Debates of Sept. 24th, 2020

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Madam Speaker, let me first respond to the initial comments of our esteemed colleague from Kingston and the Islands.

The Canadian public service has been extraordinary, and not just the federal public service but those right across the provinces, as we have worked on initiatives to support vulnerable workers and support local food banks and shelters, and as we have delivered unprecedented financial supports, with the CERB and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, for an economy that was shut down through the spring. They are extraordinary people who, even as everyone else was hunkering down and staying home, stayed at work, connected online and delivered innovative, creative ways of supporting Canadians. We are all deeply indebted to them.

With regard to the environment, we will continue to recognize that the best way to build a strong economy for the future, for the long term, for future generations and for now is to invest in innovative new technologies, in decarbonization and in moving forward to ensure that every sector is playing a role in transforming our country for the better, from energy workers to auto workers, from fishers and foresters to farmers.

We know that working together on fighting climate change and building an economy of the future goes along with being responsible and sustainable in the long term.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, so much fuss for so little return. Parliament was shut down a month ago in the midst of a serious pandemic. Now we are probably at the start of the second wave. When Parliament was shut down, the government said there would be a throne speech. We were expecting clear measures, unambiguous ideas and concrete solutions to the current situation.

Furthermore, the Prime Minister delivered an address to the nation. People were calling us, wanting to know what he was going to announce. This was an extraordinary situation. We were on tenterhooks, expecting something big. Unfortunately, the Speech from the Throne is a hodgepodge of ideas that we have heard many times before. It is a rehash of last year's throne speech. These are empty ideas, not solutions. People may say that it is greener. The greenest thing about it is all the old ideas they recycled.

Apart from that, apart from a huge, perhaps historic, intrusion into provincial jurisdictions by the federal government, there is nothing noteworthy. After listening to the Prime Minister's address to the nation, I thought, what a joke. Was that all? He told us to wash our hands, wear a mask and use the COVID Alert app, and said that the government would take on debt instead of Canadians. There was nothing new. It was really a one-man show. What a joke.

I was wondering why he went to all the trouble, and then I realized. We know how magicians make things disappear. They create a diversion. They distract us and then use sleight of hand. That is what this government is trying to do. It is using the throne speech and address to the nation to create a diversion and try to hide something. It pretends it is being serious and taking the bull by the horns.

He wants to make the WE scandal disappear into thin air. This whole charade was designed to get the Prime Minister out of the mess he has been in for the past month over WE Charity. He was up to his neck in this scandal. It was the worst scandal his government had gone through, and there were plenty. Four committees were studying the matter. The Minister of Finance resigned, which is a big deal. The Prime Minister is facing his third probe by the Ethics Commissioner. He is rewriting the Guinness Book of World Records. He is the Wayne Gretzky of ethics violations. All this to hush up the scandal. The government should not expect to get off lightly, because the Bloc Québécois intends to keep the ball rolling. We are going to keep a close eye on what is happening with the WE scandal.

People are asking us what the solution is. It is very simple. This address to the nation and the throne speech should have been about the public health crisis and the health care systems that have been affected by this unprecedented crisis. The solution came from the provincial premiers and the Government of Quebec. It is simple. The solution is to put money into health care. That is all there is to it. That is all the provinces want. They must get help to pay for health care.

The Prime Minister says he has met with them 20 times, but he is not listening to them. He met with them 20 times and every time the ministers told him the same thing, but he is not listening. He could meet with them 100 times, and it would not matter. He is not listening to Canada's health care experts, the people in charge of safeguarding the health of Quebeckers and Canadians.

Earlier, the Prime Minister spoke about blank cheques. He just does not get it. The Canadian Constitution clearly states that health care falls under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. It says so in black and white. To help the provinces and Quebec provide proper funding for health care, the federal government needs to contribute.

The federal government is saying that it will not give out any blank cheques, but it is not the government's money. The Prime Minister needs to understand that. It is not his money. It is taxpayers' money.

Quebec taxpayers pay taxes and give the federal government a blank cheque. They give the federal government that money, but in return they expect to receive services from the federal government. Quebec taxpayers expect to receive quality health care after paying those taxes. After putting money in its own pockets, this government is meddling in things that are none of its concern, acting like an armchair quarterback and saying that the provinces need to do this or that, when it knows nothing about what needs to be done.

The federal government was supposed to provide 50% of the funding, but that was cut to 33% and then 25%. In the early 2010s, the Conservatives had a great idea. They said that they were going to put a 3% cap on increases to health care transfers. It was their idea.

The 2013 Thomson report was clear. Maintaining health care spending, including in Quebec, requires an annual funding increase of 5.6%. It does not take a Ph.D. in math to understand that when costs increase by 5.6% annually and the federal government only allocates 3% more in its budget, the remaining 2.6% is on the wrong side of the balance sheet. That is obvious.

Last week, the premiers of Quebec and the provinces stated that, based on their calculations, they need an additional $28 billion for health care. Once again, the federal government refused and said it was not going to write a blank cheque.

Ironically, this government tries to interfere in the jurisdiction of the provinces and Quebec, but it cannot manage its own affairs properly.

The rail crisis was a federal matter, yet for 20 days, the government stated that it would not do anything and that it was up to the provinces and Quebec to take care of it. It is actually a federal matter. The government needs to do its job. It went out of its way to do nothing. That is unbelievable. I call that compulsive passive resistance.

Then the pandemic began. Since the virus came from overseas, the Prime Minister was advised to close the borders. It was only logical. That was his job. That is what he is there for, among other things, but he said that he would not close the borders. It took the mayor of Montreal going to Dorval and saying that enough is enough. The mayor did what the Prime Minister was supposed to do. The government is not looking after its own affairs.

Foreign workers who arrived here were meant to be put in quarantine, and the federal government was supposed to manage the situation. It failed to do that. It does not take care of its own affairs, but it pretends it is king and says it will manage areas under provincial jurisdiction. It needs to mind its own business. That is what Quebeckers want, for this government to mind its own business.

With regard to hospital staff, nurses are doing an amazing job. They have been performing miracles for years. As a result of increased chronic underfunding by this government, and by the federal government in general, they are being called upon to make more and more miracles happen. They are being left to fend for themselves. Orderlies are having to take on more and more work. Burnout is ever present. Instead of saying that it is going to help them, give them money, support them, give them resources and not let them down, what is the government doing? It is telling them how to do their jobs and refusing to provide more help. That is what the government said in the throne speech. It makes no sense.

The government saw the throne speech as an opportunity to interfere in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction, including long-term care facilities, home care, family doctors, virtual health care, mental health resources, pharmacare, training for workers, and child care. These things are none of the federal government's business.

What exactly is the federal government's business? Taxpayers' money. The federal government should take that money and give it back to the government responsible for providing these services to taxpayers, be that in Quebec City or Ottawa. That is precisely how the Canadian federation works. I did not make that up or make the rules. The Liberals are the ones not following the rules.

There is some good news, sort of. It is not entirely good news though. It never is.

Helping seniors is a good thing. For the past year, we have been talking about how seniors are in a precarious financial situation, and the crisis caused by the pandemic has made things even worse. These seniors are isolated and sick, and, sadly, many of them have died. We asked the government to help them, but the government decided to help only those over 75. We do not understand that kind of logic. Do they think nothing happens to people between the ages of 65 and 75? Do they think those people live a charmed life? Why create two classes of seniors?

The government is going to help certain industries that are struggling, including the travel, tourism and culture sectors. That is great. However, the throne speech included nothing for the aerospace industry, even though it accounts for 43,000 direct and indirect jobs in Quebec and is its largest export. This sector was hit hard by the pandemic, and yet the throne speech offers no solutions.

The government has promised to create a million jobs. This is the usual smoke and mirrors from the Liberal Party, which seems to like round numbers. It says it is going to create a million jobs, but we have no idea how.

The Liberal Party has already promised to plant two billion trees. People were impressed and wondered how the government would do that. The government would only reply that it was going to plant those trees, but now, one year later, not one tree has been planted.

The Liberals promised that Canada would reach net zero by 2050. People were impressed. They wondered what the Liberals' secret was and asked them how they were going to do it. The Liberals have no idea. This is a joke. It is all smoke and mirrors.

The government says it will create one million jobs. It may want to start by protecting aerospace jobs that are so important for Quebec. These are good jobs that benefit all of Quebec and its exports. It is not complicated. It is what needs to be done. Again, however, this government pouts and does not want to deal with the economy in a smart way, when all it would take is an aerospace policy. In Canada and Quebec, we are the only country that does not help its aerospace industry in a structured way. In Quebec, we are capable of building a plane from stem to stern. It is a source of pride. We do that in spite of the federal government and the fact that half of our taxes do not come back to us in a smart way.

The government said it would make web giants contribute. That is good news. It is interesting. Yet, the government does not mention tax havens because the Liberals are spineless. I know some Liberal members and I like them. I have not spoken at length with them about it, but I know that they would say that tax havens do not make sense. Why then are the Liberals not taking action? Which friends do they want to protect by standing by while everyone has been urging them to take action on this issue over the years? These tax havens represent billions of dollars in lost taxes.

The government has extended the Canada emergency wage subsidy. The Liberals know that it is a good measure because they used it for six months and made $800,000. They tested the subsidy and found that it worked for them. They thought it was great and decided to keep it in place.

The government is talking about a green recovery. Fine, but since we are on the subject, I would have liked the speech to nix the Trans Mountain expansion. Many economists and academics, even some from western Canada, are saying that this project is not viable, that it will not make money and that investing $12 billion in it is unthinkable. The message was crystal clear, we have heard it over and over, and it became glaringly obvious two weeks ago. The writing was on the wall. There throne speech should have made a definitive statement about it, but it was not even mentioned.

The government's environmental whims are shorter-lived than a balloon at a porcupine party. They come and go. That is a fact.

The government sacrificed the future of farmers and milk quotas, for example, for the sake of more international agreements. The government sacrificed these things for the sake of globalization, and farmers lost billions of dollars. They were promised again and again that they would get compensation and that the money was there. It was there in last year's throne speech. What happened since then? Nothing. What is happening now? Still nothing.

This sends a message to farmers. The government is putting their finances in jeopardy because it cannot negotiate sensible agreements with other countries. As a result, the government cannot and will not help them. Farmers are told that they will get help, but they will not. That is typical of the Government of Canada.

In conclusion, there is very little in the throne speech to satisfy the Bloc Québécois. If the government wants our support for the throne speech, it will have to produce an agreement to increase health transfers by next week. That is what Quebeckers are asking for. That is what Quebec's health care system needs. That is what the Bloc Québécois wants.

I would like to table, seconded by the hon. member for Salaberry—Surroît, an amendment to the amendment:

That the amendment be modified by adding, after the fourth paragraph, the following:

“We regret that your government did not respond to the unanimous call from the Premier of Quebec, and provincial and territorial premiers for an unconditional increase to the Canada Health Transfer so it represents 35% of health care costs in Quebec, the provinces and territories;

We also regret that your government is creating two classes of seniors by proposing to increase old age security only for people aged 75 and over;

We regret that your government is violating constitutional jurisdiction by not allowing Quebec and the provinces to opt out, with full compensation, of federal programs in areas under their jurisdiction;”.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The subamendment is in order.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I am somewhat disappointed but not surprised. My colleagues, the members of the Bloc, would like to see the demise of Canada. That is fairly well established. All they want is to have the cash without any standards or anything tagged onto the money. They just want the government to give them the money.

This is completely at odds with the people I represent. The people who I represent are not that much different from a majority of Canadians. They understand and appreciate that the federal government's role is more than just handing over cash or a blank cheque. They understand and appreciate the value of our health care system. They want a national government that genuinely cares about the delivery of that health care system.

The federal government does have a role to play. The Canada Health Act dictates that the federal government has a role to play.

The member commented that the throne speech would do nothing for the aerospace industry. Facts are often distorted in the chamber. The government cares passionately about the aerospace industry, whether it is in the province of Quebec or in the province of Manitoba. I suspect that the wage subsidy program has been very beneficial for many aerospace jobs.

Would the member not recognize that many of the initiatives that have been brought into force over the last six months have literally saved thousands of jobs in the province of Quebec and have assisted many more, tens of thousands, people, providing money to them?

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite must not have very many constitutionalist friends. Personally, I am going by the Constitution. I read it and I have studied it. I know what I am talking about.

He said that health care does not fall under Quebec's jurisdiction and that the federal government has a role to play in it. I am sorry, but he should read his materials again. He cannot be serious. Nobody who has read the Constitution would say that the federal government has no business writing blank cheques.

The Constitution dates back to 1867. The sources of revenue available to the provinces and Quebec were insufficient to manage all the expenses. That is why provincial transfers were created in 1867. At the time, the federal government's main sources of revenue were quite profitable. They were related to transportation and borders.

Back in 1867, one of the only ways the provinces could get money was an income tax. There was no such thing at the time. Income taxes were created in the early 20th century by British Columbia. When the Canadian government saw that this was working, it decided it wanted in on the action, even though this was not supposed to be a source of revenue for it. It is the story of the Canadian federation. I could give an eight-hour speech on this, but I think I had better stop here.

The people across the aisle are going to have to realize that what we are saying is not just hot air. It is based on facts.

He talked about aerospace policy. We do not just want the government to shell out money reluctantly or grudgingly, as it has been doing for years. When there were problems with the C Series, Bombardier waited a long time for federal money, which almost failed to materialize. At the time, most of the aerospace funding was going to sectors that channelled more capital towards Ontario and Quebec. That is more misinformation from the member opposite.

At some point, the member is going to have to learn how to handle information properly. If he wants to debate that, I have no problem with it.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is great to hear Bloc Québécois members passionately defending the Canadian Constitution. It is truly a delight to hear. It is fitting and informative.

The NDP has gone after clear wins for people, measures that will help them in their everyday lives. The crisis has shown how important sick leave is. People who do not feel well and have COVID symptoms should not feel forced to go to work. They should be able to stay home, because that is a fundamental right in terms of workers' health and safety.

Does my Bloc colleague agree that people should be entitled to sick leave?

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to point out that I am not extolling the virtues of the Constitution. I am quite familiar with the Constitution, since it has been hindering Quebec's economic development since 1867. That is why we take great interest in the Canadian Constitution and why we want out of it. From the very beginning, the Constitution has been diminishing our rights and institutionalizing our minority status in Canada. That is a fact. An entire nation and its people were simply confined under the label of “province” among the other provinces of Canada.

He is extolling the virtues of centralization and that is proof of encroachment. NDP members are like Liberals in a hurry. They want to take away the provinces' powers and Quebec's powers; that is what they are fighting for. It is too bad the member from Rosemont does not talk about this in his riding; I am not sure he would be here after the next election.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague spoke at length about the aerospace sector and Quebec's position as a leader in that field. Another area in which Quebec is a leader is the electrification of transportation, which came up in the Speech from the Throne. The ideas are there, but the details are not and that concerns us.

Quebec is already leading the way in generous car purchase incentives and first when it comes to electric vehicles in Canada. We have 1,800 charging stations. We are talking about 4,700 jobs and 58 businesses. The Speech from the Throne mentions this sector.

Where will the government put its federal investments? Will they be sent to competitors of the Quebec market, cancelling out Quebec's efforts? Will the government instead negotiate with Quebec on mineral processing and battery production and support the ecosystem of our SMEs that built this expertise?

In his last intervention, my colleague said that Quebec's initiatives have always been underestimated. What does he think about the potential harm of the Speech from the Throne to the promise of electric transportation?

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her question.

Quebec is definitely becoming more and more engaged in the green energy transition. We are pioneers in Canada. It is not that we are any better or worse than others. The fact is that our use of hydroelectricity has led us to make this energy transition more quickly.

We cannot ask this government to help both western oil and Quebec's energy transition. This just goes to show that Canada is not working, because we cannot serve two masters at any one time. Grasp all, lose all, the saying goes.

I completely agree with increasing support for the energy transition. To date, unfortunately, we have only been paid lip service.

[William Amos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Innovation]

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois's perception is shaped by its very narrow vision for the future of this country and Quebec.

The federal government invests 87¢ for every dollar invested in Canada, at all levels of government. The federal government invests to help our workers, families and SMEs, and to protect our economy and our families. This government is prepared to help Quebeckers and our SMEs all across the country.

As for climate change and environmental protections, why does the member not talk about the Government of Quebec's position on “net-zero”? Our government knows where it stands on this.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, Lavoisier said, “Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed.”

The money that the federal government gives Quebec represents taxes paid by Quebeckers. It is not a gift.

The Bloc Québécois certainly does not think of Quebec as a minor player. On the contrary, for the Bloc, Quebec is a major player, and we hold Quebeckers in such esteem that we believe they are capable of seizing control of their own destiny. Does that mean that we hate Canada? Absolutely not. It is just that we are different and we deserve our own country.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague and friend, the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni, who is going to speak to us about issues that affect his community and the people of British Columbia.

I am pleased to rise in the House to respond to the Speech from the Throne on behalf of the NDP. Quite frankly, my first reaction, and I believe everyone's first reaction, was to wonder whether this was all worth it. There has been much ado about nothing. The government prorogued and shut down Parliament claiming that we needed to take a new direction, to start fresh with a forward-looking vision.

Yesterday, I felt like I was in the movie Groundhog Day, like I woke up and was back in October 2019. The Speech from the Throne is a rehashing of the Liberals' platform from last year. It contains some worthwhile measures, some unfortunate ones, and some omissions. However, there is nothing to explain why the government decided to prorogue Parliament. The Speech from the Throne is a carbon copy of the one the government proposed during the last session. The NDP feels this was a missed opportunity.

The government doubled down with the Prime Minister's speech to the nation. It was ridiculous and comical. I think the Prime Minister did not like that the Governor General got to read his text, so he thought he would go on TV and read it himself, just to be sure he would get his face on the nightly news. I think the Prime Minister actually has plenty of opportunities to speak to Canadians and the media.

We were treated to a pointless throne speech that seemed like reheated leftovers, followed by an address to the nation that was equally pointless and told us nothing new. It simply reminded us to be careful and wear masks. It seems like the Liberals used our parliamentary institution to deliver political talking points, with no real message. Some might point out that this is not the first time the Liberals have done that, and I would agree. We in the NDP were left wanting more.

Parts of the throne speech seem promising. The Liberals say we need to look after families and children, invest in child care, and make sure people can get their prescription drugs. The NDP has a pretty good memory. The Liberals first brought up the idea of public child care and pharmacare back in 1997. The Liberals have been talking about these great social programs for almost 25 years, but they never actually follow through. They always say they could not do it this time but will do it next time. They expect us to believe them every time.

The real test is not the Speech from the Throne, but whether the government will make the right decisions and, ultimately, make investments that will really help Canadians.

We worked with the government over the past few months because we wanted to make sure everyone could eat and pay rent during the crisis. People need access to a basic income so they can power through this health and economic crisis.

At first, the Liberal government's responses were not very encouraging. We said that millions of people were losing their jobs and had no income to support their families. The government's first response was that those people could apply for employment insurance. We reminded the Liberals that 60% of workers do not have access to EI because it is a highly flawed program. Our progressive left-wing party has long been calling for an overhaul of the EI program.

We managed to get the Canada emergency response benefit. At first the Liberals told us that they were not offering it to everyone, but we wanted it to be given to everyone. Anyone who did not need it could pay it back in taxes. Then the Liberals proposed a sum of $1,000 a month. In many places, that was not nearly enough. In places like Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal, once the rent is paid, assuming that is enough to cover the rent, there would be nothing left over. The Liberals were reluctant, but we managed to push them to provide $2,000 a month.

Then we realized that self-employed workers, freelancers and contract employees were not covered. If someone has 10 or 12 contracts and loses eight or nine of them because of the crisis, they still have a little income. Initially, all of these people were excluded from the CERB. We negotiated, worked and pushed for measures, and we were able to make sure that people could earn up to $1,000 a month and still access the CERB.

The Liberals forgot about students, who were also excluded. We pointed out that not all students are mollycoddled young people living with their parents. Many of them had to pay rent and put food on the table, but they did not have summer jobs. We therefore called for a student benefit. It took a while. We worked hard and negotiated with the government, and we succeeded. This proves that progressive members who are willing to work constructively are needed. They can get things done for ordinary folks, for self-employed workers and for students.

Earlier, I spoke about sick days. Clearly, my Bloc Québécois colleague has no qualms about brushing this issue aside. In real life, sick days are very important to people, especially during a crisis and a pandemic. We do not want anyone who has symptoms such as a fever or cough to go to work. We made significant progress by putting pressure on the government. Getting sick days for workers was an achievement that was applauded by Quebec and Canadian unions. I believe we took an important step forward.

Of course, there were things missing from the throne speech. We are in the midst of a health crisis because of a virus that has been around for six months and will probably be around for six more. However, the Liberal government is doing nothing about transfer payments for the public health care system. Stephen Harper's Conservatives cut the health transfer escalator. Despite their fine talk, the Liberals have upheld the Conservatives' vision, putting enormous pressure on public health care systems in Quebec and across Canada. During the crisis, we saw that our public health care system needs money and oxygen. It must be able to recruit staff and offer good working conditions and salaries so that they stay on the job. We saw and are still seeing orderlies who do not want to go to work because it is too dangerous. We understand. They are paid a pittance. Some nurses are leaving the profession because the hours are too hard.

Obviously, hospitals are run by Quebec and the provinces, not Ottawa. However, the federal government must cover the costs and make a significant contribution. At present, the federal contribution does not even cover 25% of total health care costs. The NDP and others are telling the federal government that it is missing the boat. Why is the government not announcing that it will transfer more money to public health care systems? Why do we have a so-called public system that is largely privatized?

The NDP is the party of Tommy Douglas and universal health care. People should be able to access care with their health card, not their credit card. Why are there so many private seniors' homes and long-term care homes? Because people want to make money off health care for seniors. Disaster struck the Centre Herron, a private long-term care home in Dorval. Residents were paying between $3,000 and $10,000 a month but were not even getting clean diapers. They were eating spoiled food. They were not being cared for. They were falling down, and nobody was picking them up. That is completely unacceptable to the NDP. We do not want the private sector involved in our health care systems, and certainly not in elder care.

We are going through a public health crisis right now, but let us not forget that we are still in the midst of an environmental and climate crisis. That has not gone away. We are travelling and driving a little less. The economy has slowed down, and our greenhouse gas emissions have dropped, but that will not last. If we do not change our ways and change our production and consumption patterns, we are heading straight for a wall.

I would refer members to a book written by Frédéric Bérard, law professor at the Université de Montréal, entitled La Terre est une poubelle en feu, or “the earth is a flaming trash can”. We are seeing this again with the wildfires in California. The book's title is not simple imagery, it is actually quite accurate. If we do not drastically change our way of life, our greenhouse gas emissions will continue to rise and we will completely miss our Paris targets. It is becoming increasingly hard to imagine that we will be able to limit global warming to 1.5°C, which is the commitment we made. The Liberals keep contradicting themselves on this. They say all the right things, yet they continue buying pipelines, expanding oil production and boosting subsidies to oil companies. The NDP will oppose that.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, we heard a lot of promises in yesterday's throne speech. However, Quebec, the Gaspé and the lower St. Lawrence region have been hit even harder by the second wave of the crisis than the first. Health care professionals are near the end of their rope and we need financial support. The federal government's job is easy; it simply has to increase health transfers. What we heard yesterday will be an intrusion into Quebec and provincial jurisdictions. It shows a lack of respect for the demands and the will of Quebeckers.

At least my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie and I can agree on that. He said it feels like groundhog day, like this speech is a carbon copy of the 2019 throne speech. He called it leftovers. Still, his party, which is also known as the Liberals' farm team, is going to support the throne speech.

If this is a carbon copy, I would like to know why he would vote differently than he did in 2019.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very interesting question.

As a political party, the NDP is a left-wing, socialist and social democratic party and we have been setting ourselves apart from the Liberals for more than 60 years. We are extremely proud of that and we will continue to bring truly progressive ideas to the House.

However, I understand her concern. The Speech from the Throne leaves out a host of things that are important for Quebec. The entire cultural sector, which includes the living arts, performing arts and entertainment, is suffering right now and there is no sign of when we will be able to have shows that are profitable. For our artists, the situation is extremely worrisome right now.

Once again, the Liberals missed an opportunity to help the aerospace industry, which represents tens of thousands of good jobs in Quebec. The entire supply chain is quite interesting. We are the only country in the world that produces planes and does not have a national aerospace strategy. I think that the Liberals should rectify this situation and support the aerospace sector. It is very important for Canada and for several regions in Quebec.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, yesterday, in the Speech from the Throne, we heard many election promises. It is true that this is a new version of the first throne speech. I had the opportunity to hear three throne speeches, and I have to say that there are more broken promises in them than throughout Canada's history. What concerns me is credibility.

Some businesses in my riding are having trouble because they decided to make use of the work-sharing program. Unfortunately, employees have not received a dime since these businesses began using the program. The systems that manage the CERB and employment insurance are not connected. Yesterday, the government announced a litany of new programs when it is unable to even manage the programs that are already in place.

Is my NDP colleague concerned to see that the government is announcing all sorts of new measures when it is not even capable of managing those that are already in place?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

We share many of these concerns. The Liberals promised that the government would levy a 3% tax on the income of web giants, which do not currently pay taxes. These are thieves and cheats who are not participating in the system. However, the government made no mention of this in yesterday's throne speech. This is worrisome because it is yet another broken promise.

The current government is incapable of providing services. I have a good example that affects a lot of people in Quebec, especially in Montreal. The immigration department is essentially shut down at the moment. There are some family reunification cases in which people have not seen their spouses or children for months. They do not know when their loved ones will be able to come to Canada so their families can be reunited. Many people are very worried, and the federal apparatus seems to be broken. Many services are not being provided, and yes, we find this extremely worrisome.

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

Madam Speaker, it is an honour today to speak in reply to the Speech from the Throne, which we know is just a speech that, basically, we have heard before. In 2015, there were similar promises made. In this Speech from the Throne, we really got a litany of broken promises from the Liberal Party on things that actually matter, and that are important to Canadians.

Specifically, through this pandemic we have seen the gaps in the social safety net and people are struggling right now. They are struggling to stay employed, keep a roof over their heads and put food on the table for their families. This is not a time for just words. It is a time for action. This pandemic, as I said, has exposed huge gaps in the social safety net. These are things that New Democrats have been talking about, such as the importance of 10 paid sick days so that people are not going to work while they are sick and infecting their colleagues, but instead are taking care of their own health or are able to stay home to look after their children when their children might show signs of having the virus.

We cannot go backwards. We know that so many things are not working right now for people. This pandemic has exposed that. Our health care system is not covering everybody, and people are losing their jobs and not being able to make ends meet. Even with the CERB, many people are still not able to cover their bills. The CERB is set to expire in nine days and we are being told that many Canadians are expected to take a cut on their CERB payment. These are people who have lost their businesses, which they closed to protect public health. Now the government is looking at penalizing them.

People were excited about the Speech from the Throne. They were expecting transformational change. The government talked about building back better, but it missed so many things, and it is heartbreaking. Let us look at the things the government did not talk about. The opioid crisis was just briefly mentioned. The Liberal government still has not even declared the opioid crisis a public health emergency. In August alone in British Columbia, there were 147 lives lost. These are daughters, sons, brothers, sisters and cousins. Families and community members are dying from a tainted drug supply and the government still has not rolled out a plan to save those people's lives.

There was nothing in the throne speech for veterans. Can anyone believe that? These are the people who put their lives on the line to serve and protect Canadians, many of them now suffering from PTSD. Some of them are in the growing backlog of over 50,000 claims that the government has not even opened the envelopes of to start working on. We are seeing a growing number of homeless veterans.

The Royal Canadian Legion command wrote a letter to the government asking for help. It is saying that one in 10 legions across the country is looking at closing its doors permanently. The British Columbia/Yukon command wrote a letter saying it might be four in 10 legions that are closing their doors. They received no mention in the Speech from the Throne. That speech is meant to be about where the government is going, so it is clearly going to leave veterans behind. This is absolutely shameful. It should be responding to veterans. They have not even gotten a letter in response to their requests for help. This is highlighting the importance of the people being left behind.

Students were promised they were going to get help. My daughter, on April 24, watched the news when the Prime Minister said the government needed their help, that it knew the businesses they worked at were closed and their summer jobs were not going to happen, and that it needed them to volunteer. My daughter delivered food at the local food bank with her friends, helping to contribute. Then on June 25, the Prime Minister announced a program to help students that was starting that day. Students felt betrayed and wondered how this could be happening. Then the WE scandal emerged and they did not get any help.

There was nothing in the Speech from the Throne targeting students. There is $900 million still allocated for students and it needs to get out the door to them. If we do the math, there is $450 that could potentially go toward tuition for each student across the country. A lot of students do not know how they are going to get through the school year. There is no help from the government. They have questions. They are our future and it is important that we invest in them.

There was nothing about wild salmon in the throne speech. British Columbia has the largest salmon-bearing river in the world: the Fraser. Last year, there was half of the lowest return in recorded history. This year was half of that. We are losing our wild salmon and there was nothing in the Speech from the Throne to address that. We need help. We need the government to understand the importance of salmon to British Columbians.

While I am on the subject of British Columbia, my colleague from Vancouver East had a question on the order paper to find out how the national housing strategy is rolling out for people. I will tell the House how it is rolling out in British Columbia. We have 0.5% of the national co-investment fund, a $1.46-billion fund, and this is affirmed in a question on the order paper. Members should ask the homeless people right now how that is playing out for them. In our communities, it is real.

There is no mention of indigenous urban housing in the Speech from the Throne. Among indigenous people, 80% live off-reserve. Many of them are homeless, and they are not getting the help they need from the federal government. The Province of B.C. knows that it is not getting funding. This is also supported by the minister there, who has been fighting hard to make sure people have a home in British Columbia. We are building half of the non-market housing in the country right now in our province, and I am very proud of our provincial government for the work it has been doing, but it could be doing a lot more with help from the federal government.

There are so many things that are missing in the Speech from the Throne. There is still no fix for the commercial emergency rent assistance program. They are still relying on landlords. That is why they have only gotten a third of the money out the door. Only 15% of landlords have applied for the program. For the rest of the people who need the help the most, the tenants, the program still has not been fixed for them to apply.

I applaud the government for responding to our request when we asked for the wage subsidy to go from 10% to 75%. We appreciate them working with us. Last week we sent a letter asking the government to extend the wage subsidy. It honoured that. These are very important supports for small and medium-sized businesses across our country, and I urge the government to fix the emergency commercial rent assistance program.

The government says its most important relationship is with Canada's indigenous peoples, yet the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls Calls for Justice document was tabled over a year ago. A constituent in my riding, Chantel Moore, died on the anniversary of that document being tabled, and the government has done nothing to respond to the Calls for Justice. It is still failing to address the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

When it comes to respecting indigenous rights, we can look to the Nuu-chah-nulth court case where the government spent $19 million on lawyers fighting it. Right now is no different from the Marshall court decision for the Mi'kmaq in 1999. They're frustrated. They just want to go out and earn a moderate living. They just want to feed their families. They want to be on the water, fishing, not in court, and the government does nothing. There is nothing in the Speech from the Throne addressing that. It has not resourced the tables. It sends its negotiators to the table knowingly empty-handed. How is that the way to treat its most important relationship? People are living in terrible conditions, trying to figure out how they are going to feed their families. This is not honourable.

The Liberals talked about planting trees. They have not planted a tree since their last Speech from the Throne. Regarding clean energy, they have not met a single climate target that they set out, not one. They talked about broadband. They promised that before. Regarding pharmacare, people are living in pain. They cannot fill their prescriptions. The Liberals promised this in 1997 under Jean Chrétien in the Red Book, and they are promising it again today. Regarding child care, we learned from our colleagues and friends from Quebec who have delivered a child care plan across their province. Now 70,000 parents have gone back to work and Quebec's GDP has gone up 2%.

It is critical that the Liberals do this now, that we get action and no more talk. It is time. It is urgent, and we need the government to respond. We will be here to continue to drag the Liberals to follow through with their promises in the Speech from the Throne. They can count on the New Democrats to do that. We have done that through this pandemic and we are going to be here every day fighting for everyday Canadians.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like first to thank the hon. member for raising the opioid issue. He has been tirelessly advocating for stronger federal, provincial, municipal and all action on that front. I join him in that, as we have lost too many people. As for his daughter's volunteer work, I thank him as well. It is not easy to get young people to volunteer in such a socially conscious way and during the pandemic put themselves and their families at risk. That service is also to be acknowledged.

I do, however, take issue with some of the member's statistics and some of his analysis of the throne speech. The member says it is all words and no action.

I would like to ask him whether the billion dollars announced this week, ahead of the throne speech, and invested straight into municipalities to acquire and secure housing for the most vulnerable, as well as the government's commitment to end chronic homelessness right across the country, do not address and include veterans?

I would like the member to address the fact that the investments we have committed to in this throne speech for youth employment services are employment dollars committed to and invested in all students and young people, not just those going to college but all vulnerable youth across the country. Will he be supporting that?

Finally, I address the child care issue. I was a reporter here when we were six weeks away from a national child care strategy being locked in for 10 solid years. There were provincial commitments right across the country from coast to coast to coast, and your party chose to defeat that government. Six weeks ahead of those dollars being locked in, we lost 10 years of a national child care policy.

Will that party, this time, support a child care policy or will it gamble another Conservative government into existence?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Just as a reminder, members should speak through the Chair, please.

The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

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

Madam Speaker, there is a lot to unpack there. It would take me another 10 minutes. If you will grant it to me, Madam Speaker, I am happy to respond.

We are going to do everything we can to leverage getting help to Canadians. We will be here to do that. If the government responds by helping Canadians, we will continue to work with that government.

The member talks about affordable housing. I will talk about how it is working for people in our communities. For the growing number of people who are homeless, especially now with the pandemic, the government is not moving with the speed and urgency that is necessary.

The member talked about veterans' housing. My colleague from Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke can tell us about a great facility called Cockrell House that Angus Stanfield runs with no help from the federal government. It gets none. It operates on donations received through the poppy fund. We want to create a pilot project in our riding. I hope that the member reaches back to me and gives us help so that we can provide safe and secure housing for veterans.

The member needs to come to my riding. He needs to come to Ahousaht and see the squalid conditions that indigenous people are living in. These are the people he says are the government's most important relationship. I will tell him how that looks. Houses are mouldy. There are elders and children living in third-world conditions, and the Liberals want to tout and brag about the money they are rolling out the door to build housing. I will tell him to come to my riding and meet the people on the street. There is nowhere to go. That is what we are facing right now.

Young people feel apathy when they hear a Speech from the Throne from the same government. I do not know why the Liberals did not put electoral reform on their litany of unfulfilled promises. Why not? We know they are not going to do it.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to ask my friend a question about the government's response to COVID in terms of the public health aspects of this.

We know from international best practices a few things that work. Closing the border quickly would have worked, and that did not happen. Another is having masking in place. We know that the government actually destroyed a stockpile of masks last year and we were not ready in terms of having sufficient numbers of masks available. We are still behind on testing. In many places, people cannot get a test if they are not showing symptoms. If they do not fit within a certain prescribed window of having been exposed but think they might have been exposed earlier, they might not get a test.

Specifically, could the member comment on the fact that, in my province and in his province, people still cannot enter a diagnosis in the federal tracing app? The government has rolled out a tracing app, but if people are in B.C., Alberta or Quebec they still cannot enter a diagnosis, months later.

What are people in British Columbia saying about the fact that they are excluded from being able to participate in what are supposed to be national measures to respond to COVID-19?

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

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. Clearly, there is a huge gap and a huge problem. We are hearing every day from constituents that they are waiting in long lineups or the HealthLink phone line is not working. They are frustrated. The provinces are frustrated. We are hearing from all of the provinces that have had numerous promises from the federal government to address the very concerns that the member has outlined. Absolutely, we need to follow through with evidence- and science-based decision-making and recommendations from the public health officers, but they need to be resourced. The government needs to move much faster so that we can flatten the curve as we head into a second wave.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, I wish to advise that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Sherbrooke.

I appreciate the opportunity to address yesterday's throne speech and how it will impact the good people of Charlottetown, who I am so proud to represent.

I would like to begin by recognizing some people who have really shone through the pandemic. It is probably apt to begin with our public service. The public service in Canada has developed and tweaked programs on the fly that have been immensely successful in keeping Canadians safe and attending to their immediate needs. The efforts that have been made and the excellence that has been displayed merits our appreciation.

Closer to home, there are a couple of people who I also want to single out.

Back in the early days of the pandemic, I had the honour to attend a public meeting on a variety of issues. One of the constituents there was an infectious disease specialist, Dr. Greg German. Dr. German informed the people there that Prince Edward Island was ready to face the pandemic, that it was well equipped in terms of personal protective equipment and that there were protocols in place for testing. This has all completely borne out. Dr. German and his team are to be complimented for what we see now, which is a very significant increase in the testing capacity on Prince Edward Island.

Also, our chief public health officer for Prince Edward Island, Dr. Heather Morrison, has absolutely worked tirelessly to keep islanders safe, and the proof is in the pudding. On Prince Edward Island we have had very few cases of COVID. We have had no hospitalizations, no deaths and no community transmission. This is in no small measure due to the tireless efforts of Dr. Morrison. I salute her and all those who have done such a great job in keeping us safe in Prince Edward Island.

Back in the early days of the pandemic, there was outright fear. The pandemic was and is frightening. I would say that in the early days, fear was probably our greatest enemy, but I think it is also fair to say that it was a powerful motivator. It was fear that kept so many people on guard and tuned in to the daily briefings. It was fear that kept us vigilant, but that is no way to live and so we adapted. Personal protective equipment was sourced and shipped. The Canada emergency response benefit was implemented. Wages were subsidized. Money was sent to support the provinces, and the army was called in to assist at-risk seniors within our long-term care system. We adapted and we learned, and as a result, we have largely avoided the nightmare scenarios that we have seen in other countries.

We now know that it is within our ability to fight this thing, and because of that we have far less reason to be afraid. I would humbly submit that as we enter the second wave, complacency is now our biggest threat. Where fear makes people act, complacency makes them indifferent, and during a pandemic, that can be lethal. The truth is that we have been complacent about many things for some time now. It was complacency that chipped away at our social safety net, and it was complacency that created the truly horrifying situations recorded in the armed forces' report on the long-term care homes they were sent to assist.

Complacency leads to austerity. It is a philosophy that tells us we simply cannot do any better and that we should quit while we are behind. I remember the devastating impact that austerity had on Atlantic Canada during the Harper years. Nationally, it brought us not only increased inequality but also anemic growth. In yesterday's throne speech we heard that now is the time for action, not complacency and certainly not austerity.

I want to talk about something that was mentioned in the throne speech that is extremely important for Prince Edward Island and all seasonal economies, and that is the employment insurance system.

Yesterday, we heard the government's pledge to take action to reform the EI program. This is something that will be very well received in Prince Edward Island and is long overdue. I have seen first-hand men and women in the seasonal economy disadvantaged by decisions that in no way reflected the realities on the ground. One in particular that hits very close to home is the October 2014 decision taken by the Harper government to divide Prince Edward Island into two EI zones.

The result of this in a place that is as densely populated and as closely knit in Prince Edward Island is that it pitted workers against one another. It pitted islanders against one another, but it also did something even worse than that. It incentivized dishonesty. It incentivized people who were in one zone to have their residence listed as being in the other zone for the purpose of survival. This is something that has been rectified on an interim basis by the measures our government has taken with respect to EI. The result of the interim measures that have been taken and that will be in place for the next year is that seasonal workers and those who need the EI system across Prince Edward Island will be treated equally.

The announcement in the throne speech to reform the EI system will hopefully result in that interim measure being made permanent in a meaningful way. I will personally be advocating for public input into the measures that will be coming forward. I believe that the disastrous 2014 changes on Prince Edward Island were brought on completely without input. It is only with the people directly affected that we will achieve the right result. Employment insurance is a 20th century idea in desperate need of 21st century reforms.

We need to be completely cognizant that we are in the recovery phase. We talk about building back better, but quite frankly, that is a conversation for next month or next year. We cannot skip ahead. We have to find our feet before we can start building, but when we do, I believe that the reforms to the EI system and the Canada emergency response benefit have started a very important conversation in this country around universal basic income. I believe that universal basic income should be part of the ongoing conversations. Poverty and inequality are far too prevalent in this country despite our wealth as a nation. We have an alphabet soup of poverty reduction measures: OAS, GIS, employment insurance, Canada emergency response benefit, social assistance, workers' compensation benefit, Canada child benefit and HST rebates. All of these things constitute our social safety net. All of these things have their own rules and their own bureaucracy to make sure they get into the right hands.

There has been much written about the need to have this streamlined. This experiment that has been forced upon us as a result of the pandemic is an indicator of the potential of this idea. I believe Prince Edward Island will be uniquely positioned to serve as a pilot for such an initiative. Again, this is a conversation to be had once we find our feet.

I want to finish by offering a few comments with respect to the real existential threat in this country and that is the threat of climate change. There is plenty of room for debate on how to combat a problem that is so immense that its fallout will be measured in geological time. Here is what the government plans to bring to the table: a working plan to exceed Canada's 2030 climate goal; legislation to give Canada's goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 the weight of law; thousands of jobs retrofitting homes and buildings, which will have the added bonus of cutting energy costs; and investments to reduce the impact of climate change disasters such as floods and wildfires.

I see my time is at an end, Madam Speaker. Thank you very much for affording me an opportunity to offer some insights with respect to the throne speech. I look forward to the questions from my colleagues.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, one of the reasons this pandemic has struck Canada in such a way is the failure of the government to plan effectively in advance. Less than 20 years ago, we had another coronavirus pandemic in terms of SARS. It did not reach the same proportions, but it was in response to that pandemic that the government of the day created the Public Health Agency, which was supposed to prepare us for events like this. However, the government was not prepared. It destroyed aspects of our mask stockpile and that put us in a situation where the government was procuring very large amounts of PPE from China.

I want to specifically ask about this procurement. Many concerns have been raised about how Uighur Muslims in China. They face horrific repression and the largest mass detention of a minority since the Holocaust, according to many experts. They are being forced to participate in slave labour, including the production of PPE.

When we asked the government what safeguards are in place to ensure that slave labour is not part of the supply chain for our government-procured PPE, we were told by the minister that there is a process by which companies self-certify. In other words, those companies tell us everything is fine and we believe them.

Is the member concerned about the involvement, or the possible involvement, of slave labour in the supply chain for government-procured PPE? Is the member prepared to support new legislation to ensure that does not happen going forward? It is similar to, for instance, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which was passed with overwhelming support in U.S. Congress.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for the passion he brings to international human rights. This is a positive contribution to all of the discussions we have in Parliament.

I would respectfully submit that the government has done an admirable job in protecting Canadians from the coronavirus right down the line, including the funds that have been rolled out and the acquisition of PPE. We can be rightly proud of the public servants and decision-makers, who have done such an excellent job in having Canadians' backs through the pandemic.