44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 9, 2024 10:00AM
- May/9/24 2:18:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal leadership race is under way. Front-runner Mark Carney is first out of the gate.
He was in the Senate confirming and pledging that he would maintain the Prime Minister's punishing carbon tax. When asked about fiscal responsibility, there are no policies that he is going to change. Mark Carney will continue the Liberal legacy of higher taxes, more spending and poorer Canadians.
Canadians just do not need another random Liberal making life more expensive. Whether it is carbon tax Carney or the current Prime Minister, Canadians continue to suffer.
The more these Liberals spend, the worse things get. In contrast, common-sense Conservatives will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Let us bring it home.
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 6:51:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are a number of pieces of misinformation included in my colleague's question.
First, I do not know if he appreciates this, but this is actually a minority Parliament and he seems to have described it differently.
Second, the member talks about the investments that we have been making, which are helping communities across Canada, as a negative thing. The reality is that, if he wants to examine the fiscal position of the Government of Canada, he will see that the federal government actually has the healthiest balance sheet in the G7. He will see that we are the third-largest economy in the world that maintains a AAA credit rating, and Moody's recently demonstrated that we have a stable outlook, stronger than the United States. The International Monetary Fund is projecting Canada to be the fastest growing economy in the G7, and we continue to see, time after time, compared to other advanced economies in the world, that Canada is among the healthiest, or the healthiest, when it comes to the fiscal projections for the Government of Canada.
It is essential that we continue to move forward with a downward trending debt-to-GDP ratio, and we have seen the impact of the responsible fiscal management with the rate of inflation coming down now to within the target range, despite the extraordinary headwinds we have faced as a global economy. Canada is leading the charge when it comes to fiscal responsibility and economic growth projections.
250 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, last November, the government introduced Bill C-59, the fall economic statement implementation act. Among other measures, Bill C-59 proposed significant amendments to our Competition Act.
I am proud to share that the Standing Committee on Finance has recently completed its review of the bill and has made several amendments to further strengthen existing proposals. Before I get into some of the key details of this critical piece of legislation, I feel it is important to highlight the economic context in which this legislation is being introduced.
Countries around the world are dealing with higher inflation due to a global pandemic, further exacerbated by geopolitical uncertainty. Despite the fearmongering of the Conservative members opposite, Canada's economy is remarkably strong and resilient. That is truly due to the hard work of Canadians themselves. A few proof points demonstrate this: Canada's net debt-to-GDP ratio is well below that of our G7 peers; our deficit is declining; and we are one of the only two G7 countries with an AAA credit rating from independent experts. Something that we can all be quite proud of is that Canada received the highest per capita foreign direct investment in the G7 in the first three quarters of 2023. Some may ask why those facts matter. These proof points show that Canada is in an enviable position when it comes to fiscal management. That position is exactly the reason our government can afford to make transformative investments in improving housing affordability and making life cost less.
Unlike Conservatives, who cut support for Canadians, we believe in supporting the middle class through growth and investment. I hear from my constituents often that their top concerns are being able to find an affordable place to live and wanting to find ways to make their day-to-day expenses cost less. This legislation addresses these two core issues head on.
For many years, Canada's markets have been described as overly concentrated and not competitive enough. In fact, a landmark Competition Bureau study last year, based on Statistics Canada data and analysis from a University of Toronto professor, made critical findings in this respect, showing that competitive intensity has been on the decline over the past two decades, reflected in a number of important indicators.
Bill C-59 was introduced to help build a stronger domestic economy through more competition and contestable markets, to bring lower prices, more choice and better product quality for consumers across all sectors. The measures in this bill include strengthening provisions with respect to merger review, enhancing protections for consumers, workers and the environment, and broadening opportunities for private enforcement.
We should not underestimate just how critical these reforms are for modernizing our law and promoting competitive markets. The Commissioner of Competition has stated on multiple occasions that the amendments in Bill C‑56, the affordable housing and groceries act, which was ultimately passed by this Parliament in December 2023, and Bill C-59, are generational. I would therefore like to highlight some important reforms that have been proposed.
To begin with, anti-competitive collaborations between competitors will be under increased scrutiny, as the bureau will be able to examine and, if necessary, seek penalties against coordinated conduct that lessens competition. The expansion of private enforcement and the ability for the Competition Tribunal to issue monetary payment orders in cases initiated by private parties is also a significant change to our existing enforcement approach.
More competition is always beneficial to consumers, but the bill also takes some more direct approaches to protect consumers. These include strengthening provisions on deceptive marketing so that vendors must present the full cost of a product or service upfront, without holding back mandatory fees, which is known as drip pricing. Businesses making environmental claims about their products will be required to have undertaken adequate and proper testing before advertising those benefits. Together, these changes would ensure that consumers have accurate and complete information about products and services to make informed purchasing decisions.
We have also made strides on the right to repair. Thanks to the bill, a wider variety of service providers would be able to offer more options to consumers when they are choosing where to repair their products. These reforms, along with various administrative changes aimed at facilitating efficient enforcement of the act, are crucial to ensuring that Canadian markets remain competitive and in line with international best practices.
It has been acknowledged by all members of the House that our competition framework requires reform, and my colleagues have engaged in thoughtful discussion on ways to modernize the existing marketplace framework. The committee members were notably quite interested in enhancing protections for consumers and the environment, and I would like to draw attention to some now.
First, clarifications were made to ensure that in the Competition Act's various provisions on drip pricing, the only amounts that can be excluded from the upfront price, are those imposed by law directly on the purchaser of the products, such as sales taxes.
Next, with the committee's amendment, sellers advertising reduced prices would be required to be able to prove that the regular price is authentic to publicize discounts. On the topic of doubtful environmental claims, or so-called greenwashing, the law would also require that those who make environmental claims about their business or business activities, not only specific products, have adequate and proper substantiation in hand to support such claims.
This bill goes beyond making generational changes to competition in Canada. It also takes concrete action to build more homes faster, including new rental housing. Bill C-59 proposes to eliminate GST on eligible new housing co-operatives built for long-term rental, as outlined in the fall economic statement. This is just one of many measures our government is proposing to ensure that more people across all provinces and territories find the housing they need, at a price that they can afford.
Amidst a period of inflation and growing affordability concerns, it is crucial that our markets remain resilient and open to competition. Bill C-59 would reform Canada's competitive landscape, encourage greater innovation and improve affordability for Canadians. It would also get more rental housing built faster so that we can ensure housing is affordable for every generation.
I would urge my colleagues from all sides of the House to work together to expeditiously pass this crucial piece of legislation, instead of doing what we have seen in committee, which is to slow the bill down. We continue to see the Conservatives try to obstruct key pieces of legislation that are helping Canadians in their time of need, and that is not what we have been put here to do.
1123 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 7:54:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this fiscal economic statement has led to a budget where the debt servicing costs $54.1 billion, which is more than the federal government transfers to provinces for health care. We all know health care is very important.
How did the member find his way to supporting a fiscal economic statement that led to a budget that spends more on debt each and every year than this whole country spends on health care transfers to provinces?
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 8:40:44 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I know that the member represents his constituents well also.
I would say it is a scary point in Canadian history when the federal government, the NDP-Liberal coalition, is spending more money on debt servicing than on health care. My friend is right. The amount of GST the government is bringing in is equivalent to what it is paying in debt. There is so much more that we could be if we had our fiscal house in order. That is something we will deliver as a common-sense Conservative government, and we will make sure we give Canadians the government they deserve.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 9:11:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. She also made a good speech, in which she spoke about the billions of dollars going to oil companies.
We need to look at the root of government interference, which is fiscal imbalance. What does that mean? First, Ottawa takes in more revenue than it needs. Second, Ottawa uses that financial leeway to interfere in areas outside its jurisdiction. That is exactly what the government is doing with Bill C-59 and Bill C-69.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer said it himself: If the trend continues, eventually the provincial governments, including Quebec, will be virtually bankrupt, while the federal government will see its revenues increase.
What will the result be? The federal government will be able to intervene in areas of provincial jurisdiction. It is an unprecedented centralization of power in Ottawa's hands. That is one of the many reasons why we will be voting against these two bills.
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I have to say it seems a bit surreal to be here tonight debating Bill C-59.
In a way, it reminds me of the movie Back to the Future, because we are going back to the Liberals' fall mini-budget of last year with the hindsight of knowing what we know today because of the Liberals' recently introduced and massively failed budget 2024 document.
What did they call that budget again? Was it “Fairness for Every Generation”? I am still floored by that. Imagine leaving future generations of Canadians massive amounts of debt with zero plan whatsoever on how that debt will ever get paid. Only to the Liberals could this concept of leaving behind your bills for someone else to pay be considered some sort of generational fairness. Fortunately, everyday Canadians see the budget document for what it truly is, and they know that it is anything but fair to leave today's bills behind for our kids and grandkids to try to pay.
I realize we are here tonight to debate last fall's mini-budget and not the spring's latest budget failure, so I will focus my comments on the so-called mini-budget, also known as the fall economic statement.
There is one very fascinating thing about that mini-budget that caught my attention. Prior to it, the Liberals had forecast total debt would be $35 billion for the 2024-25 fiscal year and $26.8 billion for the 2025-26 fiscal year. This was comical. They actually forecast that the debt would go down in 2025-26. The sheer fallacy that this always-be-spending Liberal-speNDP partnership would ever spend less borrowed money is completely nonsensical, yet that is exactly what they tried to pass off to Canadians.
In this mini-budget, of course, the debt forecasts were revised and to the surprise of absolutely no one, except for possibly a certain CBC analyst, the debt forecast increased. The revised debt forecasts were now increased for 2024-25 and 2025-26 to $38.4 billion and $38.3 billion, respectively. However, it is all pointless, because we know the total debt proposed for this year is now up to $40 billion. Next year is an election year, so we can only speculate how much more debt will again increase as the desperate Prime Minister once again attempts to shovel as much money as he can out the door, hoping to buy Canadians' votes.
We are now in a position where we spend more money servicing debt than we are spending on the Canadian health care transfer. Keep in mind that this is just servicing the debt, not actually paying any off, because that is what “fairness” means to the Liberal-speNDP partnership: Leave today's bills behind for someone else to pay.
Going on nine years now, the Prime Minister has never honoured any such fiscal guardrail he has promised. The Prime Minister has never once tried to live within the fiscal framework he has established for his own government. Every year, the Liberal-speNDP partnership can pick a number they say the total debt will be, and every year, no matter how large that total debt number is, they still totally blow it off and come in higher. It is like they do not even try to live within their own means, let alone what is affordable for taxpayers.
Here is one really wacko thing about that mini-budget. The budget update mentions more housing multiple times, but the most significant parts of those housing promises, even though they were announced in the fall update, in reality are for programs that are still years away.
A few examples of this include $15 billion in new loan funding for an apartment construction program, mentioned by the member for Calgary Skyview. However, that program will not be available until fiscal year 2025-26. Similarly, there is an additional commitment to allocate $1 billion over three years for what the Liberals call an affordable housing fund for non-profit, co-op and public housing. However, this funding would not begin until the fiscal year of 2025-26.
Of course, we have an election that will occur no later than October of 2025. So devoid are the Liberals of ideas that they are now actually making promises today, or I should say last fall, on behalf of a future government that is yet to be decided on by voters. No matter how I look at it, the fall fiscal update was yet another very expensive failure in a long line of expensive Liberal failures.
Now, remember, despite all this massive Liberal deficit spending, things are so bad that even the Prime Minister himself now openly admits that young people feel like they cannot get ahead in the same way as their parents or grandparents could.
Another point, which I raised recently in my budget speech and I will make here again tonight, is that when it comes to total spending and debt, the Prime Minister has failed in every single budget to do what he promised he would do in the previous year. Let us ask this question: If the Prime Minister, who, if we ask him, thinks he is pretty awesome, in nine years has massively and completely failed to come even close to balancing a budget, what is he expecting future generations of Canadians to do that he has never done himself, because they are the ones who will be inheriting all of this?
Of course, on that side of the House, the question is never asked, is it? Why is that? Every member on that side of the House knows that bills need to be paid, and this is why so many Canadians are struggling right now. At the end of the month, when they pay their bills, for a growing number of Canadians, there is no longer enough left to live on. For some, each month, the line of credit or credit card debt only grows larger. Many tell me that they realize their financial situation is just not sustainable, and that is why there is such a growing disconnect. They see a Prime Minister, propped up by the NDP, who will literally spend any amount of borrowed money. It is not helping the average family in the least, and they are frustrated.
I am certain there are members on the other side of the House who absolutely understand and know this. I am also certain that there are a few members on the other side who are probably frustrated, because we all know that much of this mess is made behind closed doors from that inner circle inside the Prime Minister's Office without much input from them. I have been reliably informed that, at least in one caucus, some matters are even decided upon without a vote.
I realize that there is an expectation that the official opposition will oppose the government's fall fiscal update. It is, after all, the opposition's job to oppose and to hold the government to account. That was for the NDP. However, in this case, it is not like the Liberal government even tries to live within the fiscal limits it proposes for itself. That is why I mentioned in my opening comments that it is somewhat surreal to be here debating this.
We all know that the recently released budget, much of it, is just a sham, much as budget 2024 will also go down as a sham. Next fall, there will be another fall fiscal update, which will have an even bigger debt than what was proposed here today, and record spending deficits will once again be through the roof. Is there any person in this room who does not doubt that? What will they call the next budget? Would it be the “even more fairness budget”, as it will leave more unpaid debt? It is obviously pointless to speculate on whatever ridiculous title the Liberals will try to use to sell their next budget.
Getting back to the fall economic statement, we could summarize it as Liberals saying, “Yes, we spent even more than we promised, but don't worry, our expensive new programs are coming soon.” That is really, to me, what the update says. It is pretty much what happens with every single Liberal budget and budget update. The bottom line is that I will oppose this latest debt-and-deficit bill from the Liberals, brought to us by their speNDP partners.
I would like to thank all members of this place for hearing my comments at what is a very late hour, and to the Canadians who are at home, particularly those in Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, I thank them for sticking it through this far.
1482 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:03:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, just last week, the Governor of the Bank of Canada appeared before committee. He gave very compelling testimony, answering questions from the Conservative Party, and said that the government, compared to the fall economic statement in this year's budget, has stuck to its fiscal guardrails and that there would be no impact on inflation. We also had the International Monetary Fund, which recently rated Canada number one in the world in terms of budget balance.
What I want to know from the member opposite is this. His party leader has said that he would fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. Is that because he does not like the truth?
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:08:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the member's contribution tonight. Barrie—Innisfil is very lucky to have him.
What I would say is that we had the member from Calgary Skyview specifically talk about two areas. Number one was the tax-free savings program for young people. When I speak to young people, they have no savings. They do not have $8,000 to tuck away for a home some day. When they hear this particular member start talking about $15 billion in new loan funding for an apartment construction program, that program would not be available until fiscal year 2025-26.
Those young people need help and support, not a sham of a fiscal update and not the heckles of a member who should probably give it a break.
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:12:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member is an experienced member, and his comment just shows he has not read the bill, which contains within it the establishment of the Canada water agency through an act. He should read the bill. My advice to all my colleagues across the way is to just read the bill. If they are going to raise a point of order on relevance, they should make sure that they know what they are talking about. As I was saying, the collaboration that we would see in Winnipeg at the agency is something that we should all be very proud of and look forward to.
Housing is a fundamental concern. I have the honour of working as the parliamentary secretary responsible for housing. We have seen, through the economic statement, GST lifted from the construction of co-operative housing. There are 250,000 Canadians who live in co-ops across the country. We would see many more living in co-ops as a result of this measure, which would lead to many more co-ops being built.
In this fiscal environment, with high interest rates, we have to provide incentives to the private sector to respond, and this measure would be exactly that: an incentive on the table for the private sector. I am glad that we have seen collaboration on this in working with agencies, with advocates and with members of the opposition, but not with the Conservatives.
In fact I was stunned a few months ago when, let us not forget, the Leader of the Opposition said that co-op housing amounts to Soviet-style housing. What an absurd statement. This is from someone who aspires to be Prime Minister of this country. What would he tell the 250,000 Canadians who live in co-op housing? Would he say they live in Soviet-style housing? That is not serious. If we want to have a serious debate on the issues of the day, and housing is really at the top of that agenda in terms of the challenges the country faces, let us be serious about what we are facing and let us have a constructive debate to that end.
On that note, earlier tonight, I will not say I was surprised, but I was disappointed to hear the member for Oshawa equate the government's policies with Marxism and to Leninism. That is not how we advance a genuine dialogue in Canada. Yes, the country's problems are significant. We are living through very challenging times. We have just come through a once-in-a-hundred-years pandemic that has impacted this country's social, political and economic fabric in ways that we are only beginning to fathom.
Let us not forget comments such as the one by the member for Oshawa, who just a little while back, about a year ago, sat down, with other Conservative colleagues, with far right politicians from Europe. It is no surprise that the Leader of the Opposition recently sat down with, met with and talked with adherents, those who espouse the message of far right groups like Diagolon. That is the absurdity of the moment we are in.
If the Conservatives think that they are going to win the day on social media by advancing these kinds of populist tactics, they might get some clicks, and they certainly do, and they might fundraise off these things, but democracy matters. That is no way to advance an agenda that is constructive and that is going to help rebuild this country. That is what I would say to my colleagues on the other side.
I know that my colleague from Oshawa apparently wants to equate our policies with communism; however, they are anything but. Let us look at what Moody's, not a communist organization at all, said. It is a very important organization because it, among others, helps set the ratings for this country. The fundamental fact that we have an AAA credit rating is the result of ratings agencies like Moody's that have recognized that. Its recent report states that the Canadian government's history and continued focus on maintaining a prudent fiscal stance stands out, as does the high rate of competitiveness in the Canadian economy.
Things like that stand out. An AAA credit rating is something this country has. We will continue to have it, along with the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio and one of the highest rates of foreign direct investment.
The country is going through a tough time. That is true, but we have a lot to look forward to. I will end on that note, and I look forward to questions from friends across the way.
785 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/9/24 11:50:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is good to see that, even at this late hour, we still have people here intending and trying to learn from the incompetence that the present government is showing.
With the holiday season upon us once again, oh, we need to hang on a sec; I wrote this speech back in December, and the holiday season was upon us at that point in time. However, it shows the incompetence we see from the government that it has taken six months to get to this stage. It is interesting that when we look at things where things are being tabled, I guess we consider the holidays. In some ways, I am not being wrong when I say the holidays, because we do have Victoria Day coming up within a week, or as they say here in Ontario, May Two-Four day. It is a holiday that is coming, so I guess I am not being incorrect in that statement.
Now, Canadians all across the country are feeling the financial pinch, and many of them are trying to save money in any way they can. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the Liberal government, which continues to increase spending and taxes on the backs of middle-class people, as outlined in the fall economic statement. After nine years under the Prime Minister, Canadians are struggling while the government just keeps getting richer. We see this struggle in many different areas. Food bank usage is up across the country, with a record two million visits occurring in a single month, and that is projected to be increasing by another million.
First of all, I would like to thank the Salvation Army, which does a tremendous job in helping our Canadians with raising food for the food banks, helping to feed Canadians and stepping forward and stepping up. I know the Salvation Army was here this past week. I would also like to thank all Canadians who step up and contribute to these food drives and assist Canadians, because what we need is showing where Canadians are working for Canadians.
Unfortunately, as I said, we cannot say where the government can continue to increase spending and taxes on the backs of these middle-class people, and this is outlined in the Liberals' fall economic statement. After nine years of the government, we have seen that the cost of groceries continues to go up, and over 50% of Canadians are $200 or less away from going broke. The situation is alarming, and one would expect that a responsible government would introduce measures to address this, but no. Instead, the Prime Minister has announced more than $20 billion in new inflationary spending in the fall economic statement, and this will continue to keep inflation and interest rates higher than Canadians can afford.
Sadly, this does not come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to the government's dismal history when it comes to managing the finances of this country. I will read from an article from The Globe and Mail, which says, “Every time the Liberals update the country on the state of its finances, it is accompanied by pages of prose [141 pages, to be exact, in this situation] trumpeting the government’s devotion to fiscal restraint. And yet, every time, spending somehow ratchets higher.” One need only glance at the projected deficits to see that this is true.
Let us go back in time to touch on budget 2023, where the finance minister said that the deficits for the next four years would be as follows: $35 billion, $26.9 billion, $15.7 billion and, finally, $14 billion in 2027-28. Let us keep in mind that those projections were made over a year ago, and not much has changed with respect to Canada's fiscal landscape since then. Now, let us take a look at the new deficit projections from the fall economic statement. It states that we will have a $38.4 billion deficit in 2024-25, then $38.3 billion, then $27.1 billion and, finally, $23.8 billion in 2027-28. This is an average of about $9 billion more per year. In what world is that considered fiscally responsible or showing restraint, as the Liberals would like us to believe? How is that possible?
In fact, with the BIA, which we are debating right now, we now have a better idea of what the national debt numbers will be. Remember that the national debt, back in 2015, when the Liberal government came into power, was just over $600 billion. In 2023, the government showed it to be $1.1 trillion. That 0.1 is $100 billion. When we put it in that perspective and look at this, people need to finally wake up to what those costs are. According to the statement in the fall economic statement, it will be $1.2 trillion.
As for this budget that came forward just now, the 2024 budget, which was supposed to be there to help generation Z and the millennials, when one looks at what that projects the national debt will be for 2025-26, is projecting it to be $1.5 trillion. That is a $200-billion to $300-billion increase. How is that helping generation Z and millennials? That is adding $300 billion-plus onto the debt, which they are going to have to pay at some time. How is it going to happen?
As for what this government is doing, it is upping the credit limit, and it is increasing it to $2 trillion, more than we have, and continuing. How is that teaching gen Z and millennials, or even anybody, how to save money? How can they afford to survive? We are not teaching them a thing, and this from a government that campaigned back in 2015 on having just two $10-billion deficits. That is simple math. It is not hard to figure out, but when it was $600 billion, assuming that they had two $10-billion deficits, our deficit should only be $620 billion. Those numbers do not seem to add up.
Furthermore, while the annual government revenue projections are to be $6 billion higher because of their inability to control Canada's debt, interest costs have skyrocketed and will have doubled in the last two years. Here are the budget projections for interest charges on the federal debt of budget 2023: $46 billion for 2024-25, $46.6 billion for 2025-26, $48.3 billion for 2026-27 and $50.3 billion in 2027-28.
Let us compare those interest figures with the new updated projections from the fall economic statement, where we have $52.4 billion in 2024-25, $53.3 billion and then $55.1 billion, ending with $58.4 billion in 2027-28. Interest costs are now the highest they have been in a decade, and the Liberals have no plan whatsoever to remedy this. This eats up and consumes the $6 billion in increased revenue I previously mentioned. That is net-zero increases.
To put this into perspective, the Prime Minister has allowed the interest costs for the federal government to run so high that the amount is now double what it spent on national defence, and it will be more than the federal government spends on health care next year, which is evident in our 2024 budget, where the interest rates that are being paid are higher than the total amount we would spend on health care.
This means that, instead of taxpayer money going toward our doctors and nurses, it will be spent on servicing a debt that should never have been this high in the first place. The government cannot be trusted to do what is in the best interests of Canadians, and it is time for a new Conservative government that truly understands what responsible fiscal management means.
1323 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
