SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Shelby Kramp-Neuman

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of Parliament
  • Conservative
  • Hastings—Lennox and Addington
  • Ontario
  • Voting Attendance: 66%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $121,555.68

  • Government Page
  • Apr/9/24 2:17:29 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, as Canadians know all too well, the Prime Minister has abandoned any pretense of fiscal stewardship, with his government racking up more national debt than all previous prime ministers combined. His record-shattering tax and spend agenda has driven up inflation and interest rates, increasing the cost of food, fuel and housing. It has gotten so bad that leading economists are warning that the record-high spending may delay interest rate cuts. The common-sense Conservatives have a simple solution that could be implemented in next week's NDP-Liberal government budget: The government ought to find a dollar in savings for every dollar spent. This is a reasonable and simple lever they could use to get their inflation under control. After eight years, Canadians are in debt, exhausted and looking for relief. Let us axe the tax, build the homes, cap the spending and fix the budget. Let us bring it home.
155 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/19/23 2:59:24 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the long-term consequences of the current government's inflationary deficit spending on Canadian mortgage-holders is already at a head, driving up interest rates to the highest in 22 years. Senior economists across the Canadian banking sector have all indicated that another hike is likely in July, another cost-of-living hike on top of the carbon tax hike. At what point will the government stop footing middle-class Canadians with the bill for its poor economic and fiscal stewardship?
83 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/12/23 2:59:43 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, unlike the federal government, struggling Canadians cannot simply print more money. They need to manage their budgets and spend within their means. They cannot impose a series of punitive taxes on their neighbours to balance their books. They need to manage their finances with the added hurdle of reduced spending power. When will the government stop spending, reduce inflation and lower massive grocery bills?
66 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/12/23 2:58:22 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that the government's record deficit spending has shot inflation through the roof. As a result, Canadians are spending more on food than ever before. This is particularly marked in rural communities like my own, where higher shipping costs add on to the cost of the end product and will only continue to get more expensive with this government's carbon taxes. Will the government finally acknowledge the damage its lavish and out-of-control spending is having on the kitchen table? Canadians are needing help. It needs to end its inflation-inducing monetary policy. Will it do it?
105 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 4:46:49 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it is definitely no secret that Canadians are stretched in every possible regard, whether it is with housing or labour issues. The bottom line is that the budget that was presented is not responsible. It is a budget funded by Canadians suffering from inflation. Rather than providing real solutions, this NDP-Liberal government has unleashed an avalanche of uncontrolled spending. From my perspective, Canadians cannot afford business as usual. No democracy is perfect, but all are perfectible.
79 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/17/23 4:35:25 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the government has touted this budget as a budget that will tackle the high cost of living. Observers could be excused for thinking this meant the government would actually take substantive steps to address the underlying factors that have caused the historic rise in the price of food, heating, gas and other everyday essentials. Unfortunately, Canadians did not receive such a budget, and as a result, their confidence in the competence of the government's economic management continues to dither. Instead of taking care of the issues of the day, the government has burdened future generations of Canadians with billions upon billions of dollars of unnecessary debt. It should not be up to Canada's sons and daughters to foot the bill for a government looking for a quick vote today. Canadian families are suffering. That is the bottom line. This we know; we hear it every day. I can recite countless examples locally of small business owners or farmers who have had to make extremely difficult decisions in order to stretch their dollars further. However, there is one group of Canadians often overlooked in these discussions, a group of Canadians that has been treated as an afterthought by governments and looked at as an easy source of money when it needs to be found: our armed forces and its members. Over the past couple of weeks, my office has been inundated by an alarming number of CAF members expressing grave concerns over numerous issues, most recently the replacement approved by Treasury Board of the post living differential to the Canadian Forces housing differential. The push-back on this new policy has been astounding. One person, who granted me permission to use their quote, wrote, “ Many are losing money. The sliding scale it operates on has newly joined members making more money than those that have been in for 12-15 years. This means as you work hard, strive to lead and progress you will actually lose money. In what world does it make sense that as you promote into higher positions you take a pay cut? You have members who will lose money because once they move up in ranks and strive for more, they no longer qualify for the CFHD benefit and the raise does not match what they were receiving from CFHD. I'm talking about a decrease in pay anywhere from a couple dollars to 500 dollars a month. The CFHD benefit goes away for people who live in the same area for 7 years or more. Sure, many members get posted. But the Navy folks on ship are only stationed on each coast. Things don't change for those folks after 7 years for cost of living. Well it does. It gets more expensive but let's take away an allowance.” I want to personally thank this person for being courageous enough to reach out to my office to share their concerns. If politicians never actually talk to our soldiers, sailors and airmen, regardless of rank, how will we ever know the issues they are facing and how can we begin to start working on them to solve the problems? While I am sure the objective of this government was to increase the draw of new recruits into the forces, it has done this at the expense of keeping the ones we already have. The 7,700 troops who currently receive the post living differential will not qualify for the Canadian Forces housing differential. For them, it is just another benefit axed. For members living together who do qualify, that benefit is halved, and at a savings of $30 million. I can promise everyone in this House and everyone watching that the long-term effects in talent and investment we will lose as a result of this will far exceed that amount. That is only what we can realistically monetize in training costs. The amount of damage done to morale cannot have a dollar value attached to it. It also unfairly targets the navy, as the new differential expires after seven years in the same address, and the navy is notoriously non-transitional in postings. The government needs to commit to communicating with our troops and ensuring that they will not be unfairly nickel-and-dimed to pay for over-budget programs like the Canadian Coast Guard Arctic and offshore patrol ships, AOPS, which just had its program cost quietly and unceremoniously increased by half a billion dollars, especially at a time when we are in a recruitment and retention crisis. The only solution for the reconstitution crisis is to take the stopgap that exists at the recruitment phase and put it into the retention phase so that there are more soldiers in and fewer soldiers out. The CFHD fails in that objective. What we need is better equipment. We need to start replacing our Victoria-class subs and our aging Auroras, expand our over-the-horizon radar capabilities and commit to spending 2% of our GDP on national defence. Our troops need better incentives, better pay, better housing, a fair and timely recruitment process and a quick and compassionate transitioning process. We also need to remember that the government’s solemn responsibility to our soldiers, sailors and airmen is not nullified as soon as they leave the CAF. At this point, I want to thank my two colleagues, the members from Banff-Airdrie and Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, for their excellent work in advancing veterans issues and being staunch advocates for our former CAF members. Canadians, regardless of job, have been struggling. This budget was an opportunity to provide relief to those who have been dealing with these costs since well before the last election. Instead, we have a government that chooses to run up billions in new debt while simultaneously turning a blind eye to the harsh realities facing everyday families the country over, including those in uniform. The country is facing crises on many levels. The government came out with a pay raise for our forces members and almost immediately negated that net increase by completely revamping their housing differential in the middle of a cost of living crisis, a recruitment crisis and a retention crisis. They expect our normally stoic forces members to be happy about this newest slap in the face. Struggling Canadians both in and out of uniform deserve better than a complacent government content with the status quo. When he retired, Jim Flaherty was, as many opined, a “steady hand at the tiller”. During the last economic crisis, the prudent and conservative approach he took showed Canada to be an island of stability in a global sea of uncertainty. It is crucial that the government of the day, regardless of its stripe, ensures economic stability and does not fall pray to the siren calls of political gamesmanship. It is for these reasons that I will be voting against the budget.
1162 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/27/23 3:01:41 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, reckless spending, record debt and tax increases is a result of eight years of this Prime Minister. With the cost of living climbing higher and higher and the economic outlook more bleak than ever, many Canadians are at their breaking point. In tomorrow's budget, the government should reassure all Canadians that it will stand behind them, exhibit some fiscal responsibility and help restore stability in the country. Will the Prime Minister commit to cancelling the planned carbon tax hike and no new taxes in tomorrow's budget?
90 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/5/22 1:32:43 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-32 
Madam Speaker, there is no question the reckless spending of the government is burdening Canadians significantly. It is mortgaging the futures of our future generations. We need to step up. This tax-and-spend government is not sustainable.
38 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/5/22 1:31:31 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-32 
Madam Speaker, it is undeniable that all Canadians are faced with an extreme amount of economic uncertainty. There is no question that seniors, business owners and families are. No new spending and no new taxes would help seniors and all Canadians across the board.
44 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/5/22 1:30:15 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-32 
Madam Speaker, I would acknowledge there is an example of another Liberal quickly patting themselves on the back for a lack of hard work. I would like to give some facts. This country is in trouble. Government spending is up 30% compared to prepandemic levels. Next year, debt interest payments will cost nearly as much as the Canada health transfer. The member across the aisle has suggested their government is doing pretty well. Perhaps he has not spoken to his constituents lately.
82 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/5/22 1:19:02 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-32 
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!
  • star_border
  • Nov/3/22 2:54:13 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are out of money and this spend, spend, spend Liberal government is out of touch. People are losing confidence, faith and patience. Simply put, people cannot afford these record-high taxes and inflation any longer. They are sinking in debt. Families, business owners, seniors, students, all Canadians expect more from the government. When will the Prime Minister commit to no new spending and no new taxes?
69 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/26/22 1:47:08 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I will finish by saying that the Prime Minister has announced more inflationary spending that does nothing to help seniors and families struggling to put gas in their tanks and food on their tables. Could the hon. member comment on the fact-checking in his remarks today?
49 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/3/22 11:31:18 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, Canadians are at their breaking point due to financial stress. This entire nation is in trouble. It is no longer paycheque to paycheque to make ends meet. Many are in a mode of survival. On top of maxing out credit cards, people are transferring balances from one credit card to another just to avoid insolvency. Out-of-control spending, a record-high cost of living and empty platitudes from the indifferent government are getting old. Does the government actually have a plan to stop this cycle of destruction?
90 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/26/22 11:52:41 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, budgets are important. They are the core of a parliament. It is a real honour to be able to rise here today and speak to budget 2022. For many of us, this is the first substantive piece of legislation that we as new parliamentarians are tasked with scrutinizing. The importance of this job that Canadians have trusted us to undertake cannot be understated. Every single day, many people from Hastings—Lennox and Addington are calling and emailing my office with grave concerns about how they can make ends meet. Just last week, our office received hundreds of feedback forms indicating that the cost of living and affordability was their number one concern. The cost of groceries, gas, home heating and everything has increased. It is my obligation and my role as their member of Parliament to bring them a voice in this House. On general spending measures, the Liberal government suggests that the announcements in the budget will help weather inflation and make housing more affordable. In my opinion, the continuation of this Liberal approach is destined to drive us right back into a crisis of an order of magnitude larger than that of the early 1980s, based on constantly adding new permanent spending programs on borrowed money. As noted in an article I read recently, only a small portion of our national debt is refinanced each year, so we will not get stung all at once. However, year by year, servicing costs will rise and the ability to afford our essential programs will dwindle, unless taxes rise substantially to cover the rising costs of both debt serving and increased program costs. The core function of our Parliament has been, and remains, to oversee the expenditure of public monies. Parliamentarians, and parliaments themselves, fought long and hard to pry this authority from the hands of imperial executives and governors, decades ago. Their actions lend themselves to our uniquely Canadian brand of responsible government. In his important work, The Public Purse, which is used as source material in our most recent practice and procedure manual, Norman Ward describes the struggle of our nascent pre-Confederation legislatures, as it related to oversight, thus: In principle, therefore, the first goal usually sought by an assembly was to make the executive at least partially dependent on the assembly for its income; the second was to make it wholly so; the third, and most sophisticated, was to insist on some sort of detailed public accounting, on a systematic basis, of expenditures after they were made. In 1838, Lord Durham was sent by the mother of parliaments to investigate the cause of the previous year's rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada. One of the litany of causes was, as he describes, related to the relationships between the assemblies and the executives. In his hugely influential report, Lord Durham wrote: The Assembly, after it had obtained entire control over the public revenues, still found itself deprived of all voice in the choice or even designation of the persons in whose administration of affairs it could feel confidence. He went on to state: It is difficult to conceive what could have been their theory or government who imagined, that in any colony of England a body invested with the name and character of a representative assembly could be deprived of any of those powers which, in the opinion of Englishmen, are inherent in a popular legislature. This speaks to two principles of parliamentary control of finances: first, that the executive should have no income that is not granted to it or otherwise sanctioned by Parliament; and second, that the executive should make no expenditures except those approved by Parliament, in ways approved by Parliament. I am not suggesting that this legislature does not possess the capacity to scrutinize. I know it does, but I believe in recent years we have not been wielding that authority properly and effectively, especially as it relates to Mr. Ward’s third point regarding what ultimately became our main estimates. As a result, Canadians are now paying the price. We need only look at this very budget document for proof positive of what rushed legislation does, most particularly in the case of budgets. Hidden away in annex 3 of the budget, the fourth from last page reads as follows: In Budget 2022, the government proposes to amend the Old Age Security Act to clarify that the one-time payment made in August 2021 to seniors age 75 and older will be exempted from the income test for the Guaranteed Income Supplement and Allowances. This amendment corrects a reference error resulting from the passage of the Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1. This begs the question: What was the error? In sections 266 and 268 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2021, the section that had intended to make the one-time, $500 payment to struggling seniors aged 75 and up non-taxable, the Liberals quoted the wrong section of the act. Instead of quoting section 275, the section that actually created the payment, they cited section 276, which is completely unrelated to seniors and instead deals with the Public Service Employment Act. As a result, right now, under law, as desperate seniors are filing their taxes, that $500 is considered income, and not just at tax time but come the July recalculation period for benefits. In other words, the government has created and legislated yet another potential benefit clawback. It is only prudent to highlight that last time, the budget was time allocated, meaning that the government, with the NDP's support, limited the amount of debate that we could have on the budget. That was debate where we might have found this error and saved seniors the stress of another possible clawback. I would note that it was the same group of seniors, those aged 75 plus, who had the wrong T4 information sent to them due to a misprint. How convenient that the same, exact group of people who were subject to an age-restricted benefit that everyone, including, I imagine, the CRA and the ESDC, thought was non-taxable, received misprinted T4s. Now we find out that the benefit is, under word of law, actually taxable. That is why my colleague for Miramichi—Grand Lake and I called on this government to extend the filing date for seniors. With regard to seniors, they have very little to celebrate in this year's budget. Of a projected $56.6 billion in new spending through to 2027, a paltry $20 million has been earmarked for supporting our seniors. To put that into perspective, that is 0.04% of spending announced in the next five years. There is nothing to help struggling formal and informal caregivers, nothing to help long-term care facilities and nothing to help alleviate the increasing cost of living they all face. Low-income seniors need help today, and they cannot afford to wait. To get back to my original point, our job here is to scrutinize. What we do here is the basis for responsible government. When we cannot do our jobs, Canadians suffer. On my file alone, we have seen it with the GIS clawback, we have seen it with the T4 delays, and now we are seeing it with the one-time payment, which are all things that could have been avoided if we actually took the time to do our job right. I will give credit to the hon. Minister of Seniors, who has acted on things when they were brought to her attention, but the point is that it should never have gotten to this point. Lastly, I want to touch on the absolute absurdity that is our main estimates process in relation to the budgetary process and the need to align Treasury Board with Finance in the preparation of those documents. However, my time is running short, so I will leave members with one more recent quote from the 2019 report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, entitled, “Improving Transparency and Parliamentary Oversight of the Government’s Spending Plans”. The report quotes Scott Brison as saying, “The ability to exercise oversight over government spending is the most important role that...parliamentarians can play in representing Canadians.” I urge everyone here to heed the words of our former Liberal president of the Treasury Board and let parliamentarians do our jobs thoroughly and effectively, because Canadians cannot afford for us to do otherwise.
1421 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Mar/22/22 1:30:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, here is the reality. Inflation is at an all-time high. It is the highest rate in this generation. Everything is going up. What we have to recognize is that the government is spending millions of dollars on things it could have cut. It has misplaced billions it cannot account for, and sadly the government has no financial accountability. People are struggling to make ends meet. The government has an opportunity right now, today. If it wants, it could do something right for Canadians, and would have, perhaps, had it been their idea.
95 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border