House of Commons Hansard #305 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was program.

Topics

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Madam Speaker, we have seen over the last nine years that our country cannot afford the Prime Minister's budget. I am wondering if the member has any comments on the deficit spending. The Conservatives have noticed that all of the GST that will be collected in the coming year will go only to pay down the interest that is being accumulated on our national debt. I wonder if the member has any thoughts on that.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, during the pandemic, we had to help all sectors, however imperfectly, to prevent them from collapsing. Where were the Conservatives when these expenditures were incurred? They were sitting around the table with Minister Morneau, spending tens, if not hundreds of billions of dollars. If I were the hon. member, when he talks about the nine years of the current government, I would be a bit embarrassed.

He is right about one thing, though, and that is that the federal government will be looking for additional revenue. For me, it is not so much the debt servicing that bothers me, although that is problematic, it is the fact that they are using these revenues to violate Quebec's jurisdictions, to violate the Constitution, to trample on Quebec and interfere in just about everything and nothing, rather than transferring the money to Quebec and letting Quebeckers be responsible for their own programs. That is what the members of the official opposition should be outraged about.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Madam Speaker, the member spoke about taxation and the issue around taxes. What I do not see in budget 2024 is a windfall tax, an excessive profit tax, for example. We know there is a high rate of inflation and people are struggling with food prices. We also see a free pass being given to the corporate sector. In fact, the Conservatives and Liberals have aided and abetted this practice and refused to increase the corporate tax rate. If the government increased it to 15% to 20%, that would bring $16 billion a year into the treasury to support a variety of different measures.

Would the member call for the government to do what is right for all Canadians, which is to put forward an excessive profit tax?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, it is funny. The way the New Democrats talk, one would think that the revenue they want to find would be used to buy virtue.

Every dollar that the NDP is calling for in new taxes will be used to buy a new shoe to better walk all over Quebec, to implement programs that infringe on Quebec's jurisdictions, including health and education, lunch, dental insurance and pharmacare programs. I get the feeling that the member does not understand what the Constitution is all about.

Sadly, I did not bring a copy of the Constitution in both official languages, because otherwise I would have tabled it, after highlighting section 92, which clearly states what the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces are. That way my colleague could read up on that.

I am not sure what I think about these additional revenues to walk all over Quebec.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh!

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, I am rising on a point of order.

I understand that people are not always happy with what is said in Parliament. That is the nature of our work. However, I just heard the member use the word “disgusting” after my speech. I think that is unacceptable and that she should withdraw her comment.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I did not hear what was said. Of course, we can review the tape to see whether it was recorded.

The hon. member for Vancouver East.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Madam Speaker, I do find it offensive for the member to suggest that I do not know about the Constitution. I am a Canadian. I have read the Constitution, and I am proud of the Constitution, and to suggest that I do not know about it—

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

That is a point of debate. I will certainly ask that we review the tape to see what was actually said, because I did not hear it from this end. I will certainly take it from here.

On another point of order, the hon. member for Drummond.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I do understand that what my colleague from Mirabel was saying may have been offensive to the member. However, I think it was entirely within parliamentary standards to say that a member does not seem to understand provincial jurisdictions.

That being said, when the member for Vancouver said the word “disgusting”, her microphone was off. That is what my colleague from Mirabel's point of order was about. My colleague from Vancouver, standing up to defend her point, repeated the word “disgusting”. I think the very nature of the word should be the subject of this debate.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

As I said, I did not really hear the word. I understand what the member is saying. If that is the word that was used, I want to ensure that people are using words that are acceptable in the House. I can ask the hon. member to withdraw that word, and we can continue the debate.

I would ask the hon. member for Vancouver East if she is willing to take back the word she had used.

The hon. member for Vancouver East.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Madam Speaker, no, because I do find it offensive for someone to suggest that I do not know anything about the Constitution. I think it is patronizing to suggest that. I think that in suggesting that, it is also disgusting to me.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I want to remind members to be extremely careful. I will have the tape reviewed just to see how the word was used.

Again, I would remind members to be very careful with the words being said. I do not know the context. I understand what the word was, but I do not know if it was used in the term that the member was disgusting or whether it was used in the term of what he was proposing was disgusting. I will listen to what was said and then I will come back to the House.

The hon. member for Rivière-du-Nord.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Bloc

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Madam Speaker, with all due respect, I do not think that it is necessary to listen to the recordings because we all heard the member repeat the word three times.

The question is whether or not, in your opinion, the word “disgusting” is acceptable in the House. If it is unacceptable, then you must take immediate action. Every time you give the member the opportunity to explain herself, she says, rightly or wrongly, that it is up to you to decide, that that is what she said, that she believed it and that it was appropriate in the circumstances.

I would ask you to take what she said and decide whether in your opinion it is acceptable in the House for someone to say that what they are hearing is “disgusting” or if it is unacceptable—

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I thank the hon. member and the other members who made interventions.

The word in and of itself is not unacceptable. What matters is the way the word is used. As I said, using that word to describe an event is not the same as using that word to talk about an individual. That is what I said earlier. The word in and of itself is not inappropriate for the House, it is the way the these words are used in the House that matters. As I said, I will listen to the recording to determine how this was said and I will come back to the House if necessary.

The hon. member for Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, since we are talking about the budget, my speech today will focus on the most recent budget, which was tabled by the Liberal government exactly two weeks ago today.

Before I talk about the budget itself, I want to take a moment to give a little background. I want to talk about the context in which this budget was introduced. I would imagine that the government was aware that the polls were not in its favour during the period leading up to the tabling of the budget. Members of the Liberal Party were surely aware that the Prime Minister's popularity was plummeting. In such a context, I would imagine that people got together to have a discussion and figure out what they could do about it.

They came up with a solution. They realized that the situation was so dire that they had to make people forget just how dire things were, so they decided to create a diversion. They decided to talk about something else, to make people look elsewhere, so that they would not look at the government's track record, or the current situation, and instead look at what was being announced and proposed.

As we know, the Liberals are not going to reinvent the wheel. Their solution was to encroach heavily on areas under Quebec's jurisdiction, just to be original. Perhaps we can say they were indeed original, in spite of everything, because they had never gone as far as they did in this budget.

They decided to promise so many billions of dollars that everybody would be happy and nobody would notice anything. It would be so much money that people would not even notice anything else. Well, it did not work. Liberal strategists saw that selfies were not working anymore and decided to try a budget striptease to change things up. We are here to speak out against all of this.

The Bloc Québécois has submitted proposals to the government. For example, rather than the approach it has taken, we would have liked to see money for seniors aged between 65 and 75, who do not receive the same old age security benefit as those aged 75 and over. We believe that everyone should receive a decent pension that covers their expenses. Everyone has rent to pay and food to buy. All retirees have similar expenses, regardless of their age.

However, the Liberals went a different way. We proposed other things. For example, we suggested putting an end to funding oil companies. The Liberals say that they will do it eventually. When they were elected in 2015, that promise was part of their platform. It is still part of their platform today. Maybe it will still be part of their platform in 2050 or 2100.

Unfortunately, in spite of everything, we were realistic. When we proposed these things, we suspected that the Liberals would go in a different direction. Still, we took a chance and hoped they would listen to us and do as we asked.

At the very least, we wanted them to do one thing. We know the Liberals have a habit of encroaching on areas of jurisdiction that are not theirs. We told them that if they did that, they had to give Quebec the right to opt out with full compensation. Again, the answer was no. I think the vote itself was even more telling: It looks as though the other parties in the House agree with the Liberal position.

The reason they said no is not hard to understand, because the only jurisdictions the Liberals are interested in are the ones that do not belong to them. In fact, they solved that problem with their budget: Jurisdictions no longer exist for the Liberal government. The solution was simple. They just made daddy's Constitution go poof.

Being Prime Minister is not enough for the member for Papineau. He decided to become premier of all 10 provinces and three territories and mayor of all municipalities across Canada to boot. Not bad, eh? That is what this budget is all about. We have a Prime Minister who is Canada's new self-proclaimed king. He is the one who will run Quebec's health care system. He is going to show up at long-term care facilities and tell them how to run a long-term care facility. He is going to show up at dental offices and tell them how to run a dental office as well, even though Quebec already has programs to help people. He is going to show up at hospitals to tell people how to run their hospitals, while also telling them that he is not going to give them any more money.

In fact, he is going to show up practically everywhere. He will show up in cities and decide what new urban planning rules they have to follow. He will even decide how land is taxed, which is a big deal. He will tax land in the cities, even though it is a municipal jurisdiction. He will even go so far as to manage school cafeterias. Just imagine.

His own affairs hold no interest for him. What interests him is our affairs. It reminds me a bit of the know-it-all kid at school, who always told everyone else how they should do things, even though nothing he himself did ever worked out right. Do not ask Ottawa to print a passport. Ottawa is not interested in doing it and not capable of doing it. Do not ask Ottawa to manage borders either, because it is not interested or capable. If something is Ottawa's responsibility, Ottawa is not interested. It is that simple.

In fact, for years, I had a hard time understanding the Prime Minister's fascination with the monarchy. Now I am starting to understand it a bit more. The king is someone who is not accountable to the public. He is not accountable to anyone but himself and God because it is God who made him king. It could be Allah, Buddha or Yahweh, or whatever we want to call it. He is accountable to a higher power, hence the idea of fighting secularism and Bill 21 and the idea of Islamic mortgages in the budget. In the Liberals' postnational world, every religion has its own banks with their own rules. It is not up to the government to establish the rules. No, it is up to the religions. If someone is Christian, they will go to the Christian bank. If they are Muslim, they will go to the Islamic bank, and if they are Jewish, then they will go to the Jewish bank. Living together in harmony is wonderful, is it not? This will be called positive segregation: a monarchical and theocratic postnational state.

Obviously, I am being facetious, but I do not think this government is headed in a very good direction. The sad thing is that it is not a joke, because it is in the budget. That is the direction this government is heading in. Naturally, any Quebecker who reads this budget and sees that will want to get out of here, because it makes no sense. It is clear that we need independence. Without independence, soon we will not even have provincial jurisdictions. There will be no more Government of Quebec, no more municipal governments. Ottawa will be the last one standing. Ottawa will call all the shots.

Does nobody care about jurisdiction? That is what we really need to ask ourselves, because that is what the Prime Minister is telling us. He says people do not care about jurisdiction, but I do not buy it.

Let us look at how the government manages its affairs, and take the ArriveCAN app as an example. It should have cost $80,000 to design, but it ended up costing $60 million, and we are not even sure if that is the real figure yet. Two guys in a basement managed to rack up $250 million in government contracts and line their pockets at taxpayers' expense. Soldiers are being forced to go out and buy their own boots because the government cannot supply them. The Phoenix payroll system cannot pay public servants. Federal wharves and train stations are going to rack and ruin. I think people do see these things, and I think they do care about the government's incompetence. The polls are starting to show that pretty clearly.

We can see that the government's attempt to divert attention away from its pitiful track record is not working at all. What we see, in fact, is a government that is completely disoriented and that has lost its way. If we gave it a compass, it would not even know what to do with it.

That is why we are going to vote against this budget. That is why the Bloc Québécois will keep fighting. That is also why we, the members of a separatist party, insist that Quebec needs to be respected, that its jurisdictions are its own and that it can make its own decisions without constantly having another government's decisions imposed on it. It is not for Ottawa to decide how Quebec will run its cities and hospitals. It is not for Ottawa to decide these things. The government's own Constitution says that it must not run these things. The government does not care, but we do. We are going to create our own country.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

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

Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that the Bloc has made the decision to vote against the budget and the budget measures. The best I can tell, from listening to the member across the way, is that the federal government cares enough to develop a pharmacare program, to provide $200 billion over 10 years to health care and to provide food for hundreds of thousands of children. Does the member not recognize that there is a role for the national government to play in Canada, with respect to education and housing?

I am very proud that the Prime Minister came to Winnipeg and met with the premier and the mayor to make a wonderful announcement on housing. There is nothing wrong with governments working together for the betterment of Canadians. Why is the Bloc so insistent on not having the services Canadians want, and why does it not want the federal government to contribute to them?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, the member across the way just provided an eloquent demonstration of his government's position, which is to run away, not face reality, not mind its own business, and then tell others how to conduct their business. The reality is that we have child care in Quebec. We have schools in Quebec. We have hospitals in Quebec. They are not perfect, but we are taking care of them. The federal government has none of these things. It is not the one taking care of these things. It is not the one managing these things.

Who are the Liberals to come tell us how to manage our business? Why would a Canadian be better than a Quebecker at managing this?

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh!

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

If the hon. parliamentary secretary has another question, he should wait until it is the appropriate time.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, my good friend, Joshua Charleson from Hesquiaht nation, the former elected chief of Hesquiaht nation, who works for Coastal Restoration Society, is here in town to talk about the importance of a restoration economy when it comes to cleaning up our waterways and our oceans.

We had a historic program, a ghost gear fund, that was world class, and the Liberal government cut it out of the budget. It was critical in removing things like polystyrene and fishing gear that infect and that impact our ecosystem. In terms of food security, it had a really big impact on indigenous peoples in particular, on their traditional and cultural needs, and on the blue economy. I know that my colleague lives on a waterway and that he cares deeply about the environment. Is he also disappointed that the Liberal government cut this historic program? Just after we finished an international convention with the United Nations on combatting plastic pollution, what did the government do? It cut historic programs. That is not leadership.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, I do not get the impression that my colleague's question is about the budget. I am not familiar with the program he referred to, but I will be happy to discuss it with him after my speech and this debate, if we get the opportunity.

The question I am asking myself is why we always have an NDP government—or rather an NDP party, but this one is practically a government—that decides to ask the government in power to intervene more and more in Quebec's jurisdictions.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Conservative

Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the debate that we are having today, but I would ask my colleague specifically if he could provide some reflections on the fiscal state of our country. Increasingly, we are hearing leading economists around the world suggest that if we continue on this trajectory, it is going to lead to significant pain for future generations of Canadians.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

April 30th, 2024 / 1:55 p.m.

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, while I share my colleague's concern about the government's colossal deficits and the fact that it may not have a plan for returning to a balanced budget, that does not necessarily make the debt-to-GDP ratio more frightening.

I can understand why my colleague is concerned, but I am more concerned about seeing federal money used for things that are not federal responsibilities and spent in areas of jurisdiction that are not those of the government. Ultimately, my concern is that Ottawa will keep tightening its stranglehold on us and that Quebeckers will not get more for their money.

Financial Statement of Minister of FinanceThe BudgetGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Madam Speaker, I think I have about a minute or so before question period begins. I would like to say first that I will be sharing my time with the member from Saint-Laurent.

Before I get into my budget remarks, which I will save for after question period, I wish to acknowledge someone in the Italian Canadian community, who unfortunately passed away a few weeks ago. Corrado Paina, from the Italian Chamber of Commerce of Ontario, was someone our community held dear to our hearts. He did so much for our community. He was a friend, a mentor and someone I very much enjoyed spending a lot of time with. Corrado Paina was one of a kind. We went to his celebration of life on Friday morning, and several hundred people were there from our community to celebrate a remarkable person who gave back so much to our community.

In 2017, Corrado Paina helped to organize a trip for Italian Canadian businesses to Italy, which I was a part of when the Prime Minister went to Italy for the G7. Much more than that, he was somebody I would stroll with along College Street in downtown Toronto, and we would talk about politics, economics and philosophy. For the last nine years, he always provided a word of advice and always was a great friend. He is missed by myself and by many others.

[Member spoke in Italian]

[English]

I know that Corrado Paina is looking down on many of us, telling us to continue the good work for our community and for all Canadians.

I look forward to resuming the budget debate after question period.