Debates of March 22nd, 2023

Opposition Motion—Tax Increase on Beer, Wine and Spirits

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I just have a question. Was the time between the end of the speech and the beginning of Q and A interrupted by other business of the House?

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

No.

I did reference “if available”. Whether I say if somebody is in the House or not means whether they are available and whether they can.

I am not the debater of what is required and what is not in this particular case. Folks, I am going to move on to the next speaker, which is the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, to answer my colleague who asked me if I will hang around to answer questions: absolutely. It is about accountability. At least the Liberal Party of Canada stands for accountability, transparency and so forth.

We have seen a demonstration, and it has happened to me personally today twice, where a Conservative stood in his place and delivered his speech and I wanted to ask him a question, but I could not. One was the former speaker, the official opposition House leader.

It is not a reflection on the rules, but I would encourage members, in particular from the Conservative Party, to please understand that there is a tradition of a higher sense of accountability. If they say something in the chamber, they should at least provide members the opportunity to challenge, comment or ask a question. I have witnessed this first-hand as a parliamentarian in the House of Commons, but this is the first time that I have actually been stood up twice when I asked a question of a Conservative and they did not have the courage—

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

I believe we have another point of order. It is a point of order night. You guys are great.

The hon. member for Brantford—Brant.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Mr. Speaker, before the commencement of the speech from the member opposite, there was a brief exchange between me and I believe the member opposite for Milton. Under his breath, he called me an “asshole”. Therefore, I would be asking for a full apology and a retraction.

[An hon. member]

Is it true?

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Now I have heard from the NDP that it is true, so I would like—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

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

All right. Order.

Everybody can sit down. I am just trying to bring the temperature down here a little bit. We are going to take a second.

The member for Elmwood—Transcona.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to reassure my colleague that I did not say that it was true; I asked if it was true.

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

Okay, that is a clarification.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I just do not understand. Is he saying the accusation is true or that it is true that the member for Milton said it? I think there is a big difference there, and we really want to know and understand.

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

The hon. member for Milton.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge that the member and I had an exchange. However, what I said was: “Aren't you a lawyer?”

Now, I understand the word he said is sometimes confused with the word “lawyer”. However, I did not use the term that he said. It is unparliamentary language. I apologize if I offended the member, but I did not use that word.

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

I do not know if that was any better, but there you go.

While I recognize the late hour and the energy that everybody seems to be experiencing, I want to make sure that everybody has the opportunity to speak and be heard when they have that opportunity.

Right now, the floor is to the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader with eight minutes and 57 seconds left.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to get into the reality of the Conservative opposition motion that they are talking about today. We have to put it in proper perspective.

Over the last number of months, there has been a great deal of canvassing. The Prime Minister often says that Ottawa is a great place to be, and one has to bring the issues and the concerns of the constituents in one's ridings to Ottawa.

I can assure those who are following the debate that we bring a wide variety of different types of issues from out in our communities to Ottawa. We do this to ensure that we reflect what Canadians want to see.

The Conservatives are really focused on things like character assassination. In contrast, we are concerned about making sure that we have the backs of Canadians.

I say that because today they want to talk about beer and wine tax. There is no doubt that beer, alcohol, is a very important issue. I do not question that. However, when I do the math, I think it works out to about 15¢ or 16¢ on a case of 24 beers. That is what they want to talk about.

That is an opposition day. They get a few every year. I would suggest that if we were to listen to someone like me, who likes to respond to what my constituents are talking about, they talk about a wide variety of issues of great concern, whether it is inflation, health care or the environment. The list goes on.

By the way, I will be splitting my time with the member for Edmonton Strathcona.

I can assure everyone that there is a great number of issues. However, the Conservatives want to talk about taxes. They are being selective. One of the very first things we did in government, back in 2015 when Canadians kicked out Stephen Harper, was to reduce the tax for the middle class.

How did the Conservatives respond to that reduction, that legislation that reduced the tax for Canada's middle class? They ran. They voted against it.

We also increased the tax for Canada's wealthiest 1% of people. Once again, how did we see the Conservative Party vote? It voted against that too.

Let us fast-forward, right from the beginning to where we are today. It was not that long ago, three or four months, maybe five, that the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance, said we want to provide additional tax relief for Canadians. We brought in legislation to say that we are going to double the GST rebate temporarily for the next six months.

Originally, the Conservatives actually opposed that tax initiative. In fairness, it took a little bit of shaming, quite a while, but at the end of the day, they actually flip-flopped. I say it somewhat candidly, but I compliment them on their change of heart.

I am glad, because that tax break that we provided, if we relate it to this one, would buy hundreds of bottles of beer, that one break. At the end of the day, we understand the benefits and the drawbacks of what is happening in our communities from a taxation perspective.

They are talking specifically about alcohol and beer. We are all concerned about that issue. We have a budget coming up awfully soon. I know that I am getting anxious about it; maybe there might even be the odd Conservative who is getting anxious about it. We anticipate that there is going to be a wide spectrum of issues dealt with in that budget.

For years, I have been a very strong advocate, for example, on the health care file. Health care, I have argued in the past, is part of our Canadian core identity. I would suggest that it might have been more advantageous to talk about the health care issue based on what the Conservative Party has been talking about for the last few days, something Canadians are genuinely concerned about: the recognition of credentials and how we get more health care workers, whether doctors, nurses or support workers, into the system.

Conservatives might not fully understand jurisdictional responsibilities and things of that nature. They might be trying to intentionally mislead people in terms of what they could be capable of doing, especially if we look at the history of the Conservative Party. It is not very good when it comes to health care; I can assure everyone of that.

At the end of the day—

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

There is a point of order by the hon. member for Pickering—Uxbridge.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are heckling. I would encourage them, if they have questions or concerns, to ask them. The opportunity is there. I would welcome them asking questions instead of running out.

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

That is not really a point of order, but the hon. member will have questions and comments after he finishes his speech in two minutes and 53 seconds.

I would ask everyone to come to order.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has the floor.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad we are talking about budget priorities. I believe that at the end of the day, we will see things in the budget that will be there in a very real and tangible way for Canadians.

I say to my Conservative friends across the way that we all know there is a great deal of consultation that takes place, whether it is the individual member of Parliament, the work members do within their constituencies and talking to constituents or meetings and discussions within caucuses. There are discussions held virtually throughout the year, but in particular, there are the pre-budget debates. At the end of the day, I believe we will see a budget that reflects the interests of Canadians.

As I indicated—

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

I'm here to ask you a question.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

And I'll stay here for your question.

Mr. Speaker, I can say that I am going to be looking in areas that really concern the constituents of Winnipeg North. I know my colleagues will be doing likewise for the ridings they represent.

We have been advocating to the appropriate ministers, including the Minister of Finance, in different ways. These areas may be the bigger issues of our health care system, what is taking place in our environment or the importance of many of those infrastructure programs at the local level. We will continue to advocate where we believe the government should be establishing its priorities in terms of budgetary and legislative measures.

For those following the debate, as I mentioned at the beginning, we take the ways we can use our taxation policies to ensure we have a healthier economy and society very seriously. We can see this in the tax breaks for the middle class, the tax hike on Canada's wealthiest 1%, the GST rebate and the enhancement to the Canada workers benefit. We can also invest in the CRA to ensure, for example, that they stop the people who are trying to avoid paying their fair share.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I come from New Westminster—Burnaby, the heart of some of the best breweries and wineries in all of Canada. I will mention the award-winning Steel and Oak Brewing Co.; Another Beer Co., or ABC, which has terrific products; the Dageraad Brewing in Burnaby, which has a lot of innovation in its products; and Pacific Breeze Winery, which provides excellent wines.

There is no doubt that the tax increase would have a big impact. The government is aware of this. We have been speaking of this for hours. The simple question is this: Why will the government not stop the price increase? Why will it not just halt it, so that it does not increase on April 1?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to speculate about anything in regard to the budget, but what I can say is that I believe it works out to 14¢ or 15¢ for a case of 24 bottles of beer. That is less than a penny per bottle of beer. That is the essence of what we are talking about. Canadians from coast to coast to coast are concerned about a wide spectrum of issues, whether it is health care, the environment, what is happening around the world today and in Ukraine, how we can continue to support Canadians or how we ensure that there is ongoing transparency and accountability. There is a wide spectrum of things that are out there. I do not know to what degree 12¢ or 15¢ for a case of 24 beers rates as the top priority of Canadians. I suspect it does not.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I heard the hon. member just lamenting the fact that he did not have the opportunity to ask me a question, so I am happy to stand here now and give him the opportunity to at least answer a question, which is something that his leader never does, so maybe he will break that mould. It is a bit ironic after the many, many weeks at committee when Liberal MPs embarrassed themselves and demeaned themselves in their theatrical filibuster to try to prevent senior officials in the Liberal Party from testifying.

However, we are talking about an escalator tax, an automatic tax increase, on beer, wine and spirits. I did hear the hon. member say it is a few pennies, but we can add it all up and add up the increase on the carbon tax and add up the increased mortgage payments that people have to make as interest rates go up. If the Liberals say that it is not a big deal and it is just a few cents a bottle, the obvious question is, well, then why raise it?

When the Liberals talk about the cost of living and when they talk about all the costs that are falling onto Canadians, why do they believe that Canadians should pay even more, when they come home from work, to enjoy a cold beer after an honest day's work or to bring friends over to celebrate a birthday? Why do they believe that Canadians should pay more for that while the Prime Minister jets around on vacation, billing taxpayers for flights all over the country, sometimes thousands of dollars to avoid driving just an hour? Why do the Liberals believe that Canadians should pay more while they bill taxpayers so much?