So V ote

Context: House Hansard - 316 - May/23/24

May/30/24 10:08:10 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today on behalf of Hong Kongers in Canada who are concerned about the permanent residence pathways stream A and B. This is particularly relevant given the ruling that happened in Hong Kong in the last day. The petitioners note the 7,500 who have been granted permanent residency, but there are still 8,000 applications and many more in backlog. The petitioners call on the government and the minister to acknowledge the humanitarian crisis that has happened, to create a mechanism to ensure that minor study permits to children are safeguarded, to create a mechanism to grant all Hong Kong pathway applicants to maintain their legal status and to get the PR process moving quickly.

124 words

May/23/24 2:05:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, after nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, crime, chaos and disorder are getting much worse in Saskatoon. In neighbourhood after neighbourhood, the government-fuelled opioid crime spree is hurting everyday, common-sense Canadians. The Liberal-funded supervised drug consumption site on 20th Street has created a chaotic and dangerous situation for residents. The local dentist, who cleans up garbage and human feces on a daily basis, was assaulted, and she has had to delay appointments because her clients could not get into the building. Last week, Canada Post stopped deliveries to the area because of the rampant drug use and crime. In the Fairhaven area, a new 106-bed shelter has attracted chaos and disorder to a formerly calm neighbourhood. The mayor has acknowledged that tent encampments have tripled in the past year, pushing locals out of their park and making residents fearful to go outside, even during the day. This is Saskatoon after nine years of the NDP-Liberal's so-called harm reduction. The only way out would be a new Conservative government, which would finally end the drugs and stop the crime.

188 words

May/21/24 10:11:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, first of all, I just want to say that I was a home builder in a small community, so I understand that very well. I have really good news for the member. There is an easy way to find this out. All of our detailed plans will come up during an election. That member and his party have the ability to force an election on this very budget. If they choose to not support the Liberal government and this Liberal budget, and instead vote against it, we could have an election. All of the detailed plans that he is looking for will be there for him to see.

110 words

May/21/24 10:09:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean and I do enjoy our time at the immigration committee. What would Conservatives do if we were in government? Well, first of all, we would not have all the messes we have now that are leading to situations like what my colleague described. The most important thing I want to reiterate about what we would do is that, first of all, we would get rid of the carbon tax. That is the first thing we would do. The second thing we would do would be to balance the budget because that is causing inflationary pressure. The third thing we would do would be to build more homes by requiring cities to permit 15% more houses each year in order to get federal infrastructure funds. The fourth thing we would do would be to stop the crime by making sure that repeat offenders end up in jail and that we have proper treatment facilities for those who need it in the country.

169 words

Immigration

May/21/24 10:07:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is just another example of the Liberals failing to take responsibility for the inflation that has happened in this country. We have had serious record inflation, the highest rates we have had in 40 years. This has hurt the pocketbooks of all Canadians. It has reduced their buying power. It has made everything more expensive, including Kraft Dinner and everything else. The carbon tax has a lot to do with that. Inflationary spending has caused the rate of inflation to go up and has caused those expenses to get higher. Canadians are feeling the pinch.

98 words

Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24

May/21/24 9:56:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, if the leader of the Conservative Party has made one thing clear, it is that, after nine years, the NDP-Liberal government is not worth the cost. It is not worth the cost for the out-of-control spending. Federal government spending is up 43% since 2019. It is not worth the cost for increasing the deficit. Canada's total debt has ballooned to $1.4 trillion, up from $600 million in 2015 when Stephen Harper was prime minister. It is not worth the cost for interest payments. Canada's interest payments are higher than what we spend on health transfers. Plus, the incompetent finance minister forgot to lock in Canada's debts at lower interest rates, costing us billions more. It is not worth the cost for our hard-earned savings, as it is imposing the largest capital gains increase in decades. Because this budget, the government and the Prime Minister are not worth the cost, I will be proudly voting against this budget. Before this budget came down in mid-April, common-sense Conservatives sent a letter to the Prime Minister with three demands to fix the budget: one, axe the tax on farmers and food by immediately passing Bill C-234 in its original form; two, build the homes, not bureaucracy, by requiring cities to permit 15% more homes each year as a condition for receiving federal infrastructure money; and, three, cap the spending with a dollar-for-dollar rule to bring down interest rates and inflation, so the government must save a dollar for every new dollar of spending. The Prime Minister refused to listen and the result is a budget that the NDP-Liberal government delivered just a few short weeks ago that is just more of the same that broke our country in the first place. Common-sense Conservatives will not support this runaway train wreck of a budget, nor will we support the NDP-Liberal government, which has broken our country, because the truth is that the budgeting of the government is like pressing the accelerator on a runaway train. Its budgets have boosted spending by 43% since 2019, which is like pouring gas on the inflationary fire, which drives up interest rates. This increased spending further endangers our social programs and jobs by adding more debt and more interest payments. Frankly, this spending spree will not stop until common-sense Conservatives are able to start governing, stop that runaway train and turn it around. The Liberals and their costly NDP partners are not worth the cost for any generation. The government has doubled rent, mortgage payments and down payments. Food is getting so expensive that food banks received a record two million visits in a single month last year, with a million additional visits expected this year. While life has gotten worse for Canadians, the NDP-Liberals are spending more than ever before. This year's budget will include nearly $40 billion in new inflationary spending. Former Liberal governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge, said that this budget is the worst budget since 1982. This year, Canada will spend $54.1 billion to service the NDP-Liberal debt. This is more money than the government is sending to the provinces for health care. Both the Bank of Canada and former Liberal finance minister John Manley told the Prime Minister that he was pressing on the inflationary gas pedal with all this additional spending, but the Liberals did not listen. As a result, the Bank of Canada has implemented the most aggressive interest rate hikes in its history. As millions of Canadians are renewing their mortgages and know this right now, the NDP-Liberal government simply is not worth the cost. Let us talk about the carbon tax. We will hear many myths coming from the NDP-Liberal government concerning the carbon tax. I want to dispel some of them for the people back in Saskatoon West who are watching. The first myth is that the carbon tax does not add to inflation. Canadians know that is not true. They know it is making everything more expensive and miserable for everyone. The International Monetary Fund defines the carbon tax. It states: Carbon taxes, levied on...oil products...in proportion to their carbon content, can be collected from fuel suppliers. They in turn will pass on the tax in the form of higher prices for electricity, gasoline, heating oil, and so on, as well as for the products and services that depend on them. This is black and white. Carbon taxes are meant to make everything more expensive. Energy, products, food and everything else that we buy are all more expensive. Boy oh boy, has the NDP-Liberal carbon tax been very successful in making everything much more expensive. Anyone who goes to the grocery store knows the price of food has increased astronomically since the carbon tax came into effect. One cannot buy carrots, potatoes, eggs, milk, cheese, chicken, beef, pork or even Kraft Dinner without burning through one's paycheque. The Prime Minister has blamed this laughably on the war in Ukraine. How much of our cheese, milk, carrots and Kraft Dinner come from Russia or Ukraine? Let me say that it is zero, yet, as any common-sense Saskatchewan person can tell us, Canada produces and manufactures our own food. What does affect the domestic price of food is when the Canadian farmer must suddenly start paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in carbon taxes to fuel his farm equipment, keep the greenhouses hot, and move the manufacturing line and processing facilities. These costs get passed on to the retailer. The retailer, of course, has their own carbon taxes to pay on the electricity to keep the lights on and keep the fridges and freezers cold while absorbing whatever extra carbon tax costs were incurred by the transport trucks delivering the food to that retailer. All those taxes get added up and passed on to the consumer. That is how the carbon tax is making everything more expensive. That is inflation, plain and simple. There is a second myth to dispel about the carbon tax. The Prime Minister goes around touting his so-called carbon rebate cheques as his new Marxist wealth redistribution project. He tells Canadians to not worry about paying carbon taxes because he will just give it back to them with a quarterly cheque. Is that true? Like everything the Prime Minister says and does, it may seem true in his world, but in the real world, he is absolutely wrong. The Parliamentary Budget Officer, an independent officer of Parliament who is not beholden to any political party, looked at the Prime Minister's claims and produced a very detailed report. Using the Prime Minister's own figures and math, he went across Canada and examined how much everyone pays in carbon tax and how much they get back in these so-called rebates. In my home province of Saskatchewan, this year the Liberals will collect an average of $2,618 from every family, but the Liberals will only rebate on average $2,093. That means that each Saskatchewan family will lose $525. Only in the Prime Minister's head does losing over $500 mean that someone is coming out ahead. Within five years, as the carbon tax quadruples, that net loss would be well over $1,700 per year for each family. It is clear that only in the alternative reality the Prime Minister lives in does a loss of $1,700 every year turn out to be a win. As such, myth one is that the carbon tax does not make everything more expensive, but we know that it does exactly that. Myth two is that families get the carbon tax back, when the truth is they do not, leaving each family $500 in the hole. The third myth is that the NDP is somehow not to blame for the Prime Minister's brazen disregard for the Canadian public every time he raises the carbon tax. The fact is that the coalition government agreement the NDP and Liberals struck is akin to one of the greatest heists ever committed against the Canadian taxpayer. Did the Prime Minister put the gun to the taxpayers and pull the trigger? He absolutely did, but it was the NDP that loaded the gun, kept the getaway vehicle idling when the dirty work was being done and then put its foot on the accelerator to make sure the Liberals got a clean getaway. Myth number four is that the home heating oil exemption was not meant to help Liberal MPs in the Maritimes. The truth is that they created this exemption so people heating their homes in Atlantic Canada did not have to pay carbon tax. I can clearly see that in the announcement filled with all the Liberal Maritime MPs. When Saskatchewan thought this type of exemption should also apply to people heating their homes in our frigid province, what did the Prime Minister do instead? If I turn to page 408 in annex 3 of the budget, it would give the Liberals the legal authority to prosecute the Saskatchewan government for not collecting the carbon tax on natural gas. As such, exempting home heating in Atlantic Canada is A-okay for the Liberals. Exempting home heating in Saskatchewan would be a criminal act, so obviously this shows the lengths to which the Prime Minister is willing to go to favour one region of Canada over another. Ultimately, as a member of Parliament, I must make a decision on how I will be voting on the budget. How do I represent the interests of the people of Saskatoon West? Do I vote in favour of higher taxes, out-of-control spending, massive inflationary debt payments and no end in sight? Many folks in my riding email me, almost on a daily basis, imploring me to stop doing these very things. They are very concerned that our activist Prime Minister is breaking Canada. They see the crime, chaos and destruction are on our streets. They feel the pinch of higher grocery prices and higher taxes. As such, do I vote against another wasteful budget, a budget that is meant to harm Canadians, a budget that raises their taxes and increases inflation? I am a Conservative, and I believe in common sense. I am voting no to the budget. I am voting non-confidence in the NDP-Liberal government, and I am voting in favour of us having a carbon tax election as soon as possible. Let us bring it home.

1773 words

Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24

May/9/24 12:28:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member talks about so-called safe supply and harm reduction, saying that we need to do more of this, that we need more examples of this and that we need more programs to expand the scope, etc. I direct him to British Columbia. After barely a year, the NDP government there, which was a big supporter of this, all of a sudden pushed back and wanted to backtrack as fast as it could. It applied some common sense to say that it does not really make sense to have free drugs in public places. The irony is that the premier is facing an election. The people are filled with common sense, and with the voter protest, he had to do that. One of the key points of so-called safe supply is the government providing free hard drugs, hydromorphone. This is what has been happening in British Columbia. We know these free drugs are being sold to young people in particular. As they end up in the hands of young people, more new addicts are created. Does the member think it is a good plan, and does he support the federal government providing free drugs that end up in the hands of children.

206 words

Context: House Hansard - 309 - May/6/24

May/9/24 10:04:52 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present a petition on behalf of Hong Kongers living in Canada. The petitioners are concerned about the measures to assist Hong Kong residents in Canada, commonly known as stream A and stream B. They write that, as of January, over 15,500 permanent residency applications had been received, with approximately 7,500 granted, leaving over 8,000 applications in the backlog. Because of the shortage of admission targets, the processing time has exceeded the stipulated 6.5 months, with some applicants waiting up to a year or more. The petitioners are calling on the Minister of Immigration, Citizenship and Refugees to acknowledge the humanitarian crisis that has occurred, adhere to and uphold the priority processing guidelines as outlined and allocate additional admission targets to the Hong Kong pathway to effectively address the backlog.

142 words

Context: House Hansard - 303 - Apr/19/24

May/6/24 3:59:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have no problem with Canadians getting the drugs they need. I am doing something the government does not often do, and that is to think ahead. This is the first bit of the pharmacare legislation it is talking about, with a couple of drugs. There are plans to do more. Many Canadians already have drug care coverage. I am curious as to why the program is being developed in the way it is because there is a large percentage of Canadians who have coverage. One of the big questions I often get is whether Canadians are going to have to opt out and lose the coverage they have to go with this. The costs are the big concern. The PBO has said there would potentially be tens of billions of dollars being spent on the pharmacare program once it is implemented. Why are we spending money on something that Canadians already have? This is a question I have. On top of that, we know that Liberals cannot be trusted. We look at the cost of taxes, which have gone up. The cost of housing has gone up. The cost of groceries and food has gone up. I just do not see how Canadians can trust the Liberal government to implement something such as a pharmacare program at any kind of a cost that would not cause taxes to go up.

234 words

Context: House Hansard - 303 - Apr/19/24

Apr/19/24 1:31:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I know it really annoys the NDP when we talk about this. Its members need to stop supporting the Liberals if that is what they want. Life imprisonment would mean that if someone commits murder and gets a life sentence, they would serve a minimum of 25 to 40 years before parole eligibility. Let us face it: Right now the sentences under the current woke system of putting criminals first mean letting murderers walk away after very little time served. I will give colleagues some examples. Many may recall that a few years back, the NDP-Liberals made changes to ease up on the sentencing rules. Around that time, Christopher Garnier drugged, raped and murdered off-duty Halifax police officer Catherine Campbell. He did horrible things to her, spread her body parts around Halifax and treated her remains like human garbage, according to the judge. As outraged as the judge was, the best he could do was to sentence the serial rapist and now murderer to 13 and a half years, reduced to only 11 years with time served. Imagine that, 11 years for drugging, raping, murdering and desecrating the body of a police officer. By the way, the coroner testified that it took Catherine Campbell six minutes to die by strangulation after her rape; that is just two years of prison time for every minute he took to kill her. This could happen only in Canada and only in the NDP-Liberals' woke version of Canada. Let us talk about Rylen Heavenfire in Calgary; this man got only four years for shooting and killing his brother with a gun. The facts are undisputed: “Heavenfire pointed the shotgun he was carrying at his brother and shot him in the face”, yet the judge said the man could be rehabilitated. What about punishing Heavenfire for taking the life of his brother? Does his brother’s life not count even a little bit, or is the victim in this story just another piece of human garbage? The scales of justice are represented by an icon of a lady wearing a blindfold. She does not see race, skin colour or whom one prays to. All she cares about is balancing the scales. What is fair to the victims is justice. Is four years for raising a shotgun, pulling the trigger and murdering one's brother really justice? Conservatives believe that if someone murders someone, then they should be punished for their crime. For those of us with actual common sense, it is not the victims who should be treated like human garbage. Let me wrap up by saying that I and my colleagues in the Conservative Party fully support the legislation in front of us today. We believe in common-sense justice. We believe criminals like Paul Bernardo who were sentenced to maximum security should not be getting special treatment. They should be in maximum security. We believe in justice for repeat victims, not coddling repeat criminals. Conservatives believe in protecting families in their homes, not allowing rapists and murderers to roam our streets unpunished. It is time to stop the crime. It is time to bring it home.

531 words

Context: House Hansard - 301 - Apr/17/24

Apr/19/24 1:23:38 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-351 Bill C-308 Bill C-296 Bill C-291

Madam Speaker, it has been almost a year since one of the most notorious serial killers in Canada was moved from a maximum-security prison to a medium-security facility under provisions of the NDP-Liberals' so-called justice legislation, Bill C-83. This serial killer is infamous for his long string of rapes in Scarborough; the rape, torture and murder of his sister-in-law; and the rape, torture and murder of two very young, innocent girls from St. Catharines. We all know his partner in crime, his wife, Karla Homolka, skated with a 10-year sentence, despite actively participating in the crimes as per the videotape the police had in their possession. This rapist, this serial killer, this monster is Paul Bernardo. Let me acknowledge the pain and suffering, and the repeated victimization, of the families of Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French. I cannot imagine the pain that they live with everyday. God bless them. After Bernardo, that monster, was found guilty of his crimes, the judge correctly sentenced him to life imprisonment as a dangerous offender, meaning he should have stayed locked up in maximum security until he died of old age. However, no, our current government, this woke bunch of MPs who are running our justice system, decided that Paul Bernardo is the real victim, a nice, fine, misunderstood fellow who deserves medium security. The Liberals passed a law, Bill C-83, which explicitly tells police, judges and Correctional Services Canada to impose the least restrictive measures on a person as possible. In practice, this means that this monster, Paul Bernardo, now lives in a dormitory, has a tennis court and ice rink for recreation, and access to sharp instruments when he gets that urge to murder again. It is not even close to maximum security. That makes no sense. On June 23 last year, I asked the justice minister, in this very House. why Paul Bernardo gets such special treatment. What was his answer? Of course, he did not answer at all. Instead, one of the Prime Minister’s attack dogs got up to say that, just because Paul Bernardo is a bad man, it does not mean the Liberals did anything wrong with their legislation. Yes, everyone heard me right: the Liberals refused to take responsibility for their own actions. However, members need not worry. Since the current NDP-Liberal government refuses to take responsibility for its own actions, it will be the Conservatives who once again step up to the plate to fix the situation. What would that fix? Bill C-351 is a bill introduced by my great Conservative colleague from Quebec. This legislation would fix the mess created by the Liberals in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. It would amend section 28 of the act, which currently states, “If a person is or is to be confined in a penitentiary, the Service shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the penitentiary in which they are confined is one that provides them with the least restrictive environment”. That is what the Liberals have changed it to say. They made it as easy on the convicted criminal as possible. This is why Bernardo is getting all the special treatment. My colleague's bill proposes to change that section to say, “ensure that the penitentiary in which they are confined is one that provides them with an environment that contains only the necessary restrictions”. In other words, only make it easier on a convicted criminal if it is absolutely necessary. This legislation is making a significant fix through changing the words “least restrictive environment” to “environment that contains only the necessary restrictions”. While it is a simple language change, it is a massive policy change. When it comes to crime and what to do with criminals who victimize Canadians, Conservatives, such as myself, my colleague and our leader, have very different approaches than those of the NDP-Liberal government. Conservatives believe that victims of crimes, those who are innocent, who have been terrorized in their own homes, have had their cars stolen, have been mugged on our streets, who have been are raped and those who have had family members murdered, should come first. The NDP-Liberals have a very different approach than Conservatives do to crime. I believe in common sense. If a crime was committed, the criminal needs to answer. The woke, NDP-Liberal approach is that the criminal is the single most important person in the justice system. They believe, and they have written into law, that police, prosecutors, judges, jurors, and jailers must take into account diversity, equity, inclusion and critical race theory when dealing with criminals. They have put into place checklists. Does this criminal have any sort of skin colour, racial background, sexual identity or anything in their background that would warrant that criminal to walk away scot-free? If so, let them go. That is the NDP-Liberal approach to criminal justice. This woke crowd does not care if a criminal has raped a woman, kidnapped a child or murdered a indigenous man because, in their minds, that so-called underprivileged criminal is more important than any victim can be. In their topsy-turvy world view, it actually sees those committing the crimes as the people who need to be cared for, while the actual victims continue to suffer over and over again. Senator Kim Pate, appointed by the current Liberal Prime Minister, summed up the Liberal hug-a-thug position quite nicely last year when she addressed the Fredericton City Council. She said, “Canada’s criminal legal system is unjust, discriminatory and biased against indigenous people and people of colour.” I agree that it has been unjust against indigenous victims of crime like those on the James Smith Cree Nation. The coroner's inquest, which was held in my home riding of Saskatoon West, by the way, was clear on the point. The man who murdered all those indigenous people on the reserve should never have been released in the first place. However, folks like Senator Pate do not particularly care about those victims, do they? Instead, they are making excuses for the inexcusable. Senator Pate is one of the many examples of what is absolutely wrong with NDP-Liberal justice. Once a crime is committed, the criminal must be punished, period. That is why a common-sense Conservative government will bring in tough-on-crime legislation. We will lock up the criminals. We will stop the crime. “Diversity, equity, inclusion” and critical race theory approaches that lead to “hug a thug” and to repeat offenders will be swept away. Common-sense Conservatives will bring back mandatory minimums. We will crack down on the people who sexually exploit our children and on the people who peddle sexually explicit images of children on the Internet. Indeed, my Conservative colleague for North Okanagan—Shuswap brought in his private member’s bill, Bill C-291, to do this very thing. We will take the issue of women being trafficked into sexual slavery seriously and not laugh it off as sex workers and body positivity, as men pay their pimps in order to abuse and demean women. My colleague, the Conservative MP for Peace River—Westlock has introduced legislation in the House to accomplish this through Bill C-308, an act respecting the national strategy to combat human trafficking. We will ensure that men who commit violence against pregnant women face stiffer sentences. The NDP and the Liberals voted to kill the legislation, based on the justification that beating a pregnant woman senseless is just another form of abortion, almost as if that were a good thing. I would argue that the last thing a civilized country like Canada should do is beat pregnant women and not punish criminals properly for it. I proudly supported the legislation brought forward by my Conservative colleague, the member for Yorkton—Melville, that would have allowed the judge to consider pregnancy as an aggravating factor when sentencing someone who has beaten a pregnant woman. Shall I give another example? Why not? Let us contrast, juxtapose and expose the soft-on-crime approach of the NDP-Liberals. My Conservative colleague, the MP for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, has introduced Bill C-296, the respecting families of murdered and brutalized persons act, which would make life imprisonment actually life imprisonment. That means that if someone commits—

1424 words

Context: House Hansard - 290 - Mar/18/24

Apr/17/24 2:17:14 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the NDP-Liberal government simply is not worth the cost. On April 1, it raised the carbon tax by 23%. This hits farmers and our food industry particularly hard. Canadians understand that when farmers, truckers and processors pay thousands of dollars in carbon tax, this makes the food we buy more expensive. Canadians are paying way too much at the grocery store for their food. Another two million Canadians are visiting food banks each month just to feed their families because they can no longer afford groceries. Conservatives are fighting against the NDP-Liberal government every day to lower the price of groceries and to bring tax relief for Canadians. That is why Conservatives brought in Bill C-234 to remove the carbon tax on Canadian farmers. However, the Prime Minister’s hand-picked senators have gutted this bill, and NDP and Liberal MPs have worked very hard to keep the carbon tax on food. It is time to axe the tax on farmers and food by immediately passing Bill C-234 in its original form. Let us axe the tax and bring it home.

191 words

Context: House Hansard - 268 - Dec/14/23

Mar/18/24 5:55:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, when we saw what happened in Israel following the heinous attacks by Hamas on October 7, and when we see what is happening to innocent civilians in Gaza who are also victims of Hamas's violent ideology, our hearts go out to all the innocent people who are suffering, especially because many of those suffering are women and children. Conservatives want peace in the region, and we believe that, ultimately, this would be achieved through a two-state solution, negotiated and agreed upon by both sides. However, we also know this can only happen once Hamas and other terrorist organizations are removed from power. We know this can only happen when Israelis and Palestinians can be guaranteed peace and security, living side by side. This has been the policy of Canada for decades, under both Liberal and Conservative governments, yet it is the policy that this motion seeks to upend. Will the member admit that by abandoning this policy, this motion would do nothing to bring peace and security to Israelis and Palestinians?

175 words

Context: House Hansard - 261 - Dec/4/23

Dec/14/23 10:09:09 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, I have the honour to table today a Conservative supplementary opinion to the report on backlogs and delays. Eight years of Liberal-NDP leadership in the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship were described by one witness as “nothing short of a dumpster fire”. The main report includes many Conservative contributions and recommendations that we proposed to the committee. That said, some common-sense recommendations were rejected by the NDP-Liberal majority while other recommendations could not be accepted by the Conservatives. For example, the Liberals are moving toward a “click for your citizenship” system, while Conservatives believe that taking the oath of citizenship should be treated with gravity and respect and be done in person, unless there are exceptional circumstances. After eight years, we know the Prime Minister is not worth the cost, and his Liberal-made immigration backlog is causing more chaos in the department, as well as destroying the faith of Canadians in our immigration system. However, they should have no fear because soon a common-sense Conservative government will be here to restore faith and clean up these backlogs. Let us bring it home.

205 words

Context: House Hansard - 260 - Dec/1/23

Dec/4/23 2:02:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with the member for Prince Albert, to pay tribute to one of Canada's agricultural leaders, who passed away recently. Terry Summach took over the family business, Flexi-Coil, at the age of 21 due to his father's passing. Terry's business skill and ingenuity helped him grow this manufacturing business into a major Saskatoon company, employing thousands of people over the years. Flexi-Coil was so successful that Case New Holland acquired it and continues to manufacture planting and seeding equipment in Saskatoon to this day. My colleague and I both had the privilege of working for Terry at Flexi-Coil and owe much of our work ethic, creativity and risk-taking to Terry's training and leadership. More than anything, Terry cared about people and investing all he could into them. His impact lives on in the lives of his direct family and the massive indirect family that he mentored and helped along the way. His impact has also been felt in Canada and around the world through his many charitable endeavours. Terry's unwavering faith in Jesus Christ was his rock. He lived his entire life with God at the centre. Well done to Terry. He will be missed.

209 words

Dec/1/23 11:11:06 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, after eight years, this costly NDP-Liberal coalition is at it again, planning to quadruple the carbon tax on Canadian farmers. Canadians understand that when farmers, truckers and processors pay thousands of dollars in carbon tax, this makes the food we buy more expensive. The price of food is so dire that the Ontario Hunger Report confirmed that food bank visits are up 38% in Ontario, the largest year-over-year increase ever recorded. It is not just in Ontario; the director of Saskatoon's food bank said, “After about 18 months of living through increased inflation, folks are really struggling. We’re seeing about 23,000 [food bank users] per month.” That is in a city of only 300,000 people. Conservative Bill C-234 would create another carbon tax carve-out by removing the carbon tax on Canadian farmers. The good news is that this will make food prices cheaper in Canada. The even better news is that the environment minister has said that he will resign if this bill passes. It is time for the Prime Minister to tell his appointed senators to stop stalling and pass Bill C-234 to bring home lower food prices for Canadians.

206 words

Farmers

Nov/23/23 1:44:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, Canadians are certainly suffering from high prices. At the root cause of almost everything is the carbon tax. The carbon tax adds costs, first of all, to the growers who grow and produce food. Then the tax is added to the companies that truck the food to the places that process the food. Then there is the grocers who pay carbon tax on their facilities and everything else. There is carbon tax throughout the system. We are not talking a little, we are talking tens of thousands, and, in some cases, hundreds of thousands, of dollars for a farmer, for example. Those costs have to go somewhere and they do not get those costs back. Those costs end up in the price of food Canadians need to buy every day, and it is one of the big drivers in why things are getting more expensive, whether we are talking about bread, meat or whatever it might be. For that reason, two million people a month are going to food banks. People I have talked to tell me they cannot afford to buy meat anymore and are feeding their children cereal. This has to stop. We have to get rid of this terrible, destructive carbon tax.

207 words

Nov/23/23 1:43:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am very hesitant to say that the solution to the housing problem is to get the government more involved, to have it owning and producing houses. The current government especially has proven it is unable to get that done. I was a home builder before I became a member of Parliament. I probably built more houses than the government has ever built. The fact is that we cannot rely on governments, especially the NDP-Liberal government, to have any hope of building more houses. We have to engage all different parties. The more the government gets out of the way, the better it will be for our future in housing and the economy in general.

118 words

Nov/23/23 1:41:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the one member in the House who has spoken more than anybody, and I guess we could call that filibustering, is the member who just spoke. He loves to speak all the time. The Conservatives have a job to do in the House. Our job is to defend the Canadians who we represent. Our job is to prevent foolish policies from being implemented by the government. We do our jobs. I am sorry to say that the member is admitting, I guess, that he is not very good at his job, being the secretary to the House leader, and that we can do a better job of it. Our job here is to hold the government to account and to do everything we can to ensure good laws and good legislation are passed by the House.

138 words