Debates of Oct. 25th, 2022

Taxation

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the NDP-Liberal costly coalition voted against removing its carbon tax from home heating. The carbon tax cost Albertans over $1,500 this year, and they do not get anywhere near that back. The fact is that the Liberals are punishing Canadians for the basic need of heating our homes, and they are going to triple their take.

Canadians are already choosing between heating and eating, and they are forced to wear winter coats inside just to afford groceries. Why will the Liberals not cancel their triple tax hikes on home heating?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, right now in British Columbia, parts of the province have been without water for more than 100 days. In Port aux Basques, more than 100 families will not be able to go back to their homes, and that is just the beginning. In fact, some people are saying they do not want to go back because it has become too dangerous.

What does the Conservative Party have to say about what it would do to fight climate change and protect Canadians? It would do nothing. In fact, they want to make pollution free again in Canada. That is unacceptable. We have to work to protect Canadians from the impacts of climate change.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have to heat their homes. It is not a choice. Liberals are calling them polluters, while Conservatives are the only ones fighting to make life more affordable.

They say bad news comes in threes, and there is more. Next year, the Liberals will hit everyone with a new carbon tax: the Liberal fuel standard. The carbon tax already costs Canadians up to $2,300 more than they get back. The new one will be another $1,300. Struggling Canadians just cannot afford almost $4,000 in new taxes a year.

Why will the Liberals not stop their plan to triple taxes on gas, groceries and home heating?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, in the lead-up to the last election campaign, every single member opposite was in favour—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, well, you said so to Canadians.

They told Canadians they were going to put a price on carbon. Were they lying to Canadians then, or are they lying now? That is the question I have for them.

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

I would like to remind the hon. members, and I know it gets passionate sometimes, to please place their questions and comments through the Speaker. I want to assure the minister I did not do or say a thing.

The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that there is some bickering going on within the Liberal cabinet. The first public indication of this friction was in 2020, when former finance minister Bill Morneau walked away from the job because he opposed his Prime Minister's spending spree.

That friction reached a breaking point last week when the Minister of Finance publicly contradicted her boss by saying that her government would have to tighten its belt. It is clear to us that the government must stop these inflationary measures immediately.

Will the Prime Minister commit to cancelling his plan to triple the carbon tax?

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Tourism and Associate Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, being there for Canadians during the pandemic was the right thing to do.

In fact, it is because of our support for Canadians that the economy has rebounded so quickly. We are seeing the results today. In a time of global economic instability, Canada has the best growth rate among our G7 peers, with the lowest deficit among them.

We were fiscally responsible, while being there for each other.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the former finance minister left because he said that it was not working. The current Minister of Finance says one thing and the Prime Minister says another. No one in this cabinet agrees, and that is the problem.

In the meantime, when we look across the way, we see long faces. People are realizing that what the government is doing is not working.

When will the Liberals show some compassion, cancel the carbon tax and promise not to increase taxes for Quebeckers and Canadians?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind my colleague that in Quebec, we use a carbon pricing system that is different than the federal system.

In an effort to collaborate with the provinces, we have allowed those who wanted to keep their own system to do so. In Quebec, the federal carbon pricing system does not apply; the cap-and-trade system does.

I would be pleased to explain to my colleague the difference between the two.

Democratic Institutions

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to set the record straight. My oath of allegiance to the British Crown was insincere.

An oath made under duress—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

Order.

From the top, the hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, an oath made under duress when one's heart is not in it is meaningless.

My only allegiance is to the people of Quebec and the Quebec nation, not to the foreign king.

People can tell that to the Prime Minister and the King.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I have one question. If the member was insincere in that case, how many times was he insincere in the House?

However, I do want to commend my Bloc Québécois colleague for his almost unconditional love for the Constitution of Canada, his keen interest in it, and his willingness to open it and improve it. However, at the risk of disappointing him and perhaps even hurting his feelings, I have to say that that is not a priority for Quebeckers. If he talked to Quebeckers, perhaps he would learn that their priorities are the cost of living, access to housing and help for families, young people and seniors. Those are Quebeckers' priorities.

Dental Care

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has confirmed that the government's and the NDP's dental care plan discriminates against Quebeckers.

Parents of children 12 and under in Quebec will receive half as much as parents in Canada. Only 50% of Quebec children will be eligible, whereas 100% of Quebec taxpayers will contribute. That is discrimination courtesy of the NDP and the Liberal Party. However, discrimination can be addressed.

What will the government do to stop it?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, we very much appreciate this question, which allows me to speak of the importance of dental care for our children.

If Parliament agrees, of course, 500,000 children in Canada will have access to a dental benefit. For Quebec children in particular, there will be additional support for preventative dental care.

We know that prevention is key to good health, and the Canadian government will be there to help families and children across Canada, and definitely in Quebec.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will give members another reason why their dental care cheque discriminates against Quebeckers.

It is because a greater number of us have group insurance that covers dental care. In Quebec, both workers and employers make contributions to provide this service for our children. Today, the federal government is taking tax money from those same workers, who are making an effort, to write cheques to other people, who are not making that same effort.

Do the Liberals and the NDP realize that they are discriminating against thousands of Quebeckers, mainly unionized workers?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right. Many of us in Canada and Quebec know that dental care is important. That obviously includes businesses and Canadians who already have access to dental insurance. About 4% of dental care expenses are paid by the provinces and territories, and 40% of dental care is unfortunately paid by people who do not have access to dental insurance.

That is why all Canadians, including Quebeckers, will be able to benefit from the insurance program provided by the Canadian government.

Public Safety

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, new evidence has surfaced with respect to the political interference in the investigation of the mass shooting in Nova Scotia in 2020. Sadly, 22 people and an unborn child died in this incredibly tragic event. It is exceedingly clear that the former minister of public safety politically interfered in the investigation of Canada's worst mass shooting. Nova Scotians want answers, not cover-ups. Such interference may be expected in a banana republic but not in Canada.

Will the minister resign?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, President of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, as we have said a number of times in this House, the independence of police operations underpins the rule of law. This is a principle that I have not only always respected but one which I have defended vigorously for decades.

To be clear and explicit to everyone in this House, as I have been many times, I did not direct the commissioner of the RCMP in any operational matter, including in the release of information pertaining to the firearms used in this tragedy. Further, the commissioner herself has testified a number of times that there was no interference.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the former minister of public safety said yesterday that his testimony at committee was entirely accurate, but the commissioner of the RCMP not only directly contradicted his remarks at committee but also in the newly released audio recording of the commissioner during the infamous April 28, 2020, meeting where she reprimanded her deputies. It stands to reason then that the minister is implying that the commissioner lied to her deputies at the April 28 meeting, and she lied to parliamentarians at committee. If that is the case, she should resign.

Did the commissioner lie?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, President of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is free to engage in any speculation and even fabrication that she wishes, although I would suggest that she might be somewhat more circumspect when she steps out of the House and makes such spurious allegations.

Let me repeat: I did not direct the commissioner of the RCMP in any operational matter. The commissioner has confirmed that in her testimony before committee and under oath before the Mass Casualty Commission. The matter is settled.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is expecting us to believe that the commissioner acted solely on her own and that she politicized the tragic deaths of 22 Canadians. She reprimanded her deputies for failing to share the models of the firearms used in those deaths and directly tied this to the Liberals' gun control policy. Then she told her deputies that it was the minister's office that asked her to do this. We are supposed to believe that she did this all on her own.

It is ridiculous. If that was true, she would be fired, at least by a government with any common decency or integrity.

Someone is lying. Who is it?