Debates of Feb. 3rd, 2022

Economic and Fiscal Update Implementation Act, 2021

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise today in the chamber. I would like to thank my esteemed colleague from Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock for being so generous in sharing his time with me today. It gives me the opportunity to share some of the economic concerns we are seeing in the Kenora riding and across northwestern Ontario, and how I believe Bill C-8 does not adequately address some of those concerns. I look forward to providing some thoughts and suggestions to government members on ways we can move forward.

Obviously, there is no question that across the country we are facing a number of serious economic concerns, not the least of which is the cost of living right now, with inflation rising at record rates. This is something the Parliamentary Budget Officer has confirmed is a result of government spending. It is driven by government spending. It is something we are quite concerned about on this side of the aisle.

It is why our party has been continually pushing our proposal that the government cut back on its spending and phase out stimulus programs as things reopen and as we push for our economy to reopen, especially because the Parliamentary Budget Officer has stated that the rationale for this stimulus spending no longer exists. It is high time that we get things back on track, and we are looking for some leadership from the government to do just that.

When we look at everyday items, essential items like pork and beef have increased in price by 12%. I believe natural gas is up about 20%. Everyday essentials are becoming more and more expensive. These are things that were already more expensive for many in northwestern Ontario, for many in my riding, and these added costs of course make things that much more difficult. Also, government policies around vaccine mandates, specifically the vaccine mandate put in place for transport truck drivers, will have negative impacts on supply chains and will only make this issue much worse for a number of items.

I was talking recently with Nevin Nelson from Nelson Granite, which is just outside Vermilion Bay in my riding. This was one of his primary concerns. He is concerned not only about the ability for Canadians to import goods into the country, but about his business's ability to send goods to the United States. He was very clear to me that the vaccine mandate put in place specifically for transport truck drivers is going to have a detrimental impact on his business and on many others across northwestern Ontario.

We have been very clear on this side of the House, and we continue to push back against this policy. We are looking to find reasonable solutions and a middle ground so we can ensure that everyone is respected, that we are keeping everyone safe and that we are putting COVID behind us once and for all.

I have also had a number of conversations with folks from other regions of my riding. I saw some photos this week on social media from people at the Safeway in Kenora, where many shelves are empty. People going grocery shopping are not able to get the essentials.

A constituent from Sioux Lookout, Knowles, shared his heating bill. Knowles is currently paying $70 a week in carbon tax alone, with about $100 in HST on top of that. He is looking at $170 a week for just his heating. I do not know if Madam Speaker has spent much time in Sioux Lookout in the winter, but I know she is from northern Ontario, so she understands full well that heating is definitely not a luxury there; it is a necessity. In fact, in many parts of my riding, the wind chill dipped to around -50°C last night. It is quite evident that heating is a necessity, and these added costs are making things so much more difficult for people to get by.

It is not just about home heating, but about gasoline in cars as well. Prices are going up, and this is making it more difficult for people to get to the hospital, for example. Many people in my riding have to drive a couple of hours or more to access medical services, and the added costs for gasoline are making things more and more difficult.

That is why, when we are talking about inflation, our party has been clear that it is time to phase out the stimulus programs and it is time to rein in government spending. However, the government has been politicizing this position, saying that the Conservatives want to cut everything, that we do not want the government to spend anything. Of course, that is not the case. The government has to keep programs and services going. What we are saying is that the government needs to phase out the unnecessary stimulus programs, get things back on track and open up our economy.

I share a concern raised by my colleague in the NDP from northern B.C. about the northern residents deductions. The government has brought forward a plan in Bill C-8 to address the northern residents deductions by expanding the travel portion, but it has done nothing to address the base portion. We ran in the election on a plan to increase the northern residents deductions and to me, that is an example of good and efficient spending and making sure we are supporting those in the north. It is something that I think my colleagues in the NDP would agree with, and I hope the government will take it into account. Given some of the comments I heard earlier in response to a question on it, the government could potentially be considering that.

Another big issue, of course, is housing, something that is not included in the CPI. The prices we have seen have been increasing quite dramatically, and this seems to be impacting people from all walks of life and all income levels.

In the Kenora riding, we are looking for more affordable housing and housing for young people coming out of school and entering the workforce who are looking to stay in the community. A lot of people my age cannot find a place to live, frankly. This is also about working families and seniors. It is impacting everyone right across the district.

One of the biggest issues we see is that the government has not been providing incentives for people to develop. There are lots of pieces of land available in my riding, from Sioux Lookout to Ear Falls and everywhere in between. However, some of the solutions we have seen from the government and from some of the other parties in the House have only been focused on subsidizing demand, further driving a wedge into this issue and making it much worse, instead of focusing on the supply and increasing housing stock.

On the same note, housing in first nations specifically is something we need to see addressed. The underfunding we have seen from the government is leading to overcrowding, mould and a number of other issues, and this is having a detrimental impact on many people in my riding, particularly in the remote northern parts of it. In fact, as I mentioned earlier this week in the House, a recent report brought forward by the Canadian Medical Association Journal has shown that the issues in housing have led to worsened health outcomes in indigenous children. That is something we have been hearing from chiefs for a number of years and from community residents in my riding, yet the government has been slow to act. The time is now for the government to act on that and ensure we have stronger housing, better housing and better opportunities for first nations across the Kenora riding.

With the limited time I have left, I will say briefly that the labour shortage is obviously impacting many people across the Kenora riding. I looked at the job board in Dryden recently and there are over 100 positions available, from minimum wage jobs to well-paying jobs that require a lot of experience. This is a small community, of course, with a number of vacancies, and many businesses have not been able to find people to hire. We really have not seen a plan from the government on how to address that.

Those are three big issues that I feel have not been adequately addressed. I hope in questions and comments that I will be able to further share some solutions and suggestions that, going forward, will ensure northwestern Ontario can thrive economically and we can chart a new path forward.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Emergency Preparedness]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite talking about some of the concerns of his constituents, and I want to take this opportunity to talk about some of the concerns that my constituents are facing right now daily because of the unpeaceful, unlawful protest that is taking place.

For example, I just received an email from a gentleman who wrote:

My wife and I live about 10 blocks west of Parliament Hill, and while not in the thick of it, we are close enough to be continually impacted by the protesters' activities. Besides the continuous blaring of horns, we are completely disgusted by the actions of these protesters. They are rude, aggressive and intimidating in the local stores and indoor spaces. One of the nearby parking lots seems to be used as a massive urinal. Insults and firecrackers have been hurled at people wearing masks who are simply passing by. I'm sure that you all have heard these stories and more on the news.

That is the impact on my community. This protest needs to end now.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind the hon. member that, just like we do for those who are delivering speeches in the House, the questions and the speeches should be related to the actual debate that is before the House. I just want to remind the hon. member to ensure that his questions are relevant to the discussion that is before the House.

The hon. member for Kenora.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member opposite for those comments. I do not believe there was a question there, necessarily, but obviously everyone in this chamber supports the right to peaceful protest in Canada. To the extent that a protest moves beyond that, obviously again, we all support the proper measures being taken.

I do not live in the member's riding, of course, so I cannot comment on the specifics of what has been seen, but I think all of us in the House are on the same page in that respect.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my hon. colleague from Kenora on his speech. He speaks softly, but he is eloquent. I believe he is doing a great job representing his constituents.

His speech echoes the same concerns I hear from the businesses and residents of my riding, Drummond, particularly regarding some of the measures brought in to help businesses and merchants get through the crisis we are currently experiencing.

In my view, there is something missing from the legislation before the House today, Bill C-8. The goal is to stimulate economic recovery, support entrepreneurs and build their confidence. However, entrepreneurs who started their business after the pandemic set in are excluded from many of the measures in place. This undermines confidence, causing people who want to start a business to think twice. I think this is undermining the economic recovery.

I would like to hear what my colleague from Kenora thinks about that.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, it sounds like my hon. colleague and I have likely heard many similar things in our own ridings.

Throughout the course of the pandemic, I heard from many business owners in my riding that the programs brought forward had rigid criteria. Many of them were falling through the cracks and were not able to access some of the support services. Specifically, tourist camps and seasonal businesses had a lot of difficulty and, as the member mentioned, a lot of new businesses as well were having trouble getting off the ground. I would agree wholeheartedly with the member's characterization there.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Uqaqtittiji, and qujannamiik to the member from northern Ontario. I am glad to say that I am from a more northern territory, and that the information the member has shared is drastically worse in the north. According to a 2017 statistic, 76% of Inuit over the age of 15 from all over the north suffer from food insecurity. Having said that, many of the other statistics show that there is already a lot of food insecurity across Canada.

These people need help, not more cuts for the working people who are losing their income and paying more for their bills. Why do you want to make their lives even harder?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member needs to address comments through the Speaker and not directly to the member.

The hon. member for Kenora, a brief answer please.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, this is the first opportunity I have had to engage with the member for Nunavut in the chamber. I would like to congratulate her on her election and welcome her to this place. She made a very important point of not spending more or less, but spending more efficiently and spending smarter.

Over the past few years we have seen each year that the government has increased funding for Nutrition North, which is the flagship program to deal with food insecurity in the north, yet each year, as the member noted, food insecurity is getting worse. The government is spending more and getting worse results. It is certainly time for a change.

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

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak to yet another positive piece of legislation that I would encourage all members of the House to support. It is going to be interesting. I am expecting that members from the New Democrats, the Bloc and the Green Party will support this piece of legislation. I hope I am not being too presumptuous in the hope that we will get that support.

The interesting dynamic at play here is going to be how the Conservative Party will vote on this legislation. One member says “against”, and that is my fear because if they wanted to listen to what their constituents had to say, I believe they would be supportive of this legislation. I will not be surprised if they vote against it. After all, the very first piece of legislation that we introduced after the election was Bill C-2, which ensured that we could continue the ongoing supports for Canadians from every region of our country. Think of small businesses and the lockdowns, and the financial support that the Government of Canada continued to provide so that we would be in a better position to get out of the COVID-19 pandemic.

I was surprised that the Conservative Party of Canada voted against that legislation. I do not understand it. On one hand they talk about the importance of small businesses, but when it came down to supporting small businesses, they voted against Bill C-2. Here is a bill in which they could redeem themselves, at least in part, by getting behind this legislation and supporting it. I listened to a couple of speeches this morning and they highlight some issues—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I am sorry I have to interrupt, but there is a lot of feedback coming from the other side of the House. I would ask members, if they have thoughts about questions or comments, to jot them down so that they do not forget them. They will have an opportunity to ask not five minutes' worth of questions, but 10 minutes' worth of questions after the hon. member finishes his speech.

Resuming debate, the hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, if the opposition would like, I would give leave so there could be unlimited questions and answers, as opposed to 10 minutes.

The point is that the legislation before the House today is solid, good legislation that should be supported by all members. The Deputy Prime Minister, the cabinet and government members in particular have fed into this legislation some initiatives that each of us should be supporting. I would like to highlight a few of them.

We often hear about taxation. There is an incorporation of some taxation policy within this legislation. The legislation also talks about ventilation expenses. Those that would qualify under a tax credit would improve the quality of the air we are breathing.

There is a good clause that ensures that we deal with housing. We had a member this morning talk about the cost of housing. In this legislation, we are putting into place a 1% annual tax for those individuals who are buying up condos, apartments and houses with no intention of living in them. They have no intention of renting them out. The people who are non-resident, non-Canadians are now going to pay a 1% annual tax on these. When the Conservatives talk about doing something on housing, this is doing something on the housing issue.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

You are doing nothing.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, millions of dollars in taxes is significant, I would suggest to the member. However, will Conservatives oppose that? We need to remember that this is the Conservative Party that opposed the 1% tax we put on Canada's wealthiest a few years back. What will Conservatives do with this tax?

We have supported our schools. They want to improve their ventilation systems, so there is better air quality for school children in the different regions of our country. We have support for our provinces and territories in regard to proof of vaccination in this legislation. We have support for rapid testing. Canadians are interested in receiving rapid testing.

[Ryan Williams, Conservative, Bay of Quinte, ON]

A little too late.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is interesting. Members need to be careful with heckling. They could be embarrassed by some of the things they heckle across the way.

I remember Conservatives at one point jumping from their seats and hollering from the skies, saying, “We want rapid tests.”

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Two years ago.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, it was two years ago, as one member points out.

The federal government acquired well over 100 million tests. As of December, 2021, most of those tests that we purchased long ago were not being used. When we had the COVID-19 variant and the demand started to pick up, we, as a government, purchased over 100 million additional tests.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

We have a point of order.

The hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, many members in the House might have questions and comments for the hon. member. Many of us are waiting until the question and answer period for that. I would ask you to consider the importance of ensuring that those who are speaking have a chance to do so, and that those who ask questions have a chance to do so after the speech is done.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I greatly appreciate the hon. member raising that. As I mentioned a few minutes ago, I would ask the official opposition members to please hold on to their thoughts, questions and comments, and not to think out loud. It is interrupting the debate in the House. I hope they will ensure that they adhere to that.

The hon. parliamentary secretary has 13 and a half minutes remaining.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, how quickly time flies.

I can understand why the Conservative opposition is really concerned about the legislation. The Conservatives have this predetermined position that says, if the Liberals introduce legislation they have to vote against it. They are fairly good at filibustering and voting against government legislation. The problem is that this legislation is direct support for battling the coronavirus. Canadians need this type of legislation, just like they needed Bill C-2. There is this sense that the Conservatives should be voting for the legislation, so they are having a tough time with it.

Getting back to the legislation itself, it provides $1.7 billion with respect to rapid testing. That was enough money to provide for the demand for testing in workplaces and other places for the last months of December, going into January and possibly into February. We have more legislation that is coming up. Members could get a little advance on it in Bill C-10, where there is an additional $2 billion that would be invested so that the federal government could continue to support provinces, territories and indigenous communities, making sure they have things such as rapid testing.

As much as the Conservatives like to criticize the government, they find that when it comes to the issue of rapid testing it really is no issue for the federal government when it comes to criticism. We circulated all the rapid testing well in advance. The vast majority of the provinces had only used a small percentage before it became a much larger issue. When it became a larger issue, whether it was the Minister of Public Services and Procurement or the Minister of Health, supported by the Minister of Finance and the Liberal caucus, we ensured that the monies and resources would be there to support these ministers in acquiring the tests that were necessary.

That is what Bill C-8 does. It is there to support initiatives that are really making a difference. Yesterday we heard a great deal about seniors and, in particular, I was listening to the member for Elmwood—Transcona. The NDP have a focus on trying to give a false impression about seniors and the government's approach to seniors. I thought I would make it very clear, in terms of what it is and how it is this government has been supporting seniors, not only during the pandemic but prepandemic.

When I think of seniors and the six or seven years we have now been in government, one of the very first initiatives we did was that we rolled back the age for collecting OAS. The former prime minister set it at 67. We rolled it back to 65. That was one of the first initiatives. Another initiative was that we increased the guaranteed annual supplement. That had a really positive impact, not only in Winnipeg North where hundreds of seniors were lifted out of poverty by that one particular initiative, but thousands of seniors were lifted out of poverty because of a tangible increase back in the first couple of years of being in government through the guaranteed income supplement program.

In the 2019 campaign, we talked about giving seniors aged 75 and over a 10% increase in the OAS. Even though some inside this chamber criticized us about giving that increase, I rooted it back to the fact that we made a campaign promise. It was a part of our platform in the 2019 election, and we began the process of putting it into place before the last election took place just a number of months ago. We are a government that has materialized that substantial increase supporting seniors collecting OAS at age 75 and over.

We provided one-time payments to support our seniors during the pandemic, whether they were collecting OAS, GIS or both. We supported many organizations in our communities that focused attention on providing support services for our seniors. An example of that would be the New Horizons program. Members can canvass their own constituencies, and they will find that there were enhancements of services being provided through the non-profit organizations for our seniors in particular.

I remember a phone call I had with the United Way in Winnipeg a while back, and they were talking about the importance of the 211 line and the importance it could play for our seniors. Through a federal grant, the support of the United Way and its incredible organizing and organization, we now have what many other jurisdictions have: an active 211 phone number. Seven days a week and 24 hours a day, someone can call 211 and they will have access to a person who can assist them and a whole myriad of government resources and programs, not only from the national level but from other levels, whether they are provincial, municipal or non-profits.

This is a support program that will especially help our seniors. When I talk about the types of actions the government has taken during the pandemic, it is an excellent example when we hear of non-profit organizations, because we often hear about the direct payments, whether they are to seniors or people with disabilities through the CERB program or workers and employers. We often hear about that, but there are many other ways we indirectly supported seniors, and whether it is the New Horizons program or supporting organizations like United Way in Winnipeg, seniors were better served.

It does not mean we cannot do better. Within our caucus we continue to advocate for our seniors every day. I hope I can say this: We even have a strong active seniors caucus that is there to ensure that the interests of seniors are constantly being looked at. When the member for Elmwood—Transcona, for example, made reference to the fact that we are not there for long-term care and other issues such as those I just finished highlighting, I suggest to the member that he only take a look at the province of Manitoba. I would compare our record at the national level with the main years I was in opposition in the Manitoba legislature, where I saw the provincial NDP government reduce corporate income tax and do nothing, or very little, to support long-term care.

Today we have a very progressive and aggressive agenda for being there in a very real and tangible way for our seniors. That is why members of the Liberal caucus advocate continuously for long-term care facilities and how we can look at some sort of a standardization of care, what those expectations are and what kind of role the federal government can play.

We see many, including me, who continue to advocate for provinces and territories to take advantage of a federal government that has a very strong interest in a national pharmacare program. Close to two years ago, it was incorporated into a throne speech, looking for provinces and territories that would be interested. The point is that as a government we are very much interested and want to be there for our seniors.

In terms of other initiatives that we have been able to accomplish since the last election, some of the things did not get the type of attention they should have. I would like to draw attention to them, because they are indirectly tied to the legislation. These are things like the $15 minimum wage for federally regulated occupations. Hopefully, the provinces will see the leadership we are providing. It would be nice to see provincial jurisdictions take up that particular initiative.

The child care initiative shows the degree to which parliamentarians at the federal and provincial levels, working together, can produce tangible results. The pandemic demonstrated that, and so has the child care initiative. We are a government that has brought through a national child care program, albeit one province still needs to sign on.

Those are the types of issues that we have been able to deal with during a pandemic, while supporting Canadians in every region of the country, working with Canadians in different levels of government and dealing with issues of reconciliation, environment, housing, all the important issues for our constituents.

As I said in the past, and will say in future, my first priority is the constituents of Winnipeg North. Rest assured that the issues they raise in Winnipeg North are the issues I will be bringing to the floor of the House of Commons.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his maiden speech. I hope we have a lot of opportunity in the future to hear him speak again and not be muzzled like the rest of his colleagues. A lot of the back-and-forth with my hon. colleague is good-natured, despite his rather dysfunctional relationship with the truth.

This is a serious and non-partisan question for my colleague. There is new spending in this bill. New spending is required to go through Treasury Board processes. The departmental results that came out yesterday show that one out of every four programs put forward by the government have not gone through the required Treasury Board processes.

Would he identify which in this bill is the 25% that has not gone through the required legitimate Treasury Board processes?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's consistency. I too hope to be able to speak a bit more in the coming days, weeks and months.

When I think of the amount of money that the government has had to spend over the last year and a half as a direct result of the coronavirus and the pandemic, I like to think that the people of Canada appreciate and understand that often we get legislation coming through, such as Bill C-8, which commits $1.7 billion toward things such as rapid testing so that we can get test widgets to our provinces and territories in order to meet the demand.

As for the actual details of the processes of the Treasury Board, I will leave that for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.