Debates of Nov. 26th, 2024

Committees of the House

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I declare the amendment lost.

The next question is on the main motion.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I believe that if you seek it, you will find agreement to apply the results from the previous vote to this vote, with Liberal members voting in favour.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Conservatives agree to apply the vote, with Conservatives voting in favour.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois agrees to apply the result of the vote and will vote in favour.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the New Democratic Party agrees to apply the vote, and we will be voting in favour.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Green Party agrees to apply the vote and will also be voting for.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #894

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I declare the motion carried.

I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, Government Orders will be extended by 17 minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to take a moment today in front of all colleagues to raise the point of order that it is your birthday. We want to wish you a very happy birthday.

[Members sang Happy Birthday]

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Although it is not a point of order, I appreciate it.

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

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I just want to recap where I was on this question of privilege a bit, and then I will make some additional points.

We are all very grateful to have people send us here. I want to wish all the people of Niagara West a merry Christmas, a happy new year and safe travels.

I talked a little about what happened this past weekend in Montreal, which should never have happened. It is almost as though we do not recognize this Canada that we have anymore. I believe this is a direct result of the policies of the Liberal government and how its leader has been dividing people. Quite frankly, it is very troubling to see what happened on the weekend and the amount of destruction. The government had no problem freezing peaceful protesters' bank accounts before. I wonder when the frozen bank accounts are going to come from these guys across the way.

I was talking a bit about the Winnipeg labs. I will get back to that. Once again, there is nothing to see here, folks. That was back in 2021. They said there was nothing to see here but wanted to go to an election to make sure that the people of Canada did not actually have all the facts and did not understand what was going on.

I want to spend a little time talking about small business. We all understand that small businesses are the ones that help create jobs and wealth. They actually help drive the economy in our country. Quite frankly, with the challenges we have had with small businesses, they are struggling.

It is interesting: We talk about doing a number of things. We talk about axing the tax. I have a survey from the CFIB, and I want to take some time to read from this newspaper story. It is entitled “85% of small businesses reject federal carbon tax, survey shows”. It says, “A recent survey by a small business advocacy group has revealed growing discontent among small businesses towards the federal carbon tax.”

There is no surprise there. We are hearing that at the door all the time. My colleagues have talked to individuals and small business people, and they are hearing that.

The story continues:

Data by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) shows that 85% of businesses now oppose the federal carbon tax and want it removed, a significant increase from the 52% opposition recorded just a year ago. The majority of small firms find the tax unfair, especially in light of the federal government’s recent decision to exempt only one heating fuel, heating oil, from the tax.

“Small businesses have been raising their concerns with the carbon tax for years,” said CFIB president Dan Kelly.

“They pay about 40% of the costs of the carbon tax, but the federal government has promised to return only 10% to small businesses.”

We had another announcement this week, saying that the government is going to return some money. I think all small businesses are waiting with bated breath to see when that is actually going to come. I hope it will come in time for Christmas.

Once again, when we talk about the numbers, this is not revenue-neutral in any way, shape or form, which is what the Liberal government is constantly saying it is. They say it is revenue-neutral. People should not worry about it. They are going to get their money back.

The story continues:

Another rising concern is that many small firms will be ineligible for the Federal Fuel Charge Proceeds Return Program if the federal government ever gets around to creating it, explained Kelly. This program promised to deliver the $2.5 billion collected from taxpayers since 2019 to small businesses and Indigenous groups.

The recent decision by the government to exempt certain Canadians from the carbon tax for heating costs has further exacerbated the issue....

“The entire federal carbon tax structure is beginning to look like a shell game,” said Kelly.

That is something we have been saying on this side of the House for quite some time.

The article refers to “rising costs on everything from supplies to fuel to taxes and the Canada Emergency Business Account (CEBA) loan repayment”. The loan repayments were very difficult. As I mentioned previously, almost two out of three small businesses needed to take on additional debt because of what happened during COVID. They are still struggling under that.

The article continues, “Halting future carbon tax increases, including the planned hike [in 2025] should also be on the table”. We have a tax trick going on right now. The government is saying that it is going to give Canadians a break on the GST for a couple of months, but there is no mention of the carbon tax that is going to go up next April. That is a very sad trick on people.

They talk about a number of things, basically saying that, in any way, shape or form, they do not support that.

Now, another thing we have said we want to do is stop the crime. We have this revolving door; it was talked about during opening statements, in terms of what is going on there and what is happening in a number of places.

Another article, “Half of Canadian businesses experienced crime and safety issues: survey”, states:

Almost one in two small businesses reported crime or safety-related issues in 2024, marking a sharp increase from the previous year.

A report from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business reveals that 45% of small businesses faced incidents like vandalism, theft, and drug paraphernalia which affected not only their operations but also the mental well-being of their employees and workers.

The CFIB reported that the incidents are impacting business finances and safety, with owners incurring a median cost of over $5,000 over the past three years for repairs and crime prevention.

However, 68% of business owners avoid filing insurance claims, fearing hikes in already steep premiums.

I think most of us will understand why our car premiums have gone up this year. It is because of the number of stolen cars in this country. Insurance companies, God bless them, pass those costs on to us individuals. At the end of the day, we end up—

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

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

I am listening to my colleague from the Conservative Party and wondering if he is truly addressing the subject of the privilege motion that his party moved. He is talking about the cost of car insurance. That is not really a question of parliamentary privilege.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Obviously, there is some leeway during speeches, but members certainly do have to keep their comments relevant to the subject of the privilege motion being debated in the House. I expect the hon. member to ensure that his speech comes back to the question of privilege.

I will give him a bit of time to do so.

The hon. member for Niagara West.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member can hold tight. I will bring it back around, and the member will see how it all fits together.

We have a government that has wasted $400 million when small businesses are suffering and crime is out of control. The government is doing anything but leading in this country. This is affecting how small businesses can prosper and whether they are going to survive.

I am going to share a couple of quotes that are talking about security. The first says, “Some security measures, while helpful and necessary, may come at a steep price, deter customer foot traffic and, as a result, lead to lower revenues”. The second reads, “Many businesses are already operating on thin profit margins, so just one crime incident could be make-or-break-for a small business owner.”

Small businesses are watching as the Liberals are paying out of this $400 million slush fund to enrich themselves versus actually doing something for small businesses, such as setting policies or dealing with crime issues that would help businesses do a better job and be more prosperous. The CFIB report notes that businesses have adopted their operations in response to crime. About 50% have implemented safety measures that alter customer access, like locking doors or requiring appointments, and 67% resorted to spending money on more security. However, these measures have also made it more challenging for customers to access stores, potentially reducing foot traffic and revenue. I could talk more about that.

I talked about how difficult it is for small businesses. Once again, the Liberals have money for all their pet projects without setting proper policies in place that would ensure investment comes to Canada. We could attract investment and make sure that we are doing it. We can look at what is going on with our small businesses. I talked about how closings are up, openings are down and the number of businesses shutting down have grown.

This quote comes from an article that came out recently:

Canada saw the highest business closure rate since the first summer of the COVID-19 pandemic in June, with one in 20 businesses closing that month, according to Statistics Canada.

Canada's economy saw 46, 354 businesses close in June, making it the largest wave in exactly 4 years.

It's the highest closure rate since lockdown, a time when businesses were physically restricted from opening up to do business.

The data comes at a time when the unemployment rate also continues its upward trend and is seen highest among young adults.

In addition to the high rate of closures, the agency reported that the business opening rate also dropped by 0.4 percentage points, bringing it to 4.2%.

This drop marks the largest decline since August 2021.

“That statistics are worrisome,” [said the] director of economics with the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses....

[They also] noted that while business closures mentioned will be seasonal, therefore they’re not closing permanently, new businesses opening is a sign of a healthy, growing economy.

“You want to see that you have new businesses on the market trending upward and you want the closing rate dropping”....

One of the things we find challenging right now, as we look at what is happening, is that there is not much hope for small businesses and for Canadians in general. I will leave members with these statistics: “Canada has the housing prices of New York...the wages of Mississippi...the economy of Alabama...and taxes higher than all 50 US states.”

We have to deal with a new administration, and these policies are not working.

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

Madam Speaker, I want to recognize my daughter's birthday today. I wish a happy birthday to Cameo.

The member spoke about local business. Local businesses and small business are very important to my community of Port Moody—Coquitlam and in Belcarra. We are coming up to what the Americans call Black Friday, but I would like to talk about Small Business Saturday.

With CETA, there is an inability for local governments, which buy a lot of goods and services locally, to use local suppliers. They cannot procure, in their procurement policies, through local suppliers. Does the member think that is a good idea?

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Madam Speaker, one of the bigger challenges we have is that we are really at a competitive disadvantage. I know our leader has talked about this, and I think we need to continue to do that. When we look at what we are spending on carbon taxes versus the rest of the world, including the U.S., we can see that we are putting ourselves at an unnecessary disadvantage. The U.S. is one of our neighbours that we do a lot of trade with.

This is one of the reasons why we need to axe the carbon tax. When we think about how we charge the tax on the people who grow the food or produce something, if we charge the tax on the people who transport it and then the consumer who pays it, we will always be at a competitive disadvantage vis-à-vis every other country that does not have a carbon tax.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, when I have asked other Conservative members why they want to continue this debate, on the exact same motion, for month after month, after it was approved by the House back in June, and Greens, along with others, continue to call for this to go to committee to be studied to ensure that we get accountability on the mismanagement of funds, I am told by Conservatives that they need to investigate with more of these speeches. However, in the speech we just heard, we heard mostly about carbon taxes, small businesses and car insurance and very little about SDTC.

Why is it that Conservatives feel that they need to continue this filibuster if their own members are not going to speak to the motion at hand?

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I spoke about it in the first half of my speech. Maybe he was not present, which is fine. I talked about the challenges with the whole point about redacting documents and not providing documents. I used the example of the Winnipeg lab, right before an election, when we asked for documents. The Liberals decided they would rather take the former Speaker to court than actually produce those documents. There is a very easy, very simple solution, which is to provide the unredacted documents. We would then be more than happy to continue.

What we want to know is why the Liberals and the NDP are spending so much time avoiding showing us what the documents are. Why will they not just show us what we are asking for?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was wondering if my colleague from Niagara West could elaborate a little bit more about our asking for these documents.

My constituents are really worried about censorship. It seems the government, no matter what, wants to cover things up. It puts in bills disguised as hate speech bills that are actually just to shut down debate. This has been an extremely troubling trend with the government, and its apologists, in the House. The apologists are supporting the government through this entire makeover of Canadians who believe in freedom of speech.

Could the member talk a little bit more about censorship and why it is important that we have these documents because Parliament is supreme, not the government?

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I had wanted to talk about censorship as part of what I was doing, but there were just so many things that I needed to talk about that I was not able to get to it.

The Liberal government has talked about how it was going to be the most transparent government of all time, that it would show us that sunshine was the best disinfectant and so on. The reality has been that the amount of legislation that the Liberals have put forward while trying to censor, to restrict and to have government control is very worrisome.

That is why, when we ask for documents, when Parliament asks for documents, we want to see what we are asking for because we are worried about censorship from the government.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Madam Speaker, part of the reason we are having this debate is that we are continuing to see, over and over, the government get caught in scandal after scandal. Maybe the member could elaborate on why he thinks the government continues to get caught in scandal after scandal, leading the House to being engaged in this privilege debate, which has been going on for a while now.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Madam Speaker, as governments continue on, particularly Liberal governments, there is a sense of entitlement that starts to creep in. We are see that the Liberals really believe that they should reward their friends. They really believe that there are “rules for thee but not for me”.

If we think about that, one of the ways we can see that is when the high-flying, hypocritical Prime Minister has no problem burning literally hundreds of thousands of carbon emissions as he flies around the world. An individual with a family member in their car may use about three tonnes a year versus the hundred thousand or so that he will burn through on just one trip. I think the challenge is that people are seeing a trend here. They are seeing that it is more about “do as I say, not as I do”.

People have been very concerned, and they want to make sure that there is accountability. That is our job as the official opposition, to hold the government to account.

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

Madam Speaker, I look forward to 10 years from now when we might see a Conservative prime minister travelling the country in a horse and buggy. I am sure members can appreciate that, for the Prime Minister, and for any prime minister, there is an obligation to board airplanes.

How much longer can we anticipate that the Conservative Party will continue to play this self-serving political game, at a substantial cost, because of the self-serving leader of the Conservative Party? How many more days are we going to see this abuse of authority?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!