Oh, oh!
House of Commons Hansard #385 of the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was indigenous.
House of Commons Hansard #385 of the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was indigenous.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Access to Parliamentary Precinct Members debate a question of privilege regarding a protest at a parliamentary building. Conservatives allege NDP MPs were involved in obstructing access. NDP members deny organizing the protest, describing it as a peaceful sit-in by Jewish Canadians protesting genocide in Gaza, and criticize the Conservative characterization as offensive and misleading, calling the privilege question frivolous. 3100 words, 25 minutes in 2 segments: 1 2.
Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs Members debate a Conservative motion on the government's failure to provide documents about Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC). Conservatives allege cronyism and corruption in SDTC funding. Liberals defend their record and criticize Conservative policies. The NDP criticizes both parties for the impasse, stating it prevents debate on issues like the cost of living. 6900 words, 45 minutes.
Opposition Motion—Federal Sales Tax on New Homes Members debate the housing crisis and a Conservative motion to eliminate the federal sales tax (GST) on new homes sold under $1 million. Conservatives argue this increases affordability; Liberals defend programs like the housing accelerator fund, criticizing the Conservative plan. Bloc members raise provincial jurisdiction concerns, while NDP members advocate for non-market housing and structural change. 14100 words, 2 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Oral Questions Members debate points of order concerning House decorum, disruptive behaviour, and the Speaker's rulings on the relevance of Question Period questions, with multiple parties raising concerns. 1300 words, 10 minutes.
Indigenous and Northern Affairs Members debate housing affordability, focusing on the third report of the Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Indigenous housing. Conservatives criticize Liberal policies as failing, proposing to build the homes by eliminating federal sales tax on new homes under $1 million and tying municipal funding to housing targets. Liberals defend their investments, including the Housing Accelerator Fund, and criticize the Conservative record. NDP members highlight the crisis's impact on Indigenous peoples, linking it to gender-based violence and the Indian Act, advocating for Indigenous-led solutions. Bloc Québécois supports initiatives like Yänonhchia' and calls for federal funding transfer to provinces. 21500 words, 3 hours.
Adjournment Debate - Housing Mike Morrice argues for an HST exemption for non-profit home builders like Habitat for Humanity. Peter Fragiskatos cites low-interest loans and grants as alternative supports, and defends removing GST on apartment construction to increase housing supply. Morrice questions why the government "forgot" about non-profits when it removed GST from for-profit builders. 1400 words, 10 minutes.
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
An hon. member
Oh, oh!
Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON
Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands should probably be quiet, so he can actually hear the answer. It is a fact that municipalities take too long to get things approved and that they keep raising charges at the local level. When I was a mayor in Huntsville, yes, I made sure that we kept things moving along and we made sure development—
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
An hon. member
Oh, oh!
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
I would ask the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands to hold off. If he has questions and comments, there is an appropriate time for that.
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
An hon. member
Oh, oh!
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
Order.
The hon. member for Parry Sound—Muskoka. We are out of time, but I will let him wrap up.
Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON
Madam Speaker, when I was a mayor, we got things done because I moved applications along and did not wait for the NIMBYs to delay things. We made things happen. Now we need to make things happen even faster because the crisis is worse today than it has been in generations in this country, and doing things the old way, as the government likes to do, is not going to work.
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the question to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment is as follows: the hon. member for Kitchener Centre, Housing.
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Madam Speaker, I have a number of thoughts I would like to share with members, particularly with members opposite.
However, before I do that, I wanted to highlight, and I used the word earlier today in a member's statement, the hypocrisy. The degree to which the Conservatives will say one thing and vote in a different direction surprises me. Quite often, they say things that really just do not make sense.
Now, let us think about this. We have the Conservative Party saying that we need to do more on indigenous housing, but one of their major policy election platform issues for 2025 is to get rid of the housing accelerator. Now, one would think that they would have looked at some of the recipients who are receiving the benefits of the housing accelerator fund.
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
An hon. member
That requires a little work.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, as my colleague says, that requires a little work. Well, obviously, they are not working on the other side. The number of recipients that are benefiting through the housing accelerator fund is truly amazing. It is a very long list. Let us remember, the Conservative government would cut it. Conservatives have made that very clear. They actually mock it.
In fairness, not all of the Conservative members of Parliament oppose it, even though they have been told that they are supposed to oppose it, and they have kind of held back on their comments on it. At the end of the day, the Grand Poobah, the leader of the Conservative Party says, “accelerator fund, bad. We are going to vote against it, and if we are ever in government, we are going to get rid of it.”
I have done a little homework. There is a long list, and I am going to run out of time, but the number of first nations is fairly significant. Let me give a couple of examples where these are Conservative-held ridings, where the accelerator fund is there to support indigenous communities: Skowkale First Nation in Chilliwack—Hope and the Sioux Valley Dakota Nation in Manitoba. There is a very lengthy list of individuals, cities and indigenous groups that are receiving significant amounts of money through the housing accelerator fund.
The Conservatives will say that it is not building homes. It is not simply here is a plot of land, build a house. There are all forms of things that need to be done, like infrastructure. There is some red tape out there. We have a federal government that has recognized that we can play a role in providing supports through the accelerator fund to get more homes built.
If the Conservatives did their homework on this file, they would find that indigenous housing would benefit from this program, the very same program that they are saying they are going to cut. On the other hand, today, they are saying that we are not doing enough. I will get back into some more comments on the accelerator fund shortly.
This is the first time that I have seen an opposition party introduce a concurrence motion on its very own opposition day. I have been trying to think why the Conservative Party would do that, and I think I might have figured it out. Apparently, last week, the leader of the Conservative Party was embarrassed because he was all primed and pumped, and ready to deliver a speech here on the floor of the House of Commons, and the NDP outmaneuvered him by moving concurrence on a committee report. That was an embarrassing moment for the leader of the Conservative Party.
The Conservatives played a game on Friday. They tried to pay back. I guess they learned something from what had happened. They wanted to be able to talk about housing today. After all, that is what their opposition motion is on. They dug up a report on housing to move concurrence on, so they could prevent the NDP from potentially bringing in a concurrence motion. That would spoil the Conservatives' day because they did not like the concurrence motion the NDP brought in last week.
That is the only thing I can think of, in regard to why the Conservatives raised this particular report, because it is a game to the Conservative Party. What surprises me is that the Conservatives have an opposition day and I would have thought, as a Conservative Party, that they would have been following issues like trade, given what has taken place with the new president-elect, that trade would have been a hot discussion within the Conservative Party. It would have been a very productive day to have a discussion on trade. The Conservatives could have drawn some sort of a motion that would actually be voted on, which would have told Canadians exactly what they would be dealing with on that issue.
It is important. In fact, just this last five or six days, I participated in a trade mission in the Philippines with our Minister of International Trade. It was an incredible experience. We had arguably one of the largest delegations in Manila; even President Marcos made reference to it. It was like speed dating among businesses between Canada and the Philippines, trying to make connections, and we had some wonderful announcements. An exploratory discussion is taking place soon on coming up with a trade agreement between Canada and the Philippines. Air Canada came forward and talked about increasing the number of direct flights between Vancouver and Manila: four coming up in April.
Trade matters. As a government, we recognize that. As an opposition party, the Conservatives are found wanting. Today would have been a good opportunity to have that discussion because the last time, outside of an emergency debate, was when the Conservatives actually voted against the first-ever trade agreement, the Ukraine trade agreement. I would have thought the Conservative Party would deal with something of that nature, and that is not to take anything away from housing. Yes, they are the official opposition. They get to choose the issue, so they have chosen housing.
On the housing file, no government in generations has done more for Canadians than the current Prime Minister and government, in terms of dollars and real, tangible results. We recognize the federal government has a role to play. I contrast that to the leader of the Conservative Party, who, when he was the minister responsible for housing, did absolutely nothing, nothing at all. I should not say that; he actually managed to build six houses, I am told. I have no idea where those houses are, but I am told he built a half-dozen homes, but nothing else, and now he wants us to listen to what the Conservatives have to say about housing. We have heard that story before.
The Leader of the Opposition had an opportunity, and had he done his job when he was the minister of housing, maybe we would not have the shortages we have today. It is not like a house appears out of nowhere. There is a planning component to it. Has anyone ever heard the leader of the Conservative Party stand in this place and talk about what he did as minister of housing for indigenous people, or for Canadians as a whole, beyond those six hidden houses? Who knows where they are.
There is a lot of room for improvement. Our government is the first in generations to put forward a housing strategy for Canadians. It is more than just words. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, going into billions of dollars. It is a housing strategy that deals with affordable housing and ensures someone could have ongoing income supports, where rent is based on a percentage of one's income in non-profit housing units. The government has invested in different ways.
Ironically, the Liberals made a commitment for purpose-built rentals. Members will recall that from a couple of years back. That was actually taking away GST on new builds. The Conservatives voted against it: GST forgiveness for purpose-built rentals and the Conservatives did not support that. For every housing initiative by the government, the Conservatives have avoided any accountability on housing, and they vote against it. Does anyone wonder why? I would suggest we know the reason.
I wanted to get what I find to be an absolutely delightful quote. At the end of the day, everything is driven through the leader of the official opposition's office. When we think of the quotes the leader of the Conservative Party uses, and we have already witnessed it today, he likes to reward Conservatives who say the slogans or the bumper sticker words. If they do that, they get rewarded with gold stars. I figure they have individuals in the back who keep track and say, “Oh, so-and-so said it three times: three stars for the day.”
There are some Conservatives who get offside, like the 15 or 17 members of Parliament who wrote to the Minister of Housing to say how wonderful the housing accelerator fund was. Obviously, it was because they were asking for support in their communities. That was offside. They were not supposed to do that, so they might have lost some stars. If a Conservative member does not do what they are being told to do, they lose stars. It is frowned upon.
It is amazing. I cannot give an exact quote, but later I can table a document if the Conservatives will let me. If they want to come and talk to a Liberal MP, that is considered a bad thing. They are not supposed to fraternize with—
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
There are members on both sides of the House who are trying to intervene during the member's speech. I would ask members to please wait. There will be 10 minutes for questions and comments. I would ask members to please hold off until then. They can jot their ideas down.
The hon. member still has five minutes and 20 seconds left.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, in this situation, Conservatives are supposed to support whatever the leader of the Conservative Party says; they do not really have a choice in that matter. The member for Abbotsford is one of the individuals who went a little offside and we all know what happened with him.
The housing accelerator fund has benefited communities in every region of the country, including indigenous communities. There is so much potential with that program and looking at the expansion of housing co-ops. Last month, I was at a press conference hosted by Raising the Roof. Funding was provided by the federal government to Raising the Roof, an organization based in Ontario and now in Manitoba, to remodel and revitalize a home on Mountain Avenue. The house was dilapidated and the organization turned it into a wonderful rental. It is a great example of how the federal government, whether through the accelerator fund or other programs, is working with different municipalities, indigenous leaders and others.
It is something that is very local, involving many different stakeholders. Raising the Roof went to Manitoba, found a project on Mountain Avenue and went to Purpose Construction. Purpose Construction is a social enterprise that has done phenomenal work in hiring individuals, increasing their skill sets and showing them, in many ways, the benefits of the construction industry. They are the ones who did the work on Mountain Avenue.
Then if we look at the tenants, Siloam Mission, another non-profit organization, is the filter. It provides homes for two families and possibly a third individual, such as a student or something of that nature, of indigenous background. As a government, we have the national housing strategy, we have been working with the different levels of government on programs like the housing accelerator fund, and we have been working with different non-profit stakeholders like Habitat for Humanity, Raising the Roof and others that encourage and promote housing co-ops.
The federal government and the Prime Minister have been focused on the housing issues of Canadians. Let us contrast that to likely the worst minister of housing in Canada's history, the current leader of the Conservative Party. I love the contrast on that file, and I hope members will reflect on it.
Therefore, I move:
That this question be now put.
Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
The motion is in order.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil. Thank you,
John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON
Madam Speaker, the hon. member was airing a lot of grievances, apparently, about the Conservatives. I am wondering if he can comment on the threats that were made by the member for Surrey—Newton to a member of his caucus, the member for Nepean.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, given it is kind of a free-for-all, let me comment on Patrick Brown's testimony, which clearly demonstrates that the leadership of the Conservative Party was heavily influenced by foreign interference. I would suggest that is one of the reasons the Conservatives do not want to have an opposition day on foreign interference.
I believe the leader of the Conservative Party still needs to get the security clearance, but we are beginning to understand why he does not want it, and it is because he is hiding something. It is a lot more than the leadership race he went through with individuals like Patrick Brown and the issue of foreign interference. There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. I appreciate the question posed by the member.
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Madam Speaker, we learned today that there will be an economic statement on December 16. I would like to ask my colleague if he is aware that a letter was sent to the Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister about the Yänonhchia' project.
It is a really wonderful project, and all this group is asking for is a $150‑million investment to facilitate access to affordable capital and expand the model, which has already been proven effective in Quebec and could be spun out to five other regions of Canada. The interesting thing is that this could help increase the number of available housing units while giving indigenous peoples some responsibility for their housing projects. We would be giving their power back to them.
Does my colleague agree that the $150 million should be allocated in the next economic update, as requested by the Yänonhchia' project proponents? It is a great, easy solution for housing in indigenous communities.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, like the member opposite, I too am very much looking forward to the fall economic statement. It has been a long time coming, because the Bloc and the Conservatives have continuously filibustered, but we are going to get a fall economic statement. I think there are going to be a lot of wonderful things in there, and through it, I am sure there are many ideas.
I can tell the member opposite that the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance is very keen on trying to be sensitive to all the needs out there, and I suspect it is not an easy job establishing those priorities. However, when it is presented to the House, I am sure it will be a reflection of what Canadians really and truly would like to see.
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Madam Speaker, this is the first time I am rising today, and I just wanted to take a moment before I asked my question to acknowledge the heartbreaking event that happened in Edmonton this weekend, where Mr. Singh, a young 20-year-old student on his third day of work as a security guard, was shot dead doing the work of trying to protect people in Edmonton. It is a really devastating time for our community, and I want to take a moment to express my deep sympathies and my condolences to his family and those who loved him.
I would like to thank the parliamentary secretary for his contributions today. It was disappointing, of course, to see him stand to vote against the NDP motion to take the GST off home heating and things like cellphone bills. I understand that the Liberals believe Christmas trees are more important, but I did think those were important.
My actual question for him is with regard to housing. When we have a housing crisis issue in Canada and municipal, provincial and federal governments are implicated, what do we do when a provincial government, such as Danielle Smith and the UCP in Alberta, is not working with the municipalities or the federal government and would rather pick fights than actually get housing for Canadians?
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, we continue to work with those who are prepared to work, and at times, that means we put more of an emphasis on sitting down with the municipalities or other stakeholders to get the housing programs that are necessary.
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Madam Speaker, members are never going to believe this. Members will recall about 30 minutes ago there was an exchange between the member for Hamilton Centre and the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka. The member for Parry Sound—Muskoka referred to mayors as being incompetent. Then he stood up to say that, when he was mayor, he got so much done and made sure that housing got built.
It did not take that long to find something out from an article in the Huntsville Doppler. It is true that, when the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka was on city council, the council decreased the development charges in the municipality, but when he was mayor, the council increased development charges by 16%. There is literally no bigger gatekeeper than the former mayor, the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka, the now sitting MP, who had the audacity to stand up in the House to accuse other mayors across this country of being incompetent.
I am wondering what the parliamentary secretary would have to say to all of that new information.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, what is there to say to something of that nature? It is truly amazing. I look at it in the sense that the member is following his leader. His leader will say things, and we wonder where those things come from, just like how he says they want to give a tax break, yet they voted against giving a tax break. They literally voted against it.
The member for Parry Sound—Muskoka has done the same thing. He comes out to say that there are all those bad mayors, or bad councillors, and so forth, because they are wasting dollars. On the other hand, he held, as my colleague and friend has just pointed out, a very different position, both in policy and as a mayor, than he holds now as a member of Parliament. Consistency is a problem. The word hypocrisy is what often comes to my mind when I think of the Conservative Party.
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Madam Speaker, listening to the Liberal parliamentary secretary, I have to scratch my head and wonder what country he is living in or, maybe, what planet. He talks about a housing accelerator program when it actually should be called a housing decelerator program. The Liberals have put a break on housing starts. In Vancouver and Toronto, housing starts are down to levels that they were at in the seventies.
We can compare that with the Conservative plan, which would put up to $50,000 into people's pockets when they purchase a new home, and ensure a savings, also, of $2,500 a year. If the Liberals do not want to do a carbon tax election, why not one on the housing plan that we have?
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, I would love to see a contrast between the leader of the Conservative Party and the Prime Minister with detailed documentation of who has done what on the housing file.
The member opposite will find that the leader of the Conservative Party, with all seriousness, all kidding aside, was likely the worst housing minister in the history of our nation. Contrast that with the Prime Minister. We would have to go back generations to find a prime minister who has invested more resources and energy into the development of a housing policy.
I truly believe that the Conservatives have absolutely no credibility. They, for example, say that they would get rid of the housing accelerator fund, even though some of the member's own colleagues are asking for support from that fund. There is no credibility within the Conservative Party whatsoever on the housing file.
If I had the time to cite some very specific examples, I would go into housing co-ops. I would go into supports for non-profit housing units. I would talk about their lack of any form of a housing strategy. Ultimately, there are retrofits and programs to support improving housing stock. The government has worked on these types of things, and the leader of the Conservative Party did absolutely nothing, zero, on those—