A question was posed through the Order Paper process. The government responded to the precise question accurately and within timelines established in the Standing Orders. This matter does not in any way affect the member's rights or privileges in discharging his parliamentary duties.
494 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 7:01:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, would the parliamentary secretary agree with me that, if Conservatives spent more attention on making lives better for Canadians instead of on what Tim Hortons coffee cups lids are made out of or on the plant-based options Häagen-Dazs is offering, if they had the kind of passion they show toward those issues for actually solving problems for Canadians, we would be a lot further ahead?
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 7:42:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's entire speech, and the one thing I just cannot wrap my head around is how she can accuse government spending and government investing in Canadians through our budget of being inflationary.
Conservatives have been saying for months now that by the investments we are putting into Canadians and the money that we are putting into the budget, we are just going to fuel inflation. However, the opposite is true; this is the lowest that inflation has been in three years. Over the last four months, inflation has been in the target range that the Bank of Canada sets, which is between 2% and 3%. In reality, there is no rise in inflation as a result of the budget.
Does the member not recognize that what she is purporting and what the Conservatives are purporting was never actually a reality?
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 8:03:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I listened to that last exchange between my colleague and the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, and she said that she thought it was important to have a national school food program. This budget would provide for that, so obviously she supports that element of it.
I did not hear, or I did not quite decipher, whether the Green Party is going to vote in favour of this budget, so my first question is this: Is the Green Party going to vote for it? If the answer is no, how does she justify voting against the budget, given that there are some elements to it that she very much does support, such as the national school food program?
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 8:15:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member asked a rhetorical question: Who would vote against putting food into the mouths of children? Who would vote against a national school food program? I will tell her that it is the exact same people who get up every day and talk about the struggles of people and having to go to a food bank; these people talk about the problem but have absolutely no interest in helping to create a solution.
The reality is that the Conservatives are almost rooting for the opposite, for failure in government policy. They see that as a political win. Unfortunately, we are at this place in the House where Conservatives do not have an interest in outcomes being successful. They just have an interest in their political opportunity.
The member and her colleagues have shown great leadership over the last number of years in their ability to bring forward ideas. What are her thoughts on that?
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 8:47:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member spoke a lot about carbon tax.
Can he explain to the House the difference between this carbon tax that we have in place now versus the one that he ran on in 2021?
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 10:06:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I found it very interesting that the member asked what Kraft Dinner has to do with Ukraine. He should go and have look, because CNN did an interview with the Kraft CEO specifically, who said, “We’ve already increased the prices that we were expecting this year, but I'm predicting that next year, inflation will continue, and as a consequence [we] will have other rounds of price increases”. The article goes on to say, “Beyond the double-barrel challenges of shortages of raw materials and inflation, issues like...the war in Ukraine...are adding to the uncertainty”, so the member does not need to take my word for it.
The member asked what Kraft Dinner has to do with Ukraine. He can listen to the CEO from Kraft, who made those comments that I read out, who explicitly said shortages coming out of Ukraine are contributing to inflation.
156 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 10:21:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I know that the member was in the House earlier in the debate when a Conservative colleague stood up and tried to glowingly suggest that Stephen Harper had actually balanced a budget in 2015. I was not here at that time, but I certainly know how Stephen Harper did that. He did that by selling off shares of GM. He did that on the backs of veterans. He did that by increasing old age security to 67. He did a number of things. Therefore, when Conservatives talk about balancing a budget, what they are really talking about is cuts and cutting as much as they can, because they do not believe in these social programs. Could the member give some insight, since he was here at that time?
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 10:35:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, if I understand this correctly, Conservatives are saying it is this government's fault people have to use food banks, but when this government puts forward a solution to that, this member says it is not in the jurisdiction of the federal government, one should read our Constitution and the federal government should have nothing to do with this.
The member spoke as though he was very complimentary and understood and encouraged school food programs. He must know Canada is the only G7 country without a national school food program, but yet he not only will vote against this budget that puts money into it, but also voted against the national school food program policy that came before the House about three months ago. We are expected to believe this is all because the Constitution says we should not do anything about it.
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 10:47:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member is right. A lot of what we are hearing is language that is aimed at dividing Canadians and using those anxieties against Canadians. The reality is that what Canadians have been going through in the last year and a half or two years, since coming out of the pandemic, has been tough on a lot of people. Her message of hope and trying to work together certainly is something that is going to get us somewhere as opposed to trying to find people's anxieties and exploit those. I wonder if she can further share how she sees this impacting Canadians, generally speaking, and the way that people are treating each other.
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 10:55:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we request a recorded vote, please.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 10:59:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to the very important piece of legislation before us. It is what we call the fall economic statement, which was, yes, introduced in the fall. Unfortunately, because of Conservative delay tactics and their continuing to put forward amendments and having multiple people speak to it, we still have not even gotten to the place where we can pass the fall economic statement. However, I will say that a lot has happened since then, particularly with respect to inflation.
Members may recall that this particular piece of legislation came in at a time when inflation was still working its way downward but had not yet gotten into the range that the Bank of Canada dictates in its policy, which is within a range of 2% to 3%. We were seeing higher inflation. When I think back to when we were having these discussions in the fall, one of the things I think about is what Conservatives were saying about our budgetary measures at the time. They were saying that they were inflationary budgets. The Conservatives were saying to stop spending money because when the government spends money it is just adding to inflation. They said it over and over.
All the experts came out and said that actually the particular programs that the government was running in order to support Canadians were providing money to some of the most vulnerable people, the people who would be utilizing the money for basic necessities, and this was not going to contribute to impacting inflation. However, that did not matter to Conservatives because it was not feeding their narrative, so they continued on, marching along and talking about the supports that we were making for Canadians as something that was going to affect inflation and continue to drive it up.
We see today that the year-over-year inflationary rate is at 2.7%. This is the lowest it has been in three years. It has been within the range of 2% to 3% despite the fact that I know Conservatives were rooting for inflation to continue to rise because that would fit their political narrative, and they do not worry about the impact it has on Canadians. The Conservatives always just want the government to fail in any possible way it can, just so they can get a little political gain out of it, even if it means it comes at the expense of Canadians. We have seen inflation now, for four straight months in a row, within the target that the Bank of Canada sets, which is between 2% and 3%.
Conservatives were wrong. They were wrong when they said that investing in Canadians contributed to inflation, and they were wrong in predicting an outcome where those investments would actually drive inflation up. We knew that was going to be the case, because all the experts were saying it at the time, but what the Conservatives were doing is something that the member for Fredericton was talking about earlier. The Conservatives intentionally used and continue to use against Canadians the anxieties that Canadians feel. The Conservatives use those anxieties and turn them into a weapon against the very people that they are impacting, and they are doing it just for political gain. That is the only reason. It is the exact same reason that Conservatives say over and over that inflation is caused by the Prime Minister and the current government.
An hon. member: Yes, you got it.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Madam Speaker, in reality, we know that inflation is something that is going on throughout the entire globe.
I know that the member for Saskatoon—University just ran back in here and sat down so he could heckle me. I challenge him to ask me a question, to actually think about a question that he can ask me when it comes time to do so, because I am looking forward to hearing what he has to say about what I am saying right now. I will, of course, respond to that question. What we heard is not only Conservatives being wrong—
689 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 11:04:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we know that Conservatives were wrong when they predicted inflation would go up as a result of the supports we were investing in for Canadians, and we know that they were also wrong when they tried to suggest that inflation was created by the current government, because inflation is something that is being seen throughout the world. It is something that was being seen in the United Kingdom, which had a much higher inflation rate than we do. It is something seen in the United States, which continues to have higher inflation than we do.
As a matter of fact, I got a real kick earlier, when we were debating the budget bill, out of how a member from the Conservatives got up and tried to make a witty joke by saying he does not know what Kraft Dinner has to do with Ukraine, as though he was trying to somehow suggest that there is no connection between the two. The rich irony is that there is something fundamentally connecting Kraft Dinner and Ukraine, which is the resources and the supplies.
The CEO of Kraft himself said that the supply constraints and probably wheat coming out of Ukraine were impacting the ability to keep food prices low, so I just find it absolutely remarkable that Conservatives believe what they are saying. I believe that they have convinced themselves to believe what they are saying, but the reality is that it is just not true. They were wrong when they suggested that investing in Canadians was going to lead to inflation, and they are wrong when they continue to try to make the point that inflation is something unique to Canada, but I think that the vast majority of Canadians understand this. I think that they understand what Conservatives are doing, how they are trying to utilize those specific anxieties against them and weaponize them.
We look at exactly what the measures are that Conservatives were objecting to, and they are the exact measures in the fall economic statement that Conservatives said would lead to inflation. It is things like strengthening the Competition Act to ensure that the Competition Bureau is empowered to hold grocers accountable and prioritize consumer interests. Just so Canadians understand, this is really important because in the United States, the largest grocery retailer owns or controls 11% of grocery sales, and that is Walmart. Do members know which is the largest one and what its percentage is in Canada?
An hon. member: Loblaw.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: That is right, Madam Speaker; it is Loblaw. Does my colleague know what the percentage is? He does not. It is 42%, so 42% of groceries in this country are controlled by Loblaw and their retail. With Loblaw and a couple of the other large grocery retailers, very quickly I see how we have created an oligopoly here. There is an oligopoly operating in our country when it comes to grocery sales.
It becomes very important to identify what is going on here and to put measures in place to ensure that they are properly dealt with, and that is exactly what we are doing. It is what Conservatives are against. They are very loud and have a lot to say when it comes to government spending, but they are absolutely silent when it comes to the profits that are being made by Loblaw, probably because the Leader of the Opposition's own chief campaign manager, Jenni Byrne, is an actual lobbyist for Loblaw.
The campaign manager of the very individual who is standing up trying to fight against lobbyists and saying lobbyists are useless is a lobbyist for Loblaw. She has a vested interest in ensuring that Loblaw keeps its prices high, so how can anybody actually listen to what the Leader of the Opposition, the member from Carleton, says, and actually think that he is being genuine in any regard when he suggests that he understands the impacts of the greedy corporations we are seeing, in particular the retail grocery giants and Loblaw, which I mentioned specifically?
A few of the other initiatives that are in this particular piece of legislation, the fall economic statement, include unlocking $20 billion in new financing to build 30,000 more apartments per year. Conservatives love to get up and talk about how no apartments have been built, apparently. However, I can tell members that, in my riding alone, we are now on the 13th affordable housing project that has been built in Kingston, in which the federal government has, in one way or another, been a partner.
I get a real kick out of it when I hear Conservatives go on and on about it. Meanwhile, when the Leader of the Opposition was the housing minister, he built a total of six units, not buildings, not duplexes, but six units. The number seemed so wildly low to me that I thought it was impossible, that somebody was doing something with the numbers, that there was no way that this could be real, until I realized that this information actually came forward from an Order Paper question that was tabled. That information is tabled and available for everybody to see: In the one year when the member for Carleton was the minister responsible for housing, he built a total of six units. Those six units happen to be in Quebec, if one goes and looks at the numbers. However, he built a total of six units throughout the entire country.
Another thing we have done, through the fall economic statement, is to launch the new tax-free first home savings account. This has helped over half a million Canadians start saving for their first home. We have supported seniors through the Canada pension plan, the guaranteed income supplement and old age security, all of which are indexed to inflation.
Canadians are not going to forget very easily how the Leader of the Opposition, when he was in government previously, raised old age security, the OAS, to 67 years old. If there is anybody out there who is in their early 60s and planning for their retirement, they should seriously give some thought to whom they want to elect as their next government and whether it is a former member of a government that has a track record of actually increasing old age security requirements from 65 years old to 67. In all likelihood, it is going to happen again.
Earlier tonight, when we heard Conservatives talking about how they “balanced” the budget in 2015, I guess that, from an accounting perspective, they did. However, let us look at what they did to get there. They increased old age security to 67. They closed veterans' offices, doing this all on the backs of veterans. They did a number of initiatives to “balance” the budget. They did it in that one year in 2015, if one actually accepts the fact that one would consider that a balanced budget.
People have to understand that, when Conservatives talk about balancing the budget, they are really talking about cuts. Out of every Conservative budget that was introduced between 1990 and present day, only two of them ran surpluses. There is that made-up surplus I just talked about from 2015. There was also another one that Stephen Harper had at the beginning of his term as prime minister, and that was because it was coming off the heels of Paul Martin's surplus that he had. This is factual. Those are the only two budgets that ran surpluses. The reason governments will run deficits is that, as long as one's economy is growing at a faster pace than one is taking on that debt, one is still in a very healthy position. It is why we continue to get AAA credit rating reports from independent third parties for the manner in which the government is spending and taxing.
It is why we continue to see, year over year, more investments made in Canadians. It really just comes down to whether one thinks that there is a role for government to play in ensuring that people have equal opportunities.
That is exactly what we see as a government, which is that at least people have to have a shot at being able to strive and get what they want and hope to get out of their career and their life.
There are a number of other issues in here. The other one I wanted to touch on was $10-a-day child care, which was another issue that was updated in the fall economic statement. This was a very important piece of legislation that brought in an opportunity to empower more people to get out into the workforce. We have already seen it. We did not have to go far in order to study it. All we had to do was look at what was happening in Quebec and how more people, more spouses and, in particular, more women were in the workforce as a result of $10-a-day child care. This is another advancement our government is continuing to push forward in the spirit of fairness, equality and opportunity for everybody.
I look forward to the question from the member for Saskatoon—University at this point. I am sure it will be great.
1564 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 11:17:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, for starters, monetary policy is something that is done by a central bank. Fiscal policy is done by a government. Maybe the member should just Google those terms so he knows what he is talking about in the future.
When he asks about who is leading the debate, he makes it sound as though this is the first time we have talked about this. This is the fall economic statement. We have debated it.
An hon. member: It is summer.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: He is right: It is summer. Madam Speaker, that is because the Conservatives will not let this debate collapse. They just keep dragging it on and on. The finance minister has spoken to the bill, probably on more than one occasion. He suggests I am the lead on this when we have been debating it for nine months.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 11:20:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for that very serious question. I think it is a fair question, and an angle that, quite frankly, the government should be pushed on because there is always more that we can do.
There is the northern housing plan, and I might have the name wrong, but perhaps that is not enough. Perhaps this member thinks that it needs to go further, and perhaps there is validity in that claim. However, it is important to reflect on the fact that we are building a lot of housing throughout the country.
I used to be a mayor of a city in Ontario, and I could not have ever thought of the federal government coming to a municipality and saying, “Let's make a deal” and completely leaving the province out of it. That was unheard of in my time in local government. However, we have a Minister of Housing who is literally going around the country to different communities and saying, “I don't even want to talk to the province. How do I make a deal with you directly?”
However, the member's question was more about indigenous communities, and I completely accept that. Perhaps we should be doing more, and I encourage her to continue to stand up to challenge the government to do more in that regard.
229 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 11:21:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it goes to what I was saying during my speech, which is that Conservatives are taking people's anxieties, turning them into a weapon and then using it against them. They are trying to convince Canadians that inflation is completely driven by the government and that spending more money on people through budget measures is going to drive up inflation even further, but only the opposite in both of those regards has proven to be true.
Conservatives are really good with their slogans, but they are not so good when they switch from having to rhyme off three things to four things because inevitably one of them misses at least one of them, except for a few key ones that are really good. They have been practising a lot, but the rest of them keep missing one. Although they are good with their slogans, it is not doing anything for Canadians.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 11:23:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on the first part, I want to congratulate the member because he is one of the members who can get all four of those out perfectly. He did not lose eye contact and did not show that he may be forgetting one. It was very well done.
To answer his question, I would ask him this: In what year did Brian Mulroney balance the budget? In what year did Stephen Harper balance the budget?
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Madam Speaker, I am answering his question.
For growing economies, we know that, as long as our growth is outpacing our deficit, we are in a fiscally responsible position, and that is the reality.
They are laughing right now, but they should talk to Stephen Harper because that is all he did, or Brian Mulroney. It is exactly what they did. They never balanced a budget. They balanced one budget in 2015, apparently, by slashing veteran services, and then they had another surplus in 2007 on the heels of Paul Martin's surplus. However, the reality is, and this is exactly what Conservatives do because they know that, as long as our economy is outgrowing our deficit, we are in a fiscally responsible place.
208 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/21/24 11:25:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, she was not successful, because she gave one and then she had to look down. She could learn a lot from the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, because his delivery was really good.
I go back to exactly what I said before, which is that what matters the most is how the economy is performing in relation to the deficit that is projected. That is what matters the most. Conservative prime ministers have known that. Conservative premiers know that. Everybody has always operated in that manner.
If what the member is saying was true, then one would think that these fiscally responsible Conservative prime ministers all throughout Brian Mulroney's time and all throughout Stephen Harper's time would have just done exactly what the Conservatives are saying, but they did not.
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
