Debates of Nov. 27th, 2017

Speaker's Ruling

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, the targets are moving because they are growing and because our impact is getting stronger. As the economy grows, we can invest more.

I will ask a question related to the comment the NDP made. New Democrats seem to suggest that a $40-billion investment was not as significant as the $2 billion they promised. From this perspective, when we measure the emphasis we put on Canadian infrastructure, it is $180 billion, as opposed to the paltry sums offered by the Tories and the meek approach to housing. As I said on Friday, the meek did not inherit the world in this case; they got third-party status as a booby prize.

The issue is this. The Asian infrastructure bank does not just build pipelines that take oil from Asia to other markets; it also takes Canadian oil to Asian markets. Pipelines flow in two different directions.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, where does one even go in response to that? I invite the member to consult a globe to see if a pipeline from one part of Asia to another could move Canadian oil, or crude from anywhere in Canada, to areas outside of Canada. His comments seem to be more directed to the NDP bench than my speech.

The NDP member wanted to know the real dollar amount that we are voting on for this Asian infrastructure bank. That still remains an unclear, and is a poorly answered question by the government.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to follow my colleague from Calgary.

Today, I am wearing black for a very sad reason. We will be voting in the House of Commons on the bad legislative measures for marijuana legalization for what is likely the last time.

Speaking of colour, let us talk about the colour red. Let us talk about deficits, a Liberal government hallmark when it comes to finances and managing public money. That is what we are talking about today, as we debate the Liberal government's latest budget implementation bill.

This government has an impressive track record of promising one thing and doing the opposite. It promised to run small deficits, but it is running big ones. It promised to put more money in the pockets of middle-class Canadians, but they have less. It promised to make the rich pay more taxes, but thanks to its legislative measures, the rich are paying less. I can prove it.

During the election campaign two years ago, Canadians were asked to consider the various electoral platforms. What did the Liberal Party say in its platform, entitled “Real Change: A new plan for a strong middle class”? I would like to read something from page 76:

With the Liberal plan, the federal government will have a modest short-term deficit of less than $10 billion in each of the next two fiscal years....our investment plan will return Canada to a balanced budget in 2019-20.

The Liberals were elected on that promise. Now let us look at the reality at the halfway point of their term, two years after they were elected. First of all, it is no longer a question of a modest deficit of less than $10 billion. It is double what was projected, that is, $19.9 billion in the last fiscal year. That is classic Liberal government. The Liberals promise small deficits and then run up deficits twice as big.

Furthermore, their platform predicted a return to a balanced budget in 2019, but they have no idea when they will be able to balance the budget. This is completely unacceptable. Canada is experiencing strong economic growth, and we are not at war. This is the first time in the history of this country, not including periods of war or major international economic difficulties, that the government has no idea when it will be able to balance the budget.

We are stressing this so much not only because the Liberals betrayed Canadians' trust by saying one thing and doing another, but also because they are sending the bill to our children and grandchildren, and that is even worse. When a government runs a deficit, it is borrowing money from our children. Sooner or later, the money will have to be paid back. That is why we strongly condemn the Liberals' approach of allowing deficits that are two times higher than projected and having no plan to balance the budget. This is unacceptable.

The Prime Minister always talks about the famous 1% wealthiest Canadians, as though these people had a venereal disease. It is terrible that the Prime Minister has so much contempt for those who are fortunate. The government has a supposedly progressive policy that will make the wealthiest Canadians pay even more.

Let us look at what the Liberals have managed to do in two years. I have here a report from the Department of Finance entitled “Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2016–2017”. The report states the following on page 16:

Personal income tax revenues decreased by $1.2 billion...largely reflecting the impact of tax planning by high-income individuals....

In a report on the past fiscal year, the finance department found that the wealthiest Canadians paid $1.2 billion less in taxes since this government took power. Why? Despite the so-called progressive measures that would have the rich pay more taxes, the richest Canadians found ways to sidestep these measures, with the result that the wealthiest Canadians pay less taxes today than they did under our government. If someone is paying less, someone else is paying more. The middle-class family is paying more taxes. According to a Fraser Institute study, 80% of Canadian families are paying, on average, $840 more than they did under our government.

Let me read a statement by Mr. Charles Lammam, director of fiscal studies at the Fraser Institute, on measuring the impact of the federal personal income tax changes on middle-income Canadian families. He said:

The federal government has repeatedly claimed they've lowered income taxes for the middle class while in reality, taking their major income tax changes into account, they've actually raised taxes on the vast majority of middle-class families.

The Fraser Institute is speaking out against the Liberal government's flawed measures that are costing middle-class families more money, among others.

The Liberal government did away with the child fitness and arts tax credits. It did away with the textbook tax credit that helped our children when they went to school, and believe it or not, the Liberals did away with the public transit tax credit. I will never tire of saying that I never in my life would have believed that the Liberals would go after public transit.

When we were in office, some of the good things we did were to provide help for Canadian taxpayers, workers, students, and public transit users. We took proactive measures. We should thank and commend those who take the bus. The way we did that was to give them a tax credit that amounted to about the equivalent of two free months of public transit per year. That was a direct measure, a measure that made people happy, a measure that provided direct assistance to ordinary Canadians and helped them keep more money in their pockets. However, the Liberal government went after that measure and did away with it. That is sad.

The government is so righteous about its so-called environmental principles. It goes on and on about how we have to save the planet and about how we need public transit infrastructure so people pollute less. Then it axes a measure specifically designed to help people who help the planet by taking public transit. How very Liberal.

That is not even counting the revenue minister's sneaky measures that make life even harder for the poorest and weakest members of our society.

When we were in power, we had a tax credit that helped people suffering from illnesses such as type 1 diabetes, and 80% of the people who applied for that tax credit got it. Under the Liberals, 80% of the people who apply for it do not get it. Under our government, 80% of the applications were approved. Now that the Liberals are in office, 80% of them are rejected. Attacking the poorest and weakest members of our society is a despicable strategy.

Furthermore, this government launched a direct assault on small and medium-sized businesses, which the Conservative Party believes are the backbone of our economy. Small and medium-sized businesses are the true job creators and the true wealth creators. It is through personal initiative and support to our SMEs that we stimulate initiative, the desire to work, and the creation of wealth and jobs across Canada. On July 18, however, right in the middle of summer, this government decided that it would launch a direct attack on businesses when it introduced a package of thoroughly ill-advised measures.

Fortunately, we were on the alert. Thanks to the amazing quarterbacking of the member for Carleton, we mounted daily head-on attacks, under the guidance of our leader, on those who were going after our small businesses. Chambers of commerce across the country banded together, and fortunately, the government ended up scaling back its assault on small and medium-sized businesses.

I would also remind members that the government abolished several tax credits that were designed to stimulate growth and investment in our businesses and that it did finally uphold its election promise to lower the small business tax rate, but far later than expected and far too late overall, not to mention the fact that it raised taxes on pension funds.

I could go on for hours, but for all these reasons, we believe that the budget implementation bill is a bad bill, which is why we are appealing to all members of the House to reject it and vote against it.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the member referred to small business. The minister responsible for small business has done a fantastic job in recognizing its importance to Canada's middle class. She led the fight to get small business taxes reduced to 9%. In our first budget, we literally put hundreds of millions of dollars into the pockets of Canada's middle class through the tax cut. That enabled greater expenditure from the higher disposable incomes, which many if not all small businesses will acknowledge is the most important thing one can do to get consumers buying and purchasing their services and products. Through measures such as the Canada child benefit, we see money being put into the pockets of families so they can spend it on our small businesses.

Would the member agree that the proactive approach of this minister and government to ensuring there are tax benefits and more consumer consumption for small businesses is a positive thing?

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the least we can say is that the document tabled by the finance minister on July 18 was anything but a progressive and proactive way to help people and small business. It was anything but that. This is why, under the strong leadership of the Leader of the Opposition and with the fantastic job done by our quarterback, the member for Carleton, we have raised the issue here in the House of Commons. Hopefully, the government will recognize that it was wrong.

The member talked about how much money the Liberals have put into the pockets of people. May I remind him that this was done under a deficit budget. Therefore, the money he said the government has put into people's pockets will be owed by their children and the grandchildren who have not yet been born, but who will have to pay because the Liberal government cannot correctly adjust the finances of the Canadian people.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in my community there is a gentleman who has an addiction to alcohol. Every day for many years he would drink, pass out on the street, and an ambulance, a police officer, and a fire truck would get called. They would take him to the local hospital, which would sometimes run x-rays on him and keep him in an acute care bed or send him to the cells, which literally costs thousands of dollars a day. We know this man is like many other men and women in every community and riding in our country. Our community found a low-barrier housing place for him, which costs $475 a month. He has been there for five years, which is saving the taxpayers hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars.

The Liberal government announced its housing rollout plan, 90% of which is to come after the next election. It says that only 50% of homeless people will have a place to live as a result of the plan. Therefore, I ask the member this. Does he think it is good enough that only 50% of the people will be taken care of? We are talking about years down the road; it is not starting until 2021.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the NDP for raising this important issue, because we certainly all are concerned that people with difficulties do get help with housing form the government. However, for that we need a realistic plan, one that would take care of the needs of the people today. The member has expressed quite well the human aspect of it.

Let me also talk about the constitutional issue. We were very surprised to see that the Quebec government did not accept the deal or the promise made by the government. Why? It is because the federal government did not consult the provincial government, which is why it said no. We are talking about housing, and in Quebec housing is part of a responsibility issue. Therefore, we have to build on something with the support of the Quebec government. However, the current government has failed to recognize that, which is another mistake it has made.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, today we are in this House debating Bill C-63. This is the second bill to implement provisions of the budget. There are a few noteworthy elements in the bill that I will address today. Most importantly, my remarks will focus on what is not in the budget implementation act.

Financial issues have been the main focus in this House during this session. Many Canadians are concerned and have been watching with disappointment. The sponsor of Bill C-63, the Minister of Finance, is embroiled in so many scandals that I do not even know where to begin. Prior to many allegations coming to light, people from North Island—Powell River, my riding, came to my office, wrote me letters, and sent emails protesting and expressing deep concern around Bill C-27, a bill that would weaken pension obligations. When Canadians later learned that the sponsor of that bill, the Minister of Finance, still owns shares in Morneau Shepell, they were concerned. I was asked whether this means that the minister will make millions off the prospect of the bill. They were concerned that the minister would make even more if the bill were passed. This is one of the clearest cases of conflict of interest that we have seen in years. That is why we need a formal investigation into the minister's actions.

Imagine, as well, the sudden influx of calls, emails, and mail in constituency offices across Canada. when the finance minister started his so-called consultation on the small business tax. The minister failed to respect Canadian small business owners in this process. In my riding, I represent many small businesses. In our region, our economy has had many challenges. We have seen a significant change, from a very focused resource-based economy, broadening to include a strong and growing small business community. In the summer, many of the farmers and owners of tourism-based businesses contacted my offices. Many of them simply did not have time during the summer to participate in any consultation.

I also had the honour of meeting with some doctors in my region. What was most disheartening was hearing how hurt they were when the Prime Minister of Canada talked about the so-called rich doctors. In many rural and remote communities across Canada, finding health professionals is hard, and it is getting harder. The doctors who spoke with me were very concerned about the divisive nature of those comments and the impacts on their work in their communities.

Returning to the finance minister, the people from my riding are very concerned about the minister hiding his wealth from the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. I do not know many Canadians who would have forgotten their house in the south of France. So much for a transparent government. The same minister still has a series of numbered accounts stashed away from public scrutiny. This raises more troubling questions. Let us not forget that the Ethics Commissioner came to exist as a part of the Federal Accountability Act in 2007, after another series of Liberal moral and ethical failings. Today the Liberals have found more ways than ever to protect their friends, the tax cheats, by not addressing the sophisticated systems that can only be used by the wealthiest and most connected.

Bills like the one we are debating here today would not change much for hard-working Canadians, and my riding is full of everyday hard-working Canadians. Bills like Bill C-63 would keep protecting cheaters from scrutiny and justice, and that is not right. As the paradise papers are still unravelling, I cannot say that I have much confidence in the current government, other than having a good sound bite for the media. One thing to keep in mind is that the paradise papers are a result of a leak from only one firm. There are many other firms out there carrying trusts and offshore companies linked to Canadians. It is a matter of finding them, and CRA is simply not doing enough.

The latest report from the Auditor General was not friendly to the Canada Revenue Agency. While tax cheats are not its main focus, the report highlights a total mismanagement of CRA call centres. The AG's report indicates that the CRA has been blocking over 50% of Canadians' calls for help. Even worse, CRA agents are providing misleading or inaccurate information almost 30% of the time. The Auditor General's report also focused on the failings of the Liberals' responsibility to implement the Phoenix program. In fact, the AG pointed out that the Liberals have no idea of the full extent and causes of the Phoenix problem. It is estimated that it will take years before solving pay problems, and will most likely cost Canadians around $1 billion.

However, this is about so much more than just $1 billion. It is about civil servants across Canada not receiving their pay. It is about Canadians losing their homes, having to go to food banks, having their credit destroyed, and family stress. It is very important that, in this House, we recognize that civil servants are still going to work every day even when they are not getting paid. These people are dedicated to their work and to Canadians. Many of my constituents have asked why the government does not have someone writing cheques until this is figured out, because they just need to be paid. I have taken the time to talk about this failing, because I know Canadians want this problem fixed. What better way to fix it then in a budget implementation bill?

Bill C-63 lays the foundation for Canada's membership in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which we believe will cause many problems. In fact, Bill C-63 allows the finance minister to transfer $480 million Canadian to the bank. Since the bank was only recently launched, the government cannot fully evaluate the risks of privatizing infrastructure in countries where the bank will invest. Some experts have raised concerns about the lack of provisions regarding environmental impact assessments, labour rights, or anti-corruption reforms, as is generally the case with loans made by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

It is difficult to say with any certainty, because the bank has only been in existence for one year, whether it will be respecting international standards. We need better assurances from the government about these concerns, and we need proof that the bank will not contribute to privatization of infrastructures, the degradation of the environment, and the violation of labour rights. The government cannot pay its own federal employees, but we can spend $480 million on a foreign initiative that may privatize infrastructure. The government cannot catch tax cheats or fix our revenue agency, but it can spend $480 million on a foreign initiative that degrades the environment. It cannot understand the realities of small businesses, but it can spend $480 million on a foreign initiative that will potentially violate labour rights.

Let us recap what progress has been made on the first budget implementation bill, including the Canadian infrastructure bank. A few months in, and the federal government has moved in predictable Liberal fashion, with a board made up largely of Liberal donors and promoters of privatization. This list includes James Cherry, the former president and CEO of Aéroports de Montréal, who has previously advocated for airport privatization. How surprising. I cannot wait to read the AG report on this.

However, wait, there is more. The bank will be subject to audits at a lower standard and with less transparency than the Auditor General has over direct government departments, despite the $35 billion in public funding to establish the bank. Again, so much for a transparent government.

Before the budget was tabled, our finance critic wrote the finance minister to ask him to include some provisions to create a fairer and greener society. For example, we asked him to cap CEO stock options for large companies; actively fight tax havens; establish a $15-per hour minimum wage for workers; invest in energy-efficient home renovations; address accessibility problems linked to housing, drinking water, mental health services, and education in first nations communities; and establish a universal pharmacare system. None of these provisions were implemented.

After two years of listening to the government talk about the middle class and those working to join it, this budget demonstrates, for a fact, that Liberals have no idea who those people are.

I cannot support this bill. It clearly has too many gaps that leave the most vulnerable with little, and does not address the important parts of moving towards a fair tax system.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the member spoke about a lot of things that she disagreed with. She did not come up with any resolution to any of them.

The member did not mention the Canada child benefit that was changed under the government, and the increase in payments that went to families. I know in my riding of Avalon, 9,280 households received cheques, averaging $5,180 per month, for a total from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 of $47.9 million that went to families in my riding. These are families that needed that money. They did not tuck it away in a bank account and save it. They spent it. That shows the way that the economy is going now, and the unemployment rate, which is the lowest in a decade.

Could the member comment on how that is affecting families in her riding?

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, what I heard from the people of my riding of North Island—Powell River has unfortunately not changed from what I heard when I was knocking on doors in 2014-15.

I definitely heard from too many women who told me they could not work. One woman in particular came to me recently and shared her reality. She was trying to work, but the costs of day care were so prohibitive that she had to quit her job. She told me that at the end of month she was clearing about $20 a week, because everything she made was going toward paying for day care.

I encourage the government to listen to the people of Canada, to listen to the families, and to hear what they are saying about how expensive child care is. It has not created one child care space in this budget, nor in the last budget. This is really needed. This is about being a feminist country that supports women entering the workforce, and supports families. It is good that they get some money, but the reality is that the money does not come even close to covering the cost of day care.

It is the government's responsibility to work, on all fronts, to support families.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there are certainly a lot of holes in the budget that need to be addressed. We do not have time to address all of those today, but my colleague did mention some of the ill-thought-out tax proposals that the government presented in the summer of this year. I had a big response in my riding from small business owners, farmers, and from professional corporations. I also heard from doctors who are working in under-serviced areas and providing good medical care. That was a huge issue that my riding dealt with.

My question goes to a different level. People in my riding are very cynical about the current finance minister and some of his ethics breaches when it came to disclosing his assets. They are also concerned about his part in Bill C-27, which clearly favours the company that he incorporated.

I wonder if my colleague is hearing those kinds of concerns from her constituents as well.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I definitely have heard from the business community in my riding. I have heard repeatedly that these businesses are supportive of tax fairness, but they are not being consulted in a meaningful way. They feel that this could profoundly undermine their businesses. They are concerned about the unintended consequences, especially in rural and remote communities. They want to make sure that their voices are heard.

I have worked hard and continue to work hard with those communities, so I can make sure their voices are heard in the House. That is my job. It is my sacred obligation, and I take it very seriously.

There is another reality. As politicians, we have a responsibility to be ethical and honest. Our constituents are relying on us to do the right thing, to always care about their concerns, and to always be willing to listen, even when we do not agree.

I agree with the member. I have definitely heard from my constituents a raised sense of cynicism and concern that the Liberal government simply does not know or understand the reality of people who are living every day in Canada.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Before we go to resuming debate and the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil, I will let him know that there are approximately five minutes available for his opening remarks on the motion that is before the House. He will have his remaining time when the House next resumes debate on the question.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that my time is short right now in advance of question period, but it is with profound sadness today that I found out about the closure of the Barrie Examiner and the Innisfil Examiner as a result of cuts to the newspaper industry. The Barrie Examiner has been a stalwart within our community since 1864. I know in talking to you, Mr. Speaker, that you are sad as well about the Orillia Packet and Times.

May I remind the House that newspaper closures do not just affect the newspaper, they affect those who work with those newspapers. I can think of people like Bob Bruton, Ian McInroy, and award-winning photojournalist Mark Wanzel, who today have lost their jobs. As well, at the Innisfil Examiner, Miriam King, who I just happened to be with yesterday at the Innisfil Santa Claus Parade. There is profound sadness within our community, not just for the focus on community news and events, but for the people impacted by this. These are people who are directly involved in our community every day not just reporting the news, but supporting the many organizations within Barrie—Innisfil.

I want to send them my best wishes in advance of my speaking about the budget implementation bill.

In the last election, as I campaigned throughout the riding of Barrie—Innisfil, I talked about it being a “chicken in every pot” election. What the Liberals were promising, as the third party with roughly 35 seats, was basically a chicken in every pot in the last election. It is easy when one is sitting there as the third party to make all kinds of promises, but as we have seen after two years, living up to those promises has been extremely difficult.

It is no surprise that Canadians voted for change. Unfortunately, that happens in politics. However, I think many Canadians right now are living with voter's remorse, in the sense that a lot of the things they thought were going to happen with the Liberal government are not happening, or happening in a much worse case scenario that we deal with in this budget implementation act.

This is an omnibus bill. In spite of the fact that the Prime Minister campaigned on no omnibus bills, he actually has introduced several omnibus pieces of legislation. Many Canadians voted for change, which is their prerogative to do, but I do not think they voted for this. Also, I do not think they voted for deficit spending. In the last election, the Liberals spoke about $10 billion in deficit spending, and now we learn from Finance Canada that even the Prime Minister and the finance minister will not admit when we are going to see the end of deficits. There are deficits are as far as the eye can see. The profound effect of deficits in this country is on young people, people like my children and many other millions of Canadian children across this country who are going to have to pay for this deficit spending for generations to come.

I heard somebody muse recently that it is Liberals who make a mess and that eventually it is Conservatives who have to clean that mess up. We are hopefully going to be in that position again within two years. Hopefully they do not make too much of a mess and that we are not overburdened to clean it up.

As an Ontario MP, why in Ontario are we concerned about this? Because we are compounding the problem. We have a provincial government $330 billion in debt, the largest sub-sovereign debtor nation in the world, and now we are compounding it with this. Think of what that is going to mean to our children.

I am going to pick up those thoughts after we are done.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil will have five and a half minutes remaining in his time for his remarks on the question before the House.

Medal of Bravery

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr Speaker, I rise today to celebrate an act of true heroism that occurred in my riding on July 9 last year. This hero has never sought any publicity, and instead acted to protect a child from mortal danger with an instinct to which we should all aspire.

That hero is Calvin Stein from Madoc, who saved a three-year-old girl from being trampled by a team of charging horses that had broken away from their handlers at a fair in Tweed. Calvin sprinted for the child who was directly in their path and tossed her out of harm's way, seconds before the horses ran into him. He sustained severe injuries as the horses dragged him before finally coming to a stop.

I would invite my hon. colleagues to join me in thanking him for his heroism and congratulating him for the decoration for bravery that the Governor General presented him last week.

Western Mustangs

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that the Western Mustangs, after a 23-year drought, were victorious at the Vanier Cup. Saturday's game saw the Mustangs capping off their undefeated record by beating the reigning champions from Laval university with a final score of 39-17. Despite facing down the top-ranked defensive team in the country, Western's relentless offence carried them to a hard-earned victory and a perfect season record in an exciting rematch with the team that stopped them the last time they played for the cup.

To head coach Greg Marshall, quarterback Chris Merchant, defensive player of the game Fraser Sopik, and the entire team, I offer a hearty congratulations. As a former student, I know what it is to be “purple and proud”.

To my colleagues, including the member from Louis-Saint-Laurent, maybe next year, nudge nudge.

Way to go, Mustangs.

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this year marks the 40th anniversary of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. First established in 1977, COSEWIC is the independent body of experts responsible for identifying and assessing the status of wildlife species that may be at risk of extinction or disappearance in Canada.

The committee plays a critical role in ensuring biodiversity and healthy ecosystems, and it assess species using the best available scientific, indigenous, and community knowledge.

I want to applaud the committee for its important contribution to conservation over the past 40 years. I very much look forward to its future work to protect and promote biodiversity in Canada.

Saskatchewan Roughriders

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it was great seeing so many people in our nation's capital this past weekend wearing green and white, despite our Roughriders previously falling victim to a last-minute Toronto comeback. As someone who was elected by 132 votes, I appreciate late-breaking victories and hope that the Argonauts will not face a judicial recount.

My grandfather, Ken Weir, played for the Roughriders from 1949 to 1951. He did not win the Grey Cup, but legend has it that he and some neighbours once managed to set up an outdoor hockey rink for well below $5 million.

To mention a third sport, we are tremendously proud to have former MMA fighter Matt Fedler as our NDP candidate in the Battlefords—Lloydminster by-election. Matt works for the Canadian Mental Health Association in his hometown of North Battleford. All of us should support his goal of mental health coverage.

Brampton North

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this year we celebrated the 150th anniversary of Canadian Confederation. Since 1867, our great country has established itself as a beacon of hope around the world. From our Charter of Rights and Freedoms to our multiculturalism, Canada is regarded as one of the best countries to call home. For that reason, many in the riding of Brampton North have put their Canadian pride on full display.

Baljinder Sekha turned his love for Canada into a song. He had Canadians singing and dancing to “Go Canada”, a Bhangra song that praises the beauty of this land and accomplishments of its people.

At the same time, Vahid Saadati was so inspired by how welcoming Canada is that he created a hand-stitched needlepoint tapestry with the word “welcome” woven into it in over 100 times in 100 languages. It now holds the Guinness world record for the world's largest needlepoint.

If there is one thing that I am sure of, it is that Brampton North residents are proud to be Canadian.

Citizenship Ceremony

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on November 16, I had the honour to attend a citizenship ceremony for 33 new Canadians from 11 different countries organized by the Orangeville District Secondary School and the Orangeville Legion Colonel Fitzgerald Branch 233.

My compliments to principal Pat Hamilton, Department head Paul Nelson, Janine Grin, and Kathy Trimble for bringing together the student body resulting in such an impressive ceremony.

I thank the Orangeville Legion President Chris Skalozub and the Legion’s colour party for the tremendous effort they all undertook in making this ceremony memorable.

In addition, I would like to thank the senior band, Honour Stahl for her poetry reading, the ODSS choir, the yearbook class, Pommelien Thijs' beautiful rendition of O Canada, and the students who formed the flag-waving human tunnel that celebrated each new citizen. It was a tremendous experience.

Finally, I would like to thank former principals Bill Lenny and the late Darryl Kirkland, under whose leadership this initiative began.

Well done, ODSS.

Armenian Community

[Geng Tan, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, strengthening cultural diversity by helping others in need is one of Canada's greatest strengths. On Sunday, November 26, the Armenian community named the late Sara Corning as an Outstanding Canadian. This nurse helped save 5,000 Armenian orphans in 1922.

At this same event, the Minister of Canadian Heritage announced Canada's support for the Armenian community's inter-action project, empowering cultural diversity in the classroom.

Today, the Armenian Community Centre in my riding is keeping Ms. Corning's spirit alive by helping hundreds of newcomers from Syria.

As members can see, when we welcome and help newcomers, we strengthen our society in long-standing and significant ways.

Canadian Football League

[Bob Bratina, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian football was its best this weekend in two cities: Hamilton with the Vanier Cup, and Ottawa for the 105th Grey Cup.

I have watched football for over 60 years and broadcast 500 games on radio over 20 seasons for the Cats or the Argonauts, so I believe I am qualified to pronounce this as one of the most exciting games our league has ever seen.

The Argonaut victory will go down in football history in part because of the quality of its opponent, the Calgary Stampeders. It speaks to the amazing quality of Canadian football and its ability to bring our country together for a party and sports spectacle second to none. It also reflects the message of diversity, created in broadcast by Commissioner Randy Ambrosie.

We are a league as diverse as the country, where what makes each of us different makes us all stronger. It is a reminder of how great things can be if, as the Argo motto says, we all pull together.

Royal Engagement

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Mr. Speaker, today we learned that His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales is delighted to announce the engagement of Prince Harry to Ms. Meghan Markle. The couple became engaged earlier this month.

With the blessing of their families, the couple is planning to wed next spring. Following the nuptials, the couple will reside at Nottingham Cottage at Kensington Palace.

The couple share a common passion for humanitarian work. Their union forges an inspirational powerhouse with promise of meaningful contributions to those in need.

The couple kindled their relationship here in Canada, and Canadians wish the greatest happiness to Prince Harry and Ms. Markle as they begin their journey together in life.

Canada 150 Citizenship Award Ceremony

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on November 13, I had the honour of recognizing exceptional people from my riding for the Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill Canada 150 citizenship award ceremony. The award recipients all represent Canada's commitment to innovation and diversity, thought leadership, and the important Canadian values of diversity, inclusion, and compassion.

From high school students who developed software to help the visually impaired learn to read Braille, to a man who developed technology for pharmaceutical molecular structures, to a world-renowned film director, to the first Canadian circumnavigation by helicopter, these individuals truly reflect the best Canada has to offer, and I am proud to represent them in Ottawa.

For Canada 150, we unite as Canadians to imagine a vision, a big, bold vision, of what our country can become. These award winners have committed themselves to this vision by dreaming boldly through projects that will position our nation for continued success—