Debates of May 31st, 2024

Electoral Participation Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I have to allow for other questions.

The hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am very relieved that I can assure the member that he does not have to defend the interests of our Conservative members, of the Bloc members or of the NDP members. We will put that question to Canadians. We are very willing to put the question to the Canadian electorate, and they can decide. That is how the government works. That is how our institutional democracy should work. The issue of MP pensions should not come into play in an election, period, simple, done.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. I know he worked very hard last night to prepare it.

Although many of the measures in this bill are generally aligned with our vision of democracy, there is still one very problematic element.

Pushing back the date of the federal election by a week would mean that it would take place just six days before municipal elections which, in Quebec, are also very important. We are talking about a local democracy that is already struggling to carve out a space, and we absolutely want to protect it.

We want these two elections to be held on very different dates. I would like to hear my colleague's opinion on this.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to acknowledge the preparation that goes into the work that all members in this chamber do. I also want to acknowledge the hard work of our municipal politicians. As I said in my speech, moving the election date ahead, or even calling it anytime, would avoid exactly those conflicts regarding the date.

I appreciate the member's and everyone else's hard work in this chamber.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would also like to congratulate the member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington on his speech.

My colleague just spoke about municipal elections, which are extremely important in Quebec, and about the need to motivate the public to get involved at every level in each election.

However, the sensitive issue of pensions cannot be overlooked. I know that my colleague touched on it earlier. Personally, I am extremely uncomfortable about telling Quebeckers that we are going to push back the date of the election. The only message that people will remember is that a whole bunch of MPs elected in 2019 are going to be eligible for their pensions. I think that sends a very bad message. It encourages and fuels cynicism toward politicians.

I would like to know whether my colleague would agree to a possible proposal to amend this bill and move the election to a different date, two or three weeks earlier if necessary. This would address concerns over the municipal elections scheduled at the same time and quell public cynicism toward politicians, precisely over the pension eligibility issue.

[Dave Epp, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON]

Madam Speaker, I fully agree with the opinion expressed by my colleague. Cynicism is something we should be addressing, and we should not be trying to drape an elections bill over, as he correctly characterized, an MP pension bill. We can talk about improvements to our elections, absolutely, but not when we are trying to slip something through and pull the wool over the eyes of the Canadian electorate. Let us address that issue first. Then there is an opportunity to improve our election system.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill C-65, an act to amend the Canada Elections Act. I listened attentively to the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader's speech. He characterized the bill as “good stuff” and suggested that at the end of the day, the Conservatives would support the bill. I can assure him that what is in the bill is not good stuff and that the Conservatives will not be supporting it.

There are problems with this bill, putting aside the pension issue, which I will get into later. There are amendments that we cannot support. For example, one of the amendments provided for in the bill is with respect to special ballot voting, whereby a voter would be able to mark their ballot by filling in their preferred political party as opposed to their preferred candidate. This raises constitutional questions.

Under our Constitution, there are multiple references to individuals being elected to the House of Commons. In contrast, there is not a single reference to political parties, and that is because in Canada, we elect individuals to the House of Commons; we do not elect political parties. This amendment would completely upend that. I submit that, while it is arguable that the amendment is unconstitutional, at the very least it is problematic. For instance, if it were to be adopted, what is to say that another amendment could not be made to the Canada Elections Act whereby the names of individual candidates are removed altogether and Canadians would simply mark their ballot by filling in their preferred political party?

Another problematic amendment to the Canada Elections Act provided for in the bill relates to assisting voters marking their ballots. As it stands today, a voter who requires assistance may receive assistance from an individual to help them mark their ballot. Such an individual may only help one voter in an election, and there must be some personal connection between the voter and the individual assisting them. This legislation would remove both of those criteria. With this bill, an individual would be able to help an unlimited number of voters mark their ballot, notwithstanding any connection of any sort between the person assisting and the elector. I would submit that this, on its face, raises questions of potential abuse, and I therefore suggest that this amendment be carefully scrutinized at committee.

With respect to the third party financing regime, this bill is a step in the right direction but is inadequate. It is a step in the right direction insofar as it makes an important step forward with respect to financing during the pre-election and election periods. It appears that the objective of the changes to third party financing is for the expenditures third parties make during those periods to be made from funds donated by individual Canadian contributors in the same way as political parties must raise donations from individual Canadians. The problem is that it does not entirely close a long-standing loophole whereby third parties can use contributions made from foreigners, foreign funds, to influence elections.

I have to ask why the Liberals have not seen fit to close that loophole. We know that during the 2015 election, millions and millions of dollars were funnelled from U.S.-based organizations, including the U.S.-based Tides Foundation, to registered third parties that ran a coordinated campaign to defeat Conservatives, to the benefit of the Liberal Party.

After nine years of the Prime Minister, we have seen a Prime Minister and government that have a deeply troubling record of turning a blind eye to foreign interference and even being complicit in foreign interference, whether that foreign interference emanated from Beijing or from the U.S., so long as it benefited the Liberal Party. I cannot help but wonder if the reason the Liberals have not fully closed this foreign money loophole with respect to third party financing is that they see it as a loophole that benefits them electorally.

I could go on to talk about other aspects of this bill and problems with it, but at the end of the day, it really does not matter, because this bill is not an elections bill. That is not what this bill is about. It is a pension bill. It is the loser Liberal pension protection act, under the guise of an elections bill.

By the way, the government is not fooling anyone. To put it into context, we have a deeply unpopular Prime Minister in government who is on the verge of facing a massive electoral defeat whenever he has the guts to call the next election. What that means, of course, is that many of the Liberals sitting across the way are not going to be here after the next election. They have to call an election by October 20, 2025, but the problem they have is that the Liberals who were elected in 2019, many of whom face almost certain defeat, do not qualify for their pension. What do the Liberals do? They introduce the loser Liberal pension protection act to push back the election date so that all of a sudden, the soon-to-be loser Liberals can pad their pockets with a pension.

This is about as cynical and dishonest as it gets from arguably one of the most cynical and dishonest governments that have ever governed this country. It is an absolute abuse of the legislative power of the government. It constitutes the government yet again giving everyday Canadians, as it does every day, the middle finger, as the Liberals pad their pockets. After nine years, they have pummelled everyday Canadians, made life less affordable and caused enormous hurt and pain for Canadians.

Contrary to the representation of the member for Winnipeg North, the Conservatives will not be supporting the loser Liberal pension protection act.

With that, I move:

That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:

the House decline to give second reading to Bill C-65, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act, as the Bill delays the next federal election so that more departing members of Parliament can collect taxpayer-funded pensions, a measure that is particularly offensive at a time when Canadians are struggling due to the NDP-Liberal Government's inflation, carbon tax and housing costs.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The amendment is in order.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, who am I to defend 32 Conservatives? Some 32 Conservative MPs are the biggest beneficiaries, yet the member is calling out the Liberals for defending the Conservatives. There are 22 Liberals and—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. We all want to hear the question. If not, I would still ask members to not disrupt the proceedings.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, there are 32 Conservatives, 22 Liberals, 19 from the Bloc and half a dozen New Democrats. Those are the individuals who would be affected.

That aside, I do not understand the Conservatives. The last time they brought in legislation, they tried to get rid of the voter ID card as a way of identifying ourselves. We remember voter suppression and robocalls. We remember when Dean Del Mastro was led out handcuffs.

Why does the Conservative Party not understand the importance of democracy in Canada?

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would invite the member to talk to the member for Steveston—Richmond East, and then compare that to the testimony of our former colleague, Kenny Chiu, who provided evidence of the Liberal Party amplifying disinformation for the partisan gain of the Liberal Party.

That speaks to the integrity of the Liberals. If they had any integrity, and if it really was not about protecting their pensions, they would support my amendment and remove the loser Liberal Pension Protection Act from the bill.

Invest Ottawa

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, Ottawa is a global tech hub with about 1,800 tech companies, 88,000 tech professionals and North America’s highest concentration of tech talent.

Ottawa is renowned for our cutting-edge R and D and innovation in SaaS, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, machine learning, robotics, advanced networks and 5G, health tech and life sciences, smart mobility, IOT and many other disruptive technologies.

Thanks to Invest Ottawa and federal government funding, we have Nepean-based Area X.O, which evolved from the Ottawa L5 connected and autonomous vehicle test facility into a world-class R and D complex that enables and accelerates the development, testing and application of next-generation smart mobility, autonomy and connectivity technologies.

I would like to recognize and thank former CEO of Invest Ottawa, Michael Tremblay for his contribution to Ottawa's tech sector.

Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, six students from Bruce and Grey counties participated in the Canada-Wide Science Fair here in Ottawa this week.

They are the following: Chayle Oatt for her project, Plant Growth Spurt; Oscar Weerasinghe for his project, Breakfast on the Brain, which won the gold medal in the junior division, plus a health and nutrition award; Kenna Wilson for her project, Body Temperature, which won a bronze medal in the junior division; Lucas Muir for his project, Hydro Harvest; Emily Caulfeild for her project, Schooled: Diving into the Social Behaviours of Fish; and Charlotte Woodhouse for her project, Dairy Dilemma: The Fertility Fallout of Inbreeding in Holsteins, which won a bronze medal in the senior division.

Congratulations to all the participants in the Canada-Wide Science Fair. Canada's future in science is bright.

Further, I would like to recognize Ross McLean, who is retiring after 45 years of law across our riding. Ross has been a dedicated, tireless member of the community. I wish him and Brenda all the best in the future.

Theatre Aurora

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity to join Theatre Aurora to celebrate 65 years of theatrical performances.

Over the years, audiences have enjoyed, and actors have been challenged by, performances such as The Sound of Music, Annie, and Murder on the Orient Express.

Live theatre captures our imaginations and enriches our lives, and it provides a shared experience for both the audience and the actors. Theatre Aurora provides an opportunity for experiencing a wide range of emotions. It provides professional-type experiences for those involved: actors, directors, producers, set designers, costume makers, musicians and ticket sellers.

That Theatre Aurora accomplishes this in what used to be a cement factory is a testament to the creativity and the drive of all involved, providing us, the audience, with a memorable experience. For all that it does, I thank Theatre Aurora.

Safe Space London

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, Safe Space London is a collective by, with, and for sex workers, allies, women and non-binary folks.

Since 2009, this collective offers harm reduction and first aid supplies, HIV and STI testing, cosmetics, clothing, hygiene products, peer support programming and a safe place for sex workers. It also provides important education campaigns and advocacy for sex work decriminalization.

Across Canada, organizations like Safe Space are under attack by Conservatives who use cheap slogans to fearmonger and victimize the most vulnerable in our communities. They do this in an attempt to raise their own status and to fundraise. Punching down is not leadership.

The community around Safe Space London is fierce. I want to thank all the allies and organizations in London that have stood with them, showing the power women have when we stand together. I will always stand and support Safe Space, and I will always fight against the Conservatives' misogynistic, anti-choice, anti-sex work agenda.

Liberal Party of Canada

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, last weekend I was asked what the primary difference is between the Liberals and the Conservatives.

I said that Liberals care, Conservatives cut. Let us think of it in this way. On the national food program in schools, Liberals care. On the national disability program, Liberals care. On the Canada dental plan, Liberals care, Conservatives cut. On the Canada pharmacare program, Liberals care, Conservatives cut.

What is the primary difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives? The Liberal Party of Canada genuinely cares about Canadians and all the Conservatives want to do is cut.

Finance

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is a sad reality that almost daily my office is approached by someone who just cannot catch a break in navigating through the cost of living crisis. Renate from Beaverton, a senior who suffers from severe allergies, has been stuck in an unsuitable unit for years because rental rates are far too expensive.

Meghan from Kawartha Lakes, a farmer, business owner and mother, is faced with a carbon tax on her and her husband's daily operations and she has nowhere to turn for child care due to outrageous costs and long wait-lists.

Just yesterday, Laurie, a senior from Lindsay, called because she is being forced to decide between paying for food and rent, and now she relies on a food bank she was once a dedicated donor to.

As hard as these stories are to hear, they are just the tip of the iceberg in what has become a shameful legacy of the NDP-Liberal agenda, forcing almost two million people per month to the food bank. I join the plea for the NDP-Liberals to show some compassion because, after nine long years, they are not worth the cost or the misery.

Anti-Semitism

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Madam Speaker, enough is enough. On Wednesday, a Jewish school in Montreal had shots fired at it. On Saturday, two men opened fire at a Jewish school in Toronto. Last night, a synagogue in Vancouver was attacked. Over the course of the last seven months, Jewish buildings and stores have been vandalized; encampments have been set up at universities, where posters extolling terrorist groups and glorifying violence against Jews are common; demonstrators yelling chants for Jews to go back to Poland, calling for intifada and saying that Zionists are not wanted here have surrounded community buildings and blocked access to and exit from them.

At this point, condemnation is not enough. All levels of government need to do more, immediately. At the federal level, we need to designate the IRGC and Samidoun as terrorist organizations. We need to adopt Criminal Code amendments to protect schools, places of worship and community centres the same way we did for hospitals during the pandemic. Enough is enough. Canadian Jews have a right to be safe in our country.

Joe Kennedy

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Madam Speaker, when I was 14, I met a guy named Joe Kennedy. We formed a friendship that would last a lifetime. On March 9, Joe passed away due to a heart problem, which is ironic given that he had a better heart than anybody I have ever met. He was kind, he was generous and he oozed integrity and humility, which guided him during a successful career, first with Ontario Hydro and later with Community Living Toronto.

He was also the most honest man I ever met; sometimes too honest. I know because I was at the receiving end of it for over 45 years. He dished it out with a dry sense of humour. His opinion mattered to me more than any other and I would not be standing here without him. He was also fiercely loyal and there is probably no greater example than his dedication and commitment to supporting the Toronto Maple Leafs.

However, nothing, and I mean nothing, meant more to Joe than his family, his wife Mary and his daughter Sarah. His final words to me were to make sure they are going to be okay. They are going to be okay, and that is because of Joe.

National AccessAbility Week

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have blonde hair with hazel eyes. I am 5'7". I am wearing a black dress with a royal blue blazer. As the shadow minister for disability inclusion, it is my pleasure to recognize National AccessAbility Week. Let us acknowledge the contributions and leadership of persons with disabilities and of their allies, the organizations and communities that care for, support and champion persons with disabilities in Canada.

There is still much to do to make our society more accessible so that persons with disabilities can access many of the services and places most people take for granted. Even in this place, the highest institution in the land, word has come to my attention of ways that this place has not met accessibility needs and I am actively working with House administration on this.

This week and every week, let us recognize the important contributions of Canadians living with disabilities and those who support them, and commit to work on removing barriers to accessibility.

New Horizons for Seniors

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight our government's New Horizons for Seniors program. This federal grants and contributions program for seniors is a truly transformative initiative in the lives of so many seniors across Canada and in my riding of Mississauga—Erin Mills.

Let me take this opportunity to highlight just a few of the many awesome organizations in my riding that do so much great work to bring communities together. These organizations include the Mississauga Seniors Club, Ivan Franko Homes, Shubh Helping Hands, The Meadows Church and Feng Hua Senior Association.

Whether they are awareness programs to educate us about the issues of elder abuse, weekly recreational activities or even helping seniors access government services that they may be eligible for, these organizations represent the heart of my community. It is so important that we come together to support our seniors, who continue to do so much for our community.

Taxation

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Madam Speaker, in Durham Region, for years the rite of passage included spending a week with mom and dad at Darlington Provincial Park, with camping, roasting marshmallows and hot dogs, and the famous sing-alongs.

According to the out-of-touch Liberals, kids are rebelling and demanding that their parents cancel their summer vacation and immediately take them to the dentist. Yes, according to the Minister of Health, kids would prefer to say no to spending time with their loved ones this summer and instead have their teeth drilled and filled. Whose kids are the Liberals talking to?

Yes, we all know that dental health is important, but this is not an either-or question. Sadly, this summer many Oshawa families will not be able to afford a local staycation because of the Liberals' out-of-touch tax-and-spend agenda. When the Liberal MP for Whitby stated that their net-zero goals were going to cause pain, is this what they were talking about?

Why does the NDP-Liberal government not axe the carbon tax and lift the taxes on gasoline so Canadians can save that extra $670 over the summer and afford a traditional family camping trip with the kids?

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Madam Speaker, what could be better than packing up the bathing suits, the camping gear and some snacks and hopping in the truck for a family road trip? Well, according to the Liberals, it is picking up some extra shifts at work just to be taxed to the max and then staying home, pretending the couch is a van and Netflix is the great outdoors, or maybe it is another trip to the food bank line.

After nine long, miserable years, it is crystal clear that the Prime Minister is simply not worth the cost. In the middle of this cost of living crisis, the Liberal-NDP government hiked up the carbon tax by a whopping 23% this year. That is why common-sense Conservatives are calling on the carbon tax coalition to give Canadians a summer break by axing the carbon tax, the federal fuel tax and the GST on gasoline and diesel, lowering gas prices on average 35¢ a litre, so families can afford a simple summer vacation.

Conservatives will axe the tax on everything for everyone after the carbon tax election, but until then, let us give Canadians a summer break.