Debates of March 21st, 2022

(Return tabled)

Question No.297—

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

With regard to the $2,959,500,151 in expenditures on transportation machinery and equipment, as listed in Volume Ill of the 2021 Public Accounts of Canada: what are the details of each expenditure, broken down by department and agency, including, for each, the (i) vendor, (ii) amount, (iii) date, (iv) description of goods, including the volume purchased, as well as the make and model, if applicable?

(Return tabled)

Question No.298—

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

With regard to reports to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada and media reports that applications for Permanent Residency which are listed under officer DM10032 have not been advanced through the process since March 2020: (a) who or what is DM10032; (b) how many applications are currently assigned to or marked with DM10032; (c) of the DM10032 applications still awaiting a decision as of January 31, 2022, how many were received more than (i) 30 days, (ii) 60 days, (iii) 6 months, (iv) one year, (v) two years, ago; and (d) why have numerous applications assigned to or marked with DM10032 been subject to significant delays?

(Return tabled)

Question No.300—

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

With regard to the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS): (a) how many companies who received payments under CEWS have since entered receivership or bankruptcy proceedings; and (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by industry sector and by province or territory?

(Return tabled)

Question No.304—

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

With regard to expenditures by the government on data and telecommunication services related to mobile devices, such as smartphones or tablets, and broken down by month, since January 1, 2020: (a) what are the total expenditures; (b) how many devices' services are being paid for; (c) how much of the expenditures in (a) are related to roaming or similar charges, such as usage while travelling; and (d) how many devices incurred roaming or similar charges?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

CP Rail Strike

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

I wish to inform the House that I have received a notice of a request for an emergency debate. I invite the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton to rise and make a brief intervention.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 52, I am seeking leave to adjourn the House for the purpose of discussing an important and urgent matter.

On Saturday, March 19, the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference commenced a strike in advance of a lockout by CP Rail. This is having immediate and serious consequences in our country. Those in the agricultural sector, in advance, had people not sending them feed for their animals because they did not want the feed to get stuck in railcars and go bad. At the same time, planting season is upon us, and the fertilizer that is needed is not going to get there.

The automotive sector has been suffering. Two years of lockdowns in the pandemic have been compounded by border disruptions that shut down its production, and it has not recovered. These are not normal times. It simply cannot take another hit.

The Chamber of Commerce has called on the House to bring forward back-to-work legislation. This is an urgent issue requiring immediate attention from the House. I am requesting an emergency debate tonight.

Speaker's Ruling

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

I thank the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton for her intervention. However, I am not satisfied that her request meets the requirements for the Standing Order at this time.

I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, Government Orders will be extended by 13 minutes.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Cost of Living

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

The hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith is up, and I know there were approximately six minutes or so left in her time.

The hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith.

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

Mr. Speaker, right now we are seeing how big corporations spend their record profits. As just one example, last year Scotiabank made a net profit of over $10 billion. After jacking up fees for customers throughout the pandemic, it paid out over $4 billion in dividends to its wealthy shareholders. The same applies to many large grocery store chains that are seeing profits like never before, while the price paid by hard-working Canadians for groceries continues to increase. While corporations raised their prices throughout the pandemic, wages have remained stagnant. It is a broken system and it is only getting worse under the current Liberal government.

Instead of following through with his most recent election campaign promise of raising taxes on the most profitable big banks and insurance companies, the Prime Minister continues to make life easier for the wealthiest and largest corporations. On this side of the House, we know that this surtax cannot come quickly enough. It is also vital that Canada goes beyond just banking and insurance and extends this surtax to oil companies and large grocery store chains with net profits over $1 billion. Canadians know that these record-setting profits are due to big companies taking every penny from regular people that they can. Supporting this motion will show that the government is ready to stand up for Canadians who elected them instead of just wealthy stockholders.

For months now we have seen Liberals and Conservatives try to score political points around who is to blame for the rising cost of living in Canada, but neither really understands the challenges that everyday people are facing and just how out of reach life is becoming for regular people. In some parts of British Columbia, we have recently seen rent explode by almost 20% in the last six months alone. The price of the average home in Nanaimo, in my riding, recently rose above $1 million. These prices are absurd and out of reach for seniors on fixed incomes or new families looking to buy their first homes. They are a by-product of investors and private equity firms buying up homes, reducing supply and then driving up prices.

Shamefully, while Canadians continue to struggle to find homes, they do not have any way to see who they are competing with when trying to do so due to Canada's weak public beneficial ownership registry laws. That is why our motion today also calls for the government to get serious about a beneficial ownership registry. Canada's weak disclosure laws allow for an estimated $130 billion to be laundered through Canadian corporations each year, and the real estate market is a huge part of this illegal activity. In British Columbia, the provincial NDP has moved forward with a publicly accessible beneficial ownership registry, but it cannot do it alone. Unfortunately, the current government has barely begun to scratch the surface. At the rate we are headed, we will not see anything to curb money laundering and tax evasion until at least 2025.

One thing that continues to be true prior to the pandemic and remains the same today is that it is not the workers or those living in the communities who are benefiting from the billions in corporate profit. Instead, it is the wealthy corporate shareholders. It is time to start holding these large corporations to account by paying their fair share and putting it back where it belongs, in our communities.

One of the truly remarkable things about our community in Nanaimo—Ladysmith is the strength of our small and medium-sized businesses. These are businesses that have made our region their home and want to see it thrive. They are invested. Like everyday Canadians, these businesses are also feeling the pinch. Our local chambers of commerce are seeing businesses struggle. They are struggling to find employees because people are being priced out of the housing market. They are struggling to make their businesses work with increased costs from high gas prices and banking fees. This motion is critical to allowing our local small and medium-sized businesses to operate on an even playing field.

I want to close my thoughts by speaking about people like Jocelyn, who feel like they have been left behind, who feel like the system has been built to keep them down while the wealthiest keep getting richer. We can build a system where people are not left behind, where prescription medications, dental care, eye care and mental health services are all part of a public health care system, where we invest in programs to better support seniors living on GIS and CPP and we ensure that everyone is able to afford a roof over their heads and groceries for their families.

A better, more compassionate system starts with the Liberal government getting serious about putting people before corporate greed. It is about the government living up to its campaign promises and getting serious about taxing Canada's wealthiest corporations, and it is about making sure that Canadians can finally have more corporate accountability through a publicly available beneficial ownership registry.

A more compassionate future is possible. We can build a future where everyone has the support they need. I hope every member in the House will help us move forward toward a better future and support this motion.

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

Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister and the government have been up on this particular file from day one when we introduced a tax, a special tax on Canada's 1% wealthiest, shortly after taking the government back in 2015 to just a couple of months ago.

I would ask the member to reflect on what we voted on just a couple of months ago, which was to have an annual percentage tax on individuals who purchased properties in Canada yet are not using them as their residences. Could she provide her thoughts? She talked about the importance of housing and taxation.

What the government needs to do is to look at the ways in which we can ensure that people are paying their fair share of tax. In this situation it is a real tax. It is going to be a real income coming in, making homes hopefully even that much more affordable going forward.

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

Madam Speaker, we know that in 2018, the amount of money laundering was estimated at $5.3 billion just in British Columbia, my home province, through the real estate sector. We know that money laundering through home purchases is putting an upward pressure on prices. I think we can all agree on that.

We need to see the Liberal government implementing transparency tools that discourage money laundering by criminals and the wealthy at a pace that is much quicker than what we are seeing today. That is why we are putting forward in this motion the need for a beneficial ownership registry that creates a means for us to shine a light on the assets and properties that are owned and may be otherwise hidden by shell companies. I am in agreement that we need to do all we can to move forward.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, it has been interesting for me to observe NDP members over the last few days speaking about gas prices and wanting gas prices to be lower. I thought that Liberal and NDP politicians actually wanted gas prices to be higher. Is it not the point of their carbon tax policy to raise the cost of gas? They think that will discourage people from driving more.

It is curious for me to hear, in the vein of affordability along with the concerns being raised, the New Democrats, in particular, saying that affordability is a problem because gas prices are too high. Why would the NDP not simply reverse its position with respect to the carbon price if it wants gas prices to be lower?

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

Madam Speaker, we know that we need to be doing all we can to reduce pollution. We are in a climate crisis and we need to be ensuring that we are investing in renewable energy sources and moving away from our reliance on oil and gas. Bigger than that, we need to look at ensuring that the big oil and gas companies that are reaping profits like we have never seen before are paying their fair share. Their fair share of taxes can then be put back into the community where it belongs.

We know the impacts from this high cost of living crisis are being felt disproportionately by those with lower incomes. We need to take the money that is taxed from big oil and gas corporations and put it back into the pockets of everyday people.

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

Madam Speaker, the government members are talking about a tax for the super-rich. In 2015, shortly after being elected, this government offered what it politely called a tax cut for the middle class. In reality, Canadians whose taxable income was between $90,000 and $230,000 are the ones who benefited.

Can my colleague tell me whether we can still trust the Liberal Party when it comes to taking care of the middle class and voters?

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

Madam Speaker, this is a very good question. What we are seeing right now through the pandemic is that the rich are getting richer and the number of people struggling to make ends meet is increasing. We need to make sure that we are looking at how we lift everyone up and that we are taking care of one another. Right now the systems that we have are not set up to do that.

I spoke about Jocelyn, who is a constituent in my riding of Nanaimo—Ladysmith. Without her knowing that this motion was coming forward, she spoke about the barriers that she was experiencing in being able to get ahead and that we need to stop and look at the systems that we have so that everybody has an opportunity to—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

We have to resume debate.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Tourism and Associate Minister of Finance.