44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 25, 2023 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague pointed out that taxpayers will be paying about $50 more into the EI system.
Personally, I do not mind paying more to help others when it fulfills a need. However, I see two problems when people are paying more but the system does not work and has yet to be improved, despite the promises made. Even now, only 40% of people who lose their jobs qualify for EI.
Could my colleague talk about this sort of dichotomy that exists when contributions increase but services do not?
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, members of the official opposition party have repeatedly mentioned the deficits being racked up by the government. They have also mentioned the Parliamentary Budget Officer's reports.
However, they are overlooking some information, including information from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. I would mention the tens of billions of dollars in funding announcements that remains unspent. In 2021-22, this added up to $38 billion, and it was roughly the same amount last year. I would also mention the fiscal imbalance that is keeping funds in government coffers. This money comes from taxes paid by taxpayers. The situation has now reached a point where, in a matter of decades, the federal government will have settled all its debts stretching back to 1867, while the provinces and Quebec will be on the verge of technical bankruptcy, or will have lost much of their budgetary autonomy.
Is my colleague not outraged about this situation, this budgetary and financial hypocrisy, and the damage to the public and workers?
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party's role is to exaggerate the benefits of its budget to draw attention away from the things it is hiding and the major oversights. The role of the opposition parties is to cut through the Liberals' rhetoric.
It is all well and good for the Liberals to use “investing in people” as their slogan while completely forgetting about seniors, unemployed workers and unionized workers who are the victims of replacement workers. What a slap in the face from this party that taunts the opposition party about cryptocurrency while giving GST exemptions to those who mine cryptocurrency.
Will we get some consistency and respect for the Constitution in this budget at some point? That would be a welcome change.
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the government's slogan is “investing in people”. The mammoth budget bill contains a clause recognizing King Charles III as Canada's head of state.
Given that 56% of Canadians and 70% of Quebeckers are in favour of abolishing the monarchy, I am wondering how much it is costing or will cost to recognize that in the budget and what that has to do with the needs of Quebeckers and Canadians.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, if a country fails to preserve its food security and to value and support the people who make that food security possible, then no one will. At the end of the day, that country is only hurting itself.
We need farmers three times a day. Can my colleague offer one or two solutions for alleviating the burden on our farmers, including when it comes to the fertilizer they ordered before the war between Russia and Ukraine and have paid dearly for?
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, this budget is interesting in some respects. On the environment, however, I think my colleague and I agree. There are serious shortcomings.
Let us talk about one of the investments being made, specifically in carbon capture facilities, which are currently not at all efficient. They send more GHGs into the atmosphere than they are able to capture.
I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the effectiveness of these facilities and what other means could be used, such as tree planting and plant filtration, to address these challenges.
92 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to a bill that is nothing less than miraculous, because it resurrects the woolly mammoth. This is not about an elephant, but about a woolly mammoth.
Like the mammoth, Bill C-47 is gigantic. Like the woolly mammoth, whose wool hides the dust, pollen and flowers to the great pleasure of scientists, Bill C‑47 hides many surprises within its lines, and they are not the best surprises.
There are a few interesting measures, especially for tourism. However, a few of these measures have serious flaws that create some unfairness. Exceptionally, I am going to let the government boast about what its budget accomplishes. I am going to focus my speech on the major omissions.
The list of the omissions is quite long. There are no new investments in housing—even though it is more than just necessary, it is urgent. There is no increase to old age security for seniors aged 65 to 74. There is complete silence on the tax injustice affecting surviving spouses whose children receive an orphan benefit. There is nothing about improving the EI program. There is nothing about implementing anti-scab legislation. There is nothing about health transfers to make up for the federal disinvestment over the last 30 years, despite Quebec and the Canadian provinces having made that demand.
Certain elements are included in the budget, but good luck combing through the mammoth's wool to figure out who they will really impact or benefit. For example, I am thinking about greenwashing, the fiscal imbalance and the confirmation of King Charles III as Canada's head of state.
I will focus on only some of the points. Each of the points I will raise has a connection to the slogan “Investing in People”.
Very few people know about the reality I am about to describe, but it is heartbreaking. When a couple has children and one of the spouses unfortunately dies, the surviving spouse loses not only a life partner, but also the father or mother of the children and the person who helped financially. There were two people paying the bills, and now there is only one. What few people know is that the orphan's benefit that the children receive, if any, is considered income. If they are minors, this income is added to the surviving spouse's income. Thus, the surviving parent has to pay more taxes and receive fewer benefits because the government considers that the income of the orphans should be taxed to the surviving parents, which puts these people in a more financially difficult situation than they were already facing.
This is an injustice that has been known for years, and yet no federal government, Liberal or Conservative, has provided a concrete solution. The Liberal slogan about investing in people seems to imply, in this case, that the government has figured out how to take more money from people who are already in one of the most difficult situations life can throw at them.
Speaking of difficult situations, let us talk about lockouts imposed on workers by certain employers. This is the case for longshoremen at the Quebec City port. For the past six months, in Quebec City, longshoremen see scabs pass under their noses and do their jobs in their stead. It is frustrating and appalling for these workers for different reasons.
First, in Quebec, legislation prohibiting the use of scabs by companies dates back to 1977, the year of my birth. That was 46 years ago. We say that Quebec is visionary, progressive and ahead of Canada in many respects and our anti-scab legislation is one such example.
Currently, two bills have been tabled and we are waiting for them to be added to the agenda. The first was introduced by my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville and the second by the member from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, who will have to make a choice sooner or later between all the bills he has introduced, since he will only be able to debate one of them.
Despite repeated requests from unions and workers, the government is not budging. There is nothing in the budget to address this, not even cross-country consultations to ensure that everyone agrees. There is nothing.
What does this mean for the people of Beauport—Limoilou, for those who live in proximity to ports in Quebec and Canada and what does this have to do with the budget?
It is important to note that the scabs do not have the same training as the longshoremen. Because they do not have the appropriate training, they are sometimes putting their lives at risk. There are more dangers to their health and safety but also to the health and safety of the other port employees. Does someone need to die crushed between the dock and a boat before the government will take action?
That does not make any sense. We need to recognize our longshoremen's expertise. The fact that these scabs do not have the same training increases the risk of handling errors. Such errors could lead to the release of volatile products, such as nickel or the red dust that made the headlines for years in Beauport—Limoilou, during transhipment.
In short, the environment and air quality are at risk in this situation because the federal government is 46 years behind the Quebec government in banning companies from using scabs. We have a government that claims to be proactive on environmental issues and to be investing in people, but the reality is that it is doing nothing on either of those fronts. Once again, the Liberals' slogan of “investing in people” actually seems to mean that the government is refusing to invest in workers and their rights or in environmental protection for the people in my riding.
I want to come back to the mammoth I mentioned at the beginning of my speech. I was saying that there were things hidden in its wool, and one of them is the fiscal imbalance. The government has announced a $41‑billion deficit, but what it is not saying is that it is making big announcements without being able to spend the money it announces. As a result, $38 billion went unspent in 2020‑21, and roughly the same amount went unspent in 2021‑22. These two amounts combined not only erase the current deficit, but result in a surplus of tens of billions of dollars.
Some will say that is good news, but it is not, because while the government is squirrelling away taxpayers' money into its coffers, taxpayers are not receiving the services they are entitled to. Seniors 65 to 74 are not seeing their pension go up so that they can afford decent housing, food, drugs and so on. Keeping these tens of billions of dollars in the coffers is preventing desperately needed social housing from being built. Keeping these tens of billions of dollars in the coffers is preventing Quebec and the Canadian provinces from getting the health transfers they have been calling for for decades.
This is what we call the fiscal imbalance. The federal government fills up its coffers with tax money from Quebeckers and Canadians, yet services that fall under Quebec and provincial jurisdiction suffer because their taxpayers' money is not being handed over. This imbalance is so great that Canada will have paid off all of the debt it has accumulated since 1867 in less than 30 years, while most Canadian provinces will be unable to balance their budgets. Canadian federalism is cannibalizing the very foundation of the country created in 1867.
In this case, the Liberal slogan “investing in people” actually seems to mean that the government is forgetting about workers who lose their jobs, seniors, people who need decent, affordable housing, and people who need health care.
Speaking of the Constitution, the mammoth budget bill is hiding something else under its woolly coat. It confirms that Charles III, King of England, is the head of state of Canada. There was not a word about that in the speech. Have the Liberals considered the fact that 56% want to abolish the monarchy? No, they have not. Is this what they mean by meeting needs and investing in people? I am not sure.
This budget will not go down in history as being the most effective for the people, particularly the people of Quebec. This budget once again opens the door for the federal government to interfere in areas that are not under its jurisdiction, while failing to properly look after those areas that are. It is like a neighbour who comes over to tell me how to clean my house, but who suffers from a compulsive hoarding disorder.
To sum up, there is an elephant behind this mammoth budget. The elephant in the room is that only Quebec independence will allow Quebeckers to manage their own taxes in order to truly meet their needs.
1520 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I have been in the House since 2019. Since then, we have been saying that we will work together and collaborate on anything that is good for Quebec. If it is not good, it is not good; we will improve it, if possible.
That said, there is another mammoth in the room for workers. It is a blue whale. It is EI reform, which we are still waiting on, even though the program is over 50 years old.
82 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, for years we have known that the first nations housing situation is extremely difficult and that nothing is being done. Almost nothing is being done about clean drinking water. In northern Quebec and Canada, the permafrost is melting, but nothing is being done to stop homes from sinking into the ground, although we know how to prevent this. The saddest thing is that first nations cannot even decide to build their own homes. The Indian Act requires that they receive authorization from the patriarchal federal government.
There are some things that must be changed in the budget concerning the consideration that first nations and Inuit people deserve.
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, people in Quebec pay taxes just like those in the rest of Canada do. They also pay for the Canada pension plan. Why is that considered a debt? That is an excellent question, because the money adds up.
As I was saying in my speech, there is a difference of tens of billions of dollars between the announcements that are made and the money that is actually spent. It all adds up. In less than 30 years, the fiscal imbalance will have cannibalized the budgets of the provinces, especially that of Quebec, but also those of the nine others, while Canada will have paid off all of the debts it has accumulated since 1867. That is rather outrageous.
Everyone should be aware of that, and something should be done about it.
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, a bill has already been introduced by the Bloc Québécois. My colleague will have to make a choice, since there are two bills on this subject. That said, I have a single phrase to offer, and it is in English, unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately for my colleagues: follow the money.
57 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/23 10:23:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the situation in Sudan is certainly of great concern. What adds to the concern is that, right now, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Safety and Security needs additional funds precisely so he can help people not only in Sudan, but in other parts of the world as well.
A decade or so ago, there were about 15 countries that were problematic and where the situation was dangerous for the people. Now there are approximately 40. However, so far, Canada has been mum about supporting the Secretary General's actions around the world, and that is making the situation worse in Sudan in particular.
Does my colleague have a comment on that?
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/23 11:57:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her passionate and rousing speech.
She spoke about the supports that Canada must provide to regain its former standing on the international scene. It so happens that Gilles Michaud, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Safety and Security, asked Canada a few months ago to support his work, the work of the UN, to ensure the security of the most fragile populations on the planet by providing $10 million and thus setting an example for other countries.
Does my colleague agree that this vital funding must be provided to support Mr. Michaud and his team in their humanitarian efforts to keep people safe, particularly in Sudan? In other words, did Canada simply decide to stay at the back of the pack rather than leading the way?
135 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
