SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Marilyn Gladu

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of Parliament
  • Conservative
  • Sarnia—Lambton
  • Ontario
  • Voting Attendance: 67%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $118,419.33

  • Government Page
  • Feb/12/24 3:19:38 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I move that December be Christian heritage month. Some hon. members: No.
14 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/8/24 12:53:45 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I heard someone say today that there is a shortage of services for French language training in Montreal, in the riding of the member who gave her speech. What can the government do to increase services?
38 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/1/24 10:08:46 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have a petition to present, which says that preserving the petitioners' Christian heritage, rooted in the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is vital. They seek to celebrate December as Christian heritage month annually, promoting love, equality and peace. They say that their Christian foundations, recognized globally, shape their identity. The undersigned residents of Canada call upon the Government of Canada to celebrate December as Christian heritage month annually.
77 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Madam Speaker, I present a petition from residents of Canada who are concerned about young people being exposed to sexually explicit material and the harms associated with that. The petitioners recognize that online age verification technology is increasingly sophisticated and can now effectively ascertain the age of users without breaching their privacy rights. Knowing that was one of the primary recommendations made by stakeholders during a 2017 study by the Standing Committee on Health, the petitioners are calling upon the House of Commons to adopt Bill S-210, the protecting young persons from exposure to pornography act.
97 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/26/23 12:59:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak about the Canada Infrastructure Bank. At the outset, it is important to reflect upon how this bank got started and what promises were made when it was put together. Thirty-five billion dollars that had been earmarked for infrastructure in municipalities was taken back by the federal government to create this bank. This is money that municipalities needed to build their roads and sewers and upgrade their bridges and everything else. The government took that money and put it in this Infrastructure Bank. The story at the time was that the government was going to attract private investors and was going to leverage taxpayer money probably 11 times. Here we are now, seven years later. I am sure members thought I was going to say “after eight long years”, but from 2016 to 2023, it is seven years. No projects have been built, and there have been lots of comments about the projects that are on the way to being built. However, as an engineer who worked in building and construction, I would say that if I had been given $35 billion seven years ago, I certainly would have built something by now, instead of just paying large salaries to executives, as we heard my colleague talk about. In comparison, the Conservatives under Stephen Harper had multiple kinds of infrastructure funds. They spent $53 billion and did 43,000 infrastructure projects in 10 years. Compare that to seven years and zero projects completed, or compare it to some of the other infrastructure projects taken over by the Liberal government. The Liberals took a pipeline that Kinder Morgan was going to build for $4.5 billion, paid $7 billion for it, and now it has cost $30 billion and it is not finished yet. That is the reason the committee members, when they talked about the Infrastructure Bank, listened to witnesses who were involved in it and invited the Parliamentary Budget Officer, and at the end of the day, the committee had one recommendation. That recommendation was to abolish the bank, because it clearly was not coming anywhere near achieving the goals. With respect to the money leveraging that was supposed to happen, we can go to the government web page. The government started with $35 billion and now we see that it is $38 billion. The $3 billion extra that came as this great leveraged money is really, over that period of time, a 1.7% increase. It would have been better to put the money in the bank and invest it. The government would have made more money that it has leveraged in this existing Infrastructure Bank. If we listen to the people who are talking about the good things the Infrastructure Bank could do, it is not that Canada does not have a need for infrastructure. We do not build anything. Under the Liberal government, 18 LNG facilities were cancelled. Let us talk about broadband. Broadband is something everyone needs. The government has been repeatedly called on to increase the amount of broadband, but again, zero projects have come out of this particular fund. We need nuclear facilities. We know that to meet the existing electrical demands and to grow, we do not have enough electricity in the grid, and we do not have enough infrastructure in the grid. In my riding of Sarnia—Lambton, we are having a number of new plants built, but we do not have enough electricity or infrastructure there. These are projects that Canada needs to build as a nation. We hear demands from other places across the country where they need rail infrastructure, places that need airport infrastructure and of course there is the need for pipelines to get our products to one coast or the other. I am not here to say that we do not need infrastructure. I am just saying the government does not seem to be able to build anything. We have had much discussion in the House of Commons about the housing crisis in this country, that we have the most land but we have built the fewest houses. In fact, the Liberal government built the same number of houses that were built in 1972, this after recognizing that we are five and a half million spaces short. One would think that if they do not know what to do with the $35 billion in the Infrastructure Bank and there is a huge housing crisis in the country, maybe that is a place to start to funnel that money to municipalities that have plans. My riding of Sarnia—Lambton has a great plan. It has put $38 million over 10 years into affordable housing and $40 million into maintaining and upgrading existing housing. It also has five projects over five years that will create 2,000 spaces. We are trying to close an affordable housing gap of about 6,500. Many municipalities have plans, and their plans are different. They could use this money back that is in the Infrastructure Bank, which is busy paying off bonuses to executives and not finishing projects. That is something that should be considered. We also have a lot of infrastructure needs related to climate change. Shoreline erosion is the first one I would raise. In my riding, we need $150 million to address the shoreline erosion. The member for Cumberland—Colchester was talking to me about the one way of transiting to access the land, which is being eroded, and it would cut off the Atlantic provinces if it were to collapse. It really needs work. There are needs for infrastructure. We should not be giving all of our money away to build infrastructure in other places, such as to the Asian infrastructure bank, which the Liberals gave $250 million to in order to build pipelines. They are building the piplelines they will not build here in other places. I always try to bring some positive ideas when I speak in the House. One of the ideas the Liberals might want to try is something being done in my riding, where postwar houses were built structurally to take another level on top. Private mortgagers are giving mortgages to first-time homebuyers to redo the house with an apartment above and an apartment below. This would support the mortgage and triple the amount of housing. Something like that would be a great thing to do with the amount of money that was put in the Infrastructure Bank. Instead, it is a failed initiative. The one recommendation from committee was to abolish the bank, and I support that.
1111 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/12/23 1:46:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-40 
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that we are talking miscarriages of justice, because the fact that the Attorney General of Canada has not appointed enough judges, and violent rapists and murderers are going to go free because their time has been exceeded, is a miscarriage of justice. Would the minister agree?
51 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 1:57:11 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's great speech. In her speech, she was talking about average Canadians who are struggling. Could the member comment on the debt level of the average Canadian and where that is going?
38 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/27/23 1:42:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-11 
Mr. Speaker, I heard that the Premier of Quebec sent the Minister of Canadian Heritage a letter to say that he was concerned about the fact that the bill would infringe on freedom of expression. Is the hon. member also concerned?
41 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/6/23 1:29:41 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-34 
Madam Speaker, I see the outrage in the member opposite, but perhaps he could apply that to the party that he is supporting, the party that sold out health care in B.C. to Anbang. Does the member remember that? It was a total disaster. We had to come in and rescue them in the pandemic. Huawei is another example, where the government sat on its decision for two years and let Huawei build all the 4G networks under Bell and Telus in this country. Why does the member not take his outrage and apply it to the government that he is propping up?
104 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/21/22 12:05:44 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-32 
Madam Speaker, I just cannot believe this is happening again. The Liberal government ran on promises in elections that it was not going to shut down debate, yet it does it all the time. It is no wonder there are no Canadians who believe them any more. However, I am surprised that the NDP is supporting this unholy marriage, this costly coalition. They used to have principles on time allocation, and used to not allow it. It boggles the mind. How are the people of Sarnia—Lambton supposed to have their voices heard in this place when I have not even had a chance to speak to Bill C-32?
111 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/3/22 1:13:15 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I am puzzled by my hon. member's speech. NDP members have said that they want dental care for all Canadians who currently do not have coverage, so I do not understand why they have agreed to this program that only covers children under 12 in some families, when many provinces already cover that, and that the rest will be post-2025 after the election when the Liberals do not need the NDP anymore. Why did he support it?
81 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/6/22 4:33:58 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-13 
Mr. Speaker, I think that it is very important to have people who can speak both of Canada's official languages. When I was a member of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, we heard from women who were victims of sexual harassment. There was no justice for the cases presented and services in French did not exist. I will therefore support any effort to obtain far more services in both official languages.
75 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/6/22 4:02:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-13 
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his speech. He talked about the Treasury Board and how the Treasury Board is going to have the responsibility over all the departments to make sure they are complying with the official languages and that they will be the ones with the plans. How do we make sure that the Treasury Board, which has a lot of different priorities, keeps this as a priority? Also, what will the Minister of Official Languages be doing then?
86 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/1/22 1:06:58 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-13 
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for her incredible work on the official languages committee. The member spoke about the importance of the Treasury Board being in charge. I am a bit concerned about that, because the Treasury Board has a lot of different priorities. I am concerned that maybe official languages will fall to the bottom of what it is doing. Would it not be better for the Minister of Canadian Heritage to have the power to act?
81 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/1/22 12:42:35 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-13 
Mr. Speaker, we have a real problem with the enforcement of the Official Languages Act in this country. We had the Commissioner of Official Languages come to committee. He said that although there was a huge increase in the number of complaints about people not complying with the act, there is not much he can do about it. He reports to Treasury Board but does not have to update the Minister of Official Languages. Does the member believe this has been adequately fixed in the bill?
86 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border