Debates of Feb. 22nd, 2021

Industry, Science and Technology

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

The tourism industry is very important in his riding, just as it is in many regions in Canada.

I wonder if my colleague could talk to us about the impact the pandemic might have on the very small businesses that depend on the tourism industry and that do not necessarily have enough money in the bank to deal with missing a season. We are heading into a second tourism season that could be completely spoiled for these small businesses. It is worrisome because we may have beautiful attractions, but if we do not have all the resources to welcome visitors, then we will miss out on the return of the tourism industry.

I would like my colleague to talk about the importance of these small businesses that make all the difference between a lovely, fulfilling visit for tourists and a simple photograph of an extraordinary natural landscape, like the ones found in his region.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is correct. If we approach the coming tourism season and then lose it again, it will be quite devastating, not only for our tourism community in Niagara Falls, but also for many others.

In my community alone there are 40,000 workers who have come to rely on the tourism sector for their livelihoods. Our two casinos, which are the largest tourism employers in Niagara, employ 4,000 individuals. They have been off since March. As the previous speaker and my colleague mentioned, people want to get back to work.

These industries and small businesses are looking for certainty. The Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses is indicating that 200,000 small businesses may fail because of COVID. That would be devastating news for the Canadian economy and for Canadian tourism in general.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, tourism is certainly an important industry in northwest B.C. I have talked to so many tourism operators who have been harmed by the pandemic and are looking at potentially another lost tourism season, as we have already heard. I am curious about his comments on looking for certainty, though, because there is so much that is not known about the future of the pandemic. So many factors are outside of our control.

Does the member not agree that our focus should be on supporting those businesses in the face of travel restrictions, rather than pushing for a reopening of the travel industry, which may be premature in the face of the new variants of the virus, which are so concerning to health experts?

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague mentioned earlier, there cannot be a full economic recovery without a health recovery, so that is vitally important. We talked to several stakeholder groups that are looking for certainty. I have spoken to outfitter organizations across the country that derive 90% of their memberships and business from American visitation. They are looking for certainty.

What is the government plan with regard to opening the border? When would that eventually happen, and how will they be able to do it? Businesses need to start planning now. Without that certainty, they are on the verge of losing another season.

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in my riding tourism is very important, but so too is the booking industry. We have companies that work on booking cruise ships and booking travel around the world. They are worried about losing their businesses and then having large corporations take over what all these small businesses are doing.

Does the hon. member have some comments about what he sees as solutions to this issue? How can we protect these small businesses from having their businesses swallowed up by multinational corporations going forward?

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to stakeholder organizations across the country, including the Association Of Canadian Travel Agencies and independent travel agencies across the country. They are looking to the government for solutions as part of the airline assistance program.

Traditionally many of these small business operations, probably 80% to 85%, are run by female entrepreneurs. They are looking for assistance to ensure that the commissions they have generated and earned, quite rightly, are not clawed back as part of any refund program that the government puts in place as part of its airline bailout.

[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]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting, and somewhat frustrating and a little disappointing, to watch the Conservatives play their political games on the floor of the House of Commons. It is becoming more and more apparent that the Conservative Party of Canada is completely out of touch with what Canadians want their political leaders to be talking about and actually doing.

I do not say that lightly. I genuinely believe that the direction the current leadership of the Conservative party and its House leadership team are taking, as well as the discussions and debates on the floor, do a disservice to Canadians.

I will expand on why it is we have a report on travel and tourism. I listened very carefully to the former speaker and the member for Edmonton Centre, who brought forward the motion on this concurrence to talk about travel and tourism in Canada. There was nothing said by either member, nothing at all, that could not have been said during debate on Bill C-14, for example.

There was nothing implying the urgency of having that debate today. When the member for Edmonton Centre presented his arguments to debate this, he expressed concerns in regard to all the restrictions. However, I asked him point-blank whether he supports the current restrictions that have been put in place by the government. His response was that yes, he does support them.

Where is the need to actually bring forward this report at this time? If the members were saying that this is such an important industry, and we should be talking about it, I would agree. It is an important industry. It is a very important industry for all Canadians, whether they are directly employed by it, indirectly employed by it or not even employed by it. Our tourism industry is of critical importance to our economy and to our society, in terms of how we ultimately evolve. However, if it were that important, they could have dealt with it when we were debating Bill C-14 earlier today.

They have opposition day motions, and they could do it at that time also. They could single out an industry and say that they are concerned about that industry and that they want to debate it all day, and ultimately it would come to a vote.

Members of the Conservative party have been filibustering and doing whatever they can to play a destructive force in regard to Bill C-14, where there has been a great deal of talk about tourism and the tourism industry. There has been a great deal of discussion about that. My colleague from Kingston and the Islands pointed out the number of days we have been sitting for Bill C-14 versus what we would actually spend on a budget debate. As well, the Conservatives have given absolutely no indication. I asked earlier today when the Conservatives would see fit to pass Bill C-14, and there is no indication.

Now, we get this report that is so urgent that the House of Commons needs to have hours of debate on it. The leader of the Conservative Party of Canada and members of Parliament from the Conservative caucus believe that it is so very important.

For those who might be following the debate, I do not believe that it has anything to do with the industry, nothing at all. I think the Conservatives have factored in and brought in this report because they want to continue to filibuster and prevent debates from taking place. Interestingly enough, they will then criticize the government for not having debate. They will ask why we are not debating Bill C-14 more and why we are not bring forward Bill C-19. This is not the first day on which we have tried to bring forward Bill C-19, which is a Canada Elections Act bill.

We look forward to getting that high sense of co-operation coming from all opposition members. They talk about the issue of vaccines in reference to this particular report, but vaccines apply to every aspect of our society, including issues being debated in many different forums.

What should we be debating today? We could have been debating this. Not necessarily the report, but why did members of the Conservative Party not talk about this more during the budget debate, or the mini budget debate, however one might want to refer to Bill C-14?

It has come to the extreme where the Minister of Finance, the Deputy Prime Minister of Canada, had to write a letter to the Conservative leader and say that Conservatives are dragging their feet on important legislation. That legislation will have a positive impact for our tourism industry. As members talk about the—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We have a point of order from the member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am hearing a lot about Bill C-14 and Bill C-19. I am just wondering if the Speaker could remind the member of the matter of relevance?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. I heard the member specifically talking about how Bill C-14 addressed the issue of the tourism industry, so he has completely been on point. Although I do not believe I need to defend this particular member, as he does a great job of doing that himself, I thought I would throw that in for your consideration.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We can bring the matter to a close at this point.

I thank the hon. members for their interventions. Of course, it is important that members' speeches are pertinent to the subject before the House. I have been listening to the hon. parliamentary secretary. I did note that while what the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes indicated is true, in that there were, for example, references to other bills, the parliamentary secretary noted these were drawn in relation to comparisons to the subject matter at hand. In that case, I would not consider it to be impertinent to the subject before the House.

The hon. parliamentary secretary will carry on in the usual way, and we will keep paying attention to his abiding in the relevance.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes members of the Conservative Party feel a little uneasy when we get into the reality of why they play their games.

The Conservatives talk about the importance of the tourism and travel industry. That is why they brought it up. The reason we are debating this today is because apparently the Conservatives are concerned about that one industry. If they are concerned about that industry, Bill C-14 would go a long way to support it.

It is important for my colleagues across the way to understand the consequences of their most inappropriate behaviour when it comes to debate and the games on they play the floor of the House of Commons. They need to start shying away from some of the games and start focusing on what the government has been focused on since day one, and that is Canadians first and foremost.

On the government side, my colleagues and I get a little frustrated when we want to share with members the concerns we have for the many different industries in Canada. Today, this report focuses on travel and our tourism industry. We have been putting a lot of resources into that, hundreds of millions of dollars. We have not neglected this area.

I was talking about the aerospace industry just the other day. Our aerospace industry is so vitally important, and the amount of travel taking place today has significantly dropped. We all know that. It has an impact. I am concerned about the aerospace industry. I did not hear the members talking about the travel industry and the impact it is having on our aerospace industry. That should have also been tied in with this.

The reason I say that is when we look at it, what should we do? Should we do one industry at a time and debate that? This seems to be what the Conservatives want to do right now. Maybe we will forgo opposition days and some government days, and go through one industry at a time.

I am very concerned about the aerospace industry. Travel has gone down. I do not know to what degree the committee had that discussion about the aerospace industry and the impact on it.

I take great pride in the fact, and it has been said before, that an aircraft can be built in Quebec from the very start, from the nuts and bolts to a 100% completed aircraft. I am very proud of that fact.

Manitoba also has an aerospace industry. We all know Boeing is being affected by air travel. It is looking at ways in which we can support the travel industry. In fact, I met with some members of Unifor to talk about the aerospace industry and the impact that travel is having on it.

Manitoba has a wonderful aerospace industry, so do the provinces of Ontario and British Columbia. Those provinces probably have 98% of the entire aerospace industry in the country. Do not quote me on that, but I do not think I would be too far off. That is a direct link to travel.

I understand how important it is, but I do not think I would favour of having a day for every subject matter in regard to the coronavirus. There is not enough days in the next couple of months to cover them all.

Why would the Conservatives bring this up at this point? There is a government agenda. The government is moving forward. During the debate, both speakers were critical of the government because the Liberals did not get rapid tests out fast enough. Members will recall that the critic for health jumped up and down, yelling that the sky was falling and asking where the rapid tests were.

Over 20 million rapid tests have now been provided by the federal government and a very small percentage of them have actually been utilized. It sure sounded good back then when members of the Conservative Party tried to get people to lose confidence in the government. That seemed to be their priority, not the travellers.

To what degree did the committee look at that issue? We have over 20 million rapid tests and they have not been utilized anywhere near the degree they could be utilized. Has there been representation coming from the tourism industries, whether restauranteurs or travellers, in regard to it? Are the Conservatives trying to blame the provinces for not doing their jobs in terms of the circulation of rapid tests? Is that what the Conservatives are trying to say?

They raised the issue. I could not believe the ridicule and so-called outrage coming particularly from the critic of health for the Conservative Party. Of course, members, in talking about this motion, talked about the vaccine, and they were critical of the government about as well. They said that it was going to be the saviour.

This government, through its process and procurements, has put Canada in a fantastic position. We committed weeks ago to six million vaccines by the end of March and well over 20 million by the time we get into June. We are on track to reach that. There have been some bumps here and there and some things we have had to overcome. Some of them are an act of God through a snowstorm to restructuring or retooling of a company overseas.

The Conservatives have one agenda and that agenda is not to provide the type of official opposition that I believe Canadians truly want them to be. What do members think Canadians would say with respect to the debate we are having today and the games being played on the floor of the House of Commons? It is very frustrating.

I would like to be talking about the travel industry and the tourism industry once Bill C-14 gets back from committee. We should allow Canadians, committees and parliamentarians of all political stripes to have that debate about this industry and other industries at the committee stage. We can look at ways to improve it.

The previous speaker made reference to us having some programs. That is right. From day one, this government has been focused on ensuring we were there for small businesses in a real way. Those small businesses, in good part, are doing that much better as a result of the programs we put in place, and he cited some of them. A Conservative member previously made reference to the emergency wage subsidy program. It is a fantastic program.

Late last year, the Prime Minister and I had a discussion via Zoom with members from the folk arts council, which puts on Folklorama in Winnipeg. Close to 200,000 people participate in that event. Members can google it if they like. It is a major tourist attraction for the province of Manitoba.

We had representatives from the folk arts and others were involved in that discussion. They talked about how grateful they were for the wage subsidy program. A couple even indicated that if it were not for the wage subsidy program, the folk arts council might have had to close its doors. Think of the impact that would have had on my province. This institution has been around for over 50 years. There are literally thousands of volunteers. There are 200,000 plus people who will visit the different pavilions. Historically, it has been such a wonderful organization that provides jobs and economic boosts, whether to hotels, artists, and the like. It is very important to our tourism industry. It benefited from the emergency wage subsidy program. Members can talk about tourism and that program under Bill C-14 if they so choose.

However, the Prime Minister also made reference to the emergency business account, another outstanding program. I do not know if he made reference to the emergency rent subsidy program. What about the business credit availability program? One could even talk about the regional relief and recovery funds. All these programs virtually started from nothing.

The Prime Minister and this government are focused on the pandemic and working with Canadians, provinces and territories wherever we can to protect these industries. We worked with some of the best civil servants in the world and because of that, we were able to get these programs in place to protect the types of industries that are absolutely critical to our future. Because we were so successful at doing that, we are in a much better position to build back better. That applies to our travel industry. Our travel and tourism industry, like other industries we have, has benefited dramatically and positively from these programs.

We have admitted that we can do better, that there are opportunities to improve. That is one of the reasons for Bill C-14. The Conservatives continue to play this stupid game of filibustering, preventing the bill from going to committee, because they are not concerned. They might say they are, but saying it is different than doing it. It is time to have less talk and more action from the Conservative Party of Canada. We need a higher—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please.

The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes is rising on another point of order.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening intently to the parliamentary secretary's comments, and he used a word I have used in this place, a word that the Chair occupant at the time described as “unparliamentary”. I would never disagree with a Chair occupant, so when the parliamentary secretary referred to the Conservatives acting in a “stupid” way, he descended into unparliamentary language.

Speaker, before you rule and before the member for Kingston and the Islands engages in debate on my point of order, I would just say that the Chair occupant at the time shares the same party affiliation as the parliamentary secretary and the member who will now challenge this point of order.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

On that point of order, Mr. Speaker, I am going to agree with what my colleague from the Conservatives just said. No person should use the word “stupid” in this House. Indeed, my four-year-old reminds me of that every time I accidentally use that word. I would encourage you, Mr. Speaker, to encourage any member of this House not to use such a word.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I thank hon. members again for their thoughts on the point of order. Hon. members will know that words and expressions can sometimes be in the category of unparliamentary, particularly when they apply individually to other hon. members. In this particular case, I did not hear anything unparliamentary, so we are not going to rule in that case and we will carry on.

The hon. parliamentary secretary has about 20 seconds left in his comments, and then we will go to questions and comments.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes the time seems to go by awfully quickly.

I would love the opportunity to listen to members debate all sorts of issues in regard to the coronavirus and how we can work together. My challenge to the Conservatives is to step up to the plate, and let us do what we can in fighting the pandemic.

With that—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Calgary Signal Hill.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, first I would like to thank the member for Edmonton Centre and the member for Niagara Falls for bringing forward this concurrence motion. It is becoming quite obvious that the only way we can get the current Liberal government to act on anything is if we bring it to the floor of the House and put it to a vote. We saw that this afternoon with the vote on the China situation.

What has got this parliamentary secretary so worked up is that he is afraid of another vote in which either his entire cabinet is going to abstain or disappear from the vote or he is going to have all of his colleagues vote in favour of another Conservative motion. I really think he is quite concerned about how he is going to manage this situation, and it just shows what terrible disarray the government finds itself in today.

The member for Winnipeg North made one comment that actually made sense, which was that if we took a full day to debate every situation that the government has failed to act on, we would never get through all of these debates because there are so many of them.

The parliamentary secretary is great at talking about science and data. On what basis did the government bring in the decision to quarantine at hotels when the public health folks—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We will have to leave it at that. We are well enough along, and there are a number of others who wish to pose questions.

We will go now to the hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member should maybe ask his colleague from Edmonton Centre, to whom I had posed a question asking whether he supports the current restrictions that are in place. His response to me was yes, so I believe that the Conservative Party does support it. If I am wrong, the Conservatives should probably so indicate.

To answer his innuendo in terms of why I might feel frustrated at times, it is because I feel very passionate about doing what I can to combat and fight the pandemic. I see, as we all do, the impact it is having on Canadian society and I see how important it is that the government be at least allowed to do some of the things it needs to do, such as pass Bill C-14.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out that I found the hon. member's sky-is-falling mockery really disrespectful, particularly with the Liberals' non-vaccine rollout that is currently happening, and with people losing work and their homes at this point. We know this is true for the tourism industry, where workers have lost income and people do not even know what is going to happen with the EI benefit. This certainly impacts people who live in our neighbouring Winnipeg ridings.

Does the hon. member, particularly with the rates of poverty and the levels of income insecurity we share in our neighbouring ridings, support a guaranteed livable basic income to make sure that people in both of our ridings can not only make it through the pandemic but can go forward in a way that allows them to live in dignity?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I am very proud of is the way in which this government has dealt with the issue of poverty. I can cite two specific examples, and this predates the coronavirus. The Canada child benefit lifted literally hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty, and that includes hundreds, if not thousands, in the riding I represent, Winnipeg North. I would also cite the guaranteed annual income increase, which was a substantial increase for the poorest of our seniors. That policy in itself lifted tens of thousands of seniors out of poverty, including many from the riding of Winnipeg North.

I think we have a very good record in supporting people where they need to be supported, whether it was from day one or as we continue to support seniors, people with disabilities and so many more as we go through the pandemic.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to talk about women in the tourism sector. Of course, the debate on concurrence right now is specific to only one thing, and that is the level of competence of the new head of our tourism commission. Her name is Marsha Walden, and she was originally with the British Columbia tourism association, but it puts in mind the wonderful Charlotte Bell, who headed up the Tourism Industry Association of Canada and who so tragically died just months ago from a very rapid, aggressive cancer. She was quite young, so I just wanted to say how terribly sad I am to have lost Charlotte and how absolutely confident I am in today's debate, which is actually not about tourism.

The Conservatives have put us into a debate not about the tourism industry or the plight faced by tourism operators, but on one thing only: the qualifications and competence of Ms. Walden to perform in her job. I really have no question for the hon. parliamentary secretary, except to join in the lament that the business of this House is once again hijacked.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would highlight one of the things the former leader of the Green party made reference to. When we talk about our hospitality industry or our tourism industry, I suspect we will find that a solid majority of it is female and an area that we need to spend more time and resources on. It is harder hit, and I like to think that our minister responsible for gender has done a good job at ensuring that gender lens is being applied to the upcoming federal budget.