Debates of Sept. 16th, 2024

Health

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, no excuses, no one in Canada should be homeless, period, full stop. No one in Canada should pay out of pocket to get the health care they need.

The Liberals are letting people be charged membership fees or bundled payments to gain access to primary care covered by universal health care. The Conservatives want people to pay for health care in Elmwood—Transcona and right across the country. The Liberals let us down on health care; we pay. The Conservatives cut health care; we pay.

When will Liberals stop making people pay for health care that should be free?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as everyone in here knows, over the past couple of years, I have had a lot of great conversations with the NDP. I know the New Democrats actually do care about Canadians and about delivering for them. Unfortunately, they have no idea how to do it and as soon as hard things got hard, they turned tail and ran. They wanted to avoid the criticisms of the mean old Conservatives and tried to save themselves.

The reality is that we know that hard things are hard. We are going to continue to deliver progressive solutions for Canadians, because we are going to step up and fight for Canadians and not hide from the Conservatives.

Finance

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister gave the finance minister a real vote of confidence last week as he outsourced the job that she was supposed to have been doing for four years and gave it to a man who is not even in the Liberal caucus.

First, the Prime Minister tried to fire her in the newspaper. Now she is being shoved aside for carbon tax Carney, a man focused on his own profits and his own corporate interests, who was brought in to serve as the de facto finance minister. She has lost her job responsibilities. She has lost her credibility.

How long will the phantom finance minister endure this humiliation?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am not going anywhere, but I can understand why the Conservatives prefer to focus on personal mudslinging and attacks rather than to actually talk about the economy. They do not want to talk about inflation, because it has been down in the target range for seven months in a row. They do not want to talk about interest rates, down three times in a row. All they can do is insult people.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, who is going to tell her? She just got a demotion and he hired a guy who is not even elected to do her job. Does anyone believe that carbon tax Carney is going to tell the Prime Minister how to help a family afford groceries as the loudest cheerleader for carbon taxes ever?

If the finance minister is not completely humiliated by now, could she explain why Canadians should trust a man who is the number-one supporter of higher taxes to do her job?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we are seeing more clearly than ever that the only thing the Conservatives know how to do is to level personal attacks and personal denigration. They do not care about Canadians and now they are scared about the facts of our economy.

Let me tell members some facts. Inflation is in the target range for seven months in a row. Interest rates are down three times in a row. The IMF says that we will have the strongest economic growth in the G7.

Carbon Pricing

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this summer, after he argued that Atlantic Canadian home heating oil should be carbon taxed, carbon-tax-loving Mark Carney spent a lovely summer of whimsy having champers at the Royal Box at Wimbledon and rubbing shoulders at a swish cocktail party with a wealthy CEO, who yesterday, coincidentally, got millions of tax dollars. This is not someone who is in touch with the struggle of average Canadians, but neither is the Prime Minister.

Did he push aside his now-phantom female cabinet minister because carbon-tax-loving Mark Carney could get him into fancier parties than she can?

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I first want to begin by saying that it is great to be back in this place. I really did miss most people on this side. I cannot say I missed them that much, but I did miss them a little.

It is just typical from the Conservatives that when they have an eminent Canadian, someone who has given so much to the country, who does not agree with their economic vision or their vision at all in Canada, they attack him. We need to be better than this. We need to support Canadians and be grateful when they put forward for public service.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, they are not even letting her answer the question anymore.

At a time when so many people are struggling to make ends meet and pleading for someone to fix the budget, I am struggling to find a reason why the Prime Minister would put an out-of-touch elitist, active archpriest of carbon price profiteering, who has massive conflicts of interest, in charge of the federal budget while shunting aside his female cabinet minister. What a feminist.

Why does the now-phantom finance minister have to get approval for Canada's fall economic statement from carbon tax conflict of interest Mark Carney?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am actually really glad to welcome back to the QP roster the member for Calgary Nose Hill. We have not heard her raising her voice for a while.

I am not going anywhere, but I am not surprised to see the Conservatives continue cartoonish personal attacks. That is because they are afraid to reveal to Canadians their plan for austerity and cuts, cuts, cuts, because they know that is not what Canadians want.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we have two sources saying that the view of some senior officials within the PMO, including chief of staff Katie Telford, is that the phantom finance minister has been ineffective in selling the government's economic policies. It is curious, because we have a fake feminist Prime Minister who says he is all for women.

Taxes are up, costs are up, the economy is in the toilet and this carbon tax Mark Carney is now going to quadruple the carbon tax on all home heating across Canada.

Why is the phantom finance minister okay with being publicly humiliated by the fake feminist Prime Minister?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the only people being humiliated today are Conservative MPs who have to listen to their colleagues wallow in the mud of personal character assassination. However, what we are focused on is representing and working for Canadians. That is why the real news today is 30-year mortgage amortizations for all first-time homebuyers. That is the real news.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is not that Conservative saying that. It is the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Katie Telford, for the record.

I guess the question is before the phantom finance minister. She simply has two choices. Is she going to join the graveyard of Liberal female ministers under the fake feminist Prime Minister, like Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott, or will she continue to be publicly humiliated?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing today is the Conservatives running away from the reality about the Canadian economy. They are running away from the fact that inflation has been in the Bank of Canada's target range for seven months in a row. They are running away from interest rates that are down three times in a row for the first time in the G7 and wages outpacing inflation for 18 months. The only thing the Conservatives know how to do is traffic in cheap insults. Canadians are a lot better than that.

Seniors

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, these days there is a lot of talk about elections. Some people are doing with all sorts of calculations. For the Bloc Québécois it is simple: We put our trust in Quebeckers, not the Liberals, not the Conservatives, but Quebeckers.

Quebeckers tell us that they are worried about the cost of living and living conditions for seniors. That is why our priority is to increase old age security for people aged 65 to 74. They are being unfairly discriminated against and it needs to stop. It is as simple as that.

Will the government listen to this simple request from Quebeckers?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Minister of Labour and Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, the next time the Bloc Québécois supports seniors, that will be the first time in the history of this Parliament.

Let us look at the facts. When we restored the age of retirement to 65, how did the Bloc Québécois vote? It voted against. When we increased the guaranteed income supplement, helping hundreds of thousands of seniors in Quebec, the Bloc Québécois voted against. When we brought in dental care for millions of seniors, the Bloc Québécois voted against.

It is high time that they stood up for our seniors.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois's demand is simple: We want the House to pass our Bill C-319, which would increase the old age security pension for seniors aged 64 to 74 by 10%. It is so simple and it makes so much sense that all of the parties supported our bill in committee. All that is missing is the will of the government.

Since all the parties agree that we should increase the old age security pension by 10% for seniors aged 65 to 74, will the government do the right thing and give royal recommendation to Bill C-319?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Minister of Labour and Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome back the Bloc Québécois, which supports seniors, just as our government's actions do. Look at what we have done. We implemented the grocery rebate, increased the guaranteed income supplement and brought in many other measures, including dental care, which is being offered to people across Quebec this year, including those in my colleague's riding, even though she voted against it.

We are there for seniors.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I went all over Quebec again this summer to talk about Bill C-319. Everyone agrees that it is unfair that seniors aged 74 and under receive 10% less than other seniors. Everyone except the Liberals agrees that grocery bills do not discriminate based on age.

That is why this is a key issue for the Bloc Québécois. Quebeckers understand the problem. Quebeckers understand what we are doing.

Will the Liberals finally understand this as well and give royal recommendation to Bill C-319?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Minister of Labour and Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, what the Bloc Québécois does not seem to understand is that actions do matter. Votes in the House matter. They voted against dental care, and Quebec seniors noticed. They voted against lowering the retirement age to 65. Quebeckers are paying attention.

The Liberal Party of Canada is always there to support the federal pensions of Quebeckers. The Bloc Québécois has never demonstrated that it is there to protect Canadians' pensions in Quebec or elsewhere.

Finance

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the “Liberal Bloc” voted for the largest expansion of the federal government in history. There is more spending than ever. There are more civil servants than ever. There are more financial scandals than ever. All this is being done with Quebeckers' money.

How did the Prime Minister manage to convince the Bloc Québécois to support the costliest and most centralizing government in Canadian history?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, our government is proudly progressive. Our government is proud of our climate action. Our government is proud of our support for day care and early childhood centres. Our government is proud of our support for families.

We know that the people of Quebec share our progressive values. That is why we followed Quebec's lead on day care and the climate. We are proud to have done that.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the “Liberal Bloc” says it stands up for the interests of Quebeckers. Is it in the interest of Quebeckers to support the most costly government in the history of Canada? Is it in the interest of Quebeckers to increase their taxes to reinforce the federal state that keeps encroaching on Quebec's jurisdictions? It is clear that the “Liberal Bloc” does nothing but stand up for the interests of the Prime Minister.

What did the Prime Minister offer the leader of the “Liberal Bloc” to get him to agree to support all his centralist spending?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries]

Mr. Speaker, I look at the Conservatives across the way and I see that they have no shame in claiming that they want to work toward prosperity, when all they manage to do is build a road to austerity. Canadians know that the only thing the Conservatives can do is chop, chop, chop. They cut investments in small craft harbours. They cut investments in science. They cut investments in families, in child care services and in dental care. That is the way to build a road to austerity. That is the Conservatives.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, one coalition seems to have ended, but another remains: the “Liberal Bloc” coalition, which is responsible for $500 billion in inflationary and centralized spending. Under this coalition, the public service has grown, with more than 100,000 new public servants. It is the most costly government in history. Despite this, wait times and service standards have never been worse. The people and my staff in Beauce have to wait for hours to get answers.

What did the Prime Minister promise the leader of the Bloc Québécois to keep the most expensive and centralist government in the history of this country in power?