SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 272

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
January 31, 2024 02:00PM
  • Jan/31/24 2:25:40 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Stephen Harper presented a budget that had slashed funds for policing, slashed funds for CBSA officers and slashed funding for Veterans Affairs services, and we were there to clean up the mess, to cut taxes for the wealthiest 1% and to lower them for the middle class, to support families and to start moving forward on gun control in real ways. While the Conservatives cozy up to the American gun lobbyists, we have continued to step up in keeping Canadians safe. Let him bring assault weapons back to our streets; we will keep Canadians safe.
99 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jan/31/24 2:27:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has trouble believing that we would actually include real facts in our press release, something he and the former Harper government never did, for years. Yes, there is a real challenge with auto theft in this country, and our solution is to roll up our sleeves, pull together partners from across the country and get to solving it. His solution is to throw his hands in the air and blame a raft of political attacks on us. We continue to see that he is not putting forward any real solutions.
97 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jan/31/24 6:51:38 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I have two questions for my colleague and friend. First off, Stephen Harper, in the dismal decade when he was in power, put in place a series of sweetheart tax haven treaties that the Parliamentary Budget Officer says cost us over $30 billion a year. That is $300 billion over the last decade. Are Conservatives prepared now to finally apologize for having gutted the federal budget in that way? My second question is regarding all the votes we saw in December, where Conservatives voted to cut food safety, air safety, health care, affordable housing, national defence and the RCMP. There were 120 votes to slash and gut all the services Canadians depend on. Have Conservatives finally realized it was a mistake to make those proposals and to have those votes to gut all of those important Canadian programs?
140 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jan/31/24 6:53:25 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-56 
Madam Speaker, happy new year. I appreciate the opportunity to rise today and to speak in the House on behalf of the good people of Waterloo to Bill C-56, the affordable housing and groceries act. Since 2015, the federal government's economic plan has invested in the middle class, strengthened Canada's social safety net and worked to build an economy in which everyone has a real and fair chance at success. A key pillar of the government's plan has been a focus on making life more affordable for Canadians, because when people have the support they need to thrive, they can contribute to the economy, build a better life for themselves and their families, and play an active role in their communities. Regardless of what the Conservative Party of Canada members say, our plan is having a positive impact on Canadians. I recognize that when Conservatives speak of Canadians, they speak of the people who are doing well financially and therefore would benefit from their typical non-refundable tax credits. People ask, what does that mean? Conservatives are classic for their gimmicks. The people who benefit from their non-refundable tax credits are often the wealthiest. The most vulnerable do not benefit, and I have dozens of examples in the riding and region of Waterloo. They know that if they are not in the economic situation to be paying additional taxes, they do not benefit from Conservative gimmicks of non-refundable tax credits. I have heard lots of stories and had lots of conversations. People speak about the sports credit and the textbook credit, and the list goes on. They did entertain what Conservatives had to say, and then tax time came and their financial situation did not allow them to benefit. They asked me, what is the difference? I said that the difference is really understanding the way the rules in our tax system work. When the Conservatives speak of non-refundable tax credits, they are speaking about their wealthy friends. They are speaking about the people who would benefit from their financial situation and often not the most vulnerable in our community. Then people refer to the most recent issue that Conservatives are having. We all know Conservatives are riled up about the price on pollution, or the carbon tax, as they call it. The majority of Canadians agree that pollution should not be free, and the reality is that eight out of 10 families benefit from the climate action incentive that the Conservative Party of Canada wants to remove from Canadian purses. The Conservatives continue on about this price on pollution, but they do not talk about the fact that 80% of Canadians, eight out of 10 families, are actually receiving more than they pay. They are concerned about the very people they will continue fighting for day in and day out. When they speak, they relate to the average person. The average person hears them, and they say, “Oh, they are talking to me.” However, we all know that at the end of the day, they are not fighting for that average person. Therefore, let me repeat that 80% of Canadians receive more than they pay, and the wealthiest, who do not benefit, are the ones who would benefit from the Conservative plan on the backs of the most vulnerable. Canadians want to undo the efforts that we have brought forward to make sure that we prioritize the environment, and I believe that the price on pollution is the reason we should continue recognizing the importance of fighting for the environment. The price on pollution is another excuse the Conservatives use as to why they have turned their backs on Ukrainians. Ukraine has had a price on pollution. Ukrainians recognize the importance of fighting for the environment. They know that the environment does not see borders, yet the Conservatives will take any opportunity for partisan gain. When we have a world and a country where there are many people with a diversity of opinions, we need to recognize the importance of why we are here. I think about why I ran in 2015. I ran in 2015 because of the government of the day under the leadership of Stephen Harper. Because I did not vote for his government, I was told that my voice did not matter, and I did not have a say. I remind Conservatives and I remind all Canadians that when people sacrificed their lives and fought for our rights and freedoms, they fought for our rights and freedoms regardless of whether they agreed with us or not. Tough conversations are tough. Governing is tough. Every member of Parliament in this House has a really important role to play, and I recognize the value of it. Listening to people who are like-minded and who agree with us is really simple. Reaching out and listening to opinions and perspectives that do not match our own is tough, and that is something that I will continue to do in the riding of Waterloo. When I ran in 2015, I committed to my constituents that I would represent their voices in Ottawa. I promised them and I reassured them that, regardless of my personal opinion, as their member of Parliament, their voices would be heard in this chamber, and I will continue to ensure that this is the case.
899 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border