Adam Vaughan

[Employment Insurance, March 2nd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member from Bay of Quinte for highlighting the working while on claim program. I am pleased to say that budget 2018 includes a proposal to make it permanent. In fact, not only will existing EI claimants be grandfathered in, but all EI recipients will be eligible, including those receiving maternity or sickness benefits. This way, people can return to work after an illness or the birth of a child and be able to keep more of their benefits. This budget delivers on providing Canadians with a flexible and compassionate EI system.

[Business of Supply, March 1st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the list of services that the member is worried will not receive Canada summer jobs grants: children's camps, meals on wheels programs, and support for immigrants and refugees who arrive in this country. Those core jobs, none of which involve violating people's human rights or basic charter rights, are all eligible under the attestation. Additionally, the core job of a church is not to challenge charter rights in a political fashion but rather to support a moral framework under which one receives one's human rights.

The attestation does not require churches or organizations to surrender their religious beliefs or violate their moral code. All it says is that the core organizational structure of the applicant cannot be a political one aimed at violating people's rights.

For example, there was an organization in my riding that was receiving funding effectively to hand out postcards, next to summer camps, of little babies that were being tortured in some grotesque display. It was hideous. That now has been ruled as an illegal practice in the province of Ontario. That organization, whose only goal is to remove a woman's right to choice, is exactly what should not be funded in the same way that a political party should not be funded through the Canada summer jobs program.

If the member is really serious about protecting kids’ summer jobs, what is the problem with signing the attestation if the core values of the organization and the job are not about violating charter rights but about providing a summer camp for kids? Why can they not be convinced to sign it?

[Housing, February 28th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, as I said, we are investing now. We are investing immediately. That money is eligible to be spent on repairs or on new builds or on subsidies. We are leaving it to local housing providers to make the best choice based on the housing stock they are managing.

On the issue of indigenous urban housing, last year's budget had a commitment of $225 million as a down payment on a national urban indigenous housing strategy. Those dollars start flowing this year.

Every single thing being spent this year is not in this year's budget; it is in previous years' budgets. I can assure members that it is not imaginary. I have been putting shovels in the ground from coast to coast to coast, cutting ribbons from coast to coast to coast, and taking a look at the new dollars that are arriving in real people's houses, in real time, as we speak.

The investments we made in 2016, the investments we made in 2017, are on the ground building housing, repairing housing, and, most importantly, housing people in this country. We are not done yet. We added almost $3 billion in yesterday's budget.

We are committed to housing. We will deliver on housing. We will deliver real dollars—

[Housing, February 28th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, no government in the history of this country has invested more in housing than this government. The national housing strategy, which was launched in November, which was promised in last year's budget, will produce $40 billion in spending over the next 10 years.

I know there is a concern that there is no money coming this year, but that is just not true. In our first budget, we quadrupled the transfers to the provinces. In fact, we did it in such a way, and made eligible repairs, that close to 100,000 homes across the country have already been touched by those investments in housing, which were spent in the first year of our mandate and in the second year of our mandate, and are being spent right now.

Yesterday I heard the leader of the third party talk about how there was no housing money being spent for the next two years. Again, that is absolutely wrong. In fact, the national housing strategy, with a $5-billion commitment over the next 10 years, is being spent this year, starting in April, and those dollars are specifically targeted for capital investments, which include repairs.

The reality is this. We have doubled the spending on homelessness. That happened in our first budget and is now being locked in for the next 10 years. We have quadrupled the money being transferred to the provinces. We are about to embark on the Canada housing benefit, which is going to deliver subsidies to families and is going to have a substantial impact on the number of people who receive housing in the next 10 years.

The government started spending the day it took office. It has increased that spending this budget. It has added a further $1.25 billion to spur the construction of affordable and below-market affordable rental housing in major cities that are experiencing a housing crisis. There is no part of the housing spectrum, from homelessness to supportive housing to social housing to co-operative housing to low-rent and private support for new rental housing to low-income home ownership, that is not touched by the $40-billion housing strategy.

To contrast this with the party opposite, it promised to spend $6 billion over four years, not $40 billion over 10. Our approach is not only more aggressive, it is delivered sooner. In fact, we will spend more on housing in the last two years of our mandate than the Conservatives proposed to spend in their entire mandate if they had been elected.

Our program is not timid. It is aggressive. It is progressive, it is imaginative, and it is supported by virtually every single city across this country. In fact, what the mayors asked was that we accelerate the extraordinary investment so that they could get to repairs sooner. The national housing strategy actually allows them to borrow the 10 years of money up front and fit it into their capital programs so they can spend it this year and use it in an imaginative way, with different financing, to get the results they want sooner.

This housing policy has been built with cities for cities, and most importantly, by cities. Our work with the FCM has been phenomenal.

I will address the issue of indigenous housing after the second question.

[The Environment, February 28th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, federal departments have been working together to assess the scope of the debris in the Broken Group Islands. When Parks Canada's boats could not reach outer islands due to dangerous conditions on the water, the Canadian Coast Guard deployed a helicopter to support this important work.

Parks Canada will collaborate with Fisheries and Oceans Canada in its investigation to understand exactly what the incident was with the aquaculture operation.

We are committed to a stronger nation-to-nation relationship. We understand the importance of making sure information gets to our partners on the ground and to indigenous communities as quickly as possible to facilitate as quick a cleanup as possible.

The issues raised by the hon. member are serious, and we understand that our response has to be just as serious.

[The Environment, February 28th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for his focus on this issue and pay my respects to the hard work he does to make sure that the complex coastal communities of the west coast get the protection they need.

Our government also takes this issue seriously. Working together with more than 300 indigenous communities across Canada, Parks Canada and indigenous peoples are partners in conserving, restoring, and presenting Canada's natural and cultural heritage to the best of our abilities.

At Pacific Rim National Park Reserve of Canada, the agency is working collaboratively with the Tseshaht First Nation and other Nuu-chah-nulth first nations as partners to achieve long-term conservation and sustainable use of natural and cultural resources.

Parks Canada places represent the very best that Canada has to offer. They tell the stories of who we are, including the history, cultures, and contributions of indigenous peoples.

The Government of Canada is committed to the protection of Canada's national parks, and we take the issue of ocean debris very seriously.

When plastic bags were first discovered on the shores of the Broken Group Islands on November 10, Parks Canada immediately began working to remove the debris. At the time of the initial discovery, storm conditions prevented the agency from fully assessing the scope of the debris. Further work has continued since that time. With the help of the Canadian Coast Guard, approximately 4,000 plastic bags have been removed so far. Planning is under way to remove the remaining plastic bags and other, larger items. As weather permits, Parks Canada will continue to remove the debris from the Broken Group Islands. The agency is also planning a more formal cleanup effort in the national park reserve in collaboration with first nations, community groups, and federal departments.

The Government of Canada appreciates the concerns of all those who reached out after learning of the debris, and extends its thanks particularly to community members and the local businesses that have offered so much support in the cleanup efforts.

The agency's law enforcement officials are also investigating the incident and will work with the federal crown prosecutor to pursue charges under the Canada National Parks Act, if appropriate.

Parks Canada is committed to open and transparent communications with indigenous partners, stakeholders, and all Canadians. The agency also has an obligation to confirm that the information it provides is clear and accurate, ensures an appropriate response, and respects investigations that are under way.

When word of the incident first spread, Parks Canada was still gathering information to provide an overview of the situation to the Tseshaht First Nation, other indigenous partners, and key stakeholders along the coast. The agency has since had discussions with local first nations and local government representatives regarding the debris in the Broken Group Islands.

In the future, Parks Canada has committed to advising first nations sooner with respect to environmental incidents that occur within their traditional territory. Parks Canada will continue to share information moving forward, while respecting that an investigation is still under way.

[The Budget, February 28th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, it is always interesting to listen to the member opposite. He is clearly a very humorous presenter in the House. We welcome his rhetorical flourishes.

I would like him to reflect on a couple of things. Three-quarters of the national debt was generated by two Conservative prime ministers. They outdid everyone else. On debt, they really overachieved. I am curious as to whether the member is considering resigning from the party as a result of that horrid financial record.

The other thing I am really curious to have him flesh out and provide some more detail on is the notion of the housing market suddenly correcting in places like Vancouver, a situation none of us wants to see. The Conservatives talked about the enormous financial responsibility of a federal government to bail out individual homeowners. Is it the Conservatives' policy now to protect individual home prices for every single Canadian? Is that part of their fiscal plan for the future? Is that really what they are promising as a result of what they have heard in the budget?

[Homelessness, February 15th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Motion No. 147, a motion sponsored by the member for Saskatoon West that would appoint a special parliamentary committee to conduct hearings on homelessness, and develop a national plan to end homelessness within 12 months of the motion's adoption.

The member cares deeply about this issue, and we respect her for that. We welcome her passion and dedication to this issue. However, the government is unable to support Motion No. 147.

The fact is Motion No. 147 duplicates and would delay critical work this government is already doing on this vital issue.

Our government established an advisory committee on homelessness in June 2017. This 13 member committee includes housing and homeless experts, local and regional service providers, and most importantly, individuals with lived experience of homelessness. They reflect Canada's cultural, linguistic, and regional diversity. It is an extraordinary group of leaders.

It has been my honour to chair this advisory committee, and to join it as it has travelled from coast to coast to coast to hear Canadians share their insights and experiences. I have personally been in more than 24 communities, and spent days upon days with front line workers, people with lived experience, front line service providers, municipal governments, and provincial authorities studying this issue in concert with the entire workforce and social agencies embraced by this issue.

Through roundtables and forums, to town halls, online engagement, the message that Canadians have given to the advisory committee on homelessness has been absolutely clear. It is time to move from consultation and study, and get down to direct action.

Motion No. 147 would disregard this message in favour of spending yet another year studying the issue. This is time and more importantly money that could be better spent on directly addressing issues related to homelessness.

It would also ask organizations that are fighting homelessness to take their time to come to Ottawa, and to once again provide testimony. We would rather they provide services to people than provide testimony to another committee of Parliament. They have already provided feedback and input with their ideas, and they are eager now to work with us at implementing solutions.

Motion No. 147's special committee would also disregard one of the other crystal clear messages we heard in our listening exercises which is that housing is fundamentally a local issue, and requires local solutions funded federally, but designed and delivered on a community-by-community basis on a person-by-person basis.

The federal government's role is to collaborate, listen, finance, fund, and support, but it is not to rule from above, and drop solutions from Ottawa onto communities across this country, and impose programs rather than develop them with local partners.

Front line workers and people with lived experience in homelessness have told us time and time again that if we want lasting permanent change, it needs to come from communities. It cannot be dictated by federal programs.

I look forward to sharing the results of this engagement more thoroughly in a few weeks and days when we release the “What We Heard” report. The results of these listening exercises and study sessions, aligned with other studies on homelessness and poverty that have also been undertaken by this government, are part of our total redesign and launch of Canada's first ever national housing strategy.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities recently completed a study on poverty reduction, on seniors housing, and on seniors issues. All of these studies must include strategies to deal with housing shortages, homelessness, and people in core housing need.

As part of our engagement with this panel on poverty reduction strategies, which is about to be released and disclosed to all members of Parliament and Canadians, we also have people with lived experience on that committee as well. The minister's advisory committee has been focusing on giving us input as to how we can develop programs on housing and homelessness.

Something else is critically important. Preventing homelessness requires an all of government approach. It is not a single issue. It has to be placed within the context of a housing strategy, and only focusing on homelessness does not get us there. It has to be part of a strategy that focuses on income supports. It has to be part of a strategy that also deals with social security programs.

HUMA integrates this approach. It is a standing committee of Parliament. It will be reported, as part of the national housing strategy, on a regular, go-forward basis. This is the place to get a comprehensive holistic approach to homelessness addressed properly. We have a standing committee.

The national housing strategy is perhaps the most important program this government has released in its two years in office. It was just released last November, after 18 months of study and consultation with groups, provinces, territories, indigenous leadership, people with lived experience, homeless activists, housing providers on the ground, both civic and governmental. Part of that engagement and online study, and collection of data and information has produced the most comprehensive approach to housing. It is the most properly funded program our country has ever seen.

In fact, supporting Motion No. 147 would have a negative impact. It would force us to redesign the homelessness program that is part of that strategy, and start all over again. We cannot do this. The current program expires within the 12-month study period in which the member's motion seeks to report back. In other words, the program will expire while the committee is studying what to do next. We need to act now.

If we launch a new consultation process, results will not come from it for another 12 months. That will delay implementation. It will have a terrible impact.

The NDP often says that we should consult more before we act, or that we should act now and stop consulting. The members cannot have it both ways. We have done the consultation. We are about to launch that study, that program, but we have already doubled the investment, ensuring local communities have the resources they need to fight this terrible problem.

I want to underline this fact, because it is another key reason we are opposing the motion.

On the national housing strategy, $40 billion over 10 years, in our first budget we doubled the dollars that the previous government put in place. That doubling of the dollars immediately put in new resources while we studied it. Now, in the 10-year program, we have new programs and new approaches that will fortify and expand the approach to prevent and provide permanent solutions to homelessness, instead of just dealing with the crisis on too many of our city streets.

The advice we are getting from the advisory committee on homelessness is critical. It has given us good advice on how to integrate the two programs. With these investments, we will be better equipped to tackle homelessness, and we can start reducing, if not eliminating it by 2027-28.

Also, in budget 2017, our government committed to engaging with stakeholders, provinces, territories, and indigenous governance organizations, as well as urban indigenous housing providers, to ensure our approach was also consistent with the principles of truth and reconciliation. Again, it is critical that at every step of the way people with lived experience must be at the table. “Nothing about us without us” is fundamental to the approach the government takes to fighting homelessness.

This work is only part of government's broader housing plan. As I said, there is a $10 billion plan to give all Canadians a safe, secure, affordable place to call home.

As we said when we announced the strategy last November, the NHS is geared toward people with housing needs, including indigenous peoples, women and children, families fleeing family violence, seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, LGBT two-spirited community and queer community, and those dealing with mental health and addiction issues, who too often find themselves on city streets. Additionally, young people in care, the super highway to homelessness as is described by a landmark study by the Canadian Observatory On Homelessness. If we wait to act on that critical population, we will be putting young people in harm's way. I will not do that as a parliamentarian.

To meet the needs of these vulnerable populations, we are going to collaborate, foster innovation, support proper data collection. We are going to find a solution to the problem. The NHS includes and recognizes that all Canadians have a right to housing, and that a rights-based framework to housing requires us to address the homelessness situation that defines too many urban, rural, and northern communities in our country.

To back this up, we are redesigning the strategy. We will coordinate with national housing benefit, as well as programs and policies. The rights of people with disabilities are also being integrated into our approaches.

Perhaps most important, we will also enshrine the right to housing into law through legislation, to ensure that while this may be the first national housing strategy, it will not be the last. Again, it will be framed within a rights-based approach to housing, endorsed by the UN rapporteur on housing, and mayors and leaders across the country.

Our broader efforts to reduce poverty are part of this strategy. Those, too, will be based on extensive consultation with people with lived experience.

Once again, I want to thank the member for Saskatoon West for all her hard work. I know that she understands and cares about this issue. I know that she wants solutions delivered tomorrow, if not yesterday. I respect that.

These are goals this government shares, but these are goals this government is already acting on. We cannot support this motion, because it would slow down and push away from the table people with lived experience. Those are the folks we need to help. Those are the folks we are talking to. Those are the people we are going to deliver a national housing strategy for.

[Business of Supply, February 15th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I wish the member had been present in the last term of Parliament when the Conservative Party fired Julian Fantino for running away from veterans. They fired him. We got him out of the House.

When we talk about empathy, members of the party opposite fake empathy every single moment they get the opportunity. They may have discovered listening now, but they did not listen in their 10 years in government. That is as crystal clear as any issue that has ever been presented on the floor of this Parliament.

Yesterday when it was announced that 52 families in my riding lost work when the NDP raised that question, members of that party opposite laughed and clapped their hands. That is the way they honour Canadians who are struggling. It is the same way they responded to veterans during their 10 years in government.

That party has lost its way in terms of its moral compass. While the member opposite spoke about the sacred obligation, I would remind him that it was his party that denied that a sacred obligation ever existed. The Conservatives are the ones who went to court. They are the ones who literally dragged veterans into court. They are the ones who failed on a whole host of promises. We have delivered on the lifelong pension.

I have a question for the member opposite. When Canadians are in need, why do members of that party laugh and clap their hands and ridicule people? Why has that party still failed to understand that empathy has to be real for it to be respected?

[Business of Supply, February 15th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I was talking about the fake empathy the members of the party opposite are capable of generating. The sheer hypocrisy, the sheer arrogance, the sheer capacity to lack all compassion for Canadians was evident in the fact that they fired Julian Fantino as veterans affairs minister because he did not stand up for veterans. They may have fired him. This party got rid of him from the House of Commons. This party will remember the laughter they had for Toronto workers who were laid off, just as we are going to remember and veterans are going to remember the contempt they had for the plight of veterans in this country.