SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 337 - Sep/17/24

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Sep/17/24 10:23:27 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes for his speech. Here is the problem I have with his speech: I get his point, but the miserable situation he described with such over-the-top zeal made me think he was talking about Kazakhstan, only worse. I would like the member to tell me where in Canada one might witness the vision he painted today.

73 words

Mr. Michael Barrett

Sep/17/24 10:23:56 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the vision that I paint about what happens in Canada is evidenced on the streets in communities across this country, in every province including Quebec, where people are lined up at food banks and there are tent cities, devastating destruction, despair and even death. This was not something that happened before the destructive policies of the NDP-Liberal government, and Conservatives are going to fix it. I am very hopeful for what our country has in store, because it is built on such a strong foundation. The Liberals have not been able to destroy it in nine years. Life was not like this before the Prime Minister and is not going to be like it after him.

119 words

Ms. Raquel Dancho (Kildonan—St. Paul, CPC)

Sep/17/24 10:24:53 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, whenever the Conservatives talk about fiscal responsibility, all we hear from other parties is that Conservatives are going to cut, when really it is just their not admitting that they do not care about the future of the financial stability of our country at all. They do not want to balance the budget. They do not care how much they are burdening future generations. I ask the member where a Conservative government would find savings. It is really important that Canadians understand that Conservatives will take the financial responsibility of this country very seriously, so I would like to hear the member's remarks about where he thinks we can save taxpayers some of their hard-earned money.

120 words

Mr. Michael Barrett

Sep/17/24 10:25:30 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a real pleasure having the member for Kildonan—St. Paul back in the House. It is really great to see her here. We talk about what Conservatives are going to cut. We are going to cut the Liberals' $60-million arrive scam. We are going to cut their billion-dollar slush fund. We are going to cut all of the waste that we keep exposing. This weekend, they committed $2.14 billion to a company. Who is someone who has a real strong interest in that? Mark “carbon tax” Carney has a big interest in that company. Instead of providing Canadians who need it with high-speed Internet, for example, by the end of this year, they are going to take a decade more to not get it done, but they are going to make sure Mark “carbon tax” Carney gets rich while Canadians suffer.

154 words

Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC)

Sep/17/24 10:26:34 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent speech and for the opportunity he is giving us today to examine the Liberal government's incompetence and inability to govern the affairs of the state and of all Canadians. The motion before us reads as follows: That, in light of new reports that GC Strategies and other companies incorporated by the cofounders have received millions of dollars in government contracts, including a number of sole-sourced contracts, the committee request the Auditor General of Canada to conduct a performance audit, on a priority basis, of all payments to GC Strategies, and other companies incorporated by the cofounders.... It is very technical, but that is important because, sometimes, if one does not ask the right question, one does not get all the answers. Now, thanks to my colleague's motion, we will be able to get the answers, but only if we have the support of enough MPs to proceed. I will keep reading: ...and all contracts with the Government of Canada, including all departments, agencies and Crown corporations, including all subcontracts which GC Strategies and the before mentioned have been awarded under those contracts and that the committee report this request and these findings to the House. With hundreds of thousands of Canadians lining up at food banks after nine years of this Liberal government's inflationary policies and inflationary spending that has doubled the cost of housing and food since 2015, Canadians and Quebeckers might expect the government to manage their money efficiently. Unfortunately, as we saw in the case of GC Strategies and the Liberal green fund, or the “green slush fund” as many now call it, and as we saw in the case of the $21 billion in subcontracts awarded to outside consultants, the Liberal government sees its responsibility to Canadians and to government finances as a mere triviality. However, it is no trivial matter for Canadians who are unable to make ends meet at the end of the month. It is no trivial matter for families who cannot afford groceries and who are forced to make hard choices to feed their children or forced to decide between driving themselves to work or the kids to school. That is the new reality now, after nine years of this Prime Minister. The GC Strategies case illustrates the way this Liberal government operates, which, I would remind everyone, has caused Canadians to lose all confidence in this Prime Minister's ability to control both himself and the affairs of state. The example is being set from the top, and that is the problem. When the example is set from the top, when we have a Prime Minister who has twice been found guilty of ethics violations and his sole explanation and response to the Canadian public is that he takes full responsibility for his actions, yet he faces no financial penalty and no consequences other than having to utter that statement in the House, what sort of message does that send to the rest of the government, to all the deputy ministers, to all the people whose job it is to manage the public purse? It sends the message that they can cross the line and there will be no consequences. That, unfortunately, is what happened in the case of GC Strategies. I would remind members that the ArriveCAN app should have cost $80,000 but ended up costing $60 million. From $80,000 to $60 million: what a perfect illustration of the indolence this Liberal Prime Minister has infused into the workings of government since he was first elected nine years ago. Let us consider the situation as a whole. I too was out and about in my riding. Over the summer, I met with hundreds, if not thousands, of residents, and every one of them told me they struggle to pay their bills at the end of the month and asked me how things got to this point. There was GC Strategies, the use of consultants, the Liberal green fund and the $500 billion in inflationary spending supported by the Bloc Québécois. This spending inflated the economy, made more and more public funds available and drove up costs across the board. That is what happened. Unfortunately, I hear people laughing, but this is no laughing matter. There is nothing funny about people struggling to understand why they can no longer pay their bills when they used to be able to a few years ago. There is nothing funny about people getting their paycheque and discovering there is less and less money left over to pay their bills at the end of the month. This government, which has been propped up by the Bloc Québécois in recent years, has made things harder for people, even in Quebec. I am not referring to the wealthy or those receiving billions of dollars in contracts from this Liberal government. I am not referring to bankers or those who make money off of other people's money. I am referring to people who have to work hard in a factory, school or hospital. These are the people who are finding it harder to cope. These are the people we need to work for. These are the people we are here for, and it is for their sake that the Conservatives intend to introduce a common-sense plan to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. I hear my Bloc colleagues saying “yeah right”. It seems they could not care less about what is going on. What I just heard is insulting. Needless to say, they have no clue what is going on. For them, there are no tent cities in Montreal and no spike in violent crime happening in Montreal and in regions across Quebec. Those things simply do not exist. The Bloc Québécois seems to be ignorant of Quebeckers' current realities. The Bloc will try to downplay the gravity of the situation because they want to keep propping up the Liberal government. They need to downplay the damage the Liberals have done over the past nine years so they can justify their support for this Liberal government. Given the comments I just heard, I cannot get over the way these people claim to stand up for Quebeckers' interests when they cannot even recognize that all Quebeckers are suffering after nine years under this Liberal government. I listened to the speeches that the Prime Minister and the ministers gave right before the House returned. They said that they would keep on doing what they are doing, that they would stay on course, but staying on course means even more street crime. It means more and more Quebeckers having to rely on food banks at the end of the month. It means fewer and fewer young families being able to afford a home. Fewer and fewer young families will be able to have a home, and fewer and fewer families will have access to housing, period. That is what will happen if the Liberal government stays on course, and that is what the Bloc Québécois wants. Standing up for Quebeckers' interests means making it possible for them to own a home, access housing, put food on the table at the end of the month and have bigger paycheques that enable them to make the right choices for their family. That would serve all Quebeckers' interests, not just the interests of Bloc Québécois supporters. That is why we are going to fight for the interests of all Quebeckers. That is why it is important to get to the bottom of the scandals in which this government is embroiled. That is why it is important that the Bloc Québécois and the NDP support us when it comes time to denounce the government and vote for a non-confidence motion against it so that voters can finally elect a common-sense government.

1354 words

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

Sep/17/24 10:36:18 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there is no surprise that the Conservatives have used day two as a way to prevent debate on legislation. We have seen this consistently over the years, and I will expand on that during my comments. Today, we were supposed to be debating the Citizenship Act. It would have been day two of the debate. It was in anticipation that, hopefully, the Conservatives would join the Bloc, the NDP and the government in recognizing the importance of the legislation. Does the Conservative Party have any intention of looking at legislation and making some suggestions with respect to the legislative agenda items it would like to see passed, or is it purely going to filibuster from this day forward?

120 words

Mr. Luc Berthold

Sep/17/24 10:37:15 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, divide and distract is the Liberals' mantra. While I am talking about problems that affect all Quebeckers and all Canadians, namely the ability to put food on the table, find a place to live and pay rent, the only thing the Liberals and the government want to do is change the subject and pretend that these problems do not exist in Canada or Quebec. We need to shine a light on this Liberal government's corruption. We need to shine a light on this Liberal government's ineptitude and incompetence, and we need to do so in collaboration with every party in the House. We need to do it in collaboration with the NDP and the Bloc Québécois, who must vote in favour of a non-confidence motion to stop the Liberals from continuing with business as usual.

144 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Sep/17/24 10:38:10 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a bit ironic. First of all, let me offer a correction. The French word for “support” is “soutenir”, not “supporter”. It is obvious that my colleague works a lot in English. I will reassure him right away that that is not what we are doing. Our job is not to support the Liberals or to replace them with Conservatives. Our job is to work for Quebeckers and defend their interests, and despite all the disinformation my colleague spread, we agree 200% with the basic facts, namely that people are having a hard time making ends meet and that we need to do something about it. That is why, rather than trying to usurp power, we decided to focus on one priority, which is to increase old age security as of age 65. Strangely enough, ever since the new Conservative leader took over, we have not heard any more commitments from the Conservatives on this subject. I think that, as deputy leader, my colleague should be able to make a formal commitment. I would like him to give me a real answer, not just accuse me of changing the subject. Can we work together on old age security? Can we get this done quickly? Can we also get a guarantee that a Conservative government will not make cuts the day after the election?

232 words

Mr. Luc Berthold

Sep/17/24 10:39:29 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague wants a real answer. Here is one that is simple and straightforward. We voted in favour of the Bloc Québécois bill on this matter. We voted in favour of it. To suggest otherwise would be false. Unfortunately, apart from claiming that I said things that were inaccurate, he could not identify a single one. On the contrary, all I said in my speech was that the Bloc Québécois has supported $500 billion in inflationary spending by this government. That is true; those are the figures, and everyone can see them. The Bloc Québécois does not want to commit to defeating this government at the earliest opportunity. That is also true. Quebeckers are struggling. Groceries are expensive. Housing prices have doubled. They increasingly cannot make ends meet. It is getting harder and harder for families to buy their first home. That is all true. Unfortunately, Bloc Québécois members do not seem to want to talk much about the problems, because they want this Liberal government to stick around a while longer. I do not think that is the best solution for Quebeckers.

202 words

Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP)

Sep/17/24 10:40:40 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, with respect to affordability, his party brought in the GST. Later, under Stephen Harper, it brought in the HST, bribing other provinces to the tune of $6 billion in historic deficits and borrowing. Maybe my colleague can explain how the HST helps seniors with affordability, because it is a tax that was put on consumers instead of the businesses to which it gave corporate tax cut reductions. Could the party responsible for the GST and HST please explain how that has helped consumers by putting that debt on them versus the companies?

94 words

Mr. Luc Berthold

Sep/17/24 10:41:26 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the reason we are in this situation today, with housing prices doubling, food prices doubling and Canadians unable to make ends meet, is because the NDP signed a coalition agreement to support spending, thereby creating the current situation with the Liberal government.

44 words

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

Sep/17/24 10:41:48 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, listening thus far to the debate this morning has been interesting. As I indicated in my question, I am not surprised that the Conservatives have decided to take a path of playing that destructive force on the floor of the House of Commons. That is not new. The Conservative Party has been very much focused on doing that for years now, and it is unfortunate. The Prime Minister indicated yesterday about the importance of listening to what Canadians were actually saying. Take a look at the questions that were being asked of the member, whether it was my question, or the Bloc question or NDP question. We will see that they were not necessarily directly on the report itself and concurrence in that report. Rather, they related to issues that Canadians would actually be concerned about at this point in time. The Conservatives are masters at spin. They are masters at these single, simple messages. Even when the Prime Minister was the leader of the third party, they have consistently targeted character assassination as their first priority with respect to developing issues on the floor of the House of Commons. We saw it yesterday, when there was the personal attack on the Minister of Finance. It is not the first time we have seen that. It happens time and again with the Conservatives. Today, they want to talk about GC Strategies and the ArriveCAN app. For them, it is all about the issue of corruption and character assassination. Canadians, on the other hand, are having a challenging time in dealing with a wide spectrum of issues, issues that the government of the day has been addressing, in good part. In introducing the motion, what was the first thing the member did? He talked about statistics coming from Statistics Canada and doing what the Conservatives do so well. They travel the country trying to convince people that Canada is broken when it is not broken. It is still the best country in the world to live, but we would not know that by listening to Conservatives. Every opportunity they get, the Conservatives are more focused on spreading misinformation. To their credit, they are being somewhat effective at doing that. The introducer of the motion talked about Statistics Canada and then tried to emphasize how Canada was broken. What he did not talk about was the report by Statistics Canada on the inflation rate. The inflation rate is 2% today. Canadians are very much concerned about the inflation rate. I would compare Canada's performance to any other G7 or G20 over the last number of years, especially postpandemic. Even though we have done exceptionally well as a nation, Statistics Canada, the organization that the introducer of this motion brought forward, can reinforce these types of statistics. If we look at the inflation rate and interest rates, we are going in the right direction and it is having an impact. These are the types of issues that I think Canadians want us to talk about, but not the Conservatives, because they do not want to share their ideas. That is giving them credit, assuming they have some. What were we supposed to be talking about today instead of ArriveCAN? The Citizenship Act. There are individuals in Canada, second-generation Canadians, who do not have their citizenship. We will see that there are New Democrats, Bloc members and members of the Green Party who recognize that we need to pass this legislation. In fact, before the summer, a New Democrat stood in her place and made the suggestion that we pass each of the stages through unanimous consent, and yesterday, we tried to get it passed. That is what we are supposed to be debating today, but we have come to learn, by listening to the debate yesterday, that the Conservatives have absolutely no intention whatsoever of passing that legislation. Even though a clear majority of members of the House have decided that this is good legislation that should pass, the Conservatives do not like it, and they do not want to be thrown off topic, so today they introduced a motion on the ArriveCAN issue. They want to talk about ArriveCAN. ArriveCAN was there as a direct result of a worldwide pandemic. It was upon us. Actions were being taken by the government to support Canadians every day. Billions of dollars were being spent. The majority of that money was supported even by Conservative members, not to mention New Democrats, Bloc members and others, as Canada was coming together to ensure that the interests of Canadians were going to be served. As a House working in a co-operative fashion, we were able to make a difference. We brought forward programs that positioned Canada well, going into the postpandemic era. We were there to support Canadians and their disposable income through programs such as CERB. We were there saving literally tens of thousands of jobs through the wage subsidy program. We were there to support small businesses through business loans. We were there to support our seniors through one-time payments and support individuals with disabilities with payments. We were there to support non-profit organizations to ensure that they could support Canadians at the grassroots level. We were there to support provinces, territories and indigenous people. As a national government, we were there in a very real and tangible way, and that meant we spent billions and billions of dollars. Today I look at our independent AAA credit rating. Canada is still financially strong, and even during those difficult times and in the postpandemic, we still had the Conservatives taking the cheap shots with the character assassinations. I will give a couple of examples, including ArriveCAN. They say those Liberal friends got all these contracts. They are kind of right, in the sense that Conservatives got contracts, New Democrats got contracts and even some Bloc members got contracts, and when I say “Bloc”, I am not identifying the parties. I am talking about the individuals within those political parties. Yes, there were some individuals within the Liberal party. There are entrepreneurs, businesses and Canadians of all political parties who have dealings with the Government of Canada, but to try to give the false and misleading information that Liberals were given an advantage is just wrong. They try to give impressions about ArriveCAN. I think about ArriveCAN. Let us focus a bit of attention specifically on ArriveCAN. Anthony and Firth, between 2010 and 2015, were part of another small firm called Coredal, which was later amalgamated into GC Strategies. Coredal was awarded a number of contracts. Actually, one or more of these individuals received federal contracts from the Conservatives. Members can imagine that. The Conservatives gave contracts to at least one of the two individuals, possibly under a different name. They try to say that the Government of Canada said, “We want you”, when in fact it was done through the public service. There was a protocol in place. The Auditor General actually found that the government has appropriate contracting rules in place, but in this situation, the rules were not followed. If the rules were not followed, then it begs this question: What was done in regards to it? The minister and the government took immediate action. There were audits, both internal and external, to deal with this issue. The minister and the government have been very clear. If there were abuses, as it appears there has been, there will be consequences to that. That is something that we would expect for anyone sitting in this chamber or any individual that we represent outside of this chamber. We do not condone in any way, in any fashion, inappropriate behaviour with respect to the procurement process. In fact, the Auditor General came back with a report. We have accepted the recommendations of the public auditor, whether they concern Canada border control, the CBSA; the Government of Canada; or the minister. However, the Conservatives say the government is bad. One of the largest scandals that we have seen was the ETS scandal. That was a procurement scandal. There were direct links and indirect links to the Conservative government at the time. What did the Conservatives do? They avoided any sort of public accountability on the issue. They went out of their way to hide information connected to the ETS scandal. Do colleagues want to know about the ETS scandal? If they do a quick Google search, they will see the hundreds of millions of dollars at issue. While in government, whether it be the federal government or a provincial government, sometimes problems arise. Yes, at times getting the Auditor General or a provincial auditor is necessary because it is good for all concerned. The same principle applies here. Here we have a situation that is concerning, not only to Conservative members. I would like to think that every member of the House of Commons is concerned about it, as I am. I want to ensure that there is a consequence for the inappropriate behaviour of individuals who inappropriately use tax dollars because I value those tax dollars, as I know my colleagues do. We recognize the true value of spending tax dollars to the benefit of Canadians. Let me cite a few examples. There was a question put forward by the member for Kildonan—St. Paul to her colleague asking where the Conservatives would save money. His response was a little bit modest of where the Conservatives would be saving money. Let me talk about where the Conservatives are looking at saving money, based on the question that was being posed there, while understanding the value of a tax dollar and a progressive government that is here to make a difference. We know there is the child care program that supports children every month. It is estimated that, every month, over $9 million goes into Winnipeg North alone because of the Canada child benefit. Imagine the impact that has on the local economy in Winnipeg North alone. It is something which we as a government established shortly after forming government in 2015. Think of the progressive policies that we have been able to elevate and put into place, such as the dental care program. Where are the Conservatives with respect to the dental care program? Maybe that should have been the question that the member for Kildonan—St. Paul asked her colleague because I can say there are literally hundreds of thousands of Canadians who are very much interested in the Conservatives' actual position on the dental care program. We know that the Conservatives oppose it. Are they going to flip-flop with respect to it? We hear often from constituents, and I can say that the number one concern that constituents raise with me, in my over 30 years of personal parliamentary history, is health care. Health care, in my books, is number one. As a government, we have spent those valuable tax dollars on things such as generational commitments to future health care. We are talking about $198 billion over 10 years. We are talking about bringing forward, in a gradual way, a national pharmacare program. We are talking about improving the standards of long-term care for our seniors. I made reference to the dental program. When the member for Kildonan—St. Paul asks her colleague, in regard to this motion, where we can save money, and the member said that we can save it from the ArriveCan, I would suggest that is a bit of a flippant answer because what Canadians are more concerned about is the Conservative right-wing MAGA agenda for Canadians. That will come out in time. We will see that. Instead, the Conservatives like to amp up the issue of character assassinations and spreading of misinformation. Here is a lovely quote. I am going to say something and members will be able to figure out who said it right away. The Conservative Party had a caucus meeting over the weekend, and their inspirational leader had this to say to the caucus— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, the members are feeling really excited because of the misinformation they have been spreading about the tax cut. What did the leader of the Conservative Party have to say? He tried to paint this picture during a Sunday morning speech to his caucus, saying that “the Liberal government's plan to increase the price would cause a 'nuclear winter' for the economy.” He said “nuclear winter”. Get that. Wow. He said, “There would be mass hunger and malnutrition with a tax this high...our seniors would have to turn the heat down to 14 or 13 C just to make it through the winter”. He also said, “Inflation would run rampant and people would not be able to leave their homes or drive anywhere.” What is he going to say next? Will he say that refugees are eating cats and dogs? Seriously, this is something that the leader of the Conservative Party today is saying, trying to scare Canadians. He is spreading misinformation consistently. I would welcome a debate anywhere in Canada with the leader of the Conservative Party because his ideas are so much out of this world that I do not think he would be able to stand his ground in front of any university grouping, and I would welcome that particular challenge. I appreciate being allowed to share those few thoughts.

2268 words

Debating

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Sep/17/24 11:01:48 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am a bit worried because the member seems to be the only one who is able to respond to very serious questions. We are debating concurrence on a report that has to do with the basic level of accountability that a government should be able to provide for the dollars it spends. The dollars spent are not the government's money. They are hard-earned dollars paid by Canadians in the form of taxes. What does the member do? He is the only member who seems to be given permission by the PMO to be able to speak on that side. He seems to be able to say, with many words, very little. He talks about character assassinations. To assassinate character, someone has to have some. We are looking for the basic levels of accountability that Canadians expect the government to have when it comes to spending. Does the member not find it concerning that time and time again, the government is plagued by scandals to the point where Canadians from coast to coast to coast are simply saying the government cannot be trusted with the public purse?

191 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Sep/17/24 11:03:06 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am very content knowing about all the internal reviews and external reviews regarding the ArriveCAN issue. We always have to put it into the perspective, as I attempted to do, of the many things that the government was responsible for during the pandemic. That is not to say there was not any misspent money. The government is, in fact, ensuring that there is a consequence where tax dollars were abused. That is an absolute. We continue to ensure that there is a high sense of accountability and transparency with every tax dollar. The real challenge we have found is that the Conservative Party is reluctant to discuss its ideas. It is just constantly attacking personalities, which I classify as character assassination.

124 words

Mrs. Julie Vignola (Beauport—Limoilou, BQ)

Sep/17/24 11:04:19 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is important to assume responsibility for being accountable with tax dollars. What we are asking for in our report from the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates is that accountability. Where do things stand? How was the money spent? The Liberal, Conservative, NDP and Bloc members voted in favour of this report in committee. I get the impression that my esteemed colleague is against it. I would like to understand the disconnect between what happened in committee and what we are seeing today.

87 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Sep/17/24 11:05:08 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am absolutely in favour of accountability and transparency, and ensuring that there is a consequence where there has been abuse of tax dollars. That is what I believe and will continue to advocate for, whether it is through the Auditor General of Canada, the standing committees or the RCMP. I look at what is happening in that particular environment and expect, like my constituents, that there will be accountability. Those who were abusive with our tax dollars will be held to account in many different ways, everything from potential criminal charges to having to pay back tax.

100 words

Mr. Richard Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay, NDP)

Sep/17/24 11:06:15 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am glad that my colleague from Winnipeg North mentioned the wild statement about nuclear winter, made by the Conservative leader, coming from the carbon tax. The carbon tax is scheduled to go up 17¢ more by 2030. In six years, it will be 17¢ more. That would put gas prices at the pump, in my riding at least, at around $1.75. We have had prices over two dollars a litre because of corporate greed and the work of the big oil companies. Will the Liberals attack those excess profits with a wealth tax to bring those prices down? That is what is hurting Canadians.

110 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Sep/17/24 11:07:08 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I look forward to the fall economic statement, where we will be able to get into more of those details. I want to pick up on what I believe is the biggest misleading information out there today with respect to the carbon tax versus the carbon rebate. I could talk to a number of random people and what I would find is the following. A vast majority of Canadians, 80%-plus, receive more money back through the carbon tax-carbon rebate system, yet that message is not necessarily getting through. At the end of the day, that means the collective disposable income in Winnipeg North, under this administration, is actually higher with that policy, and we are dealing with an environmental issue. If Conservatives were to come into power, I can say that collective disposable income in Winnipeg North would go down because of that one single policy itself. The carbon rebate matters. It is helping people. Why is the Conservative Party not as blunt on that as it is about the carbon tax?

176 words

Ms. Leah Taylor Roy (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, Lib.)

Sep/17/24 11:08:29 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to be back in the House and hopefully debate things that are of real concern to our constituents. This summer I spoke to many of them, and not one person talked about ArriveCAN, other than to say that they had used it when they came back from a trip and that it actually facilitates re-entry into the country. We heard from the member opposite that this is hard-earned taxpayers' money, and I agree wholeheartedly with that. I wonder if my colleague could address the costs to Canadians of this kind of filibustering and what the Conservative Party has done over the past year in this House, such as having us sit late to hear ridiculous debates on issues that do not matter to most Canadians.

133 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Sep/17/24 11:09:23 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I know that many of my colleagues, if not all my colleagues, are very much concerned about the finite amount of time that we have here on the floor of the House. What we have witnessed over the last number of years from the Conservatives is what I classify as a destructive force. They do not want legislation passed, even legislation that is good for Canadians, the people we represent. Whether it is with respect to dental care or what we were supposed to be debating today, the Citizenship Act, the Conservatives are an obstructive force. They do not want legislation to pass. They show no remorse for not recognizing that, as members of Parliament, there is a responsibility to appear to work with government legislation and the government's agenda to at least try to advance it. There is a responsibility for all members with respect to that, but the Conservative Party completely disregards it. All it wants to do is focus on character assassinations. It ties anything and everything to the words “corruption” and “scandal”, and ultimately says nothing about its own policies. Shame on the Conservative members.

196 words