SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 305 - Apr/30/24

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

Apr/30/24 3:51:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, earlier today we witnessed a very embarrassing question period. The Conservative Party literally walked out. The Conservatives are very sensitive on the issue of Diagonal, a very far-right group, extreme right. There are all sorts of concerns in regard to it. The leader of the Conservative Party refuses to disassociate himself from that organization. This is the same far extreme right that talks about cuts and is very anti-government. I am wondering if the member across the way would like to put some distance between her and that association of the leader of the Conservative Party.

100 words

Diagonal

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Apr/30/24 3:52:07 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would be loath to claim that the member was intentionally misleading the House. However, in the interest of informing him, I wonder if I could seek the unanimous consent of the House to table a statement made by the Leader of the Opposition, specifically, in extremely strong terms, denouncing the very organization that the member mentioned. Do I have unanimous consent to table that statement?

75 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/30/24 3:52:31 p.m.
Watch

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. Some hon. members: Nay.

19 words

Nay
Opposed

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Apr/30/24 3:52:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, on the same point of order, I would ask for unanimous consent to table an editorial, in which the leader of the Conservative Party is advised that he should “steer clear of far-right extremists”. It says, “[The leader of the Conservative Party] did tell the group of protesters to 'keep—

57 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/30/24 3:53:04 p.m.
Watch

We are not going to start a debate on the issue. It has absolutely nothing to do with the affairs of government.

22 words

Mr. Taylor Bachrach

Apr/30/24 3:53:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, also on the same point of order, because we are talking about clarity, I believe the parliamentary secretary referred to an incorrect name for the organization in question. He called it “Diagonal”. Just so that we are all on the side of the angles, I want to make sure—

54 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Apr/30/24 3:53:41 p.m.
Watch

We are not going to start that debate. It has nothing to do with the business of government. The hon. member for Kelowna—Lake Country.

26 words

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Apr/30/24 3:53:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, thank you for clarifying that we are here to talk about the business of government and budget 2024. It has been such a balm of the government. It has had photo ops all across the country, but it has been an absolute failure. The government thought that rolling out the budget in advance, piece by piece, would have a huge uptake in the love of the budget, and that is absolutely not what has happened. We are debating the budget here today. I spoke quite a bit about all of the issues that have been created by deficit spending, and it is not working. Nine years of deficit spending is not working, and it is crushing Canadians' bank accounts.

121 words

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

Apr/30/24 3:54:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in this budget, we see a lot of interference in the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. Take, for example, pharmacare and dental insurance. Quebec already has such programs, but the government refuses to provide the right to compensation. What does my colleague think about that?

49 words

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Apr/30/24 3:55:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what is really interesting is that the Liberal government seems to feel that, if it takes something over, it will be more cost-effective and more efficient, there will be less red tape and it will run better. In fact, it is the exact opposite. We have seen that with everything it touches, whether it is internal services or the programs it creates. I really do not have confidence at all in the government taking on programs. We see, even within government departments, how they are not even meeting their own service standards internally. A lot of the programs they have taken on have not worked and have failed in many ways. Whatever Liberals touch they seem to break.

121 words

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Apr/30/24 3:55:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member for Kelowna—Lake Country made some really important remarks to the minister at the human resources committee yesterday, pointing out the extent to which folks with disabilities are living in legislated poverty. I appreciate that she made those comments. If there is a Conservative government one day in the future and the Canada disability benefit was in place at a level that would lift folks with disabilities out of poverty, in that situation, is that a benefit that would remain in place over time?

89 words

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Apr/30/24 3:56:24 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-22

Madam Speaker, the hon. member was at committee yesterday and asked some really good questions of the government and asked for documents. I look forward to those documents coming to the committee. Conservatives on this side supported the disability benefit from the very beginning. We did not do anything to withhold the legislation. In fact, we did as much as we could to expedite it when it was debated at committee. It was Bill C-22 and we supported it right from the very beginning.

85 words

Mr. Martin Shields (Bow River, CPC)

Apr/30/24 3:57:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I know in my colleague's riding she meets with many people, small businesses owners and people in smaller communities. I assume that she spoke to a lot of people, as I did, this past week. I heard nothing but negative comments about this budget, not one positive thing. Is that similar to the responses the member heard?

60 words

Mrs. Tracy Gray

Apr/30/24 3:57:25 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, absolutely, I talk to small business owners from my community and across Canada all the time. In particular, when I was home last weekend, it was the number one topic that I heard. Many business owners, especially in the tourism and hospitality sector, have not gone back to their prepandemic levels. Many of them incurred a lot of debt during that time and are still not able to pay it off. They are seeing just a continual increase in costs. They have the carbon tax, which is increasing the cost of everything that is transported. I am in a region where we have wineries and breweries. The excise tax is affecting them. Payroll taxes went up. Overall, it is not a good-news story.

126 words

Mr. Ben Lobb (Huron—Bruce, CPC)

Apr/30/24 3:58:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to echo the question that the member from Calgary just asked about being in the riding. I was not in his riding; I was in my own. However, in all the years I have been involved in politics, I think I have never had such an outpouring of negative commentary about the current state of affairs and the current government. Likely, if they were in their riding last week, all 338 MPs heard the same thing. This budget is called “Fairness for Every Generation”, and I would argue that it has been many generations since life has felt this unfair, if members hear what I am saying. I would think the reason is that every age group has been negatively impacted by the current government over the last nine years. Seniors who retired within the last 10 years, who had saved money, who had paid off their home and who figured their money would last them until they no longer needed it, are now in peril. That is now, for the first time, a question mark. Will they have enough to retire? Maybe a place where they are paying rent, if they sold their home and moved into an apartment or wherever they chose to live, was $1,200 or $1,500 a month. In my area, for example, it is over $2,000 a month now. A number of different components of high government spending have negatively impacted seniors. For families, whether it is a couple looking to have kids or a couple who has kids, whatever the kids' ages are, there are unbelievable skyrocketing costs. For people driving their kids back and forth to hockey, baseball, soccer or whatever they are doing, it is monumental how much things cost now. High government spending, out-of-control deficits, out-of-control debt and increasing interest rates have led to probably the most unfair period of time, at least in my lifetime and likely beyond that. Back in 2015, this is what former prime minister Stephen Harper wrote about what the Liberals would do: “Permanent deficits, higher taxes, and more debt, as proposed by the Liberals and the NDP, will wreck our economy, cost you money and possibly your job.” Can members imagine? He said that over nine years ago. He predicted this. He knew what the Prime Minister and his staff behind him, pushing all the buttons, would do. They were going to spend, spend, spend and destroy 20 years' worth of fiscal stewardship that would have led Canada to be among the elite in the world. That is what Stephen Harper said in 2015. He also said that “imposing carbon [tax] schemes” would “[drive] up the price of everything Canadian families buy—including gasoline, groceries, and home heating fuel. It is easy for us to be the Monday-morning quarterback now and say “of course this is what has happened”, but this is what Stephen Harper said nine years ago. He knew all this was going to happen. It was very obvious. The Liberals have done that. They have increased costs. I was at an annual general meeting earlier in the year, and the president and general manager of the co-op was commenting on the price of fuel, because the co-op sells fuel. It also sells propane to people who heat their homes with propane and to farmers as well. The general manager looks at the bills to see how bad they are. He was not making a political statement because I was there; he does not owe me anything. All he said was that, from his perspective, the single biggest and kindest thing the government could do for families in Huron—Bruce and across the country would be to get rid of the carbon tax and come right off it. However, the Liberals continue to pile-drive on Canadian families and price people right out of homes. In fact, Liberal members of Parliament are getting up and giving speeches admitting that constituents in their riding who would have been able to afford homes 15 years ago cannot afford homes now. They are living in basements. One Liberal member of Parliament said as much. I would also like to go back in time to when Jim Flaherty was the finance minister. He was probably amongst the best finance ministers of all time, if not the best. When he would deliver his budget, it was called an economic action plan. It was a plan to boost productivity, make economic gain, keep an eye on the government's finances, look at trade deals and grow the wealth of all Canadians. We have all heard the story about the high tide that lifts all boats and makes everybody do better. That is really what a Jim Flaherty budget was about. We are so far from that today. If we go back in time to when Jim Flaherty was the finance minister, a young couple could buy a home. They could afford the down payment. They could see the day down the road when they could likely retire. Their parents, who were in their fifties at the time, could also see the day they could retire. That is now all up in smoke because of nine years of high-flying spending. Pretty well everybody in here knows this by now, I would imagine, but we might as well review. When the Liberals were elected and were brought in, there was a balanced budget. There was a modest surplus after the great economic downturn of 2007, 2008 and 2009. There was approximately $600 billion in government debt. Today, the gross debt of this country is perilously close to $2 trillion. That is unbelievable. It is a blemish that will be on the government's legacy for all time. There is a deficit of $47 billion, which will go up between now and the end of the fiscal year for sure. With respect to the debt-to-GDP ratio, in 2015, it was 31% and was coming down. It was 32% or 33% the year before, and it went down to 31%. Now our debt-to-GDP ratio, according to the numbers, is 42%. It is not quite a 50% disaster, but it is definitely going in the wrong direction. I know the finance minister always says that when we compare it to the other G7 countries, we look great. If we are comparing ourselves to the worst managers of finance, maybe we do look good, I do not know, but I would not compare myself to the United States fiscally. I would not compare Canada's finances to those of Japan. Its finances are toast. It is manipulating its currency and interest rates. The United States has $34 trillion in debt. When Bill Clinton left office 20-something years ago, it was at $7 trillion and it was on its way to paying off all the debt. That is gone. It is adding a trillion dollars of debt every quarter. That is called a debt, or death, spiral. This is a perilous time. The finance minister should not say that we look great compared with the other G7 countries, because we should be comparing ourselves to what it looked like eight or nine years ago and be ashamed of our fiscal record. That is what she should look at. It is kind of like one's golf game. We do not compare it to our buddies' games, but to our own. Another thing we have heard about is the AAA credit rating. RBC just said that Canada's AAA rating is in trouble because of the spending; it can be downgraded. B.C. has been downgraded three times in three years and now sits at an AA-. The last point I will make before I turn it over is that we are entering into a period of what I call the trifecta of trouble because of this. We have backed ourselves into a corner with inflation, interest rates, mortgage rates and the Canadian dollar. If we have to raise rates because inflation is a little sticky, then the interest rates are going up, which will further compress the housing problem, as well as the Canadian dollar. Maybe in questions and answers, we can look into that further. I appreciate the time and look forward to questions.

1411 words

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

Apr/30/24 4:08:30 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Madam Speaker, I have a really specific question. The hon. member for Huron—Bruce is the sponsor of a private member's bill, Bill C-234, which is extremely important for Canadian farmers across the country. I applaud him for bringing it forward. I voted for it here in the House and will be supporting the bill when it comes to a vote unamended. The member and I would perhaps take a different view on how the government has approached the issue, but we hear a lot about Bill C-234 in the House from the Conservatives asking the government whether it would support the bill. The government has been very clear that it would take a different approach, but the Conservatives have an opportunity to actually get relief for farmers by letting that vote come to the House and happen. There is a parliamentary majority. The Bloc has signalled that it would support the Senate amendments. Can the hon. member tell us when we might expect Bill C-234 to come to a vote, if the member for Carleton will let him, so we can get relief for our farmers, including in Kings—Hants?

197 words

Mr. Ben Lobb

Apr/30/24 4:09:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member for Kings—Hants and I have had some collegial discussions over the last couple of years. There was a unanimous consent motion to pass this bill at all stages. That was rejected by the Liberals. I understand the whole UC motion thing, but at the same time, this bill will be coming up for debate at the end of May, and that will be the true test. We will hear from the member for Kings—Hants at that time on what he and his Liberal colleagues will do. I will also say that the farmers will be in the fields at that point in time. In my area, most of the corn will be planted and the soybeans will likely be starting to grow in the south. Farmers are going to want to see results. They will want to see what the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois do on this bill. Is it going to be amended or in its original form? If members are truly for farmers, they will make this vote on the original bill, because farmers need the relief.

192 words

Ms. Sylvie Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, BQ)

Apr/30/24 4:10:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we agree that the government does little in its budget for families, housing, seniors and health care. If the Conservatives were in power, would they agree to give Quebec the right to opt out with full compensation and no strings attached from any federal program that falls under the constitutional jurisdiction of the provinces?

57 words

Mr. Ben Lobb

Apr/30/24 4:11:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would argue that, when the Conservatives were in government, Stephen Harper was the prime minister and Jim Flaherty was the finance minister, we were probably the most respectful of all the levels of provincial jurisdiction. We were so effective, we almost made the Bloc Québécois extinct. I remember that. It was almost wiped out. Why? It is because the residents of Quebec knew they had a prime minister and a finance minister that respected the Constitution and the areas of provincial jurisdiction. There were no problems. There were no issues in Quebec the entire time Stephen Harper was prime minister.

107 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Apr/30/24 4:11:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I find it to be an interesting comment that there were absolutely no problems, when, in fact, the Harper government was plagued with problems. Specifically on budgetary policy, the member continued to comment about how amazing Harper's government was in terms of financial management. However, Harper ran a reported five straight budgetary deficits. What does he have to say about that? I would really love to hear.

70 words