- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Dufferin—Caledon
- Ontario
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $136,309.03
- Government Page
- Oct/18/23 5:42:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, once again, for a Liberal government whose leader admires the basic dictatorship of China, debate is inconvenient, and when the opposition picks the debate it is even more inconvenient, because the Liberals want to run the country like a dictatorship. We are not going to let them.
49 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/23 5:41:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, only a Liberal government could design an app for $54 million that some people could design in their homes on a weekend, because the Liberals are so incompetent. What makes it worse is that their incompetence also comes with an incredible amount of corruption. A common-sense Conservative government working for the people would never let that happen.
60 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/23 5:40:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with the member. A huge problem for the government has been its use of consultants. We only have to look at how it used McKinsey for all kinds of things. McKinsey was responsible for the opioid crisis. The Liberals keep giving McKinsey more and more money, and this is what they do. They do not use the public service to get things done; they hire these consultants, their friends and buddies, and it is just corruption upon corruption. It has to stop. I hope the Bloc will be with us on this.
96 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/23 5:39:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is okay. I do not mind a little noise.
I am going to talk about this question in a couple of parts.
First of all, the government always thinks that debate is inconvenient, which is of no surprise because its leader said that he admired the basic dictatorship of China. Of course, in China, there would not be debate on a piece of legislation. Therefore, when the member gets up and asks why we are debating things, it is because, from the top down, debate is inconvenient and the Liberals would rather have things work more like a dictatorship. Unfortunately, we live in a democracy. This is the House of Commons, and we debate pieces of legislation.
Second, the member suggests that this is old news. This report just came out two weeks ago. That is not old. It is new. The Liberals are trying to cover it up, and we are not going to let them. The prosecutor is going to prosecute it, and they are going to pay the price.
175 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/23 5:30:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this is what is important to look at: The arrive scam app was not just studied at the international trade committee, which is the subject of the report in the motion we are debating today. This was actually studied several times. It was studied at OGGO, which had a bunch of meetings, on October 20, November 14, November 17 and December 8, 2022. This is in addition to all the meetings that we had at the international trade committee.
I am sure members and all Canadians are wondering where I am going with this and why I am bringing these dates and other things up. It is because government officials came and testified at committee about this app on many occasions. They came to the OGGO committee on November 14 and October 20, 2022. We also had government officials from CBSA at the international trade committee.
Why is that relevant? It is relevant because it looks as though there was some pretty nefarious business going on with the development of this app. This was first reported to CBSA in September 2021 by the founders of a small, Montreal-based software company, who said that there was something rotten in Denmark.
At all these meetings, we had government officials who came to testify from public works, CBSA, Shared Services, Public Safety, customs and immigration, and the Treasury Board Secretariat. At all these meetings, the nefarious goings-on with the contract for the arrive scam app was never raised. It is unbelievable. Everyone knew there was a problem.
One may say that this was September 2021, so that maybe did not apply. It was a long time ago. They forgot about it and did not take it seriously, but they then submitted another report to the government with their concerns in November 2022. These meetings kept going on, and not once did the government raise this. In fact, we now know that when the Auditor General was looking into this, the government did not even let the Auditor General know that the contracting surrounding this app was not being looked into.
This is a typical Liberal cover-up. What is terrible is that this is not the first time. We could say that the first time the Liberal government made a mistake and did not disclose something, we could perhaps give it a pass. However, the Liberal government has engaged in this kind of corruption on a repeated and continual basis. We can go all the way back to the adscam, where there were bags of money being exchanged, and there was a public inquiry into it.
I would think that the Liberal Party and Liberal governments had learned that this is not the way to conduct business. However, in fact, this corruption continued. We only have to look at what has come up with McKinsey, SNC-Lavalin and the WE Charity.
We now have an extraordinarily long and wide track record of the Liberal government engaging in purchasing the agreements to develop this app in a way that appears to be criminal in nature. This is extraordinarily damning for the government. Once again, it chose not to follow the proper path but to go down a road of corruption. What makes it worse is that, in the course of studying this app, we heard a litany of witnesses at the international trade committee who said how terribly the app worked.
Even when it engaged in this kind of corrupt activity in the procurement of this technology, it did it in such an incompetent way that the app was way over budget. We heard that there were app developers who said they could develop it for a couple of million dollars. The government paid $54 million for an app that did not even work.
The backups at the border were unbelievable as people tried to use this app, and this happened over and over again with absolutely no compassion from the government. People who could not fill it in were given no compassion from the government. They were sometimes sent to quarantine hotels. We know what the bills for those quarantine hotels were. We know how people were treated in those quarantine hotels.
The arrive scam app is an unmitigated disaster from corrupt conception all the way through implementation to where we are today. It would appear that the government has not learned a single lesson about that because it failed to disclose an ongoing criminal investigation by the RCMP with respect to this app. The Liberals did not disclose it ever at committee. They did not disclose it to the Auditor General. Why was that? It is because the government has a track record and a history of trying to not disclose things.
This has also been published in a story by The Globe and Mail on October 3 or 4. What I am waiting for is for the Prime Minister to say once again that the story in The Globe and Mail is false.
Members can remember when that happened when we were dealing with the SNC-Lavalin scandal and the story broke about how badly Jody Wilson-Raybould was treated by the Liberal government as she tried to do the honourable thing and be a whistle-blower. The Prime Minister said that the story in The Globe and Mail was false, except it turned out that the story in The Globe and Mail was one hundred per cent true.
Therefore, I would suggest that the story we have in The Globe and Mail about more Liberal corruption and more Liberal cover-ups is absolutely true. What a disappointing day this is for Canada.
946 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/18/23 5:27:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I move that the sixth report of the Standing Committee on International Trade, presented on Monday, March 20, be concurred in.
I will be splitting my time with the prosecutor, the member of Parliament for Brantford—Brant, who will probably do a much better job prosecuting this issue than I will.
I want to start by talking about recommendation number 1 from the committee, with respect to looking into the arrive scam app. The first recommendation that the committee put together, in part, is this:
That the Government of Canada ensure the safety and security of Canadians by continuing with its ongoing efforts designed to modernize Canada’s borders, including through the use of appropriate digital and non-digital tools....
When we talk about digital tools, what we have learned is that there was some extraordinarily nefarious activity going on with the development of the “arrive scam”, “arrive can't”, app. We call it the “arrive can't” app, because every member in this chamber knows that the app was actually an unmitigated disaster for travellers. It did not work well. It caused enormous delays at the borders. Seniors were unable to use it. People had all kinds of trouble going back and forth across the border as a result of this app.
The international trade committee studied this over a series of meetings—
235 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 5:01:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, $1.3 trillion is where Canada's national debt is now. It is more than double what it was a few years earlier. The Liberal government has more than doubled all the debt that every prime minister in the history of this country has ever accumulated. What has that led to? It has led to the inflationary crisis, the cost of living crisis and a whole host of other issues.
I know what my colleagues in the Liberal Party will say. They will say that they spent this money during the pandemic because they wanted to take care of Canadians. However, there is a small problem in that. It is very clear that 40% of that spending had nothing to do with the pandemic, and they cannot get out of it. This is clear and unequivocal, so they cannot say that they spent all of this money just because of that.
The “arrive can't” app is a great illustration of exactly the kind of spending this government engages in over and over again. It throws money at things without a care or concern for taxpayers. Whether the money is well spent or not, it is just going to spend.
When we look at where we are right now, the Prime Minister said very clearly many times that we took on this debt so that Canadians would not have to, and interest rates would be low for a very long time, so it is not going to affect the fiscal capacity of this country. Well, guess what. He is wrong. I know that is not a surprise, as he is wrong about a lot things. He is also wrong to not think about monetary policy.
When we talk about where Canadians are today, they have massive credit card debt. Actually, right now Canadians have $171 billion of HELOC debt. What is HELOC debt, and why does that matter? HELOC debt is a home equity line of credit, and they are at variable interest rates. Therefore, as interest rates rise, their payments rise, and the ability for Canadian families to make ends meet declines. What we end up with are all the challenges Canadians are experiencing right now, whether it is making ends meet, heating their home, or dealing with the cost of living and inflation.
The Liberal spending binge has caused untoward damage for Canadians, and there has been an other effect as interest rates have risen. The Prime Minister said, in effect, for Canadians not to worry. He said that interest rates were not going to go up, so when we borrowed all of this money, everything would be fine. There was nothing to see there.
Well, guess what. We now spend more money servicing the debt in Canada than we do on the Canada health transfer. I will let that sink in for a minute. When we hear about the issues that are going on in hospitals across the country, and we hear about it all the time, we are spending more to pay interest on the debt than we are on the Canada health transfer. That is the shameful, embarrassing legacy of this government.
Then the government does things like spend $54 million on the “arrive can't” app. Why do I say the “arrive can't” app? It is because it does not work. We know that it does not work. Ten thousand Canadians were put into quarantine wrongly, and I was one of those 10,000 Canadians. I returned home. I was vaccinated. I got my green stamp on my passport, and guess what. The phone calls started the next day telling me I was to be in quarantine.
I said, “No I am not. I am vaccinated. I have done every thing right, and I was told that I was cleared at the border.”
The phone calls kept coming. Sometimes there were 15 phone calls a day to verify that I was at home. I am a big boy. I can take it. I dealt with it. Imagine older or vulnerable Canadians going through that. They would not just say that it is nothing to worry about. They are going to be incredibly traumatized by that experience. When I talk about the “arrive can't” app, that is a great example.
If that were the end of the story, it might have been terrible but not terrible. When I finally did get in touch with someone to speak with someone, the advice was, “Don't answer the phone. We can't take you off the list. It's impossible.” We have more than double the national debt and people have been wrongly put into quarantine and the answer is, “Don't answer your phone.” The phone just keeps ringing 15 to 20 times a day.
I had the real concern that at some point they might say they have to send a police officer, because that happened as well. Imagine the waste of resources across the country as a result of police officers going to enforce quarantine orders because the “arrive can't” app could not do the one thing it was supposed to do.
They might say not to worry because it is fixed and it is all good, that the “arrive can't” app is now fine, but guess what? On Twitter just yesterday, someone we all might know, Robert Fife reported long lineups at Pearson to get through customs. The $54-million “arrive can't” app is supposed to expedite processing through customs but the officer laughed and said the app is irrelevant so not to waste time filling it out.
We have an app that does not work. We have an app that puts people into quarantine when they should not be in quarantine. We have people then subjected to dozens of phone calls, virtually harassing them to be in quarantine when they should not. It does not work and it cost $54 million. What we have heard since then very clearly is that this could have been done for $80,000. If that was the end of the story, that would be bad enough, of course, but it is not. The story just keeps going. There are contractors and subcontractors who are listed as having been paid for the app. They said, “We did not get paid. Why are we on this list?”
I cannot explain properly how terrible that is for Canadian taxpayers, Canadians who are suffering through an affordability crisis, to see the cavalier and callous spending of their hard-earned tax dollars by the Liberal government. The Liberal government does not apologize. It would be one thing if the Liberals got up and said, “We messed up. Canadians, we're sorry. We know this thing was a thousand times more expensive than it should have been. We've learned our lesson. We're going to fix it,” but they do not. Liberals just ask us, “What is wrong with you? How dare you criticize this. This app was designed to save Canadians. You did not want to save Canadians.” The kind of hyperbole the Liberals are engaging in quite frankly is shameful. They should be apologizing to Canadians for this absolute debacle. Of course, we know they will not.
Now we get to the gist of this motion, which is to have the Auditor General come in and audit this. Let us get to the bottom of it. If the Liberals cared about Canadians, if they cared about taxpayer money, if they know they did not do anything wrong, they would say, “Fantastic. Let us have the Auditor General come in.” We have to remember that it was the Prime Minister who said “We will be open by default.” To have the Auditor General look at this program, the Liberals will say, “We are not going to do that.”
That is an interesting definition of open by default. It is the kind of behaviour that the government has repeatedly engaged in. I ask myself and I ask Canadians who are watching today, what do the Liberals have to hide? Why are they afraid of an independent officer of Parliament coming in and looking at the books?
The Liberals say there is a committee and the committee could look at it. Sure. The Auditor General has far greater ability than the committee to analyze this. I go back to what are the Liberals afraid of. They are afraid of exactly that. The Liberals know they cannot filibuster the Auditor General. They know they cannot win votes to not have documents released at committee with the Auditor General. The Liberals know the Auditor General would get in there and find every embarrassing gaffe, every contract and subcontract that should never have been awarded, and it is going to be an absolutely awful day for the government.
The Liberals will stand up and argue all kinds of semantics, that we do not need to look at this, that they would have a committee look at it, or that we should not look at it because it was designed to save Canadians' lives and therefore it should be above scrutiny. None of this makes sense. When there is nothing to hide, the government should be open by default. That is the mantra of the Prime Minister who leads the government.
I do not understand why we are here. Why are we debating this motion? It should have passed with unanimous consent. After the Conservative leader rose to give an impassioned speech about this, with a unanimous consent motion, the Auditor General would have been looking at this, and we would have the answer in no time.
Instead, the Liberals are going to try to delay. They are going to try to find a way to win this vote in the House of Commons. Maybe they will be able to do that as part of their coalition. Maybe they will make some kind of an amendment to the costly coalition agreement, so they can survive scrutiny from the independent officer of Parliament.
Actions speak louder than words. The Liberals' actions in not just saying that we are going to have the Auditor General look into this speaks volumes about what they know the Auditor General is going to find how terribly run this program was, and how embarrassing it is going to be for the government.
Why will the Liberals not just vote in favour of it? Let us have the Auditor General look into the dirty dealings of this contract.
1794 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 1:44:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this is exactly it. We can go to a stadium and watch a hockey or basketball game without a mask. These members go to receptions every night in crowded rooms without wearing masks, but they wear their masks in the chamber. Yes, things have moved on. It is time for us to move on with these restrictions, as well.
61 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 1:43:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I struggle to understand what those would be. I think many of them served a purpose and we all acknowledge that, but I do not know what we want to keep in place forever because of the chaos it is causing right now at airports. If we keep these measures in place forever, how are we ever going to get back to normal? That is the issue. Canadians want to get back to normal. They want a plan to get back to normal. If the government is not going to give us a plan, we are going to put forward a motion to get us back to normal.
110 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 1:43:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member keeps heckling and asking where my science is. We are not the government. We do not have access to the science it has at the Ministry of Health. Why will it not produce it? It probably has not done it, because it really cannot do much.
50 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 1:42:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I cannot go over what we have done differently for the past two and a half years because I have only a few moments, but what I will say we would do differently right now is this. We would have released what the benchmarks are to get back to normal, because Canadians want to get back to normal. We all want to. I would release the science we are relying on to say we cannot open up now. We would say where we are, where we need to be and at what points we would remove certain restrictions.
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 1:40:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, again we see an example of what we get with this member in particular and the current government. They do not want to have an honest debate about subjects. When I say give the information, it is because just about every time they get up to speak they talk about how they are following the science, which is why they are going to vote against this motion. It is the crux of their argument as to why they will not support the motion. They say, “We are going to follow the science, so we are not going to remove any restrictions.” However, when we ask them for that science, there is none. It is a shock. They have nothing to actually add to the debate.
129 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 1:29:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Calgary Forest Lawn.
I have had the misfortune of listening to this debate for the past hour and a bit. When I use the term “misfortune”, it is because of the absolute opacity of the government. It refuses to answer even the simplest of questions during debate. Liberal members give speeches where they are obsessed with the member for Carleton, when we are supposed to be discussing the very serious issue of chaos at airports and the restrictions that are in place.
Rather than talk about that, the Liberals are going on long diatribes about independence, other members and leadership matters. I think we have to ask ourselves why. If they cannot talk about the subject matter before us, it is probably because they have almost nothing to say. That is the absolute problem with the government and these members participating in the debate.
Why are we here? Day after day, questions are asked about when the mandates will end, and what circumstances are needed in order to do that. These are not ridiculous partisan attacks, as the members across seem to suggest. I did not know they were so fragile that a direct question would be seen as a terrible partisan attack.
We keep coming back and asking reasonable questions. We brought forward a motion ages ago, just asking what conditions, metrics or benchmarks the country had to hit so restrictions could be removed. This is not asking for them to be removed. It is asking what the benchmarks are and what Canadians could look to. The Liberals would not even vote for that. The government cannot do anything reasonable with respect to things like this.
When we ask questions, we get answers like the one from the Minister of Transport, who said that travellers are out of practice and that is why the airports are backed up. Actually, that is, unfortunately, probably the best answer we have had from a minister or a member of the government with respect to what is going on, because at least it was an answer.
We have questions, real questions, the questions Canadians are asking. I know these members get the same emails from Canadians. They cannot live in some strange Liberal bubble where everyone thinks things are perfect. They must get questions about what is happening at the airports and what are they going to do to fix it. I know I get them. I bet the Speaker is getting them as well.
We put forward a motion like this to say that Canadians have had enough, that they want to see some action. They want something done. We would expect a reasonably serious response. However, for some reason, Canadians are not entitled to that. When we are here, we are the voice of not only our constituents, but also of other Canadians as well. These are the serious questions that are being asked. It is so insulting to them. I do not care about the insults that government members throw at us. We can take it. Over here, we are not so fragile. We can take the insults, but Canadians deserve those answers.
We heard the member for Winnipeg North giving his speech. I had the opportunity to ask him what the advice was, whose advice it was, what was the actual advice is, and if he could table the advice. They were insane, ridiculous questions. How dare I ask the Liberals to share the advice they had with Canadians to show why they would not remove any of the restrictions.
We have heard the terrible stories, which is why we are asking the questions. We heard the member for Prince Albert talk about a terrible experience he witnessed at the airport. I have seen that as well. People who are desperate and missing their flights. People who are having all kinds of trouble. There is not even a semblance of regret from the government about that.
That is fine. If the Liberals do not want to say to Canadians that they are sorry they are going through this, then that is on them. However, Canadians deserve an explanation.
The Liberals must have meetings. They must be talking to experts, because they say, “We follow the experts' advice.” How hard is it? Throw Canadians a bone. They could give us a scrap of information, or maybe put a tenth of the report on the table so that we can see that there actually is a report, but they will not. If they will not do it, we have to ask ourselves why, right?
When a child goes to school and says, “The dog ate my homework”, the teacher asks, “Show me the shredded pieces and then I will believe you.” That is what these guys are doing all the time. They are saying, “The dog ate my homework.” Well, they should show us the scraps, but we cannot even see that. They are not going to give us even that little tidbit.
Canadians are frustrated. There are a lot of Canadians who cannot travel. I do not know if members have heard the stories, but I certainly have in my riding about people who cannot travel and miss all kinds of things. The Liberals might say, “Well, get in a car.” However, an 80-year-old unvaccinated woman from my riding cannot drive 1,800 to 3,000 kilometres to B.C. The Liberals' answer is: “We do not care. We refuse to give any information on when that person is going to be able to travel. We refuse to give any information as to why we are saying that person will not be able to travel. We refuse to give any information as to when that person can travel.”
It is as though we are asking for the most unreasonable, unrealistic things. That is how the Liberals paint the debate. They cannot answer the debate directly. They cannot answer the debate forthrightly. If they really wanted to debate this issue, they would put their advice on the table so that we could all see it and debate it like adults, but they do not want to. They would rather give speeches talking about the former shadow minister for finance. They want to talk about the member for Carleton, because that is so pertinent to the debate. It is so childish and insulting to Canadians who are asking the very serious questions that we are raising in this motion to have members over there treat them with so much disdain and disrespect.
I cannot believe it. Canadians who are unable to travel, unable to visit family and relatives, are watching this debate and listening to the kinds of speeches that these people are putting out, joking and laughing about the member for Carleton. It is beyond shameful. It is embarrassing, and they should be embarrassed for participating that way.
We want things to move forward for Canadians. We want answers. We tried for a motion to ask the Liberals to put the benchmarks out for everyone to see: When we get to this, we will do this, and when we get to that, we will do that. The Liberals voted down the motion, unfortunately, with help from the NDP. We had a wonderful NDP member asking some great questions, but they voted down that motion as well, and I am disappointed about that.
We have to ask ourselves: Why will the Liberals not do any of these things? It is probably because they have not set that plan out, because this is a government that cannot do more than one thing, as we have learned. They sort of stumble from one crisis to another. We choose to joke and say: “You cannot walk and chew gum at the same time.” That is kind of what we have happening here.
Now, we are back to another motion saying, “You would not give us the benchmarks, all the rest of the world has moved forward, they are lifting all these things, so let us get on with it.” Let us get on with it. Let us actually say that this is what we are going to do.
I, of course, will be voting in favour of this motion. I know that the Liberals will not be, but I am hoping other parties will. I am hoping that other members listening today will decide not to talk about the member for Carleton and will actually stand here and debate this issue, because if they do not, it tells us exactly what we need to know about them, which is that they have nothing to offer on this subject.
1475 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 1:08:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the frustration that stems from most reasonable people in this chamber is about the fact that when a question is asked, what experts are you relying upon? What is the advice that has been given? Share that advice with Canadians. If you have reports or expert advice saying we cannot open this airport or we cannot remove restrictions and here is why, why not share it?
The fact of the matter is that they do not have it, and that is why they will not table it. If you had it, you would table it. Any reasonable person would, but we are not dealing with reasonable people or rationality. Why will they not table this advice now?
121 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/22 2:57:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in October, a constituent sent me an email. She works for the federal government. She said to me that if she did not get a vaccine, she would lose her job despite the fact that she was working remotely and could continue to work remotely. I received another message from a constituent who works for CP Rail. She had the same situation: get a vaccine or lose her job. She worked remotely in IT.
These mandates are hurting Canadian families at a time when everything is more expensive. Ontario is lifting vaccine mandates March 1. When will the Liberals lift the mandates or give us a plan to do it?
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/22 4:52:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what test has been met in order to justify this extreme measure? The former NDP member of Parliament Svend Robinson has said:
I was in the House during 1988 debate on the Act, when we were promised that “emergency powers can only be used when the situation is so drastic that no other law of Canada can deal with the situation”.
That test has not been met.
@NDP can [you] stop this.
It is clear from the member's speech that the New Democrats are not going to stop this. What is happening in Ottawa that regular laws cannot deal with? We saw all the other blockades at borders removed with existing laws. What is the specific law that has to come into place to take care of something that has been taken care of elsewhere?
140 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/10/22 6:02:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the first things the Liberal government did in the late 1990s when the deficit was at horrific levels was slash transfer payments to the provinces, including the health transfer. The underfunding of health care is a direct result of what a previous Liberal government did.
Yes, we need to increase health care spending. That is an absolute must. I support that call and hope the Liberals will do it.
73 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/10/22 6:00:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, yes, we are asking for a plan, and I do not think it is an unreasonable request. We have heard from members opposite today, in their speeches and questions, that it is really hard to make plans as things can change, and therefore they really cannot make a plan. Imagine if that had been the discussion around the table in May and June 1944 and we had said it was really difficult to plan an invasion of occupied Europe as things can change all the time. I guess we would not have made a plan, because we did not know for certain exactly what was going to happen at exactly every stage. Thank goodness the Liberals were not in government then.
123 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/10/22 5:58:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have been very clear today and our leader was clear: We should not be blockading international crossings and travel. Those things need to stop. We agree with that. However, today in the chamber we saw something extraordinary. We saw all members of the opposition parties and all their leaders stand up to say they want a meeting with the Prime Minister so we can try to come together and solve this. The response from the Prime Minister was effectively no.
Will the member speak to the Prime Minister and say, “Let's collaborate; let's find a solution”?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/10/22 5:48:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Calgary Forest Lawn.
Should we tolerate them? Let us think about that for a moment. That is not a statement that was made by some extremist. This is a statement that was made by the Prime Minister of this country. Should we tolerate them? Who is he speaking about? He is speaking about fellow Canadian citizens, some of our neighbours, some of our friends, people who chose not to get a vaccine. We do not know why they made that decision, but the Prime Minister of this country is asking us, should we tolerate them? I think that is deplorable.
What this has done, along with other comments he has made, is fanned the flames of division in this country. Imagine a person is at home. They have chosen not to get a vaccine and then they hear their Prime Minister asking if they should be tolerated. This is the division and the nasty politics that the Prime Minister of this country has brought to Canada.
It is pitting Canadians against each other. Why did he do it? That is a great question. The member for Louis-Hébert shed some light on that. It was for partisan advantage. We should all think about that for a second. We should think about how the Prime Minister of this country would say something like that because he thought it would give him a political advantage.
Let us talk about some of the people that the Prime Minister questions whether he and other Canadians should tolerate. I received an email from a constituent in my riding. Her son is in his twenties and he is a construction worker. He had to make a choice: get a vaccine or lose his job. He had a young family to support, so he made the decision to get a vaccine. Unfortunately, he had terrible side effects from the vaccine. We know these side effects are rare, but they do happen. All of the people in his friend group were then scared and did not want to get a vaccine. The Prime Minister is asking if we should tolerate them.
I had someone in my office who has a complicated medical history. Her doctor told her she should not get a vaccine. She does not qualify for the exemptions that have been put in place. They are extraordinarily narrow if one wants to work in this place. That is fine. The government gets to make that choice. She was terrified to get a vaccine. She was worried about what would happen to her based on the advice from her doctor.
We often get lectured by members on that side of the House to follow the science. I can tell members that she was following the science. Fortunately for her, she can work remotely. We were able to do that for her, but like the member for Louis-Hébert said, not all of us can work from a laptop at a cottage. Again, those who cannot are losing their jobs.
When I rose in this place to speak about this earlier this week, giving a member's statement, and I said there are people who are losing their jobs because they did not get vaccinated, members on that side of the House shouted “good”. I am not surprised by that considering the divisive rhetoric that comes from them and the demonization of people without knowing their circumstances. Why would they be so emboldened to act like that? I have a great reason. Their leader, the Prime Minister, asked if we should tolerate them. I think it is despicable.
Where are we now as a country? There was a recent poll that came out that said 25% of Canadians would support putting unvaccinated people in jail and 37% of Canadians would say it is okay that they do not get public health if they are sick. They feel that way because words matter, and words from the most powerful position in this country matter even more.
Canadians have been told by the Prime Minister that if they do not get vaccinated, they are racist or misogynist, and he asks if we should tolerate them. That is where we have ended up in this country: divided, angry, pitting neighbour against neighbour. This is not how this country should be run. It is not how this country should be led. It is not how we are in it together in this pandemic.
When we talk about this motion, what we are asking for is a plan to give people hope that there is an end in sight. We are not asking for something radical. We are asking for a plan to lift restrictions. If nobody else was doing it or no other country in the world was doing it, perhaps there could be some questions. However, that is not the case.
Countries around the world are doing this, because they are recognizing this is now an endemic and we are going to have to live with the virus. Medical officers all across the country have said this. This is not some radical Conservative idea, as much as that is how Liberals will try to paint it. Countries like Sweden, Denmark, Norway, the Czech Republic, the U.K., Spain and Israel are all putting forward plans to lift restrictions, or they have lifted restrictions.
Why are we not doing it? Why are we not planning? I have heard the speeches from the members opposite today. They say it is impossible to make a plan because things change and that we should talk to the experts. Yes, do that. Talk to the experts who are saying that we now have to make the decision to live with this, and let us plan for that. Is it so hard for the Liberals to say? They have made plans before and provincial governments have made plans and had to change them, but their answer is that it is really hard to make the plans so they are not going to do it.
Canadians deserve better than that. Canadians deserve leadership. Leadership starts with the Prime Minister, and not the kind of leadership he has displayed over the last several months with vilification, demonization and pitting Canadians against each other.
What I say to my friends on that side of the House is this: They have an opportunity now to actually lead, to show some leadership and come up with a plan, to let Canadians know there is actually hope at the end of the tunnel and be a unifying factor for us. I ask Liberal members to please support this motion and come up with a plan so that Canadians know, at some point, they can get back to their lives.
1144 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
