44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 4, 2023 02:00PM
- Oct/4/23 6:35:15 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the follow-up from my colleague. I am capable of coming into the House and having an honest and open conversation without accusing my colleague of being shameful or anything like that. I hope we can carry on forthwith in that regard.
I thank my colleague again for voicing the concerns of farmers, who are crucial, as I mentioned in my answer back then. I also live in a rural riding. I talk to farmers regularly. They feed our cities. They boost our economy and they create jobs. I enjoy going to the farmers market on Saturdays and eating the fresh produce they produce. Canada's agriculture sector is a pillar of rural communities like Dufferin—Caledon and Milton. It is a vital part of our economy, and the food supplied to urban centres comes from there. Our economy greatly benefits from this sector, and it is crucial that we do more to support our farmers.
The real reason we are here is that my colleague is really proud of a Facebook post that he put up, where he accused me of giving up. I just want to make it clear that I am not giving up on fighting climate change or on countering misinformation in this place. I was forced to sit down halfway through my response to his question that day in question period, because the Conservatives were making so much noise heckling me that the Speaker stood up and told me to sit back down, so I did. I am not going to give up. I will follow instructions from the Speaker, but I will always stand up for truth and for science, and I will continue to fight climate change.
I will also say that all members of the House ran in the last election on a commitment to price carbon. The member has a short memory if he does not recall on what basis he was asking his constituents to send him to Ottawa. Erin O'Toole ran on a commitment to price carbon. That is why many members of Dufferin—Caledon's community voted for that member, because he claimed to care about climate change, as farmers in our region do.
I am not willing to give up fighting climate change just because there are countries with larger carbon footprints. Indeed, that is not how to measure a carbon footprint. We can measure them per capita, and Canadians have an extraordinarily high per capita carbon footprint. We need to do more to lower those emissions and that reliance on fossil fuels. That is one of the reasons why we have a carbon price in Canada, because a carbon price is a proven methodology, a market-based instrument. It is actually a very conservative methodology to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and drive innovation in the energy sector.
With respect to the member's accusation that I do not know my facts, many farm fuels are exempt. I am well aware of the recent bill's efforts to change some of the regulations around propane and natural gas for grain drying, but I am not here to say I know more about this than other people, certainly not more than farmers, who are the experts in their operations. I am happy to see that the bill has the support it requires to go forward. Nonetheless, my family are apple farmers, and the fuel on that farm is exempt from the price on carbon, as are many other products that farmers use to produce food.
That also leads me to my next point of what is driving inflation and higher costs at the grocery stores. It is mostly climate change. This is not a refutable concept. When we talk to farmers, they talk about how all the rain they expect over a month or even a season sometimes now falls over a 24-hour period, and then it does not rain at all for two months. We also have fruit- and vegetable-producing regions that have suffered wildfires.
The member opposite is being very disingenuous when he suggests that the minister has stood up to suggest that a carbon price is going to eliminate natural disasters. That is absolutely not what the minister said, and that is not what any person has said with respect to why a carbon price is important. A carbon price will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, demonstrating that we can build our economy forward in a green and sustainable manner. It is disingenuous for the member to suggest that a carbon price is just going to end floods, fires and extreme weather.
We rely on science on this side of the House, and I hope the member will come on board as well.
800 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 6:40:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we do not need to go back and forth in arguing what our opinions are on this matter; there are actual economists in this country who are measuring these things. The member can go consult that data on how the carbon price impacts food inflation and the cost of groceries. The reality is that it is climate change that is driving food inflation. Any farmer will tell us that climate change is having an impact on their productions.
I did look at the member's Facebook when I was tagged in the post where he accused me of giving up. I once again want to say that I am not giving up on fighting climate change and I am not giving up on standing up for science, facts and evidence, but I am also kind of concerned, because throughout the thread a lot of the people who were commenting on that Facebook post by the member for Dufferin—Caledon were saying that climate change is a hoax and that it is not true. One person said they were a farmer and climate change is not real.
It is that kind of misinformation that we need to stand up against, and it is that member who is allowing it to occur on his social media. He is encouraging it by liking those posts and promoting those posts. That is shameful, and the member ought to apologize.
238 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 6:46:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is nice to be in the House tonight to talk to my friend and colleague from Kitchener Centre. It is my pleasure to rise today to speak to the importance of democratic reform in Canada.
The Government of Canada is committed to strengthening Canada's democratic institutions.
Our electoral system, the fundamental rules determining how votes are translated into seats in the House of Commons, is one of the most foundational pieces of our democracy and it is also one of the strongest in the world. Among many things, it provides Canadians with a direct connection to their member of Parliament, who must work with every one of their constituents to develop national policy and make political decisions while engaging and remaining accountable back home in an increasingly digitally connected Canada.
Our current first-past-the-post system is not perfect. Certainly, no system is, but it has served Canada well for over 150 years and continues to advance the democratic values that Canadians want reflected in their system of government. It includes strong, local representation, stability and accountability.
How Canadians vote and how we govern ourselves are fundamentally important and they impact us all. Given this, this government's view has been very clear. Any major reforms to the electoral system should not be imposed on Canadians but, rather, they would require the broad support of Canadians. That is hard to achieve because, as the member stated, only 17% of Ontarians actually voted in favour of the premier. I think that was the number that he provided. It is tough to get people to the polls.
We all have that challenge every election. What we do during the period of an election is go out to our supporters and make sure that they vote. Voter turnout is actually pretty low. It is higher for federal elections than it is for other levels of government. In Canada, it can be challenging to get people to engage. That apathy is something that we all have to challenge a little bit.
As the member stated, I am a signatory to the idea of having a national assembly on democratic reform, to pursue some type of better representation. I am also fairly of the opinion, personally, that it should not include more unelected people, more people who do not know exactly who their representative is.
I think it is very relevant to my community that they know exactly how to find me. Just before I was here, I was in my office over at the Valour building and a member of my community reached out over Facebook Messenger and I just gave them a call. We chatted for 20 minutes. He knows exactly who his member of Parliament is and that is very important to the integrity of our electoral system. I can be accountable, I can be reassuring and I can make sure that his voice is heard in here.
However, some systems of proportional representation would have members of the House who do not directly have a constituency, as members of the Senate do. I have concerns about the lack of accountability. My concerns extend to both a future potential unelected House of Commons as well as, quite frankly, an unelected other place.
Given this and all of these things, our government has been very clear that we are not of the view that a new system ought to be imposed on people. After the 2015 election, our government consulted very broadly with Canadians. Many members of this chamber held town halls in their own riding on this topic and we heard a myriad of ideas and concerns, which is important throughout that engagement. However, no clear preference or consensus emerged.
Therefore, the government decided not to proceed at that time. I think that is where the utility of a citizens assembly could be really effective. I had a great conversation recently with Fair Vote Canada. I am supportive of the notion of Canadians coming together to talk about how our electoral process and system of governing could be enhanced.
682 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 6:50:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think most members of the House of Commons have their own strong views on this. This really comes down to how we arrive in our current place of work. Every community is very different. I think of, given the diversity of Canada's landscape, how different a riding like Kitchener Centre is from the the Assistant Deputy Speaker's riding on Manitoulin Island, a place that I love to visit, which I did not make it to this summer but I hope to next year. Those two ridings are really different. The systems by which one does one's work in those two communities are very different.
To answer the question clearly, how am I going to encourage more discussion? I am going to stay open and honest on the subject. I am going to meet with my constituents and talk to my colleagues here in the House of Commons about how we can create a more robust democratic institution here in Canada.
166 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 6:55:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my colleague. This crisis is having a tragic and unrelenting toll on Canadians, their families and communities.
There are four pillars, recognized internationally, that are necessary for a successful substance use strategy, and they are irrefutable. These pillars are well-established in the medical community. I am not a doctor. The member is not a doctor. We ought to listen to science and experts when it comes to something so critical as protecting the lives of our most vulnerable community members. The four pillars are prevention, harm reduction, treatment and enforcement.
Our government is committed to a comprehensive approach that implements policies and supports in all four of these essential areas. To address this public health crisis, we have to use all the tools we have, including innovative approaches, such as granting the province of British Columbia an exemption under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. That is a democratic approach.
B.C. asked for the three-year, time-limited exemption, which began January 2023. We take the safety of all Canadians seriously, and that is why, from the beginning, we have approached this from both a public health and a public safety perspective. This exemption will be continuously monitored, assessed and adjusted if needed. B.C. requested this exemption because of the stigma that criminalization produces.
Criminalization kills people. People are dying because they fear the repercussions of asking for help. The fact is that people who use substances need support, not judgment. They need community, not isolation. They need empathy and understanding, not stigma.
Local governments do have tools and bylaws they can use to amend and address any unintended consequences or concerns that their communities are experiencing. Local governments know their communities, their needs and what works best for them. Addressing the ongoing public health crisis while maintaining the safety of all Canadians is essential.
To ensure the safety of children and youth in B.C., this exemption does not apply on elementary and secondary school premises, nor licensed child care facilities, on playgrounds, at spray pools, at wading pools or at skate parks. We need to be careful of the potential for recriminalizing personal possession among some of the most vulnerable people who use drugs in our communities.
We are committed to continuing our work with British Columbia to find solutions, but to find solutions, we must first understand the many different factors that drive substance use. That must include addressing mental health. Prevention, treatment and harm-reduction measures all have a role to play, as do actions that reduce stigma and provide continued access to health and social supports for individuals.
Let me quote the Vancouver police department, which said, “Police can now focus on those doing the most harm in this crisis — persons and organized crime groups who import, manufacture and distribute these toxic substances.” They are not aware of any incidents in Vancouver in which safe supply has been trafficked to youth, a response that is contrary to the assertion made by the Leader of the Opposition in a much maligned video, which was, frankly, disgusting. There are media reports that have made it into the House of Commons that are further stigmatizing individuals and communities.
I want to know if the member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon would commit to something tonight. The Fraser House Society in his riding is receiving federal funding to create podcasts for men in the trades to provide tools and information on pain, trauma and substance use, while enhancing awareness, decreasing stigma and encouraging shared lived experiences.
Is the member ready to commit to publicly meeting with those individuals? They have answers, insight and perspective that may help the member further understand the very complex nature of the illness that is addiction. I have met with survivors of addiction, with people who have recovered from addiction and people who require this help, and he should too.
661 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/4/23 7:00:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is categorically false that the government has not supported recovery options. That is absolutely not the case.
Harm reduction services are a vital part of a comprehensive, compassionate and collaborative public health approach to problematic substance use, which includes prevention, enforcement, treatment and additional social and health supports.
I appreciate the invitation from my colleague, but, tragically, Milton and the GTA are also experiencing an opioid crisis. However, there is harm reduction that occurs in my riding. I have met with pharmacists who assist people living with addiction to get the services and the treatment they require so that they can continue their lives and their journey toward a drug-free life.
There are a lot of people in the Lower Mainland whom I would encourage my colleague to meet with. Furthering the stigma attached to people who use substances is not a solution to saving their lives.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
