So V ote

Context: House Hansard - 118 - Oct/26/22

Oct/27/22 10:26:07 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise here in the House of Commons to debate legislation. I have reflected upon this bill. We had time to see it in committee, though very little time I might add. We had little time with stakeholders and very little time in front of ministers to debate this bill, which is, sadly, a gateway to spending $11 billion of taxpayer money. For that fact, here in the House, having a motion to end debate on this bill very quickly and have it rammed through is a difficulty. That is the same experience that we had in committee. I am unsure why there is an urgency with this bill, other than it really panders to the political aspirations of those across the aisle and their costly coalition dance partners, which, as I mentioned, will jack up the costs for all Canadians as we move forward. Everybody in the House wants to have their sound bites and their clips for social media. All that type of stuff is potentially important. What I am going to say, I know, will be taken out of context and that is why it is important to preface it in that sense. There is not a dental crisis in the country. There is no reason we had to run this bill through in this warp-speed manner and try to ram it down the throats of those of us who would suspect we need much more prudence in how we approach spending money in this House and exactly where we spend it, which is important. It would have been much nicer if this were a mental health and rental bill as opposed to the dental health and rental bill. Why would that be more important? We know, and everyone in the House can attest to it, that there is a mental health crisis in this country that is not being addressed and that is the darn shame of it all. This is about where we choose to spend our money in the House, and the difficulty is that we do not have unlimited amounts. I always liken this to my own finances. When there are urgencies, when the roof is off the house, people have to put the roof on before they put the front step on. Sure, they are both absolutely important, but we have to look at priorities. We have to understand that a roof on the house is, sadly, more important than the front step. Do we need them both? Yes, we do. That being said, there is a mental health crisis in this country. One in three Canadians throughout their lifetime will have significant problems with their mental health. We see it in the news every day. We see it from our loved ones every day. We know that the government is not funding mental health. It is an odd fact that the commitment the Liberal government made in its 2021 platform with respect to mental health has not been spent or committed to in its current budget. That is a huge difficulty. The irony is not lost that the cost of that Canada mental health transfer would be about $875 million. When we look at the costs in this bill, the exact amount is very ironic. This money could have been spent on the Canada mental health transfer, which would have done so much for Canadians who are in that significant crisis. We need to look further at all of those things that we hold very dear here in Canada, and one of those things is people's access to our great Canadian health care system. From the president of the Canadian Medical Association, we know that this system is on the brink of collapse. It too is in crisis. It is a catastrophe. It is a disaster and, sadly, any other negative superlatives that I could come up with. We know that in my home province alone, 100,000 people, or 10% of the population of Nova Scotia, do not have access to primary care. The sad fact is that we also know, when people do not have access to primary care in Canada, it becomes very difficult to access care for mental health. Further to that, we know that there are approximately one million people in Ontario who do not have access to primary care. Therefore, is there a crisis out there? Yes, there is. I know that my words will be taken out of context and misconstrued; however, that being said, there is a crisis. It is not in dental health care. It is in mental health care and in the health care system in general. I would be so bold as to say that, if we wanted to ask Canadians how we should spend their money, I would suspect that they would say to spend it on mental health care and spend it on health care, and once that part of our house, the roof of our house, is in better shape, we can put on a front porch or a front step. That makes perfect sense. I think the other part around the dental part of this program is understanding that 11 of 13 jurisdictions in Canada do have dental programs for their citizens. I think it is also important that the Canadian Dental Association stated that a better idea than creating this “Ottawa knows best” federalist program would be to actually help tweak those provinces that are struggling and look at provinces that have excellent dental health care programs, and then help other provinces better understand how they could make a better program. I think the other part that flows very nicely into that is understanding that the administration of this program, although purported to be very simple, is in the hands of a government that cannot manage other simple programs, even programs that have been in existence for decades. Let us talk about passports, for instance. The passport system, as far as I can discern in my own life, has worked in an excellent fashion for a very long time. We would get a piece of paper in the old days. We would then sign it. We would get a guarantor, and we would put it in the mail to send it away. Lo and behold, almost as if by magic, our passport would show up in the mail. Nowadays, we do not need guarantors. It has become even simpler than that, but the government has bungled that as well. It is the government of “everything is broken”. The immigration system is broken. We have an arrive scam app of $54 million that the Liberals cannot even account for. Not only is it exorbitant in its cost, but they also cannot even account for $1.2 million. Who got paid? Who got rich? Those questions cannot even be answered. How can we ask them to administer another supposedly simple program? If we cannot even run the programs that have existed for decades, how can we create a new program and say there will be no problems with it? How can we tell people to look at how easy it is and that anybody would be able to access it, when we know we cannot even get a darned passport in this country? We know the immigration system is broken. We hear that 40,000 Afghans are going to come to Canada, but less than half of that number of people have been admitted to this country. This is a crisis. The Liberals cannot function in a crisis, and we know perhaps that is the difficulty. They are unsure, unaware or uncertain of exactly what the definition of the word “crisis” is. I think that, perhaps, is the difficulty. We also know the Liberals have bungled the whole greenhouse gas and carbon emissions situation. We know they have not met any of their targets, and we now know their provincial Liberal cousins in Nova Scotia are railing against them. We know that for the average Nova Scotian, the premier of Nova Scotia rejected the carbon tax for a more robust, complete and overall well-performing system. He rejected their carbon tax system. Even though it is being rammed down the throats of all Nova Scotians, it would appear it is going to cost $400 per year extra on top of the insane prices of home heating fuel, and we know that is going to create significant difficulties for Nova Scotians this year. The rental program, we know, is in response to the Liberals' failed housing strategy. We know it is a band-aid approach, and when the patient is haemorrhaging, putting a band-aid on it is like the old story with the little boy with the dike. We will run out of fingers eventually. We know the average rental cost here in this country is $2,000 per month. We know the cost of housing has doubled, and we know people are living in their parents' basements. The unaffordability is just astronomical, so we have a government that is spending money. Not to be disparaging to drunken sailors, but the Liberals are spending like that. I apologize to drunken sailors. The Liberals cannot run programs, and now they want to create another “Ottawa knows best” federally directed program that is likely to be a significant debacle.

1577 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 118 - Oct/26/22

Oct/26/22 3:20:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in the audio file Commissioner Lucki states, “the Minister wants to speak with me...once again, I dropped the ball.” It goes on: “I have apologized to the Minister; I’m waiting for the Prime Minister to call me so I can apologize”. The former minister of public safety needs to stop the deception, fiction, fabrication and disinformation. He needs to respect Nova Scotians and resign for his actions and political interference in the investigations of the deaths of 22 Nova Scotians and an unborn child. Will the Prime Minister accept the resignation of this minister?

103 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 117 - Oct/25/22

Oct/26/22 2:45:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the great people of Portapique, and indeed all of Nova Scotia, want and deserve answers. The sad and diabolical tragedy that visited our normally idyllic part of the world continues to haunt our thoughts. All Nova Scotians have been failed by the flawed proceedings of the Mass Casualty Commission, from which we all held much hope for answers. The sick and twisted story is further marred by the political interference of the former minister for public safety and the inappropriate dance performed with Commissioner Lucki. Nova Scotians deserve respect, not political cover-ups. Phone records were withheld for two and a half years for politically motivated reasons by a former Liberal staffer. Nova Scotians deserve answers, not fiction, not foolishness, not falsified reality and certainly not fabrication. The former minister for public safety should resign.

137 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 116 - Oct/24/22

Oct/25/22 2:43:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, new evidence has surfaced with respect to the political interference in the investigation of the mass shooting in Nova Scotia in 2020. Sadly, 22 people and an unborn child died in this incredibly tragic event. It is exceedingly clear that the former minister of public safety politically interfered in the investigation of Canada's worst mass shooting. Nova Scotians want answers, not cover-ups. Such interference may be expected in a banana republic but not in Canada. Will the minister resign?

83 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 112 - Oct/18/22

Oct/24/22 2:58:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the sad facts are this: Grocery costs are up over 10% and home heating costs are up 54% from a year ago. Seniors are now having to choose between rent and feeding themselves. They are opting out of home insurance, which they desperately need, again, so they can feed themselves. Premiers Furey and Houston have reached out to the government, literally begging them for relief for Atlantic Canadians and the extra $1 billion that they will have to pay for home heating costs by 2030. Will the Prime Minister and the costly coalition with the NDP end the tax on home heating?

104 words

Context: House Hansard - 112 - Oct/18/22

Oct/18/22 11:47:01 p.m.
Watch

We request a recorded division.

5 words

Context: House Hansard - 112 - Oct/18/22

Oct/18/22 11:44:46 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, it is nice to have the final question of the night, and the final say perhaps. One of the big things we would like to know on this side is exactly how many provincial ministers of health in the provinces and territories were consulted with respect to this bill.

51 words

Oct/18/22 3:57:33 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, $10 billion is the number that we need to understand very clearly in the House that this bill is going to cost Canadians. We also understand that perhaps what the minister is saying could be nuanced a bit in the sense that 11 of 13 jurisdictions have dental programs at the current time for low-income and special needs children. There is also the NIHB program. Perhaps the minister would want to nuance what he has said around that a bit. However, $10 billion is the real reason we should not have closure on this bill. We should have very robust and open debate with respect to how we spend Canadians' money.

114 words

All Topics

Oct/17/22 2:52:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, certainly Canadians do not believe their plan to tax us more is revenue-neutral. Energy costs are expected to rise by double or, sadly, triple this winter. This is a tremendous burden for Atlantic Canadians. We are already suffering from the cost of living crisis, and of course hurricane Fiona has taken an inconceivable toll on Atlantic Canadians. Why does the Prime Minister want to punish Atlantic Canadians by tripling, yes, I said tripling, the carbon tax and will he agree to end it?

86 words

Oct/17/22 12:59:21 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for Barrie—Innisfil for highlighting that wonderful program the Province of Ontario has. I would also like to pass on my condolences for the fallen officers in his riding. We know very clearly that many provinces and territories have reasonably robust oral health programs at the current time. As I mentioned, I think it is important that we understand that what exists now could be built upon. It is mentioned in the comments by the Canadian Dental Association to look at programs that are underfunded or going in a direction that could be improved upon and to understand that we do not need to tear down those institutions that already exist. We need to make them better, and I do not believe for one second that there is anybody on that side of the House who could possibly run a program that would be effective, delivered quickly and useful for all Canadians. I think what that member highlighted is very important.

170 words

All Topics

Oct/17/22 12:57:19 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, part of the difficulty that Canadians are facing is inflation. We know that interest rates are rising. Some other economic experts think there may even be a recession looming on the horizon. That is absolutely terrifying from an economic perspective. We understand that generations going forward will not be able to afford homes. That is a travesty. That is not the vision that we have for Canada. We understand that the current generation of adult children are living in their parents' basements because they are unable to afford a decent house. That is a travesty. On the weekend, I met with a great friend of mine of many years. Two of his adult children are living in his basement because they are unable to afford a house. Is that a problem? That is a giant problem that I lay directly at the feet of the Liberal government because, clearly, there is no thought about monetary policy on that side of the House.

164 words

All Topics

Oct/17/22 12:55:20 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, I think the important thing we need to understand here, of course, is that the government has so many flaws that it is really beyond fixing. We know that it is not catching tax cheats. We see that. It is not doing those things. It is not funding mental health care. It is not funding health care. However, it wants to fund another program. That seems to be nonsensical. I will reiterate this to my colleague. I know I said this previously, but I think it bears repeating. This is not a question of the importance of oral health. That is not what this is about. It is a question of responsible government, fiscal responsibility, partnerships with the provinces, insane federal oversight and a failed federal administration. That is what this is about.

135 words

All Topics

Oct/17/22 12:53:15 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for that important question. I know very clearly that the Canada health transfers have been a difficulty for all provinces. We see the burgeoning costs of health care, and we know that this is a significant issue. Part of the argument I would make is to ask this. Why are we spending money on more and new programs that are exceedingly expensive, as I said, on the order of $10 billion, when we are continuing to underfund the Canada health transfers at the current time? It is that old question of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Why are we doing this? Why are we taking money that we do not have and trying to pull it out of this pocket and do a little hocus-pocus to say that we have found some more money? We are continuing to print money. We know it is adding, as I said previously, fuel to the inflationary fire. We know Canadians find it very important to have a robust and accessible health system, which at the current time they do not have. That is the travesty of the Liberal government.

193 words

All Topics

Oct/17/22 12:51:40 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, the important thing here is that the government needs to begin to understand the significant effects of inflation and increasing interest rates on Canadians and the difficulties that everyday Canadians, not just in Cumberland—Colchester but across this vast nation, are struggling with when trying to feed their families. We know for a family of four it is costing them $1,200 more to feed their family. We realize that. What I would suggest is that the government needs to do something better. It needs to change its fiscal policies, because we know that is what is putting the gasoline on the inflationary fire. It continues to do it only to, sadly, support its coalition with the NDP, which continues to prop the government up.

128 words

Oct/17/22 12:27:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-31

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise in the House to represent the good people of Cumberland—Colchester. I thank the Minister of Health for his speech, as he is always very interesting. Reflecting a bit on the minister's own language, the number in Bill C-31 for rental relief and the dental program is $10 billion, which would be funded by the federal government. I think that is a big number. Perhaps I will come back to that. The deputy minister of finance talked about throwing stones in the lake, and I would suggest that we are almost throwing boulders into a teacup, which is, of course, going to overflow, unlike what she would have Canadians believe. That being said, this bill is split into two parts. Let us speak about the rental relief part of the bill. My hon. colleague from Mirabel spoke about how Quebeckers will be left behind. It is shameful, saddening, disheartening and inconceivable that the average monthly rent in Canada is more than $2,000. The Liberal government's rental relief, which the Minister of Health did not speak of much, would give people a one-time payment of $500. We know that rental prices are up 4.3% since August and 15.4% over a year, to an average of $2,043 per month. That information is from Rentals.ca and Bullpen Research and Consulting. We also know that all rental property costs are up 21.9% since April of 2021. Of course, this is due to increased demand and interest rates, which we know are fuelled by the Liberal government's inflationary fire, upon which we all know it wants to continue to pour more gasoline. Sadly, in Nova Scotia, my home province, the average rental cost per month for all property types is $2,453, which is a shocking amount of money for a place to live. In Ontario, it is slightly less at $2,451. A condo or apartment in Toronto is, on average, $2,855. When I look at those numbers, it is not that $500 is an insignificant amount of money. It is certainly an amount of money one would not pass by, but it is not significant with helping people who are having difficulty with housing. During the constituency week last week, when I asked people in my own constituency about receiving that $500, the majority of people said it was not worth it. They wondered why the government would even bother, as it might cover one week out of 52 weeks when we look at the ballooning cost of housing. Why would we not consider directing funds to things that really affect the sustainability of every household in this country? As we all know, and if we do not we are sadly living under a rock, groceries are up at least 10%. Let me expand a little on that. Fruit is up 13.2%. Eggs are up 10.9%. Bread is up 17.6%. Here is a shocker: Pasta is up 32.4%. Those are shocking increases that translate into a family of four having to spend $1,200 more to feed itself over last year. If we are giving people a one-time payment of $500, it seems like shockingly little, yet this program, as touted by the Prime Minister, is going to cost about $900 million. We all know, very clearly, that the government has added more debt for Canadians than all previous governments combined in 148 years. I know the government is going to talk about the terribly high cost of COVID, but on this side of the House, we all know that this really is not forming a significant part of the massive amount of burdensome debt that is going to be left to my children, and my grandchildren as well, which makes me very sad. We also know that the other side of the House has had significant failures on the housing file. We now know that people are spending over 50% of their cheques on housing, up from 32%, and we have the fewest houses per-capita in the G7. We also know that the average housing price in Canada has doubled. We are talking about creating another federally administered program from a government that has multiple failures. For example, Canadians are having trouble getting a simple passport. I can remember getting my first passport in the early 1990s. At that point, it seemed really quite simple. People were able to get a form that, as it was not downloaded then. I think they went to the post office. They put their names on it. They had several people in the community as guarantors. Then they would put it in the mail and the passports came back in a timely fashion. Now, shockingly, the constituency assistants in my offices in Truro and Amherst spend untold hours advocating on behalf of the great citizens of Cumberland—Colchester to simply get a passport. They are now beginning to emerge from this pandemic and they want to go somewhere. It is shocking. It is as if it could not have been foreseen, that as life returned to normal and we learned to lived with COVID that people would want to go and do something but their passports were running out. I find it just inconceivable that my office and the offices of all my colleagues have been spending such tremendous amounts of time on something as simple as a passport, and now we are going to entrust the government with another federal program. It is like asking why the government does not federally administer a program for all Canadians. That makes no sense when we cannot even get people a passport. Two other issues that I think really underline the ridiculous nature therein are with respect to the immigration file. I met with a gentleman at my office during constituency week. He has been living in Canada since 2011. He entered with a BSc and an MBA. Since being in Canada, he has obtained an MSc as well. This man has been waiting five years for his permanent residency. It is nonsense. He has been here, as I mentioned, for 10 years, working in Canada, functioning as a Canadian citizen. All of his paperwork is in. He pays taxes and he goes to work every day. Why does it take such an inordinate amount of time? Again, I would suggest that all of my colleagues in the House are really able to fully realize that this is not a fallacy. It is the sad reality that people are waiting years to become permanent residences and citizens of a country in which they are actually functioning as citizens already. They are following the laws, paying their taxes, working and are contributing to the great country which we all have the privilege of calling home. When I look at those things, how can we entrust the government to administer any other programs? Finally, as we know very clearly, hurricane Fiona has been devastating to Atlantic Canada, specifically to Cumberland—Colchester. The way in which that support is rolling out for Atlantic Canadians and the great people who live in my riding is appalling. There does not appear to be rhyme or reason. There appears to be words attached to the amount of funding that will be rolled out, however, there does not appear, as we are sadly reminded daily, to be any plan behind how to get people that funding. Trees are lying everywhere, and I am not talking about some alder bushes that have fallen over, which can be snipped with a good pair of clippers. These are big trees, and in the order of 30 or 40 trees. The government has promised money for these people to get their lives back together and, sadly, it does not have a program to roll it out. Again, I would suggest that asking the government to be a part of rolling out another federal program is really not the way in which we would like to see things proceed. We now know that Canadians are paying more in taxes than in housing, transport, food and clothing combined. We are taxed, and I do not even know where it is, whether it is above my nose or eyes. We are paying significant taxes, and people are feeling this cost of living crisis. People are not able to afford to pay more. As we all know, winter is coming, which may sound like a bit of a cliché, as it always does. People are now worried about putting oil in their oil barrel. People in Cumberland—Colchester, who often live in single-family dwellings, are very much dependent on fossil fuels, and we know this is a concern for them. We also know they are worried about feeding their families, and adding more programs does not seem to make any sense. Also, as mentioned in the House this morning, there is the upcoming payroll tax increases and the tax on tax, the dreaded tax of all, the tripling of the carbon tax. Canadians are at their breaking point, and the government continues to pile on more and more taxes on the backs of Canadians, which we know is an untenable position. People cannot afford this. People do not want to continue doing this. As we also heard, we know that the government is often wanting to give with the left hand and take with the right, which is what we are seeing with the increased payroll taxes that are going to roll out in January. Then the tripling of the carbon tax is going to be rolled out against the best wishes of many. Therefore, we see the giving of $500 and the taking away of much more. The government is taking money in the form of payroll taxes and putting it into general revenues, which really does not make a whole heck of a lot of sense. The second part of Bill C-31 is the proposed dental benefit act. As I mentioned, the finance minister said, “This is like throwing a stone in the lake — the lake doesn't flood.” Of course, when we continue to add billions of dollars, it is like throwing boulders in a lake, which eventually we know will raise the level and could possibly overflow depending on the size of the lake. If we put a boulder in a mud puddle, we know that will take up all of the space. What is the evidence with respect to this? I would like to think that the Parliamentary Budget Officer is a good source of information. The estimate is that it is going to cost $9 billion over five years. There is some other strange math that perhaps could be clarified, but it appears that year one is going to cost in and of itself $5.3 billion for another federally administer debacle. What does the Canadian Dental Association have to say about it? Arguably, it speaks for many dental professionals in the country. It asks whether it would not be better to bolster existing and underfunded provincial and territorial plans as opposed to attempting to create another system altogether. As we heard, we know very clearly that at least 11 of our 13 jurisdictions have the ability to fund, at least in part, dental care for those in the greatest need. If that is the truth, which I believe it is from the research, it would make more sense and behoove us all not to create an entire other system, but, as the Canadian Dental Association would say, to bolster the existing and underfunded programs. In Nova Scotia, for instance, there is a program that is fairly comprehensive for children under age 14. It costs $11 million per year. When we look at that, the federal program is for children under the age of 12, but perhaps Nova Scotia might have fewer children per capita than other jurisdictions. Just doing some spitball math, if there are a million children under 14 in Nova Scotia and averaging it out to the rest of the country, that would be $3.4 billion per year, certainly not an insignificant amount. We believe that the CRA is going to administer this part of the program. When we look at these things, I do not think that anybody who pays taxes in the country would believe that the CRA will create a simple administration for this program. I fail to believe that. We know how complicated even filling out a simple tax return is, and that is going to be difficult. We also understand that there could be claims adjudication in this. Early on in this part of the bill, it says it is going to be $650 a year with no strings attached, no questions asked, how much the fees are, etc. I do not know if we can keep the rest, but there is a thinly veiled threat that if people are dishonest, they will have to pay it back and there will be a fine. We know that dentists' fees vary widely in the province of Nova Scotia and across the country. We know that in Nova Scotia a checkup and cleaning, for instance, could be between $90 and $240. We know that in Nova Scotia a filling could cost from $70 up to $400. Therefore, we know there are significant difficulties associated with that. We also know, as I previously said, that multiple jurisdictions already have significant dental coverage in a universal sense. Quebec, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, P.E.I., Yukon, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories have more complete coverage for first nations families as well. We know there is additional coverage for other families that are receiving financial assistance in places such as New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. Will the provinces be expected to continue the programs they have? I have some concern about what is in the bill that would suggest that the provinces that have programs will be expected to continue them, which really does not appear to be fair and equitable. What do we really need to have happen? We need to understand very clearly that the funding for health transfers needs to be shored up across Canada. We hear day after day from folks who do not have access to primary care. We hear of the tremendous and insane backlogs that have been created by the COVID-19 pandemic, which is going to require significant effort and funding. We know that the government has also not yet committed to funding the Canada mental health transfer. On page 75 of the Liberal platform, $250 million were committed and then in budget 2022, another $625 million, which, at another point, appears to equate to $4.5 billion over five years. I do not think this is a member in the House who would not agree that mental health is a significant, ongoing and burgeoning difficulty for the entire country, every province and territory, towns, small and large. The government has yet to commit to funding the Canada mental health transfer. As well, there has not been significant consultation with the premiers of the provinces and territories with respect to this bill. We believe that is what the provincial and territorial ministers of health would want. We also know the government continues to run a significant deficit and debt. I have spoken previously and multiple times about the terrible debt burden the government is leaving future generations. I look at it like this to try to make sense of it: If I have a minivan and continue to make payments on it, why would I buy another vehicle? I do not understand that. If I cannot finish paying for the one I have, why would I want something else? I would just be adding to it. Those are wishes and desires. From that perspective, it just does not seem to make any sense. The Minister of Health also spoke about a speedy passage, and I would respectfully disagree with the minister. We know the speedy passage is related to the Liberal-NDP coalition and the demands made to keep the government afloat. That is not a reason, in any way, shape or form, to impede debate on such significant legislation in terms of the cost of the legislation. As we said, this is $10 billion. Again, I will use the minister's own parlance and say, here is a number: more than $10 billion. That is without the hiccups and pitfalls we know happen with so many federal programs. Therefore, could it be $15 billion? Again, these are boulders we are throwing into a teacup. I need to be clear that this is not a question of the importance of oral health. This is a question of responsible government, fiscal responsibility and timing. This is about partnerships with provinces. This is about federal oversight and heavy-handedness. This is about the federal administration of a program, which we know has failed multiple times. We know the government is a government that is great at making loud overtures, but we also know the government is not very good at following through on action. We also know it is great at spending money and not delivering much. It has become very clear over the last several minutes there is no way I could possibly support Bill C-31 in its two separate parts, which are the rental relief program, for which I quoted the people of Cumberland—Colchester, who feel it is not worth it and ask why we would bother, and the significant costs and even perhaps the lack of support from the Canadian Dental Association with respect to the dental portion. I hope that sheds some light on the very important difficulties associated with Bill C-31 and the need to debate it further on behalf of all Canadians.

3015 words

All Topics

Oct/17/22 11:24:06 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill S-209

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise, as always, in the House of Commons and to address legislation before the House. I think one of the important things is to understand that I do not think we need a pandemic observation day, observance day or any other day to remember the pandemic. How could we possibly forget the pandemic? Very clearly, we can all remember that in 1918 there was a pandemic. I do not think there is anybody who forgets there was a pandemic in 1918. I very clearly remember what happened during the pandemic. My wife and I were fortunate enough to be away on vacation. While there, it became very clear, and there were multiple news reports coming in from around the world, that this virus was approaching Canada. As we now know, it was probably here. Friday, March 13, 2020, came around, and I can remember having spoken to folks in my office, saying that we needed to get ready for this pandemic and that we did not know what was coming. Unfortunately, like many of us, some people did not really believe it was coming. March 15 came along. That was a Sunday, and I can remember very clearly going to our local hospital and really understanding that there were two people planning for the pandemic. When I went into that room, they asked if I would like to join them, and I did. That led, of course, to our setting up the northern Nova Scotia response to COVID-19, which we ran successfully for a very long time. Sadly, it went on and on and on. One of the interesting things I will always remember is the sense that, even at that time, when we really did not know anything about COVID-19 and how it was going to unfold, even then people joined together as a team to staff that unit and look after patients who were going to be sick with COVID-19 in that northern zone of Nova Scotia. We thought there was a better than average chance at that time that many of us would die from COVID-19, and thankfully none of us did in that unit. We are very happy to have come through the pandemic without those burdens upon us. Sadly, as the member for Vancouver Centre readily points out, there were many Canadians who did not fare as well as those of us who did. However, I think it is also important to underline the fact that for many people, the trials and tribulations they had to suffer during the pandemic are things they will never forget, and that they might even want to forget, so our continuing to have a pandemic observance day does not seem to make any sense to me. I do not believe it is a place to look at the systemic failures of our health care system, which, as I said briefly in my question, is on the brink of a catastrophic failure, when we have, in Nova Scotia alone, 100,000 people without access to primary care. When I look at those things, they are a system failure. When 100,000 Nova Scotians and a million people in Ontario do not have access to a family physician or primary care, I do not think we need a pandemic observance day to remind them how terrible the system is. What we need, very clearly, is for the government to get acting on these things. We need action. We need somebody to do something. We need to stop talking about it and blathering on about all of these things the Prime Minister has said about 7,500 doctors, nurses and nurse practitioners. Where are they, and what are they going to do in a system that is short by at least 60,000 to 70,000 nurses? We have seen none of the 7,500, and that makes me sad. That means, as I said previously, that we have a government of inaction. We need to stop talking about things, and we need to actually get things done. If we do not begin to do things, having another observation day would only enrage those Canadians, in my mind, who are unable to access appropriate care in this country, in which medical care is part of those things we hold near and dear to our hearts. It is a very important thing. I do not say that simply because I am a family physician; I say that because I am a Canadian, and those are things that are important to us. When we look at those things, do we need a day to allow us to remember that the system is crumbling in front of us? No, we need look no further, in many cases, sadly, than our own families, and we are certainly within two degrees of separation of somebody who suffers without being able to access primary care. To further build upon that, I do not think we need a pandemic observance day to remind folks who could not be with their loved ones during their final days; they are not going to forget that. We do not need to remind them that they could not have funerals. We do not need to remind them that people could not celebrate birthdays or anniversaries. My own son's graduation was an event where we drove by in our cars and, from some distance, he received his graduation certificate. These are things we will not forget, and we do not need a day to remember them. We do not need to have a day to remind us that we could not socialize with people in the manner we wanted to, that we could not travel and experience the great things the rest of the world has to offer and have learning experiences that make us better, richer people from a personal, social and spiritual point of view. We do not need a day to remind us that we were unable to do those things. We are now learning to live with COVID-19, and I think there are a lot of lessons to be learned. We need to look at the science behind it and the science behind this new group of mRNA vaccines to understand what the science is telling us. As the member for Vancouver Centre talked about repeating mistakes, if we do not have the courage to look at those vaccines and the outcomes, then we are doomed to make mistakes, which I think is going to be an important thing going forward. Do we need a day to do that? No. We need to be working on that now, and we need to do it day after day. We do not need one day to remind us to do that; that does not make any sense. We also do not need a day to remind us that our Prime Minister lashed out at many Canadians and called them racist and misogynist. We do not need a day to be reminded of those sad days. We do not need another reminder of the division that this Liberal government has created in Canada. Therefore, as we begin to look upon this, I really believe that people will not forget the pandemic, which began in 2020 and as yet is still not declared over by the WHO. We know that perhaps the pandemic emergency will soon end, but we need members of the House to have the courage to come forward with the appropriate private member's bill that will give us hope for the future, that will bring us forward, that will look at systemic failures and the failures of what happened in managing the pandemic, that will look at things that are near and dear to all of our hearts, like the health care system, and that will allow us to say, “How are we going to change things? How are we going to make it better? How are we going to repair this?” That is what we need to be thinking of. Do we need to have a day to do that? We do not need a day. We need multiple days; we need years; we need people to dedicate themselves to doing that, and I believe they are. Once again, this government of inaction needs to move forward to action and actually do something about it, as opposed to having another day to talk more about it.

1422 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 108 - Oct/5/22

Oct/17/22 11:19:14 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill S-209

Madam Speaker, a lot has happened with respect to the pandemic. That is undeniable. My question relates to the fact that it is very clear, as stated by the president of the Canadian Medical Association, that the medical system is on the brink of collapse. I do not believe that a private member's bill with respect to remembering there was a pandemic is going to, in any way, shape or form, help the catastrophe that is happing in the medical system. Why not bring forward a bill that would actually address the deficiencies in the system that the government has allowed to happen over the last seven years?

109 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 107 - Oct/4/22

Oct/5/22 3:07:05 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the government has pledged only a third of a probable over $1 billion for the cleanup after hurricane Fiona. The residents of Cumberland—Colchester are calling our office every day to try to understand the process of obtaining funding. Once again, the government of inaction and no planning has no answer. On the east coast, we are tough but people need this support now. When will the Prime Minister have a concrete plan for Atlantic Canadians?

79 words

Context: House Hansard - 106 - Oct/3/22

Oct/4/22 2:13:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the people of Cumberland—Colchester continue to be profoundly and disproportionately affected by hurricane Fiona. Being out of power is one thing; however being without power and water is in another realm altogether. The uncertainty surrounding when electricity will be restored adds to the tremendous burden of suffering being experienced. Crews are working hard to remove trees and repair damaged lines 24 hours a day, and we commend them for their work. We will continue to ask for more aid until power is fully restored, and we will continue to ask for support as the cleanup progresses and life returns to normal. As always, let us be mindful of those in our neighbourhoods who need our support and encouragement. Let us honour our shared history of being tough Maritimers and being willing to always help in a time of great need.

144 words