Debates of Oct. 31st, 2024

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

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

We are going to take a little break. I think someone is looking for their phone.

It has been found.

The hon. member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the ineligible projects were those that demonstrated no environmental benefit. SDTC is a program designed to help companies implement green environmental technologies. The Conservative Party is very open to the idea of supporting technologies that can help us, rather than imposing the carbon tax on people. We want to implement new technologies that will help us improve the environment. In this case, the Liberals seemed to forget one detail: SDTC is a fund for implementing sustainable development technologies in Canada, not a fund for helping their cronies.

We are also talking about the environment. The organization was supposed to support environmental initiatives, but $58 million was invested in ineligible projects. That $58 million was wasted, with no tangible results for the environment or green technologies. That is outrageous.

I am in business, and I am not getting any subsidies. Quite honestly, none of the SMEs in Canada are getting subsidies. What we all want is for the technologies that are put in place to help the environment to actually work. Unfortunately, the government has thrown away $58 million.

On top of that, a whopping $334 million went to projects where there was a blatant conflict of interest. That has been proven. The Conservative Party of Canada is not the one saying that. It is the Auditor General of Canada, who audited all of the records that she had at that time. She had to stop because she ran out of time. That is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the truth about this fund. There are probably a lot more problems. How can we and Canadians stand by when members of the SDTC board of directors directly profited from these public funds?

I have to briefly share a personal story. After losing the election in 2011 by nine votes, I went back to university. I took a course to get a certificate in business administration at Université Laval. The course was given over a few weekends. I relearned some things I already knew, basic things in life. When managing public funds, whatever they may be, there are certain rules that must be followed. I was the mayor of a city, and before I was mayor, I was a supplier to that city. I knew perfectly well that when I became mayor, I would no longer be able to get those city contracts for my company. If I did, I would be personally benefiting from public funds. The course I took at Université Laval is an excellent course. It still exists today, and it trains certified business administrators.

I will digress for a moment. When this government came to power in 2015, it appointed administrators who were friends of the party and who favoured other friends of the party. However, there are training programs in Canada, particularly at the Université de Montréal, Université Laval and Concordia University, that train people to run corporations and organizations.

What is a corporation? It can be a foundation, a fund, a listed company or an unlisted company, for example. These people are therefore authorized to manage funds. They do not have to be appointed. This is where most of the problem originated: Some of the people who were appointed had received funds from SDTC in the past.

When these people were appointed, of course, they declared potential conflicts of interest. However, that did not stop them from awarding themselves money after being appointed to the board of directors. There are other people in Canada who could have done a very good job of managing this fund. In some cases, directors paid money directly to themselves. Afterwards, they said that it was because they were misinformed and got bad legal advice. I went to university for a few weekends to learn about corporate management or business administration. They taught us the basics, the most fundamental things. People cannot profit directly or indirectly from public funds that they administer.

There is nothing complicated about that. It is the absolute starting point for public administration, and it is no different for a member of Parliament. I own a business that I could use to provide services to a lot of people. I could even provide services to myself. I do not, however, because it is not allowed. If I used the services of my own company, it would put me in a conflict of interest. My company employs 12 graphic designers, but I pay someone outside my company to handle my business as an MP. I know I have no choice. It is what I have to do. That is the bare minimum when it comes to potential conflicts of interests.

This $334 million was taken directly out of Canadians' pockets, out of everyone's pockets, including the people here. That money should have been invested in other innovative, useful and sustainable projects to serve these same Canadians, but instead, it was used to make the rich richer. This is almost a Liberal hallmark. They keep taking money from Canadians to make the rich richer.

This type of scandal should not be conceivable, let alone achievable. The government has a duty to protect public funds and ensure that every taxpayer dollar is used with integrity and transparency. However, SDTC's actions and the Liberal government's complete lack of control show just the opposite. In fact, the minister was forced to admit to the House that the situation had really gotten out of hand. He was forced to shut down the fund and reallocate the money to another department, which reports to his own department, in order to be able to continue investing in green technology. The whole board of directors was sacked, and rightly so. It was the only thing to do.

However, the actions of SDTC and the government's complete lack of control prove just the opposite. This government claims to be the champion of transparency and good management. This really bothers me. In 2015, the government, led by the Prime Minister, came in saying that it would be the most transparent government Canada had ever seen. Instead, we have never had a worse government than this one when it comes to transparency. Not only did it fail to manage all the funding, but it is still actively trying to hide the truth today.

These cover-ups are not an isolated incident in this government's recent history, far from it. The Liberals have earned a reputation for their many, many scandals. It is one scandal after the other, each more shocking than the last. They may not know how to outdo themselves when it comes to governing a country, but when it comes to corruption and scandal, they outdo themselves every time.

The current government has always cared more about protecting itself and its allies than serving the interests of the public, the interests of the Canadians who elected it to defend them and represent them. I would remind my colleagues across the way that Canadians are the ones who allow us to sit here in order to serve them and defend their interests, not to make them poorer and to lie to them.

Let us come back to the topic at hand. I was saying that it is fundamental to understand that the SDTC scandal is much more than an isolated scandal. It demonstrates precisely how this Liberal government operates. Conflicts of interest seem to be the norm, not the exception. How can this government hope to retain the public's trust when it so openly favours its cronies while ignoring the concerns of the people?

This contempt for Canadians is completely unacceptable. It is downright insulting. Canadians are struggling to afford food and shelter, to pay for fuel, to deal with the overwhelming cost of living. All of us, from every party, know it. We hear it in our ridings, we see the news and we make it a priority here in Parliament to say that the cost of living is too high, much too high.

I was in my riding last weekend, and I met with people who often call our office. My staff is inundated with calls from people who unfortunately are unable to make ends meet. They are struggling to survive because of rising costs. From inflation to interest costs, all this means that people cannot cope with the cost of living right now. That is really not good news for them.

Quite honestly, the current government is to blame for the increased cost of living. Over the past nine years, the government has doubled the debt. According to a statistic that was released today, Canada's GDP is tanking compared to that of the United States. Americans have a far higher standard of living than Canadians. That was not the case until just recently. We are moving in the wrong direction.

This morning, at the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, Mr. Charlebois, a professor at Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia, explained that the cost of living is only going to go up. Just this morning, La Presse published one of his articles in which he said we need to be prepared because the price of meat is going to be outlandish next year. It already is. The other day, I went to the grocery store and saw a two-pack of T-bone steaks for $87. I have never seen anything like that in my life. It is absolutely incredible.

We are conducting a study right now on credit card interest rates. Interest on credit cards is going up all the time, not only for users, but also for companies that have payments. Meanwhile, the big banks are making money hand over fist, whereas in other countries there are fixed fees that are much lower than what we have in Canada.

All of these things have prevented the government from making a decision. Today, people are literally drowning in bills they cannot pay, and it is not a pretty sight. As a result, Canadians are unable to meet their basic needs. That is the reality.

We have been debating this privilege motion for a month. If the government wants us to move on to something else, all it has to do is hand over the documents. What is it hiding that is important enough to stop it from handing over documents that we have been asking for for almost a month? This government invariably has to do things its own way. Canadians are tired of this government. It seems to live in a bubble, cut off from the realities of everyday life and completely disconnected from the people it is meant to represent. People were talking to me about it last week, when I was in my riding. They want an election as soon as possible. They are fed up, sick and tired, and they need a change.

Last week was Small Business Week. My riding is full of SMEs, and I am extremely proud of them. I admire their work and I support their activities. I am a proud long-time entrepreneur myself, having been in business for 33 years. I am also proud to say that my daughter just bought my partner's shares, so our company is truly a family business, and like all entrepreneurs, we work extremely hard to create high-quality, well-paying jobs. The most important thing for an entrepreneur is to create jobs.

The SMEs in my riding are really struggling right now. I talk to entrepreneurs every day, and I meet with them every weekend when I am in my riding. My thoughts are with those entrepreneurs who are struggling to do business in this scary economic environment. When I think of the SDTC scandal, I have to bite my tongue, because my remarks could be a lot more aggressive. I am trying to be polite. People are literally disgusted by all the scandals caused by this government over the past nine years and all the money that is going down the drain.

The chair, Ms. Verschuren, came to tell us that she was not responsible since she was no longer on the board of directors. I am sorry, but she was there when the decisions were made. We are responsible for what we do in life for the rest of our lives. We cannot just disappear into thin air just because we are no longer on the board of directors and no longer linked to that. Someone has to take responsibility for this. It is important for the people who were on the board of directors at the time and who were given money through a company to be held accountable.

The business owners all got through the COVID-19 crisis. The lucky ones at the green fund were given a sum equivalent to 5% of all the loans already given to bolster their working capital. I am sorry, but the other businesses across Canada did not get 5% of the loans that they already took out through the fund or at the bank.

We have a lot of work to do. The Liberals have a very big job to do to give us back this money as quickly as possible.

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

Order, please. I have the honour to inform the House that a communication has been received as follows:

Rideau Hall

Ottawa

October 31, 2024

Mr. Speaker,

I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable Mary May Simon, Governor General of Canada, signified royal assent by written declaration to the bill listed in the Schedule to this letter on the 31st day of October, 2024, at 17:05.

Yours sincerely,

Ken MacKillop

Secretary to the Governor General

The schedule indicates the bill assented to was Bill C‑20, An Act establishing the Public Complaints and Review Commission and amending certain Acts and statutory instruments.

The House resumed consideration of the motion, of the amendment and of the amendment to the amendment.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, in his speech, my colleague talked about training. I congratulate him on going back to university. On the Liberal side, we are offering free training to the Leader of the Opposition to get his security clearance. That is something he could consider.

With respect to the question, I really wonder whether the Conservatives understand the process here. Everyone here in the House agrees to vote to refer the matter to committee, so I wonder why they continue to want to paralyze Parliament.

If my colleague is really sincere about his constituents who come to his office and say that they need help, why does he not agree that we should vote on this and send it to committee so that Parliament can get back to work and get things done?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the Liberals do not understand. It is very simple. We are requesting, and the Chair is requesting, that the government turn over the unredacted documents to the RCMP. It is not complicated. That is all that needs to be done. Then we can get back to work.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech. I would like my colleague to know that I do not understand the influence that the NDP has right now on the Liberal Party of Canada. It is undoubtedly artificially keeping the Liberal Party in power. Does my colleague want to share his idea of what image this sends?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, back home we have an expression, “to have someone by the balls”, which refers to something real. The reality in Parliament right now is that there is an opposition leader who essentially has this government's back against the wall, to avoid using that same expression again. Why is he doing that?

Honestly, we do not know since he keeps talking out of both sides of his mouth. On one hand, he says that his party wants to help Canadians because Canadians are struggling. That is essentially what we are saying too. On the other hand, he keeps supporting the government, even after tearing up the agreement they had.

We know that in four months, the leader of the NDP will be entitled to his pension. Is that the real reason? If that is not the reason, then why not trigger an election right now?

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member mentioned the testimony this morning at the industry committee. In the same committee, the superintendent of bankruptcy told us that the number of insolvencies and bankruptcies today is below the prepandemic level; in fact, it is even lower than the 2009 level, when there was a fiscal meltdown in the country. This is because our plan is working. Our actions and our programs are yielding the results that Canadians deserve.

Today, the Canadian consumer confidence index is at a 30-month high, on the back of a low inflation rate of 1.6%. The interest rates are down for the fourth time, at 3.75%, and the Canadian economy is projected to be the best among all the G7 countries in 2025. This is why things are much better than what they are made out to be.

Could my hon. friend give his opinion on this?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question. What my colleague is saying or trying to have people believe is that things have never been better in Canada.

What he just said is that the superintendent of bankruptcy said that there may be fewer bankruptcies right now, but that is because there are a lot more proposals for bankruptcy, proposals for agreements with creditors. That means there is an increase. That is the opposite of what he is saying. There are more people who might end up in bankruptcy, but there is an openness by the banks to reach agreements based on proposals. It is like saying that this comes back to accepting 25 cents on the dollar and the rest of the debt will be written off.

That is an absolute demonstration of the current Canadian context, both for businesses and individuals. These days, people are in deep trouble. If I spoke here the way I usually do in real life, the Chair would reprimand me often.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am always entertained by my colleague's speeches, and I love the work he does on the industry committee. I would like him to comment, though, in keeping with the theme that he was just asked about, on this morning's industry committee. We had the person known as the “food professor” appear, Professor Charlebois from Dalhousie University, from the great province of Nova Scotia, which I know the Deputy Speaker loves dearly.

Professor Charlebois outlined a very shocking stat in his latest report, which is that 46% of Gen Z are emptying their savings or borrowing money to pay for food. That is an astounding number. For millennials who have families and mortgages, that number is 35%, and he said it is growing quite a bit.

What does the member think might have caused that situation?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, basically, what caused it are the conditions created by this government after nine years in power.

I cannot help but draw a link between what my colleague just said and the question my other Liberal colleague asked me earlier. The two witnesses appeared one after the other and both gave testimony along the same lines. They both said, right now, the new generation will have a harder time paying for food and shelter because the housing crisis is even worse for them. That is why our leader said that he would eliminate the GST on new homes valued at less than $1 million. That is a very concrete thing we can do.

The government keeps taxing and raising taxes, while we want to help the younger generation get by and, above all, be able to purchase homes.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, 10 years ago the Conservative government of Stephen Harper fired 1,000 Veterans Affairs staff and closed a dozen Veterans Affairs offices across the country, including in my community of Windsor.

I wanted to ask the hon. member what drives the Conservatives to fire Veterans Affairs staff and to close Veterans Affairs offices in communities across Canada.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is funny because the Liberals are acting like cornered rats. They are finished and they know it, so they are bringing up old stories from back in the day, from 10 years ago.

It is now 2024. People are struggling to make ends meet today. They are having trouble getting by every day. Young people are having an even harder time than my generation did. They are the ones we need to think about today.

Veterans are in the same boat. I think that we need to go back to the drawing board because, for the past nine years, the Liberals have done nothing for veterans.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, $400 million was misappropriated during this scandal.

Can the member explain how $400 million could be used to lower the cost of living for Canadians?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, we could help veterans, because apparently there is not even one office open for the number of ones closed back then.

There are all sorts of things we could do, especially if we continue in the same vein as the announcements we have already started making. Yesterday, we announced that our next election platform will include eliminating the GST on homes. We are going to keep announcing good news like that.

To be honest, I already feel like we are in an election campaign. I am really looking forward to going out and announcing the good news of how the Conservatives are going to lower taxes for the entire population, especially young people.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the same question as the member before me. He mentioned that close to $400 million was taken out of taxpayers' pockets and given to Liberal cronies.

What could taxpayers have seen the Conservatives do with nearly $400 million, their money, today?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, just to put things into perspective, $400 million is an astronomical sum. Considering everything this money could have been used for, especially to help young people, it is a huge amount.

In my riding, some groups are pleading for help. Let me give just one very concrete example involving non-profit food banks. Knowing that two million Canadians, out of our current population of 41 million, are using food banks every week or every month, it can honestly be said that this money could have been put to good use.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I want to wish you a very happy birthday today. Are you one? Are you two? Okay, it might take up 20 minutes of my speech if I were to continue.

Normally, I would stand up in this place and say it is an honour to rise on behalf of the people of Barrie—Innisfil, but the reality is such that we have an effective standoff going on in this place because of Liberal obstruction through not providing the documents that were requested back in June by Parliament. It was an order of Parliament that was reaffirmed by the Speaker. The privileges of its members have been violated by the government because there are, quite literally, tens of thousands of documents that were not submitted for them to be moved on to the RCMP.

We know that there are that many documents because, publicly, we have heard from the justice department, for example, that it has over 11,000 documents that it has advised the parliamentary law clerk that the Liberals have not submitted to them. It begs the question of how many of those documents from industry and science have not been following the order of Parliament, or from Environment and Climate Change.

There could be, quite literally, tens of thousands of documents that have not been submitted, as per the order of Parliament, so we can get to the bottom of this scandal. How much of that information is being hidden? How much advice from the Department of Justice, ISED and Environment and Climate Change to the board of SDTC is in those documents? What was the cost of that advice to taxpayers, and what were they discussing? How much were they trying to suppress the information for parliamentarians to not become aware of just how deep the rot and the scandal goes of $400 million being allocated by the board of directors of SDTC in 183 circumstances of this money being funnelled and approved, which we already knew were conflicts of interest?

The Ethics Commissioner had already deemed it a conflict of interest. I have had a front row seat to this whole thing. It was over a year ago this very issue came to the ethics committee, and as the chair of ethics, I recall we had Annette Verschuren and Leah Lawrence appear before the committee. We actually had the minister appear before the committee, and we could tell, based on the responses to the questions from parliamentarians, with these people who were appearing in front of the ethics committee, that something stunk. Something was not right.

Through the course of time and further investigation by parliamentary committees, and through an Auditor General's report that showed hundreds of millions of dollars being funnelled to board of director members who were not declaring a conflict of interest, we are now just scratching the surface on this thing. This is why it is so important for Parliament to invoke its will and its constitutional right to have these documents go to the RCMP, not to a committee.

It is well known that committees are places where things go to die around here. This is criminal, I would suggest. There are many people who would suggest the same thing. This is why the RCMP needs as many documents as it can to do a proper investigation. As I said earlier, there are literally tens of thousands of documents right now that have not been provided, either through the justice department, or other departments, contrary to what Parliament's order was. That was reaffirmed by the Speaker's ruling.

When we go back and we look at this over the last year, the Auditor General of Canada found that the government, led by the Prime Minister, had turned Sustainable Development Technology Canada into a slush fund for Liberal insiders. We heard this at committee when we had Doug McConnachie in front of us, who was the subject of the recording. Mr. McConnachie had said that this slush fund was on the level of the sponsorship scandal.

However, we found out that we are looking at $400 million, and the sponsorship scandal, not to diminish it, under the Chrétien government was $40 million. So, this scandal is 10 times more. The Liberals knew they had a problem, they knew that the oversight was not being done in a manner that protected taxpayers, and that people were actually benefiting and gaining as a result of their involvement on the board.

The Auditor General found out that SDTC gave $58 million to 10 ineligible projects that, on occasion, could not demonstrate an environmental benefit or development of green technology. There was $334 million over 186 cases to projects in which board members held a conflict of interest. Can members imagine if any of us operated in that way? Not only would our professional careers be ruined, but our personal reputations would be too.

I would expect that there would be some criminal investigation into this when we have that level of rot and corruption going on, with $58 million to projects without ensuring contribution agreement terms were met; they were just giving it away. Of course, one of the companies that was a beneficiary of that was Cycle Capital, which we now know the Minister of Environment and Climate Change was a shareholder in. I checked his registry under the conflict of interest commission tonight, and although he has it in a blind trust, he is still listed as a beneficiary of Cycle Capital, and we know that it received quite a substantial amount of money as a result of what went on.

The Auditor General made it clear that the blame for this scandal falls on the industry minister who did not sufficiently monitor the contracts that were given to Liberal insiders. In fact, we had, as I said earlier, the industry minister appear before our committee, and he told the ethics committee, at the time, that measures were taken to ensure that SDTC was aligned with policies. We subsequently found out that was not the case. It was implied by a whistle-blower that the industry minister had not been truthful in his testimony with the ethics committee. In fact, the whistle-blower had told us that the industry minister was well aware of what was going on within SDTC and that he turned a blind eye to what was going on. It was not until this became public and became a political issue for the government that the Liberals started actually dealing with the rot and corruption that was going on in there and, in fact, hired outside consultants to come in.

At the time, the ethics committee had asked for the unredacted report. Well, guess what we got? We got a redacted report, the very thing that we are standing here today arguing against. The Speaker ruled in favour of making sure that these documents were given to Parliament in an unredacted fashion.

Again, this is a government that, in 2015, came in and said that it was going to be transparent and open by default, and the Liberals have been anything but over the course of their government. In fact, we see that nobody is abiding by the freedom of information, FOI, laws anymore. At the ethics committee, we did an FOI study. We had witness after witness come in front of us telling us that it has taken years to get access to information and that the access to information system has effectively been broken, which is another thing that has been broken as a result of this government.

However, we are talking about $400 million. What could $400 million go to? It could go to a lot of things right now. There are families hurting all over this country. In my community of Barrie—Innisfil, similar to what we are seeing across the country, food bank usage is rising and people are stressed. Moms right now are wondering, with mortgage renewals coming up and the cost of groceries, how they are actually going to look after their family. Much of the security blanket they had in the past under previous governments is being ripped from them as a result of the cost of living and the housing affordability and attainability crisis that is going on in this country right now. These moms, and many of them are single moms, are worried about their families. They are worried about their kids and their kids' future, and about their ability to be able to afford a home.

With respect to food bank usage, we now know that two million people are visiting food banks per month. What could the $400 million that went to Liberal-connected insiders and cronies have been used for? Food bank usage has increased significantly as a result of the economic policies of the government. Two million people a month, according to a food bank study that was released just the other day, are going to food banks in Canada, a G7 country.

Before I stood to speak today, I pulled the latest statistics from the Barrie Food Bank. Interestingly, the Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit has done a study, and 30.7% of people in Simcoe County are experiencing food insecurity right now. The Barrie Food Bank had 400 first-time visitors. There are 7,000 individuals every month using the Barrie Food Bank. To put that in context, with the population of the city of Barrie, that represents 5% of people in the city of Barrie who are using the food bank right now, in a supposedly prosperous country, a G7 country like Canada. Of the 7,000 people who are using the food bank in Barrie every month, 37% of them are children.

I spoke earlier about moms who are worried about affordability, about how they are going to put food on the table and about paying their mortgage and keeping a roof over their head. The numbers are an indication of just how difficult it is for families in this country. I know from speaking with representatives from the Innisfil Food Bank that its demand has increased significantly as well and is proportionate to what we have seen not just across this country but also to the city of Barrie.

It is not going to get any better, because mortgages are due for renewal; roughly 900,000 are due for renewal in the next little while in this country. Mortgage rates have increased by about 30% to 40%. That means more and more families are going to continue to be under the cost of living and affordability crisis that is a wound inflicted by the government's economic policies.

The other aspect is the carbon tax. We have stood here and put forward, what was it, 12, 14, 20 or 24 motions to axe the carbon tax. We are doing it not because of a political ideological advantage; we are doing it because the carbon tax is impacting people in a negative way. It is impacting the cost of the necessities of life. Everyday things people are buying, such as groceries, gas, consumables and other things, are all subject in the cascading effect of the carbon tax through the supply chain.

We are hearing about the people who move the food and the goods, and about the increased cost they are seeing as a result of the carbon tax. We are seeing it among municipalities. The member from Belleville stood up today and talked about $1.5 million in additional costs to the City of Belleville based on the carbon tax alone. It does not get a rebate.

I have asked the mayors from the city of Barrie and the town of Innisfil to provide us with the cost to their municipalities of the carbon tax, the impact it is having on heating recreation centres, on putting gas in police cars, putting fuel in fire trucks and heating city buildings. It is significant, and all of those costs end up getting passed down to the consumer.

I know the government will say that it gives rebates. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has already shown the difficulty in that argument. Nobody has ever answered this question for me: If I were to take a dollar from somebody, only to give them a dollar back or maybe less, why am I taking that dollar in the first place? It does not make any sense, and it is just costing Canadian families from an affordability standpoint.

The carbon tax is not going to stop. We are at at $80 a tonne right now. The carbon tax, according to the government, is going to go up to $170 a tonne; it is going to more than double. It is going to add 61¢ a litre to the cost of fuel.

This is a government that, during the election campaign in 2019, said the carbon tax was not going to go past $50 a tonne. The Liberals and their Prime Minister stood there and said that during the campaign. Now we are at $80, on our way to $170 a tonne.

The information that the Liberals provided Canadians at the time, along with the reassurances they gave them, was not the truth. There was concern at that time about the cost of living crisis and the fact that the carbon tax was going to go up. They did not tell Canadians the truth. The truth is that they have gone beyond the $50 a tonne that they said they were going to go to, and it is on its way to $170.

The necessities of life, groceries, fuel, goods that are shipped, and the cost to our agriculture community are all things that will have a material impact on the cost of goods going forward. They will work their way through the market as a result of the carbon tax.

The other challenge that is going on right now is the housing crisis. I touched on that a little. Again, we are talking about $400 million in a scandal that went to Liberal-connected insiders and cronies. A lot of that money could have been used to offset the cost of housing.

Our Conservative leader came out with what has been universally called a game-changing plan this week, which is going to see the GST taken off homes. This is among other plans in our building homes and not bureaucracy program. That would have an effect on people. It is going to have a great effect, because that saving is going to be passed on to the people who are buying the homes, the ones who can least afford it.

There is a generation, right now, of young people who do not just feel lied to and let down by the government, but who are actually despondent. Ninety per cent of them are saying they do not have any hope of owning a home. That despondency is a direct result, again, of the economic policies that have been created by the government.

This is one step in a multistep approach that is going to lead to the building of more homes in this country, to working with municipalities and incentivizing them to build more homes. This is not just for the short term, for two or three years, but also for the long term. This is a program that will be instituted to benefit municipalities and homebuilding for a long time to come. That is what we need to do.

I am going to wrap up with the fact that this scandal and the standoff that is happening in Parliament can be resolved. These things can be resolved if the Liberals follow the will of Parliament, their constitutional obligation and the constitutional right that we have to compel documents. That was reaffirmed by you, Mr. Speaker. We could then get those documents to the RCMP so that we can truly understand and give them the investigative ability to understand just how deep and rotten the corruption is.

The other thing that $400 million can do is buy subscriptions to the National Enquirer and maybe buy tinfoil hats for Liberal members who are peddling conspiracy theories in this place. They have been doing so over the last month. They know they are part of a government that is failing, that has run out of ideas and whose time is up.

We not only need a carbon tax election in this country, but we also need to get back to some sense of normalcy for the sake of all Canadians. This would be a country where people are not divided, where region is not pitted against region, race against race, faith against faith, with the apparatus of the government being used to divide Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, let us be perfectly clear to members of the Conservative Party. I have made reference to a Hill Times story and I highly recommend the member read it. What we are witnessing is nothing but a game to the Conservative Party. It is intentionally being played because the leader of the Conservative Party has put his personal ambitions ahead of the interests of Canadians.

We are witnessing an abuse of parliamentary process. There is no doubt about that. It is unfortunate that the Conservative leader not only believes he can abuse the authority of the chamber, but also believes that he does not need to get a security clearance, unlike every other leader here, because he does not want to know.

When are Conservative members going to tell their leader to do the honourable thing, put Canadians' interests ahead of the partisan interests of the Conservative Party and the leader of the Conservative Party, and stop the game?

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have had the displeasure of listening to the member peddle his conspiracy theories over the course of the last month. I think tinfoil is on sale at Giant Tiger this month if he wants to help support one of our members.

The real travesty is that the will of Parliament is not being followed. The supremacy of Parliament is not being followed. That supremacy has been supported by the Speaker in his ruling. The government has not provided the documents required and asked for by Parliament so we can get to the bottom of this scandal and find out how deep the rot and corruption go with Liberal-connected insiders and cronies. That is the real travesty in what we are dealing with.

Unless and until the government becomes what it said it was going to be, transparent and accountable, which it has not been, and provides the documents, this standoff will continue, with the support of other parties and the Speaker's ruling.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated when my colleague talked about the concerns of young people in this country, their desperation, despondency and feelings of hopelessness. They are concerned about having a home, and the cost of everything is so expensive.

There is one thing I am hearing a lot that maybe the member can speak to. He mentioned briefly the Minister of Environment. The younger generation is very concerned about a healthy world for themselves and the next generations, and here they see the minister, who is responsible for the carbon tax and supposedly for doing everything to enable our country to become even more environmentally efficient, on the wrong side of the discussion tonight. How discouraging is it to see a government that does not follow its own recommendations?

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Yorkton—Melville because she brought up an interesting point about the despondency of young people, who, as I said earlier, feel lied to and let down by the government.

In 2015, there was so much hope and inspiration because the new government was going to provide people with opportunity, but what we have seen over the course of the last nine years is anything but. Young people right now cannot afford a home. They are way behind where prior generations were because the cost of everything has gone up. We have young people living in their parents' basement or, worse yet, living in encampments in this country. We know that in Ontario, for example, 1,400 encampments exist today. In Halifax, the latest number I heard was 35 encampments.

These are people who want the hope, prosperity and opportunity this country can provide them, but instead, and this is a perfect example, well-connected Liberals and insiders prosper while everybody else seems to be suffering.

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

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to call quorum. I do not see quorum in the House.

And the count having been taken:

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

I appreciate that we have quorum.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.