House of Commons Hansard #21 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was economy.

Topics

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

February 1st, 2022 / noon

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Mr. Speaker, I hear some dissent on the other side.

I want to pick up on a central contradiction in the positioning of some of the opposition parties here with respect to what I would argue are worthwhile initiatives. Whether it is the suicide number referenced by the member for Abbotsford, long-term care initiatives that have been proposed or mental health initiatives that have been proposed, all of which are national in scope, the Bloc's answer to all of those questions is, “Do not mess in our jurisdiction. Give us the money and go away. We do not want national standards for anything.”

I would be curious to hear how the member responds to that central contradiction from our friends in the Bloc.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:05 p.m.

Conservative

Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB

Mr. Speaker, I could probably use a few tips from the member as I embark on this. The member has become a good friend. In the Canada-U.K. committee, he glossed over it, but under his leadership as the chair, we have actually been able to do some pretty neat things and have been able to bring a lot of us together to push for certain initiatives. He should take credit for a lot of that work.

To the member's point, I was elected provincially before I came here, and it seems more and more of that cross-jurisdictional conversation is happening, whether it is municipal, provincial or federal, about the federal government's role in housing, mental health and long-term care. There seems to be a desire from the general public to have that conversation at this national level. It is something I welcome. I think there is opportunity to show leadership, whether one is in the official opposition or in government, on a lot of those conversations. Mental health is a very key conversation, because it is not jurisdictionally bound. It is a conversation we should all be having.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:05 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is always a delight to get up and talk about a speech from my colleague, because he does such important work, whether in bereavement or in work around suicide prevention. I have joined him every year on Father's Day to talk about men's mental health and suicide among men, because men are three times more likely to die by suicide than women are. It is important that we stand united, and he has my assurance that I will absolutely be joining him this year. I do wish his daughter a happy birthday as well.

I just met with the National Collaborative for Suicide Prevention. It is still waiting for a motion introduced by my friend and colleague from Timmins—James Bay that was passed unanimously in this House and that we all supported. Here we are three years later, at the height of a mental health crisis as a result of COVID-19 and many other factors, and we still do not have a national suicide prevention action plan.

Does my colleague agree that the government needs to move quickly, that we are in a crisis when it comes to mental health and death by suicide, and that the government needs to respond or we will lose more lives? This is urgent.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:05 p.m.

Conservative

Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB

Mr. Speaker, I was hoping that the hon. member would be joining me once again. I am looking forward to getting other members to also address it in the House and I am glad he will be supporting our event again this year.

The member is right. This is something he is incredibly passionate about, and it is an honour to be able to call him a friend. We have been able to bridge a lot of those conversations, as they do not need to be partisan. We can get some really good work done, and I think we saw that during the vote for the national hotline in the motion by the member for Timmins—James Bay. Ultimately, if we can work together in Parliament on things like mental health, there is nothing we cannot do in this Parliament.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

I just want to remind everybody to keep their questions and answers concise. We only got two questions in there during that one. There were great answers as well as some great questions.

I want to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to ask questions and make comments on what is happening in this debate.

Continuing debate, the hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:05 p.m.

Conservative

Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, it is an absolute pleasure to rise today in the House of Commons representing constituents of Cumberland—Colchester.

As my colleague did, I would like to thank some people from my campaign team: George Laird, Chris Guinan, Paula Henderson, Joe Nicholson, Ray Cameron, Kevin Mantin, Nick Gear and Tom Macdonald. I also thank my family, who continue to support me through this journey, which is certainly new for me. I thank all of them and a multitude of others as well.

Cumberland—Colchester is an area of Nova Scotia nestled between, on one side, the Bay of Fundy, with the highest tides in the world, and the Northumberland Strait, with the warmest waters north of the Carolinas on the other. It is an ideal place to raise a family, invest in a business, retire or go on vacation. Realistically, anything one could possibly imagine doing can be done here in Cumberland—Colchester. We have recreational activities all year long, as well as captivating natural beauty, first-rate educational institutions, business opportunities and people with a kind and welcoming spirit, such as the Smith brothers, whom I mentioned yesterday.

With all these great things in Cumberland—Colchester, why was there almost no mention of the entire province of Nova Scotia in the Speech from the Throne? The answer is very clear: There is a failure of leadership as it pertains to the current Liberal government. Let me also be clear that the office of the Prime Minister of Canada deserves to be respected. I wonder, then, how it is possible that the Prime Minister could believe that the Liberals are only there to represent those who voted for them and are able and willing to make disparaging comments about those with differing points of view.

As we all know, we in this House are asked to debate topics that are potentially very difficult and could affect the lives of millions of people. This is meant to be done vigorously and vociferously but without vitriol. Good leadership in a democratic society should not leave citizens fearful of criticizing those in the decision-making seats. They should not be disparaged for not following the party line, and our great nation should not be divided by a leader who has been tasked to be a leader for all. Good leadership calls us to be courageous yet kind, fearless yet forthcoming, visionary yet lacking venom, and highly principled, yet without hatefulness.

Sadly, this purposeful division of Canadians has only increased over the last two years for our citizens. In our great country, this has led to blaming, malevolence, hostility and demonstrations. This is not the Canada that I imagined living in as I age.

The division has been the excuse for a government that has planned poorly during a global pandemic that has been predicted for years. In the early days of the pandemic, if not for the Conservative plea for vaccines, none would have been procured, and certainly, very sadly, two years into this pandemic, none have been produced domestically in our own very capable and innovative nation. Further, our cries for rapid testing were dismissed as unnecessary and unhelpful. Now the Liberals have tabled a bill asking for $2.5 billion to procure rapid tests. This should have been a priority 18 months ago, when Canada's Conservatives recommended this course of action. Everyone in the world knows the value of rapid testing, and the government's continued failure to produce any significant number of rapid tests domestically in a reasonable time continues to illustrate its inability to plan or to execute a plan. Also, the procurement of antivirals has been slow compared to other nations, and perhaps so slow that they will be useless against the current wave of omicron.

Let me be clear: Too slow, not enough and not at the right time should be the planning model of the current government.

Therefore, colleagues, where has this left us? We are two years into a pandemic without federal leadership and without enough tools at the right time, which leaves our provincial counterparts with only the tools of lockdowns and restrictions. We are also well aware, as my colleague mentioned earlier, that the underfunding and poor planning with regard to our health care system has left us without any surge capacity at all, with 92% of acute care beds being full the majority of the time.

Once again, this allows the Liberal government to have Canadians locked down and restricted, to have businesses fail and to have a national debt that grows by more than seventeen and a half million dollars every hour: tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock. It now tops $1.2 trillion.

Fewer dollars chasing fewer goods has led Canada to a 30-year high level of inflation and a housing bubble that has hit every corner of our nation. Last month I spoke to Alison. She volunteers at a local housing board in Cumberland. Recent estimates suggest there are 100 people without adequate housing and no prospect of finding a place any time soon. In Springhill, a town of less than 1,500 people, a one-bedroom apartment, if it were available, would be $950 a month. As we have heard again and again, Canadians are being priced out of their own lives. We begin to see a trend here with respect to planning: too slow, not enough, too late.

Over many years, the government was also warned of the terrible disaster that happened in the Sumas Prairie of British Columbia. As the government is a purported champion of climate change, Canadians expect more. That disaster was preventable and now that area of Canada will be recovering from it for years to come.

I wish I could stand here and tell members that catastrophe was unique, that it will never happen anywhere again in Canada and, if the government did know about such a looming disaster, that of course it would create a plan and do something about it. Once again, it is with a very heavy heart that I report to the House of Commons that in my own riding on the border with New Brunswick, such a disaster is ready to happen.

The land that connects the rest of Canada to Nova Scotia is called the Chignecto Isthmus. As far back as the 17th century, Acadian settlers realized that this low-lying area was subject to flooding on its flanks and, therefore, diked the area. This allowed for farming of the rich soil with protection from flooding. Indeed, there has been some maintenance that has been carried out at great expense. Unfortunately, the government has seen it appropriate to study this problem once again. For those of us who stood at the top of the dikes at high tide, it is clear this problem is real. It is an awesomely frightening experience to realize that, on an inauspicious day in December, the Bay of Fundy, with the highest tides in the world, literally laps at the top of the aforementioned dikes.

For those of us who believe in planning and the old adage of “failing to plan is planning to fail”, we see the folly of another study. We know that there is a time for action and the time is now. To add insult to injury, this new study, which arrived almost a year late, is not available for my review. It was commissioned by the federal government and the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. However, for reasons which are beyond comprehension, I cannot get a copy of this study even though, as I mentioned, this looming disaster is in my riding.

In fact, I reached out to the Minister of Transport specifically requesting a copy of the study. The response, jaw dropping and astonishing as it may be, was that I should seek a copy of this publicly and federally funded study from the Province of New Brunswick. To me and to the residents of Colchester, this is a slap in the face. Indeed, it is an affront to all Nova Scotians as the Trans-Canada Highway, CN Rail, telecommunications infrastructure and $50 million of trade pass daily through the isthmus. When the dikes are breached and there is no plan, the aftermath will be horrific and the remediation beyond expensive.

I stand here as a rookie member of Parliament, proud to represent the great people of Cumberland—Colchester, but with a very heavy heart. Canada is in a crisis of division, despair, deception, decay, decline, defamation, degeneration, disappointment, doubt and dread. I place this unbelievably unpleasant state of affairs firmly at the feet of my Liberal colleagues, who continuously fan the flames of the social media ether world for political gain, while the destruction of our country due to ineptitude continues. Who is playing the fiddle?

Canadians deserve and demand better. Conservatives stand ready to get Canada back to its rightful place nationally and internationally.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:15 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Mr. Speaker, I was listening carefully to my colleague and, in the introduction to his speech, he talked about divisions in Canada. I agree with him that in a pandemic, what we probably need to avoid most are divisions.

He referred to many things, such as the rapid tests that have been slow in coming. I have a simple question for my colleague. In the last few days, they have seemed to offer tacit support to the protesters that we see outside. The question that springs to mind is this: Does he think that horns are more effective than vaccines at getting us through the pandemic?

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the member does not know that I am a physician. I have been vaccinated three times. We know that vaccines are the most important way out of this pandemic. I am not entirely sure how horns and vaccines go together. That being said, I would suggest, as the studies would say and the Canadian Trucking Alliance would say, that almost 90% of truckers are fully vaccinated.

What we do support here, as Canada's Conservatives, is the ability for people to go out and protest in a peaceful and respectful manner, and that is important to the portrayal of democracy here in Canada.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:20 p.m.

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his focus on health in his comments on the Speech from the Throne. It is obviously not just the pandemic but other aspects of health that are really of concern to most Canadians. In my province of British Columbia, we have certainly seen 2021 become the year with the most deaths from overdose in history. We are running about 150 a month.

I wonder whether the member would express his support or opposition to the ideas of creating a safe supply of drugs and decriminalizing the personal possession of small amounts of drugs, as a way of attacking this severe opioid crisis that is affecting so many families in my province.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, what we do understand is that the focus on the pandemic has left many health questions unanswered and unaddressed in Canada, suicides being one of them. I know multiple colleagues have addressed the issue of the three-digit suicide prevention hotline. Certainly that is an exceedingly important thing.

Again, we know that when all we do is focus on one thing and use subject matter experts and we have failed leadership of government, then it makes it very difficult to attack all those other very important issues that exist for a government. Therefore, we implore the government to look at the end of this pandemic and how we are going to live in an endemic world where COVID exists.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the fact that my colleague referenced the historic floods that took place in the Fraser Valley of British Columbia. The devastation is unprecedented. It is my riding. These are my farmers, my businesses and my residents who are struggling to recover from this.

He also mentioned New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and I am glad he did because the problem of climate change-related weather events is critical. We are going to need very significant investments in the many billions of dollars across Canada to protect Canadians against these weather events.

I would invite the member to comment on the investments that will be required to be made, especially in his neck of the woods, and why it is important that we make these investments now and not wait for another disaster to happen before we take note of what is happening around us.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Abbotsford and send my condolences to his constituents. I understand the remediation that now needs to take effect.

What is, as I said, jaw-droppingly astonishing to me is that there is a study that exists in my neck of the woods that I cannot get and that the government, as I previously mentioned, tells me to get from the government of New Brunswick, even though we as a federal government funded part of that study. Why does the government continue to study things to death and have no action?

I also find it absolutely fascinating that no one from the government side has any comments or questions about this kind of action that we see all too much of: too little, too late, no action.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:20 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the debate on the Speech from the Throne so many months from when it was delivered.

I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Kitchener Centre. What a pleasure it is to work with him in the House, and I wish I could be there in person. I will be soon, I hope.

I was in the House the day the Speech from the Throne was delivered, back on November 23. It was a wonderful thing that our Governor General delivered, for the first time, a throne speech not only in our two official languages but also in Inuktitut. I had the great honour of knowing Her Excellency from many of her previous incarnations, including when we once served on the board of the International Institute for Sustainable Development together. She will be a fantastic Governor General, and I was very pleased to be here in Ottawa to hear her Speech from the Throne.

As the Governor General noted at the time, on November 23, we were still in the throws of the devastating events that hit British Columbia. The hon. member for Abbotsford was just speaking of the devastation from the flooding and the landslides in the Fraser Valley. This extended into my own riding of Saanich—Gulf Islands, but the most devastating and catastrophic impacts were clearly more in Abbotsford and up through the Fraser Valley. Every land route to reach the Lower Mainland was cut off by these extreme weather events.

When the Speech from the Throne was delivered, we were only 10 days from the end of COP26, the global climate negotiations, which were not a dismal failure but they certainly failed to succeed. COP26 did not do what was required in this desperately pressing moment.

When I read the Speech from the Throne now, as two months have passed, I am struck by how the words are wonderful, but the actions promised are inadequate to meet the spirit behind the words. I will address several elements, and my other colleague from the Green Party, the member for Kitchener Centre, will address other critical issues we are very concerned about.

I want to address the reconciliation theme within the Speech from the Throne, the vaccination questions and of course the climate crisis. In no area have the promised actions lived up to the strong words that speak to the multiple crises that face us.

Let us start with the challenge of reconciliation. Many members in this place have quite appropriately mentioned that we are still in the throes of the discovery of the missing children. These are children taken forcibly from their homes and their families over a period of more than 150 years and forced into situations that were unimaginably horrible for those little children, many of whom did not return home. We have to face this. We have to continue to support first nations communities in a national program, which was required of us by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission years ago, to find out what happened to every single indigenous child taken from their home who did not return, to find out what happened, how they died and where they are. Every family needs to get a report, and that continues to be a priority.

With the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls inquiry, we were told very clearly that many things must be done to protect indigenous women, who are at greater risk of being murdered. We have not done those things. One ties in very closely to the climate crisis and to many other aspects of the things this modern, industrialized country fails to do well, and that is ground transportation. The missing and murdered indigenous women and girls inquiry stated that people are more vulnerable when they are low income and there is no public transit where they live. Their choices are basically to hitchhike, which is not a choice. We need to restore Via Rail and bus service across this country.

We also need to ensure the settlement announced in January between the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society and the wonderful, heroic Cindy Blackstock be real, be made real and to stay on top on that. We applaud the $40 billion set aside, but as Cindy Blackstock has said, it needs to be monitored closely to really deliver.

On international vaccines, I want to again raise, as I have before in the House, that we understand now from this pandemic that we will not end it. We know what comes after omicron. Someone mentioned what comes after omicron. It is pi. That is the next letter in the Greek alphabet. That is the next variant we are going to get. We must vaccinate everyone on the planet, make this place our home as a human family and stop being a living petri dish to see how many new variants we can get. We should be vaccinating around the world, but Canada has avoided and not answered the question: Will we support South Africa and India in asking for an exemption from the patent protection of the World Trade Organization? Under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS, we can get an exemption so that vaccines are more available around the world.

Turning to climate, one would think that a person in the Green Party could not be unhappy with a Speech from the Throne that says, “Our Earth is in danger” and “This is the moment for bolder climate action.” Again, they are great words, but in the pages devoted to talking about the climate crisis, there is no mention of what our Paris commitment is, nor that we should hold global average temperature as far below 2°C as possible and attempt to hold to 1.5°C.

These numbers in themselves I think cause people's eyes to glaze over: 1.5°C does not feel like a real number; it sounds small. I want to remind members that in this last year, nearly 600 British Columbians died, according to the science, in the heat dome in four days. My own stepdaughter nearly died and she is in her early thirties. She nearly died because the temperature in Ashcroft hit 50°C. These are killer extreme weather events.

As I said, 600 people died in British Columbia in four days. This was an extreme event, and the same day that the temperature kept going higher and higher, in Lytton the town centre virtually burnt to the ground in minutes. The fire truck did not even get out of the fire station. That town, by the way, has still not been helped and is still not being rebuilt. We know that wildfires have spread over hundreds of thousands of hectares in British Columbia. Then, of course, in November we had atmospheric rivers that knocked out much of our infrastructure, again killing people and hundreds of thousands of livestock and animals. The heat dome in late June and early July was estimated to have killed one billion sea creatures along our shorelines.

These events happened at a 1.1°C global average temperature above what it was before the industrial revolution, so 1.5°C is not some safe place that only dreamers can hope we hold to. It is where we need to be to hope human civilization hangs on. We are on track after COP26 to be much closer to 3°C than 1.5°C. Canada's target remains the weakest in the industrialized world, and we seem to have substituted what we need to do and what we must do to ensure our children have a livable world, which is 1.5°C to stay alive, with net zero by 2050. That creates the false impression that getting to net zero by 2050 holds to 1.5°C. It does not. It only holds to 1.5°C if the pathway to net zero by 2050 goes through 2030 with emission cuts that go down dramatically. They must go down. Canada's target range of a 40% to 45% cut is completely inadequate to meet the global demands on us to pull our fair share of the weight to reduce emissions to hold to a livable planet.

Likewise, in the Speech from the Throne, there is no mention of banning the export of thermal coal. There is no mention of the just transition act. There is no mention of the right to a healthy environment, nor of bringing back the Canadian Environmental Protection Act amendments that were in Bill C-28, which died on the Order Paper when the unnecessary election was called.

With the 30 seconds I have remaining, I say to all members in this place that I cannot vote for the Speech from the Throne for all of its wonderful words if the future of my grandchildren is not protected. We have to say it loudly. We have to be honest. We have to be clear. Maybe we have to tell everyone to just look up because we do not have much time. We must ensure the current government takes heroic action to save this planet and all humanity.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, I would be interested in the member's thoughts with respect to the greener homes program, an initiative allowing residents in her community, in mine and throughout Canada to apply for a grant of up to $5,000 to make their homes more energy efficient. One would argue it is good for the environment and good for job creation and improving our housing stock. I would ask her to share her thoughts on that specific program.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I cheered for that program when it was first announced by Stéphane Dion, the former environment minister, in 2005. Former finance minister Ralph Goodale had it in his budget. It is great to see it back and it is great to see it expanded to include such things as putting on solar panels, but it is far too small. We really need to be restoring housing stock and municipal, institutional and commercial buildings as well. Every building in this country needs a retrofit and needs it as fast as possible, so the program needs to be expanded dramatically.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her continued passion on climate change.

One of the things I have noticed, though, is that—

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

On a point of order, the hon. member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Point of order, Mr. Speaker. With all due respect, it seems to me that there is an imbalance in the way you are recognizing members in the House versus those who are participating virtually.

I have raised my hand several times now, and I do not know if we are in your blind spot or what, but I would like to be treated fairly. All MPs are equal. Nobody wants this situation. We would all like to be there in person, but now other parties are getting an advantage because they have far more members present in person than we do.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

I thank the hon. member for his intervention, and I can assure him that I do see all the members. I am trying my best to involve all members who are online or here in the House, and to ensure that all political parties are well represented.

Some of the Bloc Québécois members in the House sometimes get up at the same time, so I do my best. The member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles will be next in line to ask a question.

The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, I thank the member for her passion. She is calling for us to accelerate our efforts to address climate change, but I would say that the government has not even met its existing 2030 targets. It is not on track. I do not know how many of the billions of trees it has started to plant, but it seems there is nothing but rhetoric coming from the other side. Would the member agree?

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, this is a tough one. I cannot agree that the government has done nothing. It is putting in place programs and measures that at least should get the direction right. We often say, and this is true, that the Government of Canada, regardless of which political party is in power, has never hit a target it set. However, it is worse than that: It has never gotten the direction right. So far, no matter how many commitments are made to reduce emissions, they continue to go up.

I think we are going to begin to see emissions coming down, but that is not nearly good enough because the measure of our success is not whether we have fooled enough people to win another election. The measure of our success is whether we have met what the science demands of us to hold within a carbon budget. The window is rapidly closing on holding on to a livable world, and that is why I will give the government credit for doing something. However, I cannot claim it is doing nearly enough.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to listen to the Green Party member talk about climate change and other files, and climate change is what her speech was mainly about.

I know she is a compassionate and intelligent woman, and I would like to hear what she thinks about increasing health transfers so that they cover 35% of expenditures. All of the provinces in this country are calling for that. They need that increase in order to cope with the current situation. Along with the environment, health is at the top of the agenda.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:40 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Bloc Québécois member for his kind and generous words and for his question.

I think we also need to talk about the health threats resulting from climate change. I mentioned the people who died as a result of the heat waves. I agree with the Bloc Québécois that the federal government and the provinces need to collaborate more to protect our public health care systems.

Our provincial public health care systems have been under increasing stress since the pandemic began two years ago, and the crisis continues to grow.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:40 p.m.

Green

Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to speak with respect to some reflections on the Speech from the Throne. I would like to focus on our priorities where there is the opportunity to work constructively with the governing party and, in fact, with all parliamentarians to make progress. These are the priorities the government has put forward in the Speech from the Throne and those I have heard about time and time again from folks in my community in Kitchener.

I would like to start with housing. In the Speech from the Throne, the governing party speaks about being committed to working with partners to get real results. I want to start with what that looks like in my community.

In the last year, we did a study on the number of unsheltered folks, which has now risen to over 1,000 people living rough and unsheltered, which is three times as many as in the last point-in-time count study.

When we look at those who are hoping to purchase a home, we find that back in 2005, the cost of purchasing a home in Kitchener was three times higher than the median annual income. In 2021, that rose to 8.6 times higher.

The possibility of purchasing a home, and I know this is the case for so many across the country, is increasingly becoming completely out of reach. For those on the wait-list for affordable dignified housing, that wait-list is now upward of almost eight years. Can members imagine waiting eight years to get access to housing?

I spoke with a woman this past summer who said she was lucky to get access to affordable housing, but there is mould in her unit, and she knows her landlord has no incentive to do anything about it. We need to be addressing not just the affordability but also the quality of dignified housing.

Homes should be for people to live in, as opposed to commodities for investors to trade. To do that, we will need to address the rules of the game. For example, we need to get back to investing in non-market, subsidized, public and co-op housing. Back in the early eighties, for example, 8% of new rental units constructed were co-op housing. I lived in a co-op myself over many years and had the experience of what quality and dignified housing co-ops can be. If we look at 2020, we see that fewer than 1% of rental units constructed were co-op housing.

We could look at taxation. For example, there are investors who are merely purchasing a property to speculate and take many years to eventually flip a home. We could put in place a graduated tax on those house flippers and use the revenue to reinvest in more affordable housing. We could be looking at what BMO has also called for, which is putting an end to the blind bidding process.

I look forward to working with the government to make progress, meaningful progress, on addressing the cost of housing.

In the throne speech, there was also talk of addressing the cost of living, which made reference to the Canada child benefit and to addressing child care. While I celebrate those initiatives, we also need to recognize a group of Canadians who are disproportionately living in poverty. They are Canadians living with disabilities.

In fact, the word “disability” was not in the throne speech once at all. We know the governing party had previously introduced legislation and introduced the Canada disability benefit. This benefit would uplift up to 1.5 million Canadians who are currently living in poverty. We know Canadians across the country support it, as 89% of Canadians already support the Canada disability benefit.

Back in Kitchener, for folks with disabilities who have access to the Ontario disability support program, the shelter allowance they are receiving is $497 a month. How many apartments could someone afford in Kitchener on $497 a month? The answer is none whatsoever. This is why we need to be focused on a moral imperative to lift up Canadians living with disabilities and ensure they have access to a dignified life across the country.

With respect to mental health in the throne speech, there is talk of focusing on mental health in the same way we focus on physical well-being because they are inseparable.

I could not agree more. We are in the midst of a shadow pandemic with respect to mental health and that is why we need to see increased commitments to mental health funding while recognizing the overdose crisis we are also in the midst of as a result of a poisoned drug supply.

In Kitchener, we had 99 preventable deaths across the Waterloo region last year alone, which is the second-highest number we have had. There are groups, including the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, who are making clear calls for decriminalizing simple possession while also working towards a safer supply. These are the policies that were not mentioned in the throne speech that I would encourage the governing party to consider, recognizing the shared interest in making progress on mental health and addictions, and saving lives across the country.

This brings me to the final point. To echo comments heard earlier from the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands with respect to addressing the climate crisis, we have to simply follow the science. We are past the time for talking about whether one plan is better than another party's plan. The fact is that does not matter. All that matters is whether we choose to hold on to the possibility of keeping within the maximum of a 1.5°C increase in global temperatures.

This is true for people across my community, young and old, who are together saying that enough is enough. We have a moral imperative to ensure we provide a safe climate future for our kids, our nieces, our nephews and our grandkids.

In the words of Greta Thunberg, “Either we do that or we don’t.... Either we prevent 1.5 degree of warming or we don’t.... Either we choose to go on as a civilisation or we don’t.”

We have that opportunity today. We could be saying that maybe this is not the right time to be investing $18 billion in subsidies to fossil fuels or purchasing and expanding a pipeline to further export more emissions around the world. Instead, we could be using those same funds, such as the funds that were announced just last month for an emissions reduction fund that actually increased oil production. We could also use this new tax credit for carbon capture and storage.

Each of these is just another subsidy to fossil fuel interests that we could be repurposing to make the choice to invest in a just transition for workers on the front lines. We could be using these, in respect to comments earlier, to build on the Canada green homes grant. The $5,000 a month is a great start. Let us retrofit every building in the country and create millions of jobs as we do it.

Let us take the kind of action we all know is required if we are going to be honest about the science and follow through. My aspiration is to continue to work with all parliamentarians in this place and recognize that we have that shared interest in listening to the folks in our communities who are calling out to rise past the partisanship and whatever one party has called for versus another, and simply be honest about what scientists, young people and indigenous leaders have been calling out for. Whether that relates to the cost of housing, the mental health crisis, lifting folks out of poverty or addressing the climate crisis, we have to not just do some good, but go at the pace scientists tell us is required.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on something my colleague talked about at the beginning of his speech, namely social housing. There is a desperate shortage of housing that is not only affordable, but also economically viable for most families.

We talk about affordability meaning 10% less. I am not sure whether it is the same in his riding as it is in mine, but corporations, sometimes foreign, are building condos that go for $2,500 a month for a two-bedroom unit. Even with an affordability framework and 10% off, is that viable? The answer is no.

What solutions would my colleague propose to ensure that our fellow citizens have access to sustainable and truly affordable housing?