House of Commons Hansard #366 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was documents.
Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 13th report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage entitled “Tech giants' intimidation and subversion tactics to evade regulation in Canada and globally”.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand in the House today on behalf of the Conservative members on the Standing Committee of Canadian Heritage. We submit this dissenting report on the tech giants' use of intimidation tactics to evade regulation in Canada and across the world. The main report failed to adequately explore the state of censorship in Canada, as well as the roles played by tech giants and the current federal government. This dissenting report is required.
I should say that the committee got to hear from 18 witnesses over the course of the study. Many of those testimonies expressed the censorship of Canadians by the government and tech giants in terms of what they can see, hear and say online, with specific nods to the hindrances being caused by both Bill C-11 and Bill C-18.
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 15th report of the Standing Committee on National Defence, entitled “Rebuilding Trust: Transparency and Accountability in the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces”.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-417, An Act to establish a framework on animal-assisted services for veterans.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Elmwood—Transcona for seconding this important piece of legislation, called the assistance animals framework for veterans act.
For over 15 years, veterans groups and experts have wanted to see service animals, especially dogs, as part of VAC's mental health rehabilitation program. I have met with many veterans who have bought dogs that were not properly trained. I have met veterans who have become unhoused because tenancy laws do not have rules around making sure that service dogs can live in the home. It is a terrible thing when a veteran chooses to live on the streets to be with their service animal.
The bill would create a framework to provide certainty to the amazing animal training organizations, with clear guidelines to meet so they have a standard they can proudly showcase. It would also protect veterans, who are often taken advantage of; they pay enormous amounts of money for a service dog, but neither the dog nor the group is legitimate. It would also harmonize standards across the country, allowing veterans to have service dogs in rental homes, on trains and on planes. Finally, it would open the door to more Veterans Affairs funding to support those veterans with the service animals they desperately need. Dogs and equine therapy are perfect examples.
Canada asks so much of the people who serve our country. This is an important bill that would help many veterans and would make sure the standards of service and training of the dogs and other animals are on a level playing field for all.
I want to thank all the veterans, service providers and members of organizations who have talked to me about this issue. I also want to thank Christine Ackermann, from my office, who works so hard on this.
I look forward to seeing this come into practice in law.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
moved for leave to introduce Bill C‑418, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (accessibility and other measures).
Mr. Speaker, it is with the support of my very dear colleague, the member for Manicouagan, that I am immensely proud to introduce a bill that proposes robust measures to strengthen the Employment Insurance Act. It would reform eligibility criteria, the duration of benefits and the amounts provided. I am the Bloc Québécois employment and labour critic and I have been championing and supporting this cause to reform the EI system since my first day in 2019, along with workers and the unemployed.
The Bloc Québécois is taking action where the Liberal government has failed. Its failure is appalling, because it chose to do nothing despite its 2015 commitment to reform the system and its many promises since then. In the wake of the pandemic, the government itself recognized that it had taken too long to act. This policy choice has left thousands of unemployed workers out in the cold, victims of an outdated law that protects them poorly or not at all. The system has failed to adapt to the realities of today's workplace and the resulting injustices and inequities continue, yet the problems and solutions were identified long ago.
Today we are introducing a Bloc Québécois bill, a solid bill that is aligned to current realities and would better protect a greater number of workers. I am thinking of the workers in the seasonal industry. I am thinking of young people and women who have non-standard jobs and do not have access to employment insurance. I am thinking of pregnant women who lose their job and do not benefit from the protections of employment insurance. I am thinking of the people who are left out in the cold by the system. Thousands of workers who contribute to employment insurance are not protected by the legislation. Employment insurance coverage needs to be expanded to more people. It is about fairness.
Our bill corrects several major flaws with employment insurance and we invite the Liberal government and its Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Official Languages to also side with the workers, keep their promises and implement the proposals we are making today.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Madam Speaker, I move that the 13th report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, presented on Tuesday, May 17, 2022, be concurred in.
It is my absolute joy to rise in the House today and speak to this important report. I will say at the outset that I am splitting my time with the amazingly talented member for Bay of Quinte, who is single-handedly going to bring trade back to Canada. I am excited to split my time with him.
The order of business today is to talk about the report entitled “Lessons Learned from Canada's Record on Climate Change”, delivered by the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development.
The report was delivered pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(g) with respect to the public accounts committee. I was pleased to be on the committee when we studied this important report. I will just read a couple of highlights into the record before we get going in earnest with my speech here. It states, “The report further clarifies that although ‘Canada’s population and economy have grown faster than emissions have,’ its GHG emissions ‘have increased since the Paris Agreement was signed, making it the worst performing of all G7 nations since the 2015 Conference.’”
An update to the report sees that the trajectory has not changed in recent months or years. In 2023, the commissioner wrote in a new report, “While some progress has been made, we are still extremely concerned about the federal government’s ability to achieve meaningful progress”.
What we could really entitle both the committee report and the environment commissioner's report is “all pain and no gain”. We have experienced tremendous economic challenges because of the current government's environmental policies, without any real achievements on the environment side. In fact, I had the privilege of asking the environment commissioner some questions, and I will read from the testimony.
This was a couple of years ago, and the question was, “In the last seven years, has this government achieved any of the international carbon reduction targets?” Mr. DeMarco responded, “Not that I'm aware of”. The pain this has caused without any gain is incredible. We are sitting here among the lowest ranking when it comes to achieving reductions in GHGs, yet we are dealing with the economic pain. A large portion of that can be explained by the government's ideological, reckless, dangerous obsession with the carbon tax.
We recently received a report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, which once again amplifies that it is all pain and no gain when it comes to the government's environment policy. Among other things, the report states that the carbon tax has actually had very little, if any, material impact on our total GHG emissions. This means that the carbon tax's impact on climate change is negligible. In reality, then, one side of the equation is that, clearly, we are not achieving anything.
However, let us look at the financial impact of the carbon tax. We hear over and over again about its fiscal impact. I will just start off by saying that there is an artificial division between fiscal impact, which is the direct impact, and economic impact, which is indirect. The reality is that a Canadian does not get up in the morning and decide that they are going to go with fiscal impact today and economic impact tomorrow. We are all dealt it, so the artificial division between fiscal and economic impact should not even exist, in my opinion. When we look at just the fiscal impact, depending on where we are in the economic spectrum, there are situations where we could be ahead by getting the rebate. That is absolutely true, and I like to be an advocate for the truth. However, the reality is that we cannot live in Canada without the Canadian economy affecting us. When we look at the economic impact, which is the total impact of the carbon tax, nearly all Canadians will be behind.
I just want to read this into the record because there has been a great deal of discussion and debate about the impact of the carbon tax. Let us pick Newfoundland and Labrador. What is the net negative impact in, let us say, 2026? It is $876, so once again people in Newfoundland are behind because of the carbon tax, even including the Liberals' phony rebate. Let us flip over and pick another province: Saskatchewan. Let us go to 2028-29. The average Saskatchewanian household is out $434. Let us flip over to Alberta. The average Albertan in 2027-28 will be out $436.
It is beyond frustrating to sit here day after day, hour after hour and month after month and hear the government not telling the full story, if I am being kind. “Willfully changing the information” would be perhaps another way of casting it. The fact is that when we look at the global economic impact, which is really the only sensical way of looking at the carbon tax, we see that Canadians are behind when it comes to the per household figure. We see the impact.
Actually, that does not even fully capture the challenge of the carbon tax, because of course we live in a dynamic economy. The more money we give to the private sector, the more money grows in the private sector in the economy. It is perhaps not surprising that in 2015, when the current government was elected, there was immediately a diminution in our productivity, which has then led to a lower GDP per capita.
GDP per capita is a stat we are probably going to hear about a fair bit, because in Canada it has not risen a bit since 2015. We are facing one of the worst economies in the OECD. GDP per capita really just means per individual. Our economy has not grown, which means that while Canada, because of the growth in its population, may have technically avoided a recession, the reality is that Canadians, individuals, have been in a recession for a very long time, as per capita growth has not risen since 2015.
The challenge is that, while the Governor of the Bank of Canada is saying that we are in a break-glass emergency, the government just wants to put more and more barriers in front of our economy.
One of the bright lights in the Canadian economy is actually the energy sector, which, despite all of the impediments and all of the barriers the government has put in place, continues to work and to thrive. For example, petroleum and petroleum-related products account for 40% of our total exports. What do we do with the golden goose? We tax it and tax it some more, and we try to regulate it.
There are many members who, if they could press the switch tomorrow, would cut off Canadian energy. They are radicals and extremists. The reality is that we need clean Canadian energy to power our economy, because right now, as I said, Canadians are in an extended recession that has gone on for years. It has decreased our standard of living and made it tougher for all Canadians to do the things that they want to do, including feeding themselves. That is why two million Canadians are going to the food bank.
That does not even tell the whole story, because there are students living in cars. There are tent encampments across our country that are the direct responsibility of the government's irresponsible and radical plans for our economy. Its economic malfeasance has led to the lowering of Canadians' standard of living, making every Canadian poorer.
In addition to that, the government has not achieved any of its goals with respect to climate change. It has not lowered GHG emissions. Canada continues to be an outlier and a poor performer when it comes to reducing carbon and other emissions. The government is a failure on every account.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Madam Speaker, the member is absolutely all over the map on the issue. I am trying to understand what the report itself is actually about; I am listening very closely.
Let me pick up on one of the biggest flip-flops in Ottawa, probably in the last generation or so, which has to do with what the member is talking about: the price on pollution, the carbon tax, versus the carbon rebate. The reality is that every member of the Conservative caucus who participated in the last federal election said, “Yes, we support a price on pollution.” Then they got a new, shiny, far-right leader with MAGA principles, and he came out and said that they were going to do a flip-flop on the issue. As a result, the Conservatives are now all opposed to the price on pollution.
My question to the member opposite is this: Does he not believe that the MAGA far right has been a bad influence on the Conservative Party?
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Madam Speaker, in first-year psychology, one learns about something called “shadow projection”, which is projecting onto other people one's own insecurities and failings. When I hear about confusion and radical policies, it is no surprising that it is coming from the member who just spoke.
Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK
Madam Speaker, this is an important topic, and I listened intently to my friend's speech. I am wondering whether he has heard of other flip-flops on the carbon tax. One that comes to mind is the NDP in B.C. Its members were against it before they were for it. Another one that comes to mind is the flip-flop of the current Liberals when it came to being an open and transparent government. I remember that in 2015 the Liberal government said it would be the most open and transparent government in the history of Canada. Could we maybe walk through a few of the missteps?
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Madam Speaker, the member is experiencing something that we see with all progressive candidates, whether from the Liberal Party, the NDP or otherwise. Right after an election, they become strong, progressive legislators. Right before an election, they suddenly start understanding the importance of things like fiscal responsibility and the economy, but that will quickly fade away after the next election and they will become the radicals they are.
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Madam Speaker, we are talking about the lessons to be learned from climate change. I think the main lesson is that oil is very cost-effective and profitable for oil companies. At some point, should the government stop subsidizing these oil companies and giving them tax credits? Tens of billions of dollars are being pumped into this industry.
I think that is the most important lesson to learn. I would be curious to hear what my colleague has to say on the matter.
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Madam Speaker, the reality is that Canadian energy accounts for half, if not more, of Canadian exports. Without Canadian energy we would be insolvent as a country.
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Madam Speaker, the report that the member brings to the attention of the House is so important.
The member talks about how the Liberal Party has been all pain and no gain. The member for Whitby actually is on the record saying that the Liberals know that their net zero policies are going to cause pain intentionally. What kind of government intentionally causes pain for its population?
We do know that the Liberal leader admires the basic dictatorship of China. The Liberals talk about radicalism, but it seems to be moving further and further towards wokeness. I am wondering whether the member could talk about Canada's competitiveness, because right now we know that we have to compete with the world. What difference are carbon taxes and crazy radical policies going to make for Canadian manufacturers?
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Madam Speaker, I actually appreciated the comments from the member for Whitby because at least he was being honest about the debate.
The reality is that there are no Pollyanna solutions; there are only trade-offs when it comes to politics, so we need to have smart policies that enable us to fight climate change while growing our economy. Clearly what has happened over the last nine years is that we have not reduced carbon emissions. At the same time, we have put Canada into an absolute economic malaise. Our economy has not grown, for the average Canadian, in the last 10 years, which is making it harder for Canadians to eat. It is making it harder for Canadians to get by every month.
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to serve in this place with the member for Northumberland —Peterborough South.
A Liberal walks into a bar and says, “Drinks are on me. Who's paying?” Who is paying are the Canadian people right now with higher taxes, fewer jobs and a struggling economy.
We just have to look at the facts to see what has happened over the last nine years. With respect to the Canadian per person GDP, the average U.S. worker is now making $22,000 more than the average Canadian worker. We have a struggling economy with high unemployment; the unemployment rate for the U.S. is almost 1.5% lower than it is for Canada. The U.S. has an actual problem as it has seven million jobs it cannot fill. In Canada two years ago, there were a million high-skill jobs we could not fill. That number is now plummeting; there are fewer than 400,000 right now.
The average personal household debt per person in Canada is at 180%, whereas in the U.S. it is just under 100%. There are Canadians who nine years ago felt that they could pay their mortgage, pay their rent and afford groceries.
Of course, Canada and Canadians have been really focused on the environment. When the government came in nine years ago, it promised that it would be able to better the middle class and better the environment for Canadians. After nine years of the government's mismanagement of the climate and the environment, as well as a bad environmental plan, Canadians have found out now that it has cost them. That is the thing we hear when we hear talk about an environmental plan.
The Prime Minister said that the government will reward those who do the right thing and will punish those who do not do the right thing. However, all Canadians want to do the right thing for their family. They want to be able to get a job. They want to be able to get to work. They want to be able to ensure that their family can go to school and get a good education. They want to ensure that they grow up and are able to afford a home in a safe neighbourhood free from crime and free from corruption.
What Canadians are finding now is that all those things have disappeared, and the government still cries climate and environment over everything else. What that means is that we have only a carbon tax that punishes its citizens and punishes its workforce.
Yesterday there was an announcement to reduce emissions by 30% in the oil and gas sector, a sector which is already seeing disparity at a time when Canada is going the wrong way. If we want things to go the right way, we should not take out the environmental question but change the way we deal with it. There are good companies in Canada doing great things, but they are growing. The government's environmental policies are like saying they are going into a hot tub and will not pee in the hot tub, but everyone else is. We might think that we are doing a great thing, but we do not exactly have crystal clear water. This is what is happening across the world.
We have implemented punishing regulations for all of our sectors across Canada. We have a carbon tax that is punishing our citizens, but if we look to the south of us, the Americans are not doing that to their citizens. They are not punishing their workforce. The Americans have an economy that is performing five times as well as Canada's is.
When the U.S. implemented the IRA, the Inflation Reduction Act, it was supposed to entice clean competition and investment into America. We have seen what has happened: The U.S. gets the supply chains and is getting the results from that. It has clean companies that have decided to put their production in Canada.
We were doing a smidgen of that from electric car battery manufacturing or assembly stations in Canada. We were not including our supply chains and we were not including vehicle production. Even when we thought that the only thing we were getting out of it was workers, what ended up happening was that the workers were not even Canadian. For 2,500 jobs at Stellantis in Windsor, 1,600 workers came from South Korea.
We have not been doing the right thing to help Canada and to ensure that we are working within a worldwide phenomenon to help the world when it comes to the climate and environmental policies. That is exactly what we are seeing. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, a favourite book of the finance minister, talks about how some countries prosper and others fail.
Countries that focused on ensuring that their citizens have savings and can innovate and invest, while at the same time ensuring that they are free, in a capitalist society, to develop their businesses, innovate, invest their IP and find ways to expand their businesses to provide good-paying jobs are the nations that were wealthy and well off, with good democratic systems. Nations that restricted and coerced their industries, and set targets or decided what industries those nations should be in, and I am thinking of the old Soviet empire, failed miserably, with their citizens finding it hard to pay for rent, have good-paying jobs and ensure they had good wealth that they were able to transfer not only to their own generation but also to the next generation. That is exactly what we are seeing now.
The finance minister says that she admired this book, but I think she forgot to read it or needs to read it again. The carbon tax punishes our citizens and, more importantly, our workforce. Emissions targets and reductions are being placed on what Conservatives already consider the cleanest energy in the world. People are going to move away from that energy and go to the dirty energy that is not only from dictators but also from nations that do not have any environmental standards.
We take 15 years to develop mines in Canada for the critical minerals we need for the future of batteries, no matter where they are, yet other nations are doing it in less time. China has 86% of all the mined material needed for batteries across the world. Let us not even talk about the failed trade policies.
There is an important election today, and the news is going to be dominated by the election down south. Politico said this is the day for the government to release all the bad news because there is going to be no more room for other bad news. There is so much bad news when we look at what is happening across the world and what Canada's workers and citizens could benefit from.
We are at third base, and we act like we hit a triple. We have the oil and gas that the world needs. We have critical minerals that the world needs. We have great farms and food production, yet we punish our farmers. We have great IP institutions and universities that create great ideas, and if we just learned how to commercialize those ideas, we could get those ideas out and become a leader in the world in technology.
We have some of the greatest people in the world who come up with the greatest ideas, so entrepreneurs and small businesses that need a leg up can grow and create jobs. Small businesses make up 98% of businesses in Canada, and they are creating jobs in this country. We need to do more for them. Nations fail because they do not invest in their citizens and they punish them for decisions they are unable to provide alternatives for.
If Canadians had the ability to create a different fuel source for their car, they would. If Canadians had the ability to go to a different place of work and get paid a higher wage, they would, but right now they are struggling to keep the jobs they have. If Canadians could figure out a way to afford their mortgages or their rents and make sure they were cheaper, they would want to do that, but because of the housing crisis in Canada, they cannot.
This is all because of the government and its government-knows-best approach, which says that it knows better than the Canadian people and that it can control the environment and the economy. The result, we know, is an economy that is running away much faster from the Americans and other countries than any other nation on earth. We have trade deals that are not helping Canadians or putting Canadians first. We have workers who are struggling to find a decent wage and keep that decent wage.
The Liberals may be saying that the drinks are on them, but the reality is that Canadians are being left to foot the bill. It is time for a real plan, one that empowers Canadians, bring jobs home and positions Canada as a leader in both economic prosperity and environmental stewardship. We need a government that would axe the tax, fix the budget, build the homes and stop the crime.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Madam Speaker, the degree to which Conservative members will mislead is truly amazing. The member said that we have a failed trade policy. We should reflect on that statement. That is what he tells his constituents.
No government in the history of our Confederation has signed off on more trade agreements than this government. In the first three-quarters of 2023, we had the highest foreign investment in the world. In real dollars, it is the third best—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
I would remind the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan that, if he wishes to participate in the debate, he wait for the appropriate time to do so, as opposed to heckling.
I would also remind members that, if they continue to heckle after I have told them to not do so, they will not be recognized should they rise for questions and comments.
I will ask the hon. parliamentary secretary to wrap it up, please.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, the GDP for Canada is absolutely incredible. It is third in the world and first in the G7, and the Conservatives have no problem spreading misinformation. That is something that comes out of the leader of the Conservative Party's office.
Why do you want to consistently mislead Canadians?
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
The hon. parliamentary secretary knows he is to address questions and comments through the Chair and not directly to members.
The hon. member for Bay of Quinte has the floor.
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Madam Speaker, the member did not mention Stephen Harper, so I will do it for him. Stephen Harper signed the CETA agreement. Stephen Harper was the main one who signed TPP and set that up for the Liberals to tee off of. We can talk about who led trade development and what industries led it, and it was oil and gas. Oil and gas, which the government has declared war on, led trade export growth for Canada.
We can look at what happened for CUSMA in the last round. The member talks about their success, but it was complete incompetence. Three months before CUSMA was signed, Canada was kicked out of those agreements. Mexico went back into the negotiations, and I will ask members to guess which country is now the U.S.A.'s number one trading partner. It is Mexico. China is number two and Canada is number three. That is the record of the Liberal government: failed trade policies. We would fix that.
Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.
Before I begin, I want to recognize the career of retired MLA Todd Stone. He served the Kamloops area diligently for 12 years, and I thank him for his service as a former minister. He is somebody who gave a lot to the area.
With that being said, my colleague from Winnipeg is talking about hypocrisy. Let us talk about Liberal hypocrisy. Let us talk about a Prime Minister who has been found guilty of two ethics violations, who promised a government that would be open by default and who fired the first indigenous attorney general. He tried to get her to break the law. I think we should be taking no lessons from the Liberals when it comes to this sanctimony. What does the member think about that hypocrisy?
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Madam Speaker, we are doing a concurrence debate in reports, but the House is actually paralyzed because of the Liberal government. The government's refusal to hand over unredacted documents to the police despite Parliament telling it to do so is the whole essence of what the government stands for. It does not stand for the people. We are put here by and elected for the people, and this place has the power of the people. If the government refuses to hand these documents over, the precedent that will be set is that the people of Canada will have no more power. The government would love to have that.
Lisa Marie Barron NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for bringing forward this important debate. This is my first time having a chance to review this important document, and we can see there is a list of lessons. Lesson 2 states, “Canada's economy is still dependent on emission-intensive sectors”, which is something that the member is talking about. In consideration for parliamentarians, it goes on, “How much financial support does Canada provide to the oil and gas industry? Could this support be reallocated to workers?” This is an important consideration for us because we have seen the Conservatives continuing to prop up oil and gas CEOs instead of looking at a true transition for workers to a clean economy and for those jobs.
Can the member share why the Conservatives are doing all they can to ensure workers are disadvantaged as we move forward with a clean economy?
Ryan Williams Conservative Bay of Quinte, ON
Madam Speaker, we are doing the opposite. Oil and gas in Canada employs 500,000 people with good wages and good jobs. We want to see a diversified economy, which means that we would have IP commercialization and a tangible economy, and that we would ensure we are growing good small businesses, such as farming. Until we do that, we have to make sure the businesses and industries here in Canada are getting the support they need to keep bringing in the revenue that the government wants us to pay for, all the other programs. We are going to continue to support workers.