House of Commons Hansard #260 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was income.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I must allow others to ask questions.

The hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Madam Speaker, I am really glad that my hon. colleague raised the issue of housing. I come from Vancouver, and I can tell members that there is a housing crisis in Vancouver. Words are cheap. Talk is cheap. To listen to my hon. colleague, things are going well, and the federal government is opening all these programs.

Come to Vancouver. What the member just described would be rejected by every single citizen who lives in the Lower Mainland. There are 2.2 million people who would say to that hon. member that he does not know what he is talking about. We have people in the city of Vancouver, in Burnaby, in Richmond, in North Vancouver, in Coquitlam, in Maple Ridge, and in Surrey who cannot buy a house anymore, because the average house costs $1.6 million. The average one-bedroom apartment in Vancouver is $1,500 to $2,500. We have generations of people who are leaving Vancouver because they cannot live there. We have employers every day who are saying that they cannot find workers to work in their enterprises because there is no place to house them. That is the reality in Vancouver.

For the hon. member to say to this House that the government is doing things about this and progress is being made, that absolutely is not the case. I think it is not the case in the GTA, either.

Come to Vancouver. I ask my hon. colleague to come to Vancouver to stand up in a public forum and tell the people of Vancouver how well the government is doing on housing. We will see what the response is.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Madam Speaker, I overheard a Liberal member across the way mention that the promise to set a cap on stock options was not part of the Liberal platform, when, in fact, it actually was. We have a direct quote from the Liberal campaign booklet. The Liberals ran on that in 2011 and 2015. Furthermore, I remember the Liberal candidate in Cowichan—Malahat—Langford making that promise right alongside me.

I just wanted to set the record straight. This was a clear Liberal promise. They have broken it so far, and 2018 will be their chance to put it back in.

Going back to my colleague's speech, today's overall theme is injecting some fairness back into our tax system. If we look at the last several decades and the imbalance that now exists between what individuals pay in taxes and what corporations and the wealthy get away with, we are going down a trajectory that I think is going to be critically unstable for us as a country. If we allow wealth to continue to accumulate at the upper echelons of our society, that is going to be a structural source of instability.

I would like to hear my hon. colleague's thoughts on this. What kind of threat does this actually represent to us as a stable, democratic nation if we allow this trend to continue?

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Madam Speaker, there were two very important points mentioned. The first I would like to talk about how toxic it is to a democracy to have political parties that completely renegue on their campaign promises once elected. That creates a cynicism and distrust in government that goes far beyond just partisan purposes. It actually eats at the very fabric of our democracy.

There is a cost to our democracy when the Liberal government says that it will bring in caps on the stock option loophole, then says it will not do that; when it says it will bring in electoral reform, that 2015 will be the last election under first past the post, then says it will not do that.

It has been said in this place and elsewhere that the problem with Conservatives is that they do exactly what they say they are going to do, and the problem with Liberals is that they never do what they say they are going to do. Both those approaches need to be looked at in the House.

I want to talk about the second issue my colleague raises. Fundamentally, our tax system is based on an honour system. Our tax system is based on people who fill out their tax returns honestly and they declare all forms of income honestly. This is a very important feature of our country. If the citizens of our country feel that the system is rigged and that the wealthy are not paying their fair share, we could risk having a situation where poor working-class and middle-class people start not declaring their income honestly. Then we risk a real crisis. That happens in places like Greece and other countries, where there is a build up of a black market—

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Unfortunately, I have to allow for other questions.

Questions and comments, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development (Housing and Urban Affairs).

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Spadina—Fort York Ontario

Liberal

Adam Vaughan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families

Madam Speaker, I do not want to downplay the crisis that exists in Vancouver and Toronto. It is serious. That is why this government is acting. However, the member opposite said that we were not spending the money fast enough and that was one of the things we could finance with the bill he has presented to us. I agree. That is why we put $1 billion into fighting tax evasion to bring those dollars back.

He also said that people in Vancouver did not welcome the national housing strategy, so I want to quote a few things that were said.

The B.C. minister of housing said that it was a good first step, and was glad to see the government had renewed it. The mayor of Vancouver said that it had been an embarrassment not to have a national housing strategy, and welcomed this investment. The B.C. Premier, also a New Democrat, said that it was a fantastic proposal, was glad the money would start to fund next year, and was worried that they were not sure yet what the per capita funding would be and how it would relate to Vancouver. Janice Abbott, a strong voice for housing equity, and the co-op sector in Vancouver all praised the national housing strategy because of the dollars being delivered now, the commitment over 10 years, the fact that we modelled the program on the advice they gave us, which was that it had to be long-term, that the program had to grow over 10 years, and therefore had to be back-end loaded so we could build a strong foundation and a growing program that would get bigger year after year.

People in Vancouver love this housing strategy. What they need is you to support us to make it happen faster.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Again, the hon. parliamentary secretary has been in the House long enough. He knows he is to address the questions to the Chair and not to individual members.

The hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Madam Speaker, the hon. colleague mis-characterized my comments. I was not talking about rejecting the national housing strategy. In fact, I am glad to see the Liberals adopted one. The New Democrats have had one for a decade. Of course we are going to find politicians in B.C. welcoming federal dollars of any type after not having any federal dollars or presence. The question is whether there is enough.

I remember during the campaign when the New Democrats promised $15-a-day child care and we laid out our plan for how many billions of dollars we would spend. The Liberal Party attacked us by saying that was not ambitious enough because it was back loaded. Then of course here we are in 2018 and there has not been a single child care space created by the Liberal government since that time. The Liberals criticized ours for not being ambitious enough and then got into government and did nothing.

The issue of housing is this. Not a single co-op unit has been built in the country under the Liberal government. Not one. Where are the co-ops that have opened in Vancouver or British Columbia and have been funded by the government? I have not seen them. It is one thing to start the flow of money, but there is a housing crisis in the country. Crises require immediate action, not action 10 years from now.

I would like to see the government put its money where its mouth is. It is no longer good enough to just speak words. I want to see significant new investments of federal funding flowing now to provide relief to people in the GTA, Vancouver, the Lower Mainland, and communities all across the country to start building the kind of housing people can live in this year and next year, not 10 years from now.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Resuming debate, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader. I will have to advise him that, unfortunately, he will not be able to use up all of his time, because I will be interrupting him at some point.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, you could sense the disappointment when you said that. Perhaps my colleagues would welcome extending my time a little. It would require only unanimous consent. I do not know if I would even get that on my side of the bench, so I will accept the time constraints.

It has been an interesting debate today. In particular, the New Democrats tried to stand on a high moral pedestal to say how great they are, what they would be doing if they were in government, and all these wonderful things. It is a bit tough at times for me to digest this because for many years, when I was in the Manitoba legislature, I saw the reality of NDP governments. They talk about all these expenditures, and how just the taxes on corporations, or going after the tax evaders, would pay for everything their little hearts desire.

When I was sitting as an MLA, I believe the corporate tax bracket was cut seven times under the New Democrats. It went from over 16% down to 12%. At the time, it surprised a lot of people, especially within the New Democratic movement in the province of Manitoba. That is what happens when they are in government.

Then I hear what they are saying today, and the examples they are giving today. If we really stop and think about the examples of why they believe tax fairness is so critically important, we see that they are talking about good ideas that, in good part, are already being acted on. We have seen many positive steps forward on a lot of the things the New Democrats are talking about. I have not heard anything new coming from them. There is nothing new coming from the New Democrats today in their policy announcements.

They talk about tax evasion. Over two budgets, budget 2016 and budget 2017, hundreds of millions of dollars were committed by our government to fight and to get back the tax dollars we are entitled to. Those are historic amounts of money. The Prime Minister and the government are very serious about those who are trying to evade paying taxes, not only offshore but here in Canada.

One of the first measures we put in place was a special tax on Canada's wealthiest 1%. I need to remind my colleagues and my friends in the New Democratic Party that they actually voted against that.

Then they ask, “What about our children?” This government has materialized for our children the Canada child benefit. I believe there is around $9 million a month coming into Winnipeg North. This is a huge investment in our children by our government. I would remind my NDP colleagues that they voted against that, too.

It is the same thing for seniors. I could talk about pharmacare, housing, and many other issues. We are already doing that. We are acting and moving forward on that.

Madam Speaker, I see you are rising. There is so much more I would like to say on this issue, but I will leave it at that.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

It being 5:15 p.m., pursuant to an order made earlier today, all questions necessary to dispose of the opposition motion are deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred until Tuesday, February 13, 2018, at the expiry of the time provided for oral questions.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I suspect that if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent to see the clock at 5:30 p.m. so we could begin private members' hour.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Is that agreed?

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—Tax Fairness in Budget 2018Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Therefore, the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's Order Paper.

The House resumed from December 6, 2017, consideration of the motion that Bill C-377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

February 8th, 2018 / 5:15 p.m.

Halifax Nova Scotia

Liberal

Andy Fillmore LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-377, introduced by my colleague, the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle. The bill proposes to change the name of her riding to “Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville”.

As members of the House know, the municipality of Lacolle, which is currently included in the name of my colleague's electorate district, is actually located in the neighbouring riding of Saint-Jean. This is confusing for residents in both ridings, and this legislation has received support from the hon. member for Saint-Jean in the neighbouring riding.

Our government in turn supports this bill, because it just makes sense. In fact, at first reading of Bill C-377 on December 6, 2017, we heard from hon. members on both sides of the House who support the objectives that this legislation sets out to accomplish.

In addressing his support for the legislation, the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent stated that:

I appreciated the speech by my colleague from Châteauguay—Lacolle, a riding whose name will change in due time. I want to reassure her straight off that the official opposition fully agrees with the substance of the bill and that we will be supporting the measure.

As my hon. colleague has shown, there is indeed a major anomaly in the name of the riding, which refers to Lacolle, a place that is not even located in the riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle, but rather in that of Saint-Jean.

During the same debate on Bill C-377, the hon. member for Salaberry—Suroît stated:

I fully understand my colleague's need to change the name of the riding to Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville. As my other Conservative and NDP colleagues said, we understand and commend the initiative shown by the member in consulting her constituents, doing historical research, and keeping an election promise. That is why we are going to vote in favour of her bill.

Like members of Parliament themselves, constituency offices must be accessible to their constituents, and all members of Parliament are here to represent and voice the concerns of their constituents.

In listening to her constituents, the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle introduced Bill C-377 and told the House that the riding name causes “confusion” for the constituents of both her riding and the neighbouring riding of Saint-Jean. Her proposed new riding name would result in a more exact description by incorporating the important regional county municipality of Les Jardins-de-Napierville.

Once this legislation is passed, my colleague for Châteauguay—Lacolle will be able to return to her riding, knowing she has listened to the concerns of her constituents, and as a result, acted and made change on their behalf. For that reason, she should be very proud of her work.

I would like to share a personal anecdote that demonstrates the importance of riding names.

I am very fortunate to be the member of Parliament for Halifax. It is a short, simple name. It fits really well on any communication product. It is not a mouthful, making it easy for me to introduce myself to constituents without confusing them. It also has the very fun and distinguished history of being one of only four riding names that date all the way back to the beginning of the Canadian Confederation in 1867. I would never want to have it changed, but it does come with some challenges.

The boundaries for the federal riding of Halifax are smaller than the municipal boundaries for Halifax. In fact, the municipality of Halifax includes four federal ridings, mine and three others: Halifax West, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, and Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook. However, because residents of all these federal ridings are also residents of the municipality of Halifax, many people in these adjacent federal ridings often believe I am their member of Parliament because I am the MP for Halifax.

This means that people often contact my office for help when they are in fact not my constituents. We would, of course, love to help them, and in most cases do get them what they need to know, but as every MP here knows, we already have a substantial number of constituents who we must represent and care for, and in Nova Scotia that number is between 70,000 to 90,000 constituents each. That is to say, we already have our work cut out for us in order to serve our constituents well.

This is an example of how my riding name impacts the day-to-day operations of my office, and I am sure there are stories similar to mine and to that of the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle, which demonstrate the importance of accurate riding names.

Our government believes Canadians deserve access to their member of Parliament, and by extension, our government is also committed to helping and encouraging more Canadians to vote. The Minister of Democratic Institutions has spoken passionately about the need for us to do everything we can to encourage, and not discourage, democratic participation. In fact, we are expanding the voting franchise to more Canadians by reversing elements of the previous government's Fair Elections Act, which actually made voting more difficult and unnecessarily complicated for Canadians.

If passed by Parliament, this act will let more Canadians vote and make it easier for them to do so. It will help enhance the integrity of our electoral system as well as people's confidence in it.

Another issue the Minister of Democratic Institutions is examining is cybersecurity. In accordance with her mandate letter from the Prime Minister, the minister presented a threat assessment from the Communications Security Establishment, or CSE, to analyze the risks to Canada's political and electoral activities from hackers. The fact is political parties have been the victims of cyber-attacks in other countries, and those attacks are attempts to destabilize and undermine—

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Order. The hon. member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston on a point of order.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Mr. Speaker, while this is really interesting, I fail to find the connection between this and the riding name change that is being proposed in the legislation.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I thank the hon. member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston for his intervention. He is right. I was actually wondering myself. The hon. member for Halifax was starting to get into a subject I appreciate, though I believe he was just starting to perhaps make that connection in terms of talking about the threats to the electoral system.

We will let him finish his remarks in that regard, but I remind hon. members to address their comments to the question, or the motion that is before the House, and I am sure the hon. member for Halifax will oblige.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I commend the member for passing the test of paying attention this evening.

Of course, where I was going with all that is that in the same way that technology evolves, we have to adapt to it, so too we have to evolve and adapt to the names of our ridings, and make sure they continue to reflect the accurate geography of the areas we represent.

I told a story about my riding and how, although the correct name and only name for the riding, it created some confusion. However, the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle is not quite as fortunate as I am. She has a much more complicated, inaccurate riding name.

We would love to help her out in any way we can, and to be very specific about that, to have the name change she has put forth that we are discussing tonight. We can imagine there are a great number of riding names in the House of Commons that are represented that do not actually reflect the accurate geographical boundaries, so we very likely could expect to hear more PMBs arising to make sure we are giving Canadians the most clear and direct understanding of which riding they actually live in and which member of Parliament to contact.

In conclusion, Bill C-377 would ensure that my colleague and her neighbouring colleagues could clearly identify their riding names, resulting in less confusion when citizens go to the polls, and when accessing their member of Parliament as they do on a very regular basis with my colleague and all colleagues on a day-to-day basis.

That is why our government is proud to support this private member's bill.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC

Mr. Speaker, the name of my riding should be the one that changes, for it is too long and hard to pronounce.

All joking aside, I would never introduce a bill in the House to change the name of my riding. I would go through the usual parliamentary channels. We were all consulted. All parties were consulted to see whether any members wanted to change the name of their riding. It was easy.

Today we are looking at a bill to change the name of a riding. Although we support it, and although my hon. colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent spoke in favour of it, personally I see this as a huge waste of time.

It is a waste of time because the member decided to introduce a bill to change the name of her riding, to have some sound bites to put on Facebook, when we could be debating any number of other topics that really matter to Canadians.

My constituents know that I represent them very well. Whether my riding is called Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix or Félix-Leclerc or Saint-Laurent, they know that I represent them well as their member of Parliament. I do not need to draft a bill to change the name of my riding when there are other avenues for doing so in the House.

I think it is appalling that the party across the aisle has used this precious time to introduce such a bill. I am not saying it is not important for the member in question, but I think it is a waste of our time.

We have some very important matters to be addressed, such as our Prime Minister's illegal trip. We have been asking him for almost two weeks to pay back the money, and we have seen neither hide nor hair of the money to cover the cost of this illegal trip.

The Liberal Party tells us that it was because the Prime Minister travels. Everyone knows that the Prime Minister travels. Everyone knows that in Canada, when a Prime Minister travels, he needs security. However, security is required on official trips and not for trips with friends, family, nannies, grandpa, grandma, caviar, and wine. It is a non-issue. He was found guilty not once, but four times of ethical lapses. It would have been important to legislate about that. However, yesterday, the Liberal Party voted against our motion, which was well drafted and applied to all members of the House.

That said, I will come back to Bill C-377. It is unfortunate that 10 minutes of our time this evening is being spent on a bill to deal with a matter that could have easily been handled in another way. Personally, that bothers me. Personally, I will support it because anyone may want to change the name of their riding. However, I hope that no one introduces a bill just to have something to post on Facebook. I can post on Facebook more worthwhile things that are done for the people in my riding.

Of all the people in this place, there are some sitting behind me whose ridings have impossible names, but who actually work diligently on behalf of their riding without blowing their own horn, even though at times they would like to do so.

The price is right.

I am joking around a lot this evening because I find this bill hilarious, and yet, I also find it troubling. I hope that I will not talk about it for 10 minutes.

I think that the name of my riding should have been changed, but I never would have thought to introduce a bill to change the name. I would have gone about it through the proper channels, and that would have been entirely appropriate.

I will support Bill C-377, not because I think it is worthwhile, but because I hope that members of the House will never again dare to introduce this type of bill and that, instead, they will go through the legal channels available to them here in the House.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The hon. member for Châteauguay—Lacolle has five minutes for her right of reply.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise again in the House to debate my bill, which seeks to change the name of my riding from Châteauguay—Lacolle to Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville. Is that not a beautiful name?

As I mentioned during the first hour of debate in December, the name Châteauguay—Lacolle is inaccurate because the municipality of Lacolle is actually in the riding of my hon. colleague from Saint-Jean. The municipality in my riding is Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle. Many people have told me that they do not like the name of the riding because it causes confusion and is damaging to the pride that the people of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle take in their municipality and to their feeling of belonging

Over the past few months, I have consulted with municipal officials and many people throughout the region, and the new name that was first suggested by the former mayor of Napierville, Jacques Délisle, achieved the greatest consensus.

A petition calling on the House of Commons to change the name of our riding has already garnered several hundred signatures and is still circulating in the region. I would like to remind members why the proposed name, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, is a logical and meaningful choice.

First, Les Jardins-de-Napierville is the name of a regional county municipality that includes nine of our 15 municipalities. Second, all of the citizens can identify with the full name. The main city, Châteauguay, is located at the northwest end of the riding. The residents of the five surrounding municipalities can identify with the expression greater Châteauguay, while the RCM of Jardins-de-Napierville includes the nine other municipalities located in the southern and eastern parts of the riding. Third, the Jardins-de-Napierville RCM, whose beauty is represented by the word “Jardins”, or gardens, is well known and highly regarded for being the top market gardening region in Quebec. Lastly, the new name is a good representation of the semi-urban, semi-rural nature of our riding.

I am so pleased that my hon. colleagues from Louis-Saint-Laurent, Newmarket—Aurora, Edmonton Riverbend, and the neighbouring riding, Salaberry—Suroît, all expressed their support for Bill C-377 during the first hour of debate.

I dare say that they and other members of the House will remember how I clearly and carefully demonstrated that the name I am proposing meets all guidelines and technical requirements as outlined by Elections Canada, for example, the requirement that the name not exceed 50 characters, and that, for a combination-style name, there be proper usage of dashes, hyphens, and spaces.

In conclusion, I want to note some of the reasons my constituents and I are so proud of our home and why we are so intent on changing our riding name to a name that reflects us.

The rural part of the riding, known as “Les Jardins-de-Napierville”, is located on a part of the region called the “terres noires” because the soil there is among the most fertile in the country. This is why the area is known by many as the pantry of Quebec.

I also want to highlight some of our amazing tourist attractions, which combine history, culture, the outdoors, and environmental conservation. For example, you can travel the Circuit du Paysan by car or by bike to visit wineries and cider mills. At the Île Saint-Bernard wildlife refuge in Châteauguay, you can participate in all kinds of activities, like its famous Écomarché and its bird-watching sites. Lastly, I cannot forget about the Fiesta des cultures de Saint-Rémi cultural festival, the Saint-Cyprien-de-Napierville dragway, and the Parc Régional in Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle.

I am pleased to sponsor this bill, as it gives me an opportunity to celebrate the treasures you can find in our beautiful part of the country. It also gives me an opportunity to celebrate the pride these residents have in their homeland by giving our riding a name that suits us perfectly: Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay-LacollePrivate Members' Business

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?