SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 183

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 24, 2023 11:00AM
  • Apr/24/23 12:36:24 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, the hon. member speaks about common sense, but he has not shared any today. In fact, what he has done is list all the economic violence of capitalism and the impacts it has on everyday Canadians. When the member talks about the housing market, he never talks about the insatiable greed of the real estate investment trusts, of the speculators, of the big corporate gatekeepers who are crushing our housing market. In fact, housing prices will not come down until the government acts to curtail inflationary investor activity in the residential market. Just like the leader of the Conservative Party, this budget refuses to take on greedy private sector gatekeepers who are driving up the price of housing for their own corporate greed. Why are the Conservatives focusing only on municipal permitting when there are so many greedy, capitalist, private sector gatekeepers responsible for the current housing crisis?
150 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:37:21 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, the problem is with the party that keeps supporting this inept, corrupt government and always props it up and makes things more expensive. As the member likes to talk about socialism all the time, I would like to read him a quote from Margaret Thatcher, who said, “either you believe in capitalism, or you believe in socialism. Capitalism, as we know, creates wealth. Socialism, as we also know, creates poverty.” The clear example is today in Canada, when one in five Canadians is skipping meals and 1.5 million Canadians are visiting a food bank because of failed NDP-Liberal policies. When the two parties get together, they are doing nothing but causing more and more pain to Canadians and sending more of them to food banks. We are going to turn these failed policies around when our leader becomes the Prime Minister of Canada.
149 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:38:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-47, which is part of the government's 2023 budget implementation. I am honoured today to follow my colleague, the member for Calgary Forest Lawn, who is our party's official finance critic. After much anticipation and hope that the expensive coalition would exercise some fiscal prudence, Canadians were once again presented with a budget that will spend more and deliver less. My colleague went over numerous statistics in his speech about this legislation, but I think the most alarming one is the fact that this expensive coalition will tack on nearly $4,200 in additional costs to every household across Canada with its lackluster budget. Canadians are tired of being bought by this Liberal government with one-time cheques and slogans every time a budget is presented. This is the case with the grocery rebate, for example. Let us be honest with Canadians: This one-time cheque will do nothing to reduce the price of groceries for families. It is simply a doubling of the GST credit, presented as something it is not. We need to tackle the real source of the problem. Take, for example, the way the government is increasing grocery prices with policies like the carbon tax, the tariff on fertilizer and other harmful policies. These policies are driving up the cost of food production and transportation across the country. Bill C-47 also includes the health care transfers to the provinces, which are well below what the provinces and territories requested to provide the care that our fellow citizens and their families need. My Liberal and NDP colleagues will say that I am not helping my constituents get dental care because I will not support this budget. However, that could not be further from the truth. I would like to remind my colleagues opposite that Quebec has not only had a day care program for many years, but it also already has a dental care program for our young children. It seems as though the current government is always lagging behind on these programs. It has been clear from the start that this government does not trust the provincial and territorial governments to implement the programs themselves and that the “Ottawa knows best” approach is the only way to manage these projects. If only the government had more faith in the provinces and, especially, more respect for their jurisdictions, it might be surprised to see what can be done without Ottawa getting involved. I will now take a moment to talk about what I would have liked to see in this budget. First, there is nothing in the budget to help SMEs attract labour. The word “labour” is hardly used at all in this budget, which is hundreds of pages long. In my riding of Beauce, the unemployment rate is currently below 1.9%. Our businesses are struggling to attract and retain workers. It is one of the biggest issues in my riding. A vast majority of businesses in my riding rely heavily on temporary foreign workers to fill gaps in their workforce. However, there was nothing in the budget to improve the program. The government must reduce the paperwork and red tape associated with all these programs. What is worse, the government has allowed more than 150,000 public servants to go on strike, which means that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada will have an even larger backlog and businesses will continue to close their doors because of the Prime Minister's inaction. It is as though this government does not understand just how time sensitive these jobs are. Many farmers and landscape companies in my riding, for example, will not have workers at the most important time of the year. These businesses spend thousands of dollars recruiting foreign workers months before they are to arrive, but the government does not care. It has done nothing to reduce immigration delays. That leads me to my next point. Where is the funding for Canadian agriculture in this budget? After I took a close look at the budget with my staff, I discovered that our agriculture and agri-food sector was getting approximately 0.1% of the funds allocated in the budget. What a sad situation in which our country finds itself, when our government forgets where the food feeding our families and others around the whole world comes from. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food was pleased to speak in the House to tell us that she had increased the limit for loans available to farmers. Does she not understand that farmers are already in debt up to their necks? They need programs that reflect the current reality so they can remain solvent and competitive on the international market. Two weeks ago, in my riding, we heard the sad news that Olymel will permanently close its Vallée‑Jonction pork processing plant in December. In a municipality of approximately 2,000 people, Olymel employs 1,000 workers. This is devastating, and the entire region will be hit hard. The closure is the result of, among other things, a labour shortage that began several years ago. It will have a serious impact on the pork industry in Ontario and Quebec, as well as on a number of other industries. A growing number of farmers and farms are struggling to survive in Canada. This government has abandoned this sector for far too long. Our country needs to take measures to support the agriculture and agri-food industry before it is too late. A Conservative government will be there for farmers and plant workers. We are prepared to make this sector the economic driver it should have been in this country a long time ago. Finally, I would like to touch on something that was not mentioned whatsoever in the budget. The words “cellular connectivity” are not mentioned at all in this budget when we search the words. Since first being elected, I have been rising in the House to speak out about this problem. In the 40 municipalities in my riding alone, at least one sector in each town is poorly served by the cellular networks. I would remind the government that people in the regions are not second class citizens. They pay just as many taxes as anyone else. These people who live in the regions, who contribute to the economy, are held back by the inability to get 21st century technology. How are we supposed to automate industries to make up for the labour shortage when a business owner has to go to the top of a hill to get one bar of service on his phone? I therefore invite the government to have a look at the reporting done on this subject in March by many local journalists, including Éric Gourde at L'Éclaireur Progrès and Philippe Grenier at Radio-Canada. It is unbelievable that people come close to dying because they cannot call 911. When people do manage to get into an ambulance, sometimes the paramedics cannot connect to the nearest local hospital because there is no cell signal. Having an adequate cellular network in the regions is not a matter of equity; it is a matter of public safety. The government needs to make investments to address this issue and force the CRTC to compel the big telecom companies to develop their cellular networks throughout the regions—unless the government is still waiting for the provincial governments to get involved. In closing, it is time for change in Canada. It is time to put Canadians first, not only in major urban centres, but also in the rural heartlands. That is why I will continue to rise in the House and be the voice of the residents of Beauce, to convey their message. A Conservative government will put Canadians first and prioritize common sense.
1328 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:48:31 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, it is my understanding that the Conservative leader and his caucus have committed to supporting our $2-billion investment to save our health care system. I would like my colleague to elaborate on the Conservatives' recently announced policy on cuts to the CBC/Radio-Canada. My colleague quoted a Radio-Canada reporter in his speech, so I imagine that he has a great deal of respect for Radio-Canada. What does he think of his leader's proposal to make cuts to the CBC/Radio-Canada?
90 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:49:16 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, it is a very simple concept to grasp for my colleague across the aisle. Our leader's comments were very specific on the issue of protecting Radio-Canada. I think that Radio-Canada and the CBC are very different. Perhaps some management changes may be required. However, I think we really need to face the facts. If we analyze my leader's thinking carefully, it is clear that preserving Radio-Canada in Quebec is not at all an issue, because it is intended to serve the francophone community throughout Canada.
93 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:49:48 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague from Beauce, who raised a lot of issues that have a direct impact on Laurentides—Labelle. I am taking time to talk about agriculture and agri-food. After all these years and all the challenges related to maintaining supply management and keeping the industry as it is, one in 10 farmers are being forced to shut down. That is happening in my colleague's riding of Beauce just as it is in Laurentides—Labelle. My question is this. Are my colleague and his party willing to support, in both the House of Commons and in committee, any assistance measure to save our agriculture and agri-food industry?
116 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:50:38 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent question. She is obviously preaching to the choir in asking me that question, because I was a farmer for over 45 years. I was a fourth-generation farmer and, today, a fifth generation has taken over our family business. The current government must clearly indicate that it upholds and supports our agricultural industry. It is true that many farms are finding it increasingly difficult to find people to take over, and the economic context is unique. My colleague mentioned supply management. In my speech, I talked about the closure of a pork processing plan. The pork industry is not supply managed. Some export markets closed, and so perhaps we need to support our farmers and processors in developing and conquering new markets.
132 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:51:36 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague and many of his Conservative colleagues have been talking about housing. I think one thing we all agree on in the House is that there is a crisis of unbelievable proportions related to housing in this country. I live in Vancouver and have been there for close to four decades. The rise in house prices began in the mid-eighties, particularly after Expo, and then continued with the repatriation of Hong Kong back to China in the late 1990s and the Olympics in 2010. With each of these things, it became obvious that there was an inflow of foreign capital, from both corporate and foreign investment, that destabilized house prices in the Lower Mainland. It is at the point now where, for people who live and work there, the price of detached or even non-detached houses is completely divorced from what people actually make. What specifically does my hon. colleague say a Conservative government would do to help provide real affordable housing for people in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia? I would like to hear specifically what policy his government would advance.
189 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:52:38 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I am a former municipal councillor and I think that our leader, the member for Carleton, makes an important point when he talks about cutting red tape to ensure that municipalities can issue building permits faster. I live in Beauce, and our reality may not be identical, but housing is still a major concern. I think that there should be less red tape. I have been here for four years, and I have been saying the same thing for four years. I hope that we will see some signals in that regard over the coming months.
106 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 12:53:33 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kings—Hants. I am pleased to participate in the debate on Bill C‑47, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023, which will help build a clean economy. Today, the world's largest economies are making incredible strides not only in fighting the climate crisis, but also in restructuring, seizing the opportunities that this industrial shift represents for them and building clean industries. For that reason, budget 2023 includes innovative and substantial investments in building that economy right here in Canada. Fighting the climate crisis is clearly the main objective of all major economies. However, by building a strong and inclusive economy by seizing these opportunities and using Canada's incredible resources to achieve great success in the economy of tomorrow, we are also investing in Canadian businesses, Canadian talent and Canadian workers. Our Canadian plan uses a variety of useful measures to invest in this new clean economy. We have already spoken at length about certain clear and predictable investment tax credits. We are also providing strategic financing in sectors such as critical minerals and clean energy. By investing in these sectors, Canada will truly build its economy and increase opportunities for all Canadian workers. We are also investing in some more targeted sectors and projects of national and international significance, as we saw with the wonderful announcements about Volkswagen. By making such significant investments for Canada, we are ensuring that we are not left behind. Currently, while all the other major global economies are investing massively in these sectors, the worst thing that could happen would be for Canada not to seize these opportunities and never have the chance to re-enter the race ever again. We must invest in transforming our economy, but also in these opportunities. Budget 2023 truly ensures that a green Canadian economy is also a source of prosperity and jobs for the middle class, but also for more dynamic communities across the country. We cannot do it alone, however. This is going to require investment at the government level and beyond. I would like to take this discussion to the Canada growth fund. We know there are trillions of dollars in private capital waiting for these opportunities, waiting to be spent on building the clean global economy. Canada does have some rivals. We are all trying to attract the best capital from the private sector. The recent enactment of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act posed a major challenge for our budget. To be competitive within the North American economy, we really have to invest in our industries, since they will drive the clean economy. To succeed, we had to meet two challenges. The first was to encourage companies to take risks and invest in clean technologies, advanced technologies, here in Canada. The second was to keep up with the growing list of nations that are also using public funds to attract private capital, including the United States and the European Union. As we saw, the list does not stop there. Australia was also in the race, along with many other countries. In budget 2022, we announced the government's plans to create the Canada growth fund, a $15‑billion arm's-length public investment vehicle that will help attract private capital to build Canada's clean economy. The thought behind that was to use investment instruments that absorb certain risks. This is all about attracting and encouraging private investment in some of the riskier projects, in new technologies, in companies, but also in low-carbon supply chains. The 2022 economic statement announced more details on how the Canada growth fund would work, and this new investment vehicle was created in December. The legislation introduced last week introduces amendments to the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act to allow the board, also known as PSP Investments, to provide investment management services for the Canada growth fund. As a significant part of the government's plan to decarbonize the economy, the Canada growth fund requires an experienced, professional, independent investment team to make important investments. That is why we are pooling those services. PSP Investments is already established as a federal Crown corporation, and it already has $225 billion in assets under management. It will be able to add assets for investments in the clean economy of tomorrow. Canada growth fund assets will be managed by PSP Investments, a separate and independent corporation. We like it that way. The Canada growth fund will make investments that will catalyze substantial private sector investment in businesses and projects in Canada to help bring about that transformation I was talking about earlier, to grow the economy and to compete in the global net-zero energy market. Canada growth fund investments will help Canada achieve its national economic and climate strategy goals. I see that time is running out. I talked about the Canada growth fund, which will be very important and strategic for both meeting our targets and capitalizing on these opportunities. However, I also wanted to talk about a problem we have in Canada. Canadian companies are not investing enough in R and D, and not at the same level as their peers. To meet this challenge, the budget proposes a new approach and creates the Canada innovation corporation. This was announced in budget 2022, but now several sectors are being brought together and the Canada innovation corporation's mandate is being expanded. I do not have time to talk about it in detail, but the modernization of the National Research Council is very important too. It is another tool in the tool box that will help us achieve those objectives, which are to seize those opportunities and to join the global march toward a greener economy and a healthier planet. Clearly, we have made smart investments that are good for Canadian workers, for businesses, for the Canadian economy and for our planet. I hope that all members in the House will join me in supporting the passage of this crucial piece of legislation.
1025 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:03:36 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, prior to being elected to this chamber I served with the Canadian Foodgrains Bank. I had the opportunity to work in Pontiac with that organization, and I got to know some of the excellent farmers and rural folks in the member's riding. I am curious what reaction to the budget the member is seeing from her own agricultural constituents, as 6.8% of Canada's GDP comes from the ag sector. I noticed that she voted against Bill C-234, the carbon tax exemption for farmers, as did most, but not all, of her colleagues, which I want to acknowledge. There is almost nothing in this budget for agriculture. What reaction is she getting in her riding from her agricultural constituents?
124 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:04:20 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, my answer is very simple: Carbon pricing does not apply to Quebec. I would also add that farmers in my riding are ahead when it comes to many green technologies. They are ahead of the government because farmers live off the land and they see climate change every day. They are concerned and they need new technologies, because the seasons are much more challenging. There are some real concerns in light of extreme climate change. These farmers are ahead and they are not worried about federal carbon pricing, because it does not apply to them. Quebec has its own carbon pricing, which is quite good and accepted.
110 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:05:25 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. She spoke a lot about climate change. It is true that the government is making a lot of direct and indirect investments in the budget to help oil companies greenwash their record. The government is giving them money for carbon capture, a technology that is very controversial in the field. As we have said, there is almost nothing for housing, but the government is giving oil companies money. Let us talk about oil companies' profits in 2022. Exxon Mobil made $56 billion in profit, Shell made $40 billion, TotalEnergies made $36 billion, Chevron made $36 billion and BP made $27 billion. How can the government give money to these oil companies, which made a combined total of $200 billion in 2022, while completely forgetting about the housing crisis?
143 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:06:09 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned housing. Last year's budget earmarked a huge amount of money for housing. That funding is currently being allocated to various programs. Many citizens, committed individuals and leaders in housing are looking at how those amounts can be allocated effectively to create more housing units across Canada. Amounts were earmarked in last year's budget, and they are being allocated to various programs. It is really a matter of ensuring that those amounts benefit all Canadians.
81 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:06:54 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Uqaqtittiji, I would like to thank the member for Pontiac for focusing on climate change and what the government will do to combat climate change. I would like to ask her about the Kivalliq hydro-fibre link project, which is mentioned in the budget. Unfortunately, the budget does not say how much it will invest in that project, and I wonder if she could tell the House what kinds of investments it will make to ensure that this project does indeed go ahead so more communities can reduce their reliance on diesel.
92 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:07:32 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, the budget makes significant investments in clean energy. That is really the main point of my speech. Investments are needed in strategic sectors to ensure we have a clean economy, which must also be inclusive and bring prosperity to communities across the country.
45 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:08:07 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, as always, it is a huge privilege to rise in the House to debate Bill C‑47 and discuss the implementation of the budget. I thank my hon. colleague from Pontiac for sharing her time with me this afternoon. I want to present the views of my constituents in Kings—Hants on the budget and speak about certain initiatives that are very important to my riding. The budget essentially has three major pillars. The first is a focus on affordability. The second is a focus on health care supports for the provinces and territories to help improve health care across the country. The third is the green economy, our clean energy future, and indeed Canada's future prosperity here at home. Affordability has become a top priority for Canadians across the country as a result of higher inflation following the pandemic. The good news is that inflation declined again this month and is now 4.3%, compared to 8.1% last summer. I think it is important to recognize the context that this government is faced with. Given the fact the Bank of Canada, through its monetary policy, has been helping to try to bring down the cost of inflation, the government has to be responsible with how it is addressing the question of consumption spending. When we look at the budget, there is a one-time doubling of the GST rebate, which is being framed by the government as a grocery rebate, and that would be eligible to 11 million Canadians. It has been means tested, which means it is based on income. I certainly support it because it is a targeted measure. It would not necessarily support all Canadians, but those who have lower incomes and could really use support right now, given some of the challenges around affordability. Therefore, it is targeted, focused, and will not necessarily drive inflation higher, given the work the Bank of Canada is doing. I also want to talk about something that could be framed as a health benefit, but is also an affordability benefit, which is the Canadian dental plan. The government has introduced this, and it is going to help support uninsured Canadians who have a household income below $90,000 with a program to help support their dental costs. We know that, if people do not have access to private insurance, sometimes the costs associated with surgery or fixing one's teeth can be quite expensive, particularly for those who are struggling to get by. This is a measure that is going to make a difference across the country. Indeed, in my riding of Kings—Hants, I have already had calls from families who are in receipt of the benefit that we put out, as a government, for those who are under 12. The government's program is to expand this to seniors next year, and indeed to all households with an income of below $90,000 by 2025. My riding is still disproportionately older than the rest of the country. We have a lot of good things happening in the riding, but we have a lot of seniors, so for lower-income seniors who do not have dental insurance, this would really make a difference for them. Let me talk about health care. As a federal member of Parliament, and I would suspect it is probably the same for many of my colleagues, I get calls quite often about health care and the state of health care in this country. I remind my constituents that I do not directly control that, nor does the Government of Canada, but it is our responsibility to make sure that there are proper resources on the table. That is exactly what this budget does. Of course, we knew this was something that had been announced prior to the budget, but there is going to be $198 billion of new spending over the next decade toward health care, above and beyond where we are right now, $46 billion of which was announced as new spending tabled by the government in this budget. Spending alone will not solve health care, but it was something we were hearing from the provinces and territories. I am proud of the way this government has stepped up to make sure there is consistent funding over the next decade and of the fact that we know it is in place and that the provinces can take that measure and plan accordingly. In my home province of Nova Scotia, the provincial government has staked a lot of its credibility on “fixing health care”. It will certainly have no excuses from this government because we are making sure that those resources are there. It is now its turn to get focused on the ground at being able to deliver that. That is something I am proud of. We will continue to make sure the provinces are using the funds reasonably and make sure they are going toward health care. As we have heard before, sometimes the Government of Canada will provide transfers to the provinces and they will use them for other priorities. This government is making sure the money is going to be spent exactly where it should be, which is on health care. I also want to highlight that the budget talks about loan forgiveness for doctors and nurses. Something the government had in place previously was loan forgiveness for doctors who practise in rural areas. We know the importance of doctors, but we also know the importance of allied health professionals. This government is extending this to nurses who practise in rural Canada. Certainly in my area of Kings—Hants in Nova Scotia, this is going to be very welcome news. This government is addressing the clean energy economy, the third pillar. We have talked about health, we have talked about affordability and next is about matching what the United States has done. A lot of members have talked about the Inflation Reduction Act. This is a significant amount of money that the United States put on the table to help drive spending in the clean energy economy. The Prime Minister has been very clear that this government has had a number of measures on the table for years, but the size of the American investment, nearly $400 billion U.S., is significant. Frankly, it would have been irresponsible for this government not to have some measures to make sure we responded in a way that draws capital and investment to this country and does not allow investment to simply go south of the border. A number of measures are important, and I want to highlight a few that I think are particularly important to Atlantic Canada. One is the 15% refundable tax credit for clean electricity. This will matter across the country, and I want to give credit to the Minister of Finance. As opposed to putting these types of incentives in government programs that entities have to apply for, we are setting the criteria, saying what people can expect. The money will flow much quicker and will allow businesses to have certainty to make investments. This will matter for entities across the country but particularly in my province, which needs to keep driving its electricity future in a renewable way. I have talked a lot about nuclear in this House. Really important measures for nuclear are being included in these measures. This is something we have heard from all sides of the House, largely, and I want to compliment those who have raised these issues in the House, because this government, in this budget, is doing exactly that and making sure we have homegrown solutions that can make a difference. On clean hydrogen, we have a world of opportunity in Atlantic Canada. Members should come visit us sometime. We would love to showcase the investments and that we have the ability to help fuel the world right from Atlantic Canada. It is going to be through clean hydrogen. This government is putting incentives on the table to make sure it happens in Atlantic Canada and not another part of the country. I have talked at great length in this House over the last year about the importance of the Atlantic loop. There is again a mention of that in the budget. I know there is ongoing co-operation between the Government of Canada and various provincial entities. We need to keep driving that project forward. In Kings—Hants, agriculture and forestry are predominant industries at the primary level. I was very pleased to see investments of $368 million to the Department of Natural Resources for forestry initiatives. We need to see at least some of that go toward mass timber. There is an opportunity in Atlantic Canada, and indeed in Kings—Hants, for a mass timber facility. The Atlantic region is the only region of the country that does not yet have that. This matters, and I really hope we can see those projects move in the days ahead. On the agriculture side, the advance payments program, with the continuation of interest-free loans, is going to make a difference for my farmers. I was pleased to see the Minister of Agriculture help ensure that foot-and-mouth disease vaccines will be available in this country. We have available stock. There is also the dairy innovation and investment fund. Given that I have the largest number of supply-managed farms east of Quebec, this is going to matter to my farmers in the days ahead. One thing that I think this government needs to address would simply be the importance of continuing to drive a mechanism around non-cost measures. It is important that we invest. The government is doing so, but it is also important that we look at regulatory reform measures that do not cost money and that can help drive industry success. I hope to see a formal mechanism as we head into the fall. I see my time has unfortunately come to a close, but I look forward to taking questions from my hon. colleagues.
1694 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:18:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer reviewed the budget and identified close to $800 million in what the government is calling non-announced spending. This would be in addition to the billions of dollars in non-announced spending announced last year. I am wondering if the member could tell us what this spending would be for.
56 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:18:42 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, the hon. member would probably be best suited to ask that question of the Minister of Finance. Yes, I sit on this side of the House, but I am not a member of the King's Privy Council. I will say that, as per normal, the government will outline expenditures in certain areas where it looks to take up programs. The budget is not a complete view of every single program the government will release over the next calendar year. Sometimes it is an outlay of money whereby the government will build a model and program that will help service Canadians in the days ahead. That might be some of what the member is talking about regarding the Parliamentary Budget Officer. If he would like to have a conversation after our interaction, I would be happy to take on his concerns and do what I can to engage my colleagues on this side.
155 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/24/23 1:19:28 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague across the way to tell us more about the Royal Style and Titles Act, which the budget plans to amend. Over the weekend, a survey showed that over 60% of Canadians want to cut ties with the British monarchy. We also saw a news report informing us that the King of England is living in luxury off a tax-exempt fortune of over $3 billion. Meanwhile, here at home, the budget has next to nothing for seniors or housing. Health transfers are practically non-existent, or are whittled down to the bare bones. Can my colleague tell me how to explain to our constituents why the budget is focusing so much attention on the King of England while totally ignoring our problems at home?
132 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border