Mr. Speaker, we are here today to debate the Conservative opposition day motion. I thoroughly enjoy opposition day motions. They are an opportunity for the government to prod ideas from the opposition benches.
The text is quite simple today. It is, frankly, just two pieces. The first part is that the House recognize that the Liberal government has been in government for 11 years. We are happy to recognize that and talk about the accomplishments of successive Liberal governments. The second part is that we are in an affordability crisis. There lies a trap in how the Conservative Party has presented today's opposition day motion. It is undeniable that the Liberal Party has been in government for 11 years, and I am happy to talk about the accomplishments and the work that I am proud of, having been involved for seven years as a parliamentarian.
The truth is that we recognize as a government, and we have highlighted this, that there is an affordability challenge across the country. Reasonable members of Parliament could stand here and debate what the definition of an affordability crisis is. I recognize and this government has recognized that there are challenges across the country and that we ought to do something about them, but what is missing from today's Conservative opposition day motion is what to do about them and what measures the Conservative Party would put forward to support affordability. That is completely lacking in today's opposition day motion.
I would suggest that the opposition day motion is also lacking any recognition of the initiatives by this government, and by extension this House, because there have been examples where members of Parliament across the aisle have been supportive of government initiatives to improve affordability. There is no mention of that whatsoever.
That is why we will be voting against today's opposition day motion. It is not because we do not recognize that there are affordability challenges or we do not think there is something to be done about them, but the text of the motion, with the way it was drafted by the Conservative side, fails to recognize the initiatives that this House has taken forward. It leaves open what the definition of an affordability crisis could be and proposes zero measures to address it for Canadians.
Opposition day motions are a great opportunity for the opposition to put concrete policy forward and what it would look like. Today is a bit of a failure in leadership in that domain. We will not have the opportunity to debate policy that the Conservatives would implement if they were on this side of the bench, but that is okay.
My remaining time gives me the opportunity to opine on two areas. One is that the motion talks about 11 years of Liberal government. I have been a member of Parliament since 2019. I would like to use my remaining time to talk about some of the initiatives that I am proud to have been a part of and some of the work I have done individually as a parliamentarian. I am also proud of being part of a government that has introduced measures that matter not only to the good people of Kings—Hants, but to Canadians across this country.
I am going to start with a really important announcement. Today, the Prime Minister announced a $2-billion program for heat pumps. This program is going to support 800,000 homes across the country. It is going to allow up to a $10,000 grant for homeowners below the provincial median income. Of course, that will differ whether it is Nova Scotia, Manitoba, Ontario or British Columbia, but anyone below the provincial median income will be eligible for a $10,000 grant to put a heat pump in their home.
This is smart public policy. This program can reduce the cost of someone's energy bill. It is also, of course, an environmental measure, particularly in areas and jurisdictions where the electrical grid is much more affordable than using other forms of energy. This also allows for a $2,000 grant for anyone who is above the provincial median income.
I see a lot of similarities between the work that was done by the Atlantic caucus in the last Parliament and the announcement today. I represent a number of people, some of whom may be on a fixed income and may not have the means to do some of the renovations that might be needed and that could save money long-term because they do not have the ability to get over the hump of having money up front to pay for some of the expenditures. One of the things I am proudest of as a parliamentarian was advocating for a $500-million fund that we worked on with the Atlantic provinces to help roll out a similar type of program. It was successful.
I have dozens of examples. There are many more than that, but I am talking about dozens of people who have come to me personally and said that this intervention saved them on their home energy bill. Obviously, it is a smart environmental choice, but more importantly, it is an affordability measure.
It was quite remarkable to hear the Conservative Party attacking this idea. We want to put something in front of Canadians around affordability. Here is something important. We can produce heat pumps here in Canada. There are, for example, heat pump producers, independently, in my own constituency in Nova Scotia. They exist across the country. This is good public policy, and it is an example of something I am proud of today.
I am proud of the national school food program. We have a lot of constituents who were strong advocates of this. Many across the country advocated to say that we needed a program that could ensure that children who need this support in school have access to a healthy school food program. They said we should try to source the ingredients locally. Because of the action of many members of Parliament, the support in the last Parliament and ultimately the Liberal government, that policy is here today.
Again, we hear questions on it from the opposition benches. In fact, the leader of the official opposition calls this bureaucracy. I would invite the leader of the official opposition to come to Kings—Hants, where we see this program rolling out and benefiting children in schools today. It is quite remarkable that the leader calls that bureaucracy. I call it action. I call it making a difference on the ground. It is guided and informed by many people across the country who advocated to parliamentarians across the political spectrum to move in this direction.
As for national child care, we talked about this for 50 years in this country. This is something the Liberal government has introduced. The program is working across the country. There have been growing pains, but I think we need to recognize that there is a desire to have additional space. The government just recently announced a $5-billion augmentation to support the provinces in the continued expansion of child care access across the country.
Right now, in Nova Scotia, we are on target for $12 a day on average. This additional money will hopefully and presumably be able to get us closer to that mark. Whether or not it gets exactly to $10, it has demonstrably moved the needle on affordability, access to early education, and the infrastructure that is needed to support our communities.
How about agriculture? I am up on my feet often talking about this. I am very proud to represent a constituency in Atlantic Canada that is the heart of agriculture. I am very proud of our 2025 platform. This platform had serious measures to support farmers, whether it was the AgriStability increases or the money for AgriMarketing. A pledge to have $200 million in an agri-food processing fund was realized by the current Minister of Agriculture under the national food security strategy. We are seeing those investments roll out in real time.
The Conservatives will sometimes talk about the idea that these announcements are not resulting in concrete action. I can tell members that they absolutely are. I am proud of the work that we have done around the increases to AgriStability, something that the Conservative Party under Mr. Harper cut. We have actually increased it over the time.
There are a lot of very good measures in the recently introduced Bill S-7. It is starting in the Senate, and it will work its way to the House. It is about reducing red tape in agriculture and has amendments to the Fertilizers Act, amendments to the Seeds Act and amendments to the Feeds Act. Anyone who knows agriculture well will know that a whole host of work had to be done. It did not happen in the last government, I am afraid to say, but I am very proud to see that some of the work I did as the minister of agriculture just before the last election has been continued by the current Minister of Agriculture, the hon. member for Malpeque. There is some really good stuff there.
I am proud of the work I have done to advocate for the resolution at the Avon River. This was an issue where the constituency and individuals in the Windsor and Falmouth area were not happy with successive decisions from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the ministers therein. I have worked with the current Minister of Fisheries to resolve that issue in a way that balances fish passage with ensuring that the community perspective and indigenous rights are respected.
I am proud of the rural transit fund. This is something I helped advocate for, along with our colleagues, so we could have a fund to help support smaller communities that did not have access to regular funding. I am proud of the fact that we have increased the volunteer tax credit for firefighters from $3,000 to $6,000, and allowed funding that goes to municipalities to support fire hall infrastructure. Lastly, I am proud of the work we have done to create a facility for The Flower Cart Group and CCOA, two really important organizations in my constituency.
