Debates of Jan. 30th, 2024

Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2023

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I want to assure the hon. member that I have no trap door anywhere in this chamber, even though there are times that I do wish I had one.

With questions and comments, we have the hon. member for Beauport—Limoilou.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a difference between affordable housing and social housing. One is barely 10% below market value. The other offers services and ongoing support, which is something older people in particular need. Speaking of older people, some people aged 65 to 74 are in good shape, others not so much. Creating two classes of seniors is a problem, especially for women, who were not able to put as much away for retirement because they were looking after children and being family caregivers.

Here is what I want to ask my colleague. Recent budgets and the latest economic update did not put an end to this discrimination against seniors. When will the government take care of that?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on the category of seniors, of which I am a proud member, I too share the concern of the hon. member. I take note of the irony that, when there was a boost for post-75 seniors, there was not a boost for those 65 to 75. The point being that, from a policy standpoint, the older one gets, the less able one is to adjust to economic uncertainty. I am sure that the hon. member would agree with me that our senior seniors are the people we should address first. I think the government has done an admirable job in that area.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it was an interesting presentation. I am sure that the Canadians out there who are $200 away from insolvency every month were absolutely riveted by that information, telling them how great their lives are, when we know that violent crime in and around Toronto is up around 15%.

We know that Toronto has one of the worst housing bubbles in the entire world. We know that rent has gone up, doubled. We know that mortgages have doubled and that it is almost unaffordable for anybody to live in Toronto, certainly for newcomers to Canada wanting to move there.

I would like the member to rectify for all of us here, and for all of the Canadians watching, the incredibly boring and non-enlightening way the rosy picture of Canada was presented, when Canadians know that, every month, two million of them are visiting a food bank. As I said at the start, they are $200 away from insolvency.

Could the member tell us how this equates to this great job that his government is doing?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, generally my colleagues do not describe my speeches as boring in public. They may privately say that my speeches are boring. I feel badly for the hon. gentleman, who missed the central point of the speech.

The central point of the speech is that the metrics of the country are very good. Would he prefer, in Nova Scotia, to have 10% unemployment, or would he prefer to have 4% unemployment? Would he prefer to be dealing with the challenges of his constituents with 4% unemployment or 10% unemployment?

I regret that the hon. member finds my remarks boring, but maybe, if he had paid a little bit more attention, he would have been able to articulate the central dilemma I was speaking to.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, he mentioned how proud this government is. The Liberals are proud of the child care program they put forward, which, of course, New Democrats worked very hard to push this government on, and we are happy to see it. There is value there for his constituents, and certainly mine, in ensuring that especially women can come into the workplace and participate in greater levels.

That is very necessary for the growth of our economy. However, one thing the Liberals have not done is to ensure that those who work within child care are paid adequately. Potentially, could the hon. member explain the future plans of the Liberal government to do so, so that we could ensure that those who are taking care of children while we are at work, and we know that we need that excellent care, those in that sector, are being provided with livable wages?

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

We are out of time.

The hon. member for Scarborough—Guildwood with a quick answer.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are out of time but you are not going to pull the trap door. Thanks.

The hon. member raises an interesting issue, and this is where the $10-a-day day care comes in. This is largely a program that is funded by the Government of Canada for, in our case, the Government of Ontario. The provision of the quality of the day care worker and the wages he or she receives and the quality of the workplace are largely dependent upon the Province of Ontario.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House this evening and speak for a few minutes about the fall economic statement and Bill C-59. Of course fall has turned to winter, and yet the topics we have been debating in this piece of legislation are as relevant as ever, particularly the topic of housing. That is where I will focus my remarks this evening.

The need for affordable housing is an issue in every single community in northwest B.C. I know many members in this House are familiar with what is going on in northwest B.C., particularly the level of investment in industrial development. That has brought opportunity for many people. There are many people making good incomes in various industrial industries, but not everyone.

I remember, months ago, talking to a fellow on his doorstep in the city of Terrace. He was a carpenter. He was working on the construction of the new hospital in the city, a much-needed and much-awaited project. He told me about his struggles affording rental housing. He was renting what I believe was a modest two-bedroom townhouse. He had two kids with a third on the way. He said that he and his partner needed more space but they just could not afford it.

There are many people in that situation and people who are earning even less. When we think about people working in the service industry, there are many people who are struggling to make ends meet and struggling with the cost of housing. What we have heard in this debate is that both the Liberals and the Conservatives are relying almost solely on the market to provide housing solutions. As for the ideas that they have presented, whether it is the idea of browbeating what they are calling municipal gatekeepers or building density near transit hubs, northwest B.C. does not have transit hubs. It barely has public transit. These are not ideas that translate to rural British Columbia.

We need different ideas. We need a government that is committed, in particular, to building the infrastructure that our communities need. In cities like Prince Rupert, that means a major investment in water infrastructure. In the city of Terrace, in the town of Smithers, in the small community of Port Clements, people are struggling, and communities are struggling with the cost of infrastructure, like waste water and drinking water. That is what is needed in order to facilitate the expansion of housing development. These communities would welcome private sector development, public sector development, but they cannot do it without the infrastructure.

I will leave it there, and look forward to continuing my remarks at a future date.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

It being 6:18 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

The House resumed from November 3, 2023 consideration of Bill S-202, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Parliamentary Visual Artist Laureate), as reported (with amendments) from the committee.

Parliament of Canada Act

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

moved that the bill, as amended, be concurred in.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would request a recorded division.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to Standing Order 98, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, January 31, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Natural Resources

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, before I get started, I just want take a minute to thank all the great workers in the natural resources sector, and also our farmers and our producers, for making sure that the lights can stay on when it is -50°C, that our homes can stay warm and that we can still produce food. I also thank all the transport workers, who make sure that food, clothing and resources can get all the way across our country regardless of the temperature, whether it is warmer like it is today or if it gets to be, like I said, -50°C as it was a couple of weekends ago back home in Saskatchewan.

Canadians understand how important it is for us to have energy security. Before we all came back to the House, western Canada had to deal with the alarming effects of extremely cold temperatures. The worst of it hit my home province of Saskatchewan, but it was also in Alberta and British Columbia. As we might expect, there was a surge in demand for electricity, but this time, it all put a strain on the system. It got to the point that Alberta had to send out an emergency alert asking everyone to limit their electricity use in order to avoid blackouts. For hours, people were asked to do different things to cut down on their usage, such as turn off their lights, avoid cooking with a stove and delay charging their electric vehicles.

Alberta also received some power from other places, including Saskatchewan. Here is what our Premier Scott Moe said on X at that time. “SaskPower is providing 153 MW of electricity to AB this evening to assist them through this shortage.” It goes on to say, “That power will be coming from natural gas and coal-fired plants, the ones the Trudeau government is telling us to shut down (which we won’t).”

We fired up Boundary Dam 4 in Estevan country to produce more coal-fired power, and I am sure the folks in Alberta were very grateful that Saskatchewan was able to do so. Meanwhile, the government's emissions cap would prevent this from happening. Thankfully, we avoided having a worse situation with rolling outages. However, it is something that could happen, and we do need to take that situation seriously. For the NDP-Liberal government here in Ottawa, it should serve as a wake-up call.

Most people across the country understand that Canadian winters are tough, but I am not sure if some members, Liberal ministers or parliamentary secretaries realize what it is like to live through a typical prairie winter, where it is normal to have a wind chill of -50°C. Our average temperatures can be terribly low and last for a long time. They do not just come and go right away. There are times when it is actually not safe for people to stay outside for very long. People need to be somewhere indoors with a reliable source of heat. That is how we survive. It was one of those extremely cold days when people were faced with the power going out.

My province had greater energy demand as well, and we met that demand from reliable sources. When push came to shove, the overwhelming majority of it came from natural gas and a bit from our coal plants. At the same time, we were also able to lend a hand to our friends over in Alberta. It made a difference for them. It is not a mystery why the premier says he does not want to get rid of affordable and reliable energy. In a critical moment, we all had something solid to fall back on.

The real question is why the Liberals are obsessed with weakening our energy supply with their carbon tax, their emissions cap and the so-called just transition. Not long before all of this happened, they announced some new electricity regulations, and they were shocked to hear that the premiers of Saskatchewan and Alberta would refuse to go along with it. This threat of power outages, while enduring extreme cold temperatures of -50°C, is exactly why.

Are the Liberals going to listen to what our western premiers are trying to tell them? Do the Liberals get it yet? Does the Minister of Natural Resources understand why Saskatchewan will not accept his radical agenda? Will they finally give Canadians a break?

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, the question that actually started this late show talked about oil imports as well, so I would like to address that, because that seems to have been at least what generated this further conversation. I will start with the fact that it is really important for Canadians to know that under the previous Conservative government, oil imports were actually double what they are today. I think that is just an important piece to take into account when we are talking about these things.

I also really feel that it is important to note that the Conservatives need to wake up and realize that climate change is a scientific reality that requires urgent and sustained action, and that if we take that action there is also economic opportunity. It is economic opportunity that they should be seizing.

When we talk about the work that we are doing to reduce emissions, we have also been working with our allies to become a trusted resource for the energy they need. That is particularly in the wake of Russia's brutal and unjustifiable invasion of Ukraine.

To benefit our growing energy sectors, Canada must consider leveraging all possible sources of energy for export. Of course, that includes conventional energy sources, which we are investing to decarbonize, but, most vitally, it is also about continuing the production of all forms of energy that we are working on, like the exportation of hydrogen fuels.

In Stephenville, we launched the Canada-Germany hydrogen alliance to ensure that our resources can help European allies get off Russian oil and gas. This is something that perhaps the member opposite, having been on the natural resources committee, might really want to focus on, as part of that work is also on Atlantic offshore wind. There is a bill right now that is at committee, which would unlock Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador's wind power potential. That will help them to power their homes, and it will also allow for the sale of that clean power to make hydrogen fuel for our allies. It is great for their local economies, and it is great for their energy resources back home.

The International Energy Agency has said that the offshore wind industry is a trillion-dollar market, and the House must pass the piece of legislation that is before it to unlock the potential in the Atlantic for offshore wind. Right now, 45% of offshore wind energy production happens in China. Taiwan and Europe are also making substantial strides in this market, and they have projects also along the east coast of the U.S. If we want to help our allies and claim our share of this massive opportunity, we must continue to move forward with renewable energy and build on the investments we already have in place.

Taken together, I am talking about all sorts of opportunities that we are building right here. We have a range of investment tax credits to support industry, including those for clean technology, clean hydrogen and clean electricity. We have hundreds of millions of dollars that we have invested to expand infrastructure for zero-emission vehicles across Canada and to support Canadians in making their homes more energy-efficient. We are working with our allies, as I said, on renewable energy. These are important opportunities that we have right here at home and should be seizing.

I am going to take this moment and ask the member opposite: Will he work with his party, with the Conservatives, to make sure we unlock Atlantic Canada's offshore wind potential? It will help to support their energy security; it will help to create jobs, and it will create opportunities as well for us to help our allies abroad.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, of course Conservatives support the development of all types of energy. What we do not support is the government picking winners and losers and putting barriers in the way of provinces being able to set up whatever it is that they want.

I have actually worked in the wind industry. This is just a quick fact. In Alberta, 88 of 88 wind farms were producing next to zero power when it was -50°C, because it was literally too cold for them to operate. It was too dangerous. We need to consider other variables at play in a Canadian winter as to why we cannot go that far in on wind and certain other technologies. We can supplement a grid with them, but we cannot replace the reliable, predictable, affordable energy that we get from natural gas.

That is something that Saskatchewan has decided to do more and more of. We have the Chinook Power Station in Swift Current, which produces all kinds of wonderful power. They are building another one in Moose Jaw. The government needs to support those kinds of projects instead.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am hoping that what I heard from the member opposite is that he is going to be encouraging his colleagues on that side of the House to support the legislation that we have in the House, to support offshore wind and the development of offshore wind in our Atlantic provinces. I am sure that he recognizes the importance, like I said, to the energy grid in the Atlantic provinces and for the creation of jobs, as well as for opportunities to support our allies abroad.

We know that the premiers from Nova Scotia and from Newfoundland and Labrador are in fact asking for the passage of this legislation. I hope that he can change the minds of the people on his side of the House, so that we can see it pass quickly.

Persons with Disabilities

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, with Parliament back this week, I am glad to rise tonight to continue pushing the government to end legislated poverty for people with disabilities and, as a significant step in this direction, to adequately fund and properly implement the Canada disability benefit with urgency. Sadly, while the Canada Disability Benefit Act was passed last June, no money has yet been set aside for the benefit. It continues to be the case to this day that 40% of those living in poverty across the country are people with disabilities.

Tonight I will focus on following up on a specific concern about how the Canada disability benefit is being designed. Here is the story: As many Canadians know, nearly every important decision about the benefit, from who is eligible to how much it is going to be, is being left to regulations that are now being drafted. Late last year, though, I began to hear from organizations that serve the disability community about how the Department of Finance is considering determining eligibility through the incredibly burdensome application for the disability tax credit. When I say “burdensome”, I mean that it is one of the most difficult government programs for a person to qualify for. People qualify by submitting a T2201 form, a 16-page form that applicants need to have their doctors complete 15 pages of.

A recent report from the Kids Brain Health Network, in collaboration with researchers from the Disability Policy Research Program and McGill University, breaks down how bad it is. First, long delays in processing applications and inconsistent knowledge of staff lead to rejections that are often viewed as arbitrary. Second, difficulties with the T2201 application form, including that it lacks clear instructions and criteria, often lead to requests for additional instructions and information and even specific wording being required for approval. Third, doctors' level of knowledge about the form itself and their level of tenacity to reapply will affect the extent to which the applicant may or may not be successful. Fourth, there is a constant need to reapply, including when recipients have lifelong conditions. As a result, there is an entire industry of disability tax credit consultants set up to charge people with disabilities simply to apply for the credit.

We should not even be having this conversation. I thought we had already solved this issue. Back when the Canada Disability Benefit Act was at committee, out of the nine amendments that got through, my team and I were successful in passing five amendments to improve the bill. One of these addressed this very issue. It changed the bill to say the following: “The Governor in Council may make regulations...respecting applications for a benefit, including regulations providing for an application process that is without barriers, as defined in section 2 of the Accessible Canada Act”.

When I proposed the amendment, I gave the example of a person with a disability who has already qualified for a program when completing their taxes, as is the case for many other benefits. This is why I asked the minister in December if the government would just follow the law that is now passed. She did not answer me at the time, so I am going to ask again tonight.

The Canada Disability Benefit Act requires the Canada disability benefit to be barrier-free. However, it is clear that the disability tax credit is full of barriers. Therefore, will the parliamentary secretary now commit to the government following the law and developing the regulations to ensure that the Canada disability benefit is barrier-free?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Diversity]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Kitchener Centre for his important advocacy around the disability benefit, for highlighting concerns and bringing them to this House.

The disability community is keen and anxious to see that the benefit will be realized, and realized correctly.

We understand that many Canadians with disabilities need the additional support from the Canada disability benefit.

Our government is eager to get money into the pockets of those who need it most. We must get it right. The delivery of the benefit needs to be smooth, targeted, effective and possible.

While the previous Conservative government made promises to Canadians and to the disability community, we actually fulfilled these promises and are going to realize them. Our government has delivered to persons with disabilities. We will continue to do so.

We carefully crafted consultations with the disability community. I, myself, over the last five months of being parliamentary secretary to the minister, have learned about the disability community and have learned about the contours, the uniquenesses within the community, and there are many. The disability benefit will reflect these contours, the uniquenesses of the community.

Bill C-22 received royal assent on June 22, 2023. Immediately, within a month, we announced the start of meaningful consultations. These consultations are informing the design of the regulations to serve those in need. This is absolutely necessary.

The regulatory process is crucial and we must respect it.

There is no better way to get it right than to include those with lived experiences. Persons with disabilities need to have the opportunity to contribute to the design of the benefit's regulations. The disability community must have a say in how this benefit will look, and reflect those concerns. In fact, it is required by the Canada Disability Benefit Act.

The benefit has real potential to reduce and alleviate poverty and to support those who are seeking financial security, those who are of working age and Canadians with disabilities. We know what the target is. We will hit the mark.

Our latest engagement has been via an online tool, where Canadians throughout the country shared their thoughts on details of the benefit. We sought the advice also within key areas from experts, the disability community and advocates.

This addresses the member's question on how the application process should be structured. We are now analyzing those very responses from coast to coast from advocates, from people who are living with disabilities and from those with the variations of disabilities reflected within our country.

We are assessing those responses right now, and we are drafting the regulations. They are being put into the final stage. We are making sure obstacles are removed so Canadians, those with disabilities, will have access to this important benefit.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, respectfully, the fact is that the government has not delivered the Canada disability benefit. I will agree though with the parliamentary secretary that they do need to get this right. What the disability community is trying to tell him is that the government needs to follow what is in the Canada Disability Benefit Act, and specifically, that the benefit must be barrier-free.

Stakeholders are being told that the disability tax credit may be used as a way to access the Canada disability benefit. This is in contravention of the act. It is not what the community is calling for. What I have been asking from the minister, I am asking again tonight. Very specifically, will the parliamentary secretary make it clear that the disability tax credit will not be used in delivering the Canada disability benefit because it is not barrier-free?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to again thank the member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy.

To pick up on the previous reply, we are currently collecting the responses of Canadians who have fed into the process thus far. They are being put into regulation. Those regulations will be first in draft form, when again Canadians will be able to reply to them and to improve them. The feedback we are getting across the country is being put into draft regulations, and Canadians will again have the chance to reflect on them before the benefit is rolled out. This benefit is being done in full consultation with the community following the principle of “nothing about us without us”, which means we can only get to this benefit hand in hand with the disability community.