SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Hon. Ed Fast

  • Member of Parliament
  • Conservative
  • Abbotsford
  • British Columbia
  • Voting Attendance: 66%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $146,571.88

  • Government Page
  • Feb/15/22 1:41:32 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-12 
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the member meant when she said “get with the program on that,” whatever “that” is. We have been consistent on this side of the House in supporting seniors and speaking up on behalf of seniors. Throughout this whole pandemic, it has been Conservatives that have been pushing the Liberal government to step into the breach and to support the seniors who are vulnerable across our country. We will continue to do that.
83 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/15/22 1:39:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-12 
Mr. Speaker, I am going to have to take issue with the suggestion by the member that somehow Conservatives do not support seniors. In fact, I would remind that member that it was a Conservative member of Parliament, the member for Sarnia—Lambton, who brought forward a bill to protect seniors' pensions against insolvency, against bankruptcy, against the big corporate raiders coming along, bankrupting a company and then leaving seniors out to dry. It is the Conservative opposition in this House that is stepping up and standing up for seniors to make sure that they have the pensions they deserve and have paid into.
105 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/15/22 1:37:54 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-12 
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the House, I would never mock that individual. I have great respect for him, but he is incorrect in suggesting that we did not support these benefits and then voted in favour of them. I never, in my speech, suggested that these benefits were not necessary for Canadians. In fact, I gave a speech in the House supporting these COVID benefits because they were necessary to keep Canadians afloat. Seniors never expected that they would be betrayed and told after the fact that these benefits would be taxable, especially when they were on the cusp of poverty.
102 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/15/22 1:37:19 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-12 
Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting. They are mocking again. After denying it, they are mocking seniors across our country. At no time has our Conservative—
27 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/15/22 1:26:41 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-12 
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this bill, which is another case of the Liberal government trying to clean up after itself. I will be splitting my time with the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London. I come from the beautiful city of Abbotsford, which is nestled between majestic Mount Baker and the mighty Fraser River. We are very grateful to live in that community, but it is a community that has many seniors. In fact, my own office is in a tower that houses seniors. Another element of Abbotsford that I am very proud of is the fact that Abbotsford is the most generous census metropolitan area in the country. Of all the 27 census metropolitan areas in this country, we are the most generous by a country mile. That is a good thing. It is a great model for other communities to emulate. The reason I share this is that much of the generosity actually comes from the seniors in Abbotsford. These are seniors who contributed to building our country. These are seniors who today still contribute to the fabric of our nation, yet here we are. Some of these very seniors are well-to-do and live comfortable lives, but many are living on the edge of poverty. I know my Liberal colleagues are mocking us today. It is a shame that something as serious as this would be treated with such contempt by our Liberal friends across the way. I will say this. The seniors in my community, many of whom are on the edge of poverty, took an incredible hit from the incompetence of the current government. This is actually a story of what was intended to be something good, which was a response to the COVID pandemic. The government, stepping up and hoping to invest in the lives of Canadians and make sure that Canadians did not slip through the cracks during the pandemic, invested heavily in support programs. When the government invested in these support programs to help Canadians through the COVID pandemic, they forgot a few things. First, they forgot that these support programs that helped Canadians had to be properly designed to make sure that Canadians who truly needed the support received the support, that fraudsters who may have wanted to apply for these benefits did not get away with it, and that people who lived outside of our country and who did not need these benefits did not qualify for them. Unfortunately, many of the programs that our Liberal friends across the way implemented had none of those safeguards. They did not have the oversight, and they did not have the scrutiny. The Liberals rammed the stuff through the House of Commons. Again, my Liberal colleagues across the aisle are laughing. They are laughing at seniors across our country for the pain that these Liberals have caused them. In delivering these support programs, there were design flaws. There were oversight and scrutiny problems along the way, so that people received benefits who should not have received those benefits. There were hundreds of millions of dollars going outside of our country to people who did not even have a connection to Canada, but applied and somehow qualified for these programs. There was a second problem. The Liberals forgot that some of the most critical programs that seniors rely on in this country, such as old age security and the guaranteed income supplement, are means-tested and depend on taxable income from the previous year. Some of these seniors applied for the government support programs. They qualified for them and they received the support. After the fact, they were told that the amounts that the government had just sent them were fully taxable, and they were going to have to include them in their taxable income. Of course, what happened was that vulnerable seniors who trusted the Liberal government realized they would no longer qualify for the GIS. They realized that the funds they received from the government so generously were now going to be clawed back by that very same Liberal government. Therein lies the rub. The Liberals made a mistake. In the vernacular, they screwed up. It gets worse. The Liberal government has known for almost a year that this was a problem, and that seniors were distressed in the knowledge that this money was going to be clawed back and their ability to qualify for seniors' benefits, such as the GIS, was going to be compromised. Can colleagues imagine the distress of someone living on the poverty line who is then told they have to repay thousands of dollars to the government? These were thousands of dollars that seniors did not actually have. For a year, the government has known this and failed to act. The Liberals failed to act for a number of reasons. First, there was the situation where Parliament could have been recalled in the fall of 2021 to deal with legislation that would fix this problem. Instead, what did they do? They called an unnecessary and expensive election that changed absolutely nothing. They still are in a minority government. Over half a billion dollars was spent on an unnecessary election, and they delayed their response to a problem they had created for seniors. The election was held. Nothing has changed. The Prime Minister could not recall Parliament right away. He took many months before he recalled Parliament. In the meantime, seniors have been calling my office saying, “Ed, what am I going to do? How am I going to get through this? I don't have the money to repay these benefits that they are now clawing back from me. How am I going to survive? How am I going to put food on the table? How am I going to pay rent?” This is a problem of the Liberal government's making. Here we are now, almost a year later, and what we see are government MPs giving speeches in the House, talking about how great they are and how they love seniors, and saying that this legislation is going to provide certainty for seniors across our country. The minister herself, in her responses in question period, was pretending that this was not a problem. In fact, the Liberals are doing seniors a favour with this legislation. The minister's responses have been nothing short of a word salad. I think she was hoping to create some kind of a fog that seniors in this country would not see through. The fact is that this is a problem of the Liberal government's making. Now it is asking us, as Parliament, to fix and clean up its mess. This is symptomatic of the Liberal government: It is constantly asking Parliament to clean up after it. They ask us to get out the shovels and clean up the mess. Canadians are getting very tired of this. I hope that Canadians who are watching today understand that the problem in the House is the Liberal government and its leader. It is the most divisive, incompetent and unethical government this country has ever seen. It is incompetent even when it comes to our seniors, of all people. I will leave those thoughts with members and the Canadian people. I hope the Liberals learn a lesson from this. They are constantly doing this: screwing up time and again. This has to stop.
1240 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/1/21 7:51:49 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think the member is rewriting history. I was there, as he was, but I was on the government side. I have reviewed that agreement very carefully, and I was responsible for renegotiating or extending it for two years when it expired. First, the lumber industry across Canada embraced this agreement. It saw it as the best outcome it could hope for given U.S. intransigence. Second, on the $1 billion, again, the member does not recall this quite correctly. Half of the money went to the American industry and the other half went into a shared fund that was used jointly by Canada and the United States to promote the lumber industry. It was $500 million for that jointly administered fund, and then another $4.5 billion for Canadian producers. I see that as a good-news story.
141 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/1/21 7:47:51 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the member recalls that back when the softwood lumber agreement was negotiated and settled under a previous Conservative government, every softwood lumber province across the country had agreed with it. All producers across the country were onside. Industry was onside. Governments were onside. This was a big win for Canada. Can members imagine $4.5 billion U.S.? The equivalent of that today is $6 billion and it came back to our producers. Instead of the government keeping that money, which I am sure the Liberals would have done, we as the Conservatives said that the rightful owners of that refund were the producers themselves. The member should be celebrating that victory rather than scolding us.
123 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/1/21 7:46:01 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is very easy to answer that. The softwood agreement expired shortly before the election. It was in October 2015 that it expired. In fact, our Liberal friends across the way were making all kinds of promises about how they would extend and renew the agreement. They said they had a much better relationship with the United States. Today we know that was all bunkum. It was all a fabrication. The Liberals had no relationship with the United States. Today we know our relationship with the United States is a failed relationship under the current Liberal government. It is sad to see when we think that under Stephen Harper we had such a strong relationship. Now, under three successive presidents of the United States, the Prime Minister has been unable to achieve anything on the bilateral trade front.
140 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/1/21 7:39:57 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to start off by saying that I will be splitting my time with the member for Calgary Nose Hill. I would like to provide the counterpoint to what we have just heard from the Liberal side, because we have to distinguish fiction from fact. The truth is, there is a long history to this dispute, going way back to at least 1982. It was a Liberal government under Paul Martin that finally tried to bring peace to the woods. This was called the war of the woods because we had ongoing battles between the United States and Canada on the softwood lumber issue. Unfortunately, Paul Martin failed to get a deal done, to get peace in the woods. His trade minister, Jim Peterson, failed to get an agreement for Canadians. Then we had an election in 2006. Stephen Harper was elected prime minister of our country and he did something remarkable. He reached across the aisle and asked David Emerson to cross the floor and join his cabinet. He had one main task, and that was to resolve the lumber dispute. David Emerson had deep roots in the softwood lumber industry. He knew it well. Stephen Harper knew that David Emerson could get the deal done, and guess what? He did it successfully. In fact, he was remarkably successful. He negotiated a seven-year softwood lumber agreement and bought peace for seven years. He also negotiated a potential two-year extension. On top of that, he negotiated a $4.5-billion U.S. repayment to Canada that went back to the softwood lumber producers in Canada. It was a big win for Canada. It was a big win for the Conservative government under Stephen Harper because it brought us that peace we needed in the woods. That softwood lumber agreement needed to be ratified in the House through a ways and means motion, and guess what? The Liberals voted against it in 2006. Only one Liberal voted in favour of it: Joe Comuzzi. He boldly stood up against the duplicity of the Liberals at the time. We later ended up renewing that agreement, so we had a total of nine years of peace between Canada and the United States. Today we find ourselves in a situation. For the last six years, the Liberal government, the finance minister and the Prime Minister have been continually promising to resolve this dispute. In fact, I have here a CBC article going back to March 12, 2016. The headline is “[Canada's trade minister] heralds ‘real breakthrough’ on softwood lumber negotiations”. That was six years ago. That trade minister was quoted as saying, “We have now managed to get the Americans to the table, we have managed to raise attention to this issue at the very highest levels.” She went on to say, “I don't want to downplay to anyone the complexity—the fiendish complexity—of the softwood lumber issue [but] this was a real breakthrough.” That was six years ago. What happened to that breakthrough? Time after time, when we ask questions in the House about how those negotiations are going, we are told we are going to get a deal, yet it has been six years. That, by any definition, is failure, especially when we compare it to the standard the Harper government set in negotiating nine years of peace in the woods. For six years we have had a war in the woods and that war continues. In fact, today we are in a situation where the U.S. has doubled tariffs on softwood lumber exports from Canada. Shame on the government. Shame on the Prime Minister. Shame on the finance minister, who was trade minister when she made those bold statements. I know we can do better and Canadians deserve better.
646 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border