Debates of April 24th, 2023

Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague from Beauce, who raised a lot of issues that have a direct impact on Laurentides—Labelle.

I am taking time to talk about agriculture and agri-food. After all these years and all the challenges related to maintaining supply management and keeping the industry as it is, one in 10 farmers are being forced to shut down. That is happening in my colleague's riding of Beauce just as it is in Laurentides—Labelle.

My question is this. Are my colleague and his party willing to support, in both the House of Commons and in committee, any assistance measure to save our agriculture and agri-food industry?

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent question. She is obviously preaching to the choir in asking me that question, because I was a farmer for over 45 years. I was a fourth-generation farmer and, today, a fifth generation has taken over our family business.

The current government must clearly indicate that it upholds and supports our agricultural industry. It is true that many farms are finding it increasingly difficult to find people to take over, and the economic context is unique.

My colleague mentioned supply management. In my speech, I talked about the closure of a pork processing plan. The pork industry is not supply managed. Some export markets closed, and so perhaps we need to support our farmers and processors in developing and conquering new markets.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague and many of his Conservative colleagues have been talking about housing. I think one thing we all agree on in the House is that there is a crisis of unbelievable proportions related to housing in this country.

I live in Vancouver and have been there for close to four decades. The rise in house prices began in the mid-eighties, particularly after Expo, and then continued with the repatriation of Hong Kong back to China in the late 1990s and the Olympics in 2010. With each of these things, it became obvious that there was an inflow of foreign capital, from both corporate and foreign investment, that destabilized house prices in the Lower Mainland. It is at the point now where, for people who live and work there, the price of detached or even non-detached houses is completely divorced from what people actually make.

What specifically does my hon. colleague say a Conservative government would do to help provide real affordable housing for people in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia? I would like to hear specifically what policy his government would advance.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I am a former municipal councillor and I think that our leader, the member for Carleton, makes an important point when he talks about cutting red tape to ensure that municipalities can issue building permits faster. I live in Beauce, and our reality may not be identical, but housing is still a major concern.

I think that there should be less red tape. I have been here for four years, and I have been saying the same thing for four years. I hope that we will see some signals in that regard over the coming months.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kings—Hants.

I am pleased to participate in the debate on Bill C‑47, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023, which will help build a clean economy.

Today, the world's largest economies are making incredible strides not only in fighting the climate crisis, but also in restructuring, seizing the opportunities that this industrial shift represents for them and building clean industries. For that reason, budget 2023 includes innovative and substantial investments in building that economy right here in Canada.

Fighting the climate crisis is clearly the main objective of all major economies. However, by building a strong and inclusive economy by seizing these opportunities and using Canada's incredible resources to achieve great success in the economy of tomorrow, we are also investing in Canadian businesses, Canadian talent and Canadian workers.

Our Canadian plan uses a variety of useful measures to invest in this new clean economy. We have already spoken at length about certain clear and predictable investment tax credits. We are also providing strategic financing in sectors such as critical minerals and clean energy. By investing in these sectors, Canada will truly build its economy and increase opportunities for all Canadian workers. We are also investing in some more targeted sectors and projects of national and international significance, as we saw with the wonderful announcements about Volkswagen.

By making such significant investments for Canada, we are ensuring that we are not left behind. Currently, while all the other major global economies are investing massively in these sectors, the worst thing that could happen would be for Canada not to seize these opportunities and never have the chance to re-enter the race ever again. We must invest in transforming our economy, but also in these opportunities.

Budget 2023 truly ensures that a green Canadian economy is also a source of prosperity and jobs for the middle class, but also for more dynamic communities across the country. We cannot do it alone, however. This is going to require investment at the government level and beyond. I would like to take this discussion to the Canada growth fund. We know there are trillions of dollars in private capital waiting for these opportunities, waiting to be spent on building the clean global economy. Canada does have some rivals. We are all trying to attract the best capital from the private sector.

The recent enactment of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act posed a major challenge for our budget. To be competitive within the North American economy, we really have to invest in our industries, since they will drive the clean economy. To succeed, we had to meet two challenges. The first was to encourage companies to take risks and invest in clean technologies, advanced technologies, here in Canada. The second was to keep up with the growing list of nations that are also using public funds to attract private capital, including the United States and the European Union. As we saw, the list does not stop there. Australia was also in the race, along with many other countries.

In budget 2022, we announced the government's plans to create the Canada growth fund, a $15‑billion arm's-length public investment vehicle that will help attract private capital to build Canada's clean economy.

The thought behind that was to use investment instruments that absorb certain risks. This is all about attracting and encouraging private investment in some of the riskier projects, in new technologies, in companies, but also in low-carbon supply chains.

The 2022 economic statement announced more details on how the Canada growth fund would work, and this new investment vehicle was created in December.

The legislation introduced last week introduces amendments to the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act to allow the board, also known as PSP Investments, to provide investment management services for the Canada growth fund. As a significant part of the government's plan to decarbonize the economy, the Canada growth fund requires an experienced, professional, independent investment team to make important investments. That is why we are pooling those services.

PSP Investments is already established as a federal Crown corporation, and it already has $225 billion in assets under management. It will be able to add assets for investments in the clean economy of tomorrow. Canada growth fund assets will be managed by PSP Investments, a separate and independent corporation. We like it that way.

The Canada growth fund will make investments that will catalyze substantial private sector investment in businesses and projects in Canada to help bring about that transformation I was talking about earlier, to grow the economy and to compete in the global net-zero energy market. Canada growth fund investments will help Canada achieve its national economic and climate strategy goals.

I see that time is running out. I talked about the Canada growth fund, which will be very important and strategic for both meeting our targets and capitalizing on these opportunities. However, I also wanted to talk about a problem we have in Canada. Canadian companies are not investing enough in R and D, and not at the same level as their peers. To meet this challenge, the budget proposes a new approach and creates the Canada innovation corporation. This was announced in budget 2022, but now several sectors are being brought together and the Canada innovation corporation's mandate is being expanded.

I do not have time to talk about it in detail, but the modernization of the National Research Council is very important too. It is another tool in the tool box that will help us achieve those objectives, which are to seize those opportunities and to join the global march toward a greener economy and a healthier planet.

Clearly, we have made smart investments that are good for Canadian workers, for businesses, for the Canadian economy and for our planet. I hope that all members in the House will join me in supporting the passage of this crucial piece of legislation.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Madam Speaker, prior to being elected to this chamber I served with the Canadian Foodgrains Bank. I had the opportunity to work in Pontiac with that organization, and I got to know some of the excellent farmers and rural folks in the member's riding.

I am curious what reaction to the budget the member is seeing from her own agricultural constituents, as 6.8% of Canada's GDP comes from the ag sector. I noticed that she voted against Bill C-234, the carbon tax exemption for farmers, as did most, but not all, of her colleagues, which I want to acknowledge.

There is almost nothing in this budget for agriculture. What reaction is she getting in her riding from her agricultural constituents?

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Madam Speaker, my answer is very simple: Carbon pricing does not apply to Quebec. I would also add that farmers in my riding are ahead when it comes to many green technologies. They are ahead of the government because farmers live off the land and they see climate change every day. They are concerned and they need new technologies, because the seasons are much more challenging. There are some real concerns in light of extreme climate change.

These farmers are ahead and they are not worried about federal carbon pricing, because it does not apply to them. Quebec has its own carbon pricing, which is quite good and accepted.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

She spoke a lot about climate change. It is true that the government is making a lot of direct and indirect investments in the budget to help oil companies greenwash their record. The government is giving them money for carbon capture, a technology that is very controversial in the field. As we have said, there is almost nothing for housing, but the government is giving oil companies money.

Let us talk about oil companies' profits in 2022. Exxon Mobil made $56 billion in profit, Shell made $40 billion, TotalEnergies made $36 billion, Chevron made $36 billion and BP made $27 billion. How can the government give money to these oil companies, which made a combined total of $200 billion in 2022, while completely forgetting about the housing crisis?

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned housing. Last year's budget earmarked a huge amount of money for housing. That funding is currently being allocated to various programs. Many citizens, committed individuals and leaders in housing are looking at how those amounts can be allocated effectively to create more housing units across Canada.

Amounts were earmarked in last year's budget, and they are being allocated to various programs. It is really a matter of ensuring that those amounts benefit all Canadians.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, I would like to thank the member for Pontiac for focusing on climate change and what the government will do to combat climate change.

I would like to ask her about the Kivalliq hydro-fibre link project, which is mentioned in the budget. Unfortunately, the budget does not say how much it will invest in that project, and I wonder if she could tell the House what kinds of investments it will make to ensure that this project does indeed go ahead so more communities can reduce their reliance on diesel.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Madam Speaker, the budget makes significant investments in clean energy. That is really the main point of my speech. Investments are needed in strategic sectors to ensure we have a clean economy, which must also be inclusive and bring prosperity to communities across the country.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is a huge privilege to rise in the House to debate Bill C‑47 and discuss the implementation of the budget. I thank my hon. colleague from Pontiac for sharing her time with me this afternoon. I want to present the views of my constituents in Kings—Hants on the budget and speak about certain initiatives that are very important to my riding.

The budget essentially has three major pillars. The first is a focus on affordability. The second is a focus on health care supports for the provinces and territories to help improve health care across the country. The third is the green economy, our clean energy future, and indeed Canada's future prosperity here at home.

Affordability has become a top priority for Canadians across the country as a result of higher inflation following the pandemic. The good news is that inflation declined again this month and is now 4.3%, compared to 8.1% last summer.

I think it is important to recognize the context that this government is faced with. Given the fact the Bank of Canada, through its monetary policy, has been helping to try to bring down the cost of inflation, the government has to be responsible with how it is addressing the question of consumption spending.

When we look at the budget, there is a one-time doubling of the GST rebate, which is being framed by the government as a grocery rebate, and that would be eligible to 11 million Canadians. It has been means tested, which means it is based on income. I certainly support it because it is a targeted measure. It would not necessarily support all Canadians, but those who have lower incomes and could really use support right now, given some of the challenges around affordability. Therefore, it is targeted, focused, and will not necessarily drive inflation higher, given the work the Bank of Canada is doing.

I also want to talk about something that could be framed as a health benefit, but is also an affordability benefit, which is the Canadian dental plan. The government has introduced this, and it is going to help support uninsured Canadians who have a household income below $90,000 with a program to help support their dental costs. We know that, if people do not have access to private insurance, sometimes the costs associated with surgery or fixing one's teeth can be quite expensive, particularly for those who are struggling to get by. This is a measure that is going to make a difference across the country. Indeed, in my riding of Kings—Hants, I have already had calls from families who are in receipt of the benefit that we put out, as a government, for those who are under 12. The government's program is to expand this to seniors next year, and indeed to all households with an income of below $90,000 by 2025.

My riding is still disproportionately older than the rest of the country. We have a lot of good things happening in the riding, but we have a lot of seniors, so for lower-income seniors who do not have dental insurance, this would really make a difference for them.

Let me talk about health care. As a federal member of Parliament, and I would suspect it is probably the same for many of my colleagues, I get calls quite often about health care and the state of health care in this country. I remind my constituents that I do not directly control that, nor does the Government of Canada, but it is our responsibility to make sure that there are proper resources on the table. That is exactly what this budget does. Of course, we knew this was something that had been announced prior to the budget, but there is going to be $198 billion of new spending over the next decade toward health care, above and beyond where we are right now, $46 billion of which was announced as new spending tabled by the government in this budget.

Spending alone will not solve health care, but it was something we were hearing from the provinces and territories. I am proud of the way this government has stepped up to make sure there is consistent funding over the next decade and of the fact that we know it is in place and that the provinces can take that measure and plan accordingly.

In my home province of Nova Scotia, the provincial government has staked a lot of its credibility on “fixing health care”. It will certainly have no excuses from this government because we are making sure that those resources are there. It is now its turn to get focused on the ground at being able to deliver that. That is something I am proud of.

We will continue to make sure the provinces are using the funds reasonably and make sure they are going toward health care. As we have heard before, sometimes the Government of Canada will provide transfers to the provinces and they will use them for other priorities. This government is making sure the money is going to be spent exactly where it should be, which is on health care.

I also want to highlight that the budget talks about loan forgiveness for doctors and nurses. Something the government had in place previously was loan forgiveness for doctors who practise in rural areas. We know the importance of doctors, but we also know the importance of allied health professionals. This government is extending this to nurses who practise in rural Canada. Certainly in my area of Kings—Hants in Nova Scotia, this is going to be very welcome news.

This government is addressing the clean energy economy, the third pillar. We have talked about health, we have talked about affordability and next is about matching what the United States has done. A lot of members have talked about the Inflation Reduction Act. This is a significant amount of money that the United States put on the table to help drive spending in the clean energy economy.

The Prime Minister has been very clear that this government has had a number of measures on the table for years, but the size of the American investment, nearly $400 billion U.S., is significant. Frankly, it would have been irresponsible for this government not to have some measures to make sure we responded in a way that draws capital and investment to this country and does not allow investment to simply go south of the border.

A number of measures are important, and I want to highlight a few that I think are particularly important to Atlantic Canada. One is the 15% refundable tax credit for clean electricity. This will matter across the country, and I want to give credit to the Minister of Finance. As opposed to putting these types of incentives in government programs that entities have to apply for, we are setting the criteria, saying what people can expect. The money will flow much quicker and will allow businesses to have certainty to make investments. This will matter for entities across the country but particularly in my province, which needs to keep driving its electricity future in a renewable way.

I have talked a lot about nuclear in this House. Really important measures for nuclear are being included in these measures. This is something we have heard from all sides of the House, largely, and I want to compliment those who have raised these issues in the House, because this government, in this budget, is doing exactly that and making sure we have homegrown solutions that can make a difference.

On clean hydrogen, we have a world of opportunity in Atlantic Canada. Members should come visit us sometime. We would love to showcase the investments and that we have the ability to help fuel the world right from Atlantic Canada. It is going to be through clean hydrogen. This government is putting incentives on the table to make sure it happens in Atlantic Canada and not another part of the country.

I have talked at great length in this House over the last year about the importance of the Atlantic loop. There is again a mention of that in the budget. I know there is ongoing co-operation between the Government of Canada and various provincial entities. We need to keep driving that project forward.

In Kings—Hants, agriculture and forestry are predominant industries at the primary level. I was very pleased to see investments of $368 million to the Department of Natural Resources for forestry initiatives. We need to see at least some of that go toward mass timber. There is an opportunity in Atlantic Canada, and indeed in Kings—Hants, for a mass timber facility. The Atlantic region is the only region of the country that does not yet have that. This matters, and I really hope we can see those projects move in the days ahead.

On the agriculture side, the advance payments program, with the continuation of interest-free loans, is going to make a difference for my farmers. I was pleased to see the Minister of Agriculture help ensure that foot-and-mouth disease vaccines will be available in this country. We have available stock. There is also the dairy innovation and investment fund. Given that I have the largest number of supply-managed farms east of Quebec, this is going to matter to my farmers in the days ahead.

One thing that I think this government needs to address would simply be the importance of continuing to drive a mechanism around non-cost measures. It is important that we invest. The government is doing so, but it is also important that we look at regulatory reform measures that do not cost money and that can help drive industry success. I hope to see a formal mechanism as we head into the fall.

I see my time has unfortunately come to a close, but I look forward to taking questions from my hon. colleagues.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Madam Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer reviewed the budget and identified close to $800 million in what the government is calling non-announced spending. This would be in addition to the billions of dollars in non-announced spending announced last year.

I am wondering if the member could tell us what this spending would be for.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member would probably be best suited to ask that question of the Minister of Finance. Yes, I sit on this side of the House, but I am not a member of the King's Privy Council.

I will say that, as per normal, the government will outline expenditures in certain areas where it looks to take up programs. The budget is not a complete view of every single program the government will release over the next calendar year. Sometimes it is an outlay of money whereby the government will build a model and program that will help service Canadians in the days ahead. That might be some of what the member is talking about regarding the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

If he would like to have a conversation after our interaction, I would be happy to take on his concerns and do what I can to engage my colleagues on this side.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague across the way to tell us more about the Royal Style and Titles Act, which the budget plans to amend.

Over the weekend, a survey showed that over 60% of Canadians want to cut ties with the British monarchy. We also saw a news report informing us that the King of England is living in luxury off a tax-exempt fortune of over $3 billion.

Meanwhile, here at home, the budget has next to nothing for seniors or housing. Health transfers are practically non-existent, or are whittled down to the bare bones.

Can my colleague tell me how to explain to our constituents why the budget is focusing so much attention on the King of England while totally ignoring our problems at home?

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Madam Speaker, let me first address some of the questions.

There is $46 billion in domestic spending for health care. There has been 70 billion dollars' worth of housing spending. Part of the reason why we did not see major expenditures is money is still getting out the door to help support Quebeckers and indeed those across the country.

I will address the member's question. He is framing this as about the King of England. It is about Canada's constitutional relationship with the United Kingdom, and that includes the indigenous people in this country. The treaties we have forged with indigenous people tie back to the British Crown. Our history as a country is rooted in the relationship we have with the British monarchy. It is ceremonial in nature. We certainly have the integrity to make our own decisions in this country.

I support the relationship we have, because the question becomes how we create a different system in the days ahead. That comes with its own Pandora's box of issues. The member opposite is a sovereigntist, and he would like to see Quebec removed from the federation. I want to see Canada united. I think there is a pathway where we can recognize everyone's distinct differences across the country while recognizing that Canada's shared history ties back to the British Crown.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member spoke about specific aspects of the budget that tie back into helping rural and remote communities attract doctors and nurses by extending an offer to lessen debt for nurses. I appreciate that.

I come from a riding with communities like Port Hardy, which, an article just came out saying, is again going to have to shut down the emergency room during the day. Right now, the emergency room is open only during the day, not during the evening or the night. People have to leave their community and drive far away to get emergency services. It is the same on Cormorant Island.

Does the member think it would be important for the government to step up and make sure there are ties to small, rural communities struggling in this country in terms of health care, to get them a bit extra to get through this time? I know that, in B.C., the provincial government has stepped up, but it needs more resources to address this huge crisis.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the nature of the question. However, as it relates to whether a hospital emergency room is going to be open or not, it largely ties back to the decision of health authorities at a provincial level.

I appreciate that the member opposite said that requires more resources. I think it requires both more resources and an allocation of said resources in the province. We are doing our part, on the federal side, to make sure there is stable funding provided to the provinces. In fact, Premier Eby has recognized and endorsed the health deal the Government of Canada has put on the table.

As it relates to the member's rural communities, which I sympathize with, I hope she will take up with the provincial government what it is doing to make sure there are proper resources to service rural communities, because it is an important question.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour for me to rise today and speak to the implementation of the budget. It is an incredible honour for me, as well, to be splitting my time with the great member for Edmonton Manning, who is a very valuable colleague. I am really looking forward to hearing what he has to say later. However, before that, members have to endure 10 minutes of my speaking.

It might not come as any surprise, based on the debate we have had over the last couple of weeks, but Conservatives have not supported and will not be supporting the implementation of this budget, mainly for three reasons. We laid out key priorities that we wanted to see in this budget ahead of time and they really were not met.

This budget would add billions of dollars in debt, with no plan to get back to balance. The Prime Minister has already added more debt than all previous prime ministers combined in this country and there is no plan to get to balance. That is the part that really worries me. Not only would this spending add fuel to the inflationary fire and increase the cost of living, but it would also threaten the sustainability of our public services for future generations. Each dollar we have to spend servicing debt is a dollar we cannot be spending on other services. That is something we all have to keep in mind, moving forward, and the government should keep in mind that, when it racks up billions of dollars in debt, it is threatening our social services for future generations. This budget would also raise taxes. As I just alluded to, we know there is a cost of living crisis with inflation. The government has chosen, once again, to raise taxes for Canadians further and there is truly no plan to build homes and get affordable units built.

For those three main reasons, Conservatives voted against the budget, and I have every expectation that, moving forward, we will be voting against the implementation of this budget.

I want to take a step back and talk about another major issues that I feel is neglected in this budget. That is about community safety. We have seen concerns with community safety around the region in northwestern Ontario in communities like Kenora, Dryden and Sioux Lookout. Policing calls for services have been up, as have, of course, the costs that go with this, to the point where municipalities are struggling and trying to figure out how they are going to be able to deal with those costs. We have seen assaults, slashed tires, vehicle break-ins and things like needles being found around the community, all happening with greater frequency around the area.

As I mentioned, we are seeing this right across northwestern Ontario, but there has been a certain amount of media coverage specifically around the city of Kenora. It is the largest community in the riding, so a lot of the notes I will refer to will mention Kenora specifically, but I would like members to keep in mind that it is something that is not unique to the city of Kenora but is right across northwestern Ontario.

We have seen articles with headlines such as “Kenora assault leaves one with life threatening injuries”, from March. The Kenora OPP has recently released figures showing that property crime has actually increased 10% year over year. It is now at the point where local professionals and business owners are scared to go to work. When I go door knocking and talk to people around the community, many residents tell me they are afraid to go downtown and certainly would not go downtown in the evening or at night. That is incredibly sad on a number of levels. Kenora is one of the smallest cities in Ontario. It has 15,000 people. We did not even lock our doors when we were growing up. It is really one of those tight-knit, small-town communities and people are now scared to go downtown. Many businesses have been locking their doors during operating hours; people have to ring the doorbell in order to gain access.

It brings up the question of what is driving all of this. Why are we seeing this increase in crime, and why are people feeling less safe? There is certainly no single answer and there is no single solution, but one of the issues we are seeing in Kenora and in the other communities of our riding is that, unfortunately, there are many homeless residents. Many of these individuals are struggling with their mental health and with addiction challenges, and they do not have proper supports around them. There is great work being done by people like Dr. Jonny Grek, who has been going around providing treatment to homeless residents on the street. I had the opportunity very recently to join him for a walk to see what he does.

There are other organizations, like Ne-Chee Friendship Centre; the Makwa Patrol, also known as the Bear Clan Patrol in other areas of the country; and the Morningstar Detoxification Centre. These are all incredible organizations with great people doing great work to help those who are vulnerable and those who are struggling. However, it is an indisputable fact that the current systems just cannot deal with the magnitude of the issue before us right now. This is truly a crisis.

Coupled with the addiction concern, there has been an increase in HIV. In 2022, there were more HIV cases in Kenora than in the previous eight years combined. Overdose deaths have increased 82%, year over year, and northwestern Ontario now has the highest per capita overdose mortality rate in the province of Ontario.

On housing, and I mentioned that this issue is coupled with housing, the KDSB, the Kenora District Services Board, for those who do not know, estimates that there are 100 homeless residents in the small community of Kenora. There are more than 1,300 households on an affordable housing wait-list; that is an increase of nearly 1,000 households from just nine years ago, to paint the picture of the broader housing issue we are seeing across the region.

This budget does mention housing a bit. It does mention treatment and recovery, but on treatment and recovery specifically, it is light on details. Given the fact that this issue has been spiralling for the last eight years and that there have not been proper supports put in place, I know that a lot of people in the Kenora district and northwestern Ontario, myself included, really do not feel the government will step up to meet this challenge.

On the other hand, Conservatives support policies that get people into recovery instead of spending a night in a cell, only to be released and continue that cycle over and over again. I have seen that far too often. I have done a few ride-alongs and have been able to go around the community, not just in Kenora but also in Pickle Lake, Dryden and others. I have seen people who have asked to be arrested so that they have somewhere to stay. I have heard of people who have chosen to commit a crime so that, if they do not have proper supports around them, they know they will have a few nights of somewhere to stay where they will have a bed and a meal.

Conservatives support treatment and recovery options. That includes giving Correctional Services power to designate all or part of a penitentiary as a treatment facility. We also support greater consequences for repeat violent offenders and for the drug dealers who are preying on these vulnerable people with addictions. We want to see greater consequences for those individuals, but, unfortunately, violent crime was not mentioned even once in this budget. Overall, those solutions, addictions treatment and recovery, are what I feel is missing from this budget and it is what Conservatives will certainly be focusing on over the next number of months and into the term in which we form government.

As I mentioned, there is no silver-bullet solution to this, but it would certainly help to address the crisis that we are seeing on the streets of Kenora, of Dryden and of Sioux Lookout, to help ensure that everyone in our community is safe, from the vulnerable residents, the homeless population, to the business owners and professionals and the visitors. Kenora sits on the beautiful Lake of the Woods in northwestern Ontario and it is an incredibly popular tourist spot each summer. We want to make sure that everyone in our community is safe.

This budget does not get it done, but Conservatives will.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I have heard the hon. member repeat what I have heard a number of Conservatives repeat, which is, apparently, that they had three demands of things to be seen in the budget before they would agree to vote in favour of the budget. This member mentioned it. A number of Conservative members prior have mentioned it.

The only problem with that is that, the day before the budget was introduced, the deputy leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Thornhill, during question period, said that Conservatives would not be supporting the budget. Nobody knew what was in the budget at that point. As a matter of fact, it is against the rules of the House for anybody to have known that, yet, somehow, the member for Thornhill, the deputy leader of the Conservative Party, knew enough to know that those three items would not be in the budget.

This just leads me to assume that, really, Conservatives are just playing games with words here. They never intended to support the budget, regardless of their demands. I am wondering if the member can provide some insight into that.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have not heard from my colleague in a while in this chamber, so I appreciate his intervention.

The question gives me the opportunity to highlight the fact that the three demands we had were not met. We asked for a cap on government spending to help rein in inflation, and the government is adding billions of dollars in debt. We asked for taxes to be lowered on Canadians, and the government is raising taxes. We asked for a plan to get homes built by speeding up building permits and looking at ways to free up land and federal buildings for development, and that is not in this budget. That is why we are not supporting it.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague talked a little bit about housing, and I thank him for that, because it is a pretty important topic.

Unfortunately, when we listen to the Conservatives, it is not really clear what their solutions are and what they are going to do about it.

The Liberals are terrible, and they are getting nowhere. My colleague bragged earlier about $70 billion in investments over the last five years. In the last five years, 35,000 new social housing units have been built in Canada through this strategy. I have no idea where the billions of dollars went. According to studies by CIBC and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC, Canada needs to build 3.5 million units in the next 10 years if we are going to address the twin issues of affordability and accessibility.

If we want to help those most in need in this country, the government needs to intervene and be more effective. What are the Conservative Party's solutions?

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, the question gives me a chance to reiterate what I just said to the member for Kingston and the Islands around housing. What Conservatives are calling for, and what we will do when we form government, is to implement a plan to speed up building permits. We need to make sure it is possible to build things in this country again. We need to create those incentives so developers will be able to and will want to build the housing units we so desperately need. We also want to lean on the resources the federal government has, the land and the buildings that are being underutilized, so we can turn that into affordable housing units.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague spoke in his speech about the overdose drug crisis in this country. In 2010, I was part of the public safety committee that toured this country and studied the provision of mental health and addiction services in Canada's federal prison system. At that time, we came out with a number of recommendations to the Harper government, which included a number of positive things, none of which were brought in by the Harper government. Instead, the Harper government closed the Kingston farms, closed industrial training programs for prisoners and did not implement a single harm reduction measure in Canada's federal prison system.

It appears the modern Conservative Party has had a conversion on the road to Damascus and is now talking about progressive policy. Does the member agree with the NDP that it is time we gave access to timely treatment for anybody who wants treatment for substance abuse or addiction through Canada's public health care system? Does he agree that addiction is a health issue and it warrants access to treatment through our public health care system, like every other disease and affliction?

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am always amazed by the NPD's focus on a prime minister who has not been in office in eight years. The Harper government was elected and lost power from office before I was even able to vote, so it is incredible that the NDP is so focused on the past instead of holding the current government to account.

To the specific question, which is an important one, I do not have time to—