44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 26, 2022 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, I had the privilege of sitting in the 43rd Parliament, and I listened to Conservatives saying both that the government was spending too much and that the government needed to spend even more in certain areas.
I heard that reiterated today when this member was talking about debt levels and the need for government to rein in spending. I did not hear him once mention that the government is actually in a surplus position for this current fiscal year. I think that this is really important to recognize, that the government is reining in spending.
However, that is not going to create an affordability element overnight. His proposition is, essentially, that the government should stop spending and that would create affordability.
Why will this member not support targeted measures for vulnerable Canadians? What he is proposing would not have any direct benefit on households for, probably, a couple of years' time.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I agree with the majority of what my hon. colleague had to say today. Of course, he talked about dental care, particularly for those who are most vulnerable, and I could not agree more, frankly. I think it is an important public policy. It is shared between our two caucuses, and it is great to see that spirit of collaboration here in Parliament.
I am not privy to the ongoing working relationship between some of the ministers on this side of the House and the NDP, but it seems that the NDP wants a permanent federally delivered program. My question for the member is not on the merits of dental care but on the delivery. Why does the NDP feel that it should be administered by the Government of Canada when there are existing programs at the provincial level that are focused? Why not work with each province to make sure the outcomes we want at the federal level can be delivered by the provinces, which are closest to health care, and the providers that want to see this good work completed?
184 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. opposition colleague for his speech this afternoon.
I understand the principle of provincial and territorial jurisdictions, in particular with respect to dental care. However, I do not understand why my colleague is against direct payments for rent support and dental care support until a potential agreement is signed with our partners in the confederation regarding the implementation of this strong federal program.
68 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to touch on dental care. I know we are talking about two separate bills, but it is part of the larger affordability element. I would certainly agree with the member about the importance of dental care, particularly for those who are most vulnerable. The health impacts are very clear and I do not want to debate the merits of that.
My question is about the NDP, which seems to take the position that this should be administered by the Government of Canada. Of course, we are helping to provide payments, but what I have read in the news and what I can ascertain is that the NDP thinks this should be a federally administered program, notwithstanding that health is provincial jurisdiction.
I understand that we are providing interim payments until those agreements can be worked out, but outside of indigenous communities and perhaps military families, why does the NDP think this should be federally administered, as opposed to working with the provinces, which have connections on the ground, similar to what was done on child care?
180 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, normally I try to engage in French, but I want to make sure my point is very clear.
I was interested in the member's conversation around supply-side economics. Of course the inflationary period we are seeing right now is somewhat unique. The Bank of Canada is increasing its benchmark borrowing rate to try to bring down demand.
Does he have certain concerns on the monetary policy side such that if this is a supply-side economic issue that is driving inflation, and notwithstanding the Bank of Canada is trying to do its job to bring down demand, it may prove difficult to actually quell inflation because this is a supply-side economic issue?
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Whitby. Tonight is the first time since June that I have formally risen in the House. I would like to begin by greeting my colleagues. I hope that they had a great vacation and summer in their ridings with their families and constituents.
We are here tonight to debate Bill C‑30 which, along with Bill C‑31, represents a suite of federal measures to make life more affordable for vulnerable Canadians.
I think it is very important to put things in context. Over the last couple of years, we have seen the effects of supply chains that have been rocked by the pandemic. There have been weather events. Of course, there is the war in Ukraine, caused by Russia's invasion. There are also demographic changes. The economy, in Canada and in other countries, is very robust. Unemployment is very low, and that creates inflation in Canada and around the world.
I quite appreciated my colleague from the Bloc Québécois who talked about this being a supply-side economic issue. That is what I was trying to mention, while working on my French. Hopefully it came through in the translation. The fact is that some of what we are seeing right now is being driven by factors outside of Canada that relate to the products, goods and services that we, as global citizens, want to make sure we have as Canadian consumers. It comes down to two issues when we are talking about economics and affordability. The Bank of Canada has a role with respect to monetary policy and setting interest rates and trying to keep inflation to around 2%, and the Government of Canada has a role and obligation that pairs with that, albeit independent of the Bank of Canada, which is around fiscal policy.
It was mentioned today in the House, I do not think it needs to be repeated, that it is important that all parliamentarians respect the independence of the Bank of Canada and its expertise in setting monetary policy. Our job here of course is to perhaps understand the implications of those decisions, but to really focus on the government's fiscal decision-making as it relates to and couples with monetary policy. We have seen the Bank of Canada acting. It has increased its benchmark rate, which is having an impact on Canadians. It is quelling some of that demand. In fact, we are looking at forecasts right now with respect to trying to avoid a recessionary period, not only in Canada but indeed around the world.
I had the opportunity to review the decision by the Federal Reserve in the United States, which has significantly increased its interest rate. There will be a conversation that will have to be had by the Bank of Canada as to whether or not it will match that rate, such that we are not impacted from a consumer side with respect to imports and the value of the American dollar going higher, or whether or not we will try to pair a bit lower, such that our exporters can benefit with respect to that economic side. It is complex. I do not pretend to stand here as a pure economic theorist, but those are the decisions that are being made right now.
That brings us to this conversation on affordability, because we know particularly vulnerable Canadians are struggling right now. During the pandemic, I will remind members, the government was there to help support the small businesses and individuals who were impacted the most. As we come out of COVID–19, as we move beyond the pandemic, it is also our responsibility to look at the situation and be able to rein in government spending.
I will go on record to say, and it has not really been talked about here in the House, particularly by His Majesty's loyal opposition, that the government is actually in a surplus situation. I think that is pertinent right now given the fact the government has had to spend. It would be unwise if the government had not stepped up and provided that economic support at that time of uncertainty to make sure our economy continued to function and move forward, and indeed to set the stage for where we are at right now.
Again, it is Keynesian economics at its core. Government spends during a down period when help is needed and then reins back spending when the economy is strong, as is happening right now.
How do we try to help support Canadians without impacting what the work of the Bank of Canada is doing right now, which is to try to bring down demand? I think it is what we doing right now with Bill C-30 and Bill C-31, which are targeted measures. These are not just spending measures to provide support to all Canadians, including some of those who are the most wealthy. This is targeted to those who really need help the most.
I want to give some context to what we are talking about today. Bill C-30 proposes to double the GST credit for the next six months for both individuals and families who are eligible. That is about 11 million Canadians. The benefits at an individual level would be for someone without children with a household income under $49,000. That is what we are talking about in terms of providing very targeted support to those who need it. For those who have families, the example would be under $58,000. For anything above and beyond that, these individuals would not necessarily be eligible for these supports.
It is extremely important because it is targeting those who need the help without impacting Canada's fiscal position. This is a $2.5-billion spending measure. That is not insignificant, but it is not going to disrupt the work that the government is doing to rein in spending, at the same time understanding that the Bank of Canada has a mandate to bring down inflation. Indeed, in some contexts of what we hear His Majesty's loyal opposition calling for, the government is doing it. Perhaps that is not the narrative they want to spin, but we are working to do just that.
I just want to take a moment to speak about Bill C-31. I understand it is a different piece of legislation, but they are interconnected. This is about providing affordability measures on housing with a $500 housing benefit for those who are vulnerable, and providing dental care. We have heard great impassioned debate and context about how important this is. The dental care is for children who are under 12 whose household income is under $90,000 and who do not already have private insurance coverage.
Right now, conversations continue on how best to deliver this. I have asked some questions in the House of my NDP colleagues. There is merit in working out program delivery with the provinces, who are closest on the ground, who are going to be able to be there to help implement this and who would have relationships with dentists. I understand that right now this is an interim stop-gap measure to help provide that support to families.
I, as a parliamentarian, may disagree with the NDP assertion that this should be a federally administered program. Perhaps it should be for indigenous communities, where the Government of Canada shares a very close constitutional relationship. I think that is clear. Perhaps it should be for military families if there is a way to roll that out through the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces. Otherwise, this is best suited for the provincial level.
I recognize that my time is coming to a close this evening. What I way to say and what I want to reiterate is that I think these measures are reasonable, balanced and targeted to Canadians who need the support the most. We are in a situation where there is some level of economic uncertainty. Inflation is coming down. The Bank of Canada is doing its work. The government is responding in a responsible manner to not drive additional liquidity at a time when the Bank of Canada is reducing its interest rates accordingly.
I look forward to the conversation and the questions from my colleagues here tonight.
1412 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the candour of my hon. colleague opposite. We have a great working relationship on the agriculture committee.
There is a whole host of areas I could look at it, but what I want to reference is when the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance tabled her budget. There is a plan to undertake about nine billion dollars' worth of spending efficiencies that the government is hoping to accomplish. There is probably a number of areas where that could happen. We are talking about a budget, in normal times, that would be around $370 billion. I do not want to label any one specific program; I think that would be inappropriate. However, I think there is room for the government to look at measures on efficiency and to rein in spending, similar to what we are asking Canadians to do. We know this has been a challenging time.
We are going to do that responsibly. I will certainly look forward to the government's work on that. I am happy to take any suggestions if the member has some areas where he thinks that is particularly important.
192 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.
The housing issue is a very complex one. The private sector and municipal and provincial governments must be part of the solution.
Of course, the Government of Canada has a role to play and must help by implementing certain programs. However, it is above all a municipal responsibility. To some extent, the problem is rooted in the labour shortage and the supply chain.
With respect to old age security, a $110-a-month increase for every senior is definitely possible. However, such a measure would cost $10 billion per year and per budget. I understand the importance of seniors, but at the same time, it is important to think about balancing the budget.
123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I will try to keep it short.
Those things are exactly what we did in this last budget, where we increased the expectations on banking and insurance companies. We expect them to able to contribute a bit more during this period, so we are doing some of the measures the member opposite is suggesting. I am not going to do it on a class warfare basis and criticize people who are successful. We certainly take the view on this side that we want to increase taxes on the super-rich in this country. That is what we have done, but we can do it in a tactful way instead of just attacking individuals and corporate entities across the board in this country.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/26/22 7:51:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I share my hon. colleague's sentiment about the way in which we work together in Atlantic Canada. Our communities step up for one another.
The member spoke about the importance of making sure that brush piles and debris-cleaning efforts are undertaken right away. I was certainly relieved to see that there were Canadian Armed Forces members on the ground in Nova Scotia, working with local authorities.
My question is around agriculture. In Kings—Hants, we are what I would call the breadbasket or the agriculture heartland of Atlantic Canada, but I will certainly share and recognize that Cumberland—Colchester has an important agricultural community as well. One of the things we worked hard on over the weekend as members of Parliament was to share about the impacts with the Prime Minister, the Minister of Emergency Preparedness and the group that is working on the ground.
Would the hon. member share with the House the impacts on the agriculture sector in Cumberland—Colchester, such that we can make sure that we have a really important response in the days ahead?
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/26/22 8:16:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to correct the record. My hon. colleague articulated that the Government of Canada had no strategy or plan to deal with climate-resilient infrastructure. Respectfully, I just do not think that is indeed the case. The program would be the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund. It is a multi-billion-dollar fund that works directly with provinces or municipal governments to deliver federal dollars to meet local concerns and needs.
The member opposite, of course, sits in a sovereignist party that often talks about jurisdiction and making sure that we devolve those decisions to local government. Here is one example of the Government of Canada doing exactly that, and I did not hear her recognize that in her remarks. I am wondering if she could comment.
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/26/22 8:24:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to be here today. I would like to thank my parliamentary colleagues because tonight we are talking about the impact that hurricane Fiona has had on Atlantic Canada, and I certainly recognize eastern Quebec as well.
I want to start by recognizing that I will be sharing my time this evening with my hon. colleague for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour.
It was difficult to try to prepare exactly how best to tackle this debate tonight, given the gravity of what we are still seeing on the ground in Atlantic Canada. Yes, as an Atlantic Canadian member of Parliament, I am here, but many of my colleagues are not. They are actually at home working with their constituents directly in their ridings, to be able to address the real and severe consequences of hurricane Fiona, which found its way to our shores Friday night and carried on throughout the weekend.
I suspect that many of us, those in the House and, indeed, Canadians watching at home, have seen the gut-wrenching images from across the region, whether it was in Port aux Basques, where individuals' houses were finding their way into the ocean and where a woman has unfortunately passed away, or in Prince Edward Island, where massive trees, hundreds of years old, have been ripped out, almost as if they were play toys. That is the velocity and ferocity this hurricane has presented itself with. There remains across the region a number of residents who are without power. They, indeed, would have no hope of even watching this debate here tonight because they are worried about trying to keep their houses warm. They are worried about trying to make sure they have the supplies needed to move forward.
Before I go too much further, let me thank the first responders, volunteers and professionals who are on the ground doing all that they can to help support those who are in need clean up from this significant storm. I had the opportunity to be in my riding yesterday.
I talked to workers from Quebec and Hydro-Québec. Public services from Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, Quebec, Ontario and Maine all coordinated their efforts.
It was amazing to see the way in which we as Canadians come together, and I really want to thank those who are working away from their own families to make sure that our families in Atlantic Canada are protected.
I hope to use my time tonight to cover three distinct areas. One, I will talk about the impact on my riding of Kings—Hants. I do not want to sound disingenuous, because the impact was significant and severe, but it really does pale in comparison to northern Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, Prince Edward Island and western Newfoundland. I will talk about those three distinct areas as well as Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine in Quebec, but first I will speak a little about Kings—Hants.
I was fortunate enough to get home last week from my work in Ottawa just before the storm arrived. We sustained winds of around 130 kilometres an hour at its peak in Kings—Hants. The house was shaking, and we have a relatively new home in a new area in our community. Frankly, we did not get much sleep, and I know many people across Atlantic Canada did not either. We saw significantly damaged trees, with some fallen on electricity lines, which put a lot of people out of power. Some of that is returning in my riding. In fact, by and large it has returned, but there are some who still do not have power. They are hoping to be connected either tomorrow night or Wednesday.
I often speak about the agriculture sector in Kings—Hants. When we think about the Annapolis Valley, as was mentioned today during question period, we think about the significant fruit-growing industry and apple orchards that we have. This is also the harvest season for those fruits.
I had the opportunity to be with Andrew Bishop of Noggins Corner Farm, and yesterday I visited Alex Sarsfield and Dave Power, farmers in my riding, to see the damage, which is significantly better than it was after hurricane Dorian. In some instances, almost across the entire industry, 90% of the apples had fallen from the trees, which made them no longer marketable in the same way they would have been had they been picked off the trees. Thankfully, in many cases, that is not the case in the Annapolis Valley, but there is some significant damage on certain farms.
On the telecommunications piece, in the first 36 to 48 hours, it was very difficult to make a phone call or send a text message. I remember waking up Saturday morning to survey some of the damage. I wanted to get around in my riding to engage with my community to see how best we could help at the Government of Canada level and with different local authorities. I was unable to even participate in the conference call that the Minister of Emergency Preparedness had arranged, because of the fact that the cellular connection was not in place.
I understand this is a nuanced subject and it is challenging for telecommunications, but I do think it has to be one of the lessons learned from hurricane Fiona regarding our telecoms. When power goes out and the Internet is not available, many people do not have a landline anymore. It is their cellphone that is their connection to their community and to emergency services. What could we do to make sure those cell towers stay up as long as possible, even though we know service will not be perfect because of the nature of these types of storms?
Northern Nova Scotia is home to my colleague, the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, the MP for Central Nova. We have seen some of the pictures of the impacts on farming and forestry infrastructure in that particular part of Nova Scotia. Sydney was hit particularly hard. I am happy to report to the House that the member for Sydney—Victoria has let us know in our Nova Scotia caucus that power has been returned in his community. I know that Prince Edward Island, for example, is still struggling to get the lights on. I do not have a current update, but I know we are continuing to work in that domain.
I do not have words for Port aux Basques. The number of houses lost is certainly over 25. I think about the member of Parliament for Long Range Mountains, the Minister of Rural Economic Development, who is on the ground. If she is watching today, I want to make sure that she knows we are thinking of her. To lose 25 houses and to lose a member of the community in that fashion, I could not say anything today that would do justice to what that means.
I want to talk about what we are doing in terms of responding. It is under three major elements. The Canadian Armed Forces are already on the ground in Atlantic Canada. As the provinces put forward requests, we were there to provide support. I give credit to the Minister of National Defence for mobilizing those folks to be able to help with the cleanup. The member for Cumberland—Colchester talked about how important that is. I agree. That is exactly is why, and impressively, within 48 hours we have Canadian Armed Forces on the ground helping. I give a tip of the cap to them tonight.
For the next 30 days, the Government of Canada is going to match private contributions to the Canadian Red Cross. That is an important program. I suspect the government may be open to extending that window, depending on the circumstances and the extent of the damage, once that is assessed in the days ahead. We really welcome that measure and the fact that it was rolled out very quickly.
Finally, there is the disaster financial assistance arrangements program. For example, there was a $5-billion package that the Government of Canada helped roll out with the Government of British Columbia when we saw those atmospheric rains and the major impact on the interior of British Columbia. That is the model that the Atlantic provinces and the Government of Quebec, if they choose to do so, could enact so that the Government of Canada would be there to help with the repairs and to help with the rebuilding of communities.
I just want people at home to know, if they are able to watch this debate tonight, that the Government of Canada is going to be there to help support the rebuild of their communities. We are going to roll out these programs as soon as possible. We know that there will be logistical challenges. We think about rural communities and capacity, such as having the construction companies and the labour to make this happen. It will not happen overnight. However, we will be there and we will be steadfast in working with members of Parliament in this House, with provincial governments and with local authorities to make that happen.
Perhaps a member could ask me about the agricultural impact. As the chair of the agriculture committee, I would be happy to answer.
My key conclusion is that the Government of Canada will be there. I know all members of Parliament will support those initiatives for us to be there with communities on the ground in Atlantic Canada. Now is an important time, when we look to rebuilding certain communities that have been the hardest impacted with a lens on making sure the infrastructure is climate resilient. I know those words can be really cliché, but it is about making sure that what we build back, whether it be houses, arenas or schools, is able to withstand future storms. I will leave it at that.
1679 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/26/22 8:36:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is a really important question because, as I mentioned, a number of individuals do not have landline service and are not able to be connected. If the electricity goes out, that is their true lifeline from a pure public safety sense.
I am aware of hurricane Dorian. It was before my time in Parliament with the minister he mentioned, the Hon. Ralph Goodale. However, now is the time for all parliamentarians to be asking those questions.
I certainly want to give the benefit of the doubt that telecommunications companies are working in earnest to be able to improve this, However, if not, that is our job as parliamentarians, whether it is through the mechanisms of committee or by engaging with the minister when he is back from Japan and the funeral of the prime minister there. Those are the questions we can ask and they are important ones so that we can make sure we avoid this situation, moving forward.
163 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/26/22 8:37:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague knows that normally I would love to engage with him in French, but at this hour of the night and on this subject, with a lot to handle, I am going to just answer in English.
We are still assessing the damage in Atlantic Canada. In Prince Edward Island in particular, the corn crop has been extremely impacted. A number of supply-managed barns, dairy and poultry, had major structural damage, so these are programs that we have to be able to put in place.
I mentioned a disaster finance arrangements program. That is an extraordinary program that can be established for a whole host of industries, including agriculture. My hon. colleague would know about AgriRecovery and about different programs that are cost-shared between the province and the Government of Canada as it relates to agriculture specifically. However, we do have mechanisms on extraordinary costs above and beyond that and this might be a time when we have to evaluate whether that is indeed the case, so we can get that support right away.
Again, I want to manage expectations. When we talk about the rebuilding of barns, we have a labour shortage right now in this country and we have to be mindful that it is not going to be easy, particularly in rural communities, to have the capacity to build this overnight, but we will get to work right away.
238 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/26/22 8:40:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member as he played a role in helping make sure tonight's debate happened.
I have a couple of things. I heard him reference this particular question earlier and I thought the problem was the 20% contribution from local government, which is another aspect here. Yes, the Government of Canada has to provide financial support, but it has to be in co-operation with different levels of government. I am not familiar with that particular case, but I can say that any time the Government of Canada can work collaboratively in supporting provinces and local governments, it is important.
My understanding of how these programs are designed to work is that the province actually sets the parameters of how we can work, but I am happy to take this conversation off-line and see what lessons can be learned.
144 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
