44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 29, 2024 02:00PM
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to be here to talk to Bill C-353.
There are a lot of moments in this place when I think about the specific challenge that we have as legislators. When we look at the human condition and what is happening in the world around us, we have to find a way to create legislation that will hopefully help and be supportive.
I will be supporting this piece of legislation to get it to committee, but I do have some concerns about it. What we need to do, of course, is the important work in committee to make sure that those concerns are addressed. Hopefully, we can see folks work together to make this the best possible bill.
This makes me think of my many years working with the newcomer community in the work that I did before being elected. I remember sitting with people who were facing the terror of having a loved one taken, not knowing what was happening to them and wondering every day whether that would be the day when they hear something that lets them know their loved one is safe. I think most of us cannot imagine what that reality would look like.
I think about the responsibility that someone who becomes an elected member of Parliament has when those things happen. We often have to sit powerless with our constituents and watch things unfold knowing that we are doing everything we can, and we still do not know what the outcome will be.
When I was reading through this particular bill, it really reminded me of a now dear friend from my riding. Her name is Jan. Hers is a completely different circumstance, but it resonates with me given the similarity.
I remember her chasing me down in a change room. One of the fun things about being a politician that I do not think people always hear about is that when we become public figures, sometimes we have the most interesting conversations in the oddest places. Jan's granddaughter was stolen. She was in another country and they were trying everything they could to get her home. It was terrifying for that family, because they did not know if she was safe and she was very young. I remember, in that moment, thinking to myself that if I was a grandmother having this experience, I would also follow somebody into a change room to make a difference for my loved one.
I really appreciate deeply the intention of this bill, but I have some clear questions about providing PR for informants and their dependents. I think we really need to address the issue of exploitation and how we can keep these people safe in those circumstances. It is so important that when people are in a vulnerable state, when they are afraid and when they are stressed by political interference, unlike anything most Canadians ever experience, we keep them as safe as possible.
We need to be talking about sufficient supports for the families of victims. We need to make sure that when they are going through some of these vulnerable times, the supports are there. We may think they are there, but I can promise that a lot of the supports are not. People are left to wrestle with profound agony and pain, and the supports are not there to help them move forward.
We have to look at some of these important things. Which incentive programs would the minister create? Should hostage-taking and arbitrary detention be put together? There are some questions that I definitely have as we go through this process, and I look forward to having meaningful conversations and making sure that we have experts. Again and again in this place, one of the things that I am really grateful for as an MP is that we do not have to be experts. We can have experts come in, walk us through these really challenging things and provide feedback that helps us make really good decisions.
It makes me think of the work that I do in my riding, because one of the things I have been provided with is expertise from my own riding on particular issues. I learn so much from constituents as they guide me with their expertise. In these particular issues that are very complex and far-reaching, we need to make sure that there are no unintended consequences. What we do not want to see, of course, is legislation put in place, some serious unintended consequences happening, and then our being behind the ball trying to get that dealt with.
I think we are all very apprised of what is happening in Israel and in Palestine. There is a lot of agony and pain. It does remind me of my dear friend Mary, who fled Germany during the time of the Holocaust, how she survived and that so many of her family members did not. She told me that she did not believe in God anymore but that she still prayed for peace every day. When I look at the piece of legislation before us, I just think about her intention, what she did to help herself go through such a hard crisis, to lose so much.
I think we all have to remember that when we cannot find solutions that are peaceful, the price is far too high. Part of this, of course, is knowing that there are people who have been taken hostage and that someone is waiting again and again for when they are released, to hear their name. I was reading some articles about some people who have had their loved ones taken in Gaza as hostages. Every time people are released, they are holding their breath, hoping that their loved one's name is on the list. When we look at these things, I think we have to remember that we must do all we can to create peace and that we must do all we can to find safety for all people, and that we should pray for peace unceasingly.
I think the bill needs a bit of work. It needs a little bit of study. I think the experts will be very helpful. We know that there are some good recommendations from the New Democrats that date back to a foreign affairs study in 2018. The report was called “Strengthening the Canadian Consular Service Today and for the Future”. It sought to prove instances of hostage-taking that have not been fully incorporated in the bill. We might be able to look at some of those things and hear from the experts.
Things like creating a mechanism to track the extent to which consular services meet service standards and meaningfully improving communications with families are absolutely key; we need to make sure that families are kept up to date as much as possible. This is the most terrifying period of their lives, most likely, and keeping them informed in a really practical way would make a big difference.
As for the decriminalization of private payment of ransom, I think of the people whom I love the most, and if I had a dollar to pay for their lives, I think I would do it. We need to really bring this back to the humanity.
I will be supporting the bill. New Democrats will be supporting the bill. We will hope to see some really good and strong work in committee to make it a stronger bill, to make sure that there are no unintended consequences that would have a poor impact on people who are facing these realities.
I just want to send my love out to everyone who has ever had this experience or is living through it right now. We have to remember, in all of the work that we do, that humanity is at the core of it. It is hard sometimes, when we are divided, to find our common humanity. I think it is important that we remember how human, how vulnerable and how scared people are, and not silence people but bring together the places where we can be human.
1368 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I appreciate many of the comments made this evening. I listened very closely to the parliamentary secretary, and a couple of thoughts crossed my mind. Sometimes I think we might be putting the cart ahead of the horse. Members of the Bloc and the NDP say that if the bill goes to committee, they have lots of concerns about what is in the legislation. The parliamentary secretary talked about what we have in place already and how the proposed legislation, Bill C-353, could in fact cause a harmful outcomes for hostages.
At the very least, what might have been nice would have been for a standing committee to look at the issue in its entirety and possibly come back to the House with recommendations as to how we might be able to give strength to the legislation and, ultimately, protect all the different interests that were highlighted by my colleague, the parliamentary secretary, who is responsible for public safety and deals with foreign affairs on so many occasions. He has done an outstanding job representing Canadians in many different types of situations.
When I look at the private member's bill before us, those are the types of concerns I have. I do not believe that we should send the bill to committee, based on the arguments that were presented. We need to recognize that we stand up, first and foremost, for Canadian values. We need to protect Canadians and their interests and work with other like-minded countries. We all want a more stable and secure world; that is one of the reasons Canada is working with allied countries in order to deal with some of these very complicated issues. Our laws, through time, are modified and given strength, which reflect our values, what other allied countries are doing and the best practices taking place.
There were a couple of things the parliamentary secretary referred to. One of them is how the bill would mandate the sharing of information. Information is so critically important and can be a deciding factor in many ways in the outcome of a hostage-taking situation. If there were certain legal mandates that compel information, that information could ultimately compromise a negotiation that is taking place. What we are really talking about is the lives of Canadians.
At the end of the day, I do not have any interest in being involved in high-stakes negotiations and having to deal with individuals who have taken hostages. We see this virtually every day on the news lately with regard to Hamas and what is taking place in the Middle East. I hear that if this particular legislation were to pass in the manner it is proposed today, we would be providing incentives for people kidnap or hold people as hostages as a way to derive cash or be given some sort of preferential treatment to come to Canada. That goes against what possibly even the member wanted to be in the legislation.
That is the reason I would say the legislation, on that one aspect in itself, raises a lot of flags, and we should all be concerned. When one talks about providing incentives for someone to ultimately kidnap or about providing information or mandating its being released, when it could ultimately compromise someone's life, I have a difficult time with that.
What I have not heard in any of the discussions and the debates I have listened to is anything that is very clear about how the legislation would help in a way that would not come back to hurt the victims and their families. There is a certain amount of discretion necessary in the releasing of information, as an example. We have to go out of our way to ensure that we are not providing any form of an incentive for people to be kidnapping Canadians or holding them as hostages.
652 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, all the comments over the course of the bill's presentation deserve more than five minutes, and I am glad that I will be able to do that at committee.
It is unfortunate that the member for Don Valley West did not read the bill or simply did not understand it, because none of those arguments are actually in the bill. Therefore, I will not bother with that.
I want to clarify that the bill was put forward not as a critique of the government or its existing policies but as a next step forward in the natural evolutionary development of laws that are necessary in the terrifying new reality of this world. This is something we are going to face, and the bill would sharpen existing mechanisms to meet the moment in our own country. In many cases, laws evolve from generalized existing provisions, which often fall short in contending with the evolution of the problem, to become more targeted. That is exactly what the bill would do.
Sometimes, our laws have been a product of motions or other declaratory statements that, to be effective, eventually had to find their way into specific laws. As a case in point, prior to 2001, there was no crime related to terrorist activity in our Criminal Code. However, in 2001, Canada passed the ATA, which recognized a whole new series of provisions related to terrorism, which would become one of the greatest challenges in our lifetime. Similarly, international law had only developed its own specialized terrorism provisions over the last decades, which it did for the same reasons: Terrorism had evolved, and the existing frameworks needed to be specifically recalibrated to address the enormity of the threat.
Oftentimes, when these newly targeted provisions are introduced, the question inevitably arises of whether they are really needed. The question came up here a couple of times. However, the House has often adopted a targeted approach to current problems as a first step in a long process of legislative development. In my opinion, it has done so correctly. This is actually what we do here. Therefore, whether we are dealing with terrorism, sexual assault, minority rights or drunk driving, our system has only benefited from more targeted legislation, which ensures that there is better prevention, deterrence and punishment.
Bill C-353 is actually premised on new hostage-related initiatives that are currently being undertaken by our government in an effort to improve Canada's capacity for dealing with the ravages of hostage diplomacy. This has, frankly, upended international world order, specifically, in the last number of months. It was the current government that actually took the step in launching the declaration. The bill before us would strengthen that and sharpen those tools. It would give the senior official for hostage affairs, a lead in consular services who is now concerned with this, more tools in order to do her job, or maybe his job in the future.
The bill would go a step further. It would legislate and impose consequences for perpetrators, create mechanisms for bringing our hostages home and provide better assistance for the families caught in these nightmare scenarios. There is certainly recognition, both by government and our allies that developed a robust legislative response to hostage-taking, that there is a new threat on the horizon, which needs to be addressed concretely.
Some in this chamber have asked whether the legislation would have prevented the hostage taking of the two Michaels. I am not sure. No bill is a silver bullet that would cover the plethora of contingencies or different kinds of cases. I will say, as was correctly noted by the senior official who was appointed in the Department of Foreign Affairs, or Global Affairs Canada, Julie Sunday, that no two hostage cases are the same. However, undoubtedly, in a multitude of scenarios, Bill C-353 would provide better tools to respond to a wide swath of possibilities. Obviously, they would do so in concert with other tools available to the government.
I look forward to seeing the bill go to the next stage at committee. I thank my colleagues in the Bloc and the NDP for actually reading it.
701 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:19:51 p.m.
- Watch
The question is on the motion.
If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
The hon. member for Calgary Shepard.
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:20:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we request a recorded vote.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:20:34 p.m.
- Watch
Pursuant to Standing Order 93, the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, June 5, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:21:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, several weeks ago, I asked a question about Red Seal training programs in correctional institutions. The answer seemed unsatisfactory, so I am providing further details today about issues that I think ought to be dealt with.
There is no question that proper training, in a trade for which there is a market demand, helps incarcerated individuals to find employment upon their release. There is also no doubt that, when a former inmate finds employment, it reduces recidivism.
This is why Corrections Canada follows a mandate of “assisting the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community as law-abiding citizens through the provision of programs in penitentiaries and in the community.”
The programs are reasonably understood to include educational programs, programs that give job skills and programs that allow individuals to become productive members of society, thus the terms “correctional” facilities and “penitentiaries”. It is the idea that one is not being locked away forever but rather is being prepared, upon having done one's time, to be a productive member of society.
Our net results in Canada are singularly unimpressive. Offenders who have received training within our system have a recidivism rate that is no better than those who have not. To me, this suggests that our job training certification programs in our correctional institutions here in Canada must not be doing a very good job of giving our inmates verifiable, certifiable skills.
It is odd, then, to learn that our system has produced an impressive 112,000 vocational training certificates over four years, starting in 2020 and ending at the end of last year. With this in mind, I filed an Order Paper question about the details, and I received some interesting responses.
I asked: How many certificates have been issued, broken down by region, over the past five years? What are the top categories of certification? How many provincial apprenticeship programs are engaged? How many Red Seal apprenticeship programs are engaged?
I will tell members the depressing results. Out of 112,181 certificates issued in 2020 through 2023, only 64 were for actually achieving a certified vocational Red Seal-approved apprenticeship program. There were zero provincial apprenticeship programs outside of the Red Seal program. The most common vocational programs were for WHMIS, which is the workplace hazardous materials information system; for working at heights; and for ISO 9001 training, for a total of about 17,000 certificates.
I looked into this, and these certifications are not properly understood as being meaningful certifications. They are, in fact, just one-day programs. The WHMIS program can be purchased for $7.95. That is not a very serious program.
I think this explains why, when I look to Out of Bounds magazine, a prisoner-published publication, I see the following comment from an inmate: “these generic skills don't qualify as job readiness skills on a resume. These are prerequisites of any job applicant in the same way appropriate dress and good personal hygiene are implicitly understood.” That is unsatisfactory.
Why is more not being done?
517 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:25:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I really appreciate the opportunity to rise in the House this evening to speak about the positive benefits offered by the Correctional Service of Canada's employment and employability programming.
Employment programs and services help build essential services and skills related to employment while connecting offenders with resources to assist them in finding community employment after release. The benefits associated with correctional programming have long been demonstrated. In fact, going back a decade, research has noted a direct connection between employment and positive reintegration results upon release.
We know that those inmates who participate in CORCAN employment programs while incarcerated are more likely to be granted parole and get jobs in their communities. Also, offenders under community supervision are less likely to return to crime. Without the holistic approach of the CORCAN program, offenders would not be in a good position to find employment.
In addition, community programming works to save Canadians money. The daily cost of maintaining the inmates in prison amounts to six figures annually. When an inmate can be safely returned to their community and find employment, they are working to support themselves financially. They are required to pay taxes, and they no longer incur, of course, a six-figure cost to the Canadian public. This is why I am very happy to note that there has been a year-over-year increase in the opportunities for inmates to undertake Correctional Service Canada programming.
In the fiscal year 2022-23, employment coordinators, including staff and contractors, directly assisted offenders under community supervision to obtain over 2,000 community job placements, and it is estimated that job placement levels will be maintained in 2023-24.
In 2022-23, on-the-job training opportunities were provided for over 2,600 offenders within one of CORCAN's five business lines, and in 2023-24, another 2,600 offenders benefited from the on-the-job training. I am proud to note that a total of over 16,000 vocational training certificates were earned by inmates of all backgrounds in 2022-23, and in 2023-24, there was a significant increase in vocational training, representing over 22,000 certificates.
In the apprenticeship program, offenders have the opportunity to register, accumulate hours and take block training to become Red Seal journeymen in a specific trade. Since September 2020, a total of 147 offenders participated in apprenticeship programs, of which 64 have completed their certification, with many of them continuing on.
Correctional Service Canada has formed partnerships directly with indigenous communities to further increase project availability and to provide indigenous offenders with additional job training.
433 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:29:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, amidst all that, the parliamentary secretary made the point in his final remark that I was trying to make: 64 individuals over a four-year period got Red Seal certification. I can work out the math myself. This is about 20 people or less per annum in their entire system. There are about 10,000 incarcerated individuals in Canada. That is pathetic. I know there are other things the government is doing, and they are helpful and useful in their own small way, but someone is not going to get a job if they do not have a definable skill with an objective external certification, and 64 out of 10,000 over a four-year period is a disaster of a program.
The parliamentary secretary is trying to talk about thousands of certificates for one-day programs. They are not useless, but they are not something that is going to get anyone a job. That is why our recidivism rate is no better for those who complete these programs than for those who do not.
177 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:30:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as stated, correctional interventions work to provide meaningful employment and employability program opportunities for offenders, increasing the likelihood of safe and successful reintegration. As part of this, CSC works with partners in the academic, private and not-for-profit sectors to access learning materials that mirror those available to the general public and to develop courses online with community employment standards.
These resulting vocational certificates are issued in most cases by a third party. This certificated work is to provide offenders with the support, referrals and services to address their employment needs and contribute to their ability to find and maintain employment. For Canadians, there are benefits to having safer communities: less repeated crime and additional workforce availability for inmates.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:31:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, on May 9, I asked the government if it was concerned that pro-Hamas entities in Canada are funnelling money to support an illegal encampment at the University of Toronto. Unfortunately, it is very sadly telling of the naïveté of the government that my question touching on an issue of public safety, of foreign interference and foreign financing of an illegal pro-terrorist occupation of a university campus was answered not by the Minister of Public Safety, not by the Minister of Global Affairs and not even by the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, but by the Minister of Diversity and Inclusion.
Who is the Liberal government trying to include here? Is it Samidoun, which has been on B.C. campuses? This is a registered Canadian non-profit with a direct affiliation to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a listed terrorist organization since 2003. Is it Hamas or the IRGC, which murdered 55 Canadians on board flight PS752 and is able to continue to operate on Canadian soil with impunity because the government has been too cowardly to designate the IRGC as the terrorists they are? Who is the government trying to include?
The encampments set up at university campuses across Canada are not representative of peaceful protests. In the case of the U of T encampment, it is an illegal occupation comprising mostly external demonstrators for hire who are not even students at the university. Moreover, the vitriolic, hate-filled comments and signs at this site are nothing but anti-Semitic propaganda aimed to intimidate and threaten legitimate U of T students.
We are seeing the normalization of hate and anti-Semitism. Students are being subjected to death threats and assaults. Just yesterday, I was at OCAD University with Samantha Kline. Samantha is suing OCAD because of its inaction. OCAD chose to turn a blind eye to the death threats that Samantha was receiving, and OCAD chose to ignore the threats of sexual violence toward Samantha's mother. I guess I should not have been surprised when I saw that a group claimed it was from OCAD and supported the illegal encampment at U of T. This is not normal, but it is rapidly becoming the new norm in our country.
These types of peaceful protests are anything but peaceful. They are certainly not a reflection of the Canada we aspire to be. Enough is enough. Governments at all levels must be seen to take action to restore the safety of our educational institutions and indeed our streets. These sham protests are being funded by shadowy pro-Hamas entities that are supporting a listed terrorist organization. Also, the government, in choosing to ignore violence, threats, anti-Semitic slogans and other forms of hate propaganda, is making a complete mockery of Canada's laws.
I want to ask the parliamentary secretary whether it is government policy to turn a blind eye to the violent protests abetted by Hamas supporters. If so, perhaps the government is unaware that when an ostrich sticks its head in the sand, its most vulnerable part sticks out.
I will ask this again. Is there any concern by the government over what is happening on our campuses and streets? Are there any investigations being conducted by the RCMP or our security service agencies? Also, what exactly does it take for mob rule to overtake the rule of law? How far will government go to ignore what is going on? If Canada supposedly has hate propaganda laws, what is required for such laws to be enforced? Is it the government's strategy to just duck its responsibility and pass the buck to other levels of government to handle until these sham protests go away, or does someone have to die before the government finally acts?
637 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:35:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for bringing up these important issues.
Standing up against hate is a fundamental Canadian principle that every member of the House stands firmly behind. We as a government also have this principle firmly embedded in our mission and mandate. It includes standing up against the recent rise of anti-Semitism. Everyone in this country has a right to live free of discrimination, no matter who they are.
Our government is taking meaningful measures to protect the Jewish communities from hate and discrimination. We have invested more than $200 million in Canadian anti-racism strategies. Budget 2024 proposes $173 million for Canada's very first action plan on combatting hate.
These programs provide crucial funding to support community projects that fight racism and hate. More than that, we must support work that is led by and shepherded by communities. It is through the work of intercultural and interfaith discussion that we find compassion and understanding for each other. It is by learning about one another that each of us is able to find common ground. Through this, we can also melt barriers. By promoting multiculturalism, we strengthen our society. That is what Canada is, and each and every member of the House stands firmly behind respect for diversity and addressing discrimination.
Canada's action plan on combatting hate is an important step toward a safer and more inclusive Canada.
Canada's action plan on combatting hate will support community outreach and law enforcement. It will tackle the rise in hate crimes. It will enhance community security. It will counter radicalization. It will increase support for victims.
To enhance our effort in combatting anti-Semitism, our government appointed Deborah Lyons as Canada's new special envoy on preserving Holocaust remembrance and combatting anti-Semitism. Engaging with communities on current issues and creating community-informed solutions are core aspects of the special envoy's mandate. To further support the special envoy in her work at home and abroad, we have increased her resources by an additional $7.3 million. This money will help her in her work.
Canada is a multicultural society built on the principles of inclusion and respect for diversity. We have learned that our differences do not have to divide us. Our government remains steadfast in combatting all forms of hate, racism, discrimination, intolerance and, in particular, anti-Semitism. All of us in the House are united in that.
409 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:39:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have immense respect for the parliamentary secretary as a person, but citing the amount of money being thrown at the problem is not enough because we see the efficacy of this government's efforts. What it is doing is not good enough, and unfortunately, what it is doing is not working.
The safety and security of Canadians are first and foremost a responsibility of the Canadian government, yet one need only look at campuses across this country or speak to anyone from the Jewish community and, increasingly, non-Jewish Canadians to know that safety is top of mind for everyone, alongside the challenges of affordability and the cost of living. What this government is doing and continuing to propagate by sharing the same talking points is not going to make us any safer.
Is anyone investigating what is happening at these encampments and will the government take action? What will it take?
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:40:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, these are important matters. We must be discussing in the House the issues of discrimination, making sure that each and every Canadian is safe, secure and welcomed in each and every place in society.
Our government is committed to combatting hate in all its forms. We are committed to ensuring that everybody is safe at home, on the streets, in places of worship and in our communities. Budget 2024 proposes $273.6 million to combat hate. This includes $20.2 million for the hate crimes task force. It also includes $25 million for anti-hate programming and promoting intercultural ties and community-based activities.
We have many initiatives that address discrimination and anti-Semitism. We are committed to supporting Canadians and the betterment of society.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:41:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals keep bending over backwards for their friends in oil and gas. The Globe and Mail has multiple sources confirming that the Minister of Finance was considering a windfall tax on oil and gas in this budget, but then backed down in the face of strong lobbying from oil patch executives and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.
If anyone was wondering whose side the Liberals are on, they are clearly not on the side of Canadians, who are facing unprecedented climate disasters, with wildfires, flooding and multi-year droughts. They are clearly not on the side of future generations, which deserve a climate-safe future, a future where ecosystems are not collapsing, where our food systems are not threatened. They are not on the side of farmers or indigenous communities, who are on the front lines of the climate crisis. They are on the side of big oil and gas. When the oil and gas lobby asks, there is almost nothing the Liberals will not do. They will buy a pipeline. They will water down key climate policies. They even invited oil and gas CEOs to help them craft their climate plan. That is like inviting the fox to help design the henhouse.
Once again, when there is a sound policy to tax the excess profits of oil and gas companies, something that the majority of Canadians are in support of, to disincentivize price gouging and fund climate solutions that would make life more affordable for Canadians, the Liberals side with the CEOs, who are fuelling the climate crisis while raking in record profits. As for the Conservatives, they cannot even agree if climate change is real. Canadians are getting delays and disappointment with the Liberals, and climate change denial with the Conservatives. Consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments have put us in the position we are in now, where we have missed every single climate target.
When will the government implement a windfall tax on oil and gas? It is time to choose: Will the Liberals stand with Canadian families or will they continue to side with big oil?
353 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:44:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to take part in tonight's debate on this very important topic.
The member is correct in that we must act on transitioning Canadian industry towards a sustainable green economy as well as make sure that those who pollute pay their fair share.
This is generational: ensuring that we build the economy of the future, both with investments in key transitional sectors of the economy, as well as developing a fair tax base so that we are able to make these key investments in a fiscally responsible way.
Last month, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance announced bold actions in budget 2024 to build a fairer future. We firmly believe that, at a time when middle-class Canadians are struggling to get ahead, when their hard work is not paying off, it is necessary for the government to improve the fairness of Canada's tax system. This means asking the wealthiest Canadians to contribute a bit more so that we can make investments to ensure a fair chance for every generation.
Since taking office, we have reduced taxes for the middle class while implementing measures to ensure that the wealthiest individuals and corporations are contributing their fair share. One way we propose to do that is by increasing the inclusion rate on capital gains realized annually above $250,000 by individuals and all capital gains realized by corporations and trusts from one-half to two-thirds effective June 25, 2024. Of course, principal residences will continue to be exempt from capital gains. It is expected that this new measure will generate more than $19 billion in new revenues over the next five years. This is new money that will be available to help fund the green transition.
We have also permanently increased the corporate income tax rate by 1.5% on bank and insurance company groups in Canada and introduced a one-time Canada recovery dividend of 15% on the largest bank and insurance company groups. In addition, we have introduced a 2% tax that applies on the net value of share buybacks by public corporations throughout the country, and we have implemented a luxury tax on private jets and luxury cars priced over $100,000 and boats priced over $250,000. To further increase fairness, our government proposed to modernize the alternative minimum tax to ensure that the wealthiest Canadians do not avoid paying their fair share through the significant use of deductions, credits and other tax preferences. This is just a small part of our plan.
Tax fairness is being coupled with creating an investment environment that will attract foreign investment in key sectors, which will help Canada grow into the next sustainable economy of the future. Canada is at the forefront of the global race to attract investment and seize the opportunities that the global transition to net zero presents.
I hope the member opposite saw the announcement our government made with Honda. The $15-billion investment in Canada was made possible, not only by Honda, but in partnership and in line with our government's investment in the clean economy.
522 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:48:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this week I met with members of the Matsqui First Nation who have been calling for a health study for their community for decades. They are seeing rare forms of cancer in their community in unprecedented proportions that should be unheard of. The government could fund that health study, it could invest in protecting the communities impacted by the oil sands and by the corporate greed that we are seeing across this country, but it is choosing not to. It could be giving every low- and middle-income Canadian a heat pump, but it is choosing not to.
If the Liberals are choosing not to, because, as they are saying, there are fiscal restraints, well then tax the big oil and gas companies that are burning our planet, poisoning the water and fuelling the climate crisis that we are in. When will the government implement a tax on the biggest corporations, the big oil and gas companies?
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:49:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing.
Our government understands that it remains hard for many Canadians to make ends meet, and that is why we are still supporting those who need it most. As was clear in the 2024 budget, we remain committed to increasing tax fairness in Canada, as well as the investments in the most needed areas. Thanks to the actions we are taking, not only with respect to fairness, but as well by contributing and investing in those areas, Canadians can count on this government. They can count on our government to continue looking at ways to improve the fairness of the tax system and supporting Canadians who need it most. We are going to continue to make those investments based on the revenue that we are collecting and ensure that no one is left behind.
142 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:50:42 p.m.
- Watch
Pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), the motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been withdrawn, and the House will now resolve itself into the committee of the whole to study all votes under Department of Health in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025.
52 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/29/24 7:51:36 p.m.
- Watch
The House is now in committee of the whole to consider all votes under Department of Health in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025.
Today's debate is a general one on all votes under the Department of Health. The first round will begin with the official opposition, followed by the government, the Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party. After that, we will follow the usual proportional rotation.
Each member will be allocated 15 minutes at a time. This time may be used for both debate and for posing questions. Members wishing to use this time to make a speech have a maximum of 10 minutes, which leaves at least five minutes for questions to the minister. When a member is recognized, he or she should indicate to the Chair how the 15-minute period will be used, in other words, how much time will be used for speeches and how much time will be used for questions and answers.
Also, pursuant to order made earlier today, members who wish to share their time with one or more members shall indicate this to the Chair, and the Chair will receive no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent.
When the time is to be used for questions and comments, the minister's response should approximately reflect the time taken by the question, since this time will count toward the time allocated to the member.
Pursuant to order made earlier today, the time provided for the debate tonight may be extended beyond four hours as needed to include a minimum of 16 periods of 15 minutes each. I also wish to indicate that, in committee of the whole, comments should be addressed to the Chair. I ask for everyone's co-operation in upholding all established standards of decorum, parliamentary language and behaviour.
We will now begin tonight's session, starting with the hon. member from Fort McMurray—Cold Lake.
332 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
