44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 1, 2023 02:00PM
Mr. Speaker, I have my trinket with me. I hope I do not show it off too much tonight.
I would like to go back to Groundhog Day. I loved that movie. In fact, I feel like I just relived Groundhog Day while listening to my NDP colleague speak.
I am the member for Jonquière, and the tax centre at issue is in my riding. I remember how in 2019, the former member for Jonquière, an NDP member, said that there would never be a single tax return, so there would not be any job losses. At the same time, however, the leader and deputy leader of the NDP were telling the national media that they respected Quebec and wanted Quebec to have as much autonomy as possible. They wanted the single tax return to go through.
It was Groundhog Day for the NDP as they talked out of both sides of their mouths. They were trying to charm Quebec by acknowledging its political autonomy, but the member for Jonquière was being told to say that it would not happen. They were saying one thing in Jonquière and another in Montreal. That is not Groundhog Day. Back home, we would call that plain old hypocrisy. However, I would not go that far. That was just a friendly update for my friend and colleague from the NDP.
I would like to come back to the member for La Prairie's fantastic introduction, which made me realize something. It often happens that the member for La Prairie makes me see the light about something. In his introduction, he talked about the genesis of the single tax return and, in doing so, he recapped the reasons that led to Confederation. I want to add a layer. The member for La Prairie forgot one small detail.
The reason for the birth of Canada, and what motivated the fathers of Confederation, was the desire to build a railway, of course. They wanted to do business from coast to coast. They had a stake in a railway company and figured that if they wanted to build a railway, why not unite?
Some countries arise as a result of a quest for emancipation. Take, for example, the United States and “We, the people”. The birth of the United States was a quest for emancipation. Other countries were created for business considerations. They said to themselves, why not build a railway?
I think this is quite important. The member for La Prairie told us that, and I think it is important because this is one of the key points about the single income tax return. The only political entity that is still trying to develop through a quest for emancipation is Quebec. There is a link here with the single income tax return.
Listen carefully. I will not shock anyone, but everyone will see the inescapable logic in what I have to say. I often do this with my girlfriend. When she says something to me, I want to know why. I want to know where she is coming from when we have a disagreement. Similarly, I want to find out what is behind the federal government's refusal to relieve taxpayers and business owners from having to file two tax returns.
What is the Liberal government's motivation for not wanting to save $425 million a year?
The answer is quite simple, and the member for La Prairie gave us part of it. It is the fear that the government would be sending a message to Quebec that Quebec is capable of managing itself as a nation. What really scares the Liberal government is the possibility that Quebec might prove that it is capable of managing itself. It is the fear that my nation might take another step towards political autonomy.
It has always been that way. Quebeckers did not want a railway; they wanted political autonomy. The other side is all about business, so our interests are not aligned. We will come back to that later.
The first major stumbling block that prevents us from being on the same page as either my NDP colleagues or members of the Liberal government is not concern about jobs. It is their fear of giving Quebec any kind of political autonomy. Doing so would show that Quebec is capable of governing itself as a nation. That is what worries them.
The Conservatives did things hastily in committee. Fear is also why they abstained from voting in committee. This would give Quebec a degree of autonomy. They can say yes in a roundabout way and then change their tune when it is time to take action. That is what we are seeing with the new Conservative leader, who now has no choice but to say he will not support Bills 21 and 96.
If we look carefully at the situation, we see that all of the parties in Ottawa have a centralizing vision, and that no party truly wants to recognize Quebec, which has unique characteristics and makes different choices. They do not want Quebec to have a single tax return.
That brings us to the strategy that the NDP and the Liberal Party use when it comes to self-government. It makes me think of Robert Charlebois's 1969 Paris tour entitled À soir on fait peur au monde, or tonight we scare people. I encourage everyone to listen to it. This strategy works all the time. I remember how Jean Chrétien said that if Quebec decided to separate, it would definitely not be able to get any more oranges. Florida would not sell oranges to Quebec because it only sold them to Canada.
The same thing is happening here. This evening, we are talking about a single tax return and they are fearmongering. If Quebec gets a single tax return, then jobs will be lost. That is the argument that I hear every time we talk about a single tax return. However, that did not stop us.
I—along with the member for Joliette, who introduced the bill in the previous Parliament, and my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean—looked into this situation, and we went to meet with workers at the tax centre in my riding of Jonquière. Not only did we go to meet them, but we also commissioned a study to get an overview of federal public service employment in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. In looking at the results, it is clear that the government's motivation for maintaining public service jobs makes the government look bad.
The first observation is that Quebec pays approximately 20% of the CRA's budget but has only 12% of the jobs. That alone is blatantly unfair. Quebec has only 11% of the full-time jobs and only 12% of CRA jobs. Again, that is blatantly unfair.
The study we commissioned shows that there was serious job growth tied to the federal public service in the 2000s. In Saguenay—Lac‑Saint‑Jean, we are short 1,100 federal public service jobs to be in the Canadian average. We are already below acceptable levels, so trying to scare people by saying that they will lose their public service jobs is just stupid.
A constituent who was hired by CRA during the pandemic approached me recently. She is happy to work for CRA, but she told me that she was told when she was hired that her position would become bilingual. Since she is not bilingual, but a francophone, her contract will end.
This person who processes CRA files will not get a permanent position because she is francophone. The federal public service is currently falling apart. We experience that as MPs every day. Whether we are talking about employment insurance, immigration or any other service the government offers, there is a severe shortage of workers. Then they take a francophone and tell her that because she is not bilingual she will not be able to keep her job.
If I were a Liberal member, I would be a lot more outraged about that than about the idea that a single tax return could result in job losses. We all know that, through attrition or by reassigning these people elsewhere in the public service, it is possible to make sure they keep their jobs.
The truth is that the government is deathly afraid of Quebec gaining greater autonomy.
1420 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I will continue along the line of what the member said was the truth. We heard a sense of the truth from the member when he indicated that really what this is about is separating from Canada. That is what seems to be the primary motivation for Bloc members in making their presentation, if we listened to what the member was suggesting. I would like to hear the logistical arguments on why it would be in Canada's best interest as a nation to do what the Bloc is proposing without a separatist bias.
Every province and territory has separatists who live in them. However, if we listened to what the member was articulating, it was not about the logic behind the bill. Are we to say that every separatist in every province is saying they should have their own taxation, or that they should forget about OAS and they want their own OAS program? I suspect the separatists inside this chamber would say they do not want a national OAS program.
I beg to differ. I would suggest that with the OAS supplements, GIS and many other programs that are out there, all Canadians in every region of our country benefit from them. The Bloc has failed to demonstrate why it is in Canada's best interest, including the province of Quebec, and why there is an argument to be made for a single system that is solely based on the province of Quebec versus Canada.
I believe the Liberal caucus is open to the arguments, but not with the bias that I heard demonstrated by the former speaker who last addressed the chamber. I believe in the distinct nature and uniqueness of the province of Quebec, and I think there is a great deal of sympathy in terms of how we can recognize that in many different forms. However, in no way was that demonstrated in the debate on the introduction of the bill, particularly by the Bloc member who spoke previously.
I suggest that the bill, before going to committee, needs to be looked at again. At the end of the day, I am somewhat concerned about how the Conservative Party is placing itself on this legislation. I hope it is not an appeal to garner support from the Bloc side.
I think we need to take a look at Canada and the services it provides. If there are better ways we can provide those services, then we should look at those. However, it does not mean that we start taking apart Canada, whether it is separatists in one province or another, which is their ultimate goal and the purpose of the legislation as it was implied in the previous speaker's comments.
458 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business is now expired, and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am here again to ask about the urgency for persons with disabilities for immediate income support as they continue to wait for the Canada disability benefit.
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
There was news today that there will be a vote tomorrow, and the House wants to push this through quickly, but we still have to wait for those regulations to be made. We know that persons with disabilities face too many challenges, which are only increasing with the rising costs of living, such as food and skyrocketing home and rent prices.
Throughout the course of the committee study on Bill C-22, we heard about the suffering of those living in poverty. We heard from the minister that ESDC had supplied information that the average gap for persons with disabilities between their income and the Canada poverty line is $9,000. That is $9,000 below the poverty line.
Overwhelmingly, we heard that almost one million persons with disabilities living in poverty are not eating enough meals daily and cannot keep up with the rising costs. They are making impossible choices between housing, food, heating and transportation, and the provincial support programs have remained stagnant.
As we know, no single province is even close to the poverty line. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick show the highest gaps, in excess of $12,000 a year, while two of the most affluent provinces, Ontario and B.C., have gaps nearing $10,000. I have no doubt that the gaps have only grown worse. It is essential that the federal government step up with some interim benefit immediately.
The government has international obligations, including the UN’s Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to ensure dignity and full equality for all. This includes necessary and adequate income, but it is not happening right now. Dire financial circumstances are the reality for too many people with disabilities, and the longer they must wait for the promised Canada disability benefit, the more they are left feeling abandoned by the government.
Another common theme from witness testimony in committee for Bill C-22 was that income supports are needed now. With the rising hopes and expectations of a Canada disability benefit, persons with disabilities are calling for assistance to get them through until the disability benefit is a reality. In the last several months, we have been hearing a growing call for an emergency response benefit to offset the cost of living.
Will the Liberal government acknowledge the dire financial situation for one million persons with disabilities in this country? What is the plan to protect their human rights? Will the Liberals explore an interim benefit as we wait for the Canada disability benefit?
421 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Port Moody—Coquitlam for her advocacy on behalf of persons with disabilities.
I want to especially acknowledge the advocacy of the hon. Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion. She has worked tirelessly throughout her career to promote the rights of persons with disabilities.
I understand my colleague is looking forward to knowing all about the Canada disability benefit, and I too want nothing more than to see Canadians with disabilities receive the new Canada disability benefit as quickly as possible. I remind my colleague that, as set out in this legislation, the details of the proposed benefit will be addressed in future regulations. Those details include the benefit amount, eligibility criteria and other features, such as the treatment of employment income. We will work out all of those details in consultation with our partners, including persons with disabilities and disability stakeholders, as well as with the provinces and territories.
The Canada disability benefit will be a groundbreaking income supplement. It has the potential to lift hundreds of thousands of working-age persons with disabilities out of poverty, and that is why we are taking the time to get it right.
In the spirit of “nothing without us”, we will continue engaging with the disability community at every turn to ensure that the Canada disability benefit is designed with their voices at the table. We will keep their voices at the forefront to ensure that we truly reduce poverty and support the financial security of working-age Canadians with disabilities.
I am pleased to say that engagement activities began in the summer of 2021. A series of virtual round tables with stakeholders took place during the winter and spring of 2022, and community-led consultations will continue over the coming months.
We have also been working closely with provincial and territorial governments, because they play a key role in providing benefits and supports to many Canadians with disabilities. This will help us ensure that every person who receives the Canada disability benefit will be better off. It will also help us harmonize delivery of the CDB and ensure that there are no clawbacks to other benefits.
The Canada disability benefit has the potential to make a profound difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of working-age Canadians with disabilities. For that to happen, we need to take the time to do things the right way, and that is exactly what we are doing.
417 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I appreciated working with the member throughout the whole process of Bill C-22 since Parliament began to sit.
Right now, the cost of living is limiting persons with disabilities who are living in poverty the opportunity to eat a meal. I am asking the member if the Liberal government is willing to consider an emergency interim benefit as we wait for the Canada disability benefit to get into their bank accounts. I want to know from the member if it is on the Liberals' radar to make sure that people living with a disability in this country are having their human rights upheld and can afford to live in a home, eat a decent meal, and buy fresh fruits and vegetables.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the proposed Canada disability benefit has the potential to reduce poverty and improve financial security for hundreds of thousands of working-age Canadians with disabilities. That is why we are taking the time to consult with our partners, including the disability community, indigenous organizations, disability researchers and experts, persons with disabilities, and disability stakeholders, as well as the provinces and territories.
Persons with disabilities know what they need. With their input, we will determine all details of the Canada disability benefit, which we look forward to sharing with everyone, including my colleague, the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam.
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/23 7:38:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am here tonight because I am deeply concerned about the state of our immigration system in this country. I am overwhelmed by the horrific stories of people's lives being ruined because the government has failed to provide a service it is required to provide for people who are trying to come to Canada or who are trying to bring their loved ones to Canada.
I do not think anyone in this place is going to be surprised when I say that my office is dealing with non-stop stories about IRCC issues. Every single member of the House of Commons is getting non-stop calls about how our immigration system is failing to meet the needs of Canadians. It is failing to meet the needs of all those people who are trying to make Canada their home.
We have a government right now that is promising things. It promised to bring in “unlimited of this” and “40 of that.” It makes tons and tons of promises like “500,000 of this”.
The way I have described this in the past is that we have a goat track. Our immigration system right now is a goat track. Do not promise to buy me a Lamborghini when what one has is a goat track. The system is broken, and the government has an obligation to fix our immigration system.
The fact of the matter is that we have people who are trying to come to Canada to go to school. The question I asked the minister, and that I am bringing forward again today, is about students who want to study in universities in Canada. My goodness, we want these people to come to Canada. We want these people to study at our universities. Our universities need that tuition. Our country benefits from having these people come to our country, yet they cannot come because our immigration system is so broken.
This question was about students and their ability to come to Canada to study, but I need to take this opportunity to tell the House a little about some other folks. Yesterday, I was walking into the House of Commons. There was a man from Afghanistan who worked for the Canadian government. His family and his loved ones are still in Afghanistan. He cannot get them out. He was sobbing on the steps of the House of Commons because he is so worried his family will be murdered. It breaks my heart.
I have been working with members of every party in the House to bring female members of Parliament from Afghanistan to Canada and to safety. I woke up a week ago to news that one of those members of Parliament had been murdered, so I do not want to hear from the government that it is going to bring in 100,000, 20,000, or whatever the number of people is, because it is not fixing the immigration system. The problem, when it does not fix the immigration system, is that it ruins people's lives. It ruins our chance of having people come to be part of this beautiful country that is Canada.
I do not want to hear that the government is doing enough. I want to hear what it is going to do to fix the deeply broken immigration system in this country now.
568 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/23 7:41:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to highlight our government's progress as we continue working to improve our immigration and refugee system.
In addition to the challenges brought by the pandemic backlog, Canada is the top destination in the world for immigration. There are record levels of people wanting to come to Canada. We also saw back-to-back humanitarian crises in Afghanistan and Ukraine, which significantly impacted processing capacities as more resources were reallocated to these crises.
Our government has added the tools and resources, with more than 1,250 new employees in 2022 to tackle this challenge for students and all others, and the results of 2022 show it. Last year, IRCC processed over 5.2 million applications, nearly double those processed in 2021. This is thanks in part to improvements to the immigration system, including digitized applications, the hiring and training of new employees, streamlined processes and the harnessing of automation to increase efficiency while protecting the safety and security of Canadians.
The results for study permits were even better. IRCC processed approximately 739,000 study permit applications, compared to 555,000 in 2021. The fact is that we have made international study permits a priority, which is why there has been a 100% increase in international students since 2015.
Canada is on track to meet its goal to process 80% of new applications within service standards of 60 days and provide shorter wait times for clients.
We have been taking concrete steps to reduce our backlogs, which, to be clear, are the applications that have been in inventories longer than the service standards. The government knows the wait is too long and is working hard to address the problem and return to service standards. That is what Canada's future students, workers, permanent residents and citizens expect.
To support greater transparency, we have implemented solutions like online status trackers that provide reassurance to clients by allowing them to view progress on their applications. Our case status trackers are in place for citizenship applicants and certain permanent resident applications. We will continue to expand these trackers to more applicants across our system in the coming months, including study permits. To keep Canadians up to date on our progress on reducing backlogs, the department has also been publishing monthly updates on its websites.
These actions demonstrate our commitment to improving processing, reducing backlogs and ensuring our immigration system works for everyone.
403 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/23 7:44:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, universities in Canada are losing millions of dollars because study permits are not being processed in time.
Iranians trying to escape from their murderous terrorist regime are waiting years for news on whether loved ones can come and when they can come.
In Afghanistan, there are nine female members of Parliament. The current government could get them out today. It could get them to safety today, and it is choosing not to do that.
For Hong Kongers, right now there is a program that is going to expire, and the current government has done nothing to ensure that it is extended.
Ukrainians in my riding have not been able to study at university because the current government has failed to give them a study permit.
That is not a solution.
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/23 7:45:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is not just promises; it is action. Our government added the tools and resources, such as 1,250 new employees in 2022, and we see the results with 5.2 million applications processed, which is nearly double the applications processed in 2021.
The results for study permits were even better. IRCC processed approximately 739,000 permit applications, compared to 555,000 in 2021. With hard work and timely investments, we are processing more student applications than we ever have.
82 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/23 7:46:11 p.m.
- Watch
The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 7:46 p.m.)
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
