Debates of Nov. 5th, 2024

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is a tough but fair question. Just having a member like the member we have representing King—Vaughan would be enough to convince them to vote for the Conservatives.

This is an important issue. We saw, out of ad scam, that we had new transparency laws. The Federal Accountability Act was brought in by former prime minister Stephen Harper. I think the good that we are going to see come out of these scandals is a demand and action from the future Conservative Party in government to ensure that we do have transparency and, just as important, accountability. Canadians will then know that their hard-earned tax dollars are going to what Canadians want, and not to corporate welfare or Liberal insiders, but to Canadians.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague gave a wonderful answer to the question I asked a few minutes ago. I have a follow-up question because his answer triggered something.

How many innovation ministers does he think might be complicit in this scandal because there have been several since the current one? I am wondering how many innovation ministers, possibly because of the scandal, could still be deeply involved. How many does the member think are involved in this? Does it go back all the way to 2015? I wonder if my colleague has an answer for that question.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to my friend for Regina—Lewvan again because that is probably the most I have spoken to him in a while.

I think the issues are deep. The SDTC is not a new program. It has been around for a couple of decades. Up until this government took over, the Auditor General had given a clean bill of health for the program and for its investments. This has only been since this government has taken over.

The Auditor General very clearly stated in her report that this falls at the feet of the current industry minister. It is very clear from the documentation we have seen with the contribution agreements that he had to have been told that there were conflicts, and he purposely ignored that because it was benefiting Liberal insiders, or he refused to ask if there were issues. We had a whistle-blower who made it very clear that the current minister was aware that these issues were brought forward. We have also seen the previous minister, Navdeep Bains, go around the application process to hand-pick the CEO, who was later convicted of violating conflict of interest rules, the same person who the Privy Council is now protecting by refusing to turn over the documents.

It is very clear that the rot is deep, and I think this is why the government is refusing to hand over the documents.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague went through details, I think we have often mentioned that between $300 million and $400 million has been discovered at this point, but there is a lot more information. There were only 180-some cases that were looked at, and there are a lot more in that documentation. This is another reason we need the full disclosure because this is not all of it. There is much more. As my colleague has established in his speech, we have just seen the tip of the iceberg. To my colleague, why does he believe we need to look at more?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we need to look at more so that we can clear the air to find out and get to the bottom of just how much taxpayers' money has gone to insiders, and how much taxpayers' money has gone to ineligible companies. It is actually right in the contribution agreement. Off the top of my head, I think it is on page 29, if the Liberals want to look it up. However, SDTC and industry have an obligation to go after funds that were given out but were not eligible.

We have asked repeatedly if the government did that, as is required in the contribution agreement. The answer, repeatedly, is that the Liberals completely derail and go onto a different topic. They refuse to answer. It is right in the contribution agreement. SDTC has an obligation to recover taxpayers' money and return it. I think the current government is protecting its insiders so that they do not have to pay back what has been stolen from taxpayers.

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

Mr. Speaker, the scandal continues. Parliament continues to uncover more evidence of the shameful record of the Prime Minister and the Liberal government after nine long years. Canadians are once again seeing that the Liberal government is not worth the corruption. It is deeply concerning to witness the government covering up another scandal.

Every day, Conservatives expose more of the Prime Minister's corruption. We bring forward important testimony and new evidence that the Liberal government has tried to hide from Canadians. It is because of this corrupt and potentially criminal behaviour that Conservatives must rise in the House to bring home the facts, directly to Canadians. With so much going on, it is important to bring all Canadians up to speed on the deeply troubling situation that has paralyzed Parliament.

For weeks, the Prime Minister has defied the will of Parliament by refusing to produce documents ordered by the House of Commons. For weeks, Conservatives have demanded that he surrender this evidence so parliamentarians can uncover the corruption that has seeped into another Liberal green slush fund: Sustainable Development Technology Canada, also known as SDTC. This is my second time rising in the House, and I will continue to rise as long as the Liberals refuse to hand over evidence to the RCMP. Conservatives will not allow the Prime Minister or his caucus to hide the truth that Canadians deserve.

How did we get here? For those just tuning into this scandal, I would like to explain how SDTC started to rot. According to the program's website, SDTC was a government-funded program that claimed to help “Canadian companies develop and deploy sustainable technologies by delivering critical funding support at every stage of their journey — from seed to success.”

What the program's website does not tell Canadians is that the SDTC program became corrupt when the Liberals made changes to its board of directors. In 2019, under the direction of the Liberal industry minister, new appointments were made to the SDTC board. The website does not tell us that many of these appointees' own companies would soon be caught in conflicts of interest with the same funds they were responsible for handing out. The SDTC website does not tell us that Liberal insiders began to siphon funds into their own pockets and were getting rich for years while the Prime Minister and his cabinet turned a blind eye.

How do we know this happened? In a tremendously brave manner, whistle-blowers came forward to call out the corruption they saw while working at SDTC. Without their honesty, the scandal may have never been uncovered. Thanks to these whistle-blowers, the alarms started to sound on the Liberal government.

The ensuing investigations would suggest SDTC's negligence was much more than just mismanagement of funds. I refer to investigations, plural, because both the Ethics Commissioner and the Auditor General have reported findings of greed and corruption that were allowed to thrive under the Liberal government's watch. Over the course of multiple investigations, including investigations by Conservatives at committees, it seems Parliament has only scratched the surface of the Liberal corruption. What started as tens of thousands of Canadian tax dollars being quietly directed to Liberal insiders turned into hundreds of thousands, which turned into millions, then tens of millions and finally hundreds of millions of dollars.

Multiple investigations have revealed that through the green slush fund, $390 million in funding was approved for projects that had extremely concerning conflicts. What the Auditor General found, which was truly disturbing, was evidence that the Liberals' green slush fund had handed out $58 million to projects without a promise that the contribution agreement terms were met. Another $58 million went to 10 projects deemed ineligible as they, at times, could not prove an environmental benefit or were not developing green technology. Finally, there was $334 million in over 186 cases where SDTC board members held a conflict of interest.

This shocking misdirection of funds by Liberal-appointed board members has opened the eyes of Canadians to a corruption that demands Parliament's full attention. I am sure Canadians from my riding in Manitoba can think of many ways these hundreds of millions of dollars could have been used, whether it is improving internet and cellular connectivity in rural and remote regions or investing in law enforcement to crack down on crime. Instead, Liberal insiders got rich in the name of fighting climate change, all under the Prime Minister and his minister's watch.

I am proud to say that upon discovering this gross negligence and potentially criminal acts, the Conservatives stood firm and demanded that a proper investigation take place. The Conservatives voted to pass an order in the House of Commons to force the Liberals to hand over documents involved in their green slush fund. We demanded that these documents be handed over to the RCMP so a proper investigation could take place. However, surprise, surprise, the Liberals, who voted against the document production order, refused to release the documents to the House of Commons. This is undoubtedly a breach of parliamentary privilege, as the Speaker of the House of Commons has ruled. It is on this breach of privilege that my Conservative colleagues continue to rise today.

Not only were the Liberals caught giving funds to their Liberal friends, the minister responsible was also exposed for handing out tax dollars to projects without guaranteeing the projects would do good for the environment. This proves once again that the Liberals are nothing more than fake environmentalists. The Liberals failed to manage this program, leading to $390 million going into the bank accounts of Liberal insiders. Some SDTC recipients had no requirement to meet the environmental goals set out in the fund, and others were not even eligible for the funding.

This is not the first time we have seen the Liberals mislead Canadians about the environmental record. After nine years, the Liberals have proven to be fake environmentalists. In the environment committee, Conservatives have uncovered extreme negligence and a cover-up attempt by the Liberal government and its environment minister.

Evidence revealed at the Jasper wildfire investigation proves the Liberals do not care about the environment and will not accept responsibility for the damage their action caused. During the national tragedy this last July, a third of Jasper burned, resulting in nearly a billion dollars in damage and leaving over 2,000 people homeless. The environment committee launched an investigation into the Jasper wildfire. What it revealed was shocking.

For years, the Liberals were warned by experts that the deadfall caused by an infestation of mountain pine beetle meant the forest was a tinderbox waiting to ignite. Instead of taking action, the Liberals ignored experts and played politics. An email obtained by the Jasper wildfire investigation revealed that senior officials in the environment minister's department discussed cancelling prescribed burns months before the Jasper wildfires: “At what point do we make the organizational decision to cancel...prescribed burns in Western Canada?” They went on: “political perception may become more important than actual prescription windows.”

In fact, alarm bells rang for years under the Liberal government, as local forestry experts raised concerns with forest mismanagement. In a situation similar to the one we are discussing today, whistle-blowers came to the committee to speak the truth. The Jasper wildfire investigation heard from professional foresters who warned the Liberal government in 2017 that a devastating fire in Jasper was not a matter of if but when. The same professional forester revealed, “Nothing was done to address the landscape of the beetle-killed timber to prevent the megafire of July 22, 2024.”

While the Liberal's radical environment minister falsely claimed that his department did everything it could to prevent the fires, Conservatives exposed that Liberals ignored warnings about Jasper for years.

In fact, just like the green slush fund, the Liberals are failing to co-operate with another investigation, the Jasper wildfire investigation. On October 9, the Prime Minister appointed a minister responsible for Jasper's recovery. On that same day, Conservatives passed a motion calling for the minister to testify at the Jasper wildfire investigation. That was 27 days ago. Despite this, the minister has gone into hiding. He does not want to come to committee, where he will be held accountable. Canadians want to know what the minister is hiding from this committee, and why he will not show up to answer the people of Jasper, who have lost their homes because of the Liberal government's inaction. This is just another example of Liberal cover-ups and corruption.

While the minister responsible for Jasper will not testify, Conservatives have continued this investigation on behalf of Canadians. The Jasper wildfire investigation also revealed that a Parks Canada employee, who spoke out about the mismanagement in Jasper, was fired under the Liberal government. The Jasper wildfire investigation also heard from professional forester Ken Hodges, who asked whether the inaction by the Liberal government could be considered criminal. Why does the question of criminality keep coming up under the government?

The forestry expert submitted a written submission to the Jasper wildfire investigation that stated, “Was the inaction by Parks, knowing the issue and concerns, that created this catastrophe a criminal act?” Canadians should be concerned by this question, which shows once again how often the Liberal government's actions blur the lines between negligence and criminal behaviour. The Jasper wildfire investigation is ongoing, as Conservatives continue to uncover powerful evidence that shows Liberal negligence allowed Jasper to burn.

We have to hold the government accountable. This is precisely why the SDTC documents must be handed over to the RCMP, so Canadians can understand just how corrupt this deal was and whether it was criminal. Canadians are rightfully wondering about this.

To the millions of Canadians who are outraged to learn about this corrupt and potentially criminal use of Canadian tax dollars, I would direct them to yet another Liberal handout that has just been exposed. I refer to yet another flashy Liberal announcement earlier this September, this time for a project the Prime Minister claimed would bring high-speed Internet to Canadians.

The Prime Minister claimed his government had signed a $2-billion deal with Telesat, which would lead to “better and faster Internet service, even in rural, remote, and Northern communities.”

The Prime Minister went on to claim, “Telesat Lightspeed will expand Internet and 5G networks in communities across Canada, with affordable, high-speed broadband connectivity.”

The Prime Minister also said, “The network will accelerate the federal government’s work to connect all Canadians to high-speed Internet by 2030.”

The Liberal government handed out tax dollars in another deal they claim will connect rural and remote Canadians, but guess what we just learned? There is zero commitment to connect any household with Internet with this $2 billion. There is zero, nothing, nada and none.

I asked the government, in a written question, “What are the complete details of financial penalties, if any, for not connecting the number of households agreed to in the funding agreement”? This was the minister's response, who, by the way, was the same minister overseeing the green slush fund: “The funding agreement does not include any commitment in regards to number of households to be connected to high-speed Internet”, then went on to say, “and so there are no associated financial penalties in this regard.”

Can members actually believe this? It is a $2-billion joke. Canadians are being forced to pay $2 billion for a connectivity program that may not connect a single household. How can we expect to connect Canadians to high-speed Internet when our contract does not even set a minimum number of households that must be connected? Was it laziness, neglect or corruption? It was probably all of the above. At the end of the day, this means Canadians will not receive the connectivity services they paid for, even though these services can mean the difference between life and death, especially in rural and remote regions.

The news comes after last year's findings in the Auditor General's damning report of the Liberal government's discovery that over a million households in rural Canada and over half of first nations still do not have access to high-speed Internet. It is becoming very clear that the Liberals measure success by how many tax dollars they spend instead of by the results they achieve. It seems that the Prime Minister has no problem sending money to his friends in big corporations; he does not expect to receive anything in return for Canadians. It is no wonder that, despite multi-billion dollar deals, Canadians are still not connected, especially in rural and remote areas.

This is why Conservatives are fighting for taxpayers. Allowing the Liberals' phony deals to go unchecked means more out-of-control spending and corruption, which only harms Canadians. Canadians know they cannot trust the Prime Minister to get results. The only people better off after nine years under the current Prime Minister are Liberal insiders.

Despite the Prime Minister's claim, in 2015, that his government would be “open and transparent”, Canadians only see corruption and cover-ups. The Prime Minister's corruption and scandals are becoming so damning that even members of his own caucus have lost faith in him. The Prime Minister is hoping that the green slush fund scandal disappears, but Canadians will not let him get away with this. All the outraged Canadians watching from home can see a clear but unmistakable pattern. While Conservatives continue to expose the truth by asking questions, there seems to be no end to the Liberal scandals. Whether we look at past scandals, such as SNC-Lavalin, the WE Charity or the arrive scam, or the ongoing investigations, such as those into the Jasper wildfire or the $8-billion net-zero accelerator fund, new scandals are coming to light every day. There are new scandals like their $2-billion Telesat deal, mentioned today.

All these blunders have a few things in common. They all have the fingerprints of the Prime Minister on them. They all involve Liberal negligence and the misuse of taxpayer dollars. Canadians are worse off for each and every scandal the Liberals have created. The Prime Minister has inflicted incredible damage on Canadians' well-being. Billions of Canadian tax dollars are being mismanaged by the Liberal government and, in some cases, going directly to the funds, with no real commitment to get results for Canadians, who foot the bill. Then, coincidentally, the same funds find their way into the pockets of Liberal insiders.

It has become clear that, instead of working to ensure Canadians have affordable food to eat, Liberals are focused on ensuring that Liberals can fill their bank accounts. Instead of building enough affordable homes for Canadians to live in, Liberals choose to build a bureaucracy of red tape. Canadians deserve a government that can benefit them, not just the Liberal elite. I hope the Liberals can end the cover-up and hand over the documents, so we can expose to Canadians just how deep the Liberals' corruption runs.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to once again offer my sincere apologies to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and to all my colleagues.

All members are free to speak in the official language of their choice, and my comments were inappropriate.

I am sorry.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the pattern that my colleague established of the problems we have had with the Liberal government over the last few years. In this particular case it is about the money, the corruption, the uncovering of those problems and the responsibility to return this money.

Could he please respond to what he believes is important about this cover-up?

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

Mr. Speaker, these dollars belong to taxpayers. These are not our dollars. This scandal, this whole debate, is all about what we do here in Parliament as members of Parliament. We have a responsibility to everybody who votes for us. Meanwhile, the Liberal government and the Prime Minister are blowing all Canadians off. This should not be accepted by anybody. We cannot have a carbon tax election fast enough.

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

Small Business

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in October, I asked the Minister of Industry and the Minister of Small Business why it was okay for Liberals to enrich their friends through Sustainable Development Technology Canada while small businesses are struggling. SDTC was established in 2001 and it operated with few issues under both previous Liberal and Conservative governments until the Prime Minister took office.

Earlier this year, the Auditor General released a damning report that outlined serious governance failures including 186 conflicts and over $400 million in misspent funds. The Auditor General made it clear that this scandal falls squarely on the shoulder of the current Liberal minister, who did not sufficiently monitor the contracts that were given to Liberal insiders. The Liberals' refusal to table documents regarding the green slush fund has effectively paralyzed our Parliament, hindering our ability to do work for which we were elected. This obstruction makes it impossible for us to address pressing issues like Canada's poor economic environment with high business insolvencies, a lack of productivity and high tax burdens.

Indeed, small businesses are struggling more than ever. Business insolvencies were reported at 6,331 for the 12-month period ending August 2024, an increase of 51.6% year over year. More businesses closed than opened in four of the past five months. For example, in July 2024, we had 42,346 closing businesses and only 41,738 opening businesses.

Canada's productivity has been stagnant since 2019, going from bad to worse since the pandemic, while other countries in the OECD have seen economic indicators improving. In key sectors, the combined activity of our agriculture, utilities, manufacturing and construction have fallen from one-third to one-quarter of the Canadian economy from 20 years ago. The construction sector has experienced some of the worst productivity in Canada.

The Bank of Canada's “Monetary Policy Report” in July 2024 reduced its forecast for overall Canadian productivity over the next two years, citing constraints on housing construction coming from structural factors such as the availability of land, zoning restrictions and a lack of skilled labour as the key concerns.

According to the Canadian Survey on Business Conditions, in the third quarter of 2024, half of all businesses reported rising inflation as an expected obstacle over the next three months. The rising cost of inputs was the second-most frequently reported, followed by rising interest rates and debt costs. As well, Canadians are now being taxed higher on their capital gains. Business groups are saying that these changes are unwise at a time of weak productivity. More than half of small business owners believe it will affect the eventual sale of their business and that high capital gains are among the most economically damaging form of taxation because they reduce the incentive to innovate and invest. This will penalize a lifetime of hard work. I might add that Environment and Climate Change Canada's estimates of the cost of the carbon tax in 2030 is that it will cost the inflation-adjusted GDP $25 billion.

Will the government release the green slush fund documents so that Parliament can get back to the important issues of this country?

[Bryan May, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Small Business and to the Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to respond to comments made earlier by the hon. member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon regarding support for small businesses.

Our government understands the important role that small businesses play in the economy. This is why we will deliver $2.5 billion to close to 600,000 small and medium-sized enterprises by the end of the year through the Canada carbon rebate.

We have negotiated agreements with both Visa and Mastercard to reduce their interchange fees by up to 27%, or by $1 billion over the next five years. This means that more small businesses will be able to invest in their operations, create good jobs and strengthen our economy. To help Canadian businesses thrive, we have also invested in them through the Canada summer jobs programs and My Main Street programs.

We lowered the small business tax rate from 11% to 9%. This is in recognition of the vital role that small businesses play in our economy and to enable business owners to have more cash flow. In 2024, small businesses and medium-sized enterprises will save an estimated $6.2 billion because of the preferred small business tax rate.

To encourage Canadian innovators to turn their ideas into growing businesses, our government announced the creation of the Canadian entrepreneurs' incentive, which would reduce the inclusion rate to one-third of a lifetime maximum of $2 million in eligible capital gains. Combined with the increased $1.25-million lifetime capital gains exemption, the Canadian entrepreneurs' incentive would make eligible business owners better off when selling business shares worth up to $6.25 million.

The government's latest budget devotes $200 million to renewing the venture capital catalyst initiative, with a goal of supporting venture capital for entrepreneurs who are part of equity-deserving groups, and investing in underserved communities and those outside key metropolitan areas. This will ensure that more small businesses owned by women and members of the Black, 2SLGBTQI+ and indigenous communities have access to the capital they need to start up and scale up.

Giving young people the option to choose entrepreneurship as a valuable career path for the future is important to our government. That is why in budget 2024 we invested $60 million in Futurpreneur Canada to help the organization increase its capacity to support young Canadian entrepreneurs.

These measures combined make a real, tangible difference that supports small businesses, including those led by women and members of equity-deserving groups.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that in every Liberal budget, there seems to be a line item for every issue facing our country. However, the Liberal approach fails to address the broader economic conditions that government programs, on a one-off basis, cannot address. We need a government right now that is going to address the overall productivity of the Canadian economy and the overall state of our economy so that the statistics I outlined related to business closures, business openings and the productivity crisis we face in our country are addressed.

We need to create an environment for the economy to thrive once again, and that will only come through broad-based tax measures, changes to the tax code and changes to the way the government treats the natural resource sector.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are going to continue to support small and medium-sized businesses. We are empowering entrepreneurs. We are increasing the lifetime capital gains exemption. We are investing in Canadian start-ups, and we are supporting equity-deserving entrepreneurs and businesses. This also gives me the opportunity to highlight that we have negotiated agreements with both Visa and Mastercard to lower interchange fees by up to 27% as of October 19 of this year.

Our government is committed to supporting small businesses, economic growth and prosperity for all Canadians. We have been with small businesses and supporting small businesses from day one, and the opposition has voted against all of it.

Persons with Disabilities

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am back tonight to continue calling on the government to fix the Canada disability benefit. It is particularly timely because we are now nearing the time when we would expect to see its fall economic statement. It is an opportunity for the government to right a wrong. The stakes are pretty high: 1.5 million folks with disabilities are living in poverty across the country, which is 40% of all of those living in poverty in Canada.

It was the Liberal Party's own platform in 2021 that said that a re-elected Liberal government would implement the Canada disability benefit, saying, “this new benefit will reduce poverty among persons with disabilities in the same manner as the Guaranteed Income Supplement and the Canada Child Benefit”. Both programs are in the order of tens of millions of dollars. I think it is around $15 billion for the Canada child benefit.

The minister, at the time, said that this would be a generational program, a sleeper legacy piece, if we do this right.

We are now nearing the end of the government's mandate. The fall economic statement is likely the last opportunity to fix the benefit before we head into an election. If nothing is done, here is the reality: The proposed benefit amount is currently capped at a maximum of $200 a month and would not even start until July 2025. It is going to be limited to those who can access the incredibly burdensome disability tax credit.

Recent modelling from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives shows that only 10,000 people will be lifted above the poverty line by the benefit, as is currently laid out. Here is Inclusion Canada commenting on it: “Our disappointment cannot be overstated”.

The government has got to fix the benefit, and the disability community has been calling for specifically seven things to address to fix the Canada disability benefit: first, remove the barriers to application by automatically enrolling recipients in provincial and territorial disability programs as well as those who currently receive CPPD in the Canada disability benefit and remove the requirement for a DTC; second, remove the additional barrier of another application that it has proposed in the regulations with a simple opt-out option for those who do not wish to receive the Canada disability benefit; third, support the dignity and the independence of each person with a disability by means testing the benefit against an individual's income; fourth, increase the maximum amount to lift folks with disabilities above the poverty line, taking into account the added cost for those who live with a disability; fifth, raise the income threshold so that it takes into account the added cost of living with a disability; sixth, fast-track the implementation and delivery of the benefit; seventh, issue retroactive payments dating back to when the legislation was passed in June 2023.

The government could pay for this easily if it redirected the subsidies it currently gives to the oil and gas industry every single year. That was about $18.5 billion in 2023 alone. This is about honouring the government's own promise. It is about addressing poverty. It is about listening to the disability community.

My question to the parliamentary secretary is this: Will the government do it?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Diversity]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy and also thank the disability community for its advocacy over the last several years. Everyone in Canada should be able to live in dignity. Our government is dedicated to this principle. We are prioritizing the needs of persons with disabilities and the disability community, and we are working toward meaningful solutions, solutions that matter and are impactful. It was our Liberal government that enacted the Accessible Canada Act. This was the first national Canadian legislation that impacted all government departments and federally regulated agencies.

We are committed to making Canada more accessible and inclusive.

We launched the disability inclusion action plan, our blueprint for change. A key component of the plan is a robust employment strategy. The strategy is integral to supporting persons with disabilities and helping them to enter the workforce. In fact, Statistics Canada estimates that over one million working-age Canadians with disabilities could participate in the labour market if they had a fully inclusive environment. We are committed to providing that fully inclusive environment for the one million Canadians of working age with disabilities.

Our government is committed to removing barriers through programs like the enabling accessibility fund, which supports essential improvements such as ramps, accessible doors, accessible washrooms and accessible offices. Additionally, the opportunities fund assists individuals with disabilities in preparing for, finding and maintaining employment. It also helps to advance careers.

Together these initiatives help foster accessible communities and workplaces and enable us to tap into this important and valuable talent pool.

Our government has invested more than any other federal government to support Canadians with disabilities, but there is still a lot of work to do. With the Canada disability benefit, our government is taking another historic step forward.

As a cornerstone of the disability inclusion action plan, the Canada disability benefit aims to enhance the financial security of low-income working-age persons with disabilities. Importantly, the disability benefit is designed to supplement existing disability support programs, not replace them.

The provinces and territories play an essential role in the payment of benefits.

We aim to see the combined federal, provincial and territorial benefits improve supports for persons with disabilities to match the levels of old age security and the guaranteed income supplement. This significant adjustment is essential in order to effectively address the rate of poverty facing persons with disabilities. The Canada disability benefit allows our government to work with provinces and territories to see that there are no more clawbacks of existing benefits.

Together we can explore the best ways to improve our collective assistance to persons with disabilities. We understand that the disabilities community is eager for the payments to be made. We are too.

We are moving swiftly towards establishing essential components of the disability benefit and delivering on it. It will be in people's pockets as of July, and we are committed to that.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the government can move swiftly. It did so with the Canada emergency response benefit, CERB, in the midst of the pandemic. Within weeks, a framework was designed. When it came to people with disabilities, though, the promise was made over four years ago and the current session of Parliament is now nearing its end.

There is a really critical economic document coming out in the coming weeks. It is an opportunity for the government to show the disability community that it has actually been heard, and an opportunity for the government to see persons with disabilities and the reality of how insufficient what the government has proposed is. A maximum of $200 a month, limited to those people who can get through the burdensome disability tax credit application process, is not what the government promised in the throne speech years ago or in its platform.

Will the Liberals take this moment to reflect on the feedback they have heard from the disability community and demonstrate they have heard the disability community by doing better and fixing the Canada disability benefit?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to again thank the member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy.

Our government is committed to supporting persons with disabilities. The first cheques for the disability benefit will be in people's pockets as of July. This is an important and historic benefit for all working-age persons with disabilities in our country living in challenging times. It will help reduce poverty and support the financial security of so many people.

The Canada disability benefit is a major milestone in our government's commitment to diversity and inclusion. Our government is moving as quickly as possible to get the money to people who need it most.

The Conservative Party has said it supports persons with disabilities. However, there is a question mark in regard to which programs the Conservative Party would cut first. We have heard this from the Conservative leader in the past. We would like to know if this benefit would be cut by Conservatives in the future.

Carbon Pricing

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to wrap up this evening's events and ask some follow-up questions, on the carbon tax, to what I asked the Minister of Environment a week ago in question period.

We all know the carbon tax costs a majority of Canadians much more than they get back in rebates. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has confirmed that time and time again and recently confirmed it in his most recent PBO report. We all know the Canadian Trucking Alliance has said the carbon tax, from 2019 to 2030, will cost the trucking industry $26 billion.

How do the NDP-Liberals not think that that cost will get passed on to consumers, for example, at the grocery store? We have seen grocery costs skyrocket under the NDP-Liberal government over the last few years. I am sure whoever gets up on that side will say we have heard the PBO say eight out of 10 Canadians are better off with the carbon tax rebate, but it is not true.

When we take in the total cost, the indirect cost, of the carbon tax, I would say a vast majority of Canadians are worse off. The rebate is minuscule, and the carbon tax is put on, in most parts of the country, home heating and air conditioning; every time people fill up their gas tank and every time they go to the grocery store, they get hit again.

Canadians now realize the NDP-Liberal government is not worth the cost. Over the nine long years it has been in government, everything has gone up in price. We have heard it time and again: costs are up, taxes are up and time is up. It is time to have a carbon tax election.

We even see the Liberals' junior partner, the NDP, waffling a bit on the carbon tax. We saw the member for Burnaby South, right in the middle of the Elmwood—Transcona by-election, say that maybe the New Democrats are not in favour of a carbon tax. Only days later, he flip-flopped back to come on board. We saw the NDP Premier in B.C., Mr. Eby, say the carbon tax is hurting people in B.C., and maybe the government would revisit that. He made that promise during an election campaign, but once again, the NDP will go back to their old ways of foisting the carbon tax on the Canadian people in B.C., and making them pay more each and every day.

I would like a clear answer from whichever Liberal is going to give an answer this evening about why the Liberals continue to break the promise they gave in the 2019 campaign that they would never raise the carbon tax past $50 a tonne. It was in the campaign platform. That was the Liberal commitment, that they would never raise the carbon tax past $50 a tonne.

What we are going to see by 2030 is a quadrupling of the carbon tax. It is going to cost each and every Canadian an extra 61¢ a litre. That is an undeniable fact. I am hoping to have an answer to why the Liberals are breaking their promise to Canadians and quadrupling the carbon tax.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing]

Mr. Speaker, without an ounce of irony, the hon. member gets up and talks about breaking promises. That member ran on pricing pollution; he and every member of his party ran on a carbon tax. It is in his platform.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, he is heckling; he says, “Show me where it is.” There was an announcement. It was on the cover of the Conservatives' platform. The guy with the muscles, whom they got rid of a little bit after, ran on a carbon price.

It is shocking. I looked it up before the speech, and more than half of the member's province is currently in drought conditions. However, in his entire speech, he did not talk about any action on climate change. Climate change is affecting the farmers, whom he purports to stand up for, in dramatic ways. It is affecting yields and their livelihood, and he says, “I don't care.” Maybe in Regina, the impact on farmers of climate change beyond the borders of his riding does not matter. However, as the hon. member and I have discussed, we both like to eat. Is it not important that we stand up for farmers, that we stand up for our economy and that we fight climate change? If not for them, should we not do it for our kids, who are facing this?

Looking at my phone right now, it is 18°C on November 5 in Ottawa. We can see the impacts of climate change with our own eyes, and the hon. member just wants to stick his head in the sand. He quotes the Parliamentary Budget Officer. I do not know that he has even read the report, but the report specifically says that eight out of 10 Canadians do better under the carbon pricing system. However, he is the person who would speak to 100 doctors who say that smoking is bad for a person, speak to one doctor who says it is okay, and then say it is great to smoke. He would say that we should really do that, regardless of what the other 99 doctors said.

Three hundred of the top economists in this country have said that carbon pricing works and that it puts more money in the pockets of Canadians; however, this member does not care. He went through his speech without even mentioning the rebate. Yes, costs get passed down, but there is a rebate back, and because more money is put in their pocket, Canadians are better off.

It is shocking that the members from the other side do not care about the environment, do not care about climate change, when it is an existential threat to Canada and Canadians.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, there was so much wrong in that answer. I want to unpack it, but I do not have the time. However, one thing I will say, as a father of three, is that smoking is very bad. Please be assured that I do not think smoking is a good thing for anyone. I would just like to get that on the record.

I was not sure that my hon. colleague was going to answer, but I am glad he answered because I enjoy his clever banter every now and then. However, I will invite him out to Saskatchewan. I was born and raised on a farm, and so I know quite a few people who still ranch and farm. We will tour southwestern Saskatchewan. I am sure the member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands would help us out. We will tour northern Saskatchewan and go to every farmyard we can. The member can talk about the efficacy of the carbon tax and if it is helping or not. I will put our position on the table, and we can see what the people of Saskatchewan think is better. We can do that or have a carbon tax election.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the hon. member thinks I come from, but there is a lot of agricultural land. I speak to farmers in Niagara, especially grape growers, and they are incredibly worried about climate change. Looking at British Columbia, farmers have lost 95% of their crops because of the impacts of climate change.

The hon. member does not care. He buries his head in the sand and still does not acknowledge that eight out of 10 Canadians are better off with the rebate system in place. Not only has the Parliamentary Budget Officer said so, but 300 of the top economists in this country have as well. Again, he would pick that one doctor who says smoking is okay, regardless.

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

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:47 p.m.)