Debates of Feb. 1st, 2022

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, it is a real pleasure to see my colleague from Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon again, albeit virtually. I certainly enjoyed working with him on the human resources committee, and for a member of Parliament from British Columbia to be so knowledgeable about the situation on Prince Edward Island is appreciated.

To answer my hon. colleague, there is much more to do. Of that there is no doubt. There is a dramatic increase in housing prices right across the country, and Prince Edward Island has not been immune to those increases.

We have a bit of a perfect storm here in P.E.I. We have done a great job of attracting and retaining immigrants, and before COVID our economy was absolutely booming, but we have a situation here of 1,000 unfilled construction jobs. That is a major bottleneck, so the member makes a fair point. There is much more to do, and in one sense, we have actually become victims of our own success. However, I certainly appreciate the question from him and the knowledge displayed in the way he posed it.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague on his speech.

He spoke a lot about social housing and the major housing crisis. We know significant investments are needed. However, there are delicate jurisdictional issues at play in these areas.

Would my colleague agree with the idea of transferring a large amount of money to the provinces and Quebec so that they can quickly start building a significant number of social housing units?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

I believe that our government has done a great job implementing the national housing strategy. There are some aspects in this strategy, no doubt, and I would be happy to support any measure that will help speed up the solutions to the problems in this country, including making transfers to the provinces.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his speech. One of the issues that I am hearing in Nanaimo—Ladysmith that I did not hear in the member's speech surrounds the inaction on the part of our current government.

Each year, unfortunately, despite flooding, droughts and a quickly approaching deadline to lower greenhouse gas emissions, Canada is giving 14 times more money to big polluters in oil and gas. Is the member opposite ready to support a real transition to address the climate emergency?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, yes.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Drummond.

Many people have said that the throne speech was a compilation of platitudes, an short collection of empty words designed to appeal to hardcore Liberal converts, the ones who will get behind anything. It has been said that say the throne speech contains commitments, promises. Let us be clear. The word “promise” comes from Latin. The prefix “pro-” means “forward” and the verb “mittere” means “send forward”. I do not think that is the case here.

If we really think about it, the throne speech only contains three things: first, old news; second, silences; and third, repetitions.

With respect to the “old news”, the throne speech confirms that the Liberal government plans to continue interfering with areas under provincial jurisdiction, such as housing, police reform, mental health, natural resource management, and the prevention of violence against women.

Now, let us talk about the “silences”. There is a deafening silence when it comes to health transfers, the transition to green finance, EI reform, seniors, agriculture, and many other issues.

Now to the third point, the “repetitions”: unacceptable immigration delays, access to clean drinking water in indigenous communities, international aid, making web giants pay their fair share, and so on. I could go on because the list of recycled, unkept promises is infinite, but life is short, so I will stop there.

The throne speech talks about bilingualism and foreign policy. Since I have just 10 minutes, I am going to talk about two issues, both of which qualify as “old news” or “repetitions”: the French language, and the absence of a clear foreign policy direction.

With respect to the French language, the throne speech is a step backward. It creates the illusion of aspiring to equality for English and French, but all it really offers in return is institutional bilingualism. The proposed means are not commensurate with the stated ends. French and English can never be of equal importance. A mere eight million francophones are up against 400 million anglophones.

When it comes to the preservation of French, real equality for the two languages is just wishful thinking. It will take asymmetrical measures to restore equity. I want to make it clear that “equity” is not the same thing as “equality”. Equality means “everyone is the same” or “the same thing for everyone”, whereas equity means everyone gets their due. Equity means adjusting symmetry so that both languages can take on their rightful importance. That is not going to happen overnight.

As the Bloc Québécois critic for the international francophonie, I can assure my colleagues that French and the francophonie are doing well around the world. It is projected that French will be spoken by 700 million people around the world by 2050. If the Liberal government's current momentum is any indication, it will not have much to do with it.

In order to move things forward, I have proposed that the Jeux de la francophonie be held in my riding of Trois‑Rivières. The games will bring delegations from 50 participating countries and nearly 5,000 participants and supporters to Trois‑Rivières. These people will do more for the French language during the games than the half measures proposed in the throne speech.

Perhaps the Prime Minister has forgotten, but French is an identity, a culture, a way of life and a way of seeing things. This way of seeing things is an asset, and we must not squander it.

It would be better to protect the French language than to repeat yet another intention. Do my colleagues know what an intention is? It means being about to do something, but not having done it yet. Rather than intentions, we would like results. If the Liberal government is unable to take real action on the French language, it should let Quebec do it for itself, by not opposing its initiatives.

Next, I want to talk about Canada's foreign policy or, I should say, its lack of foreign policy. When it comes to diplomacy and global affairs, time and consistency are key to building lasting ties that allow us to expand our influence and wield that soft power on the international stage. I get nostalgic thinking back to a time when Canada was seen as a key player, a country that would be called upon to settle disputes or provide unique perspectives or solutions. I remember when Canada had a foreign policy.

I will remind members of the Quebec Conference in 1943. That was a long time ago, but the conference brought together Churchill, President Roosevelt and his French counterpart in Quebec City. Some of the decisions made at that conference changed the course of history. Canada did change the course of history with the Iraq war, but since then there has been nothing. I remember when Canada did not choose new foreign affairs ministers based on polls or personal preferences. Diplomacy takes time; it requires consistency and perseverance. Diplomacy calls for long-term commitment and proven action, not just talk or a show of intentions. I may sound wistful, but I also remember a time when Canada made foreign policy decisions without first looking to the United States. I remember a time before Canada decided to simply copy the Americans instead of thinking for itself. I remember a time when Canadian prime ministers knew and understood that they could make their own decisions. I remember a time when Canada had a vision for its foreign policy and clear objectives.

Many challenges lie ahead in 2022, including China and Huawei, Ukraine, international immigration, humanitarian crises, American protectionism, and so on. The throne speech does not address any of those troubling issues, but maybe that is my fault. I expected too much of the throne speech, but I guess that was about nostalgia for a bygone era. In the Speech from the Throne, I would have liked to see the Liberal government outline a direction for its actions, a path to follow, a way forward; instead, it was just empty rhetoric.

I do not want to end on a sour note, so I will say this: I can only applaud the throne speech, but with no hands.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his eloquent speech, which contained some very interesting facts, but I want to pick up on the official languages issue he talked about. Unlike the legislation introduced in 1988, the bill we will be introducing in the next few weeks will better reflect a bilingual Canada, French Canada and English Canada.

I also want to point out that holding the Jeux de la Francophonie in his riding, Trois-Rivières, could indeed be a great success story. I certainly agree that if it existed, it would help, but the difference between the bill introduced in 1988 and the one we are proposing today is that the departments can do or must do certain things.

A strong French Quebec means a strong French and English Canada as well. Along with Acadia, let us all work together for the French and English languages in Canada.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I salute my Acadian colleague who is a fellow member of the Canadian Branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie. I can only agree; however, to be fair, I would say that, unfortunately, when it comes to official languages and French, the Liberals' intentions have always been verbs conjugated in the future tense. I would like the government to commit to doing what my colleague just said, because what he said is not bad at all. Nevertheless, it needs to differentiate between bilingualism and our two official languages. They are not one and the same.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, this throne speech is really shallow. After an election that cost over $600 million and a message to Canadians that a new mandate was needed, it seemed to be missing a lot. It missed getting pharmacare to communities and Canadians. It does little to address labour shortages, equity for persons with disabilities and equity for first nations, Métis and Inuit people.

I share with the member who gave the speech tonight his feelings on five-dollar day care. Both of us benefited from it with our children. I am sure both of us agree on day care, but we certainly agree that this speech is empty.

Would the member support some more push around the labour shortages, especially in our care economy, including for day care and health care transfers to the provinces?

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his suggestions. The answer is an unconditional yes.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I like my colleague's style and eloquence. It is always welcome. I would like to come back to the part of his speech where he talked about the etymology of the word “promise”, meaning to send something forward. Does he think that is what the Liberal Party is doing when it keeps making promises that it does not keep? Take for example the promise of high-frequency rail.

I would like my colleague to give us the benefit of his background as an ethicist and tell us the impact this has on this government's credibility moving forward.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, in Latin, “promise” means to send forward. However, when there is no follow-up, it amounts to nothing. The Liberals talked about high-frequency rail. It was an election promise in 2015 that was recycled in 2018, then in 2019 and again in 2021. The result is that the public, voters and citizens lose interest in politics. Citizens become cynical and lose faith. To build a society, people need to have faith in it. That is very important. Broken promises lead to a lack of engagement.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Trois-Rivières for agreeing to share his time with me. I would have listened to him for another half hour because of his eloquence and rich vocabulary, as my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé mentioned.

I would like to begin this first speech of 2022 by acknowledging the members of my constituency team, who are listening right now because I asked them to prepare this address in reply to the Speech from the Throne. I would therefore like to thank Andrée‑Anne, Marie-Christine, Marika, Jacinthe and Mélissa because they really work hard. I am convinced that is the case in all the ridings represented by my colleagues in the House of Commons. We work very hard to address the very moving and personally difficult requests from our constituents.

Some people find themselves in difficult situations. I have to admit that there is a lot of frustration that builds up when we see the lack of support and organization in the services provided by certain departments.

This evening, we will speak to the Speech from the Throne. Not surprisingly, no one is holding their breath about the result of the vote. We have already announced our intentions. However, I find that this is a good time to point out some troubling issues that the current government should have addressed as a top priority.

I want to start by talking about employment insurance reform. Things have gotten worse now, but in 2021, 300,000 applications were not processed on time. Some of these applications have yet to be processed, and it is now February. The normal processing time is 28 days, but that target is rarely met these days.

People are going without income for several weeks. Dozens of cases were referred to the Drummond food bank. These fathers and mothers who were earning an honest living are now in extremely precarious situations.

We hear heartbreaking stories every week. Not too long ago, when I was first elected in 2019, it was rare to hear such emotional stories. Now it is commonplace. We have almost become accustomed, but we never will, thank God, because we are compassionate, caring people. This type of situation has unfortunately become so common that it is now a regular part of our work day.

Take Mr. Picard, for example. He has five children and has been waiting for EI since the end of November. His file is being processed. When he inquires, he is told that his file is being processed and that they are verifying some information. The system is working, but it is just a matter of speeding up the process and making this department a little more efficient.

Now, let us talk about immigration. I do not know how many times we have talked about it. I do not even know where to begin anymore. Yesterday, according to an article published in La Presse and an English-only press briefing by the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, it was announced that the government should be back on track by the end of the year, after COVID-19 caused a significant backlog in processing applications. In 2019, there was already a significant backlog of immigration applications. COVID-19 is starting to become an excuse for everything.

It might almost be better to tear down the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and rebuild it from scratch. Some delays date back to well before 2019 and long before COVID-19. The government previously announced that it would spend $85 million in 2022–23 to process the backlog, yet there are now 1.8 million pending applications.

I could tell the House about many heartbreaking cases. I would like to talk about Ms. Dupont, a woman in my riding who I have spoken to a few times. She obtained permanent resident status in June 2021, but she never received the documents. It is now February 2022. Ms. Dupont dealt with the pain of losing her father, who became ill in the fall. She was told that she should not travel because there was a good chance she would not be allowed back into the country without her documents. Ms. Dupont was unable to get to her father's bedside, and he passed away without getting to see his daughter and grandchildren in the fall.

Over the holidays, Ms. Dupont found out that her father-in-law had stage 4 cancer. Because she still has not received her permanent resident card, she cannot take her family to France to be with her father-in-law during his final days. The department could maybe do with a little more sensitivity. It might be time to work on that.

From family reunification cases to businesses looking for temporary foreign workers to help them get through the pandemic, there are dozens of cases like these every week, not just in the riding of Drummond but in every riding represented by my colleagues here.

We were hoping for something concrete for culture in the throne speech. Web giants have been stealing ad revenue from our media outlets and content creators for too long. We are expecting the new broadcasting bill to be introduced this week, and I call on all my House of Commons colleagues to get it passed quickly. Our culture, our content creators and our media are at the breaking point. They have been waiting years for an updated Broadcasting Act. We will be getting a look at the new bill this week, and we must pass it quickly to restore balance to Canada's broadcasting system.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

It being 6:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question on the motion now before the House.

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.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #19

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I declare the motion carried.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved

That the address be engrossed and presented to Her Excellency the Governor General by the Speaker.

(Motion agreed to)

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

Regional Economic Development

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is great to be back in the chamber this year. It is great to be back participating today.

On December 13, I rose in this chamber to ask the minister responsible for FedNor what specific measures her department is taking to improve wait times for funding application decisions. Unfortunately the minister did not respond and instead the government House leader rose to provide, frankly, a non-answer.

It is concerning, because over the last two years every core program administered by FedNor has failed to meet its own service standards regarding these wait times. There are countless valuable shovel-ready projects across northern Ontario and in my riding of Kenora that would create jobs and enrich our communities. They are just waiting for support from the federal government to make them happen.

The timing on these applications truly matters, especially in a region like northern Ontario. Many FedNor applicants are in rural and northern communities and face logistical challenges in getting their projects under way. For instance, remote communities such as Fort Severn or Kasabonika Lake in my riding only have a small window of winter road access each year, which can limit their ability to deliver equipment and materials. If they do not hear back from the department in a timely manner, they may have to wait as much as another year before they are able to put shovels in the ground and move forward on an important community project.

It is clear that small businesses, municipalities, first nations and communities across northern Ontario rely on this department for support, and they really need clarity on the status of their applications. Successful applicants need to be told as soon as possible, so that they can start to work as soon as possible. Unsuccessful applicants need to find out in a timely manner, so that they can adjust their plans to seek other sources of funding, either at the federal or provincial level.

In these uncertain times, the ability to plan ahead can be the difference between a business or municipality being able to fund new projects or, for a business, to maybe be able to keep its doors open. I know from my conversations with the minister that she recognizes this issue and wants to see it addressed, so I am asking again today if someone on the government side can please share what specific measures they are taking to fix this issue.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Madam Speaker, to begin, I want to acknowledge that I am speaking today from the traditional territory of the Haudenosaunee and Anishinabe peoples.

Our government shares the member's view about the importance of the efficient and responsive delivery of the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario, FedNor, program funding. We recognize the significant challenges facing northern Ontario's small businesses as well as communities as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the particular impact it is having on indigenous communities and rural and remote areas.

The ongoing pandemic has significantly increased the demand for support for communities as well as businesses in this region. Since 2020, FedNor has received more than double the number of yearly applications to its programs. From day one, FedNor moved quickly to respond to their needs, helping to protect jobs and keep businesses afloat as they deal with the impact of COVID-19. With more than $123 million allocated for northern Ontario through the COVID-19 regional relief and recovery fund and the regional air transportation initiative, FedNor has efficiently and effectively delivered support to key sectors, contributing to the economic well-being of the region.

In delivering the RRRF program, FedNor mobilized quickly to provide decisions on applications in half the time of its current service standard of 80 working days. FedNor is now delivering four new recovery programs that will inject nearly $83 million in new funding into the region over the next few years. These new programs were launched this summer and include the Canada community revitalization fund at $19.14 million over two years, the tourism relief fund at $25.3 million over two years, the jobs and growth fund at $26.6 million over three years, and the aerospace regional recovery initiative at $11.88 million over three years.

FedNor staff continue to work diligently to process applications to deliver on new relief and recovery programs, while continuing to offer its regular programs. FedNor is also working to streamline business processes. One of its priorities is to reduce the current service standard of providing a decision on funding applications within 80 working days of receipt of a completed application.

FedNor will continue to remain committed to providing responsive and quality service.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, I must say it is incredibly disappointing that the minister responsible once again was not able to answer my questions. Once again, I had a response that clearly did not answer the questions put forward.

I was asking what specific measures the government is taking to address the wait times. The member mentioned that they are working to meet the current standards, however, over the past two years, every core program has failed to meet those current standards.

I would like to provide the member with an opportunity once again to answer the question that I put. What specific measures is the minister taking to fix wait times and ensure that each core program can meet the service standards as they are set out?

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, frankly, I was very specific to the member across and if he wants, I can pass on my speaking notes to him as well as some of the specifics that I outlined in my response.

From the onset of the pandemic, our government moved quickly to implement Canada's COVID-19 economic response plan. As well, FedNor was a key partner in delivering special relief and recovery funding in northern Ontario. FedNor demonstrated its ability to quickly deliver these special programs to mitigate the impacts of the pandemic for affected businesses, organizations, communities and first nations in the region.

FedNor, as I mentioned earlier, will continue to deliver on its commitments to the people of northern Ontario. It will work to find efficiencies to ensure it remains responsive to the needs of the region and that it meets program delivery service standard timelines.

Health

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

Madam Speaker, on December 3, I asked the Minister of Health why the government was slow to act in the entire Canadian response to COVID‑19.

I tried, with a great many arguments based on documents that I could not table at the time, to show that everyone felt that the Liberal government had been slow in dealing with the pandemic, slow to act in the beginning, particularly when it came to borders and vaccines, and slow to provide rapid testing. The government always seemed to be one step behind. At that time, we also saw that the government was having trouble coordinating its decisions with the various jurisdictions involved.

The government did act quickly on one occasion by calling for border testing at airports on the same day that the omicron variant was discovered, or not long after that, and by responding to the official opposition's call for action at the borders. The minister quickly announced that yes, the government would take action.

Unfortunately, it took days, weeks, and months before we even knew who would be responsible for administering these tests at the border. Those measures were supposed to prevent a new variant from sweeping through Canada, but unfortunately, they did not work, and Canada was ravaged by a fifth wave, as we saw. The government said all the right things but did not follow through. It seems that the government has not learned its lesson since the beginning of the pandemic.

It used to be that we all knew someone who knew someone who had COVID-19. I remember that at the start of the pandemic, we were all worried about this illness, this virus, but it did not really affect us directly. Today, however, the reality has changed. It is not happening to someone else anymore. Now we are the ones contracting COVID-19. A close family member of mine has had COVID-19. I have had COVID-19. The Prime Minister currently has COVID-19. COVID-19 has spread exponentially, and the situation continues to evolve quickly.

Unfortunately, this government still seems to be one step behind this rapidly spreading virus. The government only moves quickly to announce that it is going to do something, but it is ultimately unable to deliver the goods.

I understand that Canadians are tired of the restrictions imposed by every level of government. However, I would like to point out that despite how slow this government was to act to protect them, Canadians stepped up and got vaccinated. We are one of the most vaccinated countries in the world. I thank the Conservatives, who insisted from day one of the pandemic, at every question period, that the government focus more and more on securing vaccines and signing contracts with pharmaceutical companies.

I want to take a moment this evening to commend Canadians for their resilience nearly two years into this pandemic. I sincerely hope that the government learns from past mistakes so that we can deal with any new waves caused by new variants.