- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Hastings—Lennox and Addington
- Ontario
- Voting Attendance: 66%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $121,555.68
- Government Page
Madam Speaker, I will be quick to suggest that economic stewardship in this place, as parliamentarians, is significant. It is huge. The government has had seven years. From my perspective, it is the captain of a rudderless ship and the rhetoric that I am getting from across the aisle is not working.
52 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am happy to rise today to speak to this year's fall economic statement implementation act.
I was hoping to see in the update a plan to address the rising costs of living. I was hoping to see a plan to combat inflation. I was hoping to see a reduction in government spending. I was hoping to see effective financial relief for rural and low-income Canadians. I was hoping to see support for our armed forces members. Unsurprisingly, instead we received more spending and higher taxes on already struggling Canadians.
The cost of putting food on the table has seen its biggest jump this year in over four decades. Home heating, oil and propane have all seen drastic increases in price and cost. The same is happening at pumps across Canada, especially in rural ridings.
One of the single largest complaints I hear about at the grocery store and through my office is about costs, the cost of living and the rising cost of everything. Unfortunately, for many struggling Canadians, it is only going to get worse thanks to the government. The carbon tax is not working.
When I am out at local events in my riding, people often say to me that standing up in question period and asking questions is all fine and dandy, but they want to know what I am actually doing to help Canadians. They ask what steps I, as the opposition, am taking to help the people of Hastings—Lennox and Addington. The answer to that question is of course tied up with the capacity of the legislative branch to put checks and balances on the executive or cabinet. In Westminster systems, those two branches are often intermingled, so it can be difficult to parse the capacity and role of either.
That being said, I want to take this opportunity to highlight two separate ways our Conservative opposition use our powers, as parliamentarians, to hold the government accountable. The first is by easing the burden on Canadian families and the second is by scrutinizing Liberal legislation at committee.
The member for Carleton, our Conservative leader, introduced a motion in the House of Commons to introduce a tax exemption on home heating. The NDP, Bloc and Liberals voted against it. The member for Regina—Qu'Appelle introduced a motion calling on a moratorium on taxes on gas, home heating, groceries and paycheques. Once again, the NDP, Bloc and Liberals voted against it. A third motion calling on the government to not implement the carbon tax was also voted against by three other parties in the House.
While the House was able to unanimously agree to a motion on high food prices, the fact remains there is only one party that is attempting to lower the cost of home heating and gas prices in a manner that would be quick and effective, and that is the Conservative Party.
It was also the Conservative Party that exposed the Liberal government's attempt to ban long guns through an amendment package at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. I want to thank my colleagues on the public safety committee for their due diligence in respecting the rights of law-abiding firearms owners. I want to let the hunters and farmers in Hastings—Lennox and Addington know that I will unequivocally vote against any attempt by the Liberal government to take their legally owned long guns.
Another area that this statement is silent on is rural broadband. I had many constituents contact my office, if they can get service, to ask me why it was taking so long for the government to deliver on its promise to increase broadband in ridings such as mine, and it is extremely frustrating not to be able to provide an answer. A number of local ISPs have also expressed a concern that they are being frozen out of funding opportunities in favour of larger companies.
I would note that in the annex there is an indication that funding under ISED is not coming this year and has only been earmarked for next. I hope the government actually gets the money out the door instead of lapsing the funding like it has done with National Defence to the tune of billions of much-needed dollars.
My colleague from Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman earlier spoke to this bill, and rightly touched on the complete lack of support for our armed forces in economic the statement. He highlighted the desperate need to start cutting steel on our surface combatants, the Type 26 variant, and pointed out that we still did not have contracts signed for our F-35s, a strategically vital piece of equipment that the government delayed by years because of playing political games with military procurement.
I also want to congratulate our friends in the United Kingdom for getting their first Type 26 in the water, the HMS Glasgow.
He also touched on what I believe to be an even bigger issue, and that is the recruitment and retention crisis. I want to reiterate to the House how much of an issue this is. Our armed forces are in crisis.
In an order issued on October 6 of this year, General Eyre instructed the entirety of the armed forces to cease all non-essential operations and focus exclusively on recruitment and retention of personnel. The general's words leave no room for interpretation. Our forces are in crisis and no area of it is left unaffected, with every single trade operating at below its effective level.
When we look at the current state of our armed forces, the reasons behind the shortage begin to become clear.
For example, the post living differential, essentially a cost-of-living adjustment based on posting location, has not been upgraded since 2008, mainly due to stingy Treasury Board regulations. This is simply unacceptable. In my previous shadow minister position for seniors, the importance of updating these allowances was made excruciatingly clear to me. The CPP is updated every January. The GIS and OAS are updated four times a year. However, we expect our armed forces members to live in an economic climate of 2008 instead of 2022. That is unacceptable.
If we do not have the necessary equipment and troops, we do not possess the capability to meet our current commitments, whether they be peacekeeping missions, protecting our Arctic or responding to evolving threats on the international stage. It also severely limits our capacity to expand our commitments into future endeavours, such as the recently announced Indo-Pacific strategy.
Our armed forces' capability commitment gap is increasing at both ends, with our commitments growing in an increasingly unstable international order and our capability shrinking through attrition.
This reconstitution of our armed forces is affecting every single trade. The general made it clear at the Standing Committee on National Defence that every single decision the CAF made was through the lens of reconstitution.
Whether it is by continually failing to provide basic services and equipment to our serving forces members or offering medically assisted suicide to them once they transition out, the government’s refusal to treat our CAF members with the dignity and respect they have earned and deserve is appalling. This cannot be allowed to continue.
I really do hope the government, with the CDS, addresses the recruitment and retention crisis in our armed forces.
I must reiterate that I pray the government listens to Canadians in their communities and takes substantive, effective and meaningful action to combat the cost of living by cancelling the carbon tax.
I do not mean to sound as though there is nothing of substance in the statement. The reality of the matter is that what is missing from the update speaks volumes as to where the government's priorities lie, and I do not believe they lie with rural Canadians. Whether the it is aware of it or not, the simple fact of the matter is that its carbon tax will add to the already astonishingly large financial burden facing everyday Canadians, and they simply cannot afford to be bled anymore.
1362 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/20/22 1:37:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise to speak to our Conservative opposition day motion.
As we already know, record inflation is driving up the cost of everyday necessities. Meat is up nearly 8%. Dairy is up nearly 10%. Vegetables, fruit and baked goods are all up over 10%, with cereals up nearly 18%. Gas prices are 13% higher than they were at this same time last year. Our dollar is simply not going as far as it was before, and home heating is no different.
Canadians have been burdened with paying these increased prices in tandem with their creeping increases. We buy groceries and gas every week and do so year-round, but heating is different. Heating costs, for most Canadians, is a seasonal expense. It is not something that most Canadians are paying at this point. As we head into the winter months that is going to change. With heating costs so high, thanks to the government, this Christmas will mark the very first time in history that Canadians are actually hoping for lumps of coal in their stockings.
Rural and low-income Canadians are going to be hit the hardest. According to the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario, the average amount spent on home energy in a year in urban centres in Ontario is $2,002. In rural Ontario, that number explodes to $3,198, a shocking increase of 62.6%. The report also breaks down the types of fuel used between electric, natural gas and other sources. When accounting for this, rural communities spend 57 times more on other sources of fuel. That is the difference between urban and rural Canada when it comes to energy expenditures in our homes.
We have all heard about the dramatic impacts that are being caused by the energy shortages around the world, inflation and the war in Ukraine, but I want to bring this closer to home. Most of us here in this place have the privilege of walking into a room, flicking a switch and the lights go on. If the room is cold, we walk over to a thermostat and turn it to a comfortable temperature. Unfortunately, that is not the case for too many of our constituents. Even in my riding of Hastings—Lennox and Addington, natural gas is the exception, not the rule. Most rural residents outside of small towns and villages heat with propane. Some are still using fuel oil, and a number, which would probably surprise colleagues, still use wood stoves as either primary or secondary heat sources.
Earlier today, the member for Kings—Hants took issue with the wording of our motion, specifically the portion stating that for some Canadians there are no alternatives to propane or heating oil. He suggested that Canadians simply convert their homes to other sources. He may not speak to his constituents, but those who struggle through the winter need to be listened to. I am listening to the people of Hastings—Lennox and Addington. Would it surprise colleagues that there are communities in my riding that operate winter wood banks? It is like a food bank, but it provides dried, split wood to seniors and other shut-ins who otherwise cannot cut and split wood for themselves and might run out if the heating season lasts too long or is harsher than normal.
My riding is not unique. Many ridings across Canada do not have the privilege of natural gas heating. Many homes across Canada have not been able to take advantage of electric heat pumps, because their climate is too cold or electricity has been too expensive. Propane is widely used and so is heating oil. This is why we keep asking the government to stop adding more and more taxes to these fuels. It is not that Canadians do not want to do their part. It is about treating one's fellow Canadians with respect instead of driving them into energy poverty.
The cost of living is the single biggest issue in my riding of Hastings—Lennox and Addington. Constituents regularly call into my office, post on my social media or contact me directly with their concerns. For example, one wrote, “Last March I paid over $800 for half a tank of furnace oil. Last month it was $527 to top it up. I don't see how I'll be able to pay for basic home expenses.” Another said, “I paid over 400/month using budget billing (equal payments each month) equalling almost $5000 a year. Many people in rural environments that don't have the option to live in new homes AND for many people that are transitioning from oil to more efficient heating like propane, the cost is between 10 and $12,000.”
To be clear, it is not just individuals who are being hurt by these increases; it is businesses as well. Last week, I received a text from one local business owner, who said, “Rural areas are getting gouged. [The] price of propane is out of control. I record every purchase I get, so I compare what It would have cost last year to what it will cost this year.” I would continue, but frustration with heating costs led this person to some very explosive language that would be considered unparliamentary in this place.
For those watching at home who may not be familiar with the nuts and bolts of what is actually happening today, allow me to briefly explain.
There is a tradition in Parliament that maintains that government cannot submit its expenditures until the opposition has an opportunity to demonstrate why it should not be allowed to. As such, certain days are allotted to the opposition parties to decide what the topic of debate will be. This is commonly referred to as an opposition day. On these special days, the motion put forward by an opposition party gets precedence over other government business, which means we debate that motion on the day regardless of what else is on the docket. This is what we are doing here today. This is what we are doing right now. Our Conservative opposition chose to ask the government to exempt heating from the carbon tax.
Previously, we used one of our opposition day motions to ask the government to lower gas prices by 5% via a reduction to GST/HST. Unfortunately, that did not pass. I hope this opposition day motion will be different.
Yesterday, in this place, the Prime Minister responded to a question from my colleague chastising the Conservatives for standing in the way of a payment. He said, “Mr. Speaker, this supposed preoccupation of the Conservatives with the cost of living would be slightly more believable if not for the fact they are standing in the way of delivering $500 in extra support to low-income renters between now and Christmas”. Today we have an opportunity to do better than a one-time cheque. We have an opportunity to provide sustained relief over the dark, cold, lonely winter months for millions of Canadians who are struggling by making their already inflated heating bill exempt from the carbon tax.
Minority Parliaments can do the right thing. Sometimes, but not often, we do see eye to eye and do the right thing for Canadians. We saw that earlier this week when the House voted in favour of the NDP's opposition day motion to lower food prices. I was comfortable voting in favour of that motion because I knew it would help struggling Canadians.
This motion would help struggling Canadians with home heating prices, and I hope this House has the good sense to pass it.
1290 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/7/22 5:27:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, today I will be splitting my time with the wonderful member for Sarnia—Lambton.
Once again, I find myself standing in this place, along with my Conservative colleagues, to speak on behalf of my constituents of Hastings—Lennox and Addington and on behalf of struggling Canadians who are concerned about the cost of living.
Just this week in particular, one of my constituents posted this on her social media: “As per our weekend routine, today I went to fill up my car and buy groceries for our family. This routine normally costs around $300. Today it was $500. Seriously, how are people surviving right now? I don't normally get so shaken up about things like this, but we've been in a constant state of transition for three-plus years now, always pivoting, always trying to figure out a new plan for the way we do things. I know there were parents out there struggling before inflation, and I can't even imagine what is keeping you up at night now.”
While the current government often hand-waves its role in inflation domestically, there is one area where it could make things better: lowering prices at the pumps for Canadians. They cannot wait until carbon tax rebate season for money to buy groceries and the medication they need today. Then again, I suppose the point of the tax is to make it prohibitively expensive to drive. Of course, this completely ignores the plight of rural Canadians, who literally depend on a vehicle in order to survive. The carbon tax is only driving up fuel prices and is disabling business owners in my riding. That is why the Conservatives tried to put a halt to the bleeding by introducing an opposition day motion to reduce prices by 5%. Sadly, it was not supported.
In March of this year, while speaking to that motion, I urged the members of this place to consider the official opposition's realistic, tangible and direct solutions for Canadians suffering from high prices. I noted that, up until that date, this legislature's reaction to those gas price increases was completely inadequate. Two and a half months later, nothing has changed, except that the price of gas continues to rise.
In a few short weeks, this House will adjourn for summer recess while we go home to our respective ridings to work locally. As a legislature, we will have no capacity to provide relief for single parents, low-income families, seniors or small businesses. They will face continuing increases on groceries, gas and the basic necessities of life. In my humble opinion, this country is spinning in a downward spiral and we need leadership. We need to provide something to Canadians so they do not feel abandoned for the next two and a half months. Today, in our motion, we are offering a chance to put politics aside and deliver the relief that Canadians need.
Every single day, I speak to constituents in my riding. They are worried. They are having trouble sleeping. People just do not feel like they can get ahead. Young families are being busted apart because of financial stress. Too many seniors are feeling helpless and ignored, and their quality of life is failing. On top of that, food insecurity is staring people in the face.
On this side of the House, we have been trying in vain to provide some sort of relief, to no avail. I know my hon. colleagues have already pointed this out, but I feel it necessary to reiterate. As previously stated, when gas prices continued to increase, we asked that the government suspend the GST on fuel to give Canadians a break. We asked again for relief for Canadians by suspending the carbon tax increase on April 1, and we also asked that the tariff on fertilizer bought before March 2 be removed in order to help our agricultural producers.
I recognize that it can be difficult for some people to accept a good idea when it comes from somebody else. Perhaps that is why the government stubbornly refused to follow through with the previous government's decision to purchase the F-35s, despite everyone, apart from the lobbyists working for competitors, knowing it was the right decision. Barb aside, I implore the government and this House to take substantive, meaningful and timely action to help Canadians out, because they cannot afford to wait.
I know that I am not the only one seeing regular, everyday Canadians struggle with the cost of living. We in this chamber have a tremendous responsibility. It is enormous, but we must also never forget the people who sent us here. Canadians are suffering with the high cost of fuel, food and housing. The taxpayers who put the confidence in us to be in this place do not get a housing allowance. They do not have travel points and they cannot claim any meal allowance. It is no wonder that many Canadians are losing faith in their elected officials.
They turn on the news and see the highlights of question period, which often is little more than theatre. I suppose this is the natural result of a legislature that puts more focus on communication and sound bites instead of good policy. A very wise man, if at times a very difficult man, saw this trend starting in the 1980s. The late member for Yukon and deputy prime minister, Erik Nielsen, lamented this shift to focus on commentary, interviews and opinion papers. The sound bite was the goal, not the substance of the discussion. Nuance was dying in front of his eyes, and in his autobiography, he tried to warn us.
In a similar vein, the individual who gave the inaugural televised speech in the U.K. House of Commons, Ian Gow, said in November 1989:
I have always voted against the televising of the proceedings of this House, and I expect that I always will. The brief intervention earlier of the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer) did nothing to alter my view. Despite my strongly held opinions, a letter that I received—three weeks ago—I believe that a copy was sent to each of us and possibly even to you, Mr. Speaker—made the following preposterous assertion: “The impression you make on television depends mainly on your image (55 per cent) with your voice and body language accounting for 38 per cent of your impact. Only 7 per cent depends on what you are actually saying.”
This is sad. While Ian Gow and, indeed, the entirety of the Parliament at the time thought those claims preposterous, there is no denying that the quality of debate and the level of co-operation have declined and been largely replaced with imagery, with theatre. A cursory reading of the historical Hansards will show this. The fact that the NDP felt it necessary to surrender its money-scrutinizing authority to the Liberal government in order for a promise shows this.
Every single person in this room, including my good friends on our side of the House, needs to do the job we were sent here to do: to work with other parties and fight for the best interests of all Canadians. I ask my colleagues across the aisle to please exercise a minimal amount of humility. Adopting this Conservative opposition day motion would do just that.
1245 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/22 11:14:10 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Avalon for bringing this incredibly important issue to the floor of the House of Commons. It goes without saying that the issue of long-term care is perhaps, along with the cost of living, one of the issues heard most from concerned constituents by all members in this place.
The population in my riding of Hastings—Lennox and Addington has one of the highest percentages of seniors in this country. If we couple that statistic with the rural nature of a large majority of the riding, suitable housing for seniors is a real issue.
Not only do we need to make sure there are enough beds in facilities, but we need to ensure that those facilities are spread throughout the riding to accommodate the decentralized population centres across thousands of kilometres of Hastings—Lennox and Addington.
Many of my rural counterparts do not benefit from having the centralized smaller footprints of our urban colleagues, which means much more costly overhead in terms of capital and staff in getting our facilities set up.
While this is certainly daunting, recently Hastings—Lennox and Addington served as a good example of how the provinces can start the process on their own. Recently, the Ontario government announced $1.8 million of additional funding for long-term care facilities in Hastings—Lennox and Addington, and Kingston and the Islands.
This affects over 500 beds across these two ridings, and I am sure my colleague for Kingston and the Islands would be happy to join me in thanking the Conservative government of Doug Ford for this very important investment in long-term care across our riding. While this is certainly a positive step in the right direction, far more work needs to be done in Hastings—Lennox and Addington and across our country.
The reality of the situation is that the COVID-19 pandemic shed a jarring light on a problem that has been festering in Canada for decades. It was the dirty little secret that millions of Canadians did not want to acknowledge: Many of their parents were living in dismal conditions in our long-term care facilities.
In my opinion, the most eye-opening example of this was when the Ontario and Quebec governments called in the military to provide logistical support for their overworked caregivers in Operation Laser. Following this deployment, the Canadian Armed Forces released a document that contained five annexes titled observation reports. These chronicled concerning shortcomings that were further exacerbated by COVID-19 at five long-term care facilities.
I want to apologize to my colleagues for the graphic nature of much of these reports, but as someone responsible for the seniors' portfolio, I believe that it is incumbent on me to remind the House of the contents of the reports and read them into the record.
I want to reiterate that while the following excerpts are, for lack of a better term, horrific, they are not indicative of all facilities. However, the fact is that these situations occurred. Even if they were isolated instances, it is one time too many.
In the first facility, the report noted the following, among many other issues:
Reusing hypodermoclysis supplies even after sterility has been obviously compromised (e.g. a catheter pulled out and on the floor for an undetermined amount of time);
Poor palliative care standards—inadequate dosing intervals for some medications...
Generally very poor peri-catheterization care reported. Example: retracting penis foreskin to clean isn't happening on a widespread level. CAF have found nearly a dozen incidents of bleeding fungal infections....
Extra soaker pad: residents who routinely soil their bed despite incontinence products are not permitted to have an extra soaker pad or towel...to help protect sheets and blankets from soiling.... [The] rationalization used is that an extra pad is undignified....
New staff that have been brought to LTCF haven't been trained or oriented.
[LTCF] is “severely understaffed during day due to resident comorbidities and needs....
[Medical doctors] not present and have to be accessed by phone....
CAF [members] have witnessed aggressive behaviour, which ACC staff assessed as abusive or inappropriate.
In a second facility, the following were noted:
Little to no disinfection had been conducted at the facility prior to CAF operations. Significant gross fecal contamination was noted in numerous patient rooms;
Insect infestation was noted within [the long-term care facility]—ants and cockroaches plus unknown observed;
Delayed changing soiled residents, leading to skin breakdown....
Forceful feeding observed by staff causing audible choking/aspiration, forceful hydration observed by staff causing audible choking/aspiration;
Patients observed crying for help with staff not responding for 30 minutes to over two hours....
SNO reported incident of patients' enteral feed bottle not being changed for so long the contents had become foul and coagulated; date and expiration of the contents not noted on the bottle;
SNO reported incident of permanent catheter being in situ three weeks beyond scheduled change date....
and,
[Personal support workers] often rushed and leave food on table, but patients often cannot reach or cannot feed themselves, therefore missing meals or not receiving meals for hours.
This is just a small section of the report covering two specific facilities. It is disturbing, yet these same scenes are being played out across our nation and have been going on for decades. We in this nation seem to be content with treating our senior citizens, the people who literally built this country and raised our entire nation, no better than we would treat an animal. It is a national tragedy and a national shame that thousands of Canadian seniors consider the previously mentioned incidents to be part of regular life.
As I have previously mentioned in the House, in 2018, the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities released a report entitled, “Advancing Inclusion and Quality of Life for Seniors”. That report identified a number of issues surrounding long-term care and suggested a number of actionable recommendations to address those issues. It is extremely unfortunate that, over four years later, we are still moving motions to crassly declare our great outrage over an issue this Parliament was directly made aware of at the time, but did not move fast enough to address.
Unfortunately, it seems to be the modus operandi of the current government to move a non-instructive motion, develop a framework, strike a working group, create a road map and do anything except actually address the issue at hand.
This year's budget is another perfect example of this mentality. Despite all of the grandstanding from the government about it having the backs of our seniors, it provided $20 million in its support for seniors budget line. That is $20 million out of $56.6 billion in proposed new spending. To put that into perspective, for every dollar the government has proposed to spend, Canadian seniors get less than half of a tenth of a cent.
To finish off, I would like to reiterate that I am not assigning blame to my hon. friend across the way who moved this very important motion, but more so to his colleagues on the front bench, who dither away while our Canadian seniors are suffering. I really want to thank him for bringing this motion to the floor. I hope that he will continue to advocate for Canadian seniors and press his caucus colleagues into meaningful action on this file.
1261 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/22/22 1:16:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I wish I could say it is my pleasure to rise in the House today to speak to this motion, but that would be misleading in this place. The circumstances that have led to the necessity for this opposition day motion completely efface the normally noble feelings I have to expect when standing in the House.
The price of fuel has been increasing: This we all know. We can sit here and debate the macroeconomic reasons for how we got here. We can point fingers at various governments, regulatory bodies, international associations, etc., but what would that do? What would pointing the finger at government agencies do for the business owners who I spoke to during question period in the last sitting week? The reality of the situation is that no amount of bickering in this place about past governments will lower the out-of-control fuel bills Canadians are being stuck with.
People of all ages and stages of life are grappling with these costs. Their budgets do not have room for the increase when paying the minimum payment on their exhausted credit cards is their primary concern. Bickering about OPEC or about allegations of corporate greed among oil and gas companies does nothing to help the young couple from Stirling I spoke to earlier today, the retiree from Bath last week, or the gentleman from Tamworth who emailed this morning begging for relief. Empty words and pit-bull rhetoric from wordy politicians gets old and will not help.
However, this motion would help. This is why it is critical that we pass this motion today and do so unanimously, so we can all go back to our constituents and say that we did this together. We set aside any professional grudges we held. We set aside our pride. We set aside our loyalty to our parties and we delivered a financial reprieve to those suffering from these ridiculous fuel prices.
It is no surprise at all that those in the House who are lucky enough to represent the more rural ridings in Canada feel particularly strongly about this issue. To be clear to my more urbanite colleagues in all parties, I do not mean to minimize the effect that these fuel prices have had on their constituents. I know they suffer too, but the simple reality is that the people in rural Canada, such as those in Hastings—Lennox and Addington, rely more on fuel than lobbyists in downtown Toronto or bureaucrats here in Ottawa. There is no city bus from Eldorado to Enterprise. There is no LRT from Bancroft to north Thurlow. Many people do not live within walking distance of where they work. The vast majority of voters, constituents and human beings do not: They need to drive cars, and believe me when I say driving around Hastings—Lennox and Addington requires a lot of gasoline. There is a lot of driving.
Farmers, who have often invested millions of dollars in their machinery, do not have the option to use some tax credit to convert their fleets to electric, nor do haulers, foresters or any small business owners reliant on any type of machinery.
Another point that often gets left out is that of home heating. I spoke to a senior late last week who is living on a fixed income. This particular gentleman lives in the rural community of Marmora. People there cannot switch over to a more cost-effective heating option not only because it is cost-prohibitive, but because in many instances, such as his, the infrastructure just does not exist.
These are good people. Many of these people have been raised to work hard and play harder. These people have paid their taxes, volunteered in their communities, coached sports teams and baked for school fun fairs and church bazaars. These are Canadians who rely on their vehicles to get to work and take their children to activities. These are Canadians and non-profit groups that depend on their vehicles to keep serving their communities. They needed a reprieve yesterday.
They do not deserve to suffer under paralyzingly high fuel prices. Something needs to be done, and today something can be done. Today, we can call on the government to pause the GST on fuel and give Canadians a break. This would immediately reduce prices at the pump by about 8¢ a litre. I recognize this does not solve the problem, but it helps. The reality is that 53% of Canadians cannot keep up with rising costs. Higher fuel prices raise the cost of everything. It is not just a ripple effect anymore; it is a tidal wave, and Canadians are feeling it across this country.
I urge the members of this place to consider this. The official opposition has before them a realistic, tangible and direct solution for Canadians suffering from high prices. To date, this legislature's reaction to those gas price increases has been completely inadequate. A vote against this motion is a vote for the status quo. It is a vote against the low-income senior who is forced to choose between heating and meals. It is a vote against the single parent of four kids struggling to make ends meet. It is against the farmer who grows our cities their food. It is a vote against the struggling student working three service jobs through town to get through school.
This is a good motion. It would help all of our constituents. An opposition day motion should not automatically elicit a paroxysm of partisan mania from other parties, yet it happens far too often. While I am not surprised, I am extremely disappointed that the NDP has now formally signalled to the Liberals that it will support whatever measures are needed to prop up this minority Parliament.
Regardless of one's political leanings, the option was not on the ballot. It is not democracy at its best. Today, I implore the members who vote against the motion to at least consider listening to their constituents crying out for help. If they have not already, they should ask their staff to read the emails sent to them and listen to the messages that are being left on phones. I guarantee they will have many instances to share with them.
Try to understand the sleepless nights that these increases in prices are bringing. If members vote against the motion, at least they could think about how else they could ease the financial burden of the short-sighted economic policies from governments the world over that have been foisted onto the backs of our seniors, our single parents, our indigenous communities, our farmers and our rural Canadians, and they could act.
This is what we were sent to this place to do: to act. If members must vote against the motion, be it because of pressure from their whip or leadership, then I pray they will listen to the words of the members here and their constituents at home, and use these to go back to their caucuses and create something more palatable for Parliament. None of our constituents, especially those in rural communities, can afford the indecisiveness and indifference that plagues politicians in Ottawa. The status quo is not acceptable. We owe them all better, regardless of political affiliation.
1223 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/29/21 2:13:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to have been born in a small rural community in Hastings—Lennox and Addington. However, the reality is that rural living has many challenges and the policies of the government are making them even harder.
Many people in my riding find it increasingly difficult to survive. Whether it is fuel, groceries, rent or propane, inflation is hitting everything. They should not have to decide between feeding their families a nutritious meal, putting gas in their vehicles and heating their homes.
I implore the government to focus on helping Canadians with the dramatically rising costs of everything. It is not just inflation; it is about the government's inability or unwillingness to recognize that people are hurting and need help now.
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
