- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- NDP
- South Okanagan—West Kootenay
- British Columbia
- Voting Attendance: 61%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $128,729.57
- Government Page
- Feb/9/24 12:53:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment my hon. colleague on his work in our science and research committee. He is a very strong advocate for research. He and I have been pressing the Liberal government to provide more sufficient support, especially for graduate students. That is not what I am going to ask him about today. We are talking about a different subject, but I wanted to thank him for that work.
He claimed, in his speech, that the funding rates for francophones were lower than for anglophones, but in the report, there is conflicting data that shows that the percentage of francophone applicants asking for money from the tri-council is actually higher, in all cases, than for English applicants.
I am wondering if he could comment on the source of that conflicting information. It looks like, to me, francophones do very well in funding applications.
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/23 1:38:05 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague from Lac-Saint-Louis is a champion for all things water in the House and in this country. I would like to thank him for mentioning my old friend, Bob Sandford, who I worked with in the Rockies back in the early 1970s and has gone on to be a global spokesman for water issues on behalf of Canada.
It is hard not to agree with the bill before us because the issues are so dire and the need is so great, but it makes me wonder why the government has not been doing this over the last eight years. What we really need for flood protection in Canada, on top of the prediction, is to have communities ready for floods. It is one thing to say a flood is coming in the next two days, but it is another thing to have a community ready. We need dedicated federal funding to help communities reshape their defences for floods ahead of time, and we do not have that.
174 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/21/23 2:15:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities is in Ottawa this week to discuss the essential work its members do in over 2,000 communities. Sixteen of those communities are in my riding: Fruitvale, Montrose, Trail, Warfield, Rossland, Castlegar, Slocan, Silverton, New Denver, Nakusp, Grand Forks, Greenwood, Midway, Osoyoos, Oliver, Penticton and the regional districts of Okanagan–Similkameen, Kootenay Boundary and Central Kootenay.
I want to single out Leah Main who is a councillor from Silverton. Leah is a champion for rural issues on the FCM executive.
Municipalities are at the pointy end of the stick on some of the toughest issues, such as housing, climate adaptation, public safety, mental health and more. Small towns lack the funds to tackle these massive problems, and many even lack the HR capacity to apply for existing funding programs.
We need to fix this with a more direct allocation of funds so that communities across Canada can do the work that we depend on them to do.
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/7/23 1:39:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we just had a conversation about tradespeople and how important it is to have enough of them. This is not going to happen in one year; it will happen over a number of years.
I would have to do some quick math, but, yes, $4 billion can buy only maybe 400,000 heat pumps. There might be three million households in Canada, so it would take maybe five or 10 years to get through the program, but we have to start it now. This is a very common-sense, easy-to-understand approach with a funding mechanism, a clear goal and clear benefits for all Canadians.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/15/23 7:04:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this adjournment debate arises from a question I asked the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry on May 1.
On that day, as I was asking the question, on the lawn of Parliament Hill, there was a crowd of young researchers from Ottawa universities demanding to be heard by the government. They were part of a cross-country demonstration that day that involved nearly 10,000 graduate students, post-docs, faculty and supporters. They had walked out of 46 institutions across Canada.
Their question for the government was simply this: Why are grad students are getting paid the same amount today as they were being paid 20 years ago? Their wages, which come in the form of federal scholarships and fellowships, cover the full-time work they perform doing their research, and that work is the backbone of our university research in Canada.
These are scholarships, so these are not average students, but our best and brightest, yet the federal government pays them below minimum wage. They are forced to live below the poverty line. Master scholarships have been pegged at $17,500 per year for 20 years. Ph.D. students get a bit more at $21,000. Therefore, my question for the minister is this: Why have these scholarship amounts not changed since 2003?
Last week, at the Standing Committee on Science and Research, we were studying the same question. One of the witnesses was Sarah Laframboise, a Ph.D. student from the University of Ottawa, who had organized the May 1 walkout. She had appeared before our committee exactly one year ago on the same subject. This time, and I am quoting from the blues, she stated, “It is frustrating, however, that in the last year since my appearance there has been no action by our government to solve these problems. During this time, we have 7,000 scientists and 40 scientific associations sign an open letter. We had 3,500 signatures on a petition...delivered to the House of Commons. We rallied on Parliament Hill in August. We spoke to MPs, ministers, media and the public about our cause, and sent over 2,000 emails to our MPs. But this wasn't enough. Budget 2023 contained no new funding for graduate students and post-docs.”
Also testifying was Dr. Maydianne Andrade, a professor of biology at the University of Toronto. She said, and I am again quoting from the blues, “Our current system is a massive filter. It is a filter that is filtering out people as a function of their finances, not as a function of their excellence, not as a function of the likelihood that they might be the next Canadian Nobel prize [winner].
“We are filtering out people who can't take the mental load of living in poverty, those who don't have credit ratings that allow them to take out loans, those who are unable to manage incredibly challenging research agendas while holding down several jobs.
“We are filtering out mature students who have dependents, and we're filtering out anyone whose family can't help support them through this without massive debt.”
The science and research committee recommended last year that these scholarship amounts be increased. We have the advisory panel report on the federal research support system, headed by Dr. Frédéric Bouchard, and commissioned by the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry himself, recommending that these scholarship and fellowship amounts be increased and indexed to inflation. I spoke with Dr. Bouchard recently, and he was mystified as to why these recommendations had not been followed.
Therefore, I will repeat my question: When will this be fixed? When will we start paying our young researchers a living wage so they will stay in Canada, where we need them to be, instead of leaving for any number of countries that would happily pay them twice as much as they receive here?
661 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I really appreciate the work the member does with the all-party tourism caucus.
I come from a tourism riding as well. It is a big part of the economy in South Okanagan—West Kootenay. There are some things in the budget that would really help tourism. There is increased funding to Destination Canada.
However, when I talk to hotels and restaurants, all the businesses in my riding that depend on and grow with tourism, they say that what tourism really needs is a bigger, more available labour force, and what that labour force needs is more housing. There is very little in this budget on housing. That is at the core of so many of the things that are holding the Canadian economy back.
I would simply ask the government to be more bold with housing investments that would allow us to bring in more workers to create the wealth—
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am happy to rise this evening to debate Bill C-47, the budget implementation act.
I would like to start by wishing my daughter, Julia, a very happy birthday yesterday. She brings us much joy.
The budget was tabled about a month ago. We have already voted in principle on these measures, but this bill is a chance to debate in more detail about the legislative changes needed to carry out the initiatives outlined in the budget.
The most impactful part of this budget is the full funding for dental coverage for all Canadians making less than $90,000 who do not already have coverage through an existing plan. This would change the lives of millions of Canadians.
I keep hearing stories from friends and constituents who grew up without dental care because their families simply could not afford to go to the dentist. One friend phoned me soon after she heard about the new dental care plan. She is retired now, but grew up painfully shy after having many of her teeth pulled out as a child because of the lack of regular dental care. That shyness changed her life and personality so much that she still avoids social gatherings. She was very emotional when she told me how much the new dental plan would really make a difference to the lives of Canadians of all ages, but particularly to those of young Canadians. Her example is a clear case of how the lack of dental care is the single visible mark of poverty for Canadians. This dental care program will change all of that forever.
This is an addition to our public health care system that New Democrats have been calling for ever since Tommy Douglas brought universal health care to our country in the 1960s. It would not have happened without the NDP using its power in the current minority government to force the Liberals to act. Both the Liberals and Conservatives voted against dental care in the last Parliament when former MP Jack Harris introduced dental care legislation in this very chamber.
The other missing piece in our national public health care system is pharmacare. Right now, Canadians can go to a doctor for free, but if they are prescribed medication for their condition, they have to pay for that themselves. Millions of Canadians cannot afford their prescriptions and end up in emergency rooms, putting pressure on the critical care part of our health care system, which is already overloaded. A public pharmacare program would provide free prescription medications to all Canadians, while saving us a minimum of $4 billion a year. It is a no-brainer. The Liberals have promised to bring in framework legislation for pharmacare by the end of this year, so it is really concerning there is no mention of it at all in this budget, not a peep.
There is good news in this budget about investments in the clean-energy economy. Significant tax credits will spur development in growth in this critical area. Thanks to the NDP, those tax credits will be tied to good jobs with good union-scale wages. Too often governments give out millions of dollars to big companies only to find that the funds went to executive bonuses and a boost in shareholder dividends. The strings attached to these incentives will ensure that workers are at the centre of the shift to a new clean-energy economy.
I used to work at the University of British Columbia, so I know first-hand how valuable investments in higher education can be. They are essential in this new knowledge economy. This budget has some help for post-secondary students. It will increase the Canada student grants by 40%, up to a maximum of $4,200.
However, the government totally missed the mark by not including anything to help graduate students who are living in poverty. Grad students work full time in their studies. It is their job. Many grad students across Canada are funded by scholarships from the federal government. These students are our best and our brightest, and these scholarships have remained at the same dollar figure and same level since 2003, for 20 years. Masters students are now trying to live on $17,500 per year. It is below the minimum wage. It is below the poverty line.
Students and researchers have been campaigning for over a year to change this. They had big demonstrations here in Ottawa last summer. They appeared before House of Commons committees. The science and research committee recommended that the government not only increase the amounts of individual scholarships, but also increase the number of scholarships. This would help us compete in the information economy and help us stop the brain drain of these young researchers moving to other countries that properly value their talents.
The students were profoundly disappointed when this budget had nothing in it for them. Students and researchers across the country will be staging a big walkout on May 1 to highlight this lack of recognition from the government and this lack of respect. They will not give up until the government agrees to pay them enough so they can live above the poverty line while they generate the innovations that Canadian companies need.
Canadians pay some of the highest interchange fees on credit card payments in the world. This is a real hardship for small businesses that increasingly rely on credit card transactions. New Democrats have been calling for reduced fees for years, for decades. Jack Layton was big on this point. We want to put us on the same level as other countries.
In my role as small business critic, I have talked to Visa, Mastercard, Moneris, the banks, Aeroplan and other players. I know it is a complicated issue, so I was very happily surprised to see that the budget announced real action on this. The lowered fees will save small businesses an average of 27%, which is over $1 billion over five years.
We have been hearing a lot about labour issues in recent days with the job action by the federal civil service. The ability to withhold labour in the face of unfair pay and work conditions is the only power organized labour has. Unfortunately, companies have often chosen to bring in replacement workers when faced with striking workforces. This flies in the face of the right of workers to strike and creates divisions within communities and between neighbours.
The NDP has been trying to get anti-scab legislation passed in this place for years. I remember one of the first private members' bills in 2016, when I was a rookie here, was anti-scab legislation brought forward by one of my NDP colleagues. Unfortunately, the Liberals and Conservatives voted against that bill, as they have for every other piece of anti-scab legislation. Again, I am happy to see that the NDP has used its power here to force the Liberals to bring forward federal anti-scab legislation.
The big disappointment on the labour front in this budget is the lack of any real employment insurance reform. One thing the COVID epidemic quickly taught us was that most Canadian workers are not covered by El. Only 40% are covered. We desperately need a new El system to protect workers for future job losses. If the predictions of some economists for a recession in the near future are correct, those job losses may be just around the corner. We must be ready to protect Canadian workers if that happens.
As I said earlier, while the NDP supports this budget, it is not a budget that an NDP government would table. That is clearly shown on the revenue side of the ledger. Every year Canada forgoes billions of dollars in taxes through legal tax avoidance by Canadian corporations and wealthy individuals. Every year the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The government has made baby steps to reverse the trend that has been going on for decades.
In this budget, the government changed the alternate minimum rate from 15% to 20.5%. That will raise the amount that wealthy Canadians must pay no matter what tax deductions they declare. It will recoup about $3 billion over five years, and 99% of that increase will come from people making more than $300,000 per year.
What we need is a wealth tax that will force super-wealthy Canadians to pay their fair share. What we need is legislation that eliminates the option for Canadian companies to hide their money in offshore tax havens. What we need is an NDP government and a real NDP budget.
1446 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby, for his real championing of so many things that give Canadians a better life. One of the things he has been championing is the green new deal, the idea that we have to have a transition to a cleaner future and leave no workers behind. Because of the NDP pressure on the government, we have significant funding for clean tech in this budget that is tied to good union wages so people can have a respectable life in this new future.
I wonder if my colleague could provide further comments on that and on whether this should be standard operating procedure for future government infrastructure funding.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, in 2018, the Auditor General pointed out that the Liberal government was not assigning enough funding to national historic sites to keep them from falling apart. We are adding more, and with this bill, hopefully we will add more indigenous-led historic sites. I am wondering what the government's plan is to properly fund the preservation of these sites.
62 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/10/23 11:47:22 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Canadians have seen what happens when we are not prepared for climate disasters: Homes are swept out to sea, and vital transportation corridors are destroyed by floods. Municipalities across Canada are asking for help, but the Liberals are not stepping up. Instead, according to Postmedia, the government is underfunding disaster adaptation by $13 billion.
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities is calling for action, so will the Liberals listen and immediately increase disaster adaptation funding?
76 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/8/22 7:46:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the minister, in his reply to my question in question period, did admit that there are still 4 billion dollars' worth of subsidies going to the oil and gas sector. The government is just lacking in boldness and ambition on climate adaptation when we need it most. It is like the tepid responses to climate mitigation and the lack of success in bringing down our carbon emissions.
The almost $500-million top-up to DMAF is not enough. We need to make bold investments to minimize the impacts of the climate crisis. The NDP believes that we must provide at least $2 billion in additional funds to the disaster mitigation and adaption fund every year. That is still well below the $5 billion we are losing every year in ensured damages.
We need to make investments in adaptation, not just reactive funding to the disasters that are devastating communities across the country, leaving Canadians without homes and without livelihoods. We need to make these investments now. We need to make sure we are supporting Canadians and Canadian communities as they face an uncertain future.
186 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I know the member's history and appreciate all the work he has put into this and where he is coming from.
It is a very important bill, and we should, at its core, recognize the indigenous history of Canada, which has been completely absent from most of our commemorations. To protect historic sites, monuments, places or whatever one wants to call them, we need funding. In 2018, the Auditor General found that there was not adequate funding.
That happened in my riding. The Miners' Union Hall in Rossland, which is the only site in my riding that is a national historic site, could not get federal funding to maintain its roof.
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/22 6:45:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, science and research are the basis of our modern life. All the technological marvels and comforts we enjoy come from that. In the research ecosystem, it is graduate students and post-doctoral fellows who do most of the work. They do the heavy lifting, and they work full time on their research. It is a full-time job.
They are paid through postgraduate scholarships through the federal funding councils: the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The values of these scholarships were at one time enough to allow young researchers to live reasonable lives. I had one of these scholarships when I was doing my masters studies at the Memorial University of Newfoundland in the 1970s, and it paid for my housing and food, with a bit left over. By sheer coincidence, I am wearing my MUN tie tonight.
However, that is not the case today. The scholarship amounts have not changed since 2003. That is almost 20 years ago. Masters students now receive $17,500 annually, and Ph.D. students get $21,000 annually. That might have been enough 20 years ago, but we know how housing and food costs have skyrocketed since then. On top of that, these students have to pay their tuition, and that adds thousands of dollars to those annual costs. In fact, the average postgraduate tuition in Canada is over $7,000 a year.
These are poverty wages. This is below minimum wage, yet this is what we are expecting our best and brightest to live on. We are depending on these students for our future, and we have to keep them here in Canada, but many of them are lured out of the country to find research and educational opportunities in countries that value them more than we do.
A group of students, scientists and other concerned citizens formed a group called “Support our Science” recently. They sponsored a petition here in the House of Commons that garnered over 3,500 signatures. They were asking the government to increase the value of graduate scholarships by 48% to match inflation over the past 20 years, and to index that to the consumer price index so it does not fall behind again. They also asked that the number of scholarships be increased by 50% to match the demand for graduate students and the demand for these graduates in the innovation workplaces of Canada.
Once these students complete their doctoral degrees, they seek out post-doctoral fellowships. It is the traditional route to finding work in academic institutions and in research and development companies across the country, but the number of post-doctoral fellowships does not line up with the number of doctoral students. About 3,000 masters students receive these scholarships, and almost 2,000 Ph.D. students receive the scholarships, but there are only about 450 post-doctoral fellowships offered. Because of that, a huge number of recent graduates leave Canada for post-doctoral work elsewhere in the world. In fact, 38% of them leave the country. They are drawn by good salaries and good lab support, both aspects in which Canada does not compete well.
At its most basic, valuing these students means paying them enough, so I urge the government to do the right thing and the obvious thing, and pay these young researchers a living wage.
573 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/18/22 11:44:55 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Canada's graduate students and post-doctoral fellows are living in poverty because the government has not increased their wages in almost 20 years. This week, scientists were completely unimpressed when the minister tried to tell them that ongoing funding was new money. One Canada research chair even tweeted “just the same old investment with a shiny new bow.”
When will the Liberals stop pretending they support science and increase the funding for Canada graduate scholarships and post-graduate fellowships?
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, as for the dental care provisions that received royal assent yesterday, this is a temporary interim measure. Since the government did not act quickly enough, we could not bring in the real dental care program that we would have liked to see. People in Quebec can apply for that funding if their children are not eligible for the funding under the provincial program, and we have heard a lot—
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/19/22 4:52:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise today to present a petition signed by 3,596 Canadians who are deeply concerned about federal funding for graduate students and post-doctoral scholars.
They point out these students are our best and our brightest. They are the life force of discovery and innovation in Canada. They are funded by the federal tri-council funding agencies, but the wages paid to them have not increased since 2003 and now amount to less than minimum wage. They are living in poverty. Therefore, the petitioners ask the government to increase the value of graduate scholarships and post-doctoral fellowships by 48% to match inflation over the past 20 years and to index that value to the consumer price index. They also ask that the number of scholarships and fellowships be increased by 50% so we can truly support their efforts to keep science and innovation alive in Canada.
150 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/26/22 6:42:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member for Cumberland—Colchester represents the area where my mother's family came from, my ancestors, so I appreciate that.
It is important to work together in this place to get help for Canadians when they need it. One example I did not give is the Town of Oliver in my riding, which had a landslide that caused $10 million in damage. It did not qualify under DMAF for funding, and there were years of lobbying on my part. I tried to help them. The government eventually changed DMAF so that small communities can now access funding of under $20 million. It was too late for Oliver, but those changes can be made, and we need to work here together to make changes when Canadians need them.
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/21/22 6:45:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, if the parliamentary secretary could get her minister to respond to the two letters I have sent about this issue over the last few months, I would appreciate that.
It is great to hear announcements of government investments in climate adaptation. In B.C. there have been projects jointly funded by the federal and provincial governments this year amounting to almost $30 million, but that is in stark contrast to the after-disaster rebuilding funding announcements this year in British Columbia, with the federal government funding over a billion dollars to help communities rebuild after floods and fires.
Some of these funds are simply advances; the final cost will be higher. If my math is correct, that is about 30 times difference between the investments before a disaster and the payouts after. We need to significantly increase those investments in climate adaptation in Canada. This would not only save communities from future disasters but lower the future costs of rebuilding after these events.
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/17/22 3:21:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I outlined some of that in my speech. I would like to thank the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley for allowing me to go on.
We need to spend those monies on reaching this future with a clean economy. I mentioned interprovincial interties in electrical redistribution. That would help us get clean electricity across the country and reduce our emissions tremendously, but it costs a couple of billion dollars for each intertie. Those are the kinds of things we have to be looking at, instead of funding the oil and gas industry, which is very profitable.
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 3:12:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today an open letter to the Prime Minister, signed by nearly 300 top scientists and scientific organizations, highlighted that Canada's best and brightest graduate, post-graduate and post-doctoral students are living in poverty due to the inadequate funding they receive. The scientists point out that the dollar value of federal scholarships has not changed since 2003.
We need to increase the scholarship amounts and index them to inflation. How can we expect to keep these brilliant young scientists in Canada when we force them to work for less than minimum wage?
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
