44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 21, 2022 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, my colleague asked a very good question.
We are grateful for the NDP's support in the House to move this bill forward to the committee stage.
This is a serious situation. The supports in this bill will help Canadians at a time when they need it most. As my colleague said, we need to eliminate interest on student loans, cut taxes for small but growing businesses and make it more affordable to buy a first home.
My constituents have asked me to take action here in Parliament to provide that help, and that is what we are doing today.
102 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, rising yet again on a time allocation debate, I am reminded of when, in previous Parliaments, the Conservatives under Stephen Harper used time allocation again and again and again. I sat in that corner with the Liberals when they were the third party. Consistently, every time, they said that if we allow this to happen, eventually Parliament and democracy will be diminished and time allocations will become so routine that they are used over and over again in future Parliaments. I think I am the last standing member of the opposition to Stephen Harper's use of time allocations for almost every bill. It has, as we worried, become routine. I will never vote for a time allocation on a bill. Even when, as is the case here, I support Bill C-32, I object to the truncation of time. It diminishes Parliament's work.
I do, though, sympathise with the governing party in that because we have ignored our rules for so long, nobody remembers that it is against Westminister parliamentary rules to give a written speech. I maintain that House leaders, when meeting together, should give an honest assessment to each other of how many members they really have who can speak to a bill without a written speech, without notes, and contribute to a thoughtful debate. I lament where we are right now, and this can be regarded as more a comment than a question, because the Liberals have completely forgotten all the reasons they used to warn that the use of time allocation for almost every bill was anti-democratic.
266 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. colleague for her support of Bill C-32. I was not on the opposition benches at time to which she is referring. As a member and as a minister, I can say that I talked to Brad in my riding this week, who thanked us for making sure we got Bill C-30 and Bill C-31 done so quickly, because he wanted and needs the $500 housing support in that legislation. On the weekend, I talked to Mike and Laurie, who thanked us for our child care supports. They said to me at the All is Bright festival, “It's making a real difference, and we're able to make it through this inflationary cycle.”
There are millions of other Canadians waiting for us to get to work, to get to committee and to get Bill C-32 passed so that the people who need the help the most can get those supports when they need them the most.
168 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the very fact that we are having this debate is disappointing enough, but it is even more disappointing to hear once again how the New Democrats have completely surrendered to the Liberal Party and become literally the lapdogs of the Liberal government. I was on the finance committee—
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I know the member is a little cranky and a little upset because nobody is paying attention, but the word “lapdog” is unparliamentary. I would ask him to withdraw that.
39 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/21/22 12:15:03 p.m.
- Watch
I do not know if it is unparliamentary, but it is not very nice. I will take note of the comment and verify.
The hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I will spare you the research and I will withdraw the term if that would please you, Madam Speaker.
I was on the finance committee with the House leader of the New Democratic Party and I remember a time when he took seriously his obligation as a member of the opposition to oppose legislation where necessary and actually to take seriously parliamentary norms and the parliamentary duties and responsibilities of a member elected in opposition to the government. It is very disappointing—
83 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the member knows that the NDP takes things seriously. That is why we have dental care now in this country, rental supplements and a doubling—
33 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/21/22 12:16:15 p.m.
- Watch
That is debate. I will let the hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge finish his comment.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will let that part of it speak for itself. That is the extent to which this costly coalition is imposing itself on Canadians.
With respect to getting back to the bill itself, we heard an absurd speech from the government House leader last week on Motion No. 22, where he completely dismissed the idea that members should speak to legislation and justification of the draconian actions they take to limit debate in this House. We have a bill that would give Canadians more debt, more spending, more taxes, more inflation and higher interest rates, yet the minister would have us shut down debate before members have been able to weigh in and let their own constituents know, by using their voices in the House of Commons, to put their opinion on record on this bill. He should be ashamed of himself. I will let him weigh in on that and comment if he may.
157 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the only dog that we have in this fight is getting supports to Canadians. I am never going to apologize for or run away from lowering taxes on growing small businesses. Maybe the Conservatives have difficulty reading that, because every time we have lowered taxes on Canadians, the Conservatives have voted against it.
We are talking about taking interest off federal loans for apprentices and students. We are talking about reducing taxes for small businesses. We are talking about making housing more affordable. With 18 hours of debate, 120 interventions and more time for clause-by-clause when it gets to committee, it is time the Conservatives stopped obstructing and let us get it past second reading and get these supports into the hands of Canadians.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like members to flash back to last year, 2021, when the fall economic statement was brought forward. We saw the Conservative Party filibuster that legislation. In fact, that legislation passed earlier this year. The Conservatives held back the 2021 fall economic statement, saying they wanted to speak and they wanted to speak, and it was well into 2022 before it ultimately passed.
There are substantial aspects of this fall economic statement that would help Canadians through a difficult time of inflation, and it is imperative that this legislation passes. If we leave it up to the Conservatives, they will never stop talking on the bill.
Can the member speak to why it is so important that we pass this legislation?
124 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the point of the matter is that the fall economic statement would do three things: It would provide supports to Canadians who need it the most at a time when they need it the most; it would give us extra fiscal firepower so we can manage whatever the world throws at us in the coming months; and it would also put generational investments in the competitiveness of our economy and the ability of our economy to grow, so we can grow and see inflation reduced over time.
We are talking about families that want the ability to save for their first home. That is embedded in this legislation. Students and apprentices have already asked us to please get rid of the interest on their student loans. Apprentices and students want the interest gone. We would also make it easier for companies to grow and scale in this country, paying lower taxes.
153 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the House adopted a motion last week to allow sitting hours to be extended until midnight. To justify this abuse of process, the government said that it was to limit the use of time allocation motions. We can see today that it was all a sham.
Can the minister confirm that the Liberal Party was once again taking us for a ride?
64 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the government has multiple projects on the go at the same time. That is why, as a country and a government, we need more hours of debate in the House to explore all the issues before us. Extending sitting hours in the House of Commons has nothing to do with today's situation. The fact is that Canadians need support. We have had 18 hours of debate and 120 interventions, and the clause-by-clause study will be carried out in committee. Canadians need these support measures. That is why we are here today.
97 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member opposite is all too happy to drive the number one driver of the economy in his home province into the ground. The fall economic statement talks about how our closest partners are shifting their strategic reliance from dictatorships to democracies. However, it does not give a plan about how the government itself is going to shift its support from dictatorships to democracies.
The member is systematically driving our industry into the ground, so that the dollars go to dictatorships and not to democracies and the oil and gas sector. When the government limits debate on this, it limits Conservatives' ability to go through this statement, this plan, take it apart and show how we can better support Canadians and help make sure we are supporting democracies and not dictatorships.
What does the member have to say to that?
142 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the hon. member is about to vote against tax credits that, quite frankly, are essential to Alberta, tax credits for green investments and for hydrogen. I am not sure if the member heard, but my hon. colleague, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, was very clear in this House on Friday when he told the House and Canadians about the fact that we had a $300-million investment in Air Products in Alberta, and that we will build a $1.6-billion net-zero hydrogen complex, the largest in the world, right in Alberta.
I am never going to stand here and say that we are somehow restraining or constraining the oil and gas sector in Alberta. In fact, we are doing the opposite with pathways and with our shared contribution to making sure we get to net zero. We are going to make sure we get to net zero with the oil and gas industry, making sure Alberta and Canada continue to be the fourth-largest producer of oil and gas.
The Conservatives can vote against tax incentives for Alberta petroleum. I will not.
188 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, let us talk about kicking the dead dog here. I have never met a Conservative who supports any investment into green energy or green tech in western Canada.
However, what I also find fascinating is that my Liberal colleague has said the government is going to ensure that Canada remains the fourth-largest oil and gas producer. We went to COP27 with more oil and gas executives than anything else. Canada is seen as a country that is ignoring its obligations internationally. The Canada Energy Regulator predicts that Canada's oil and gas production in 2050 will be the same as it is today.
I would ask my hon. colleague this. How can the government claim it is going to meet the International Energy Agency's obligations to rapidly reduce and transition, and work with Alberta energy workers who are pushing a green economy, when what we see from the Liberals is that they continue to pump money into big oil time and again?
166 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I respect the hon. colleague and his views on this very serious matter of the existential threat of climate change. On Friday, in my riding of Edmonton Centre, I met with the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, Gil McGowan. We had a long and detailed conversation about greening the economy and making sure we are working with workers who are going to be responsible for greening the sector.
Who is going to green the sector? It is not government, but the workers and companies walking down the path of making sure we focus on emissions, which is why we put billions of dollars in budget 2022 for carbon capture, use and storage.
My friend from Calgary can be upset about the fact that we are supporting Alberta industry, which is more than he did when he was a provincial minister, but I can tell the House that we are here, focused on oil and gas, focused on the future and focused on reducing our emissions. Today is about getting to vote, so Canadians can have what they need in their pockets, which is more money.
189 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the government's key piece it likes to talk about in the economic statement is the interest relief for students going to school. The question is fairly simple. How many more students will get to access post-secondary education from this government change than otherwise would be the case?
The government does not have an answer. It is giving a windfall to the students who are already there and spending $500 million a year of money we do not have. Instead of making sure that more students can access post-secondary, the Liberals are spending $500 million and giving it to students who are already there.
108 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
