Debates of Oct. 3rd, 2022

Foreign Affairs and International Development

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, the annexation of Crimea and the last four elections, all of which were illegal, are causing other countries, other areas surrounding Russia and other places that also once “belonged” to the U.S.S.R. to fear the worst.

What is being done and what should be done to be more proactive and prevent these areas from also falling to Russian annexation?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, I agree with the member that more needs to be done, especially on the diplomatic front. I am always worried about some of those eastern European countries, former members of the Soviet Union, that are not members of NATO. They do not have the luxury of an attack on one being an attack on all. Article 5 does not apply to places such as Moldova and Georgia. I have already seen nefarious actions from Russian players, whether from the state itself or individuals who continue to undermine their own democracies and economies.

We need to continue to stand with those countries and find ways to strengthen them, knowing that right now the west is spread pretty thin in trying to deal with the Russian threat as well as what is going on in the South China Sea. We will have to continue to work collaboratively to find ways to support all member countries. Right now, the best thing we can do is defeat Russia in Ukraine. Then it would not be that big of a threat to all the rest of the nations in the region.

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

Madam Speaker, this is my first opportunity to enter into this debate having listened to it all afternoon. I want to thank the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman and many members of this place, such as the member for Wellington—Halton Hills and the member for Etobicoke North. We heard many strong denunciations. The member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount spoke too. We, here, are quite united in condemning what Putin has done.

There seems to be some uncertainty and cautions are being expressed about who committed the sabotage under the Baltic Sea in three separate places of the Nord Stream pipeline, which led to methane releases.

Does the hon. member have any conclusive areas to point us to in explaining that sabotage?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Madam Speaker, there is no evidence yet to determine who did it. There are only a few countries that have the capabilities to fire upon a pipeline that deep in the sea. As the member said, it was in three places.

It would not surprise me if it was a false flag operation done by Russia itself. It has already rejected the turbines from Canada. They were erroneously provided back to Gazprom and have been able to pump more natural gas from Russia into Germany and the rest of Europe. I would not be surprised if Vladimir Putin, who is famous for doing false flag operations, actually orchestrated this one as well.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Madam Speaker, I will begin my remarks with a message for Vladimir Putin. It is the same message that the Right Hon. Stephen Harper delivered when he met with Mr. Putin at the G20 in November 2004, following the annexation of Crimea. The message is this: “You need to get out of Ukraine.”

At the time, Vladimir Putin denied the presence of Russia in Crimea. Now, almost eight years later, there certainly can be no denial. Canada did not buy his lies then, and in the wake of sham referendums last week, we do not buy them now.

I want to thank the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development for their fourth report. It is a brief report but carries great significance. It reads as follows:

That the committee condemns any attempts to hold referendums in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine; any such referendums have no legitimacy, the committee maintains its belief that Ukrainian national boundaries recognized at the time of the Budapest Memorandum remain Ukraine’s national boundaries today, and the committee report this motion to the House.

I fully endorse the report from the committee and call upon every member of the House to do the same. We must send a strong and clear message from the Canadian House of Commons that Russian aggression in Ukraine is not acceptable. We must be unified in condemning the sham referendums held by Russia in the illegally occupied regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

For our part, Conservatives will not now nor ever recognize these regions as Russian territory. Rather, these referendums have only served to redouble our commitment to Ukraine sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. It should be noted that these referendums took place amid a collapsing western front as Ukrainians continue the brave defence of their homeland once again.

However, the Russians are doubling down and are sticking to their dangerous military doctrine, namely the doctrine to escalate to de-escalate. The Russians have already raised the stakes by threatening the use of nuclear weapons should they be attacked in these occupied regions. These threats are not acceptable. The world has known the horrors of nuclear warfare and must not be subjected to it ever again. NATO has indicated that conventional forces will be used in response to such an attack in Ukraine.

The Putin regime is even targeting its own civilians by sharpening repression at home, including conscription of minority communities. This sounds a lot like actions I learned about in Soviet studies courses during my undergraduate time. This territorial grab harkens back to, pick one, the Soviet days or the Russian imperial days.

I have already been banned from Russia, something I wear as a badge of honour, so I will speak freely. The destruction that Vladimir Putin has inflicted upon Ukraine is nothing short of genocide. The horrific scenes of what Russia has left behind as Ukraine forces advance are nothing short of chilling.

I recall bringing my father-in-law, a man of Ukrainian descent, to the Human Rights Museum in Winnipeg. I vividly remember the look on his face when he saw the statue of the starving child, representing the millions who starved because of Joseph Stalin, the dictator who engineered a food shortage in Soviet Ukraine in the 1930s. His goal, like Vladimir Putin's, was to destroy Ukrainian ambitions for independence and ensure Ukrainian subservience. As a result, millions of Ukrainians experienced desperate hunger and died. Today we are witnessing the same aggression we saw from Stalin during the Holodomor, and it must be blunted.

Russia intends on using the so-called referendum results as justification for further aggression. They would have the world believe that they are defending what is theirs. However, Russia is the aggressor; Ukraine is the defender.

Canada will always stand against dictatorial aggressors and stand with those defending themselves. Canada must do more to support Ukraine. In the short term, we must ensure that Ukraine is well armed and has the weapons it needs to defend itself. President Zelenskyy has asked for more arms, and Canada should be a reliable partner.

We need to help Europe isolate Russia by supplying them with Canadian energy. We also need to remove our own domestic barriers to help Europe become energy independent from Russia. We should replace Russian oil and gas with a Canadian product that is produced with the highest environmental standards and respect for human rights.

The Prime Minister violated his own sanctions against Putin by sending back a turbine so that the Russians could continue to pump gas into Germany, so while the Liberals are against pipelines in Canada, they are in favour of maintaining the turbines for Russian pipelines that fund Putin's war. Meanwhile, we have 1,300 trillion cubic feet of natural gas that could be used to free Europe from its dependency on Putin. Plus, we have the ability to produce it cleaner than anywhere else in the world. We should use our resources to help our security partners in Europe.

We should also ensure that our own national security is fortified. Russia's extraterritorial target right now is Ukraine. What will Canada do when Russian turns its sights even further onto our Arctic and puts its 40 polar icebreakers against our one? Russia is aware that Canada has let its northern warning systems lapse, and NORAD modernization has to be elevated to urgent status, with the funds necessary to combat and detect modern warfare tactics and equipment.

Canada has chronically underfunded NATO, something that should be corrected immediately. We are well below the 2% commitment made years ago, and repeated currently. This is another case of too much talk and not enough action. European countries such as Germany, Sweden and Finland have moved swiftly to deal with present threats, and Canada needs to do likewise. We need to do likewise now.

Only now that Ukraine, especially its eastern oblasts, and parts of Europe are under threat is Canada starting to take its funding commitments seriously. These funding commitments mean better military equipment for our armed forces and mean helping with our flailing recruitment and retention. These funding commitments mean that Canada can continue to be counted on for the security of our own citizens as well as internationally. Right now, our allies are questioning our commitments and abilities. The Liberal government must get to work on these priorities right away. The path to greater support is clear. The only thing lacking is willingness.

Although the government's foreign affairs minister has stated that Canada is just a middle power that is good at “convening”, Canadians know that we are also proud and fierce fighters, trainers and peacekeepers. We have shown our mettle internationally since Confederation, particularly during the last century when we were called up to go above and beyond. Today, many Ukrainians fighting for their country and their families credit the Canadian Armed Forces for the calibre of critical military training they learned under Operation Unifier.

History will tell a very different story about Vladimir Putin than the one he tells himself. His legacy is one of lies, destruction, genocide and suffering. The world is uniting against him in a way not seen in a generation, demanding that he must withdraw from Ukraine and pay for his crimes. In the meantime, the House will condemn the sham referendums in Ukraine and give voice to those suffering under Putin's aggression.

Slava Ukraini.

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

Madam Speaker, I have been listening very closely to the debate today on this critically important issue of the concurrence motion coming from the standing committee. To be very clear, the Government of Canada has been, in every way, very supportive in working with our allied countries and doing whatever we can to support Ukraine during these very difficult and trying times.

I do not want to underestimate the importance of what we are witnessing overseas. It is very horrific. Ukraine is really paying a price. However, it is demonstrating to the world that through its heroes, it has been able to fight back against Russia. In good part, providing Canadian resources, financial and others, through programs such as Operation Unifier has made a difference. Other allied countries have done likewise, particularly the United States.

Would the hon. member not agree that the coalition, the solidarity for Ukraine around the world and the support for our Ukrainian heroes fighting in the war have ultimately turned it around so that there is hope we will, in fact, be able to overcome it and that it is only a question of time?

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Madam Speaker, I absolutely agree that it is the coalition of the willing coming together and standing united against Russia's aggression that is helping Ukraine do what it is doing, but we can never underscore enough the bravery, the commitment and the heart of the Ukrainian people who are fighting, as I said, for their homeland and their families. We should be doing whatever we possibly can.

My colleague mentioned more medical equipment and facilities. There is more that we can do. When I met with Ukrainian members of Parliament, they know what we can do and they are asking us to do even more.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. This debate is important because of the risk this situation involves. I will make three comments. My colleague can respond to any of them.

The current threat is not a reason to abandon the fight against climate change. Those are not my words but the words of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

Then my colleague talked about her experience in her Soviet studies courses. When I was younger, I studied the Chernobyl accident and its effects. The risks of the nuclear threat are not to be trifled with.

Finally, I will conclude by reminding her of the importance of the coalition, as well as the importance of tackling disinformation, the kind of rhetoric that circulates, particularly in Russia, against the west. This kind of rhetoric is dangerous. As a former journalism student, I am particularly concerned about what is coming out in the media and the messaging coming from President Putin.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Madam Speaker, we have lots of urgent issues facing our world and what we are talking about tonight is the threat of Russia against Ukraine, the genocide that is happening there, the cruelty and aggression that Russia has adopted. For Ukrainian people, it is about what they need right now. They need to win this war. They cannot lose this war for themselves or for all western democracies. They must win it, and we must do everything we can to make sure that happens.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, as many Ukrainians are fleeing this Russian war and entering Canada, so many in my riding of Nanaimo—Ladysmith are welcoming Ukrainians with open arms. Central Vancouver Island Multicultural Society is one such organization that is offering so many supports for those entering Canada.

I am wondering if the member could share her thoughts on the importance of wraparound services and supports for Ukrainians entering Canada, so that they not only have barrier-free access to Canada for safety but also have the supports they need once they are here.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Madam Speaker, I agree that we should be doing everything we can to support Ukrainians who have come to Canada. There are many of them, but there could be more. Most of them do not want to stay in Canada, as much as they feel welcome here. They want to go home and have a peaceful country to rebuild and live in again.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to join in this debate today to condemn the referendums that have been held in the occupied territories of Ukraine.

One of the things I want to get on the record is about natural gas or, as we call it, the “freedom energy” that Canada can provide to the world. We have seen over the years how the Liberal government has stood in the way of the production of Canadian natural resources and the export of natural gas around the world, the export of our freedom energy, as it were. Now we see the impacts of that when it comes to Europe, with its dependence on Russian gas and its somewhat hampered ability to provide aid to Ukraine because the Russians hold them ransom with natural gas.

Also, there is the fact that the sale of natural gas funds the war. The sale of natural gas funds the Russian war machine. As Russian energy is sold around the world, that money comes back to Russia and that is what is allowing the Russians to maintain their war against Ukraine. That is what I wanted to get on the record here today: the fact that Russia is the aggressor in this instance and that Russia needs revenues in order to be able to maintain this war.

I come from a part of the country that is well endowed with natural gas. I remember that before I was elected, in 2013 or 2014, Canada was talking about LNG. There was big support for LNG on both ends of the country. We could have been a first mover in that, and we could have led the world in that technology. We would have been able to provide both Europe and Asia with LNG. Unfortunately, due to government inaction, we have been unable to approve these projects and we have been unable to provide the world with the freedom energy that comes from the promised land, as I like to call it, in northern Alberta.

Here we are today. We heard from the member for Etobicoke Centre about how Ukrainians feed 400 million people in the world, and that food is not getting to the rest of the world at this time. Canada has the opportunity to step up and provide more food to the world, but at the very time when the world is looking for more food, the Liberal government is talking about reducing the use of fertilizer in this country. Do members know what happens when we reduce the use of fertilizer? We lose food production.

The use of fertilizer multiplies our food production by a factor of about three, so if we took away all the fertilizer we use, we would only get a third of the food production in this country. A warning to the world, in terms of the use of fertilizer, is the country of Sri Lanka. It has abolished the use of fertilizer and has basically destroyed its economy and starved its own people, so I would recommend that Canada does not go down that way.

We can feed the world, and we can provide it with the freedom energy it needs.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time and put forthwith the question on the motion now before the House.

The question is on the motion.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division, or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Pursuant to an order made on Thursday, June 23, the division stands deferred until Tuesday, October 4, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

The House will now resume with the remaining business under Routine Proceedings.

Menstrual Products

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to present two petitions.

The first petition is e-3932, which calls on the government to address period poverty and to address the barriers vulnerable people in Canada have in accessing menstrual necessities and products. This petition calls for funding to be provided to provinces to administer free access to menstrual necessities and to ensure the provinces provide equal and accessible services for menstrual necessities.

I am proud to table this petition in the House.

Guaranteed Livable Income

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, the second petition is on a guaranteed livable income.

This petition, e-3987, calls for the federal government to begin negotiations with the Government of P.E.I. to develop and implement a guaranteed livable income in P.E.I. and ensure that all federal transfers that support current provincially funded services and programs remain in place during these negotiations.

I am proud to table it in the House.

Air Transportation

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have not had a chance to table this petition since last spring when constituents in my riding of Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon were pushing the government in good faith to amend its air transport agreement with the Government of India to allow for direct flights from British Columbia to Amritsar in the Punjab. The petitioners are requesting this direct flight because it makes economic and cultural sense, and people want to have more flight options.

I would encourage government members to look very closely at this petition. The request might just fit into its new India strategy moving forward.

Firearms

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have a number of petitions to present today.

The first petition I am rising to present is a petition that proposes to support the health and safety of Canadian firearms owners.

The petitioners recognize the importance of owning firearms and are concerned about the impacts of hearing loss caused by the noise level of firearms and the need for noise reduction. These petitioners acknowledge that sound moderators are the only universally accepted, recognized health and safety device, but they are criminally prohibited in Canada. Moreover, the majority of G7 countries have recognized the health and safety benefits of sound moderators, allowing them for hunting, sports shooting and reducing noise pollution.

The petitioners are calling on the government to allow firearms owners the option to purchase and use sound moderators for all legal and sports shooting activities.

Charitable Organizations

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, the second petition I have to present comes from Canadians across the country who are concerned about the Liberal Party's platform in 2021 that promised to deny charitable status to organizations that disagree with the Liberal Party on its views around abortion. The petitioners are concerned that this would jeopardize the charitable status of hospitals, houses of worship, schools, homeless shelters and other charitable organizations that do not agree with the Liberal Party on this matter.

Many Canadians depend on the benefits that these charities provide, and the government has previously used a values test to discriminate against applicants of the Canada summer jobs program. As such, these people are calling on the Government of Canada to protect and preserve the application of charitable status rules free from discrimination and without imposing another values test on charitable status. They also ask for an affirmation of the Canadian rights to freedom of expression.

Northern Residents Tax Deduction

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, the third petition comes from folks who live in the towns of Fox Creek and Swan Hills, which are rural and remote communities in northern Alberta.

The petitioners are calling for an extension of the intermediate prescribed zone for the northern living allowance. Currently, it is an arbitrary line that runs across northern Alberta, and neither Fox Creek nor Swan Hills fall into this area. The petitioners are calling on the government to recognize that they live in remote communities and for the residents of these two communities to be allowed to claim the residency for the intermediate area.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Housing

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, at the beginning of May I had the opportunity to ask the Minister of Housing what the government was planning to do about the housing crisis, which has only worsened since the spring.

It is now October, and we still have yet to hear of any concrete plans about what the government is doing or when it will present real results to British Columbians and all Canadians who are struggling with critical housing needs.

According to the Fraser Valley Current, the city of Abbotsford alone is seeing a drastic decline in the number of new homes being constructed. In the last 12 months, just 670 new homes have begun construction, compared to 1,162 in the previous year. Multi-family projects, I might add, are experiencing the biggest decline.

A simple fact is that available housing supply is not meeting the needs of our communities. In fact, CMHC reports that in the month of August 2022, housing starts for the entire province of British Columbia were a meagre 3,817. On top of that, the average price for a home is still over $900,000, at $918,378. Young families simply cannot afford to live in my province right now.

In addition, across Canada, year over year, one-bedroom apartment rents were up by double-digit amounts in August in over half the markets tracked by rentals.ca. In Vancouver, it is not uncommon to see a one-bedroom or studio apartment going for more than $2,000 a month. It is just unattainable for so many people.

As we stand here in the House of Commons today, it was just over a year ago that we had a federal election, when all the respective parties put forward their plans on housing. Let us look back at some of the things the Liberal government said it would do.

The Liberals' first promise was to reduce monthly mortgage payments when people needed it the most. I cannot think of a time in the history of Canada, except for maybe the late 70s and early 80s, when mortgage payments for many people on a variable rate mortgage have increased as much as they have in the last few months.

This summer I was with a family friend who has a variable rate mortgage. She is a single mother and she said she could not take much more if her mortgage payment went up another $500 or $600, which it has. She said that the Bank of Canada said we were not going to see interest rate hikes like we have seen, and wanted to know why the Bank of Canada and the Government of Canada told her that the low interest rates were going to stay where they were. She had bought a variable rate mortgage with that information in mind, and she had been failed.

One of the second promises the Liberals made was that they were going to help renters become owners. Inflation is crippling people. I filled up my car with gas last night before driving to the airport, and I paid $2.23 a litre. In many parts of metro Vancouver, it is 10¢ to 15¢ higher than that right now. The cost of groceries, home heating, Fortis and Telus bills, everything continues to go up. The government's promise to help renters become owners has failed, because they cannot save any money. It is so hard.

A third promise the Liberals made last year was to end chronic homelessness or reduce it by 50% by 2027. They have failed on that, too.

Finally, there was the housing accelerator fund. What are the Liberals doing to help communities actually reduce red tape?

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Diversity and Inclusion (Housing)]

Madam Speaker, the government recognizes the pressures faced by Canadians with the current housing market. We recognize that home ownership is out of reach for far too many Canadians. That is why we made housing a cornerstone of our last budget. The government presented the most ambitious plan that Canada has ever had to increase the supply of housing and make it more accessible for everyone in the country.

My colleague dismisses this government's past and present housing efforts, but his constituents may not. Twenty families from the Cook's Ferry Indian Band and the Leq'á:mel and Splatsin First Nations have housing as a result of the rapid housing initiative, and some 1,000 other units and beds have become available in this riding alone with federal funding. These success stories are happening in ridings across the country.

This government is proud of the efforts it has made to date and we are committed to doing even more. Our plan includes many provisions that will help people who are trying to get into the housing market for the first time. These provisions include the extension and expansion of the first-time home buyer incentive.

First-time homebuyers can also take advantage of a new tax-free savings account. This homebuyer incentive will help them save up to $40,000 for the purchase of their first home. We have also doubled the first-time homebuyers' tax credit to $10,000, providing up to $1,500 in direct support to homebuyers.

One of the drivers of rising house prices is simply that supply is not keeping pace with demand. That is why we have increased funding in our budget to double residential construction over the next decade. To that end, we will invest $4 billion to create a new fund to accelerate housing construction with the goal of building 100,000 net new units within five years. This fund and other related measures will help provinces, territories and municipalities build more housing faster.

We will also accelerate the construction of housing by providing $2.9 billion in funding through the national housing co-investment fund. This will enable us to support the creation of up to 4,300 units and facilitate the repair of up to 17,800 units for the people who need them most in this country.

Our government made housing a priority. As soon as we took office, we realized the extent of the impending crisis. During this time, we have brought in a wide range of strategic measures, including the first-ever national housing strategy.

These strategies include the first-time homebuyer incentive as well as other successful programs, such as the rapid housing initiative. Our budget provides $1.5 billion over two years to extend this very successful program, which constantly exceeded its affordable housing construction targets.

Far too many people in this country struggle to find safe and affordable housing. Although the government has already taken excellent measures that we can describe as historic to help these people, we know that we still have a lot of work to do. I would invite my colleague and all opposition members to support the measures we will be presenting over the coming weeks and months.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, the Government of Canada needs to separate its rhetoric from reality when it comes to housing. We do not want to hear about announcements or committed funds.

I am going to give the parliamentary secretary an opportunity to answer a straightforward question tonight. She talked about the housing accelerator fund that plans on creating 100,000 net new homes by fiscal year 2024-25 by changing the systems that are preventing more housing from being built. How many homes have been built under that program?