44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 5, 2022 10:00AM
- Apr/5/22 6:18:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak today about some of the challenges we have seen with donation matching programs launched by governments in response to crises around the world.
When there is some singular event causing massive destruction elsewhere in the world, one way that governments have provided assistance is through matching programs that match private donations up to a certain amount. I believe that, in general, matching programs are a very positive vehicle. They are a mechanism for encouraging private participation in humanitarian work and promoting the habit of private giving in general. Because matching programs are often time-limited, they can encourage individuals to make their donations in a timely way. These programs also reflect the important idea that governments and private actors can and should work together to advance international humanitarian objectives.
However, there is one significant problem with matching programs. The risk is that, by offering matching opportunities to some organizations and not others, the government uses its financial and rhetorical power to direct private donations in a particular direction. People naturally want to give to organizations that are beneficiaries of a matching program, so that their contributions will be effectively doubled. Promoting donations to these organizations in particular is part of the point of matching programs.
However, if people who might otherwise give to unmatched organizations instead choose to direct their donations to organizations that are the recipients of matching programs, these organizations who do not benefit from matching programs end up receiving less private money than they would otherwise.
The government is picking winners and losers among humanitarian and development organizations when they construct matching programs that apply to a certain narrow set of organizations and not to others. This perverse outcome is something that should be avoided. I believe that when it comes to matching programs, the government should always cast a very wide net. The government could, for instance, establish a policy of matching donations to all charitable organizations that are responding to a particular crisis.
In particular, it has seemed to be the tendency of government to launch matching programs with big, established multilateral humanitarian organizations with which the government has long-established relationships. This is the easy thing for government to do and it may also entail less of certain kinds of risks. As the saying goes, nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.
The problem is that there may be other good reasons to prefer matching programs with organizations other than big, well-known multilaterals. In many cases, smaller, local charities will have particular competencies and connections on the ground. The organizations best positioned to provide humanitarian relief in Lebanon may not be the same as the organizations best positioned to provide humanitarian relief in Ukraine.
The easy way out for government is simply to work with big organizations that have some capacity to operate everywhere, but matching donations to smaller, local outfits may actually have a greater, real impact. These organizations may also be leaner and more efficient.
A focus on large, multilaterals ignores the potential of uniquely Canadian-based and affiliated organizations, in some cases led by diaspora community members with particular connections abroad and in other cases simply Canadian organizations that are leveraging Canadian innovation and involvement. Imagine the experience of someone who starts a local Canadian not-for-profit organization, has a strong base of support here and suddenly finds that they are losing donations at a critical time because Canadians are instead choosing to donate to multilaterals that are benefiting from a matching program from their own government. This is not right and it is not fair.
Now I have also seen how government matching programs often miss Christian and other faith-based organizations that are doing good development work in the service of all. A secular government should be neutral on questions of religion, which means providing matching opportunities for faith-based and non-faith-based organizations alike. This would be a neutral position, but by avoiding faith-based organizations in the matching program, the government is not taking a neutral position.
My initial question was about matching in the case of Ukraine. Notably, in the case of Ukraine, Canadians have been extremely generous, donating far above the allotment for the matching program, and the level of generosity in this case means that the perverse outcomes of only matching donations to one organization may likely be less of a factor, but this is a larger policy issue that needs to be addressed by government and I hope it will be.
759 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:22:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Canada is deeply concerned about the worsening humanitarian impact of Russia's unjustifiable invasion of Ukraine. We stand strong in our unwavering commitment to provide life-saving humanitarian assistance to those affected by the conflict.
Canada responds to complex humanitarian crises through an established international humanitarian response system, comprised of United Nations agencies, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and experienced non-governmental organizations. This mainly involves providing financial assistance to help meet the urgent needs on the ground. The flexibility provided by monetary assistance is essential in complex, fluid operational environments like the one that we see in Ukraine, allowing humanitarian organizations to procure relief items and deploy key equipment and trained personnel quickly and efficiently through established and coordinated humanitarian networks.
To date, in 2022, Canada has committed $145 million to support the humanitarian response, which has been allocated to experienced UN, Red Cross and NGO humanitarian partners, many of which are working with local NGOs. This includes $100 million in response to the UN humanitarian flash appeal and the regional refugee response plan for Ukraine.
To really make the most of Canadians' generosity and these strong interpersonal connections between Ukraine and Canada, we launched a $10‑million matching fund in partnership with the Canadian Red Cross in February.
In recognition of the success of the matching fund, an additional $20 million was announced in March, increasing the total amount matched to $30 million. When humanitarian crises occur, such as the one we are witnessing in Ukraine, Canada's immediate priority is to get life-saving relief to the most vulnerable quickly, safely and securely in a manner responsive to the complex environment.
Canada is partnering with the CRC because the Red Cross movement had the earliest and best access to affected populations, as well as a proven ability to address the multisectoral needs of those affected by the conflict. As a global network of humanitarian organizations, the strength of the movement is its ability to quickly mobilize personnel, equipment and critical supplies directly through local societies to help people affected by emergencies all over the world. The Red Cross was on the ground in Ukraine prior to the escalation of this conflict and continues to work in close coordination with global and local actors to address critical needs.
The generosity of Canadians has been remarkable. We recognize and value the immense contribution of organizations such as the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and the Catholic Near East Welfare Association, which are working hard to support the humanitarian response in Ukraine and surrounding regions.
As the crisis unfolds, our government will continue to re-evaluate the best approaches and the best partners to meet evolving humanitarian needs.
451 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:26:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for her response. She did confirm the policy that I identified, and it is one that I think should be revisited. That is the policy of emphasizing partnerships with large multilaterals.
It is not that working with these organizations is unimportant, but including small Canadian diaspora-led organizations as well as larger Canadian diaspora-led organizations can be very effective as well. When we have matching programs, we should be careful that we are not directing away from those organizations toward a small set of chosen partners.
I would quibble a bit. The parliamentary secretary talked about how the benefits of these large multilaterals are that they move quickly and that they can work with organizations that are local on the ground. I would say that working directly with organizations that have already established local partnerships can often allow for a quicker response, and fewer resources are lost in the process of transferring them to the multilaterals and then to those small organizations.
I know this is not something that can be changed on the fly, but I would encourage the government to look at this issue.
194 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:27:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would say to my hon. colleague that it is not either/or, and certainly we are constantly re-evaluating.
Since the onset of the crisis in 2014, Canada has supported the humanitarian response in Ukraine with over $194 million in humanitarian assistance through experienced humanitarian partners. Their unparalleled access to affected populations and their ability to provide neutral, impartial emergency assistance quickly and efficiently are paramount at this time.
The matching fund was established to support the generosity of Canadians. With the urgency to respond efficiently, we are working with experienced humanitarian partners and using supply pipelines that are already established.
As long as the Ukrainian people are grappling with the challenges of this emergency situation, we are committed to ensuring those humanitarian needs are met.
129 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:29:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise this evening as we are nearing budget day.
Canadians who have been recently asked have listed their priorities for the government, and I hope all government members here this evening are listening very attentively as we prepare for this budget.
Ipsos did some polling of Canadians and listed the top three priorities of Canadians. In this poll, 53% of Canadians ranked “help with the soaring cost of everyday needs due to inflation” as a priority, so this is obviously a huge issue. We have seen it in all parts of our economy. Housing inflation is a very big one, with the price of homes in Canada having doubled in recent years under the government's time in office. The average Canadian home clocking in at over $800,000 puts it well out of reach, and even those below the average are out of reach for people looking to enter the market for the first time.
We also know that Canadian households will face an average of an increase of $1,000 more in groceries this year, which is going to put an incredible stress on families when an absolute majority of Canadians, more than 50%, are already within $200 of not being able to meet their financial commitments. They are within $200 of insolvency. As well, a third of Canadians are currently meeting the definition of being insolvent right now.
The second priority, listed by 45% of respondents, is “lowering taxes”. This would ease some of the pressures Canadians are facing. We know that the price at the pumps has gone up, which is making things incredibly difficult for Canadians, particularly those in rural areas. We saw the price at the pumps go up again on April 1. Global instability doing what it does is very much outside the control of our government here domestically, but the tax increase it implemented on April 1 was directly under its control. People cannot afford to get to work, get to medical appointments or take their children to recreational activities. This is within the government's purview, and it could do something that would be very responsive to the needs of Canadians.
Next, 40% of Canadians ranked “greater investments in health care” as a top priority. Over the course of the pandemic, which put incredible stress on our health care system, we saw the government refuse to meet with the provinces to give them stability and predictability with respect to health care funding, which is of course incumbent on the government.
What Canadians are looking for and what this boils down to is that Canadians want a government that is going to be prudent. It is time to respect the tax dollar. It is time to respect Canadians, give them a break, give us a break from inflation, give us a break from housing inflation and help Canadians keep a little more money in their pockets so they can afford to heat their homes, feed their families, save for the future and maybe one day buy a home of their own.
522 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:32:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am very happy to have this opportunity to address our government's fiscal position, as well as the many ways that we are improving affordability for Canadians.
In 2015, we promised to invest in the future of Canada by incurring small deficits while targeting investments in economic growth. In our first four years we made significant investments in housing, transportation and indigenous reconciliation. We grew the economy while reducing poverty and unemployment to all-time historic lows. We lifted 1.3 million Canadians out of poverty and began to tackle climate change in a serious and meaningful way. We grew the size of the economy while reducing our debt-to-GDP ratio every single year.
This was an enviable financial position and was built on fiscal prudence. This position would allow us to invest further in the growth of our nation or prepare us for economic shocks that may come in the future. While we could not foresee a global pandemic or a war in Europe, when it comes to the finances of the country Canadians can rest assured that our net debt-to-GDP is the lowest in the G7 and we have improved our relative position over the course of the pandemic. We have seen strong economic growth and have recovered 112% of the jobs lost during this health crisis.
Canada remains committed to our strong fiscal anchors that were first articulated when we formed government and reiterated in the 2021 budget. This means we expect to continue to reduce our debt-to-GDP ratio while unwinding the COVID‑19-related deficits. While it is true that the cost of the pandemic was significant, it was more than reasonable that the federal government use our strong fiscal position to take on this burden. We did this so small businesses, Canadian workers and family household budgets did not have to. While Conservatives may see these investments as frivolous or unnecessary, I would expect the nine million Canadians who were able to feed their families, or the 450,000 employers who were able to employ 5.3 million Canadians, would disagree with that position.
Our government is also focused on targeted measures here at home to help Canadians make ends meet. This includes lowering taxes for the middle class, $10-a-day child care and a more generous OAS and GIS for seniors. All of these programs were not supported by the Conservatives, including increased investments in health care.
I am pleased to say this plan is working. Canada has exceeded its goal of creating a million jobs, well ahead of expectations, and we have seen the strongest job recovery in the G7 alongside the lowest net debt.
Our government's focus will continue to be on jobs and growth and making life more affordable. These are priorities that will form the foundation of our upcoming budget, as well as our commitment to continue to be a responsible and careful fiscal manager.
496 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:35:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when Canadians hear the government say things like they should not worry because the net debt-to-GDP ratio is great in response to the concerns they have, such as having to choose between heating their home because the price of natural gas has gone up so high or feeding their family because the price of groceries have gone up so quickly and so much, it is really tough for them to feed their family on that word salad. Those global comparators do not do anything to address the individual concerns and the harsh realities those Canadian families are facing.
When the government says that it took on debt so Canadians did not need to, who is responsible for paying that money back? That money does not belong to members in this place or the government. It is collected from Canadians and borrowed in the name of future generations of Canadians who are going to have to service the debt and some day that bill will come due. That is the government's job.
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:36:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we understand all too well that Canadians are being impacted by high inflation. However, these price increases are global and Canada's rate is still lower than the United States or the average of the OECD, the G7 or even the G20. Understanding this fact, our government will continue to move forward with measures to help Canadians make ends meet while also remaining fiscally responsible. I hope the Conservatives will start to support some of those measures that help make life more affordable for Canadians.
I would like to conclude by making something very clear. The federal budget that will be tabled later this week will demonstrate how our government intends to continue building a stronger and more resilient economy, one that generates shared prosperity for all Canadians while maintaining our country's low debt advantage, long-term fiscal sustainability and strong credit rating, all while making life more affordable for Canadians.
154 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:37:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, time and time again I have risen in the House to bring to the government's attention the flooding and wildfire disasters in my riding and the horrific impacts they have had on my communities. I would be remiss if I did not mention that this is budget week and the window of opportunity to receive funds to help repair many of the damages that British Columbians have suffered is quickly closing.
In October 2021, I met with the City of Abbotsford along with other members of Parliament to discuss the city's request to the provincial and federal governments for dike infrastructure upgrades. During that meeting, we talked about the record of the City of Abbotsford, which has been making these requests for many years, and even the fact that the member for Langley—Aldergrove, the member for Abbotsford and I were in a meeting with the mayor just a few weeks prior, before the floods happened, talking about the need for the federal government to work with the province and the municipality to address these major infrastructure gaps.
When the first request was put in about a decade ago, at the time, estimated upgrades for the dikes would cost approximately $500 million. Fast-forward to a few months ago, and the cost to upgrade flood mitigation infrastructure has skyrocketed. The City of Abbotsford put forward four options to mitigate the threat of the Nooksack River overflowing its banks again. The options ranged in cost from $209 million, which would restore us to the previous standard and offers little protection, to a whopping $2.8 billion, which would provide protection for Matsqui, Sumas and Clayburn Village well into the future.
Clearly, what happened in my riding and across B.C. was a costly lesson to learn. Hesitation on the part of both provincial and federal governments of Liberal and Conservative stripes to get funding out the door cost our communities a heavy price, and the bill to build back continues to grow. We cannot afford any further delays in building flood mitigation infrastructure moving forward.
We know there is going to be another flood. We know that we are going to face another disaster. It might be in 10, 15 or even 30 years, but right now the mind of Canada, as we have the government's attention, is on British Columbia. We have an opportunity to do something that is going to keep people safe for many decades to come.
In the last number of weeks, I have probably stood more often on this issue than on any other I have spoken about. The Emergency Planning Secretariat, a local organization for 31 first nations, is calling for some of this work to be done. The Letse'mot community forum that I am part of, which means “one heart” in the Halq'eméylem language, has put forward many requests. I have also met with numerous indigenous bands in my riding: Sq'éwlets, Siska, Spuzzum, Shackan and Lytton First Nation. They are all calling on the federal government to improve emergency responses on indigenous lands.
Now is the time to act. Now is the time to protect British Columbia. Now is the time for the government, in the budget on Thursday, to put forward the taxpayer funds to protect British Columbia. I am pleading with the government to give more than $5 billion. Just Abbotsford alone will cover half of that, and we have not even talked about Merritt and other small communities in the Fraser Canyon that cannot afford to pay for the infrastructure upgrades that are required. Taxpayer dollars are needed. I plead with the government to put them in the budget in the next couple of days.
628 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:41:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Government of Canada has been there from the very beginning, and we will continue to be there to support the people of British Columbia. While I am sure the member will understand that I am not able to discuss what is in the budget before it is actually presented, our government has been there for the people of British Columbia since day one to help them through the response and into what is now the recovery.
The impact of November's flooding and landslides on British Columbians was enormous. Residents across the Lower Mainland saw their homes, farms and businesses devastated. Thousands were displaced from their communities. When the province turned to us for help at the height of the emergency, our government responded. At its peak, just over 750 Canadian Armed Forces personnel were on the ground supporting evacuations, assisting with logistics and protecting critical infrastructure. Nine aircraft supported the evacuation of 330 people.
The same month, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Emergency Preparedness travelled to B.C. While there, the Prime Minister announced the creation of a new joint committee between the federal and provincial governments to guide immediate and ongoing support. Through this committee, our government continues to work together with our B.C. counterparts and with indigenous leadership to ensure a coordinated recovery and a build-back effort.
Our government also matched every dollar Canadians donated to the Red Cross response. With the province doing the same, every dollar Canadians gave turned into three for British Columbians. Over $90 million in total was raised and, as of February, more than $18 million had gone to over 7,400 families. We do not have the final estimates of the costs from this event yet, but we know it will be significant. The Insurance Bureau of Canada has estimated that the insurance damage alone was in the range of $515 million.
Public Safety Canada officials are currently working closely with their provincial counterparts, on the request from the province. Through the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements, provinces access federal cost-sharing for the response to and recovery from exactly these types of events.
As we move forward on this request, our government has already set aside $5 billion in the 2021 fall economic statement for its share, as well as to assist with other costs related to the recent extreme weather events in British Columbia, such as the Lytton wildfire. This allocation is a historic contribution that reflects the extreme nature of this particular disaster.
Unfortunately, we also know that, thanks to the impacts of climate change, the kind of extreme weather events we saw last year are only going to become more frequent and severe. That is why building resilience to weather-related disasters continues to be a priority for our government. We are already engaged in the work that demonstrates our commitment. For example, under the national disaster mitigation program, the Government of Canada has contributed almost $28.5 million for 117 projects across British Columbia. We are working to increase forest resilience to wildfires, including by training 1,000 new community-based firefighters, investing in equipment and in other measures to reduce risks from wildfires, and supporting fire management by indigenous communities.
We are also working to create a new low-cost national flood insurance program to protect homeowners at high risk of flooding and without adequate insurance protection, as well as to develop a national action plan to assist homeowners with potential relocation for those at highest risk of repeat flooding.
We know there is much more work to do, not just for British Columbians, but to protect all Canadians from the increasing risks of climate-related disasters. I can reassure my colleague that our government is committed to the undertaking of—
633 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:45:41 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon.
10 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:45:44 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Winnipeg for that summation and congratulate the public servant who wrote that. It was a job well done. It was a good summary.
I have a couple of other points to quickly raise. The Duffy Lake Road was on the national news a lot when the disasters were taking place. Four people died on the Duffy Lake Road, largely due to mudslides. Much of that highway, which is very popular for tourists and British Columbians alike going into the back country, does not have cellphone reception even though it is a major arterial road and was the main conduit from the Okanagan into the Lower Mainland when many other roads such as Highway No. 1 were washed out.
I am pleading with the government to consider putting cellphone towers up as an immediate measure to keep people safe on the Duffy and to have adequate cellphone coverage. Equally, this remains an issue in other areas of my riding, such as parts of Highway 12 and other sections of—
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:46:45 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. parliamentary secretary.
4 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:46:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I previously mentioned, officials are fully engaged on a request for financial support under the disaster financial assistance arrangements from the province. I would like to inform the hon. member that through the DFAA, British Columbia has received over $860 million in federal contributions for 42 separate events that have occurred in the province since 1970. Our thoughts continue to be with those affected by the tragic events in British Columbia and with everyone involved in the recovery and reconstruction.
Yes, the bureaucrats and public servants do a fantastic job, whether it is on the ground in British Columbia or here in Ottawa, ensuring we provide, as much as possible, the type of information Canadians would like to hear.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 6:47:34 p.m.
- Watch
The motion to adjourn the House is now to deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 6:47 p.m.)
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
