John Williamson

[Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, September 15th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, in 1947, on the occasion of her 21st birthday and while on a world tour with her family, the future Queen Elizabeth II delivered a radio address to the entire Commonwealth of Nations and said:

I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.

I think we can agree that Her Majesty was true to her word. Throughout her remarkable 70 years as Queen, and it was a long life to be sure, she was fully devoted to the service of her many subjects. This includes that vast majority of Canadians born after 1952 who had never known another head of state. Her death last week at the age of 96 is a time for profound sadness and respect.

Every Canadian has some sense of connection to the Queen, whether fleeting or profound. That is because she was always there for us. While we all understood that she had an entire Commonwealth to serve, many of us, including me, like to think that we were her favourite, such was the deep connection she formed with Canada. Queen Elizabeth often said she had to been seen to be believed, and so she worked tirelessly to ensure that she was indeed seen and believed by her public.

Her 22 state visits to Canada include many of the most momentous occasions in the life of our country, including the centennial in 1967, the 1976 Olympics in Montreal, and the repatriation of our Constitution in 1982.

Some visits had unusual twists, like when Her Majesty visited my home province in 1984, and marijuana was found in our premier's luggage in the royal plane. Obviously he did not know how it got there, and a judge even speculated that a member of the media had planted it. It was all a royal fuss, and I am sure many MPs from other provinces have similar colourful stories about the Queen, pot and the RCMP, or maybe not.

Be that as it may, the Queen's experience allowed her to see how we see ourselves. In 2010, on her final visit to our shores, she said, “This nation has dedicated itself to being a caring home for its own, a sanctuary for others and an example to the world.”

The durable relationship between the monarch and her public was the direct result of the Queen's duty and devotion to public service. While these qualities often seem in short supply today, our Queen had them in vast, seemingly limitless quantities. Her sense of duty alone is reason to greatly mourn her passing.

Our Queen served a role of even greater significance than her own personal dedication to public service. I refer here to the role she played in preserving and protecting our remarkable democratic constitutional monarchy. While our system is greatly preferable to a republic, it nonetheless requires an astute but apolitical monarch to function properly.

The Crown must be dedicated to defending the public interest without ever imperilling the natural course of the elected government. She must reign without ruling. Doing so requires a delicate balancing act of tradition and modernity, tradition because Canada's current system of government dates to the earliest stirrings of our country. From the Royal Proclamation of 1763 to the founding of New Brunswick in 1784, a date of particular significance for my constituents, to Confederation in 1867, Canada has grown and thrived under our living constitutional monarchy.

In her interactions with the public and the pomp that surrounded her, the Queen offered repeated reminders of our connection to our institutional foundations, our long democratic traditions and our cultural ties to other Commonwealth nations. However, critics who claim the Crown is too focused on tradition and is an antique institution resistant to change have overlooked the many ways in which Queen Elizabeth was responsible for the remarkable reforms to the institution she embodied.

From embracing new forms of communication to recognizing the revolution in modern relationships, the Crown has changed with the times. Members will recall that the very reason Elizabeth became the Queen was that her uncle King Edward VIII abdicated in 1936 because, at the time, it was unthinkable for a monarch to marry a divorcee. Today, her son Charles takes the throne with Queen Consort Camilla as his wife. Was the Queen hidebound? Hardly.

In all that she did, Queen Elizabeth exemplified a classically dignified approach to change. She worked tirelessly to defend the institution she represented while recognizing the need for its slow and measured evolution in line with public expectations.

The seamless ascension of King Charles III should be seen as a final testament to Queen Elizabeth’s commitment to the institution of constitutional monarchy. There was never a moment of confusion in the entire process. In fact, it happened before most of us even realized it, and it is happening still as bonds deepen, which is the remarkable authority of the Crown.

Finally, all Canadians can take great comfort in knowing that, as soon as he took his place, King Charles made direct reference to his mother’s own historic pledge from 75 years ago. He said, “That promise of lifelong service I renew to you today.” Such a commitment is exactly what Canadians have, need and expect from their monarch. The virtues of a head of state of discretion, dignity and duty have been passed from mother to son, from Queen to King. Queen Elizabeth’s ultimate and most lasting gift was to ensure her long years of work to safeguard that the continuity and stability of our constitutional monarchy will continue far into the future.

On behalf of my constituents, I recognize all that Her Majesty has done for this great country of ours. I thank our Queen Elizabeth. Long live the King.

[Committees of the House, June 20th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the following four reports of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. First, I present the 16th report, entitled “Enforcement of COVID-19 Quarantine and Testing Orders”.

I also present the 17th report, entitled “Regional Relief and Recovery Fund”, and the 18th report, entitled “Natural Health Products”.

Finally, I present the 19th report, entitled “Health and Safety of Agricultural Temporary Foreign Workers in Canada During the COVID-19 Pandemic”.

[Committees of the House, May 31st, 2022]

I request a division.

[Bank of Canada Accountability Act, May 19th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, New Brunswick is large in its mind, and it is large in its geography as well. Thank you for recognizing me and permitting me to address this important piece of legislation. I should remind the House and members here that when we cut right through it, inflation is the price that we and all Canadians pay for the things that the government told us would be free. That really cuts to the core of this debate and why this bill is so important.

Parliamentary oversight and accountability are key pillars of our democracy that we as legislators should be determined to protect and safeguard. Members of Parliament have a great deal of respect for the work done over the decades by Canada's auditors general, along with the Parliamentary Budget Officer and the other independent offices of Parliament. As chairman of the public accounts committee, I have heard from our current Auditor General, Ms. Hogan, and her deputy, Mr. Hayes, on a number of occasions this year. I can say that MPs from both sides of this chamber welcome their analysis on the machinery of government, through audits of federal departments, agencies and Crown corporations.

The Auditor General's office has historically performed a valuable service to Canadian taxpayers. Their work informs us in this House of both the missteps and the achievements that come from fulfilling policies and programs implemented by the Government of Canada. With few exceptions, these policies and programs are tied to mandates given to them by the executive, that is the cabinet. Of course, those mandates come ultimately from Canada's voters. When civil servants do not adhere to these mandates, it is on us, as parliamentarians, to hold them accountable and to make course corrections.

As such, I wholeheartedly support Bill C-253 to bring the Bank of Canada under the purview of the Auditor General by including the central bank under section 85 of the Financial Administration Act. What this bill would do is authorize the Auditor General to include the Bank of Canada in her normal audit cycle, which means the Bank of Canada would be subject to the same types of routine audits that Crown corporations and departments undergo. That is it. At its core, this is about accountability and transparency, and adherence to its mandate and Parliament.

I applaud the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle for introducing this bill, because he, like me, wants accountability from the Bank of Canada to ensure it adheres to its mandate. Some hon. members protest that MPs should not examine or even criticize the Bank of Canada, because it is independent, but this is a view out of step with democratic oversight in the United States, Britain and other countries where lawmakers are today vigorously debating what their central banks got wrong. We can just turn to a couple of headlines, which read, “Former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke said the central bank erred in waiting to address inflation”, and “The Fed's slow response to inflation was a mistake”.

Another one, from the Financial Times, states, “MPs turn on bank's handling of economy as [British] government feels heat from cost of living crisis”. In fact, even here in Canada, the media are reporting about Bank of Canada officials. In this case, “Carolyn Rogers says the Bank of Canada is learning from its mistakes”, yet some feel that this House has no role in this debate.

Historically, the Bank of Canada has been focused on a stable rate of inflation, and the bank's previous governors successfully kept inflation under control. It was not always easy and it required work, independence and a focus on results. However, in recent years, the bank's references to employment targets has been a consideration. If colleagues look at the bank's website or listen to speeches that officials have made, other considerations are now being added by bank officials in its considerations.

More recently, the bank has also started to indicate that other goals, such as environmental and social objectives, would or could influence policy. Since the pandemic, the Liberal government's deficit spending program has been underwritten almost exclusively through the bank's use of quantitative easing. That is a fancy word for expanding the money supply, which is a polite way of saying “printing money”.

As my hon. colleague just pointed out, when we expand the money supply, we dilute or reduce its value, and that is what has happened today in Canadian wallets. Their paycheques and their savings are worth less than they previously were.

How has all of this worked out? As members of Parliament, we should not be afraid to ask, to probe questions and to seek answers. The bill we are considering would allow the Auditor General to conduct audits of the bank through its normal 10-year cycle. Such audits include performance evaluations, something that is not happening now as it would go beyond the fiscal balance sheet examinations.

This is an important and key addition, particularly since the central bank is implementing monetary policies that are without precedent, and this will have massive implications for things like interest rates, inflation, growth and household incomes going forward. It is necessary that the Bank of Canada be subject to more transparency and accountability by Parliament.

Of course, there is precedent for allowing the Auditor General to have jurisdiction over arm's-length independent financial institutions. The Public Sector Pension Investment Board operates free of political interference but is still subject to the Auditor General's oversight. This bill follows virtually the same model by amending the Financial Administration Act's exemption for the Bank of Canada to match the Public Sector Pension Investment Board. Again, we are calling for the Bank of Canada to be covered in a way that other arm's-length agencies are.

Let us return to mandates and accountability. The Bank of Canada and its governor, Tiff Macklem, wield an extreme amount of power by setting our nation's monetary policy, not economic policy, as one of the members on the government bench said, but monetary policy.

I would argue that the bank's governor is the most powerful unelected civil servant in Canada. At the same time, he is bound by the mandate of his office and therefore subject to accountability, for us to ask how this governor is doing in his job. Unlike other institutions that report to Parliament, the Bank of Canada is audited by external auditors, who are appointed by cabinet on the recommendation of the finance minister. Therein lies the problem. There is not enough oversight or independence.

The bank is responsible for maintaining low and stable inflation, a safe and secure currency, financial stability and the efficient management of government funds and public debt, but at its very core, the governor is responsible for keeping the rate of inflation between 1% and 3%. How is he doing? The rate of inflation, in this country, has hit 6.8%. That is a 30-year high and not a record of success.

Political elites do not want MPs or Canadians to talk about the Bank of Canada's shortcomings. This is to protect the governor from proper and legitimate criticism, yet Governor Macklem has blown Canada's inflation targets and, in doing so, was cozy with the Liberal government.

He should have done his job instead of echoing government talking points about non-existent fiscal anchors. The incestuous relationship between the Liberal government and the Bank of Canada should never have been permitted to develop.

Because the Bank of Canada did not properly perform its job, Canadian households are paying a high price and, I fear, will pay a high price for years to come. Interest rate hikes will be more punishing, and price increases will last longer than had an independent Bank of Canada acted sooner.

Instead of talking about the punishing financial hit on Canadian families and businesses, these gatekeepers, to shield the governor from legitimate public scrutiny, cried, “Respect the bank's independence.” Those cries ring hollow after the governor failed to exercise his own independence from the Liberals. The bank should be held accountable for its errors. This is not interference. This is accountability.

This bill is a modest reform to grant Parliament some oversight, since the Auditor General's audits would be tabled in Parliament and studied by its members. It would bring Canada's Parliament in step with other democracies in probing the Bank of Canada's implementation of its mandate. It would allow MPs to hold the Bank of Canada accountable and to ask and seek answers.

Conservatives do not wish to diminish the Bank of Canada's independence, but we want to ensure it is acting independently while fulfilling its mandate to control inflation. I support this bill, and I urge others to do likewise.

[The Economy, May 19th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals keep blaming Russia's war in Ukraine for the big price difference for gasoline between Canada and the United States, but that is Liberal disinformation. The objective of Canada's carbon tax is to make gasoline more expensive, and it is working. The Liberals should be taking credit for making energy more expensive with their punitive carbon tax.

After the exchange rate, gasoline in my riding is $2 a litre, and it is only $1.50 in the state of Maine. That difference is all tax. What does Russia have to do with that?

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, earlier today, when I attempted to state what I thought was the NDP's position clearly, the member for Timmins—James Bay yelled that I was lying. He told the House that Canada can decide whether our children have a future or whether we are going to continue to have cheap gas.

I should not have to point to his words or my words to request an apology. I would like him to withdraw the remark that he made that somehow members of this side, myself in particular, are lying for pointing out what the NDP is in fact saying today in the House of Commons.

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, this is what qualifies as not being honest in the House, apparently. One moment the member says that we cannot have affordable, cheap gasoline, and when he is called on it, he says that he did not say that. In fact, it is exactly what the NDP is saying.

What is the NDP's position? Does the NDP want high gasoline prices, which means Canadians are going to pay, or does it want gasoline prices to come down so that Canadians get a break and we have affordable prices?

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I have a question for the member. We are hearing the NDP speak out of both sides of its mouth. The member, maybe in a moment of honesty, said she is concerned about high gas prices. This morning, I asked the member for Timmins—James Bay about gas after he said we cannot have affordable gas prices, and he got up and he said that was wrong—

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's honesty in saying that he opposes affordable gasoline for Canadians. He wants high gas prices. My question to the member is this: Why will his partners in the Liberal government not also claim victory on this?

The Liberals brought in the carbon tax with the stated purpose of raising gas taxes at the pump. That is what happened. Now they are running for cover and blaming it on Russia.

I will give members one example. In my riding, a litre of gasoline is $2.00 a litre. Across the border, 10 minutes away in Maine, it is $1.50. That is a 50¢ difference. Now, all that gasoline comes from the same place, which is the refinery in Saint John, New Brunswick. Maine does not have a more efficient refinery with harder workers or lower input costs. It is coming from the same place. That difference is all tax.

I would say it is mission accomplished, as they are driving up the price of energy in this country. Why will the Liberals not also claim credit on this and say, “Mission accomplished”?

[Petitions, May 17th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I rise to present a petition in opposition to the Liberal plan to deny the charitable status of organizations that have convictions about abortion that the Liberal Party might view as dishonest. This may jeopardize the charitable status of hospitals, houses of worship, schools, homeless shelters and other charitable organizations that do not agree with the Liberal Party on this matter for reasons of conscience. These concerned petitioners, citizens and residents of Canada call upon the House of Commons to affirm the rights of Canadians to freedom of expression and to protect and preserve the application of charitable status rules on a politically and ideologically neutral basis.