SoVote

Mar/31/22 12:47:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am not saying that we should not work with all other parliamentarians and other parties. Having been a parliamentarian and a minister, I know what it means to negotiate with other parliamentarians and reach a compromise. That is very normal and that is why we are here. That is why we have committees: to improve bills and arrive at the best possible solution. However, what we are talking about today is an agreement reached behind closed doors to keep this government in power until 2025 in exchange for implementing the NDP platform. Canadians never voted for that.

100 words

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

Mar/31/22 12:48:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague read the Conservative motion to us, and it deals rather harshly with the carbon tax. Quebec has a carbon market, which is a pretty good system. Quebec recently approached Ottawa and invited it to participate in the market along with California, which is working with Quebec. The system in question was created by one Jean Charest. He recently declared that he does not agree with abolishing the tax, but he does think that it should be paused and that we should think carefully before increasing the tax. I would like to ask my colleague if she supports abolishing the tax or simply pausing it.

108 words

Mrs. Dominique Vien

Mar/31/22 12:49:30 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let us leave former prime ministers and the leadership race out of this debate. The Conservatives have moved a clear and simple motion calling on the current NDP‑Liberal alliance to present a credible, reasonable plan to balance the budget with well-defined measures for government spending. Every expenditure must correspond to revenue. That is what we are saying today.

63 words

Mr. Matthew Green (Hamilton Centre, NDP)

Mar/31/22 12:50:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will, once again, zero in on the second problematic point of this cockamamie Conservative motion, which states that taxes on Canadians continue to increase, from carbon tax to the Canada pension plan premiums. The text of this motion mis-characterizes the Canada pension plan as a tax, when in fact it is a deferred wage and a meaningful way for Canadians to plan for retirement. Given that the previous Conservative member refused to answer this question when I put it directly to him, could the member opposite clarify why the Conservatives believe the Canada pension plan premium, which saves for retirement, is considered a tax? Also, by cutting pension premiums against inflation, would it not stand to reason that Conservatives are also looking to lower the meagre payouts to our most vulnerable seniors?

136 words

Mrs. Dominique Vien

Mar/31/22 12:51:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Canadians, including my constituents, are under a lot of pressure. They are in the clutches of skyrocketing inflation, which is currently at 5.7%. Our fathers, mothers, sisters and children are struggling to make ends meet. Young people cannot buy a home. Seniors are unsure of what they can afford and why they have to choose between food and medications. That is what we are talking about today. We are calling on the Liberal government to be careful and reasonable in its upcoming NDP‑Liberal budget and to be mindful of spending too much. That is what the Conservatives are saying today.

105 words

Ms. Julie Dzerowicz (Davenport, Lib.)

Mar/31/22 12:51:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Kings—Hants. It is a great pleasure, as always, to rise in the House on behalf of my riding of Davenport to speak to the opposition day motion put forward by the Conservatives, which calls on our government to present a “federal budget rooted in fiscal responsibility with no new taxes, a path to balance and a meaningful fiscal anchor”. We are well aware that elevated inflation and the rise of gas prices are leading Canadians to worry about the cost of living and how this is affecting their everyday lives. Let me remind everyone in this venerable House today, and all those listening, of a few things. Inflation is a global issue. Initially, it was due to global oil prices, pandemic supply chain problems and the way the virus changed our spending habits. We also know that inflation is being exacerbated by Russia's illegal war in Ukraine. Since the beginning of the pandemic, our federal government has been tireless in our efforts to protect Canadians, to support them through ongoing challenges and to bridge them through the postpandemic recovery. This significant fiscal policy support has contributed to a rapid and resilient recovery so far. I would add that we have provided if not the most generous, then among the most generous emergency supports in the world. The motion we are speaking to today asks the federal government to present a federal budget that is rooted in fiscal responsibility and also to provide meaningful fiscal anchors. We have been fiscally responsible every step of the way during the pandemic, as well as since we were first elected in late 2015. Indeed, throughout the entire pandemic we have been in strong fiscal shape with the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio of the G7. Our GDP returned to nearly prepandemic levels in the third quarter of 2021, and it grew by an annual rate of 6.7% in the fourth quarter of 2021. On top of that, Moody's and S&P have reaffirmed Canada's AAA credit rating. In addition, the Stats Canada labour force survey showed that the labour market gained 337,000 jobs in February of this year, and we have recovered overall 112% of the jobs that we lost at the peak of the pandemic. Therefore, we have been fiscally responsible, we continue to be fiscally responsible, and we will be fiscally responsible moving forward. We have also had meaningful fiscal anchors. Those anchors have been net GDP-to-debt ratios that, as was mentioned earlier, are the best in the G7, as well as an outstanding jobs growth number in addition to our overall GDP growth. The result is that our economy is growing back as it continues to try to come out of this pandemic into the postpandemic world and economy. I just want to point out that it is because of the generous emergency supports provided throughout the pandemic by our federal government that the economic foundation is strong and that companies can pivot back quickly as we are trying to come out of this pandemic. Saying all that, I want to highlight some elements of the federal government's recovery plan that we have announced so far. Our current recovery plan is targeted toward growth-enhancing and job-creating initiatives such as investment to support child care and the adoption of new technologies that will help boost supply. Increasing supply will help the economy to grow without the risk of higher inflation. As the situation across the country has improved, our federal government has moved from very broad-based support to more targeted measures that will provide help where it is needed and when it is needed. When the new variants and major outbreaks occurred, lockdowns and capacity restrictions were painful but necessary last resorts to break the chain of transmission and to save lives. That is why, this past December, we announced that we were temporarily expanding the Canada worker lockdown benefit as well as the local lockdown program to support workers and businesses that were affected by capacity restrictions of 50% or more. We also temporarily lowered the current month revenue decline threshold requirement, from 40% to 25%, for employers to access the local lockdown program. This means that eligible employers could receive wage and rent subsidy support of from 25% to 75%, depending on how much revenue they had lost. For workers who work in a region that introduces capacity restrictions by 50% or more, this means they can qualify for the Canada worker lockdown benefit. This enables Canadians to put $300 a week in their pockets to supplement lost wages. Like all Canadians, we hope that lockdowns and capacity restrictions will be a thing of the past. We know Canadians are tired of COVID-19, but the unfortunately reality is that COVID-19 is not quite tired of us. We put these supports in place so that public health authorities could make the right, albeit difficult, decisions knowing that the federal government could be there to continue to support workers, small businesses and other employers in their communities when needed. We extended these key, enhanced lockdown support programs to ensure that Canadians were protected and workers and businesses had access to the help they needed to sustain them during the omicron wave. There are a number of additional measures we have taken to support Canadians and address top issues affecting Canada's economic growth and prosperity. Last December, we introduced Bill C-8, which seeks to address housing affordability through the implementation of a national annual 1% tax on the value of non-resident, non-Canadian-owned residential real estate in Canada that is considered to be vacant or underused. It is something our federal government announced as part of budget 2021 to crack down on underused housing. The bill would introduce a new act, the underused housing tax act, to ensure that non-resident non-Canadian owners, particularly those who use Canada as a place to passively store their wealth and housing, pay their fair share of Canadian taxes beginning in the 2022 calendar year. We are also working to address the issue of supply chain disruptions from around the world and shipping bottlenecks that have made it harder for Canadians and businesses to get the products and supplies they need, and that in many cases are contributing to rising prices. To help strengthen supply chains and address bottlenecks, the federal government has launched a new targeted call for proposals under the national trade corridors fund to assist Canadian ports with the acquisition of cargo storage capacity and other measures to relieve supply chain congestion. The fund will dedicate up to $50 million to support eligible priority projects. Today, we are on strong economic footing. Our federal government has also prioritized putting the lives of Canadians first. This has meant that we have had one of the lowest mortality rates in the G7 due to COVID-19. In addition, we are making vaccines free and a priority. As of March 25, over 85% of Canadians five and older were fully vaccinated, and the Canadian economy has seen the benefits of prioritizing our health. Given all of the aforementioned emergency and economic supports, the Canadian labour market rebounded strongly from the omicron wave in February. I would add that the recovery and economic growth have been broad-based and supported by solid underlying fundamentals, with ongoing rebounds in sectors hardest hit by the pandemic. In conclusion, our federal government is determined to continue to do what is necessary to sustain the recovery, to provide help where it is still needed, to create jobs and to set the stage for strong growth for years to come. From the start of the pandemic, we understood that having a job was essential to Canadians' economic well-being. That is why our investments have been so singularly focused on employment and why Canada has experienced one of the fastest job recoveries in the G7. Canadians can remain confident that they have a strong hand at the wheel of the federal government in safeguarding and growing our economy.

1372 words

All Topics

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

Mar/31/22 1:01:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment you on your hard work. My colleague spoke about the tax on vacant housing owned by non-Canadians. This is not a bad policy for addressing the crisis that is playing out right now. Unfortunately, it is just a drop in the ocean. The federal government's main programs, including the national housing co-investment fund and the rental construction financing initiative, are programs that, unfortunately, mean that Montreal's so-called “affordable” housing costs $2,200. A lot of money is being invested in things that the average Joe cannot afford. A decent program was launched during the pandemic: the rapid housing initiative. Rumour has it that this program could be extended as a result of the Liberal-NDP agreement. In Quebec, housing organizations are asking for predictability. Will the program be extended for just one year or for several?

149 words

Ms. Julie Dzerowicz

Mar/31/22 1:02:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, housing is, indeed, top of mind for all Canadians, irrespective of what's happening with COVID and what's happening in the world today. Everybody's hearts and minds are with Ukrainians today and every day as long as this unprovoked illegal aggression is under way. Housing is top of mind, both from a housing affordability perspective and an affordable housing perspective. I do agree that the underused tax is only one of the many things we have to look at. We introduced a $72-billion national housing strategy and a $4-billion housing accelerator fund. We will be introducing many measures in the coming weeks and months to address the housing issue in Canada right now. It will require steps to be taken at every level of government for us to urgently address this very important issue.

140 words

Mr. Eric Melillo (Kenora, CPC)

Mar/31/22 1:03:30 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I must admit that I came in at the back half of the member's speech and I did not hear her full remarks. I am sure it was a great speech, and I apologize if my question was covered in her earlier remarks. Given that we know Canadians are facing a cost-of-living crisis, this motion is quite simple in asking for the government not to increase taxes at a time when Canadians can least afford it. Based on the comments I heard by the member and others on the government side, it does not seem like they are too fond of the motion Conservatives brought forward today. I wonder what specifically they take issue with, given the fact that the cost of living is getting out of control for so many people in this country.

140 words

Ms. Julie Dzerowicz

Mar/31/22 1:04:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, costs and inflation are definitely top of mind for Canadians today. The federal government, since it was elected late in 2015, has taken a number of measures to try to make sure that we reduce income inequality and make life affordable for Canadians. The latest thing we have done is to introduce the national child care plan. That is a historic plan. When I was first elected, I never thought we would see a day when national child care would be implemented in Canada. Today I am so proud to be part of a government that is implementing a national child care program that will reduce costs by 50% by the end of this year for all Canadian families that have children in day care. We will continue to be concerned about the cost of living for Canadians and we will do everything we can to continue to support Canadians as we move forward.

156 words

Hon. John McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood, Lib.)

Mar/31/22 1:05:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like the hon. member's comments on the third element of this motion, which is the government refusing to provide relief to Canadians by temporarily reducing the goods and services tax on gasoline and oil. If I pull up my pickup truck and fill up for $200, I get $10 back. If I fill up my Toyota Corolla for $20, I get $1 back. I still get 500 kilometres with both vehicles. I would be interested in the member's comments as to whether she thinks that is fair.

93 words

Ms. Julie Dzerowicz

Mar/31/22 1:06:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we had a very important discussion and debate around the increasing price of oil and gas in this country. We had an important debate around implementing a tax holiday. Our government will continue to be very concerned about gas prices and prices overall in this country and we will continue to support Canadians—

56 words

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Mar/31/22 1:06:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House of Commons, even in a virtual manner, to address the opposition day motion today on what I think is an important element for us to talk about: economic and fiscal policy. What I am going to do in my 10 minutes is to try to tackle some of the elements in the actual text of the motion and also to provide some of the recommendations and thoughts I have as a member of Parliament about things that I think all parliamentarians should be thinking about in the days ahead as we start to work our way out of COVID and look to how we can maintain fiscal balance but also continue to pursue the social programs that Canadians expect. Before I get into the text of the motion, I want to take us back to the period before the pandemic, from 2015 to certainly just the early part of 2020, and how this government approached spending and its parameters around what it felt was important. The member for Burnaby North—Seymour, who is the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Finance, made what I thought were really important remarks this morning when he talked about the government coming in at a time when the Harper government had really underfunded a lot of really important programs. He spoke about not just economic deficits but social and infrastructure deficits that had essentially protruded over time. When we look at the level of spending the government took on during that time frame, it ran relatively modest deficits of around 1% of GDP at a time when the economy was continuing to grow. We would remember that, following the global economic crisis in the 2008-09 period, there was a lagging economic recovery that had been evident under the Harper policies. We really saw a lot of economic growth from 2015 to 2020. I will remind colleagues that unemployment was at a 40-year low just before the pandemic, and although the government was spending deficits, the economy and economic growth was far outpacing the cost of the debt taken on at the time. Essentially, we came into the pandemic with the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. We were in a very strong fiscal position to be able to tackle what was a once-in-a-generation type of pandemic. We had not seen this level of uncertainty since the Spanish flu and the influenza crisis just following World War I, so I want to remind Canadians and colleagues that this government has been able to walk the line between not only investing in Canadians but also maintaining important fiscal balance in the same sense. I will go to the text of the motion. The first part speaks about “excessive government spending” during the pandemic. I think it is an open debate whether or not that was indeed the case. Other colleagues, and also perhaps the Minister of Finance, have said that, if we are putting out a fire, we are usually not critiqued on how much water we use to eliminate the fire. It is easy for armchair quarterbacks on the opposition side to sit and suggest that the government spent too much, but private sector economists, Canadians and the people who needed support during this extremely difficult time would tell us that these were important investments to ward off the economic scarring that would have happened in a similar light to what happened during the 2008-09 financial crisis. Of course, the job of Her Majesty's loyal opposition is to critique and hold the government to account, but I think on the whole the government was responsible in making sure there were programs in a timely manner that were there to support Canadian businesses, Canadian individuals and even the provinces and territories because we had a strong fiscal footing going into the pandemic. Therefore, I would take issue with the fact that there is text in the motion that talks about “excessive government spending”. During the magnitude of the challenge we have just gone through over the past two years, which I would remind my colleagues we are not completely out of, I think it was proportionate to what we saw. I also want to remind my Conservative colleagues that, in the 43rd Parliament and leading into the election in September, they were proposing to spend more money than what the government had allocated in its platform commitments. I remember sitting, virtually, during the height of the pandemic, listening to Conservative members get up and say in one breath that the government was spending far too much money, which goes to the excessive spending piece they are talking about now, and in the same breath would come back and say the government is not doing enough and it needs to do even more. That inconsistency around how best to move forward is why I think the Conservative Party continues to not have a true idea of where it necessarily sits on this issue. I want to talk about fuelling inflation. The idea in the text of this motion is that the government spending during the pandemic has fuelled inflation. I think, in part, it has, but this is a much more nuanced question. Governments around the world have invested to try to ward off the worst economic implications. We know that had to happen. Otherwise, we would have had an economic collapse. This has to do with the supply chains that were impacted. This has to do with climate change. The member for Abbotsford's community and certainly the communities close to him were severely impacted by the atmospheric rainstorms that we saw in British Columbia, which then created supply challenges. Climate change is having a major impact on global inflation, as well as is the war in Ukraine. I would also argue that low interest rates contribute to this. There is a fiscal piece to this, but there is also a monetary element, where the Bank of Canada significantly lowered its interest rates, which also stimulates investment and spending, which is also part of what we are seeing now. There is a piece of this motion that talks about the taxes continuing to increase with reference to the carbon price. What the motion does not mention, of course, is that the carbon price is designed to give money back to Canadians. On a per capita basis, money is returned so that it actually incentivizes change in behaviour. As the chair of the agriculture committee, I will recognize that in some instances, in particular, our farmers have been impacted in the sense that they may pay a higher proportionate cost. That is why we have made adjustments in the economic update, which we are still trying to get through the House as the Conservatives continue to delay, to get measures that will actually give rebates to farmers who many not have otherwise had the opportunity to get around those challenging circumstances. There is also a provision around relief to Canadians through the GST. I had lots to say on that with the member for Abbotsford about a week ago. I think there is merit at looking at affordability. I think the manner in which the Conservatives are proposing to go about this allows members of Parliament, who are some of the higher income earners in the country, to benefit from something. It is not targeted. I think there are more targeted ways we can try to focus on supporting individuals who truly need the help, given the circumstances we are under. The last piece, and this is the piece I tend to agree with, is that “the House call on the government to present a federal budget rooted in fiscal responsibility”. I do fundamentally believe that is an important element that this government is going to have to tackle in the days ahead. There has to be a balance between social progress, which I believe in, and the programs that matter, and having a plan for how those can be sustainable over time. I would agree on that point. I also agree that the economy is very hot right now because of the investments that we have made and because of how we have been able to support businesses. Unemployment is at historic lows right now. Members opposite and members in the House writ large have talked about the importance of immigration to make sure that we can fill job vacancies that exist in the country. I do think we have to be mindful about not continuing to put liquidity in an already hot economy, which is ultimately going against the principles of monetary policy when the Bank of Canada is signalling that it will be increasing interest rates in the days ahead. Just quickly, on no new taxes, I think the Conservatives are either going to have to come clean that they do not necessarily want to support some of the social programs that are being talked about, whether it be dental care or pharmacare, or they are going to have to say that there is going to have to be a revenue generation to pay for those. Whether that is growing the economy or looking at ways to work in a multilateral form so that we do not price ourselves out in a competitive sense around tax policy, there are going to have to be serious questions around revenue to make sure that these programs that are being introduced are sustainable over time. Let me just say again, as I have said in the House before, I think this country has a tremendous opportunity on foreign policy. We have the propensity to feed the world. We have the propensity to provide energy to the world. We have the propensity to provide critical minerals that are key to the energy transition. There is a great opportunity on foreign policy, but it is also an important economic driver that can help pay for some of the very important social programs the government has introduced and is planning to introduce in the days ahead.

1704 words

All Topics

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

Mar/31/22 1:16:35 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, at the start of his speech, the member spoke about the Liberal government's goal of maintaining a balanced budget while also adhering to the very worthy plan of safeguarding social programs. However, I wonder why this government is depriving itself of the gargantuan profits made by the big banks in 2021, nearly $60 billion. Why are the Liberals opposed to eliminating tax havens?

67 words

Mr. Kody Blois

Mar/31/22 1:17:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that the government is contemplating those types of policies. Let me say, though, which I often say to my NDP colleagues, that there is merit in looking at individuals who have the propensity to pay more to help contribute to social programs, but we need to do so in the sense that we are in a global economy. The best way to move forward is working in a multilateral forum with other countries so that we create things like a minimum corporate income tax and do not basically create an environment where we do not have foreign direct investments and companies do not want to come here. We have to always guard against that, and working in a multilateral forum globally is the best pathway forward.

131 words

Ms. Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NDP)

Mar/31/22 1:18:05 p.m.
Watch

Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji. The lack of housing is the biggest issue in my riding. All too often I hear about 18 people living in a three-bedroom unit. This is an all-too-common story from Nunavut. Will the government commit to making sure that the wealthy pay their fair share so my constituents do not have to continue to live in deplorable conditions that help prevent real reconciliation?

68 words

Mr. Kody Blois

Mar/31/22 1:18:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I know the particular housing situation in Nunavut would be more nuanced than the one in my riding of Kings—Hants. However, the government certainly has committed publicly to investing in indigenous housing specifically in the days ahead, and I take notice that this is important to the member opposite and her constituents, as well as to many others across the country. In perhaps a lesser sense, in terms of basic shelter, housing prices in Kings—Hants have gone up I think 40% year over year. This is a challenge being faced across the country, and the government has to work with all three levels of government and the private sector. Particularly focusing on social housing would be an important element in the days ahead. We have to have important conversations about the revenue to pay for such programs, but I do support that principle.

149 words

Mr. Eric Melillo (Kenora, CPC)

Mar/31/22 1:19:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from the Liberal Party brings a lot of solution-oriented remarks to this chamber. I always appreciate his interventions. He noted that the carbon tax impacts agriculture disproportionately. I would argue that extends to rural and northern communities of the country more broadly. I am wondering if the member can articulate further some ways he thinks we can support agriculture and support our rural and northern communities in giving them relief from the carbon tax.

79 words

Mr. Kody Blois

Mar/31/22 1:20:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, likewise, I always enjoy the interventions from the member for Kenora and his insight. This government recognizes that for certain industries and certain individuals, depending on where they live in the country, there are fewer options. Being in a rural area myself in Nova Scotia, I know that my constituents may not have the same access to public transit and different elements as others, so there is a lot I could address. On agriculture, the government has recognized that the price some farmers are paying exceeds what they may be returned under the current model. That is why we introduced Bill C-8, which has monies designated specifically to go back to farmers to continue to keep the price signal there and continue to encourage innovation, not necessarily to harm farmers in any way. I hope the member opposite will have conversations with his colleagues so we can advance that bill and make sure support is given to his farmers and many others across the country.

168 words

Mr. Eric Melillo (Kenora, CPC)

Mar/31/22 1:21:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to join this important debate and discussion today. Before I get into my formal remarks, I want to tell members that I am wearing a very special tie today. In the spirit of non-partisanship, I want to make note of this because this tie was gifted to me yesterday by a good friend, Anthony, who, as members know, works in the lobby for the NDP. He is a great man. Of course, we disagree on many policy initiatives and I am very disappointed that his party is supporting the government for the next three years, but I wanted to make note of the tie and hopefully embarrass him a bit in the process. I cannot hear him laughing quite yet, but I am sure I will shortly. Also, he did not give one to the member for Kingston and the Islands, which is the cherry on top, I have to say. I am pleased to be splitting my time today with my friend and colleague, the member for Kelowna—Lake Country, who does a fantastic job representing her constituents in British Columbia and Canadians across the country in her role in the shadow cabinet of supporting small businesses and ensuring that we have a robust recovery across the country. I am very much looking forward to hearing her remarks today. This motion is very important for me and the Kenora riding and people across northwestern Ontario and across the country. As we have heard from many members on all sides of the House, inflation is getting out of control and the cost of living is driving through the roof. We know that food prices as a whole have increased by 7.4%, with beef up almost 12% and ham and bacon up 15%. It is getting harder for people to put food on the table because prices are going up and wages are not keeping up. As we have seen in reports from the PBO, this has been driven in part by the reckless government spending we have seen from the Liberal government. It is continuing the spending beyond the point that was necessary throughout COVID-19 and the height of COVID-19, and as a result, Canadians are now facing the highest inflation they have seen in 31 years. It is the highest inflation I have seen in my lifetime. I want to focus specifically, off the top, on gas prices. Gas prices in my riding always tend to be a bit higher than in other regions of the province and the country, being that it is in northwestern Ontario. However, it is getting especially difficult now. This week, gas in Dryden was 185.9¢, in Red Lake it was 191.9¢ and in Sioux Lookout it was 193.7¢. In Fort Hope First Nation, the gas price this morning was $2.65 per litre. When we hear the government talk about reconciliation and wanting to ensure that it has an important relationship with indigenous Canadians, it is hard to look at something like this with the cost of living on reserve. The remote community of Fort Hope is just one example of many in my riding, and it is hard to square that circle, because a lot of the government's policies, such as the carbon tax, choose to keep taxes high. Based on the remarks today, as I mentioned earlier, it seems like the Liberals are not fond of our motion. However, it seems like the policies the government is bringing forward from a fiscal point of view are hurting a lot of northern, rural and indigenous Canadians the hardest, and we are seeing that in my riding. The government claims that Canadians are going to be better off when they get their rebates for the carbon tax specifically. However, I respectfully note for members across the aisle that many Canadians right now cannot wait for that rebate. They are struggling to get to the end of the week and the end of the month, and for this rebate, although it will be coming, this is too long for them to wait. They are paying for it right now. Also, the PBO report has actually refuted the minister's and government's claim that most of the costs would be recuperated. Indeed, households subject to the tax are actually going to experience a net loss, so even after waiting for that rebate to come back, it will not be enough to fill the gap. This is especially important in my riding because we have very few transit options for busing. Subways are non-existent. It is certainly far different from University—Rosedale or many of the ridings represented by government members. In my riding, as I have mentioned before, many people have to travel a number of hours just to see specialists or go to the hospital, either to Winnipeg or many more to Thunder Bay. That is even farther to drive, but based on a lot of the rules around health care, they have to stay in the province so they have to go to Thunder Bay. Just recently, Red Lake, because of a shortage of health care personnel, actually had to close its ER. The community of Red Lake, with 5,000 or so people, for 24 hours did not have access to an emergency room. The closest emergency room would be about two and a half hours away, in Dryden. Needless to say, if someone had a serious emergency, it would not end well. We are thankful that nothing happened over the last weekend, but the threat will remain there as the shortages exist across the region. That is why fuel is so important and gas is so important. It is actually getting incredibly prohibitive for people to travel to access critical services such as health care. In my remaining time, I want to bring this back to the motion today, because I think we are not asking for very much in it. What the motion is saying is pretty simple, and we have not been asking for much over the last couple of weeks and months. We have suggested providing a GST holiday on gasoline. We also suggested a suspension of the carbon tax increase that is coming on April 1. The government has shut the door to those discussions. Frankly, respectfully, I think we are bringing forward reasonable proposals and trying to help alleviate the cost-of-living crisis and help ensure that people can keep more money in their pockets. I am having a hard time understanding why members on that side of the House do not seem interested in having this discussion right now. Today, specifically in the motion, we are asking for the upcoming budget, as my colleagues have noted, to be rooted in fiscal responsibility and to not add any new taxes. Frankly, it is the least we can do at this pivotal moment for many families across my riding that are struggling. They are just asking for the government to help them, and that is why we are bringing forward this motion here today. We want to lower taxes to give a little more peace of mind and to take one more cost away from the equation. I ask government members here today to think about that and remember this: In my humble opinion, money is better spent by the people who have earned it than by a government that thinks it has a right to go in and tax it. I ask my colleagues on the other side to think of that. We are hoping that the 2022 budget will not include any new taxes, of course. I hope that all my colleagues in the House will support this practical motion today and ensure that our budget does have a debt management strategy, because Canadians are struggling to get by. They are struggling to afford the basic necessities. It is time for the government to step up to provide relief to ensure that we do not leave Canadians in rural and northern communities and in many indigenous communities across northwestern Ontario behind.

1370 words

All Topics

SoVote

House Hansard - 50