SoVote

Jun/4/24 10:58:43 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the concerns, and we are all worried about the input costs in the supply chain. However, we are also recognizing government supports in the rebates and the return of that pricing to our suppliers. They are competing in the international market, which is pricing carbon; if we do not do it at home, they are going to be charged as they go forward. The Government of Canada is providing rebates and supports and, as I just mentioned in the speech, a tremendous amount of supports for our farmers to be competitive in the long term. We must do both: Protecting the environment is also protecting our economy.

111 words

Context: House Hansard - 324 - Jun/4/24

Mr. Larry Maguire (Brandon—Souris, CPC)

Jun/4/24 11:20:39 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would just like to get my colleague's comments about the difference in inflation between now and the Harper years, when the former Harper government stimulated the economy and balanced it again in six years instead of seven, which it even had in its plan, versus what is happening today.

53 words

Context: House Hansard - 324 - Jun/4/24

Mr. Ryan Williams

Jun/4/24 11:25:45 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the New Democrats are applauding this record. Canadians right now are poorer than they have ever been and are paying more for services compared to the rest of the world. We have less competition. There was even a limerick on this: The NDP let the Big Fish Swim HSBC Shaw, they're all in RBC and Rogers GREW Sunwing flew right out of view. At the end of the day, the NDP was the only party and its leader to say no to these mergers to help Canadians. When we look at what is happening with grocery prices, it is the only party that could have said no to what is raising the prices of groceries the most across Canada, which is the carbon tax. When we tax the farmer who grows the food, the truckers who ship the food and the manufacturers who make the food, those taxes add costs all the way down the line and grocery prices have gone up. More importantly, when we look at competition for groceries, even though we heard in this House of Commons Loblaws consistently and Metro hardly ever, not once have we heard about the manufacturers, the manufacturing size and scope of these big monopolies that exist not only across Canada but across North America: Nestlé, PepsiCo, Tyson Foods, Kraft Heinz, Archer Daniels Midland and George Weston Limited. Manufacturers are charging excessive amounts for their products because there is no competition. When we talk about competition, I finally figured out why it is so wrong with the NDP and the Liberals. If one were to sit down on a three-legged stool, there is balance. There are three legs and that is really what we are missing in competition: one is regulation, one is competition and one is innovation. The common-sense Conservatives talk about these three things. First, on the need for regulation, we do not believe in the big, powerful companies. We want to make sure there is regulation, companies are held in check and Competition Act changes are made. I have a bill that would eliminate the efficiencies defence. Second, looking at competition, we need small players to grow and compete. Third, we need to make sure we have innovation, new ways to bring innovation and bring more competition to Canadians. I finally figured it out with this three-legged stool. The NDP only has one leg. That is why, when people sit on it, they talk about regulation, regulation, regulation and not innovation or competition. People topple over, and they topple left. It is how it goes. When we talk about what we need for competition, of course we need to talk about regulation, but we have to talk about competition in Canada. No aspect of this motion talks about taking on manufacturers and their large profits or looking at who can grow in Canada. Let us talk about Save-On-Foods with 183 locations in western Canada. Why are we not helping Save-on-Foods come east in Canada? Freson Bros. in Alberta has 16 stores throughout the province, a great, locally owned grocery store. Why are we not helping it grow, expand and get to the rest of Canada? We are looking at how locally owned grocers can play a part in competing in the Canadian economy. There are new innovations right now. People can order groceries on their phones and they are delivered to their doors. There is normally a four-dollar delivery fee, but what is being eliminated? It eliminates the warehousing and the retail store. The biggest advantage that Loblaws, Sobeys and Metro have, besides the leader of the NDP's brother working for one of those companies, Metro, is real estate. The biggest monopoly in some of that real estate is the real estate investment trusts. They own all the land. Of course those grocery stores are going to be tough to compete against because they own the land on which they reside. Grocery right now is a retail game. It is basically a real estate game. They own the land on the right side of Main Street, and people driving home from work, driving to work or on the weekend get groceries for their families. They have a complete and utter monopoly on how we get groceries to Canadians. It has to be about distribution, which is part of innovation. It has to be competition, meaning we are bringing more competitors in. It has to be regulation, but regulation also means that we get rid of the burden of the carbon tax, which we know is increasing those prices. None of that is in this opposition day motion. When we talk about what could have happened for Canadians, there are motions and ideas, but we had ideas up front, we have put forward motions that the government could have made and that the NDP could have said no to, which was opposing the three mergers that are hurting Canadians today. The fact is that Canada cannot even get cellphone prices down. We have the highest in the world. The answer, of course, is the same thing: competition and innovation to get those prices down. When we look at bank fees, open banking will revolutionize banking in Canada, if we can ever do it. It has taken six years to get regulation in place. When we look at airlines, airports and competition as a whole, the only party in the House that is even willing to look at this is the common-sense Conservative Party. A common-sense Conservative government understands there are three legs to a stool. We know we are going to create competition, and we know we are going to ensure there is innovation. We are going to axe the carbon tax. We are going to ensure there are regulations so the monopolies do not control this economy. We will bring back competition to Canadians, to their families and to their savings and their households.

1000 words

Context: House Hansard - 324 - Jun/4/24

Mr. Ryan Williams

Jun/4/24 11:34:48 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, when it comes to competition, I do not think there is any industry we are really protecting and one that is really protected. Every part of the Canadian economy is a monopoly or an oligopoly. That is just simple fact, and that is after nine years of the Liberal government. When we look at every single sector, whether that be telecommunications, banking or airlines, the government has done nothing to create competition in any of that. The result is that Canadians, and I do not know if the member's constituents should be happy, are all paying more than every other G7 nation, every one, because of the government's inability to create competition. Saying that we are protecting something when everything under the government is under a monopoly or an oligopoly is pretty rich.

137 words

Context: House Hansard - 324 - Jun/4/24

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

Jun/4/24 2:24:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the minister has already taken measures to ensure that these programs are properly spent and that the processes are properly followed in terms of contracts. We know we need to continue to ensure value for money for taxpayers while at the same time continuing to step up on the fight against climate change and on the creation of a green economy. That is why we continue to deliver a Canada carbon rebate that puts more money in eight out of 10 Canadians' pockets in regions where it is in place, at the same time as we fight climate change effectively right across the country.

106 words

Context: House Hansard - 324 - Jun/4/24

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

Jun/4/24 2:26:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, obviously the taxpayers deserve to get value for money, which is why we have continued to strengthen our oversight and the measures whereby public servants grant contracts, including to outside consultants. We have reduced those numbers. We are making sure that we are able to both grow the economy and fight climate change at the same time as we ensure value for money. We will, of course, continue to work with the Auditor General and her recommendations as we move forward. At the same time, we are committed to delivering more money into the pockets of eight out of 10 Canadians as we fight climate change with the Canada carbon rebate.

113 words

Context: House Hansard - 324 - Jun/4/24

Mr. Taylor Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP)

Jun/4/24 4:51:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise this afternoon and speak to the motion brought forward by my colleague from Cowichan—Malahat—Langford regarding food prices. The motion calls for something rather simple. It calls on the Prime Minister and the government to force the biggest grocery chains in this country to lower food prices or face consequences. There are a lot of statistics in front of us, which have been offered up over the course of this debate. Most people in our ridings, in the communities we represent, understand this issue intuitively. They do not need to know what the rate of food price inflation was over the past three years or precisely what the profit margin of the big grocery giants has been compared with historical profit margins. People are going to the grocery store in places such as Prince Rupert, Smithers, Kitimat and Terrace. They used to spend $100 on the two bags of groceries that they are buying, and now they are spending $120. They are wondering why. They are looking around, after the difficult years of the pandemic, and seeing that the biggest corporations in this country have been raking in massive profits, but their buying power has not increased. Their salary has not gone up. Their employer has not given them a 20% raise, yet every time they go to buy food for their family, they are paying 20% more than they did just three years ago. It is wrong. What the motion seeks to do is to take real action to ensure that those prices do not just stabilize but actually come down. The cost of food in Canada has gone up 21% in just three years. The grocery giants posted profits of $6 billion in 2023 alone. The margins since 2021 have been double what the historical margins were in the grocery sector between 2015 and 2019. It is fairly clear what has happened here. The big grocery giants have taken advantage of the conditions of the pandemic, when, for all sorts of reasons, we saw the cost of everything go through the roof. We have seen other factors drive food price inflation, things such as global conflict and extreme weather events. However, what we see is that the price of food goes up quickly, but when the price of the inputs goes down and those supply chain issues resolve themselves, when things get better, the price of food does not come down. Why would they lower the price of food when they can simply rake in more profits? That is why we need action from the government. Now, the government has acknowledged that there is a problem, but the approach has been to ask politely for these corporations to do something on behalf of consumers. It has been nine months since the Prime Minister called on the grocery retailers to stabilize prices or face the consequences. At the time, he mentioned taxation as a possible consequence of inaction. However, we have seen no action, and we have seen no consequences. I looked through the much-lauded grocery code of conduct. I think the average Canadian reading through this document would be hard pressed to see how its contents are somehow going to lead towards lower prices at the grocery store. In fact, in reading through the code of conduct, I only found the word “price” mentioned twice. We also did a search for a word; I believe it was “reasonable”. We found 12 mentions of it. This is a voluntary agreement that asks the parties, companies in the food supply chain, to be reasonable with each other. Somehow this is supposed to lower prices for Canadians. I do not think that is a reasonable assumption. We need action from the government. We have seen, around the world, that other governments have been willing to act on behalf of their citizens, to take more aggressive action with companies that are raking in unreasonable profits. We have been talking about the example of France. In France, the government stood up for people and told the biggest food companies in the country that the prices of the products they were selling were unreasonable. It required them to bring down the prices of 5,000 products, and if they did not do that, there were going to be consequences. It came to an agreement with the 75 biggest food companies in the country to lower the prices of those products. That is what a government that is serious about protecting its citizens from price gouging is able to do. However, in this country, the Prime Minister politely asks it of companies, over and over again, and reflects back to Canadians that times are tough, things are difficult, but he has done very little to lower prices. I want to talk for a moment about the distinction between stabilizing prices and lowering them. We have seen, as I mentioned, that the unreasonably high prices have stuck. Yes, food price inflation has declined in previous months, but those prices are still at a level that Canadians cannot afford to pay. The margins are still at a level that is far in excess of what they have been historically. We need the price of food products to go down so that people can finally afford the groceries they need to feed their families. I mentioned the example of France. Greece has also taken steps to tackle food prices in a more aggressive way. South Korea has intervened on behalf of its citizens. Clearly, there are things that the government could do. This motion simply urges the government to take aggressive action, to say that enough is enough and that it is not going to ask politely anymore. It needs to require these companies that are raking in massive profits to lower the prices of their products for all Canadians. I think everyone accepts that we live in a market-based economy, where, for so many things, the price is set as an agreement between a willing seller and a willing buyer. That is a premise that most folks in the House accept, but there are also some things in our society for which we have said that we are not willing to solely allow the market to dictate the price of things that people need. When it comes to rent, most provinces in this country have controls on rent increases because, in the past, they have seen the cost of rent increase year over year, to the point where people simply cannot afford basic housing. The same is true with energy. We know that people need to be able to afford energy to heat their homes. In British Columbia, the price of energy is regulated so that people can have some sense of certainty when it comes to the cost of electricity. The government has intervened on behalf of consumers and said that, for certain things, it is not going to let the free market dictate what we pay. Of all the basic things that people rely on, one would think that food would be something the government would intervene on and say is non-negotiable. We simply cannot have a free-for-all when it comes to the prices people are paying for basic groceries. Everyone accepts that retailers should be able to make a modest profit as part of their business, but the profits that we have seen are not reasonable. The price that people are paying for food in this country is not reasonable. Therefore, we are urging the Prime Minister to step in and, despite his cozy relationship with these companies, be firm with them and establish what the consequences are going to be. He needs to look to these other countries around the world that have had some success in driving down the price of food and deliver food price reductions for Canadians in the short term. That is what is being asked for here. It is a very reasonable demand that every Canadian can get behind, and I hope everyone in this place supports the motion we have put forward.

1365 words