44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 10, 2024 02:00PM
- Apr/10/24 2:27:10 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, wages are growing faster than inflation. Under the Conservatives, poverty was at 14.5%. When we replaced the Conservatives, we brought it down to 7.4%. We will continue to invest in Canadians with the supports for affordable housing, for renters and for early learning and child care, and because of our work, we will make life fairer for Canadians, unlike the Conservative leader, who is here for himself.
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/10/24 2:30:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the time is always right to talk about the impact of federal investment for Quebeckers.
Let us start with child care services. A $6-billion investment over four years is helping give families, and women in particular, 35,000 new child care spaces. Naturally, this is helping boost family income and reduce poverty, while contributing to gender equality and childhood development—without interfering in anyone’s jurisdictions.
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/10/24 2:56:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is quite right to talk about the cost of living and the high cost of living for middle-class and lower-income families.
What is surprising, however, is that the Conservatives oppose the Canada child benefit, which reduces child poverty by 50% every month. They oppose dental care for children, and now for seniors. They are against investing in child care, which, in Quebec, has proven so important for gender equality and poverty reduction.
Now they seem to oppose investments in housing, despite the fact that their Conservative leader was the minister a few years ago—although he was not very good at housing then, either.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/10/24 2:57:24 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my colleague that in his own riding, some 12,000 families receive the Canada child benefit on the 20th of each month, which is one week from now. That is about $500 a month tax free per family. This reduces child poverty in his riding by 50%.
Unfortunately, one of the first things the Conservatives did in 2016 was vote against the Canada child benefit, which helps thousands and thousands of families and children in his own riding.
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/10/24 6:18:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am glad that for the first time, and for as long as I have been paying attention to federal politics, Conservatives are talking about poverty elimination. It is good that we are actually looking at strategies to help people with their bills.
While the member was talking, I went on the Food Banks Canada website. They have provided an Alberta checkpoint. It is like a report card, which they have provided, with policy recommendations, a whole bunch of rankings and letter grades for various things. I read all of the policy recommendations.
I have met with Food Banks Canada. I meet with all of the poverty elimination and food security experts across the country on a frequent basis because poverty elimination is a top concern for my government, our government and for me personally. I grew up in community housing, and I believe that poverty is something that we can tackle together.
None of the policy recommendations from the Alberta report card on the Food Banks Canada website mention the price on pollution. It does not mention the carbon tax because pollution pricing does not contribute to the financial difficulties that Canadians are experiencing.
That is something that has been repeated over and over again by over 200 economists in Canada. They wrote a letter, which basically called out Conservative misinformation and the criticisms that the party has put forth over the last two years, since the member for Carleton has been the leader of the Conservative Party.
I have said this a number of times in the House. All of those Conservative members ran on a price on pollution that was very similar to ours, except instead of getting rebates, such as the Canada carbon rebate, it would have been deposited into some type of loyalty account that they could use to spend on specific items. A lot of people called the proposal, “the more you burn, the more you earn”. It was widely refuted by environmental organizations and groups as a half measure in lowering our emissions.
The price on pollution sends money back to eight out of 10 Canadian families, and that includes Albertans. The report card on poverty reduction from Food Banks Canada, specifically under its Alberta section, lists all of the things that the Alberta government could be doing. It calls out, as a contributing factor, the Alberta government for changing the previous NDP policy on the Alberta child benefit. The Alberta government has not adequately kept up with inflation with respect to minimum wage. It has not built any affordable housing. The report card makes some very good recommendations on things such as better basic income programs, similar to the Canada child benefit, which we modernized and made tax-free.
We are continually being told by the Conservatives, as the only party in the House of Commons saying this, that the price on pollution in Canada is what is causing the financial difficulties Canadians are facing. This is absolutely false. It is not true. These Conservatives can repeat their slogans all they want. When hundreds of Canadian Ph.D.s and economists write a letter to say that it is nonsense, that it is garbage and they should stop saying it because it is untrue, I wish the Conservatives would take heed.
Now, it is important to recognize why the Conservatives are on this campaign. It is clear now. It is actually a cover-up campaign. It is because the Premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, on April 1 increased the price of gas in the province of Alberta by 4¢. This is the exact same day that the price on pollution went up a little bit, and the Canada carbon rebate went up to accommodate that. She increased it by more than the price on pollution.
It seems that the Conservative members, particularly those from Alberta, would like to cover that up and hide it from public knowledge. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation called them out and said that, if they are going to throw stones, to get out of their glass house. The Conservatives from Saskatchewan are in the exact same situation. Both of those premiers have done nothing for affordability in those provinces.
706 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/10/24 6:23:27 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, once again I want to stress that pricing pollution does not cause financial stress. In fact, the Canada carbon rebate sends more money back, particularly to those families who are experiencing food insecurity and poverty.
However, since the member opposite wanted to use food banks as an example, I would like to read the policy recommendations for Alberta food banks from Food Banks Canada.
Under recommendations on “Accountability”, it reads:
Introduce a provincial poverty reduction strategy
While Alberta made significant headway in the reduction of child poverty between 2015 and 2020...thanks to...the federal Canada Child Benefit, the lack of a comprehensive plan with clear goals and indicators stymies the ability of government and stakeholders to work together with a common vision.
The second section is “Affordable Housing”. Despite what the member opposite just said, housing is expensive in Alberta. The report goes on to say, “Dedicate 0.5% of the provincial budget every year to affordable rental housing construction”. This is something they have not done.
The next section is “Adequate Income Support”, or decent work that pays. They are asking the provincial government in Alberta to help more. Alberta's premier, Danielle Smith, could start by stopping the price hike on gas that she did on April 1, which was more than the price on pollution.
229 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
