Debates of June 21st, 2022

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay—Lacolle

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

moved that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say what an honour it is for me to sponsor Senator Dalphond's Bill S‑207 in the House. The bill would change the name of my riding from Châteauguay—Lacolle to Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville.

I would like to remind the House why this bill was introduced. The name Châteauguay—Lacolle is a historical error dating back to the previous electoral redistribution. The name of the municipality of Lacolle is in the riding name, but the city of Lacolle is not in the riding. A correction is therefore in order, and the best name is Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville because the vast majority of municipalities in the RCM of Jardins-de-Napierville are in my riding and the other municipalities in the area I represent makeup the greater Châteauguay region.

The simple fact that the municipality of Lacolle is not in my riding and that this bill would result in a complete representation of my riding should suffice to convince my hon. colleagues here in the House that this name change is necessary.

However, some of my colleagues might be surprised that I am once again introducing this bill. Some may have thought that the issue was resolved because the House unanimously agreed to pass the bill in 2017. I will explain why the House needs to pass the bill again, after it already had the support of all members of Parliament.

This bill was first introduced in the 42nd Parliament as Bill C‑377. It was unanimously supported by the House of Commons, made it through committee without amendment, was passed at third reading and then sent directly to the Senate.

The bill was sailing from one legislative step to the next. However, the Senate committee was just preparing to study Bill C‑377 as the 42nd Parliament was drawing to a close, so there was a race against time to get the bill passed. Unfortunately, the Senate committee did not have time to study the bill before Parliament was dissolved. This meant that the bill, which my constituents had been waiting for, died on the order paper right before the finish line.

Today, I am continuing what the House started four years ago by introducing Bill S‑207. The bill has already been approved by the Senate, and once approved by the House, it will pass at last.

I would like to remind my colleagues in the House why this bill is crucial to the residents of my riding. I will tell the story behind it, which speaks to its fundamental necessity.

This name change has been close to my heart since the beginning of my political career. I committed to getting the name changed the first time I spoke in the House of Commons in 2015.

Since being elected, I have always encouraged achievements that benefit the people of Châteauguay—Lacolle. Whether it is through investments in local infrastructure that have a direct impact on my constituents or through financial assistance to help many farms in my region go green, I have long been at the service of the people I represent on a daily basis. Today, by introducing this bill, I am again at their service.

I could go into much more detail about the circumstances that led to my constituency being misnamed. However, as my time is limited, I am counting on the goodwill of my colleagues here in the House to support Bill S‑207, a crucial bill for my constituents.

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

Mr. Speaker, why now? With the redistribution that is happening, is this an important time for this to be coming up?

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it was actually a question that I faced back in 2018. It is because it is important to my constituents. It does have to do with this error in the fact that there is a municipality that finds itself in my name that is not in the riding. Yes, there is a separate process going on, but that is something that is separate from this House. As Senator Dalphond graciously had Bill S-207 adopted in the Senate, I am seizing on this opportunity to make this happen and I count on the member's support.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. She represents a region that is dear to my heart. My grandfather was from Saint‑Édouard, just outside Napierville.

However, I find it hard to understand why we are using time in the House of Commons to talk about this issue when there are other tools and processes for achieving this goal.

Is there not something more fundamentally important we could discuss, something that could directly help the people in her riding?

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague. Saint‑Édouard is in my riding and is one of the municipalities in the RCM of Jardins-de-Napierville. It is truly a cornerstone of the region.

Frankly, my constituents have been asking me for this name change since my first election campaign. It was the late mayor of Napierville, Jacques Délisle, who first suggested it, and this bill is, in part, in honour of the late mayor, who was highly regarded and respected in the region.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the 2015-19 Parliament, my predecessor attempted, by similar means, to change the name of my riding, Saint‑Hyacinthe—Bagot, to Saint‑Hyacinthe—Acton, so that all constituents would feel represented.

Unfortunately, the bill died in the luxurious sleepy hollow known as the Senate. I do not want my colleague's bill to meet the same fate. I am going to try to take advantage of the current redistribution process to also propose changing the name of my riding.

However, if I were to propose a bill to change the name of my riding, could I count on my colleague's support?

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I do remember the very good discussions I had with my colleagues about the fact that it is important for constituents to feel represented by the name of their riding. It is not a frivolous matter. It is truly symbolic.

My colleague can count on my support if he ever introduces a bill on the same subject in the House.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, although I share my colleague from Peace River—Westlock's curiosity about why this would take priority at a time when there are so many important issues facing our country, I want to ask a question more broadly about the need for democratic reform in this country.

Alberta is significantly under-represented, both in this place and in Canada's Senate. I am wondering if the member would agree that this is an inequity that needs to be addressed. Although the most recent redistribution does take a small step in the right direction, the current inequity is not wholly addressed. Would the member agree that it needs to be?

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his thoughtful question, and it can be answered in part by the question that was asked earlier. There is a process going on now that is the thoughtful place for that kind of discussion, where MPs indeed can present their views in front of the commissioners. This was not done, unfortunately, in this case. This was an omission that occurred in the last redistribution. That is why I am here today: to correct a wrong.

Message from the Senate

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I have the honour to inform the House that messages have been received from the Senate informing the House that the Senate has passed the following bills, to which concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-4, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Identification of Criminals Act and to make related amendments to other acts, COVID-19 response and other measures, and Bill S-9, an act to amend the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay—Lacolle

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am a bit out of breath after running over here from the all-important operations committee.

I am pleased to rise on this private member's bill. I want to address all my comments to the bill itself. I am sure the member who presented it is a wonderful parliamentarian. I served with her on OGGO, but I have to say I am not a big fan of this bill. It is almost like it is “bad private members' bills” week. Earlier, I had to speak to Bill C-245, which was talking about bringing the $35 billion in the wasteful infrastructure bank over to be $35 billion to add to the wasteful infrastructure department.

I have to say that with this bill it is like “déjà vu all over again”, to quote Yogi Berra. I recall actually speaking to this bill about four years ago in the 42nd Parliament. I was not a fan of it then, and I am not a fan of it now. The big reason is that I have to wonder, of all the things going on in Quebec right now, or in Canada or around the world, if this is what we should be discussing in the House of Commons and taking up two hours of our time.

For example, I look at issues in Quebec right now. I think in the member's own riding we have an increase in problems at Roxham Road again. We have heard from the Government of Quebec of the incredible strain on its social services from these illegal or irregular crossings, however we wish to term them, but I think that is a bigger, more important issue we should perhaps be debating right now.

Of passports, we hear repeatedly in the House from across the country. In Edmonton, people are actually lining up at 12:30 in the morning to get passports, so that is not quite a day in advance, but it is the same problem in Quebec. We actually heard from Trois-Rivières that calls for help from citizens at the Trois-Rivières constituency office were increasing. They have been approaching decade highs daily for three weeks now. Why are we not talking about a private member's bill addressing that issue?

There is a labour shortage. I recall, actually now for several years, hearing about the labour shortage in Quebec. It is hurting productivity. It is hurting the economy of farmers, retail and aerospace. We cannot get workers in that province. Again, this is directed at the PMB. I would think it is a much more important issue we should be chatting about right now, as well as hurrying up the access to foreign workers.

Of course, there is inflation. It is 6.8%, and we will be hearing new inflation numbers tomorrow. My guess is that it is going to rocket past 7%. We hear in Quebec, again, about the shortage of bodies that is going to be driving wage inflation and making the inflation issue more troublesome. One would wonder if that is not a more important issue to be debating right now than a name change for a riding.

There are border issues and the ArriveCAN app, or “ArriveCAN'T” app, as we call it. This is a quote from the newspaper:

It's time to bid farewell to the ArriveCAN app, say border-city mayors, tourism industry leaders and others who complain Canada's stringent COVID-19 rules for international travellers are encouraging would-be U.S. visitors to spend their tourist dollars at home.

Estelle Muzzi, mayor of the Quebec border community of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, says that the rules are a drag on border crossings that are vital for the local economies. I think that mayor might actually be in the member's riding. Here we have the mayor saying she has issues with ArriveCAN and passports, and we have to wonder why we are talking about a riding change, especially right now.

With the redistributions, the ridings are going to change completely in Quebec, probably. My own riding is getting split into Edmonton West and Edmonton Winterburn. It would be strange for me to perhaps change the name of my riding right now to “Edmonton West Edmonton Mall” or “Edmonton Kanye West”, as I jokingly call it, knowing that in two years the riding was going to change to Edmonton Winterburn.

Again, we have a lot more important issues we can talk about. I want to give some examples of some PMBs that have come through the House recently from my Conservative colleagues that, perhaps, are better examples of how parliamentarians should be spending their time.

Bill C-296, which is from the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, is a PMB to amend the criminal code to find the person convicted of abduction, sexual assault and murder of the same victim in respect of the same event—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The parliamentary secretary to the government House leader is rising on a point of order.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think we have to be somewhat cautious when we say, “We do not like this bill, and here are all the alternatives”, then list off a bunch of other issues. I am just suggesting that if we were to apply that principle, we could really be off topic on a wide variety of things, so this is more of a caution.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would just point out that, typically in this type of debate, members are provided broad latitude. On the particular matter, as the member for Winnipeg North often points out, I am sure that the arc of the member's speech will eventually come back to why the bill ought to have been replaced with something more meaningful, as the member for Edmonton West is trying to point out.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I welcome the member's input on this matter. I will also caution folks that we need to stick to the bill as best we can, but we do provide a lot of leeway in those discussions.

The hon. member for Edmonton West.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the member for Winnipeg North has to get his comments in. I think it has been probably 35 seconds since he actually last spoke in the House, so even when it is nonsensical, he has to get a word in.

These bills I am talking about are much like the other issues I spoke about earlier, which have perhaps more importance to the people of the riding than the one we are talking about. It is unfortunate that the member for Winnipeg North has to stand and try to deflect from what I said is part of a bad private member's bill. Rather than actually discussing the merits of it, he has to try and interrupt me.

Getting back to the example, I am sure it would be something that people in the riding would probably care more about. We know that there is a crime issue: We hear it non-stop in the House. On gun crime in Quebec, we have heard of it in Laval and of shootings in Montreal. The bill perhaps could have been addressing these issues, as well. There is denying parole for persons involved in the crimes of sexual assault, abduction and murder. They would perhaps get 25 years without parole.

Another one that could have been considered instead is from the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap. We have a bill that would amend the Criminal Code by replacing the term “child pornography” with “child sex abuse material”. It would take away the word “pornography”. Why that is important, as the member explained, is that pornography, by and large, whether one is for or against it, generally is done legally and with consent, whereas child pornography, of course, is a disgraceful, disgusting and horrific crime and should not in any way be used with any wording that implies consent.

The member for Simcoe North actually brought forward an important bill. We hear about the housing crisis in Vancouver, and also in Quebec, that is out of control and is being pushed by money laundering. The bill put forward would have tackled the money laundering issue.

From the member's home riding, Senator Housakos brought in Bill S-203. Rather than the bill before us, this is something decent from the Senate. It is a bill that provides for the development of a federal framework designed to support autistic Canadians, their families and caregivers. This is an example of a bill brought through by someone from Quebec into the House that would have tangible, material benefits for the people of Quebec. We have been trying to get a national framework for autism in the six and a half years that I have been in the House. The member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin has brought it up several times in a private member's bill that was voted down by this government. This is a perfect example of something that would be fulsome and a help to the riding itself.

The member for Lévis—Lotbinière has a bill that would bring changes to the EI Act and increase from 15 to 52 weeks the maximum benefits paid because of illness, injury or quarantine. This is an issue that affects all Canadians. In my previous life, as we call it, before I got into this, I was in the hotel business. I also had a side involvement as an employment insurance appeals commissioner: We would hear appeals for EI. I did this for two years, and it was very enjoyable. We would hear from people who came before the tribunal who had been cut off from EI, or were not eligible for EI, and were suffering from cancer, MS or ALS. They were from all walks of life. Here is a bill being brought forward from a member from Quebec. It is something that would have helped everyone in the riding who had been sick.

I realize that I am running out of time, but I have a lot more examples of what I consider better bills. Again, I served with the member on the all-important OGGO committee, and these criticisms are directed specifically at the bill and not at the member. I understand her reasons behind putting the bill through.

I just think that when a member has a once-in-a-Parliament chance to bring forward a bill that would be helpful to the members of her community, it would be something different from this. It should be something meaningful to the people in the community and help people, as opposed to something as relatively meaningless as a name change.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to talk about the issues and priorities that matter to Quebeckers.

The bill we are debating this evening is a unique one, given that it has to do with changing the name of a riding. I sympathize with the idea and think the new name is quite lovely. “Les Jardins-de-Napierville” has a nice ring to it.

However, as other members have mentioned, the problem is with the decision to prioritize this issue over other challenges faced by families, workers, seniors and students in our communities.

Time in the House is limited, and this time is a precious commodity used for advancing issues that are important to the people we represent, our constituents. I am sure that the people of what is currently known as the riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle are very happy about this initiative and will be happy with the new name, but we are spending a lot of time to change a name that could have been changed through other means, for example, through the Commissioner of Canada Elections.

There are many people who are struggling and suffering right now. There are plenty of challenges that I think deserve, as a matter of priority, the benefit of the House's time and the potential debates between parliamentarians.

I met with representatives of the Unifor union recently, and I would like to talk about a problem that affects a lot of people, namely, offshoring of jobs. It affects several sectors but is particularly prevalent in the telecommunications sector. This is related to something that is very topical and that may even affect people in my Liberal Party colleague's riding. For the first time in its history, the union representing Bell Canada clerical workers has a strike mandate. A total of 4,200 people in Ontario and Quebec are going to engage in a labour dispute, perhaps for the first time, because they are fed up with seeing their jobs sent overseas. A few years ago, this unit had 15,000 clerical workers at Bell Canada. Has there been less work to do at Bell Canada in the last 20 or 25 years? Of course not, but the jobs are being moved to the Philippines, Morocco and Tunisia. These people want to have the means to continue working here in Canada, at home, because it is still necessary.

The most infuriating thing about this is that companies like Bell Canada get federal subsidies to cover part of their development and infrastructure. They owe nothing in exchange, and jobs are being relocated to other countries. I think that this is an issue we as parliamentarians should address and find solutions for.

Unifor has proposed a solution that would not necessarily entail obligations to keep jobs in Canada right away. I personally would be prepared to go there, and I believe the NDP would as well. At the very least, we must demand transparency from companies that receive tax dollars and then send jobs offshore. Transparency would reveal information about which jobs have been offshored and details about contracts and why those jobs did not stay in Canada.

I would like to draw the attention of the House to this possible imminent labour dispute, which could start in about two weeks and will affect thousands of people in Quebec and Ontario. Offshoring jobs is a serious issue that I think deserves our time, as well as solutions and ideas from members of all parties.

As we are speaking of the federal government's role, we could also spend more time talking about the quality of the federal government's services overall. In many respects, quite a few government organizations and departments have become dysfunctional and completely inefficient.

I spoke about this another time, but I want to come back to this subject. There is a woman in my riding who qualified for employment insurance and has been waiting for her cheque since February. It is now June. That is a rather long time. She has been forced to borrow money from friends and family and to rack up debt on her credit card to pay for groceries and rent. These are ineffective strategies. I believe that, as parliamentarians, we have a responsibility to put pressure on a government to provide its services. I am not telling my colleagues anything new. The passport delays right now are absolutely appalling. It is a catastrophe.

People are waiting in line for 24 or even 36 hours. They are becoming frustrated and anxious. It is not simply a matter of saying that they are just travellers and vacationers anyway, so it is no big deal. First of all, they have a right to this service. The government is failing to deliver on time. Second, after two years of the pandemic, many people have saved up enough money to be able to afford a dream vacation for their children and their family abroad. Now they are losing the thousands of dollars they invested in that trip. They are being robbed by a government that cannot meet the demand, when this situation was foreseeable.

I was absolutely astonished to hear the Prime Minister tell us, in response to a question today, that he saw this coming. He obviously did not see it coming, because if he had, he would have prepared for it and put some resources into it. What we are seeing now is horrible. People are shouting at security guards. The rules are chaotic and contradictory, and they differ from one office to another. The police have even had to intervene.

These are all key issues.

The government's failures are affecting the businesses in my Liberal colleague's riding. All the delays at Immigration Canada are causing major problems, whether they have to do with permanent residency applications, work visas, student visas, temporary worker permits or other things. I am sure that there are many family farms in her riding that are unable to keep up because they need these temporary workers. It is taking a long time. We are experiencing a labour shortage and these businesses do not have the means to quickly find workers for the upcoming summer and for the harvest at the end of the summer, in August and September.

The labour shortage is causing major challenges, and the government is unable to make these services essential for economic development, but also out of respect for the people who are waiting for these documents and whose applications are getting lost in a federal bureaucracy that seems rather disorganized these days.

One major issue that I am sure also affects people in the Châteauguay and Napierville region is the housing crisis. Rent prices are ridiculously high. I am very proud of the NDP's negotiation with the minority government. The agreement contains a new definition of affordable housing. Real affordable housing will be built through projects funded by the CMHC. I am very proud of that, and this will make a difference in the future. It will help my constituents and my colleague's constituents as well.

People who are looking to buy their first home or who are wondering whether they will be able to keep their homes, in light of what is going on, also have concerns. We could have used this time today to talk about the solution, about support for homeowners or potential homeowners who have concerns. What are they concerned about? They are concerned about the high likelihood of an interest rate hike.

According to a recent survey, one in four homeowners is genuinely worried that they will have to sell their home if interest rates go up slightly. We are not talking about a 5% increase, but a few percentage points. These interest rates would look like ones we have seen before—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I believe we have a point of order from the hon. member for Fort McMurray—Cold Lake.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of the chamber that I do not believe we have quorum here in this place and online. While it is not quite 6:30, we are in fact required to have more than 20 members in this chamber, and at my count we do not.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Let us give it a second to make the count.

And the count having been taken:

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I see quorum.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was talking about homeowners who are concerned about the likely rise in interest rates. I think it is our responsibility to look at how we can help these people so that they do not have to sell their homes or lose the property that they have invested so heavily in. This goes back to the issue of cost of living and inflation, which is hitting workers and families very hard right now.

I think we should discuss the NDP proposals being put forward. We demanded that a special tax be imposed on the excess profits of the big banks and oil companies, which are making record profits these days, and that those funds be used to double the GST tax credits, which really helps the poorest people in our society. We also suggested increasing the Canada child benefit, which is a good way to redistribute wealth and really help families who are struggling with the rising cost of gas and groceries.

Those are all concerns that I think Parliament should be addressing.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to add my voice to this debate on changing the riding name.

Given that we are talking about riding names, I often talk about my riding and the beautiful riding that it is. Peace River—Westlock is the name of the riding. Although the name includes two of the towns in my riding, it does not necessarily do it justice, in the sense that I represent over a sixth of the province of Alberta in terms of land mass.

I usually tell people that the land mass my riding represents is the size of a mid-sized European country. I also always tell all my colleagues in this place I represent the promised land. Most of my colleague members of Parliament are usually quite certain that they represent the best part of Canada. That might be true, but I represent the promised land.

In order to prove that, I have evidence. I point out I represent the honey capital of Canada and I also represent 7,500 dairy animals, so the riding is literally flowing with milk and honey. That is my first point for the fact that my riding is the promised land.

The second point is that I represent the municipal districts of Peace and Opportunity, and that is a promising name as well. I also represent an area that was settled on a promise called Treaty No. 8. If those are not enough arguments for my riding to be known as the promised land, I do not know what is. That is northern Alberta.

I have put in recommendations to change my riding name to the “Promised Land” in previous Parliaments when we had a bill to update the names. I also would have liked the name “Peace and Opportunity”, which are two municipal districts in my riding, as I said, and being the member of Parliament for Peace and Opportunity would be great as well. If that were not enough, I also have the opportunity to perhaps rename the riding to “Northern Sunrise”, as there is a municipal district called that. It would be a great riding name, and it would be fantastic to be the member of Parliament for Northern Sunrise.

Mr. Speaker, I did not start my clock. How much time do I have left?

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The member has seven minutes and 29 seconds remaining.