SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 304 - Apr/29/24

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Apr/29/24 12:53:22 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member speak a lot about the lack of details within the budget. She spoke about wanting more clarity on what some of these pieces within the budget would mean. One of the things I know about the member is that she believes quite strongly in the need for action on the climate crisis, but we did not see very much in the budget on this; it was not a big priority in the budget. All things considered, when we have one party that, for all intents and purposes, denies climate change exists, and we have another party that is not making any gains in terms of decarbonizing our economy, I wonder if she has some comments on things she would have liked to see within this budget to deal with the current climate crisis we are in.

143 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud

Apr/29/24 12:54:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the opportunity to speak on this. Normally, I like to deconstruct the budget from the standpoint of the fight against climate change. Now I am doing so based on my region. What I notice is that, indeed, there is not much in this budget for the fight against climate change. The government prefers to invest in nuclear energy and to continue offering subsidies to the oil and gas industry, which is raking in billions of dollars in profit every year. It is extremely disappointing to see what the budget has allotted for the fight against climate change.

104 words

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Apr/29/24 12:54:55 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, if we had to define this budget, if we had to characterize it, I think it could be best described as a budget of interference. However, before getting into that, I would like to return to what happened before the budget. It was unheard of. Like me, my colleagues are discerning analysts of federal politics. None of us had ever seen such a series of pre-budget announcements. At the end of this unveiling, or striptease if I may be so bold, of the various government measures, the emperor was left without any clothes. We did not even need a lock-up. We already knew what was in the budget. Why did the government do this? If we take a closer look, its motivations are fairly obvious. These are electoral motivations. Like all the other parties, the Liberal Party is watching the polls. They took the pulse of the electorate. Clearly, things have not been going too well for the Liberals for quite some time, so they put out a budget designed to boost their standing in the polls. That in a nutshell is what this budget is about. This is an election budget, that much can be said. It can also be described as a budget of interference. In reality, I see in this budget a degree of continuity when it comes to the structural problems with Canada's federation. I say that because the reality of this budget is typical of what is not working in the Canadian federation. It comes down to two fairly simple things, which stand out even more in the current context. First, there is the fiscal imbalance and jurisdictional encroachment. Second, there is Ottawa's inability to propose an economic system that does not rely on fossil fuels. That is what we have seen in this budget. These are consistent trends in Canadian politics: On the one hand, Ottawa acts in areas of provincial jurisdiction, and on the other, it does everything it can to support oil and gas. That leaves me with serious doubts about the alternative available in Canada. What is the alternative? Right now, it is the Conservatives. When I look at the Conservatives over the past year or two, what I see are people parroting often empty slogans. I could mention what the Leader of the Opposition says when he talks about the budget. He says he wants to “fix the budget”. I do not even know that he means by that. Is he going to take a pickaxe and a hammer to it? We do not know. He says he wants to fix the budget. He says he wants to stop the crime. Those are empty slogans. What are the Conservatives' proposals for getting us back to a balanced budget? It is just another sales pitch, just more prattle. Their dollar-for-dollar policy is just political prattle. It sounds like a McDonald's ad: This week, Big Macs are a dollar. It sounds like a McDonald's commercial. It has no real substance. When I take a closer look, it is quite clear that the Liberals and the Conservatives have similar instincts. The leader of the Conservative Party often says that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. The Prime Minister responds by saying that his government will be there for Canadians. I have even heard him say they would be there to be there. These empty phrases get tossed around during question period. One side says the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. The other replies that they will be there to be there. Who loses in all of this? Canadians lose. This can be seen in the recent budget. I would like to come back to the fiscal imbalance and the subject of jurisdictions. When I look at the budget, it feels like Groundhog Day. A wide-ranging inquiry was conducted in Quebec in 2002 by the Yves Séguin commission. As everyone knows, Yves Séguin is not a sovereignist. His goal was not to hassle the federal government, far from it. He wanted to explore how Quebec could keep its public finances healthy within the context of the Canadian federation. In 2002, Yves Séguin launched this commission on the fiscal imbalance and came to one glaring conclusion, specifically that the Canadian federation is dysfunctional because the federal government has much greater fiscal capacity than the provinces and yet spends less money. Why is that? It is because Ottawa is not responsible for social services, which cost a little more. That is what we learned from Yves Séguin. That was recently reaffirmed by the late Benoît Pelletier, a federalist, before his passing. He denounced the federal government's many encroachments on jurisdictions that were none of its business. We saw that again in the budget. We saw it encroaching and wielding its spending power left and right. When I think about this, what immediately springs to mind is Jean Chrétien. Toward the end of his political life, he had an unguarded moment. He revealed a political strategy used by the Canadian federation that was common knowledge. He said he could reduce health transfer payments without ever paying the political price because the public, the voters, would think that the Government of Quebec and the provincial governments were responsible for the cuts to health care. It was Jean Chrétien himself who said that. That statement beautifully explained what the fiscal imbalance is. Well, today we are seeing something similar. The federal government is trying to do the same thing, to follow Jean Chrétien's logic but in reverse. When asked by pollsters what their main priorities are, Quebeckers will immediately respond health and education. These are always at the top of Quebeckers' list of priorities. The Prime Minister decided that, if he wanted to be in step with Quebeckers' priorities, he would have to try to get involved in health and education. At the very least, he would have to try to get involved in social matters, hence the dental care and pharmacare programs, which are no doubt the product of the Liberals' marriage of convenience to the NDP. With these two measures, the federal government is trying to run roughshod over provincial jurisdictions. The budget even interferes directly, with amounts for long-term care, along with dental care and pharmacare, of course. The federal government has absolutely no jurisdiction over those things, and it is repeatedly interfering in provincial jurisdictions. I would remind members that, initially, the provinces were calling on the federal government to provide $28 billion to increase health transfers from 22% to 35%. By 2040, the federal government's share will be down to a measly 20%. It does not stop there. The federal government is interfering in education, too. I saw two sections. The first is entitled “After-School Learning”. As far as I know, the federal government does not run any school boards. The second is entitled “Coding Skills for Kids ”. That is bordering on meddling. However, what is most surprising is the government's take on one of the other major issues of our time: global warming. The federal government had pledged to end fossil fuel subsidies in 2023. According to what I see in front of me today, it is going to put into service a pipeline that cost us $34 billion when it was originally supposed to cost us $7 billion. The budget talks about myths like low-carbon oil. It talks about carbon capture strategies, which received massive amounts in previous budgets. While the government says it will cap emissions by 2026, Alberta is breaking records. Almost four million barrels of oil a day are flowing out of Alberta. Clearly, the polluter pays principle does not apply in Canada. In 2023, fossil fuel subsidies amounted to $18 billion. We are talking about $65 billion over the past four years. At the same time, investments in clean energy have dwindled to a trickle. I will finish my speech with the cherry on the sundae. The only worthwhile tax credit was the 15% that could have been given for clean energy. However, that was not enough for the government. It said that if it provided the tax credit, it would have to have a hand in setting rates. In Quebec, Hydro-Québec's rates are set by a board. Quebec politicians do not meddle in Hydro-Québec's rate setting. It is governed by a law. However, the federal government says that, if we want the 15% tax credit, then it will decide how much to charge for electricity. In conclusion, this budget is all about interference and continued reliance on fossil fuels.

1480 words

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

Apr/29/24 1:04:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, one of the announcements I am very proud of is that the federal government has recognized the importance of not having children in schools who are learning on empty stomachs. We came up with a national food program, which is going to help an estimated 400,000 children. The Bloc does not like it because it says it is not our jurisdiction. I would counter by saying that a caring national government should be concerned about the children in our schools. If we are in a position to be able to assist children and have them learn on fuller stomachs, we should be doing that. Would the member acknowledge, at the very least, that the national government does play a role? Not all jurisdictions in Canada may have the same attitude in terms of providing full stomachs to kids going to school.

144 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Apr/29/24 1:05:51 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would simply point out to my colleague from Winnipeg North that we do not need the federal government to take care of children in schools. Rather, it is the federal government that needs Quebec. It copied the Quebec government's child care program. It is trying to copy the Quebec government's family-related policies. It is interfering in jurisdictions in which Quebec is already quite comfortable and has the expertise. Those folks over there who have no expertise in education want to impose conditions on people who do have expertise for them to be able to access funding. It makes absolutely no sense. All Ottawa has to do is transfer the money to Quebec. People have the skills and expertise to ensure that funding goes where it is needed and improves everyone's life. This is already the case in Quebec, where family coverage is among the best in the world. We will take no lessons from the Liberals. These proposals have been made for purely electoral reasons, and they should admit that.

177 words

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

Apr/29/24 1:06:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, spending on machinery and equipment by businesses in Canada, and on research, development and innovation, has been falling as a share of GDP in Canada for many decades, in fact dating back to the large corporate tax cuts that Paul Martin introduced at the turn of the century. To compare us to the United States, in 2014, investment support per worker in the U.S. was $20,700, and it was $14,400 in Canada. In 2023, the U.S. spending per worker rose to $27,800, and it is only $14,500 in this country. It has gone up $100 in about 10 years. I am wondering whether my hon. colleague would agree with me and the NDP that we need to find ways to have the business sector in this country invest more in machinery and equipment and in technology and innovation, and whether he has any ideas to share with the House as to how we could do that to better support workers and, by doing so, improve Canada's economy.

176 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Apr/29/24 1:07:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the first thing we can do is try to diversify our economy, certainly. Today, there are massive investments of public money in something that is doomed to fail, namely carbon capture and storage strategies and efforts to try to make oil cleaner in order to increase production. In the meantime, we are not taking the same direction as the United States with its Inflation Reduction Act. We are not investing in clean technologies and we are not supporting the sectors of the future that are promising and, I must point out, are located mainly in Quebec.

98 words

Mr. Mario Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ)

Apr/29/24 1:08:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague from Jonquière on his excellent speech. There is a lot of talk about interference. We know that there are new pharmacare and dental insurance programs that already exist in Quebec. There is a considerable overlap and the Liberals refuse to give a right to compensation. Could the member elaborate on that?

59 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Apr/29/24 1:09:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that compensation is essential. The Government of Quebec is asking for $2.9 billion. This does not appear in the budget. In my introduction, I talked about the fiscal imbalance. Well, that is what is going to happen. The federal government generates and creates expectations. Then, it withdraws from programs. It is the Government of Quebec that is obligated to meet these imperatives. This puts pressure on Quebec. The federal government never pays the political price. It is groundhog day.

83 words

Hon. Joyce Murray (Vancouver Quadra, Lib.)

Apr/29/24 1:09:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for St. Catharines. I will take this opportunity to highlight some of the transformative measures in our recent 2024 budget. A fair chance to build a good middle-class life, to do as well as your parents or better, has always been the promise of Canada. Today, for too many younger Canadians, that promise is not being fulfilled. Millennials and gen Z Canadians have so much talent and potential, and they need to see and feel that our country can work for them and that the promise of Canada can still be reached. We know that Canada's success depends in large part on creating opportunities for each generation. Budget 2024 will make strategic investments that will create opportunities for workers today, driving productivity and economic growth for generations to come. We are giving our children the best start in life. We know that we have to start early when it comes to preparing our children to succeed. That is why, for example, budget 2024 commits to powerful investments such as $1 billion over five years for the new national school food program, which is expected to provide meals for more than 400,000 children every year. The budget would also strengthen the affordable Canada-wide early learning and child care system, which is helping young parents, many of them millennials, to pursue their careers thanks to significantly lower fees. Budget 2024 would improve access by providing $1 billion in low-cost loans and $60 million in non-repayable grants to help build additional affordable child care spaces. The budget would also offer student loan forgiveness for early childhood educators who work in rural and remote areas. With regard to coding skills for kids, starting in the early years, budget 2024 would help prime our children for success in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The budget is committing $39.2 million over two years to advance the next phase of CanCode, a federal program that, since its launch, has helped over 4.5 million students from kindergarten through grade 12 to develop coding and digital skills. CanCode is helping young people unlock future opportunities in the increasingly digital global economy. Next is increasing students grants and loans. There is even more, including support for young Canadians who are pursuing their career dreams. Budget 2024 will restore generational fairness by facilitating access to post-secondary education, investing in the skills of tomorrow and creating new opportunities for young Canadians. Since 2016, the federal government has supported an average of 638,000 post-secondary students per year with $38.4 billion in up-front grants and interest-free loans, making it possible for young Canadians to continue their education, regardless of their origins. This is real progress, and budget 2024 promises even more. The budget proposes to extend for an additional year the increase in full-time Canada student grants from $3,000 to $4,200 a year and interest-free Canada student loans from $210 to $300 per week, an estimated total investment of $1.1 billion in 2024-25. With this change, Canada student grants will have doubled in size since 2014. These are powerful steps that would empower so many young Canadians. Then there is investing in homegrown research talent. Canada's post-doctoral students and researchers are addressing some of the biggest global challenges. The solutions that they are proposing have the potential to make the world a better place and enhance Canada's prosperity. They represent the academic and scientific excellence of tomorrow in Canada. They will create new innovative businesses, develop new ways of increasing productivity and create jobs as they grow their businesses, if they get the support they need. To foster the next generation of research talent, budget 2024 proposes to provide $825 million over five years starting in 2024-25, with $199.8 million a year ongoing to increase the annual value of master's and doctoral student scholarships to $27,000 and $40,000 respectively, and post-doctoral fellowships to $70,000. This would address a real barrier. There are jobs and skills training for gen Z. Gen Z is a diverse group, from those starting to think about their future career years now to those just starting their first full-time jobs. Budget 2024 commits to investing $351.2 million to create 90,000 youth job placements and employment support opportunities. These investments include $200.5 million to create well-paying summer job opportunities through the Canada summer jobs program and $150.7 million to provide job placements and employment supports through the youth employment and skills strategy. The budget would empower young entrepreneurs. Budget 2024 does even more to create a bright future for Canadian youth. To empower young entrepreneurs, budget 2024 commits to investing $60 million over five years in Futurpreneur Canada, a national non-profit organization that provides young entrepreneurs with access to financing, mentorship and other business supports to help them launch and grow their businesses. Futurpreneur will match this federal investment with funding from other levels of government and private sector partners. This will have a significant impact. By 2029, Futurpreneur estimates that this investment will enable 6,250 additional youth-owned businesses to launch and scale up. We are also launching a new mental health fund. Budget 2024 also aims to improve the well-being of young Canadians to ensure that they have what they need for a happy, healthy start to their adult lives. Young Canadians face high levels of stress and mental health challenges, including depression and anxiety. Many of them are still in school or just starting their careers and are struggling with the costs of private mental health care. To help younger Canadians access the mental health care they need, budget 2024 proposes $500 million over five years to create a new youth mental health fund. The actions I have just described are only some of budget 2024's bold measures to help younger Canadians achieve their dreams. We are building an economy where every Canadian can reach their full potential, where every entrepreneur has the tools they need to grow their business and where hard work pays off. With budget 2024, we will give young Canadians the opportunity to excel in an ever-changing economy. In everything we do, we strive to keep the promise of Canada within the reach of our younger generations because that is what they have earned and that is what they deserve. That is what parents and grandparents want for young people, too. As the member of Parliament who has the good fortune of representing the University of British Columbia, I have been hearing about these challenges, but also the appreciation of the support that students have been receiving from our government over the past number of years.

1147 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Apr/29/24 1:19:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the young people my colleague mentions, gen Z, millennials and so many Canadians are facing a double crisis: the crisis of affordability but also the crisis that climate change presents. These two crises together present an immense mental health challenge, and $500 million just will not go far enough. We need to see action in the face of a devastating future wildfire season. My home province of Alberta has seen young people suffocating. When I went to visit schools, kids told me they were scared because they could not see the sun. Why is it that the government continues to invest in the production of resource companies that are flagrantly disregarding the catastrophe that the climate crisis presents? This disconnect scares young people. What message does the member have for young people to show that the government takes climate action seriously?

143 words

Hon. Joyce Murray

Apr/29/24 1:20:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of our government in 2015, we have been very clear that the climate crisis is a priority. We have taken an enormous amount of action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, with a comprehensive plan that covers all sectors of society and with tools like putting a price on carbon, which ends up creating benefits for individuals when they receive a rebate in their bank account, while incentivizing the reduction in the use of climate gas-producing products like gasoline. We are on track to meeting our goals and objectives, and in fact we are seen globally as a leader on the issue of climate gas reduction. An example is our powering past coal initiative, which has led the international community and supports other countries in moving past the use of coal-fired electricity. We are doing the work we need to do. I appreciate all of the support from various members of Parliament for action to address the climate challenge.

165 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais

Apr/29/24 1:22:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, one item that young people have been calling my office about, and that I have heard about across the country, is in relation to this affordability and climate crisis. They presented a solution, which is the youth climate corps. It would put into action the very real intent of young people to contribute to our country, to contribute to solving the challenges of the climate crisis, and to live a life that is not just fulfilling in that the next generation can actually achieve what they would like the next generation to see, which is clean water, good environment and good air, but that would also ensure that we have real jobs and tangible opportunity for young people to get paid for the good service they do. It is unfortunate that the government was not able to fully fund this program and is only going to be launching consultations, something that I think we just have no time for. We are in a climate crisis. Can the member commit, as a member of the government, to ensuring that the Minister of Environment, the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister commit to a dedicated program for a youth climate corps that puts young people in control of their future?

211 words

Hon. Joyce Murray

Apr/29/24 1:23:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think that the youth climate corps is an excellent initiative. We know that if we, as a government, launch complex new initiatives without fully involving those who will be affected by them, there can be unintended negative consequences or the initiative may not achieve all that is possible to achieve. Launching consultations is a critical part of the process, and I am proud that we are doing that. We are committed to hearing from young people as to how this might work for them and what they would be working on, as well as consulting with industry and first nations. All of that is very important, and I cheer that we are engaging in consultation on a climate corps.

122 words

Mr. Chris Bittle (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.)

Apr/29/24 1:24:30 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to be here today to talk about the budget, called “Fairness for Every Generation”. A fair chance to build a good middle-class life and to do as well as one's parents, or better, has always been the promise of Canada. Unfortunately, today for too many younger Canadians a fair chance to build a good middle-class life feels out of reach. That is something I hear about, not just from young people, but from their parents and grandparents. I would like to focus on one of the issues I hear about most, not only in my role as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing, but as the member of Parliament for St. Catharines. That is housing. When I was speaking to a housing advocate some months ago, he said that the one piece of good news about solving the housing crisis is that, overall, there is one simple solution, unlike many of the crises we face in the country, and that is to build more homes. How we get there is a bit more complicated, but the government has put forward a comprehensive plan. One of the first things that caught the attention of a lot of my constituents, especially those who are members of a previous generation, is the housing catalogue. We do not need to reinvent the wheel. Solutions can exist that existed in the past. This is not the first time, as the minister has stated, that we have faced a housing crisis. We faced one after the Second World War, with soldiers returning and wanting to have houses of their own, and part of the solution was a housing catalogue. Just as I go through St. Catharines, I am sure that many of the members here go through their communities as well and can still see those wartime houses that were in a catalogue, which people could just build based on the catalogue that existed. It used the building code to have series of pre-approved houses to shorten the window that it takes to get a house approved and built. This would not just be the strawberry-box houses that we have seen in the past. This would be higher-density, up to quadruplex, and we would see the opportunity of solving the housing crisis that Canadians had when they returned from war. Because we have done it before, we can do it again. Another item that has been very successful across the country is the housing accelerator fund. We see the Government of Canada working with municipalities that have a bold plan to build more housing. I know the department received a lot of applications on the file, and we entered into agreements with those municipalities that had solid plans. The City of St. Catharines was one of them, and one of the things I am most excited about is its municipal land development corporation. It might be a bit of a wonky notion, but what better place than the House of Commons to talk about something like that? The City of St. Catharines had no mechanism to help build housing. Surplus land would just be sold to the highest bidder. When I drive through St. Catharines, I see many parcels that have been sold off and are vacant, such as the two old hospital sites. Acres and acres of residential land that is primed for use sits there empty, the city passing up an opportunity to bid on it. What this new municipal housing corporation would do, funded through the housing accelerator fund, is allow the City of St. Catharines to use those lands, land being one of the biggest costs in developing new housing, to build affordable housing and help sustain the corporation to go forth, get new land and keep building. Profit is not necessarily the motivating factor; it is about getting as many houses built at below-market price as possible, and this municipal housing corporation would really give the City of St. Catharines an opportunity to do that. We have seen those items across Canada, whether it is permitting issues, these types of corporations or investments by municipalities. There has been significant success in moving the needle and taking that next step forward, and I was happy to see in the budget further funding for the housing accelerator fund. One thing we know we have to do is to make the math work on building new housing. We know the significant costs of land and the increased costs across the supply chain. That is why we have taken steps to reduce or to remove the GST on purpose-built rentals. That is why the budget is committed to low-interest loans. The government cannot do this on its own. We need the private sector. We need to move the cost of building down further to get these buildings built. Looking to my own community, the City of St. Catharines and St. Catharines city council are eager to approve housing, eager to approve higher-density housing, and there are thousands of units of approved housing waiting to be built, but the math does not work. We need to do what we can at all levels of government. We are going to work through the budget again on low-interest financing by removing the GST. Another item is a $6-billion infrastructure fund because housing cannot just be created on its own. We expect that when we turn on a faucet, water will come out, and we expect it to be clean. One thing I hear from municipal officials across the country is that there is a desperate need for more housing-based infrastructure. We cannot build more housing if we do not have the supply of that infrastructure, which is usually water and waste water, and also roads, to get that housing built. In the Niagara region again, there is so much land that cannot be developed at the moment. That region is waiting for the expansion of a water treatment facility. I have heard about this for a long time, as a member of Parliament, since I took this job, about the need to expand that water treatment facility. It is a priority for me, as I know it is a priority for the residents of Niagara. A water treatment plant in the Niagara region may not seem to be the most exciting issue, but I can see the member for Niagara Falls looking over at me with excitement. Perhaps we are the only two individuals in this place who are excited about it, but this is an opportunity to unlock a lot of housing. It is an opportunity to take pressure off the water system in St. Catharines, and it is an opportunity to develop the lands in Fort Erie and in Niagara Falls, where they are ready to build more housing. Part of this infrastructure fund is to enter into agreements with the provinces. The federal government can only do so much. Many of the most significant levers at play for building more housing are at the municipal and the provincial levels. We are ready to step up and work with provinces. We have done it in the past. We have done it with the Province of Quebec. I hope the Province of Ontario, my home province, steps up. I know the premier and the minister of housing for the Province of Ontario understand that there is a housing crisis and that more work needs to be done. However, we need them to come to the table in the way that the Government of Quebec did, which matched federal funding when we entered into a deal, with respect to housing. I hope we see that same level of commitment because I do want to move forward on issues like that water treatment facility, not just in Niagara but also with all the mayors and the council members I have talked to while working on this particular portfolio of housing and infrastructure. This is a crisis that can be solved, but it will take all levels of government working together. We have shown that we are willing to work with municipalities. We have shown that we can work with the provinces. I just hope we can move the needle forward to work with them all, to get more housing built and to solve this housing crisis. We have a plan.

1412 words

Ms. Louise Chabot (Thérèse-De Blainville, BQ)

Apr/29/24 1:34:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member why his government is not honouring its commitment to support the unemployed with the EI reform it promised for the summer of 2022. It is 2024. The government is turning its back on workers. Why will the government not initiate this much-needed reform immediately?

54 words

Mr. Chris Bittle

Apr/29/24 1:35:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is an important thing. I hear from many of my colleagues as well, and it is an important issue for the government. However, I take issue with the fact that the hon. member says that we do not stand up for workers. This has been a very pro-worker, pro-labour government. There is the anti-scab legislation that the hon. member mentioned. After a decade of watching the previous government watch manufacturing disappear across Ontario, we are seeing a resurgence, not only in Ontario but also across the country, with respect to manufacturing jobs, good-paying jobs that will stay here and that will not be exported. This is a pro-worker government. Obviously, more work needs to be done. I look forward to working across the aisle to see that happen.

136 words

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

Apr/29/24 1:36:11 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague talked about the provisions in this budget that would allocate billions of dollars for housing. I think that is an excellent initiative in this budget. I think we all know, across the country, that we are facing what can only be described as a housing crisis. The generation coming up has never before faced such a difficult time finding an affordable place to rent or to own. We have to get money to pay for it, if the federal government is going to be at the table as a partner. In 2022, the government put in a 15% surtax on bank profits over a billion dollars, yet in 2022, the oil and gas industry made record profits of $63 billion. Never before in the history of Canada has it made more money. Why has the government not considered bringing in, at least temporarily, a 15% surtax on excess profits over a billion dollars for the oil and gas industry and using that money to help build houses for Canadians who need them?

177 words

Mr. Chris Bittle

Apr/29/24 1:37:11 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am not opposed to what the member is suggesting, but I think it highlights a point; the oil and gas sector is creating record profits, and it is not passing that down to Canadians. That goes into the myth of what the Conservative Party says, which is that despite the fact that eight out of 10 Canadians get more money back in their bank accounts, based on a carbon rebate, Conservatives want to end that and want to put the money back into oil and gas companies, which we will not see the benefit from. It is a good example of where the Conservative Party stands. I think the hon. member raises a good point, but the Conservative Party, unfortunately, is just in the pocket of oil and gas.

132 words

Profits

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

Apr/29/24 1:38:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to give the hon. member a chance to expand on the whole issue of the housing accelerator fund. The average person might be forgiven for playing along with the question that was asked regarding how many houses this would build. The housing minister said that it would build none. People would ask what that is all about. With regard to the housing accelerator fund, what is it all about?

73 words