44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 6, 2022 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, when I think of Bill C-19, of course, the government has—
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the government whip raising that issue. He is quite right. The national child care benefit program that we have today is there in good part because of the Province of Quebec. The Province of Quebec has clearly demonstrated that we all have so much to learn when it comes to child care. By having this particular program, we are now enabling literally hundreds of thousands of people to be engaged in the workforce and to do many other things. We saw that when Quebec expanded its child care program.
When a province does something well, which the rest of the nation can copy and emulate, we should do that. For the first time in many years we have actually seen the establishment of a national program. Canadian families from coast to coast to coast will directly benefit under this program. Not only is it good for families, but it is also good for the economy. Clearly, it is one of the ways in which the government can spend money for the betterment of our society.
179 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have a couple of quick points.
I am interested in the member's thoughts with regard to the luxury tax. The principle of a luxury tax is something the Bloc supports. I would like clarity on that particular point.
The second issue that I have is with regard to the Province of Quebec. I do not know if this is still in play today, but it provided a subsidy toward the purchase of electric cars, something that we in government have also provided.
I am wondering if he could provide his thoughts on that. Again, when the provincial and federal governments work together, we can enhance programs, which is good for the consumer. It would be nice to see other provinces follow Quebec's lead on that issue.
131 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am a bit surprised that the former leader of the Green Party would not support the principles of a luxury tax, for two reasons.
Number one, there is financial inequality in the country. We know that; it is around the world. It might be somewhat small, but it is significant. The $150 million in additional revenue is a significant amount.
Second, if we follow through the logic the member is espousing, one would ultimately be able to say that we should reduce consumption taxes in order to somehow see more production and give a break on people's tax points. I tend to disagree with that logic, believing that a consumption tax is a very effective way of ensuring, especially if there are rebates, that there is a fairer sense of income equality.
I am wondering if the member might want to reflect on why she would oppose a luxury tax when I suspect the vast majority of Canadians would support that.
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/22 3:17:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions. These responses will be tabled in an electronic format.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/22 3:28:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by a number of my constituents. They are looking to see more action be done on the issue of our environment, specifically the climate emergency. They are looking for the government and the Prime Minister to enact just transition legislation. They have a number of progressive ideas within the petition. It is a pleasure to table it today on their behalf.
68 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/22 3:35:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.
The Speaker: Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member spent some time talking about the importance of innovation, so I would think he would be more inclined to be sympathetic to supporting the budget. We have seen record amounts of money being allocated to things such as the research councils at the many different universities, which are there to encourage innovation. We have seen huge investments. We all recognize the importance of innovation, not just with respect to the public sector. There is also joint co-operation with many of our private industry stakeholders we have to incorporate, such as post-secondary institutions, along with private sector and public sector involvement.
I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on those three sectors coming together to ensure Canada does not fall behind on the issue of innovation.
133 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the member spent a great deal of his time talking about inflation, but there is something he does not tell people who might be following the debate. Yes, we do have inflation, and no one is denying that, but what the Conservatives fail to say is that we need to compare Canada's inflation to what is happening around the world. The pandemic and the war that is taking place in Europe are very real. Inflation is not affecting only Canada; it is affecting the world. In fact, if we compare Canada's inflation rate to that of other countries, whether the United States or the average of the European Union, Canada is doing reasonably well. Ours is actually lower than theirs.
Yes, we need to look at policies, including for our seniors. That is one of the reasons why there is a 10% increase for OAS for people over the age of 75. Government is taking action. The child care program is reducing costs, which enables more people to get engaged. I wonder if the member can provide his thoughts as to why the Conservatives put a spin that tries to—
199 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the former minister of finance also said that it was not very advisable for the member for Carleton, the wannabe leader of the Conservative Party, to be critical of the Bank of Canada and the Governor of the Bank of Canada. Even some of his caucus colleagues said this, even though one of them received a demotion for speaking out against the member for Carleton's policies on the Bank of Canada.
I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on that. I realize he could be putting his political future in jeopardy if he says the wrong thing, but does he not agree with the member for Abbotsford that maybe the Conservatives should be a bit more considerate in their criticisms of the Bank of Canada and the bank's governor?
135 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, earlier I posed the question of whether the Bloc members support the principles of a luxury tax, and the response was that yes, they support the principle of having a luxury tax. My understanding is that this would include the impact it would have on the aerospace industry, but there are some timing concerns they have in regard to the possible credits or issues of this nature.
Could the member provide clarification? Does the Bloc support the principle of a luxury tax as stipulated in the bill itself?
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the member makes reference to oil. It was not that many years ago that the Conservatives were criticizing the government because the price was too low. When it was selling at 88¢ a litre, we were being accused of crashing the Alberta economy, according to many of the Conservatives. Now they are saying that the price of oil is too high.
The Government of Canada carries some influence; there is no doubt about that, but the member needs recognize that there is a world economy and that the world sets the price of oil. Does he really believe that the Government of Canada can dictate to the world what the price of oil should be?
122 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there are a number of things the member said that are just not true. She says there are no investments in long-term care or mental health, when we have invested record amounts of money designated for those categories. She tries to give the impression that there are no increases in health transfers, when that is just not the case. She tries to give the impression that the Government of Canada has not been there in a very real and tangible way for the province of Alberta in a just transition. She should talk to some of the ministers and she will get a list of things that we have done. We have spent record amounts of dollars on infrastructure in the province of Alberta. We had worked with the former NDP premier and now the current Conservative premier to ensure that the federal government is there in a real and tangible way for Alberta.
How does she reconcile the reality versus what she just finished saying about Alberta?
171 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would retract the “reality” comment.
10 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there were wonderful references and the attempt in the speech. What the member does demonstrate is that, in the last federal election, there was a very clear indication that Canadians in all regions of our country want a higher sense of co-operation, and we can provide that.
I am going to pick up on the member's last comments on the importance of health care transfers. We all recognize how important that issue is, and I have always thought maybe it is something we should have some ongoing debates on, whether it would be with an opposition motion or in a standing committee. It would be very interesting to get a better sense of exactly where we are and what the future might hold in terms of long-term investments into health care. In order to appreciate that, we also have to appreciate the history of health care transfers. Could I get the members thoughts on that aspect?
161 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I was going to bring up the Minister of Agriculture coming to Manitoba to meet with cattle producers and talk about providing direct drought relief, which was exceptionally well received in the Prairies, as just one of many examples, and/or the huge increases we have seen in the Department of Agriculture, but my question is in regard to the member's statement on the NATO commitment of 2%.
Does the member not realize that during Stephen Harper's era, it just got to the 1% mark? We have seen dramatic increases under this administration in support of our allied countries. Could the member provide her thoughts on whether she has any regrets that Stephen Harper did not have that same sort of commitment that she seems to have today in terms of supporting NATO?
137 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/22 6:48:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I suspect that if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent at this time to call it seven o'clock, so we could adjourn and go into Adjournment Proceedings.
40 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/22 6:52:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the government is hiding nothing. In fact, what we see are Conservatives who have opposed the use of the Emergencies Act and every mechanism they can create in their minds. They want to try to put a Conservative spin on it and say the Emergencies Act was not necessary.
There is no convincing them otherwise. They were biased going into committee. They already know what their own conclusions would be, and that is what they will advocate for. It does not matter what the public inquiry or special committee come up with. I sat in on one of the committees. It is pure politics. We are seeing political gamesmanship from the Conservatives.
They do not understand the harm to our economy, whether it was at the Ontario international border crossing or Manitoba's border crossing. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars every day. They do not care. They want to play political games on this issue. They knew their position prior to going to committee.
Yes, there is a special joint committee because there is an open government. We are following the law that was put into place. What I can say from first-hand experience is that, the day after it was put into place, I saw members of police forces providing information to those who were protesting.
We saw a relatively peaceful end because of the legislation. The threat was still there. The member does not take into consideration the harm that was being caused in downtown Ottawa. The invocation of the Emergencies Act had a very positive outcome. That is completely discarded by the Conservatives.
As opposed to being so lopsided and determined to try to say this was wrong, if they opened their collective mind, I suspect we would see more productivity at the special joint committee, which I have had the opportunity to be a part of for one evening. I witnessed the behaviour from the Conservatives at that particular meeting.
The Prime Minister, just like all members of the Liberal caucus, wants to see and is anxious to see the reports that come forward. We understand how important it was to be there to protect our economy and to protect the jobs. The Province of Ontario declared an emergency. The City of Ottawa declared an emergency. The Conservative Party does not care.
The Province of Manitoba, three days prior, did send a letter pleading for assistance. Yes, they did not state something specific, but was begging for Ottawa to get engaged and do something because of the tens of millions of dollars being lost at the Emerson border.
We take the issue seriously. We have from the very beginning, and we will continue to as we review the process of its implementation.
463 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/6/22 6:57:09 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. We have actually put in a mechanism that would enable the Conservatives to see what they want in regard to the Winnipeg lab. The mechanism is there. It is the very same mechanism that Stephen Harper brought in. However, giving them what they want is not good enough, because the Conservative Party wants to create scandals where there are no scandals. It is an attitude that the Conservative Party has adopted. Even when we give the Conservatives the things they want, it is not good enough.
I am suggesting that members should start putting Canadians ahead of the partisan politics they have been playing with respect to these very important issues. If they did that, I believe they would get better support, quite frankly.
133 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
