SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 160

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 14, 2023 10:00AM
  • Feb/14/23 10:11:47 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to table today a petition signed by the residents of Winnipeg North with respect to the Canada Health Act. They make reference to the fact that the Canada Health Act sets out a framework to ensure that we have a true national health care system from coast to coast to coast. The petitioners are asking governments of different levels to work together to ensure that issues are dealt with, to broaden health care responsibilities, to take into consideration mental health and long-term care and to continue on the path set out for dental care, pharmacare and issues of that nature. I am sure the petitioners were quite happy to see that we just recently made a $198-billion commitment over the next 10 years to build upon the national health care system.
139 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 10:13:51 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.
14 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 12:11:26 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member went on an attack and wanted to point out hypocrisy from the Conservatives and the Liberals in terms of corporate taxes. She pointed out that we have not increased or reduced corporate taxes, and in particular, we have not increased them. I want to remind the member that the only government that I have witnessed offhand decreasing corporate taxes was the NDP provincial government in Manitoba. Not once but several times, the NDP, who have never been in office here in Ottawa but have been in my province, decreased corporate taxes. Does the member feel that there might be a bit of hypocrisy if we put this into the context of what she was saying?
119 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 12:46:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Kings—Hants. It is a nice, sunny day outside, I think, although I am not really 100% sure. However, I can say that on days like this, when the Conservative Party brings forward its best efforts to try to sway public opinion, it is like an ominous black cloud covers the House of Commons and the chamber. One can get fairly depressed just listening to the bafflegab that comes from the other side. This is a kind of warning for people who are following the debate not to believe everything the Conservatives say, because, quite frankly, they are very good at stretching the truth, if I can put it that way and still be parliamentary. I find it truly amazing just how deep in darkness the Conservative Party can really be. I would like to show some contrast between the dark side and a party that, through the years, has been there in a very tangible, real way for Canadians for the last seven years. Maybe that is a good place to start. It is kind of ridiculous that we hear the Conservatives stand up time after time and say, “eight years of Liberal government”. They should do their math. Even if we round it off, it is not quite eight years yet; it is actually closer to seven, so they will be able to regurgitate these exact same speeches a year from now.
249 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 12:47:52 p.m.
  • Watch
We will be getting to eight years eventually. Hopefully, with the blessing of Canadians, we will be able to double down on that in the time to come, but we need to be able to show that, at the end of the day, we are prepared to respect what we have been given. We were given a mandate to manage the economy in a minority situation, meaning that we have to work with all political entities here in order to get things passed through the House of Commons. From my perspective, the essence of the motion before us today can be broken down into two things, the amount of spending and the inflation issue. First and foremost, we have to understand and appreciate that the everyday lives that Canadians are going through can be very challenging. Costs have gone up and we have recognized that. That is why we have brought forward programs, whether through legislation or budgetary measures, to support Canadians in every region of our country in a very real and tangible way by putting money in their pockets. Let there be no doubt about that. We are concerned about the issues of being able to have groceries and pay those bills. That is one of the reasons why we are developing the programs and putting them out, even though the Conservatives vote against those programs. What is truly amazing is how the Conservatives try to misrepresent the reality in the world today. If we listen to the Conservatives, we would think that the inflation rate today is unique to Canada and is all because of this particular government. Absolutely nothing could be further from the truth. Surely to goodness, the Conservatives do not believe that Canadians are so dumb as to believe that. Canada is, among many other nations, doing reasonably well in terms of the inflation rate. We are doing better than the United States, England and the European Union, where the inflation rates are higher than Canada's. As much as the Conservatives try to give the impression, the Prime Minister of Canada is not causing worldwide inflation. The Prime Minister and the government are providing supports for Canadians in a very real and tangible way, so that we can assist them in dealing with the inflation rate here in Canada, because we understand and recognize the hardship. What happens when we do that, when we recognize that, first and foremost, yes, we have to take action, even though we have a lower inflation rate than countries around the world? We have to do things such as doubling the GST rebate on a short-term basis. Originally, the Conservatives came out against that particular policy stand. They had to be shamed into ultimately coming onside and supporting that particular initiative. What about others, such as the rental support program? They voted against that. On the one hand, they are criticizing the cost of rent. On the other hand, when we provide a support for a good number of Canadians on that front, what do they do? They vote against it. What about the benefits being provided to children under the age of 12 for dental care? Tens of thousands throughout the country, thousands in Manitoba, have already taken advantage of that program. We are talking about hundreds of dollars in the pockets of families for dental work for kids under 12. What did the Conservative Party do? It voted against that too. We bring in programs that are having a real, tangible impact, such as the Canada workers benefit. For workers out there having a difficult time and working hard, we are topping off their salaries, making life more affordable for them. Do members know that over four million Canadians will benefit from that program? We get criticized by the Conservatives regarding how much money we are spending. They say that we are spending so much more than just what has to do with the pandemic. Yes, we are spending money. We are investing in children. By having a national child care program, we will have more people engaged in the workforce. We will improve the quality of care for children. We will improve the quality of life for Canadians in general, as more people will enter the workforce as a direct result. We have seen first-hand in the province of Quebec, when it instituted that very same policy, how that had such a positive impact. In fact, there is a cost to the program, but because of it, revenues will actually increase. We know that. We just signed off on a $198-billion health care agreement to enforce a national health care system. I wish I could have half an hour to expand on why that is so important not only to the people of Canada today, but also to future generations. Those who want to talk about mental health, palliative and long-term care, waiting lists and doctor shortages, the need for the managing of health care, accountability and transparency should be supporting this initiative for the $198-billion, 10-year proposal. I am so glad to see that the provinces are now onside with it. Our health care system is a part of who we are as Canadians. People have an expectation of the government, that we will be there to protect them and to have their backs when the economy is having some difficulties, whether during a pandemic, a slowdown, inflation, or whatever it might be. This government from day one has been investing in Canadians and in our infrastructure, and has been building a stronger, healthier economy even during the turmoil of a pandemic. By providing those types of supports, and, yes, the billions of dollars, the government has put Canada in a better position to build back better. We believe in Canada's middle class. We want to see an economy that works for all Canadians. There are a lot of good things taking place in Canada today, contrary to what the Conservative Party might try to get Canadians to believe. There is reason to be very optimistic, because as we deal with those economic measures, we are not forgetting about the environmental measures. We are not forgetting about those important social programs that Canadians are so dependent on and very fond of. This is a government that will continue to bring in progressive legislation and make budgets that will be there every day for Canadians no matter where they live.
1083 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 12:57:45 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, in a humorous way, the member tries to make the difference between seven and eight versus the word “broken”. I understand that Conservative members who stand up and use the word “broken” probably get little gold stars put beside their names in the Conservative room. That is all part of the Conservative spin. The Canadian economy and society are not broken. We continue to move forward. We continue to build. I would gladly debate that particular member any time and anywhere, as long as it is somewhat reasonable, in terms of the planning of the things we have been able to accomplish compared to 10 years of Stephen Harper. With regard to the issue of mental health, I would remind the member that part of our health care system is recognizing that the administrative responsibilities lie with the provinces. From an Ottawa perspective, we are investing historic amounts of money in health care. We continue to raise the profile of mental health, unlike the previous Harper regime.
173 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 12:59:44 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I was hoping that the Bloc would have had an opposition day motion based on health care transfers. I think this is the first time in a generation when we have had such a long-term commitment toward a truly national health care system. It has just been signed off on, with the provinces now agreeing to the principles of the $198-plus billion over the next 10 years. There is a history of fiscal transfers. We have the highest number of federal dollars going toward health care in the history of Canada. The tax point shift was made back in, I believe, the late 1970s, toward tax points versus actual health dollars. I am very happy to say that, because of this particular agreement, we are going to see a permanent, solid presence of health care throughout the country. There will be more transparency and accountability and a higher sense of a national program, which I think all Canadians will be very proud of.
167 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 1:01:38 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know that, whether it has been the Prime Minister or the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, they have been very clear in terms of the issue of tax fairness. We have brought in some measures to ensure there is more accountability. Taxes coming in from banks is an example from the financial industry. I am sure that all things are on the table as the government tries to ensure a higher sense of fair taxation.
80 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 1:31:32 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, there is a bit of a discussion here. Some members want to know who wrote the speech that the member has provided. Is it her, or does she have someone who writes it and then she edits it? We are really quite curious about who wrote the speech.
50 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 3:40:27 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I always find it amazing when one does a contrast between the government and the Conservative Party. The member says, as the Conservatives have, that we are spending too much money, and yet when we take a look at the money we are spending, in good part, we think of the billions on child care. Conservatives say they do not want that child care, and yet when we brought in the legislation to support it, they actually voted in favour of the legislation. We just made a commitment of $198 billion toward health care, and now the Conservatives are saying they would not cut that money back if they were to get elected. The Conservatives seem to be of the impression that they can just criticize and provide no actual plan. Does the hon. member not feel, whether it is on the environment, health care or child care, that it is an obligation of the official opposition to provide its plan on some of these important social issues?
170 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 4:31:24 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would be inclined to ask a quick question regarding what the member thinks about the NDP-Liberal B.C. agreement on LNG. I could possibly ask him what he believes Rachel Notley has to say about the purchase of the pipeline. However, I would rather pick up on what he said in his speech about how government can actually spend where there is a very high return. Could I get his thoughts on the national child care program and its net benefits, which were clearly demonstrated in the province of Quebec?
94 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 4:41:59 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Conservative Party says that if we are going to spend the money, we have to find the money in order to do so. Now, we just made a major announcement for the future of the national health care system, $190 billion over 10 years, and there are hundreds of millions flowing this year. The Conservative leader has now endorsed it. He has said that Conservatives will not cut back on that commitment. Can the member now share their plan? When they talk about money being spent only if money is coming in, in terms of programs, what programs would the Conservatives be cutting as a result of the commitment that the Conservative Party leader has made?
122 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 5:12:03 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, we have had Bloc and Conservative members and next we would get an NDP member. If I were in opposition, the kind of motion I would like to see is one on health care. I think all of us here and Canadians have a big interest in health care. It is more than just the cost factor in terms of how much money is going to Ottawa or how much money is raised at the provincial level. It is about managing change. I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on the issue of health care management of change and the importance of transparency and accountability.
109 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 5:23:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I suspect that, if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent to see the clock at 5:30 p.m.
26 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak to Bill S-222 this afternoon. I think what would come as a surprise to a good number of people is the degree to which wood is being utilized as a building component, especially for people—
47 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Madam Speaker, I appreciate it. I know the member for Abbotsford, who has been looking forward to my speech on this issue today, really appreciates it too, because he wants to digest, no doubt, every word that I am sharing with him. After all, if we take a look at the environment of Abbotsford, I suspect we will find that the wood and timber industry is of critical importance. I know the member for Abbotsford knows full well the significance of the wood industry to the province of British Columbia. In fact, as a former minister of Stephen Harper, he can relate, I am sure, to the many different types of trade issues related to our softwood industry.
118 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/14/23 5:54:13 p.m.
  • Watch
Well, whether he was a good prime minister is a debatable issue, but that is for another day.
18 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Madam Speaker, my apologies to the member for Abbotsford for getting a little off topic there, too. My first experience in dealing with wood in a substantial way, which goes beyond the general framing of a house in Winnipeg, is when I had actually bought a home on Burrows Avenue. I went into the home. We had to replace some drywall. Instead of a concrete foundation, it was actually a wood foundation. It was a bit of an eye-opener for me. I am somewhat familiar with the construction industry. I have family members who have been doing it for many years. A thought that crosses my mind right away when I touch a wood foundation versus a concrete foundation is there is a far better insulation value. If one is from a city like Winnipeg, Edmonton, Calgary or Regina, out in the Prairies, insulation value is quite important. If members were to do a Google search, which I have, they would find, to the surprise of many, how skyscrapers are actually now being made. Someone made reference to a wooden structure of eight floors. In Wisconsin, there is a 25-storey timber building. In Canada, if we look at British Columbia, by UBC, I believe it is called the Brock Commons. It is an 18-storey complex. More and more, we are seeing wood being used in these taller buildings. I believe it is a vastly underestimated potential for Canada's wood industry. Like others, I have had the chance to travel abroad. Often in the countries I have visited, we do not see wood being utilized as we would here in North America. I believe that it is speaks volumes to the potential markets out there if one could really get out there and communicate the advantages of wood over other products. We have talked a great deal about the transition to a greener economy. When we think of that greener economy, a big part of it is within the construction industry itself. As we see our wood industry grow at least in part, recognizing the potential of that growth and talking about it would add even that much more value to it. This is not the first time that we have had this type of legislation come to the floor of the House of Commons. Some have already made reference to, I believe, Bill C-354, which went through a while ago, passing in the House of Commons. It was the election in 2019 that killed the bill because it did not quite get through the Senate. It bodes well, in terms of where we are today, talking about Bill S-222. Within that legislation, given the very nature of the fact that it is originating from the Senate, and we have seen the wide support from a previous House, where members on all sides saw the value of supporting it, I suspect that Bill S-222 would in fact be able to pass the House, and ultimately receive royal assent. That is a very strong positive. As I said, there is nothing new, from a government perspective, in dealing with the environment and having a greener transition, because I think it fits what we have been talking about. We have seen a number of legislative and budgetary measures to support a greener economy. I am thinking of those magnificent timbers, beams, one-by-threes for sidings, two-by-fours and, nowadays, two-by-sixes that are being used in many of the construction codes for exterior walls, for example. We have seen far more opportunities in recent years. As building codes continue to evolve and give more strength, I believe we will see that the demand for wood will continue to increase. At the end of the day we do want to see a reduction in greenhouse emissions, and the bill would support that in principle, because of the product itself, a product that is renewable. Someone made reference to the province of B.C., where one tree comes down and three are planted in its place. We have a commitment to plant two billion trees, coming from our government. Many of those trees are going to be planted within our cities to provide beautiful plush green canopies over our municipalities, cities and communities, but a good number of trees we see that are planted today are there so that we can ensure that we can continue to harvest. We have heard a great deal about British Columbia, and we do not want to give the impression that it is the only place where there is an industry of that nature, because one could easily talk about hardwoods and others that go from Ontario to Quebec and a couple of the Atlantic provinces, where there is very much a healthy industry, and that is not to say my own home province of Manitoba does not have great potential in the development in that industry. I think that, in looking at the bill, we see sustainable forest management. We see a government that is committed to greening federal buildings, whether it is by retrofitting, building new or just completing repairs, and what the legislation would do is allow the minister to recommend wood usage, not necessarily compel it, but recommend it.
884 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border