Debates of June 8th, 2022

Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, first and foremost, the member should probably recount the members who are actually in the House, and he will find that there is a quorum, even under the old rules. As you have pointed out, Madam Speaker, we are under Motion No. 11 rules, which received support from a majority of members of the House.

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

To make it very clear again, before members go any further with this point of order, I would remind them that on May 2, the House duly adopted an order prescribing that the Chair shall not receive any quorum calls after 6:30 p.m.

The Chair rendered a decision on the admissibility of the motion, including the section on quorum calls during extended sitting days in May and June.

The ruling can be found in the Debates of May 2, 2022 at pages 4,577 and 4,578. I would invite the member to read the ruling of the Speaker to find that this matter has already been settled.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I know it is getting a little late, so I first want to thank the member for being here to participate. It sounded a bit like a canned speech, but I will leave that to the member to decide whether it was by his own hand or someone else's.

I think it was around this time five years ago that the former minister of national defence tabled a new national defence policy. I have been listening to what this member wants for national security. I would simply ask him to speak with his caucus because, quite honestly, the government has been terrible on these large policy reviews in other areas of government.

If we look at the mess that the current Minister of National Defence has inherited and how our Canadian Armed Forces is underprepared in so many different ways, it is woeful. It is shameful. The member may want to consider that, rather than proposing new policies, perhaps the government should actually start filling the gaps that exist right now.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I mentioned in my speech, in 2017 we had a policy document, but things have changed tremendously in the last five years. Misinformation and disinformation, while not a major factor five or six years back, have now become a major factor. We did not have the pandemic then, but now this pandemic has shown that a man-made virus could create havoc throughout the entire world. These are the reasons why the government has said, rightly so, that we are going to review the policy and update the existing policy document.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech, which did not have the slightest connection to Bill C-19.

I know that when a point of order is raised to have the Chair ask members of the House to ensure their speeches are on topic, it is always interpreted very broadly. In this case, however, my colleague's speech had absolutely nothing to do with Bill C‑19.

First the government introduces a special motion forcing us to sit until midnight every night, at its whim, under time allocation. The normal process of debate in the House is not being followed. Now the government is sending in Liberal members who, as interesting as their speeches are, are more or less filibustering on Bill C‑19.

My question for him is—

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

I am sorry, but I must leave time for a response.

The hon. member for Nepean.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, if the hon. member had read the budget, he would know that there is an entire chapter on this. Not only has $8 billion been invested on the basis of the policy that was published in 2017, but I can go on to read what the government has announced in investments.

The government has provided $875 million to address the cyber-threat landscape, based on Canada's first comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. On misinformation and disinformation, the government has provided $13.4 million for the G7 rapid response mechanism. The government has provided $10 million for the Privy Council Office to coordinate, develop, and implement government-wide measures designed to combat disinformation and protect our democracy. The government has also provided $385 million for IRCC and CSIS, plus the—

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

We have to proceed with questions and comments.

The hon. member for Calgary Forest Lawn.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, although I appreciate that the member gave a lot of anecdotes of what Canada should be doing and could be doing, I was wondering if the hon. member would commit to getting whichever ministry he thinks is responsible for that long speech to get to work on the work he just said Canada should be doing. If he is okay with that, can he please tell us which minister he will approach and when he thinks this will take place?

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, in fact, that is the entire big mistake, what the member is doing. It is not the responsibility of one minister; it is a whole-of-government approach. If he had listened to what I was saying, he would know I said that we need a coordinated, comprehensive policy to tackle the new threats Canada is facing, which were not there five or 10 years back.

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

Madam Speaker, to pick up on what my colleague from Joliette was saying, there was indeed not much of a connection between our colleague's statement and the subject at hand, which has me wondering if he is tacitly acknowledging that there is nothing in the budget.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, absolutely, if the member had taken some time to read the budget, there is a whole chapter on this. As I mentioned, there are many investments on many different levels that deal with the defence of our country and the security aspects of our country. Every single one of these things has been derived from the budget.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Madam Speaker, I just want to respond to the previous comments that were made by my colleagues across the way. I take a lot of offence at the fact that they were stating there was nothing in the budget with respect to cybersecurity and nothing in the budget with respect to defence, which my colleague spent 20 minutes highlighting.

I sat on the national defence committee during the first mandate, and I know full well exactly what the threats facing Canada are today. The fact is that we had to look at “Strong, Secure, Engaged” and shift and pivot, given the new realities.

That is what the member just mentioned, and he spent 20 minutes highlighting the new realities here, so I find it quite offensive that people are accusing the member of not discussing what is actually in the budget, on page 136.

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

The member for Joliette on a point of order.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to remind the House that we are talking about Bill C‑19, the budget implementation bill, not the budget itself. Not everything in that speech is in Bill C‑19. My colleague may take offence, but that speech had no connection to Bill C‑19.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague, and everything I talked about is part of Bill C-19.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, maybe the member could clarify and clear the air. Did he write that speech, or did he literally just take sections of chapter 5 out of the budget? I would just like to know.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, I take offence at the remark asking whether I wrote the speech. In fact, I spent quite a number of hours today preparing for the speech and have read so many documents, including the recent document on national security that was published by the University of Ottawa and the major leading experts on security and defence of our country. I completely take offence at these comments.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Speaker, I listened to my colleague from Nepean's speech in hopes of finding some connection with Bill C‑19.

Beyond that, I also picked up on some criticism, constructive criticism, about his government's proposals relating to things that had kind of been forgotten. That is why I want to ask him if he plans to support Bill C‑19.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have a simple answer. I do support Bill C-19.

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

Madam Speaker, I did enjoy the member's comments, and I wanted to ask him something a bit different. When we take a look at the budget implementation bill, one of the things we talk a great deal about is the ways in which we are supporting Canadians, and the national child care program is something that is universally very well received. The only political entity in Canada that is actually in opposition to it is the Conservative Party of Canada. We have Progressive Conservative provincial parties that are supporting it.

I am wondering if the member could just provide his thoughts as to why this is an important program for our children and parents across Canada.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, that is a very important question.

The child care policy across Canada is very important because it equalizes everybody from coast to coast to coast. We have signed agreements with every single political party, from the Progressive Conservatives in Ontario to the Liberals in Atlantic Canada to the Conservative government in the west to the NDP government in B.C. Every provincial government has joined. That will give much-needed support to middle-class families who are burdened with the very high cost of child care. Child care at $10 a day is a boon to most middle-class families.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Niagara Falls. Niagara is a beautiful spot in Canada, but not as beautiful as Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

I am very pleased to rise in the House this evening to share my thoughts on Bill C-19, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures.

The first thing that came to mind when I read the budget was the phrase “out of touch”, because I was really upset to see how out of touch the government and the Prime Minister were with the reality of Canadians and their daily concerns.

Inflation is at its highest in 30 years. Absolutely everything costs more. The price of gas has skyrocketed. In my riding, the price per litre of regular gas is around $2.03 right now. The price of food has climbed by 9.8% since last year, and house prices have doubled since the Prime Minister came to power.

All these increases have a direct impact on ordinary Canadians, but the government is doing absolutely nothing to help. We pored over the budget, but we did not find anything that would help families cope with these three key issues.

The government is just as out of touch with two important sectors of our economy that are especially important to me and that are being hit hard right now: the agri-food chain, which is severely affected by inflation, and the tourism industry, which suffered tremendously during the pandemic. The budget offers only a few crumbs for these two sectors.

Madam Speaker, there is so much noise I cannot hear myself speak.

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

The hon. member is quite correct. He has a lot of difficulty understanding and so do I in hearing what the member is saying. I am asking members to respect the fact that he has the floor.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, I seldom rise in the House, and so I hope that you will listen to me, as my colleagues obviously will.

The Conservative Party proposed very concrete solutions to address inflation and the cost of gas, food and housing. Yesterday, our interim leader moved an opposition motion that was debated and voted on. The motion called for the implementation of simple, sensible and concrete solutions. It was a motion full of empathy and compassion, which demonstrated our support for Canadian families, workers, youth, families and seniors.

The motion would have given farmers some breathing room and allowed the tourism sector to grow after two years of misery. Unfortunately, all these solutions were rejected outright by the Liberal-NDP coalition. I would like to come back to these matters today and show how arrogant, out of touch and petty the Prime Minister is.

In the past, Canada has gone through periods of high inflation that often resulted in recessions. At present, we are clearly in a period of inflation, and red flags are being raised. Has the government learned from the past, and will it do everything in its power to prevent history from repeating itself? I am not so sure.

There are currently huge wait times for passports. It is insane. Canadians want answers about the services they are getting.

Then there is the skyrocketing price of gas. In Rivière‑du‑Loup, in my riding, gas is currently around $2.24 to $2.30 a litre. That is the highest price in a year, or ever. We have never seen gas prices so high.

Summer is almost here, and people are planning vacations. We need to put ourselves in the shoes of an average Canadian who wants to leave home after two years of the pandemic. They want to visit regions all across Canada, especially Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, of course, and drive through all of our magnificent scenery.

How can they plan a family vacation when they cannot even make ends meet? They were thinking of travelling 700, 800, 1,000 or 2,000 kilometres, but they now have to reconsider since that is nearly impossible, considering the cost of gas. When it costs $100 to fill the tank, it makes a person think twice about taking a road trip.

When we ask the government about this, it blames international circumstances and the war in Ukraine. The budget should be providing solutions, but it has none to offer. We in the Conservative Party put ourselves in the shoes of our constituents and share their fears. That is why we proposed concrete solutions. We asked the government to drop the GST on fuel as a priority to give Canadians a break, just as several countries have done. We called for a pause on the carbon tax hike that took effect on April 1. The government refused our requests.

Let us talk about food. The cost of groceries has risen at an unprecedented rate, the highest in 40 years. Some families have already paid over $1,000 more for groceries since the beginning of the year. Other families have to make an agonizing choice between buying groceries, paying the rent and filling up their car to get to work. I myself have employees who are asking if they can work remotely because it costs too much to go to work. This is not a joke.

Food banks are now providing food to people who have full-time jobs, not just disadvantaged, penniless folks. These are people, families, couples who are working, but who are still being forced to turn to food banks in order to eat.

The government has no short-term solutions in its budget, only crumbs, to help these people, and it voted against the motion we put forward. The Conservatives argued for solutions to the supply chain issues and for farm taxes to be eliminated to help bring down food prices.

Let us now talk about housing prices. Since the Prime Minister came to power, housing prices have doubled in Canada. Young families are watching their dream of home ownership drift further and further out of reach. The budget mentions a $1,500 tax credit, but that will not even pay the lawyer's fees. This amount is nothing when the average price of a home in Canada is about $800,000.

In my riding, some sellers are getting four or five offers on their homes, which has never happened before. Houses are obviously less expensive in my riding than in Toronto or Vancouver, but sellers are receiving multiple offers, pushing the selling price above the asking price.

The government had six years to solve the affordability problem, but it did nothing. It left the real estate market in the hands of foreign buyers and unscrupulous speculators, who drove up the price of housing. We proposed an amendment to budget 2022, demanding that an inquiry into money laundering be launched immediately in order to curb speculation. Surprise, surprise, that amendment was rejected too.

Concerning the tourism sector, I am pleased to be part of the shadow cabinet on tourism together with my colleague from Peterborough—Kawartha, who is not here.

In a region as picturesque as mine, tourism plays an important role in economic development. This is particularly important to me. As members know, the pandemic devastated the tourism sector, especially during the two years of recession when many restaurants had to close their doors and performance venues sat empty. These are incredibly sad stories.

There was some emergency assistance, and the Conservatives supported a number of government measures. We even helped find solutions in some cases, because the assistance was not all that well adapted to many businesses or economic sectors. We therefore helped the government.

The government stubbornly insists on maintaining the COVID‑19 measures at airports, leading to very lengthy lines. Many people have had their entire vacations cancelled. That is completely ridiculous. There are some important things to be done about this, as well.

The luxury tax imposed by the Liberals is another measure in the budget that has an impact on this sector. The owner of a flying school in my riding buys 25-, 30- or 40-year-old aircraft secondhand for teaching purposes. Planes are not toys. They can be quite expensive. Because the planes are worth more than $100,000, this man will be forced to pay a luxury tax, which means that he will have to charge all of his students more. There are some measures in this budget that make no sense. I sincerely believe that this threshold needs to be reviewed. We have proposed amendments to the legislation.

Agriculture is essential to my riding. The price of gas and fuel is one thing, but the price of fertilizer has also gone through the roof in the past few months. It is unbelievable that none of the measures in the budget provide assistance for these sectors.

I could go on for another 12 pages.