SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 134 - Nov/24/22

Nov/24/22 2:45:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it was not clear, but perhaps the interpretation was better. Moving up the deadline by two years and threatening to keep the money if cities cannot turn on a dime is almost blackmail. The federal government wants its infrastructure fund to be used quickly. We agree. However, it should be used intelligently and equitably for the best possible projects for all municipalities, both small and large. The government should collaborate instead of threatening our towns, which are doing their best. This is absurd, it will have to back down. Can it promise today that all money not spent by March 31 will be transferred to Quebec and not put back in its own pockets?

117 words

Context: House Hansard - 134 - Nov/24/22

Mr. Terry Duguid (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)

Nov/24/22 2:51:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I beg to differ with the hon. member. We received praise coming out of COP27 for our climate finance measures; for setting up a fund to help developing nations adapt to climate change; for committing to eliminating coal, eliminating fossil fuel subsidies and capping oil and gas emissions; and very importantly, for investing in the clean economy, with $9.1 billion in our emissions reduction plan. We will ensure our emissions come down and we build the economy of tomorrow.

82 words

Context: House Hansard - 134 - Nov/24/22

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

Nov/24/22 4:05:50 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill S-4

Madam Speaker, this bill does take a number of positive steps, but I am curious as to why the government left out the recommendation from the justice committee's report on access to justice and legal aid. It called on the federal government to replace the legal aid funds currently included in the Canada social transfer with a specific earmarked legal aid fund for provinces, administered under the Department of Justice Canada's legal aid program. This would help with backlogs and access to justice. Does the member support this recommendation, and does he agree that the government should have included this in Bill S-4?

106 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 134 - Nov/24/22

Ms. Leslyn Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk, CPC)

Nov/24/22 5:36:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am here tonight to ask the government for transparency on one of its signature policies, the Canada Infrastructure Bank. The bank was celebrated with much fanfare by the government in 2016. The Liberals claimed that every dollar invested would yield a return of four private-sector dollars. They even anticipated that with investments from the municipalities and provinces, it would yield a multiplier effect of 11 to one, but that was six years ago and that has not happened. Now what we see is, sadly, a version of corporate welfare, with the taxpayer subsidizing industry projects that they can fund themselves. The Infrastructure Bank has failed by almost every standard. Not only has it failed to deliver the private-sector investments it promised, but it has never even completed one project. Now we find that a $1.7-billion partnership with Fortis Inc., a North American utilities company that rakes in billions of dollars in revenue every year, has also failed. The bank promised $655 million to the U.S.-based ITC Holdings, which is a subsidiary of Fortis, for the Lake Eerie connector project. The cancelled project was going to be a 117 kilometre-long underwater power cable under Lake Eerie. It would also have brought in $33 million to the Six Nations reserve. In fact, this line would have run between Pennsylvania and Haldimand County, which is the community I represent. When the agreement was first announced one and a half years ago, the government gushed about how it would deliver tons of low-carbon energy, billions in GDP and hundreds of Canadian jobs. Now that the project has flatlined, the government needs to answer for the millions it committed. It is completely unacceptable that at a time when Canadians are struggling to put food on the table, the government cannot account for $655 million that it loaned to a multi-billion dollar corporation. It is a project that, ironically, according to the media reports, failed due to inflation caused by the Liberals. What is worse is that there has been no transparency. It is a statutory requirement that this bank operates with transparency and reports to the public. We know only from local media reports that the project was cancelled back in July. To this day there is still no information on the bank's website or on government websites about the real status of the project. Where did the money go? Is the money still in the Infrastructure Bank? Is it with Fortis, the company? Is the money gone? We just do not know. In fact, the bank's corporate plan was tabled in this very House and still lists the deal as an active project. It says that final due diligence is still in progress. This is misinformation. To have the—

470 words