Debates of Jan. 30th, 2024

Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2023

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, happy new year to everyone. It is my first time speaking since 2024 arrived.

I would like to thank the member for his intervention. Thanks to the supply and confidence agreement between the Liberals and the NDP, we have been able to secure a great dental care program for children. I wonder what the member will be saying to his constituents about why he voted against dental care for children in his riding.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the challenges that are facing my riding include an increase in food bank usage. People are absolutely shocked. They do not know where their spending power is going. They do not know where their money is going.

It is insidious. The carbon tax and the inflation that the Liberal government has imposed on people are a train coming at us. People are going to be renewing their mortgages and going from 2.55% up to 6%. It is going to be a big shock, and it is impacting a lot of constituents in my riding.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is wonderful to be here today and to be able to speak to the amendment to this bill, an amendment I was very proud to second from our leader of the Conservative Party.

In fact, the Conservative leader, the hon. member for Carleton and Canada's next prime minister, delivered a really clear message to Canadians on Sunday: Axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget, stop the crime.

I hear from Canadians regularly, from right across Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, who are struggling. What they are seeing are higher grocery prices, higher home heating costs, higher electricity costs, higher gasoline costs and higher mortgage and rental costs, and they are seeing their limited paycheques being spread thinner and thinner.

Unlike the Liberal government, the hard-working people I talk to know that there are consequences, real consequences, for spending beyond their means. They understand that budgets do not balance themselves, and they, in turn, are making sacrifices to accommodate these inflated prices. They are angry when they see the Liberal government out jet-setting and this out-of-touch Prime Minister continuing with out-of-control spending.

The fall economic statement announced $20 billion in inflationary spending, further driving up interest rates, which further makes life harder. A record two million people visited a food bank in a single month. Housing costs have doubled. Mortgage payments are 150% higher than they were before the Prime Minister took office eight years ago. Violent crime is up 39%. Tent cities exist in almost every major city and in small towns across the country. Over 50% of Canadians are less than $200 away from going broke. Canadians who are renewing their mortgages will see an increase from 2% to 6% or even higher. The IMF has warned that Canada is the most at risk in the G7 for a mortgage default crisis, and business insolvencies have increased by 37% this year.

These results of the costly new spending spree can be summed up simply: Prices are up, rents are up, debt is up, taxes are up, and Canadians I talk to every single day have told me that they want the Prime Minister's time to be up. They want to see an election today. They want to make a decision on the leadership of our country, because they know that their finances cannot afford another year of this Prime Minister.

In 2024, for the very first time, we are going to be spending more money on payments to service our debt than we will on health care, more money to finance the reckless spending than on health care. More than $50 billion is going to be spent just on the interest payments to service the debt.

I think that this is shameful, and the Canadians I talk to totally agree. They are not running up their credit cards unless they have no other option, yet the government has options. It is just choosing not to take them.

The reckless spending risks a mortgage meltdown on the $900 billion of mortgages that will renew over the next three years. Personally, I am concerned about the countless people I have heard from who are currently under water on their homes. Their homes are worth less than what they owe to the bank. This is because of the government's relentless attack on Canadian energy, which has had a real impact on the home prices in many communities right across Fort McMurray—Cold Lake.

Our eco-activist environment minister has made no secret of the fact that he not only dislikes Canada's energy industry, having a socialist idea of government transitioning it to something else, but also seems to have a problem with the very concept that we have an energy industry here in Alberta. Quite frankly, there is a serious problem with having a Soviet-style transition away from Canada's energy industry.

I am proud to come from northeastern Alberta and to have grown up in Fort McMurray, seeing the major innovation that has taken place in our energy industry over decades. During this most recent Arctic vortex, just a couple of weeks ago, many energy workers were working outside. They were bundling up. They were going to work when the rest of us were very grateful just to get to stay inside. These brought temperatures across the Prairies of -50° and even lower in some areas, with the wind chill. In those temperatures, frostbite can set in in a matter of minutes, yet these energy workers bundled up so we could stay warm. That is, for the families who could afford to keep the heat on.

The Liberal government has consistently doubled down on charging the carbon tax on home heating in the Prairies, which continues to rachet up the cost of our home heating. We do not have a choice in the Prairies during an Arctic vortex or throughout the winter as to whether we can or cannot heat our homes. If a home is not heated in -50°C, the pipes will freeze. There will be additional costs, and people will die. That is the reality. Frostbite will set in in minutes, yet this government has decided to have a carve-out for Atlantic Canadians, allowing them to have a pause on the carbon tax because of plummeting polls. However, in the Prairies, where we were facing -50°C weather this winter, in those areas we continue to have to pay the carbon tax. Not only do we have to pay this punishing carbon tax, but it is set to continue to increase on April 1. That is no joke.

With plummeting polls, the Liberals are making it so that a Canadian is not a Canadian is not a Canadian. The Canadians I have had the opportunity to chat with thought that this unfair, callous and crass decision of carving out the carbon tax away from Atlantic Canadians was wrong.

Canadians are out of money, and this government is completely out of touch. Conservatives have been and will continue to stand up, clearly asking this costly coalition of the Liberal-NDP government to remove the carbon tax on everything for everyone. The government rejects this, but we continue fighting, so, in the interests of Canadians we have asked for a variety of carve-outs: eliminating the carbon tax for farmers, eliminating the carbon tax on first nations, eliminating the carbon tax on home heating and many others. However, make no mistake, a Conservative government will axe the carbon tax on everything for everyone. This is common sense. Canadians need relief, not higher taxes.

After eight years, the Liberal Prime Minister does not understand that if we tax the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who transports the food and the store that sells the food, we ultimately tax the family buying it. I have talked to moms who are having to make hard choices as to whether they put extra water in their babies' formula just so they can afford to feed their families. I talk to families who are struggling as to whether they are going to continue bundling extra sweaters onto their children, because they cannot afford to turn the temperature in their home up an extra degree or two to keep them nice and toasty.

This is why the Conservative Party introduced a very common-sense bill, Bill C-234, to axe the tax on farmers. It would have made the cost of food more affordable for everyone by saving farmers $978 million between now and 2030. It passed through the House of Commons, yet the unelected Senate gutted our common-sense bill under pressure from the PMO and the eco-activist environment minister. In fact, the same environment minister threatened to quit if there was another carve-out. The same environment minister even admitted during an environment committee meeting that he had called up to six senators to pressure them into voting to keep the tax on farmers. That is shameful. Now, all Canadians will have to pay a higher price at the grocery store.

Common sense means getting rid of the carbon tax to lower the cost of living for all Canadians. It means capping reckless spending and getting rid of waste to balance the budget and lower inflation and interest rates. Common sense means cutting tax to make hard work pay off again. This NDP-Liberal government needs to rein in spending and balance the budget so that inflation and interest rates can come down and Canadians can keep more of the money they work so hard for. They need relief.

It is clear that after eight years of waste and incompetence, the NDP-Liberal government is not worth the cost. Canada's Conservatives have provided a clear, common-sense plan to reverse course and undo the damage the Liberals have done. Only common-sense Conservatives can be trusted to axe the tax, balance the budget, bring down inflation and interest rates, and build homes, not bureaucracy, to bring lower prices to Canadians. I'll say it again: Axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Mr. Speaker, one thing that is very clear is that the Conservatives are going to axe the tax, as I have heard time and time again. However, I would ask the member opposite what other programs are going to be axed by her and her party. Are they going to axe child care? Are they going to axe the Canada child benefit?

The member spoke very passionately about what families cannot afford, yet she voted against child care, dental care and other programs that would save families thousands of dollars a month. Therefore, I would ask the member opposite what programs she and her party will axe.

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, we plan to axe Liberal members of Parliament from right across the country, so that is a simple one. We also plan to axe interest rates because Canadians deserve affordability. As well, we plan to axe inflation so Canadians can keep more of the money they have worked hard to earn.

Frankly, it is very hypocritical for a member from Atlantic Canada who got a carve-out on the carbon tax and does not have to pay the tax on their home heating this winter to tell me that somehow people in the Prairies deserve to continue paying carbon tax on home heating in -50°C weather.

I will not take any lessons from that side.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. However, I have some questions about what she is telling us. She is talking again about getting rid of taxes, saying, “Axe the Tax”.

We see in this budget that $30.3 billion are granted in subsidies to the oil and gas industry in the form of tax credits, meaning that all taxpayers in Quebec and Canada will subsidize the oil and gas industry, which we are trying to transform to develop clean energy. Apparently $30 billion is not enough for my colleague or for the rest of the Conservative members of Parliament who want us to get rid of taxes and give more to oil and gas companies.

We also see in this budget that a department of municipal affairs is being created, which is in violation of the Charter.

Does my colleague think it is a good thing to pour $30 billion into subsidies to the oil and gas industry?

Also, what does she think of the federal government creating a kind of department of municipal affairs to be called the department of housing, infrastructure and communities? What does she think of this interference in areas under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces?

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

Mr. Speaker, I know that voting for the Bloc Québécois is very costly.

One of the problems we see is that the Bloc supports and continues to support the Liberal Party's ever-increasing expenses. It continues to vote in favour of Liberal budgets that increase costs for all Canadians and Quebeckers.

The Conservative Party will continue to build a country where Canadians can keep the money they worked very hard to earn.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are now two years into the brutal invasion of Ukraine by Putin and the mass killing of people in Ukraine, yet the member voted against Operation Unifier, which is a fundamental connection supporting the people of Ukraine, while the Trump MAGA team has attacked Ukraine and while Danielle Smith brings a white supremacist and Putin troll to Alberta to celebrate. He is a man who has attacked Zelenskyy and the people of Ukraine.

How dare the member stand and support the Putin machine and undermine the people of Ukraine?

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

Mr. Speaker, in my previous answer to one of my Liberal colleagues who asked what I was going to cut, I forgot to say that I really want to cut the NDP member for Timmins—James Bay—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

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

Order. A question was asked, and I want to hear the answer. I cannot hear it with everything going on.

I will allow the member for Fort McMurray—Cold Lake to start again.

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

Mr. Speaker, in my previous answer, I said I wanted to cut Liberal members of Parliament. I also want to cut the NDP member for Timmins—James Bay because, frankly, he is not serving his constituents. He voted to keep the carbon tax on home heating for his constituents in northern Ontario, and that is absolutely shameful.

Frankly, as a proud Ukrainian Canadian, I have continued to stand up for Ukraine. I do not understand in any way, shape or form how Liberals and New Democrats can get up on their high horse and supposedly support Ukraine while they allowed a turbine that fuels Putin's war machine to go back there. I also do not understand why they are refusing to support Canada's oil and gas industry, which could be providing gas to Europe and around the world and starving Putin's war machine. Instead, they want Putin to continue producing oil and gas, undermining Ukraine.

I am sorry; I am not going to take any lessons from the member.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have to comment on the last answer we heard from the Conservative member, because it somewhat defies the reality of what the Conservative Party's actions are versus what some of the members actually say when it comes to Canada and Ukraine and the need for Canada to support Ukraine in a very real and tangible way.

Just last December we had a series of votes. I want to make reference to how the member actually voted when it came to Ukraine. There was a vote for Ukrainian immigrants settling in Canada, with respect to helping them find accommodation and receiving initial financial support. She actually, as all the Conservatives did, voted no to that. They also voted no to training Ukrainian soldiers through Operation Unifier. Not to be outdone, they also voted no to Canada's NATO mission.

The real twist on this is the Conservative Party's approach to the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement. Imagine the President of Ukraine, at a time of war, coming to Canada and signing a trade agreement with the Prime Minister. The expectation of the community of Ukrainian heritage, which is well over 1.3 million people, not to mention of a vast majority of others, was that the Conservative Party would support that particular Canada-Ukraine deal. In my original comments on the legislation, I suggested that the Conservatives would be supporting it. Boy, was I wrong. It is unbelievable.

That is where there is a whole mix-up as the Conservatives try to throw a red herring as to why they are voting against the trade agreement. What they are saying is that it is because of the carbon tax and that they do not think Canada should be imposing a carbon tax on the people of Ukraine. News for them, as one of them applauds, is that Ukraine already has a price on pollution. It has had a price on pollution since 2011. This means that even when Stephen Harper was prime minister, the people of Ukraine were farther ahead in recognizing the climate reality than the Conservative Party was in 2011.

Why, then, are Conservatives opposing the Canada-Ukraine agreement? It is because of what many are suggesting is the far right element, the MAGA Conservative movement, which is kind of creeping up from the United States and seeping into Canada. It is being advocated by no one other than the leader of the Conservative Party and the minions of Conservative MPs who sit behind the leader to talk—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

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

I want to remind folks not to cause disorder in the House. It comes from both sides. I want to make sure we have good debate on the bill before us and on the amendment.

The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the point is that the Conservative Party of today is so extreme that it has even now taken a position that is not in the best interests of the Canada-Ukraine agreement. It is not just the Liberal Party that is saying this. It is usually the New Democrats who vote against trade agreements, but not this trade agreement, because they too recognize the value of it. It is only the Conservative Party that has voted against it.

I have had a couple of meetings. I was hosting a lunch, and a couple of hundred people showed up. They were more than happy to sign a petition on the issue. The issue is that they, much like the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and the Ukrainian ambassador to Canada, want to see the Conservative Party flip-flop and support the Canada-Ukraine deal.

I would encourage the member who spoke and provided that answer to take what she put in the answer, talk among any Conservatives with rational minds and see whether they can meet with the leader of the Conservative Party and get him to come onside and support the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement.

That was not what I was going to talk about today. I was going to talk about the Canadian economy and the types of things we are hearing.

I love the idea of contrasting the Liberal Party and the government's policy with what the Conservative Party is saying. Let us do the contrast. The Conservatives came in yesterday, and they were all gleeful and happy, saying they have four priorities and were going to hit a home run on them. What were the four priorities? There were at least a half-dozen members who talked about them yesterday.

I will give an example. Their shiny one is the bumper sticker that is going to read, “Axe the tax.” I will stay away from the idea that the Conservatives are climate deniers and do not have any policy on the issue of climate change and the impact it is having on Canadians. Rather, they have a wonderful little slogan they want to use, and it does not matter.

Yesterday I said that the Conservatives' policy would actually be taking money out of the pockets of a majority of the people who live in Winnipeg North, because we have a carbon rebate that goes to the people of Canada. When the leader of the Conservative Party says they are going to axe the carbon tax, that means they are going to axe the carbon rebate too. More than 80% of the constituents I represent get more money from the rebate than they actually pay in the tax.

That would mean less money in their pockets, as a direct result of the Conservatives' ignoring the climate issue and choosing to change their opinion from what they told Canadians in the last federal election, when the Conservative Party, all of it, in its election platform, made very clear that its members supported a price on pollution. It is only under the new leader and with the bumper sticker idea that they have actually done a flip-flop on that particular issue, and now they are prepared to take money out of the pockets of Canadians and completely disregard the importance of sound environmental policy.

That is one of the Conservatives' priorities. What a dud that one is. I will talk about the second dud: their talk about housing. They want Ottawa to play a role in housing. There has not been a government in the last 50 or 60 years that has invested more in housing than the current government has. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars.

We are talking about working with provinces, municipalities and non-profit organizations, many different stakeholders, to ensure that Canadians will have the ability to get homes, rent and own, into the future. The federal government has stepped up to the plate in a very real and tangible way.

When the leader of the Conservative Party was housing minister in the Stephen Harper government, he was an absolute disaster. He had no concept of what a housing strategy was, let alone have the ability to construct houses. He now wants to take it on. Really? It just does not make sense.

The federal government, unlike any other government in the last 50 or 60 years, has stepped up to the plate and demonstrated strong national leadership, and we are working with the municipalities, the provinces and other stakeholders on the file. That is something the Conservative Party would not do.

What about the Conservatives' third priority? Their third priority is the budget. People need to be very concerned when Conservatives talk about the budget. This is where the whole hidden agenda comes in. Every so often, we get to see some of that hidden agenda ooze out.

An example I will use is the issue of the Infrastructure Bank. All the members across the way support getting rid of the Canada Infrastructure Bank. Their finance critic made that statement earlier today and we have heard it before, if people want to talk about a dumb idea. It does not matter as facts and reality are completely irrelevant to the Conservative Party.

The reality is the Canada Infrastructure Bank has been exceptionally effective, yet the Conservative Party will say it has not done anything. It says that knowing full well that is just not true. The reality is we are talking somewhere in the neighbourhood of about $10 billion.

Mr. Speaker, if we take a look at $10 billion coming from the Canada Infrastructure Bank, that money is being tripled. In total, that is another $20 billion through different sources because of the investments being made by the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

Members opposite are saying to tell them how many projects there are. At last count, we are talking 48 projects. How many did the Conservative Party say? Zero. We are not talking about the intellectual capabilities of the Conservative Party when I say zero. I am saying that is what it says the number of projects are.

If members do not want to believe me, they can take a look at the website. There are all forms of projects that are not only on the books, ongoing, but are also completed. It is truly amazing.

They are in all different areas of the country: public transit, 11 projects; clean power, eight projects; green infrastructure, 17 projects; and broadband, eight projects. Some of the broadband ones are in Manitoba for rural Internet connections. We would think that many of the rural Conservative MPs might be a little sensitive and want to support that but no.

Keep in mind that in everything we are talking about here, the billions and billions of dollars, a lot of private dollars, the Conservatives oppose it. They oppose that sort of development. That is building a healthier economy. That is building Canadian infrastructure. We all benefit from that.

There is a reason the foreign investment in Canada is as healthy as it is today. It is because, as a government, we support investing. It has paid off significantly. The finance critic was critical of the government, saying we do not have foreign investment. The reality, the facts, play no role in what the Conservative Party says.

At the end of the day, on foreign investment in Canada, on a per capita basis, from last year, in real dollars, Canada was number one in the world. One would think that the Conservatives would understand that concept, yet the finance critic is saying that we are down on foreign investment.

Conservatives cannot accept the reality of good news. In terms of job numbers, there are well over a million new jobs from pre-pandemic levels. That is good news. One would not know that because we constantly have the Conservative Party going out about the nation saying that Canada is broken and is just not working. How does that actually compare to the reality of the situation?

As I pointed out earlier today in a question, if the Conservatives say Canada is broken, they have to believe that the entire world is broken. We can compare some of the measurements that the Conservative Party uses. They talk about things like the inflation rate. Have they taken a look at Canada's inflation rate compared to other G20 countries? Whether we are taking about France, Germany, the U.K., the United States or any of the other countries in the G20, we find that Canada is ranked at the top, in terms of the lowest inflation rates. It is the same for interest rates.

The government policy that we have put in place, whether through budgetary or legislative measures, has helped bring down inflation rates. Even though we recognize that, relatively speaking, compared to the rest of the world, Canada is doing exceptionally well, we still need to do better. That is the reason we are seeing policies being brought in that have made a difference. We will continue to work with Canadians and other levels of government in order to improve conditions. We want an economy that is going to work for all Canadians.

We want to continue to invest in Canada's middle class and those who are aspiring to be a part of it. That should not be a surprise. Virtually since 2015, when we were elected to government, Canada's middle class and those aspiring to be a part of it have been the first priority of the Liberal government. We continue in that area. We continue to support programs that would lift people out of poverty.

We can talk about the GIS increases, the Canada child care benefit and the many different programs we have put in place to support Canadians, pre-pandemic, during the pandemic, and going in and out of some very difficult times that people are experiencing today.

When it comes to the economy or the budget, on priority number three, I warn members to be very much aware of that Conservative hidden agenda. It is going to disappoint a great number of people.

Their fourth point was on the issue of crime. Let us stop and think about that one for a moment. We just brought forward the bail reform legislation that had the support of the provinces, law enforcement agencies and a number of stakeholders from all over the country, and every political party inside the chamber except the Conservative Party. We had filibustering taking place on that important piece of legislation, even though, months prior, the Leader of the Conservative Party said we would pass that bill lickety-split. That did not happen. He wanted to filibuster the legislation, putting the government in a position where we had to force the legislation through.

That is why I say very candidly that, whenever the election is, although I suspect it will be in 2015, at the end of the day, I look forward to being able to share who the Leader of the Conservative Party really is and remind him of some things: the cryptocurrency issue; his talking about firing the governor of the Bank of Canada; the flip-flop about the price of pollution, the flip-flop about Facebook and the big Internet companies. There is so much out there that one is going to be able to go to people's doors and share with Canadians from coast to coast to coast, in contrast to the Liberal Party with a solid record of working with Canadians, supporting Canadians. Compare that to a Conservative Party that does not even have an idea about the environment nowadays, that does not want to tell Canadians what its real agenda is all about.

I love to make that contrast. I look forward to many more days, months and a couple of years of debate, no doubt.

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

First of all, I just need to help the hon. member with his math. We are not having an election in 2015. It could be in 2025 but 2015 has already gone by.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for York—Simcoe.

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Winnipeg North is right about one thing. Conservatives are going to axe that tax.

Let us talk about that tax, although I suspect he is not going to answer my question. The Prime Minister said his most important relationship was with our first nations, yet he is discriminating against the first nations in my riding based on geography.

Let us talk about that carbon tax rebate. The Prime Minister made an announcement out east. I know the member for Avalon is here. His riding got rolled back with its data from the census so that it stayed rural. My riding of York—Simcoe is now considered to be a part of Toronto so that no one gets the 20% rural top-up. The member for Winnipeg North knows that it would take 14 hours to walk to the Finch subway station from my riding. The Deputy Prime Minister likes to say that she does not even need to own a car as she can just walk out of her house and get on a subway. We do not have subways, we do not have streetcars; we do not have transit.

I would like him to comment on that. The answer will be astounding, I am sure.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I wish the member had provided an answer to many of the questions that others would have of him in regard to the price on pollution. That member actually campaigned in the last election based on, in part, an election platform document that said very clearly that the Conservative Party supported a price on pollution. It is only in the last two years that that member and the Conservative Party have made a flip-flop saying now that they do not support a price on pollution. Who knows? I suspect they might even have some bumper stickers already printed saying they want to axe the tax. Even if that ends up taking more money out of the pockets of Canadians, they are not prepared to abandon that priority. I will give them that much.

I look forward to having that particular debate whenever it comes.

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

Mr. Speaker, many things struck me in my colleague's speech. He said that no government in 50 years had invested so much in housing. I do not know the statistics, but it is possible, even probable.

I wonder if he is not a bit embarrassed by the lack of results they have been able to produce with all those investments. Today we need 3.5 million housing units by 2030, after investing $82 billion in the great national housing strategy.

The housing accelerator for municipalities was voted on in the 2022 budget, almost two years ago, and yet not a single door has been built under this program.

I wonder if my colleague is not a bit embarrassed.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not find it embarrassing at all. Since 2015, we have had a national government that has recognized it has a tangible role to play in housing. That role has continued to grow under this administration to the degree in which we are seeing historic funding and programming to support housing.

However, it is not just the federal government. The provinces also play a critical role, and the Bloc needs to recognize that even the Province of Quebec has non-profit housing supported by federal dollars, but there are also many other things that it and other jurisdictions, whether municipalities, provinces, territories or indigenous communities, can do. It takes a team approach, not just the federal government throwing a whole lot of money at it. That means there has to be a strategy and ongoing discussions, and homes are getting done. A great example of that is getting rid of the GST for purpose-built rentals. We have seen some provinces adopt that very same policy at the provincial level to ensure more purpose-built rentals will be built.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government member just said that, since 2015, the Liberals have recognized that the federal government needs to be involved in housing. That is not true.

I am the representative for the NDP on HUMA. The housing minister of the very recent past refused to acknowledge that the Liberals have a market-driven lens on their take on housing. I can tell members that it has been damaging to my community of Port Moody—Coquitlam, and they are still doing it.

I think about the rents right now and the seniors in my community who are being displaced by the gentrification. There has been luxury condo after luxury condo that the federal government has loaned money for. It has not spent a dollar on operating, when it needs to subsidize and help those seniors stay in homes. We have seniors living in tents.

I am not going to let the Liberals take a victory lap on the work they have done since 2015 because they have done nothing.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, that is just not true. The federal government provides tens of millions of dollars, likely going into the hundreds of millions, to subsidize non-profit housing units on an annual basis. This government has increased that funding. We are talking about tens of thousands of units across the country. In the province of Manitoba, my best guesstimate is probably somewhere around 20,000 units. Many of those units are for seniors, so to try to give a false impression does a disservice.

The bottom line is that, since 2015, we have had a national government and a Prime Minister who are very much committed to the housing file. I would suggest that he is second to no other prime minister in the last 60 years here in Canada.

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

The hon. member for Châteauguay—Lacolle.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is the riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle, but soon it will be the riding of Les Jardins‑de‑Napierville.

My hon. colleague made a number of excellent points, including alluding to the election of 2015.

What galvanized me and many other folks in my region was when we were threatened by the previous Harper government with an extension to age 67 in accessing old age security, when we knew that the family allowance was taxable and when people knew that cuts were being made to balance the budget. It was penny-wise and pound foolish, as I like to say, on the backs of Canadian citizens.

I would like to hear more from my colleague about what the world would have been like if we had not won in 2015. Indeed, we need to win again in 2025.