Debates of Oct. 3rd, 2024

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

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

Madam Speaker, my colleague knows our position. We agree that there has been a breach of privilege.

That said, is there not a broader problem around the fact that there are a bunch of governments within the government, sub-governments, sub-sub-governments and so on? I am talking about the fact that funding is sometimes given to private companies that subcontract and do a number of things. However, these companies are not accountable to our constituents, and this is in a context where the public service is constantly growing and should have the necessary expertise to do what needs to be done.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I think that is part of the problem. The problems are being created by the government, which decided that it did not need to hand over the documents and share the information.

I think that every situation would be much easier to navigate and that it would be much easier for Canadians to understand what is happening, if the government would act ethically and in a way that is more acceptable to the House, to committees and to Canadians. In my opinion, this is indeed a problem, but the problem is the government.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Madam Speaker, the member for Calgary Midnapore has done amazing work dealing with the McKinsey scandals of the Liberal government, the ad scam scandal and many others. I actually have a spreadsheet in the office to try and keep track of them. As for the spurious argument of the government members, they will not provide the documents over a House order because somehow they think that the only way the police can investigate a crime and ask for documents is if the police do it. This is totally false.

The member is an experienced diplomat. If in her time as a diplomat in Canada, I am not saying that this happened, but if it ever did happen, and she discovered that an employee had absconded with taxpayer money from an embassy or from a mission, would she have to leave that employee in place to continue to do the work until the police discovered that that was going on and went to the courts to ask? Would she as the employer responsible for that money actually have a responsibility to contact the police, provide the documents and information? Is that not another way? Is that not what Parliament is doing here? Essentially it is Parliament on behalf of the taxpayers that owns this foundation where $400 million had disappeared and been funnelled into Liberal insiders' pockets.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would say to my colleague and to any Canadian who is watching here, anyone who is serving abroad, anyone who is serving in this chamber, their first obligation should be loyalty to Canada. Therefore, they should take whatever actions are necessary to ensure that loyalty to Canada is maintained, whether it is from a security perspective or from a fraud perspective. The government is not showing loyalty to Canada in not providing documents for the review of the official opposition and Canadians. This is a principle that I carry with me in the House of Commons, as do all of my colleagues, and that I carried with me as a diplomat. People can determine my actions based upon my loyalty to Canada.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. Before I begin, I want to wish a very happy birthday to one of the people in my community, somebody I have known since I was a teenager, and that is Joan Brittance, who just recently celebrated her 80th birthday.

With that said, I would like to ask my hon. colleague what it shows us when the Liberals, who campaigned on openness by default, will not even give us something that the Speaker has ordered. Is that not the greatest hypocrisy we could possibly see in this place?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is a hypocrisy. Is it the greatest hypocrisy? I would say that it is one of the greatest hypocrisies that we have seen in the House. There was a commitment to sunny ways, and Canadians are living in gloom and doom every single day. There was a commitment to openness and transparency, as my colleague pointed out, a commitment to Canadians in general, when, really, Canadians have been nothing but let down by the government.

This is certainly one great hypocrisy, but there are so many great hypocrisies of the government, and Canadians deserve better. I cannot wait until we have that carbon tax election.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have said it before and I will say it again: When it comes to the strength of a Parliament, its only real power lies in the trust that people have in it.

That trust seems to have been shaken in recent months. It has been shaken by the actions that have been taken and by the decisions that have been made. I would like my colleague talk about the consequences of undermining people's trust in the parliamentary system.

Before I close, I just want to wish a very happy birthday to my daughter who turns 25 today.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I too would like to wish her a happy birthday. We have so many things to celebrate today. It is always good to have things to celebrate. Is there anything else we should be celebrating today? This is a good time before we wrap things up for the day.

I think the most important thing people of any country need to have is trust in the government, which is not currently the case. Canadians have clearly lost confidence in their government. That is why we need a carbon tax election.

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

Madam Speaker, I am going to join in with some of my colleagues on this day of celebration and wish my husband a very happy fourth wedding anniversary. When we got married four years ago, I did not think I would be standing here in the House of Commons asking questions on scandals. It has made me reflect.

When I first started getting interested in politics, it was right around the time of the Gomery commission. I think about the normalization of scandal. After nine years of a government that claimed it was going to have sunny ways and be open by default, we see a pattern, case after case, of the government hiding facts from Canadians and trying its very best to avoid every single new scandal. It is hard to even keep up with the number of scandals just in the last three years.

To my hon. colleague, who has been at the forefront of finding many of these, what does she think the solution is for Canadians?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her fourth wedding anniversary. It is sunny ways that she is still married, so well done to her.

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

I am at 40.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, that is wonderful. I congratulate you as well. What a day of celebration it is. I hope our whip and House leader do not mind all of this celebrating. It might be getting a little too congenial.

Again, it is incredibly disappointing. It is interesting to think about the Gomery scandal, which was some time ago now.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

It was 2005.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, it was 2005, almost 20 years ago, as the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo points out. It was the end of the Chrétien era, speaking of different eras once again.

My point is that Harper came in as a result of this scandal, so when we see a pattern of scandal, it tells me that it is time for a carbon tax election. Let us bring it home.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Housing

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is always a privilege to rise on behalf of the residents of Kelowna—Lake Country.

I rise today to speak about homelessness and the ongoing housing crisis affecting my community and Canadians from coast to coast to coast. With each passing day, we are seeing more tent encampments, fewer affordable houses and more people forced into homelessness.

In my community of Kelowna—Lake Country, I hear constantly from residents about their concerns regarding homelessness, and we see people struggling on the streets. Residents are justifiably concerned over vulnerable people suffering on our streets. They are also concerned about the implications that increasing homelessness has, such as crime occurring in encampments.

Nationally, the story is similar across Canada. The Parliamentary Budget Officer released a detailed report in May this year outlining the state of homelessness in Canada. The data shows that the NDP-Liberal government is failing on this issue. According to this report, since 2018, chronic homelessness has increased by 38%. Chronic homelessness refers to persistent or long-term homelessness for at least 180 days. The Liberal government committed to eliminating chronic homelessness by 2030, but this increase illustrates how much the Liberals are failing on this issue.

This report also states that the number of individuals living in unsheltered locations has increased by a staggering 88%. Unsheltered locations are places not intended for human habitation, such as streets, alleys, parks, transit stations and encampments. This increase is significant and should worry every Canadian. Canadians should not be sleeping on the street.

What we are seeing is the result of a total failure of responsibility from the Liberal government and its partners in the NDP, and this is unacceptable. Over 35,000 people experience homelessness in any given night according to the most recently available data from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. By year, it is estimated that 235,000 people experience homelessness. These figures are only collected through information from shelters. Some experts believe the true number of those experiencing homelessness is triple what is reported, which is potentially more than 700,000 people.

These are not just numbers; these are people. These figures are a reflection of the heartbreaking reality that too many Canadians are increasingly facing. Each one of these people is a family member or friend. They are neighbours who can no longer afford or manage to stay in permanent housing. They are Canadians whose Canadian dream has been crushed, and they are just barely getting by.

Homelessness is often a complex issue that can intersect with many other issues, such as addiction and mental health problems. However, we know that housing affordability is just one key overarching reason. An expert witness at the housing committee from the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness stated, “Homelessness is a housing affordability problem. It's driven by high rent and low vacancy.”

Unfortunately, the NDP-Liberal government is failing. Since 2015, housing costs have doubled, rent has doubled and mortgages have doubled. The NDP-Liberal government is not creating the policies to build the homes Canadians need, and affordability has plummeted as a result. We need to do more to address homelessness.

That is why the Conservatives will build homes by linking federal infrastructure money to housing construction and by firing the gatekeepers who block homebuilding and contribute to housing unaffordability. We will axe the taxes and get a softwood lumber agreement with the U.S. in order to bring down construction costs and bring home investment to housing.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Madam Speaker, in the spring, we outlined, in budget 2024, our plan to build a Canada that works better for every generation; a Canada where younger generations can get ahead, where their hard work pays off and where they can buy or rent their own home. To support this, we are also making Canada's tax system fairer by asking the very wealthiest to pay a bit more so that we can make investments in prosperity for every generation.

Today, Canadians pay tax on the income from their job, which is fair. What is not so fair is that, currently, they only pay taxes on 50% of capital gains, which is the profit generally made when an asset, such as stocks or rental property, is sold. Increasing the capital gains inclusion rate from one-half to two-thirds on capital gains realized annually for above $250,000 by individuals and on all capital gains realized by corporations and most types of trusts will create a fairer tax system and one that does not disproportionately benefit the wealthy.

To ensure that middle-class Canadians and Canadian entrepreneurs do not pay higher taxes, the government is maintaining existing capital gains exemptions and even creating new ones. This includes ensuring that people pay no capital gains tax when they sell their principal residence. In addition, we will introduce a new $250,000 annual threshold for individuals so that those with a modest capital gain will continue to benefit from the 50% inclusion rate. We will increase the lifetime capital gains exemption to $1.25 million from the current maximum of about $1 million on the sale of small business shares or farm or fishing property. We are also introducing a new Canadian entrepreneur incentive that reduces the inclusion rate to one-third on a lifetime maximum of $2 million in eligible capital gains.

Recently announced enhancements, from eliminating the founder and reducing ownership requirements to expand the eligibility to more small businesses, will further ensure innovators and small business owners, including farmers, are rewarded for their hard work. Combined with the $1.25 million lifetime capital gains exemption, when this incentive is fully rolled out, entrepreneurs will pay less tax and be better off on capital gains up to $6.25 million.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, tonight we are talking about homelessness and tent encampments. It just shows how completely out of touch the Liberal member is, considering he spent most of the time talking about the capital gains tax.

We cannot address homelessness if we are not increasing housing availability. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation has stated that 5.8 million homes are needed to build and restore housing affordability in Canada. An expert at the housing committee said that there is “not a chance” that the government meets these numbers. This makes sense, given that housing starts continue to fall short of what is needed to address housing affordability. Never has a government spent so much to achieve so little, and that is the Liberal government's record.

In Canada, there are more tent encampments, more homeless and more people not able to pay for basic necessities. Unlike the Conservatives, the NDP-Liberals simply will not create the policies to build the homes that Canadians need to address the housing crisis and homelessness. This is why we need to have a carbon tax election so that Canadians can make the decision to bring home the Canada that we know and love.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Madam Speaker, today, it is possible for a carpenter or a nurse to pay tax at a higher marginal rate than a multi-millionaire, which is not fair. Our government is increasing the inclusion rate for capital gains over $250,000 for individuals with the exemptions I mentioned to make Canada's tax system fairer. In the process, we will also generate new revenue that will help make life cost less for millions of Canadians, particularly millennials and generation Z. It will help fund our efforts to turbocharge the building of four million more homes. It will support investments in growth and productivity that will pay dividends for years to come.

Carbon Pricing

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, I asked the minister about his failed environmental policies in my original question in question period. Since then, Canadians have discovered more environmental failures by the Liberal government.

An email obtained from the environment minister's department revealed that, for some reason, a senior official at Parks Canada was considering the political perception of prescribed burns. Five months before the devastating wildfires in Jasper National Park, a Parks Canada official sent an email that reads, “at what point do we make the organizational decision to cancel planned prescribed burns in Western Canada?” It notes that, as more and more media articles raise public concern over drought conditions, “Public and political perception may become more important than actual prescription windows.”

Why was the environment minister's senior official considering political optics and media articles over proper forest management?

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Madam Speaker, climate change is fundamentally changing the way in which Canadians live their lives. From extreme weather events to the price of food, climate change is making life more expensive.

Climate-related impacts are already costing the average Canadian household $720 per year; without government taking action to reduce emissions, this is likely to rise to $2,000 per year by 2050. Our government is taking decisive action to combat the effects of climate change because the cost of inaction is too great. This summer, Canadians watched in horror as parts of Jasper were ravaged by devastating wildfires.

Our government is stepping up to help communities combat the effects of climate change, whether from wildfires, floods, droughts or hurricanes. Canadians want a government that uses every tool to combat the deadly effects of climate change, and carbon pricing is an essential tool in our tool box.

Experts agree that carbon pricing is the most cost-effective way of combatting climate change. The Canadian carbon rebate puts more money back into the vast majority of Canadians' pockets. In fact, on October 15, residents in the riding of Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa and across Canada can look forward to their Canada carbon rebate. In addition, households in rural communities will receive a 20% top-up to their CCR, which reflects the unique circumstances they face.

Conservatives are uninterested in what the government has to say. Their claim that pollution pricing is causing inflation is simply not true. The reality is that carbon pricing is not causing inflation. The Bank of Canada estimates that the carbon price contributes under 0.15% of inflation every year. It is worth asking this: Why have the Conservatives spent this much time undermining carbon pricing when Canadians are better off? With the new revelations that senior Conservative advisers are confirming that they would let industrial polluters off the hook, combined with the reports that the Leader of the Opposition met with dozens of oil and gas CEOs at private fundraisers, their motivations are very clear.

This is not about helping Canadians, and it never was. It was always an effort to serve the leader's ultrarich, big polluter friends, especially those in the oil and gas industry. The Conservative position on carbon pricing is clearly designed to create political cover for them to try to let their leader's friends in big oil and gas and other heavy industries pollute for free while ending the Canada carbon rebate and leaving Canadians on the hook to pay for the cost of that pollution.

Putting a price on pollution is a proven, affordable method of reducing emissions and continues to be an important tool in combatting climate change. Our government is stepping up to protect the environment and ensure that future generations will have a place to live. It is a shame that other parties will not do the same.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member talked about the cost of inaction. Inaction and improper forest management cost the community of Jasper $1 billion. We can let that sink in a bit.

Again, was the environment minister aware that his senior officials at Parks Canada discussed cancelling prescribed burns because of political perception, yes or no?

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives can point their fingers in different places, but they cannot come to the realization that climate change is real. The situation in Jasper was not because of a bureaucrat or failed policies. Climate crisis is upon us and is costing us money today. The effects of climate change are too great to ignore, and that is why our government is committed to delivering on concrete climate solutions, which include pollution pricing.

Our government is focused on the bigger picture of protecting Canadians from the devastating impacts of climate change and ensuring a prosperous future for generations to come. Pollution pricing is working for Canadians. It is crucial, as we work toward combatting the effects of climate change, that our government stay committed to protecting the environment while making life more affordable for Canadians. That is what we will continue to do.

Government Accountability

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Madam Speaker, I asked a question last Friday that echoed the sentiment of Canadians from coast to coast, which is simply this: When will we have a carbon tax election? It is not a platitude, quip or slogan that should be brushed away, which the Liberals are doing. The carbon tax represents a societal and political flashpoint, and they really should be aware of this just by looking at the polls, for example. However, the Liberals have been married to it. It is full speed ahead, no matter the torpedoes. There is a more vulgar way to say that, but I will not say it here.

Yesterday and today we have been discussing, and I do not know for how many more days we will discuss, a privilege motion about producing documentation. The Speaker and the House ordered the Liberal government to produce documentation that a committee requested, which is within its right. What did it get? It received documentation, but it was blanked out and the information was not there. Hundreds of millions of dollars inappropriately went to members of the board of SDTC, who were Liberal appointees and had obvious conflicts of interest.

One in particular stands out in my mind, and that is the board member who runs Cycle Capital, which received a quarter of a billion dollars. Who was a lobbyist for Cycle Capital who actually got elected? It was none other than the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. He lobbied the Liberal government and the Prime Minister 25 times the year before he was elected in 2019. We do not know the facts. Why are the Liberals hiding the facts, forcing us to debate hour after hour in the House when we should be doing other business?

I am thinking out loud, but is the whole obsession with the carbon tax really about getting Liberal insiders rich? We have to ask ourselves that question, and I think Sustainable Development Technology Canada is an example that sounds the alarm. I have taught Canadian history in school, and I am not aware of a more scandal-plagued government in Canadian history. There has been scandal after scandal, and it begins with the Prime Minister.

While so many Liberal insiders are getting rich on taxpayer money, people are getting poorer and poorer. In my riding and throughout the country, the response at people's doors is the same. Canadians are having a hard time, and the carbon tax is adding to the pressure by making gas more expensive, and groceries, housing, the cost of living—

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

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations.