SoVote

Madam Speaker, I suspect that if you were canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent to call it 6:44 p.m. so we can begin private members' hour.

30 words

Context: House Hansard - 239 - Oct/25/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Oct/25/23 6:50:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak to the motion we have before us. I want to address a couple of the points. I always find it interesting that, when we get into debates on motions or private members' bills, sometimes individuals will read into them things that are not necessarily there from the sponsor's perspective. I have seen that before. When I look at this particular motion, the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells has done a wonderful job in identifying an issue that is very important to many people. Most people would be quite surprised. Some might say that the centre of a runway or the total length of a runway is a bit of a nuance. I was in air traffic control before, posted in Edmonton. It has the longest runway in the Commonwealth. A space shuttle could land on it. I can recall the fire hall's having drills, and I can say that it takes quite a while to get down a 14,000-foot runway. I can understand and appreciate that every second counts. We need to recognize that when members bring forward motions, not very many of them will pass in the life of a session. The member has been inspired to bring this issue forward, and I suspect it might have had something to do with discussions we had about recognizing cancer agents for firefighters. The government was made aware of this in a very real and tangible way by another member of the chamber, the former deputy House leader. By their raising the issue, the public and the House of Commons became more familiar with it and ultimately passed legislation. Today, firefighters from coast to coast to coast have benefited from that. The motion my colleague from British Columbia has brought forward deals with the issue of safety. When we canvass about different professions and ask which ones Canadians really respond positively to, I suggest that firefighters are close to the top of the list. I will not say where politicians are. When I think of the firefighters in the community I represent, Winnipeg North, I have an incredible amount of confidence in people like Alex Forrest and the associations that not only advocate for the safety of their membership but also ensure that Canadians are safe, whether they are in their homes or in international or domestic airports. To be honest, I had no idea that firefighters at airports are not allowed to go into a plane. That surprises me. I think it would surprise a lot of people. The other point that is raised in the motion is that the location of fire halls is also important. If there is a three-minute standard and the location of a fire hall could make the difference, then why would we not give some sort of consideration to that? Across the way, some would ask why the member brought this forward in the form of a motion as opposed to talking to the department. After all, it is a so-called regulation, and the regulation should be changed, as one member across the aisle pointed out. However, the member also indicated that this has been an issue for many years, for decades. Let us not try to make it a political partisan issue. Let us believe that the member has taken an initiative during private members' hour and that he feels that, at the very least, he now has a mandate to be able to bring it to a standing committee. Not only are we having a debate here, but if it passes the chamber, it can also get the standing committee engaged. I think there was one member who spoke, talking about whether the matter should be brought to a standing committee. I love the answer that was provided. We are setting this as the goal, saying that people need to be aware of this. This motion makes us all aware of a very important issue. In terms of how it is actually implemented, the standing committee could assist in that. Members who want to pick up the ball from where the member has brought it to now, to date, could ultimately bring it to a standing committee. The committee could work out the different ways in which it can actually be implemented. If at some point in time, unlike in the last 40 or 50 years, it is determined that this could be done, I think there would be a greater likelihood today that we would actually see the change as a direct result of the initiative from the private member. This is if a standing committee has also taken a look, and, through the standing committee, there have been invites to professionals, whether firefighters or municipalities, to come forward to make presentations. I do not think we should be discouraging private members from identifying issues that are important to them. We should be encouraging it. Through that, we get the type of changes into the future that can really make a difference. I respect that about the member's motion. As I said, as a member of the Canadian Forces, I sat out in a tower. It is no longer there, as this was a few years back. I do not want to date myself, but I can say that one builds up a bit of a relationship and sees the practice that is taken, and justifiably so. Our firefighters take their jobs seriously. They are very quick to respond. There is a standard that we are talking about, in terms of three minutes, and maybe it is time that we try to raise the profile of this issue to a degree where we can see some specific action. That may mean, at the end of the day, that the municipalities and Ottawa need to work together and maybe even bring in the provinces. Our airports are economic engines. They provide so much to our communities, and they need to be safe. That is why, ultimately, when I would see the fire trucks going out onto runway 29-11, back at Lancaster Park, I saw first-hand the types of responses. I must say that they actually did, at least in the military, even more than that, by going out. There are other types of benefits. They are not just direct but also indirect. I hope that members will, in fact, support my colleague's motion with the idea that the issue has now hit a point in time where we will at least have some sort of discussion on how it can actually be done. Then we can work on ways in which we can improve the issue of safety at our airports. I thank the member for bringing the resolution forward.

1139 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 239 - Oct/25/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Oct/25/23 7:09:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think at times Conservatives are challenged when it comes time to look at the reality of what is taking place not only in our communities, but around the world. First and foremost, it is important for us to recognize that Canadians are, in fact, hurting. We are very much concerned about inflation rates, interest rates and the whole issue of affordability. We do not need to be lectured by Conservatives who have the mentality that the way to resolve things is to just cut, aimed recklessly at where it is they would like to take the country and at a huge risk. That is the Conservative way. We have been consistent. Let us compare Canada to any other country. Let us look at the U.S. or the G20 countries, from Germany to France to England, and what they have for interest rates and what is happening with inflation. In comparison, Canada is doing relatively well. That gets completely lost on Conservatives, because they have a specific agenda of trying to say that everything in the country is broken. They are like the Prince of Darkness. They have nothing to say that is positive about the economy, the hundreds of thousands of jobs that have been created and the supports that have been put into place. That does not mean that we do not have to provide additional support. We have legislation before us, which Conservatives continue to filibuster, that is going to put money into the pockets of Canadians and ensure we see thousands more homes being built. I have news for the member opposite and the Conservative Party. No government in the last 50 or 60 years has invested more into housing. Stephen Harper was an absolute failure when it came to investing in housing. One of the reasons we have a shortage today is because of the former government's inability to have affordable housing. It was this government that came up with the housing strategy that ultimately led to millions of dollars of investment into the repair of affordable housing, and thousands of affordable homes. It is this government that has supported things such as infill housing through non-profit agencies and working with provincial entities to ensure that we can improve Canada's housing stock. Compare that to Stephen Harper. Yes, we have seen substantial growth, and growth throughout the pandemic, which had created very difficult times for a lot of people. Let us put it in the proper perspective, in a context that is fair, which is something Conservatives are not. I think $300 million was spent on 99 homes built. The reality is Conservatives were missing in action when it came to the issue of affordability in housing. There is no doubt they did not believe there was a federal role, that the national government should play a strong leadership role. That is the absolute opposite of us. When it comes time to deal with things such as interest rates and the issue of inflation, the member's leader said that he would fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. Now he is glorifying him and putting him on a pedestal when a number of months ago he said he would fire him. Those are the flip-flop policies we cannot count on. It is risky to go with Conservatives. I can say that much.

566 words

Context: House Hansard - 239 - Oct/25/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Oct/25/23 7:14:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the slogans and the bumper stickers will do well under the Conservatives, leading up from now until whenever the next campaign is going to be. The Conservatives are more concerned about character assassination. They are more concerned about saying how broken Canada is and about getting as many people as possible worked with anxiety. They are not interested in resolving issues, because when it comes time for them to actually step up to the plate and put money in the pockets of Canadians, they choose to play games and filibuster. That is the reality. All we have to do is take a look at what the members have actually done. One can take a look at the affordability legislation and moving motions of adjournment and concurrence motions. There is not enough time for me to explain to the member how much of a game this is for the Conservative Party. We take it seriously.

156 words

Context: House Hansard - 239 - Oct/25/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Oct/25/23 7:19:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member is talking about a very important issue, and there is no doubt about that. I am very sympathetic to the farmer, and also very understanding of the Conservative Party's positioning on the issue of the price on pollution, or carbon tax, whatever one wants to call it. When it comes to farmers, I do believe there have been some healthy discussions with different ministers, in particular the Minister of Agriculture, who has been following this issue very closely. We want to ensure, as much as possible, we are helping farmers. At times I too get frustrated. I remember when I was in opposition and there were huge ships out in the Pacific Ocean that were not able to come in and pick up the wheat piles all over the Prairies. The wheat, in many cases, was getting wet, and there were serious issues back then. The member would know, if he recalls, at the time there was that issue along with the one of the Canadian wheat board. I bring this up because I do very much follow agriculture and the importance of food supply. Canada plays a critical role in this whole area. I would like to think, given the number of stakeholders out there, that they will continue to work with not only the federal government but provincial jurisdictions, and to a certain degree the many municipalities. We need to ensure farmers are supported in a very real and tangible way. However, then the member brings in the issue of the carbon tax. As the member is very much aware, it is very much an issue of contention in Ottawa nowadays. The Conservative Party says it will get rid of the carbon tax, or the price on pollution, and its members have made that commitment. If by chance, whether it is in two years, four years, six years or eight years, they ever get the opportunity to govern, I suspect there is a very good chance that commitment will happen. I say that tongue in cheek to a certain degree because in the last campaign, they actually campaigned in favour of a price on pollution. When it was in the election platform, did they exempt the farmer? If not, why did they not do that? I would be very much interested in knowing if the member is aware of that. Having said that, I realize there has been a change, but it is an important point. It demonstrates consistency of party policy. The member knows full well the government's position on the price on pollution and the carbon tax. We will continue to provide rebates. We should continue to have dialogue with farmers and see how the government can continue to work with the agricultural community to ensure it is able to continue to grow and prosper. The agricultural community as a whole is one of the greatest environmentalists in the nation. On many of the techniques and ways it cultivates land, we lead the world. We also lead the world in many different ways when it comes to the environment.

519 words

Context: House Hansard - 239 - Oct/25/23

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Oct/25/23 7:25:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the manner in which the member is presenting the case. In the agricultural sector, there are many strong advocacy groups and farmer personalities. They are always very happy, I have found in the past, to share their opinions. Many of us recognize that we need to do more for the environment. When we are doing that, there is no intention to devastate an industry. The diversification of crops benefits not only the farmer but also all the communities in many different ways. We could talk about what we see on the food table for Canadian products and of the overall future through diversification. I love the amount of diversity we have witnessed. Being from a Prairie province, I think of strawberries from Portage la Prairie, which irrigation plays a role in. The member made reference to potatoes. Manitoba grows a lot of potatoes, too, and irrigation is important. I am sympathetic to what the member is saying, and I am going to have—

168 words