Debates of Oct. 3rd, 2024

Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Madam Speaker, the NDP has brought up the Harper record multiple times today. The Harper government increased health transfers by 6% every single year we were in government. With Jim Flaherty as finance minister, we introduced the registered disability savings plan; Ready, Willing and Able; and Employment Works. We launched a Canadian autism partnership and funded Special Olympics. We got the Abilities Centre built in Whitby, and we introduced the working income tax benefit. I could go on.

Jim Flaherty and the Conservative government were seen as champions for the disability community, notwithstanding what NDP members might be saying today.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank our colleague from Edmonton—Wetaskiwin for the tone and substance of his speech; it reminds me of a time, a few years ago here, when we worked together on a letter to push the government to move forward with Bill C-22. We need more of that, as we have seen in recent days, and a different tone in this place.

I think it is fair to ask about what a future Conservative government might do. We know, for example, that the Canada carbon rebate would be taken away. The Conservatives have made that very clear. However, they have not been clear about whether they would fix and deliver the Canada disability benefit at an adequate income level. I know it is something that he cares about.

If there is not a commitment in place already, can he share about what he can do to ensure that a commitment is in place in the near future?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have mentioned this a couple of times. The number one thing we can do for vulnerable Canadians, whatever the vulnerability might be, is to fix the budget and to fix our spending problem in this country. Ultimately, the most vulnerable always pay the price. They pay the price in the present because their incomes do not go up with inflation. They pay the price in the future because future governments cannot afford to fund new innovative programs; they do not have the budget to do it.

We need to get on top of the budget and Canada's fiscal crisis exactly for the most vulnerable—

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

We have to resume debate.

The hon. member for Rosemont— La Petite‑Patrie.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am very honoured to have the opportunity to speak today. I would like to point out that I will be sharing my time with the incredible member for Winnipeg Centre.

I cannot help but notice that the Conservative member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, who just finished his speech, did not answer my question. Nor did he answer the question from the member for Kitchener Centre, who asked whether the Canada disability benefit would be maintained if, by some misfortune, a Conservative government were elected in the next election.

If the Conservatives feel it is inadequate, will they enhance it? Will they maintain pharmacare? Will they maintain the dental care program for seniors and people with disabilities? They are not giving any answers or commitments. All the Conservatives want to do is make cuts, yet they will not tell us what they want to cut. I hope citizens will not have to wait for an election campaign to hear what their platform is.

Right now there is no way of knowing where they will get the savings they need if they are truly interested in reducing the budget and public spending. I am deeply troubled by the attitude of both the leader of the official opposition and the Conservative members in the House, which consists in systematically refusing to answer very clear questions on subjects that will affect the lives of millions of Canadians.

I would like it said, noted and recognized that there is absolutely no response or clear commitment on the part of the Conservatives in the House. I think that at some point they will have to be transparent with people, reveal who they truly are and lay their cards on the table, so that people can make fully informed decisions. We, for our part, have a record of achievement.

For two and a half years we have forced the minority government to do things they had never agreed to do in the past. Examples include the anti-scab bill, sick leave and the basis for a drug plan to reimburse contraceptives as well as drugs for nine million diabetes patients in Canada. There is also the dental care program that has already benefited 700,000 Canadians, including a large majority of seniors.

Let us return to the debate before us today. I commend my NDP colleague from Port Moody—Coquitlam on moving this motion to adopt the report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in order to discuss an issue of great concern for all of our communities. It affects millions of people and, in particular, one million persons with disabilities who also live in poverty.

I would now like to take the time to read the Committee's recommendation, because no one has done so since this morning and I think it is worth it. It reads as follows:

In the opinion of the committee, the government should safeguard the Canada Disability Benefit from any potential clawbacks and engage in comprehensive consultations with the disability community to ensure the effective implementation of the Canada Disability Benefit by:

(i) ensuring that the Canada Disability Benefit is adequate to lift people living with disabilities out of poverty,

(ii) ensuring that the Canada Disability Benefit is accessible through the reconsideration of the Disability Tax Credit as a barrier to access, and establishing a more equitable and accessible enrolment method,

(iii) acknowledging the multitude of unseen expenses associated with living with a disability, which exacerbates financial strain, particularly amidst escalating costs of living and inflation crises,

(iv) recognizing the adverse impact of benefit entitlement reductions as families earn higher taxable incomes, perpetuating cycles of poverty among lower-income households,

(v) collaborating with provinces and territories to fortify support systems for individuals with disabilities, thereby fostering inclusive and supportive communities across the country.

And the Committee report this to the House.

This is an excellent recommendation, and I am glad that we can discuss it in the House, because it could really fix the mistakes made by the Liberal government. It could also address the broken promise in the legislation resulting from Bill C-22, which is woefully inadequate. The Liberals have been promising concrete measures to lift people with disabilities out of poverty since 2015, but this reminds me of the story about the mountain that laboured and brought forth a mouse. Instead of really strong measures to lift people out of poverty, what did they get? They got 200 bucks a month, which is peanuts. That is nothing. It is more like giving people a few crumbs and telling them they have to make do with it, when what we wanted was a meaningful measure that would lift one million people out of poverty, people who are living in extreme hardship every day.

I wanted to talk about this because for people like myself and many others who do not live with disabilities, it is hard to imagine what life must be like for those who must rely on a wheelchair. This is a rather ordinary example. What I am saying is not terribly original, but over the years, as I worked with groups in my riding, I have learned how much everything we consider normal and easy and take for granted can be difficult and painful—finding a job, for example. Indeed, unemployment among persons with disabilities, an already vulnerable group, is far higher than the overall average. It is harder for them to access the job market. They are less likely to be hired than other groups of people in society, which contributes to their financial difficulties and makes them more prone to poverty.

Special needs housing is expensive. Small things like going to the grocery store, returning home and making something to eat when the person's home has not been adapted for their situation, whether they have to use a wheelchair or are living with other disabilities, are no easy tasks. Small things we do not even think of drive up the cost of special needs housing, and subsidies are not always available. This creates problems. People become dependent on their family, friends and neighbours. Every little activity of daily living becomes more difficult. It costs a massive amount of money to address this issue.

The Liberals had promised to help these people avoid hardship in their daily lives, but no, the problems remain. They have an haphazard, piecemeal approach. They say the promise was kept, but it is all smoke and mirrors, and it will not benefit the people in need. The groups are disappointed. Persons with disabilities are disappointed, angry and frustrated because their needs are not being met.

Another need in the daily lives of persons with disabilities is transportation. Not everyone can afford a car, especially the poor. The measure is insufficient to ensure the availability of adapted public transit. The schedule is a problem because buses do not come often enough. People often have to hire a taxi because the bus or paratransit is unavailable or has broken down, or cannot get there for another three hours, when the person might have a doctor's appointment in 15 minutes and needs to get there fast.

We may not necessarily think of all these small costs and charges. I represent a Montreal riding that includes a handful of subway stations equipped with elevators. Universal access is not a given. Getting into the subway station is one thing, but getting out is another. Sometimes, people have to travel three or four subway stations past their destination just to get to an elevator. Then what? They wait for a bus that takes forever to come.

All these little things add up to make persons with disabilities more vulnerable. We thought that the Liberal government would recognize that, but no. The relevant word here is “disappointment”.

I was talking about that disappointment with groups in my riding of Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, which I am very proud to represent here. There are a dozen or so of them, namely, the Association d'aide et de loisirs pour personnes à autonomie réduite, or ALPAR; the Regroupement des organismes spécialisés pour l'emploi des personnes handicapées; the Association multiethnique pour l'intégration des personnes handicapées du Québec; Compagnons de Montréal; Giant Steps Autism Centre; the Association des Parents pour la déficience intellectuelle, or PARDI; the Regroupement pour la trisomie 21; DéfPhys sans limite—

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

I must interrupt the member. It seems the interpretation is not working.

The problem has been resolved.

The hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite‑Patrie has 30 seconds to wrap up.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to again list the local organizations that do truly incredible work in the community and that I have the pleasure and honour of representing here.

The list includes the Association d'aide et de loisirs pour personnes à autonomie réduite, or ALPAR; the Regroupement des organismes spécialisés pour l'emploi des personnes handicapées; the Association multiethnique pour l'intégration des personnes handicapées du Québec; Compagnons de Montréal; Giant Steps Autism Centre; the Association des Parents pour la déficience intellectuelle, or PARDI; the Regroupement pour la trisomie 21; DéfPhys sans limite—

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

Unfortunately, I must interrupt the hon. member because we need to move on to questions and comments.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.

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

Madam Speaker, the Canada disability benefit program is one of a number of national programs that have been put into place by this government. As a budgetary line, it had the largest increase, at just over $6 billion. I believe it is a good, solid first step.

We came up with $6 billion. How much money would the NDP have budgeted for this particular line?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, we will budget whatever amount is needed to lift people out of poverty. It is as simple as that. That is vital. In any case, that money will come back to the community and stimulate spending in our local economy. It will be good for everyone. It will be good for these people, as well as for local businesses.

Earlier today, the member for Winnipeg North said that his party would like to be able to do this. I would remind him that he is in government.

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

Madam Speaker, the member talked about disappointment in the Liberal government. I will remind him that he supported all those measures through the Liberals. He supported quadrupling the carbon tax on home heating bills. He supported the housing crisis. He supported the cost of living crisis that we have in Canada right now. He supported the crime problems we have on our streets, which directly impact people living in poverty.

The member talked about disappointment. I wonder if the people of Montreal he represents are disappointed in him for supporting the Liberal government.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, things are going very well in Montreal. I thank the member for his concern, but he does not have to worry about me, because I have a lot of support.

I would like to ask the Conservatives a question. During the dark years under Stephen Harper, cuts were made to public services and direct services to the public. Are the Conservatives prepared to commit today to maintaining the gains that the NDP made to help seniors, to help workers, to provide pharmacare, to provide dental care to seniors and to provide a benefit to people with disabilities, even if it is minimal? Will they commit to maintaining these programs, which provide direct assistance to millions of people, or will they abolish them again?

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the member can share with us the dangers of a Conservative government, noting not just what Conservative governments have done historically, but what one would look like moving forward. The leader of the Conservative Party has outright said that he would cut a school food program, cut dental care and cut pharmacare. We know that he does not support child care. We know that he wants to increase the pension age from 65 to 67, as his former government did. There is a history here. He is also talking about cutting the exact services that people living with disabilities need and deserve.

Can the member speak to how important it is for us to truly lift up people living with disabilities and not just have talking points like the Conservatives, who have no record to show that they would make a difference?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question from my NDP colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith.

I would point out that most economists agree that eliminating the poverty associated with having a disability would reduce overall poverty in Canada by 40%. That is significant. I repeat, 40% of poverty would be eliminated if we had a serious measure.

The member is asking a great question. When the Conservatives say they are going to fix the budget, what does that mean, beyond their silly slogan? I can interpret that for everyone. It means making cuts. It means cutting programs for people with disabilities. It means cutting programs for pensioners. It means cutting programs for unemployed workers and veterans. That is the danger. That is what happened during the dark years under Stephen Harper.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to start by commending my colleague from Port Moody—Coquitlam for putting forward the debate. It is a debate that is long overdue. I spent the morning listening to the debate, particularly the Liberals' blaming poverty on one's disability instead of on the Liberals' failed systems and their failure to provide adequate programs to ensure that we can end legislated poverty in this country once and for all, something that is absolutely ableist.

I know that real offence was taken this morning to my calling a speech ableist rhetoric. That speech likened the poverty of the disability community to their disability. I stand by that because the reason we are in this crisis today is legislated poverty against indigenous people. We know that the disability benefit is totally inadequate and needs to be fixed.

We know the Liberals broke their promise to the disability community. The Liberals' decision is to underfund the benefit, even though they are claiming that this is a good start. It is a $200 benefit at a time of an inflationary crisis and a cost and affordability crisis. This is unacceptable.

The benefit in its current form will leave over one million people in poverty. That is unacceptable. The Liberal government has tried to put off putting in place the disability benefit, requesting consultation after consultation. We have had enough consultation. The Liberals have certainly run out of the excuse that they need to consult more.

We know it needs to be done, and we know it needs to be done now. We know that almost one million persons with disabilities live in poverty in Canada. We know it has gotten worse with the rising costs of food, rent and housing. We know that it is becoming more difficult for everybody, particularly the disability community, which often has extra costs related to disability. It has been made even worse.

This has happened over decades of consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments. We know what Conservative governments do. I certainly saw it in Manitoba. They cut, cut, cut. They cut health care. They cut education. The current leader of the Conservative Party has said he will cut the school food program, the dental care program and the pharmacare program. I do not ever count on the Conservatives to ensure the human rights of all peoples in this country. In fact, they constantly push and vote against measures to ensure the human rights and dignity of all people, including the disability community.

We know that the current disability support programs have been further eroded by the current affordability crisis. We cannot afford cuts and we cannot afford anymore a Liberal government that turns a blind eye to its willful human rights violations against the disability community and then gets angered when it is called out for it. It gets defensive when it gets called out for it. This is especially true because both the Conservatives and the Liberals have had no shortage of subsidizing their rich CEO friends and rich corporations, whether it be Loblaw and the campaign manager, Jenni Byrne, running the show, or spending $12 million on fridges.

New Democrats will continue to fight for benefits. New Democrats will continue to fight to improve the material conditions of all people. That is exactly what I tried to do with the guaranteed livable basic income, which was supported by disability groups from across the country, in addition to current and future government supports and services.

Guess what happened. The Conservatives and Liberals voted against it, a guaranteed livable basic income that would have lifted the disability community out of poverty in addition to current and future supports meant to meet their specific and special needs. What do Conservatives and Liberals do at every turn? They vote against measures to lift people out of poverty.

There are persons with disabilities receiving provincial and territorial disability income supports who, with the new benefit, are at risk of clawbacks from provincial and municipal programs. Also, the way that it is set up even makes it hard for many people in the community to qualify.

We want to get the benefit in the pockets of people in 2024, not by 2025 like the Liberals are promising, after the next election or 20 years from now. There are grandiose announcements but nothing is getting out the door. The NDP will continue to fight to make sure that all people living across Canada live above the poverty line. If it were not for the Liberals and Conservatives, we could have done that with a guaranteed livable basic income, something that the Conservatives laughed at and the Liberals threw out the door.

We want all low-income persons with disabilities to be automatically enrolled in provincial and territorial disability support programs, and we want the government to work with provinces and territories to secure a commitment that no clawbacks will occur should anybody receive the benefit. Nonetheless, we wait on the Liberal government in spite of overwhelming outrage that has occurred. We continue to wait for the Liberal government to do the right thing.

I will share some of the outrage. Disability Without Poverty said, “We have a crisis of poverty in this country. Over 41% of people impacted are people with disabilities. This cannot be ignored anymore in a country like ours”. Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress, said, “From barriers to employment to affordable housing—

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

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time and put forthwith the question on the motion now before the House.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I am just verifying that the hon. member for Kitchener Centre will be allowed to speak.

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

The hon. member for Kitchener Centre has the floor.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise to participate in the debate. I want to start by sharing why the debate is so important. Across the country, 1.5 million folks with disabilities are living in poverty. That is about 40% of the people living in poverty across the country.

This summer, I was at St. John's Kitchen, operated by The Working Centre right in downtown Kitchener. It is a gathering place for diverse folks across our community, a lot of whom are living in poverty, might be living unsheltered or are at risk of homelessness. Time and again I would be chatting with folks and I felt like I had the same conversation over and over. I would learn that someone is living on the Ontario disability support program, and they would share with me how difficult life is living in poverty.

I would start to share with them a bit about the new Canada disability benefit. However, as I did so, they would learn that it is a maximum of only $200 a month, that it is not starting until July of next year and that to access it, they had to apply for the disability tax credit if they did not have it already.

What is involved in applying for the disability tax credit? There is an 18-page form. How do they get that form? They need to find a way to print it and then find a doctor who is willing to complete 16 pages of the 18-page form. They try to find a doctor who might have done it before, because it often the case that if the doctor has not done it before, they are either unwilling or would not know how to complete it. Time and again, I just felt exhausted realizing that these are people who have been provided with a process designed for them to fail.

How did we get here? It was a commitment from the Liberals in their platform in 2021. Their platform stated, “this new benefit will reduce poverty among persons with disabilities in the same manner as the Guaranteed Income Supplement and the Canada Child Benefit.” The minister at the time would later say that this was going to be a generational benefit, the sleeper legacy piece if they were to do it right.

Community pressure from the disability community, and letters both in the House and in the Senate, led to Bill C-22's getting introduced. It was then improved at committee. I am glad to have worked with colleagues to secure five improvements that came from the disability community. This included requiring that the benefit be indexed to inflation and that the disability community be meaningfully engaged in the regulations process, which almost every important decision was left to, including one that would require that the benefit application process be barrier-free.

Sadly, we also attempted to extend the benefit for those over the age of 65, but that was ruled out of order. It continues to be a significant point of contention that a person's disability does not end at 65 and neither should the Canada disability benefit.

As I mentioned earlier, almost every important decision was left to the regulations. That is what we learned just a few months ago when we learned, in the budget, that the governing party was proposing only a maximum of $200 a month for the disability tax credit, and not until July of next year. At the time, I shared in this place that it just felt so unserious. It felt to me like the government was playing politics with the lives of people who have been marginalized for a very long time.

With the rest of my time, I would like to provide solutions with respect to what we could still do with the remaining time in this Parliament to fix the Canada disability benefit. It is included in the regulation I submitted a few weeks ago. There are seven specific items that could be addressed in the Canada disability benefit, all of which come directly from the disability community.

The first is to just remove the barriers to the application process by automatically enrolling folks who are already on provincial, territorial and federal programs, including CPPD, and get rid of the barrier that is the disability tax credit.

Catherine, a person with a disability, shared this with me this summer that “requiring those who may be eligible for the CDB to apply or reapply for the benefit will put significant strain on the already overworked health care professionals who have patient loads so large that paperwork issues are frequently placed as a last priority item by these professionals and will cause significant delays in the delivery of the benefit to those who [need it the most].”

Catherine is right. Here are the stats. The CRA reports that in 2022 alone, it received over 133,000 phone calls from folks having issues accessing the disability tax credit, and only 600 of those calls got redirected to navigators who could help the person.

If the DTC is to be used at all, it should only be used as another method of getting access, an optional item in addition to provincial programs, such as the ODSP, and federal programs, such as the CPPD.

Second is to remove the second barrier, which is another new application process, so that a person does not need to apply a second time for the DTC. In fact, the regulations state that this is going to be an additional application for those who have the DTC, which would need to be repeated if the person were ever needing to reapply for the DTC. We should just get rid of that application altogether and have it as an opt-out so folks with disabilities who have already been assessed through other programs, whether federal or provincial, would directly have access to the Canada disability benefit.

Third, and really important, is that we should supporting the independence and dignity of an individual person with a disability by means-testing to the individual's income and not family income, as the regulations currently propose. Extend-A-Family Waterloo Region, an organization serving folks with disabilities in my community, referred to this measure as “dehumanizing” in its June letter to the minister.

Michael, from my community, who lives with a disability, shared with me, “one of the many issues for disabled people is that they often get trapped in abusive relationships due to income levels. One cannot escape and set up an independent life free of abuse when they have no, or extremely limited, income of their own. Expecting a person's spouse/partner to completely support them not only adds stress to the relationship, but gives an abusive partner a way to trap and control them.” The federal government should acknowledge that folks with disabilities should have the independence of means testing to their individual income alone.

Fourth, and probably one of the most important, is to increase the maximum amount to actually lift people above the poverty line. Here are the numbers we have already: StatsCan reports the low-income measure for the after-tax threshold is just over $28,000 for an individual and over $40,000 for a couple. In Waterloo region, my community, the market basket measure is over $26,000 for an individual and $37,000 for a couple. ODSP in Ontario, for example, is just over $1,300 a month, or less than $16,000 a year. There is not a single provincial or territorial program for folks with disabilities that, when we add $200 from the CDB, even if a person qualifies for the maximum amount, would lift that person above the poverty line.

These words were shared with me by Chad this summer: “$200 a month...isn't going to do much for disabled Canadians”. It is clear that the maximum benefit amount is insufficient and should be the true supplement originally proposed, which, with provincial and territorial programs, would lift someone above the poverty line.

Fifth is to raise the income threshold. As it stands right now, when a person makes more than $23,000 a year, which is below the poverty line, the CDB is going to get rolled back. That amount should obviously be above the poverty line, ideally taking into account the additional costs that a person with a disability incurs.

Sixth, we need to fast-track the benefit. Many folks in the disability community called out that the government moved quickly on CERB, and it could do it again here. The disability community has called it the “disability emergency response benefit,” and the government needs to move quicker with a benefit of some kind. The government could move quicker with the Canada disability benefit and put it into force more quickly as well.

To close, I would like to say to colleagues from all parties that we have a moment here when this could still be addressed. The governing party members could use this as a moment to demonstrate to Canadians that this is a signature priority of theirs, in either the fall economic statement or the budget. My colleagues in other parties could demand this of the governing party for their support in this minority Parliament. As Greens, we are going to continue to prioritize it because the fact is that the disability community has been unwavering in telling the government what it must do. Now is our chance to listen.

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

Madam Speaker, it is important to recognize that the government has this as a signature priority issue. For the very first time ever, we actually have a national program. Over $6 billion was allocated for it. That is the single-largest budget increase on a line.

When we talk about $200 a month, and we had a clear indication that this is a good, solid first step, how much money does the member believe we should be providing a month? He inferred it should be $1,000. Does he have a tangible amount that he could provide so we could take that back to get some sort of a cost analysis done?

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, at minimum, the government should follow through with what it promised to do, which was to model it after the guaranteed income supplement, a $15-billion- or $16-billion-a-year program. The $6 billion we hear cited by the governing party is over six years, so it is only $1 billion a year. The amount, as I mentioned in my speech, should be enough to supplement provincial and territorial programs so that they are above the poverty line. If it is taking, for example, the market basket measure in Waterloo region, it would amount to just over $1,000 a month or so, and we summed that up in a way that ends up being a significant generational program.

The Liberals could find the money for it if they did not give billions of dollars for carbon capture and storage and billions to fossil fuel companies across the country. Those are the dollars we could be getting to folks with disabilities, who need it the most.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Liberal government made a big deal about doing something for the disabled, but instead of listening to the disabled community, which was asking for $1,300 a month, they brought forward a benefit that is $200 a month. At the same time, they jacked up the carbon tax so that groceries cost $700 more per year and the cost of housing was doubled under the government. Essentially, disabled people are now even worse off, and Liberals seem to not be doing anything about it.

Does the member agree that Liberals have made things worse, not better?

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to recognize that the member for Sarnia—Lambton was one of the very first to sign the letter I mentioned, for which we initiated a number of parliamentarians early on in this session to ensure MPs from all parties were advocating for this. The Liberal Party, the Conservative Party, the Bloc, the NDP and the Green Party joined in that letter, and she was a really critical part of that.

If we are going to be honest, though, about the rising cost of living, I have to be clear. Corporate profits are the main element of it. I know the member likes talking about removing the carbon rebates, but there are no rebates on the gouging of the oil and gas industry. When we look at the price at the pumps for folks in our communities, while the carbon tax went up two cents a litre, the profits of the industry were 18¢ a litre.

If we want to make life more affordable, that is where we should be focusing our time. We should be getting those dollars to folks with disabilities and others living in poverty, who need it the most.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his very interesting speech. We see that he is very interested in the issue and he takes it seriously. It is nice to see that even when people are not members of committees they can still be interested in certain files and get to the heart of the matter. I think that the comments he shared with the House are very constructive, very pragmatic and also very concrete. They could help improve the lives of people living with disabilities.

My son lives with a disability, so this debate affects me, personally. I am not looking for sympathy, but I hope that the government will be more ambitious and more generous, because the people who have children with disabilities lead very difficult lives and have to make a lot of sacrifices. They do not feel like having to constantly fight with the government to be recognized. They need help and they need to have some quality of life, like all of us here do.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague and friend from Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères for his comments.

What I would say to him is that this is an opportunity for all of us to use our power here to do more. The Bloc Québécois has supported Bill C‑22 at every stage. It now has the power to make demands of the government, which is a minority government. Among other things, the Bloc Québécois can demand that the government fix the Canada disability benefit.