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.

Topics

line drawing of robot

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.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives criticize the government for doubling the national debt, exceeding the $40-billion deficit guardrail, and increasing taxes like the carbon tax. They demand an end to inflationary spending and taxes. They repeatedly question what the Liberals promised the NDP for their continued support and call for a carbon tax election. They also raise concerns about violent crime and bail reform.
The Liberals highlight their economic record and upcoming Fall Economic Statement. They emphasize measures to support Canadians, including a GST holiday, Canada Child Benefit, dental care, and affordable housing. They also point to investments in AI and border security, while criticizing the Conservatives for opposing these initiatives and muzzling MPs.
The Bloc questions the government's approach to secularism in Quebec and its impact on integration. They criticize CBSA fiascos like the CARM app, calling for an audit, and urge closing the 14-day loophole exploited by illegal border crossers.
The NDP criticize the government for excluding vulnerable groups like seniors from a $250 cheque. They raise concerns about the housing crisis, its impact on survivors, and favouring private investors over affordability, as well as the growing need for food banks.
The Greens call for restoring Canada Council for the Arts funding and ensuring communities get their fair share.

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.

Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:45 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, during this important vote for the NDP to ensure that the GST was taken off family essentials, home heating and telecom, the leader of the official opposition ran away; he fled the scene. He could not come up—

Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

3:45 p.m.

The Speaker Greg Fergus

I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, Government Orders will be extended by 30 minutes.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order coming out of question period.

I am afraid that an extremely dangerous precedent is being set with respect to how you, Mr. Speaker, are allowing questions to continue when they are clearly not about the administration of business. Today, we had a number of Conservatives bringing up issues and talking about the NDP for the entire question. Finally, at the end of the question, they said, for instance, “Will the Prime Minister let the NDP leader do something?” However, this was clearly not in line with government business.

I go back to my question from a week and a half ago. I started by talking clearly about government measures. My question started, “Mr. Speaker, last week our government announced measures”, and it went on. At the end of my question, I specifically asked the Prime Minister why the leader of the official opposition should allow his MPs to vote in favour of that legislation. Somehow, Mr. Speaker, you deemed my question out of order, but when we see what is going on today, you routinely allow those questions to stand.

Finally, I would like to add the following. I think that—

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

The Speaker Greg Fergus

Order please.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, to conclude, one of the things you are doing, which I think is a huge mistake, is to allow an entire question to be asked, and then say that you see the minister rising on his or her feet. When you do that, of course somebody has to provide a response, but it neglects the fact that the question had nothing to do with the administration of business.

I asked this last week, on Friday, and I have asked it routinely. Once again, I would ask that you go back, consider all of this, consider other interventions that have been made and come back to the House with a concrete ruling that we can then rely on.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Andrew Scheer Conservative Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK

Mr. Speaker, I just noticed the virtually unprecedented attack on a sitting chair occupant in real time.

As the member should know, if he has specific complaints about the actions of a chair occupant, he should put it in a formal motion. However, when that was done in this chamber, the member voted against that motion. I just wanted to point that out.

I would also point out that, many times in the House, we hear Liberal members who have entire preambles to questions or asks that have nothing to do with government business. Sometimes they have both. However, you, Mr. Speaker, have allowed those questions to stand. Nevertheless, having the guidance that you gave, we did not get up afterwards and challenge your ruling or insult your ability to handle question period. We just simply adapted and followed the precedents that you have set out for the chamber.

I would say that it is absolutely relevant and within the purview of government to ask the Prime Minister what promises, policies or deals he offered another party in order to keep its support so that he can stay in power. That is exactly what those questions were today. I just find it shameful that the parliamentary secretary for the government House leader would challenge your authority and your ability to handle question period, Mr. Speaker.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:50 p.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have a problem. My seat is a ways away from yours and when members of the House are bringing forward points of order for your consideration, I often cannot hear what those points of order are, even with my earpiece, because the Conservatives are causing such an uproar. I have to say it appears that sometimes decisions are being made by the Table based on how much uproar and rude behaviour we see from the Conservatives. My perspective is that the loudest, squeakiest, whiniest wheels in the House should not be the ones to dictate the behaviour of the House.

When I cannot even hear what those points of order are because Conservative members of the House seem to feel they have the right to instruct you on what your decision will be, Mr. Speaker, that is a problem because it means that I cannot participate fully as a member of Parliament.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB

Mr. Speaker, on that same point of order, even though I am a little closer to you, during question period, I was unable to hear what was going on because of the way members of the New Democratic Party, specifically the member for New Westminster—Burnaby and the member for Timmins—James Bay, were carrying on, giving instruction to the Speaker and making it very difficult for members, even on this side, to hear what the Speaker was saying.

The whip of the New Democratic Party has folks within her own area she needs to address her concerns to because it is obstructing the business of the House.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have to say this is very rich coming from my colleague, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, who, when he was Speaker from 2011 to 2015, systematically cut off any question that did not deal with government administration after 10 or 12 seconds. This was the “Scheer doctrine”, so to speak. During that period, if we did not—

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

The Speaker Greg Fergus

The member knows that we cannot use a sitting member's last name.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, if it was established that it did not have to do with government administration at the beginning of the question, the question was cut off halfway through. Conservatives know this. That is what was put into place.

Conservatives need to respect the rules of the House and you should use the tools you have, Mr. Speaker, to cut them off when it has nothing to do with government administration.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

The Speaker Greg Fergus

The Bloc Québécois has not had a chance to speak. The hon. member for Drummond.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Mr. Speaker, I find it quite rich to hear the NDP and the Conservatives passing the buck about who is disrupting the House the most. The Bloc Québécois sits between the two parties. Members on both sides are yelling and hurling insults at each other. There is clearly a lack of decorum in the House. This is not the first time we have risen to point that out.

Once again, I appeal to you, Mr. Speaker. Even during Statements by Members, we hear a lot of noise and conversation. During question period, it is absolutely unbearable. I think that all parties should make an effort. We ask for your vigilance on this.

We should be able to do our work with a modicum of decorum and respect for one another, and especially for the interpreters, who are finding it increasingly difficult to do their job because of the chaos in the House and the lack of respect among the parties.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

December 9th, 2024 / 3:55 p.m.

The Speaker Greg Fergus

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay would like to make a short statement. I will give him the floor.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I notice that I am allowed a short intervention. The issue speaks to our lack of faith. Every member should be treated fairly, and they are not. We have learned very quickly that, if the Conservatives create enough chaos, the Speaker bends to that. When New Democrats raise points of order, they are shut down. We are told to sit down. In fact, one of the only times I remember the Speaker standing up on a point was when my colleague was wearing a brooch, yet we have seen outrageous insults and attacks, and that is considered okay.

Everything is based on precedent. If the Speaker bends to toxicity, then New Democrats will fight back because we have the smallest number and the fewest questions. If the Speaker does not allow proper fairness and continues to bend to the Conservatives and their toxic behaviour, then there will be push-back, and it undermines the House.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

The Speaker Greg Fergus

Colleagues, I have entertained a round of questions from all the political parties here. First of all, a number of the issues raised are issues the Chair has engaged to come back to the House on, and the Chair, indeed, will be coming back very shortly. This is an issue we have been working on, and we will move very quickly on that front. I thank members for their interventions.

I recognize how important respect and decorum are to ensuring equal participation in the House.

The hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands is rising on a point of order. I hope it will be new and relevant.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, in an effort to avoid bogging down the House, I do not rise to contribute to every debate. It does not mean that the Green Party of Canada does not exist in this place. The Speaker said that he had heard from all parties in this place. I try to be helpful, not invisible.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

4 p.m.

The Speaker Greg Fergus

I thank the hon. member, and if the hon. member had risen, I certainly would have given her an opportunity to speak.

Government Response to PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to nine petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Nickel Belt Ontario

Liberal

Marc Serré LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and to the Minister of Official Languages

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, a report of the Canadian Section of ParlAmericas respecting its participation at the sixth Gathering of ParlAmericas' Parliamentary Network on Climate Change, held virtually on June 23 and July 5, 2022.

Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Madam Speaker, I move that the third report of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, presented on Monday, June 13, 2022, be concurred in.

I will be sharing my time.

Christmas is approaching, and I want to wish colleagues a merry Christmas as they begin their preparations. As I have been reflecting on the Christmas story, it seems closer to home than ever. We have a distant, unfeeling Emperor Caesar Augustus who is bent on raising taxes, and this poor young couple who travels to Bethlehem. There is a housing shortage, so they have to give birth in a barn. If only Caesar Augustus had axed the tax and built the homes, it would have been a more comfortable first Christmas. However, it does show that God can come to us in the midst of challenging circumstances, so I do wish colleagues a merry Christmas.

Conservative priorities are clear. They are to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Today, we are focusing on the need to build the homes. Indeed, Conservatives are ready for a carbon tax election. If the Liberal government does not want a carbon tax election, how about a housing election? We are ready to contrast our constructive proposals to build the homes in this country with the demonstrable record of failure that we have seen from the Liberal government.

The Liberals put forward something called the housing accelerator fund. They think that people will believe that it is accelerating homes just because it is in the name. However, they admit that this program they have put forward does not build homes. It gives extra money to already inflated bureaucracies, and it feeds those bureaucracies instead of actually contributing to the construction of homes.

The Conservative opposition has put forward a meaningful and constructive proposal that is being debated today. It is about providing real relief to homeowners. In order to save Canadian homebuyers up to $50,000, or $2,500 per year, in mortgage payments, our motion is to call on the Liberal government to immediately eliminate the federal sales tax on new homes sold under $1 million and to call on the provincial premiers to match this proposal.

Particularly this afternoon, we are debating the concurrence of the third report of the indigenous affairs committee, which deals specifically with indigenous peoples and the need for housing policies that allow indigenous Canadians, all Canadians, to be able to access the homes that they need. This is why we have put forward proposals that do actually build homes.

In this debate about housing policy, we can see the old story of New Democrats and Liberals wanting to be judged by their intentions instead of by results. Conservatives believe that the effectiveness of a political party and of their policies should be judged not by the intentions or by how much money is being spent, but by the actual results in terms of the affordability of homes.

What Canadians care about when it comes to housing is not fundamentally how much the government is spending on housing. It is how much Canadians who are renting or buying have to spend on housing. That is really the acid test of a housing policy. It is not how much money the government is spending, but how much money the individual who is buying or renting has to spend in order to make that purchase.

In fact, under the Liberal government, the record of failure is very clear. Housing prices have doubled, rent has doubled and costs are way up as a result of the policies of the government. There are many different reasons why these policies they are proposing are not working. It does not take much of an analysis to know that they are not working. One simply has to look at the results. Canadians of all backgrounds are paying more for housing than they ever have. They are paying more for housing in a country that has an abundance of land.

Liberals have blamed inflation on supply chains, yet they have not reckoned with the fact that the land we use is right here. We have more land than almost any country around the world, yet our housing prices are higher than almost anywhere else.

If we compare where we were nine years ago, in 2015, and where we are now after nine years of the Prime Minister, the record is clear that Liberal policies are failing. Under the leadership of the member for Carleton, we have sharply put the spotlight on the problem of housing affordability and the centrality of building new homes, so we have put forward a constructive proposal for how to do this. We have been very specific in our proposals around housing. We have been very specific in what we have put before the House and what we have put before Canadians.

We have proposed a framework, and the member for Carleton, our leader, has put forward a private member's bill on it, whereby municipalities would be expected to meet certain targets in terms of new home construction. They would have flexibility in terms of how they do it. It would not be up to the federal government to decide precisely what to build or where to build it, but there would be an expectation, as there has to be an expectation, that every level of government would work together to ensure sufficient construction of new homes. If municipalities failed to meet those targets, they would face clawbacks in terms of federal funding, and if they met or exceeded those targets, they would receive a bonus.

The policy would tie federal spending to the requirement of results when it comes to housing. This would bring the kind of results orientation that Canadians expect from their government. I heard a member opposite say that this is common sense, and I agree. He is coming around. It is common sense to measure one's housing policy by the results. We would hold ourselves to that standard—

Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh!

Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

4:10 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I am just going to interrupt, because someone else was actually interrupting the member. I would just ask members to please wait for questions and comments before they try to indulge themselves in the conversation.

The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan has the floor. I would also ask him to speak directly through the Chair and not to individual members.

Indigenous and Northern AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Madam Speaker, that reminds me that I want to recognize the very good work being done by Mr. Guglielmin, who I know is a strong advocate for responsible housing policy in the area of Vaughan—Woodbridge.

The focus of Conservatives is on delivering results for Canadians, and our housing policy would hold us to that standard of delivering results. It would also hold our municipal partners to the expectation of meeting the requirements around new home construction. We have also put forward a motion today that, on top of the existing plan, would build on it by providing tax relief directly to facilitate the construction of new homes and to make it easier for Canadians to purchase new homes.

The third report of INAN deals specifically with housing for indigenous people, and the failure of the government to build homes has ripple effects across all dimensions, all communities and all parts of Canadian society. The government has made many promises with respect to indigenous reconciliation, yet right now we are seeing its scandalous failure to follow through on those promises.

It is a scandalous failure because Liberals have actually allowed a whole industry of non-indigenous elite insiders and pretenders to take advantage of programs and policies that were promised to indigenous Canadians. There are people inside the government, like the member for Edmonton Centre, who have pretended to be indigenous in order to advance their own commercial interests as well as their own political interests. Moreover, there is a turning of a blind eye to the whole industry of fake, non-indigenous pretenders.

It was reported in today's Globe and Mail that an auditor was trying to draw attention to the problem of abuse of programs that are supposed to benefit indigenous people, yet that auditor had continuous roadblocks put in the way. The government actually imposed new rules to constrain and limit the work of auditors at the same time as those auditors were coming forward to identify the rampant issue of pretenders taking advantage of the policies. The government, it seems, wanted to allow the abuse to go on so it could make it look like it was doing better and could say, “Look at all this money we are giving to indigenous people,” when, actually, fraudsters and non-indigenous elites were taking advantage of the programs.

Therefore we need to build the homes in this country and restore the promise of reconciliation, and that is exactly what a Conservative government would do.