SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 212 - Jun/13/23

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Jun/13/23 11:05:46 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the seeds of this housing crisis were started by the Paul Martin government ending the national housing program. That has led to a shortfall every year of 25,000 affordable housing units, and over time we have reached this crisis point across the country, where people simply cannot afford to live. I recognize, as the member has pointed out, that the Conservatives were awful at this. During the Harper regime, we saw the housing crisis double, and we saw no initiatives to actually put affordable housing in place. However, the Liberal government has not moved quickly enough. The NDP has been pushing. There have been announcements about funding, but we are not getting the numbers of affordable housing units built that need to be built to end this crisis. Would the member admit that the government has not proceeded as quickly, on the scale and scope that is required, to meet this housing crisis?

156 words

Context: House Hansard - 212 - Jun/13/23

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Jun/13/23 12:36:03 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I always appreciate hearing my colleague speak. However, as he realizes, the seeds of this housing crisis started with Paul Martin's elimination of a national housing program. The fertilizer was the dismal decade of the Harper regime where there was simply no funding for affordable housing. The government has been pressed by the NDP, by members for Vancouver East and Burnaby South, to build more affordable housing, but it has chosen to prioritize things like a $750-billion liquidity support package for banks, $30 billion going every year to overseas tax havens, and it is a crisis. Would the member admit that the government has to act immediately and has to treat the crisis with the scale and scope required, which means immediate investments to build housing across the country?

133 words

Context: House Hansard - 212 - Jun/13/23

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Jun/13/23 2:16:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, today, the member for Vancouver Kingsway, seconded by the member for Burnaby South, retabled the Canada pharmacare act. Two years ago, I was the sponsor of that bill, and the Conservatives and Liberals shamefully voted against it. Now, under confidence and supply, the Liberals have committed to voting for pharmacare this time. Tommy Douglas always believed in health care that covered people from the top of their heads to the soles of their feet, and Canada remains the only country with universal public health care that does not have universal pharmacare. Pharmacare will save Canadians over $4 billion a year according to the PBO. It will save money for our health care system and it will save money for businesses. Most of all, it will save lives. Hundreds of Canadians die every year because they cannot afford medication that sometimes costs more than $1,000 a month. The NDP will continue to fight until universal pharmacare becomes a reality. Let us get the Canada pharmacare act passed.

169 words

Context: House Hansard - 212 - Jun/13/23

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Jun/13/23 8:41:05 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree. We all agree the interpreters are really the foundation of Parliament, and we have to work harder to ensure they have a safe working environment and that we bring new interpreters along so we can really have them contribute in that most valuable way to the life of our Parliament. We all agree on that. I think where some parties might disagree is that having close proximity to ministers means they are more accountable. I lived through the Harper regime and it was terrible. For nearly a decade, and there were some exceptions like Jim Flaherty, generally speaking there was no accountability by Conservative ministers. We saw that each and every day. They would not answer questions. They would not meet with members of Parliament. That is a red herring raised by the Conservatives. My colleague pointed out that the Bloc Québécois uses the voting app more than any other party. The Conservatives use hybrid Parliament about as much as any other party. The NDP and the Conservatives are equal in that. The Liberals use it a bit more. The reality is Conservatives voted against and tried to block hybrid Parliament during the height of the pandemic. At the end of 2021 and in June of 2022 when COVID was still raging, they voted against it and tried to block it. We needed to use procedural motions to get the hybrid Parliament back in place to protect everybody. Why does my colleague think Conservatives have been so adamantly opposed to a hybrid Parliament but use it so extensively?

267 words

Harper

Context: House Hansard - 212 - Jun/13/23

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Jun/13/23 10:39:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable for his speech. He knows that I really enjoy working with him. However, I must correct certain facts. First, we have been working in hybrid mode for three years. It is not like this just started yesterday. There are still improvements that need to be made for the interpreters, but it does work really well. We know that because the Conservatives use it just as much as the other parties, if not more. Second, we discussed it for a year at the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. When Parliament asked the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to do this work, it carried out a year-long study. There was a great deal of consultation, and the Conservatives know as much about it as the other parties do. Therefore, I am somewhat skeptical about the Conservative Party's statements.

156 words