SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 334 - Jun/18/24

Jun/18/24 2:17:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal-NDP government is not worth the cost or the corruption. Thanks to the leader of the NDP, Canadians have been forced to endure one more year of this cover-up coalition avoiding accountability. From the $60-million arrive scam app to the $200 million spent on McKinsey and the $1-billion green slush fund, the NDP and its leader have been there to cover up for the Liberals at the expense of taxpayers. Now the NDP is putting forward motions at parliamentary committees to block any attempts to uncover the truth in those scandals over the summer. How many more billions of taxpayer dollars need to disappear for the leader of the NDP to finally stand up to corruption, stand up to the Prime Minister and say “enough is enough”? This summer, while they protect the Liberal Prime Minister, Conservatives will continue to fight not only for the truth but also for Canadians, each and every day.

163 words

Context: House Hansard - 334 - Jun/18/24

Mr. Rick Perkins (South Shore—St. Margarets, CPC)

Jun/18/24 3:11:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the environment minister is already under fire for his $30-billion carbon tax cover-up. He was a lobbyist for Cycle Capital. Cycle Capital companies got more than $200 million from the Liberal green slush fund. Now we learn that he is still a big shareholder in Cycle Capital, and since he became environment minister, Cycle Capital companies have gotten another $17 million from the green slush fund. Liberal insiders are getting rich on taxpayer money. There is a carbon tax cover-up. The environment minister is profiting from the green slush fund sleaze. When will Liberal corruption end?

101 words

Context: House Hansard - 334 - Jun/18/24

Mrs. Caroline Desbiens (Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix, BQ)

Jun/18/24 7:38:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her faith. I would like to bring her back to familiar territory: common sense. Back home, growing up, my father often talked to us about common sense. Common sense relates to a set of elements that everyone, or almost everyone, agrees on. Is my colleague's party seeking unanimity? After all, there is a part of the population that is worried about climate change and the astronomical contribution of billions of dollars in taxpayer money that is invested in oil companies that are already worth many billions of dollars since they make a lot of money. Since my colleague is for common sense, I would like to know if her potential government will stop investing in oil companies that already have billions of dollars. I would also like to know if she is going to increase health transfers to the provinces so that they can use them how they want and breathe a bit of life back into their health care networks.

169 words

Context: House Hansard - 334 - Jun/18/24

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

Jun/18/24 7:49:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member made reference to aircraft and expenses. I was in opposition when Stephen Harper flew to India and then made the decision to fly his car to India at a cost of $1 million for the taxpayer. At the end of the day, we value all tax dollars. We also value the services that tax dollars can provide. There is the difference between Conservatives and Liberals: Liberals care; Conservative-Reformers cut. My question to the member is related to the cuts. We talk about disability benefits. We talk about pharmacare. We can talk about dental care. These are the types of programs that this government is getting behind, providing literally hundreds, if not thousands, of his constituents supports. Why has the Reform Party of Canada, or the Conservative Party, as they are the same thing, made the determination that they are going to cut those services?

149 words