- Member of Parliament
- Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
- Liberal
- Winnipeg North
- Manitoba
- Voting Attendance: 68%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $110,821.77
- Government Page
- May/6/24 12:30:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, all of the investments we have put into our Canadian Armed Forces, if not directly then indirectly, are a great way to prepare for all the different types of emergencies that take place in Canada. Many years ago, I participated with members of the armed forces in the city of Winnipeg to battle floods. During the pandemic, members of the forces, who are well trained, helped take care of seniors. Therefore, any sort of investment in the forces is always a good investment, from my perspective.
When we talk about volunteer firefighters, the tax incentives and the dollars allocated to support them are a very powerful step in the right direction. However, knowing my colleague who asked the question, she will continue to be at the table to want more yet.
133 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/6/24 12:27:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question, but I can honestly say that the strongest advocate I have ever seen with respect to firefighters is my friend the former deputy House leader, now parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Emergency Preparedness.
What I like about the budget is that it is a true reflection of what Canadians have been advocating for to parliamentarians, both opposition and government members. I truly believe that. Therefore, when we look at the budget, what we see is a reflection of the values and thoughts of Canadians with respect to the type of budget they want to see. That is why, in my previous response, I made reference to things such as pharmacare, the national school food program and other types of social programs, along with economic policies that are going to help build a stronger and healthier economy.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 4:26:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to start my comments by thinking of those individuals who have had to weather the forest fires, particularly those who live and work in the communities who, whether in terms of recreational, work or living environments, have incurred a great deal of hardship. One cannot underestimate the degree to which these fires have impacted literally thousands of lives in a very real and tangible way. We recognize the interruptions that have taken place as a direct result.
However, we do not often hear about a wildfire taking place in a particular community. It might be on the news for a day or two, maybe more than that, but what remains in these communities is there for a long time. It takes a while for a community to bounce back. To those individuals, I want to extend my best wishes and recognize what they are going through, which is a great difficulty that no doubt creates much anxiety and stress. They should know that they have a national government that is doing what it can in co-operation with different levels of government, stakeholders and non-profits. Obviously, the Government of Canada will do whatever it can with respect to our firefighters; whether they are paid or volunteer firefighters, the government has their back.
The second thing I will comment on is the firefighters. The other day, the Prime Minister was talking to me and others about a situation, which was referred to earlier today. Two firefighters were called into a home just north of Halifax. There was an elderly gentleman with dementia who had gone missing, and family members called in expressing concern. They were not too sure where he was, but they believed he was actually still in the home. The two firefighters busted down the door and went into the home, with smoke all around and flames flying. They found the elderly gentleman sitting in a chair, in good part unaware of what was taking place, and they rescued him. In a very humble way, both firefighters said, in essence, “That's what we do.”
I think that those two fine gentlemen embody the spirit and goodwill that we see day in and day out in our first responders, both from those who get paid and those who volunteer. I think I can speak on behalf of all members, no matter what political party, in recognizing the efforts of our firefighters. This is where I wanted to start things off.
It is an interesting process when we see disasters in communities. In Manitoba, we have had forest fires and floods, and I will provide comments on both situations. However, right now, I want to recognize these three provinces in particular: Quebec, Nova Scotia and Alberta.
I also want to talk about how people come together. Let us recognize that. The government plays a very important role. There is absolutely no doubt of that, and I will expand on that. However, we see people come together when there are tragedies that take place in communities. They do this in different forms, whether it is through volunteering, sending money or other forms of support. It could be as simple as a prayer at a local gurdwara, church, mosque or synagogue. It could be sending support in the form of cash. We see that time and time again.
In Alberta, we saw people from Manitoba pitching in to help fight the wildfires. We have a wonderful neighbour, the United States, to the south of us. President Biden was talking with the Prime Minister of Canada. As one member referenced, smoke and wildfires do not know any boundaries.
The smoke from the fires from the province of Quebec is travelling all over the place and crossing international boundaries. I would suggest that it did not even have to take that for the President of the United States and the Prime Minister to have a discussion; we now have individuals from the United States coming north to help us deal with the wildfires.
Whether it is the communities at the micro level, the different levels of government or international relations, we see people coming together. This is because we recognize the harm being done, not only to our communities but also to our environment as a whole. That is why we have such programs as the disaster program, which is there to support Canadians, because disasters take place.
I looked something up. I understand that it was actually Pierre Elliott Trudeau who established the program, the request for federal assistance, back in 1970. It was an interesting figure that I received. It is estimated that 280 events have happened since 1970. If we put that into the perspective of what we have witnessed over the last few years, there is no doubt that we are seeing an increase.
Interestingly enough, in terms of those direct federal contributions, we are looking at close to $8 billion over that time frame. We can look at what we are spending today in terms of disaster support. A hurricane hit Atlantic Canada, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. Homes were destroyed. The municipality went to the province. The province then came to Ottawa, and Ottawa has been there to support Atlantic Canada after that storm. We continue to be there today to support Canadians, as we are there today for the people of Alberta, Quebec and other jurisdictions where we see these disasters taking place.
In the past, my home province of Manitoba has had forest fires and floods displace thousands of people. We need to recognize that there are things the government can do that will, in fact, make a difference. One of the best examples that comes to mind, as I see my colleague from Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa walk in, is “Duff's Ditch”.
A premier from Manitoba said that one of the ways we can avoid the city of Winnipeg flooding all the time is to build a floodway around the city. If we look at the south, where the water comes from, the floodway takes the water just before it enters the city. When the Red River is overflowing, Duff's Ditch will take the overflow around the city. It takes it around via the east and then dumps it back into the Red River once it is north of the city.
What an idea that is. This is the type of investment that we need. We need to become more resilient. Former Premier Duff Roblin has often been referred to as a visionary for trying to deal with this particular issue. I can tell members that, with respect to the amount of real dollars, even factoring in inflation, billions have been saved as a direct result of this. The premier at the time realized the benefit of looking at what is being thrown at us through the environment. By doing this, people's lives were protected in many ways, and property was protected in terms of flooding. There have been occasions when we have had floods in the city and in the Point Douglas area, the area I represented. Back in 1997, I can say that the federal government was supporting the area. I remember when Jean Chrétien came to Point Douglas to support Canadians in the north end of Winnipeg at a time when we had needs. Therefore, there have still been issues.
I use that as an example, because one of the things that we need to recognize is that climate change has really had a profound impact on weather patterns. Because of emissions and other environmental factors, we are seeing a greater number of disasters. As a result, different levels of government need to take more action. We have a national government that states that it has set up a national adaption strategy. It is the first time ever. As a national government, we are saying that we need to have a strategy that encourages municipalities, provinces and others to look at ways in which we can improve the infrastructure, so that when disasters hit, we can minimize the cost and the damage to our communities. There is no question about whether that will happen.
We are talking about 1.6 billion new federal dollars. That is on top of the $8 billion that we put in place since we have been in government. No government in the history of this nation has invested more in infrastructure than the current government has. That is why, when I hear some opposition members saying that we are not doing enough or asking what the is government doing, I would suggest that they review some of the budgets that have been introduced. They will see hundreds of millions of dollars, going into multiple billions, to invest in things like infrastructure. They have seen a government focused on dealing with the environment in a very real and tangible way. Whether it is working with indigenous, provincial or territorial governments, the federal government understands and appreciates that there is joint jurisdiction in many different areas, and the environment is one of them.
Earlier today, someone posed a question in regard to our oceans. I happened to be sitting beside the minister responsible for oceans, and she gave the answer. Canada has three oceans from coast to coast to coast. Often, people forget about the north. Do people know that under 1% was actually protected when we formed government back in late 2015? Not even 1% of our coastal Canadian waters, which we are responsible for, were actually protected. Today, one can multiply that by almost 15. Just under 15% of Canada's coastal waters are now under protection.
What was even more encouraging is that the minister responsible for oceans talked about 2025. There is a very good chance that, as a government, we are going to hit 25% of our oceans being protected. We have the Prime Minister and cabinet saying that this is not good enough, and we can even attempt to do better. By 2030, let us see if we can get it up to 30% of our coastal waters. I believe that we are on target to hit that type of a milestone.
The amount of land being converted for conservation has dramatically increased under the government. I believe we have even seen the adoption of what could be three, maybe more, new national parks under the government.
They say let us talk about other policies. We have budgetary policies, or monetary policies, and we have legislative policies, or initiatives. Let me give members an example of both.
From a legislative perspective, we have brought in legislation to have net-zero emissions by 2050. For the first time ever, we now have, in legislation, a law that says that Canada will be at net-zero by 2050. That is a very important commitment in law that is coming from the Government of Canada, a legislative initiative.
We also have a budgetary initiative that will have, and has had, a very positive impact on Canada's environment and the people of Canada, which is the price on pollution. The Conservatives call it a carbon tax.
Countries from all around the world, back in 2015, went to Paris, and one of the points that came out of Paris was the idea of a price on pollution. It was not a new idea, but it was amplified in Paris back in 2015. It was not new because the first government in North America to have a price on pollution was the Province of Alberta. It was a Progressive Conservative government in Alberta that brought it in.
It was not new. When this government adopted it, we brought it back to Canada. We said that we are going to have a price on pollution because it is the right thing to do. We instituted a rebate to support Canadians. The system works so that there is an incentive, whether one is a consumer or one is within the industry, for less emissions, for ensuring that we see actions being taken to protect our environment.
The Conservatives have been all over the map, like a fish out of water, flipping and flopping, depending on who their leader is. The current leader says they do not support the price on pollution. I am hoping that fish is not dead yet, and we will get another flop or a flip. I am hopeful.
I believe there are members of the Conservative caucus who understand the benefits of a price on pollution. There were leadership candidates, although they lost, mind, in the Conservative caucus who actually support it. It is always interesting to watch when the Conservatives get a little bit embarrassed or humiliated on that particular issue.
2147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
