- Member of Parliament
- Minister of Justice
Attorney General of Canada
- Liberal
- Parkdale—High Park
- Ontario
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $120,537.19
- Government Page
- May/23/24 10:28:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think the better question would be on how much not addressing gun violence would cost Canadians in terms of their mental health and their physical health.
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/22/24 6:39:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would just politely remind the member opposite to take a look at the text of the actual proposed programming motion. It talks about the committee meeting for five hours a day on two further sitting days, so that would be ten hours of hearings. There would be a third sitting day for actual clause-by-clause analysis. There has also already been ten hours of debate on this important bill. I think it is important for Canadians to understand why we believe this is important because Canadians should not have to choose between paying for their bills and paying for their health care.
We know that cost has consistently been identified as the single most important barrier to accessing medications and that cost is unevenly borne by women and gender-diverse Canadians; that is on the contraception piece. With respect to diabetes, one in four Canadians with diabetes has reported not following their treatment plan according to the cost and their inability to pay those costs.
That is significant because, as I said earlier in this debate, people with diabetes that goes untreated end up having more significant health care consequences, which include things like stroke and amputation. The knock-on health care costs to our system are very significant, let alone the hardships those people endure. Through this legislation, which we are putting an emphasis on passing quickly, we can improve the health care outcomes and the economic outcomes for those Canadians.
246 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/22/24 5:19:22 p.m.
- Watch
I do not agree at all with the remarks of my colleague opposite.
First, when we created a national program for all of Canada's provinces and territories by investing about $200 billion, we launched a process to sign bilateral agreements with each province, Quebec included.
Second, I would ask my colleague to talk to diabetics and women in his riding about the cost of their medication these days. The oral contraception pill costs about $25 a month, or $300 a year. Diabetes medication can cost between $900 and $1,700 a year.
I think my colleague should support this bill so that his constituents can save money while receiving care from the health system and getting their medication.
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/22/24 5:16:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think the fiscal case for proceeding in this manner is quite remarkably already laid out in studies, such as the one at UBC that I cited, and studies that we have seen in other areas with respect to diabetes. If there was no need for these kinds of services, I would query the Conservatives why 1.9 million seniors in this country registered for the Canada dental benefit, if no actual need existed.
I would put to the Conservatives, also, that if there was no need for extending that coverage on dental care, why we have already had 100,000 appointments set up, in literally the first three weeks of the program. It expresses to me, on a simplistic analysis, that the need is acute.
We are addressing the need with the program. Does it cost money? It absolutely costs money. However, that is an investment on the front end that cures costs to the system on the back end, which is something that a traditional red Tory would normally get behind.
175 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/22/24 5:06:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, certainly there are many reasons to get behind this kind of legislation, but there is also an economic reason. I appeal to the red Tories who are standing opposite right now. On the diabetes stats alone, unnecessary costs are incurred from lost productivity and elevated health care system use due to diabetes and its complications, which include heart attack, stroke, kidney failure, blindness and amputation. If we provide diabetes medication free of charge, we can save an estimated $27 billion to $39 billion in our health care system in this country by 2028. That makes fiscal sense, not to mention ethical sense.
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/11/23 2:52:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today I have heard a lot about rising costs. I just want to make sure Canadians watching appreciate that, when parliamentarians vote for 30 hours, and it costs about $70,000 an hour to keep this place running, it is costing Canadian taxpayers about $2 million. That is the first point.
Second, with respect to the point that was just made by the member opposite, if Conservatives were so concerned about the price of food, I would have thought they might have voted in favour of a school food program to keep food prices down for young Canadians in this country. Alas, they voted against it.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/6/23 3:13:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, when I hear from everyday Canadians about affordability, and when I hear from people such as Lindsay in my riding and former classmates such as Stephanie, they say to me that the cost of food is going up, but they understand that it is a complex problem.
Climate change feeds into the cost of food, and things such as instability overseas in Europe and an illegal war in Ukraine affect the price of food. Ergo, we wonder about the sincerity of the party opposite when it votes against instrumental measures, such as an affordability piece of legislation or legislation that would assist Ukraine and stop that illegal war.
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/23 11:51:16 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the fundamental principle is that the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues are not worth the cost.
What is the cost? The cost has been underscored by the president of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress herself, a woman who happens to be my constituent. She has said that Ukraine needs assistance. The Ukrainian government is begging for that assistance.
What we have seen is a failure of leadership on the part of the official opposition to make supporting Ukraine a non-partisan issue. It should never be partisan to confront an authoritarian ruler in an illegal war who is driving up the price of food in this country and around the world.
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/22/23 8:14:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate contributing to this evening's debate, although we had a bit of a late start.
What is important about today's debate is that it is set in the context of basic issues about affordability, basic issues about rising costs and the cost of living, which is a challenge for families right around the country. It is no different for my riding of Parkdale—High Park and for the 337 other ridings around the country. People feel it every week when they are at the grocery store. It is difficult for many people, and we understand that. That is why we put in place a series of measures to make life more affordable for millions of Canadians.
Our focus on this side of the House throughout this rise in the cost of living has been on Canadians who need the help the most. It is no longer possible to help everyone in Canada, as we did during the pandemic, so we are seeking and have been pursuing, quite diligently, targeted measures. That is really critical, particularly in light of the situation we are facing with inflation, as it currently stands. Our capacity to spend is not unlimited, nor would it be prudent to spend in an unlimited manner. What we are doing is trying to help those who need it the most.
Let me talk specifically about the nature of this evening's debate with regard to the excise duty on alcohol. Let us be very clear that we are not talking about an approximately 6.7% rise in the price of alcohol. What we are talking about is a rise in the excise duty. I can tell members what that translates into if we equate it to the price of a bottle of beer. I will say quite candidly that I am one of those purchasers of bottles of beer. Like many other members of this House, I appreciate a good bottle of beer, including from a microbrewery, such as Henderson's, from just outside my riding, such as Waterloo Dark, such as Upper Canada Lager, and the list goes on. When we translate what this means to a person like me, to a family like mine, to Canadians in this chamber and those watching our proceedings on this Wednesday evening, it translates to less than one cent per can of beer. It is less than one cent. In fact, it is 0.78¢, so not even one full cent per beer is what this price escalator reveals.
Why is it indexed in the manner it is? It is quite simple. We use this as a frequent tool to ensure that, as the cost of producing the goods we put taxation measures on changes and as the cost of living changes, so does the excise tax duty. There is a direct proportionality. That is the basic premise that we are dealing with.
I will be splitting my time with the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge, who is also a lover of finer things. I think he is more fond of wine. I am personally more fond of the great thing that comes from wheat and grain, including a good pint here and there, beer in particular. This is a good segue into wine, which is next in my speaking notes.
What we have been doing to support the sector is that we have implemented a wine sector support program, which provided up to $166.2 million to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in 2022-23, as it will in the forthcoming fiscal year, to support wineries in adapting to ongoing and emerging challenges. Indeed, the member for Niagara Falls, with whom I serve on the Standing Committee on International Trade, is very fond of promoting, as he should, the excellent wines from the Niagara Region. We are supporting those wines from the Niagara Region.
Small and medium-sized brewers right now also benefit from the currently lower rate of excise duties on the first 75,000 hectolitres. One hectolitre is 100 litres, so that means, with my crude math, that one has to create 7.5 million litres before one hits the level of the higher excise duty applying. Just that simple feature of having a threshold that is hit at 75,000 hectolitres saved brewers up to $851,000 per brewer in 2022. That is significant in terms of supports that are already in place.
What we have also done as a government is repeal the excise duty on non-alcoholic beer. One may be a designated driver or one may not feel the need for alcohol on a given evening or at a given weekend barbecue. Sometimes people pursue non-alcoholic beer. That is a great thing. We have a vibrant non-alcoholic beer industry. What we did is repeal the excise duty on that particular type of beer altogether on July 1, 2022, to encourage growth in that sector.
What I also want to indicate today is that Canadians who are watching need to contextualize this discussion. When we talk about an escalator on the excise duty, when we talk about issues that relate to the cost of living, we have to put that in the context of what we are doing about the cost of living as the Government of Canada.
We are doing a great deal. The targeted measures that we have rolled out over the past several years are vast, and I am going to list some of them. We have implemented changes to the Canada workers benefit. That means eligible low-income and modest-income families can receive up to $2,461 this year alone. Single Canadians, through the Canada workers benefit's improvement, without children, could get up to $1,428. We have provided $2.5 billion to 11 million Canadian individuals and families with low and modest incomes through the GST credit payment.
We are providing tax-free payments of up to $650 per child per year. That is through a phenomenally popular program that covers dental expenses for kids under 12 through the Canada dental benefit, a program, among others, that the members of His Majesty's official opposition had the wisdom to vote against. That program alone has already helped 230,000 children with an aspect of their health care that was not covered previously, absent this new benefit that we have created.
We are offering a tax-free payment of $500 to help low-income renters who are struggling with the cost of housing. My first remarks in the context of this evening's debate were about helping those who need it the most. Our view is that people who already receive the Canada housing benefit are among the lowest-income Canadians who are struggling with the cost of housing and with affording their rent. They are precisely the people who need our help the most, and that is what we have been doing with that top-up. There have been 625,000 applications received for that top-up to the Canada housing benefit, demonstrating the acute need that exists in the economy at present.
We have heard the official opposition rightfully raise the issue of seniors on many occasions. Seniors and seniors in poverty deserve our assistance and they deserve it in a targeted manner. What we did is put a 10% increase on old age security payments for seniors who are 75 or older. That provides over $800 in additional support to full pensioners in their first 12 months.
Thanks to our agreements with provinces and territories, we are reducing child care fees. This is actually quite incredible. I believe the mover of this motion is from the province of Alberta. In his province, fees have already been reduced by 50%, ahead of schedule. By 2026, our Canada-wide early learning and child care plan will bring fees for regulated child care down to $10 a day on average from coast to coast to coast. In fact, the $10-a-day goal has already been achieved by some provinces that were early adopters of our plan. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for my own province of Ontario, which was the very last adopter of this plan. We will not realize the benefits of $10-a-day child care in Ontario as fast as we could have, had there been a bit more earnestness on the part of Premier Ford, but I will leave that discussion for another day.
In terms of the province of the mover of this motion, Alberta, the savings already in effect will be an estimated $8,610 on average per child, per year, for my friend's constituents. If we compare the magnitude of that kind of savings with 0.78¢ per can of beer, I think members can appreciate the priority we are placing and where we are placing it, in terms of Canadians and their true needs. Canadians are facing challenges; there is no doubt.
In these final two minutes, what I would say is that improvements have been occurring. Last month alone, 22,000 jobs were created, more than double what was expected. More than 20 million Canadians now have jobs. That is 830,000 more Canadians employed than prior to the COVID-19 pandemic; 126% of the jobs that were lost since the peak of the pandemic have now been recovered. On average, wages have increased 5%. For women, age 25 to 54, the participation rate is now at an all-time high of 85.7%. I will draw a direct linkage between that statistic and the child care policy that I just outlined. By empowering affordable child care, we unlock the potential of women to fully participate in the economy. That is a critical initiative. That is a gender-focused initiative. That is a feminist initiative. That is an initiative I am proud to stand by.
In this final minute, what I will say is that Canadians are here, and on all sides of the House. We promote our wine and our beer industry. It is vital to job growth in this country. It is a vitally proud industry for Canadians of all stripes, from all political backgrounds. What we are not debating is support for that sector. What we are debating is the impact of the excise duty escalator. What I would say to Canadians who are watching tonight is that, yes, the price will go up by 0.78¢, less than one cent per can of beer, but what we are doing is addressing the costs of Canadians by the acute measures that I have outlined. That is important and I think we should all raise a toast to just that kind of initiative.
1799 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/16/22 7:14:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in terms of responding directly to the member, I think that a comprehensive plan is under way. We see that through efforts we are taking not only to assist small businesses but also to assist Canadians with their daily costs.
The member and I have ridings in the province of Ontario. We heard today that 90% of the child care centres have signed on to our child care plan. This means that families in his riding and mine would be benefiting from a 25% rebate for the early part of the year and a 50% reduction by the end of the year, in terms of child care costs.
We voted on a GST rebate, which will help 11 million Canadians deal with the rising costs of food.
Is food bank usage an important metric? Absolutely, it is. We cannot turn away from the rising costs of groceries and the impact that is having on Canadians.
What we are doing through targeted measures such as the GST rebate, such as the housing benefit and such as dental care for young people is providing relief to those who need it the most, along with the supports for small businesses that I outlined earlier.
203 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to recognize that I am speaking from the House of Commons in Ottawa, which is on unceded Algonquin territory. We are speaking today about a bill that is extremely important for those of us in the House, but also for Canadians listening to the debate and Canadians feeling the pressures of affordability right now.
Bill C-31 would address two key facets of affordability in this country, housing and dental care, and the first thing I want to broach is why we are targeting these two particular areas. It does not matter which ridings members represent in this chamber or which part of the country they come from, Canadians are feeling the same sentiment about the cost of living: Prices are escalating and life has simply become too expensive. This is partly a function of the pandemic, partly a function of global conflicts, such as Russia's unjust invasion of Ukraine, and partly a function of supply chains and the need to make them more resilient. What we are doing as a government is listening to those concerns and responding directly to them.
Last week, we provided a doubling of the GST rebate, something I believe all parties in this chamber supported, for which I am thankful and I believe Canadians are thankful. Today we are again talking about targeted relief on two indicia: housing and extending health care to include dental health.
This bill would do two pivotal things. In terms of the housing benefit, it proposes to provide a top-up payment to something called the Canada housing benefit. It is a $1.2-billion investment that would result in a $500 benefit being made available to approximately 1.8 million people in this country who rent, including students and people struggling with the cost of rental housing. The second key facet of the bill, as we have heard in the debate thus far today, is that it proposes to provide dental care for uninsured families with incomes of less than $90,000 annually, targeting dental relief to children under the age of 12.
It is important to recap for Canadians where we are in this fight to build a more affordable Canada and ease issues related to the cost of living.
What have we been doing on the housing front since I was elected to this place in 2015? About two years into our first mandate as a government, we launched a national housing strategy. At the time it was launched, it was approximately $40 billion deep. That housing strategy has expanded to the tune of $72 billion now, which included a $14-billion investment in housing in budget 2022.
Key for the purposes of this debate is what we are doing now with the national housing strategy. It involves the Canada housing benefit, a $4-billion program within our broader strategy that provides an average of $2,500 in direct assistance to help those who have low incomes with the high cost of rent they are facing.
There are also other aspects of what we have been doing with respect to affordability. We could talk about the Canada workers benefit or something that I am very proud of, the Canada child benefit, which is a means-tested, non-taxable benefit that is targeted directly to families that need the assistance the most. With respect to child care, we can talk about what we have done in just the past 12 months to alleviate the costs of child care for people raising young families around the country, reducing those costs by 50% by the end of this year and to $10 a day by the end of four years.
We have taken significant steps, and what I have found troubling in my time in this chamber as a parliamentarian is the consistent opposition we have faced, particularly from His Majesty's loyal opposition, on many of the programs I just outlined. I was very pleased to see support for the doubling of the GST rebate as recently as last week, but I am still troubled by the fact that an initiative such as the one we are talking about today, which is, again, targeted relief to assist those who need it the most with some of their most basic necessities such as housing and extended health care, are being opposed by some of the members opposite. I would urge them, through the course of their deliberations on this bill, to change their position and vote for it.
I want to dwell a bit on housing and dental care as specific topics. We know that housing has become more expensive in this country in recent times. At the end of September 2022, the average rent for property types across the country saw a monthly increase of 4.3%, an annual increase of 15% and a 21% increase since the market low that was experienced in April 2021.
The city of Toronto consistently ranks as one of the most expensive rental markets in the country, somewhat neck in neck with Vancouver. We know this has become a challenge for the constituents I represent and for the people in Toronto, Vancouver and right across the country, something I am reminded of by my constituents and the stakeholders in my community.
I want to highlight a couple of key stakeholders that have been doing consistent work in the area of affordable housing for many years.
One is the Parkdale Neighbourhood Land Trust, which has taken it upon itself to index the amount of rooming houses that are available as deeply affordable housing in the community of Parkdale. As well, through its land trust initiative, it has collaborated with city and provincial partners to purchase land and keep rooming houses viable in the city of Toronto, in my community, and to keep people who need supportive and affordable housing properly housed. It is a tremendous initiative. It does that in conjunction with the Parkdale Activity Recreation Centre, which manages the property it was able to purchase in 2019.
Another program I want to highlight with respect to housing is what we have been able to do very successfully, as part of the national housing strategy, with the rapid housing initiative. This is an initiative that started out with about $500 million for urban cities, $200 million of which was dedicated to Toronto, and was subsequently doubled in budget 2021 because of the popularity of the program. It provides acute, targeted assistance to those who need it the most and does it quickly, as the name denotes. Within 12 months people are housed very quickly.
What the new totals mean for the rapid housing initiative, as part of this broader suite of housing assistance that we are providing, is that the city of Toronto will be receiving $440 million to create more than 1,000 new homes and do it very quickly. How does this impact Canadians? It impacts my constituents. We have $14 million of that money coming directly to Parkdale to assist with the creation of about 50 modular units on Dunn Avenue. That type of housing policy takes root, takes hold and starts to work quickly.
This bill would help in the same vein. Bill C-31 would provide an additional benefit for those who already receive the Canada housing benefit. When I say targeted, I mean tested. The facts are important to articulate in this chamber. We are talking about a one-time benefit that will go to applicants with incomes of less than $35,000 if they are a family or less than $20,000 as individuals. Certainly, every member in the House can agree with the idea that the people in those low-income brackets deserve our help the most and deserve targeted support on behalf of the Parliament of Canada.
Last, I want to turn to the idea of dental care. We know it is part and parcel of health care as we conceive it in our country. Members heard my intervention with respect to the previous speaker. We have heard from entities the Canadian Association of Public Health Dentistry talk about people who do not receive the dental care they need because of the costs associated with it. In fact, 55% of dental care right now is delivered by those who have private insurance, 40% of Canadians pay out of pocket for their dental care, and some just do not access it because they simply cannot afford to. That creates a knock-on impact to our health care system. People who do not receive the primary health care they need pre-emptively to prevent problems from mushrooming end up in our emergency rooms in our hospitals, which are publicly funded, and that has a knock-on cost for our health care system. Let us avoid that cost by providing something as simple as basic dental care for people who need it the most.
I would dare to say that it is hard to argue with the needs of children with respect to their growth and development. Addressing their extended health care needs by providing free of charge something as basic as visits to the dentist is an important thing to do, and we try to do that through this legislation.
Targeting housing and extended health care benefits through the lens of dental care is critical to dealing with the affordability challenges being faced by Canadians right now. That is why I support the bill and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
1592 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
