Adam Vaughan

[Canada Elections Act, May 7th, 2021]

Giuliani or Trump? Pick a lane.

[Canada Elections Act, May 7th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for raising the issue of mental health, which is a critical issue, but she referenced the danger of holding elections, cited some provincial elections and identified Newfoundland and Labrador as a particular case study.

Is the member aware that the number of active COVID cases registered yesterday in Newfoundland and Labrador was six? In two provinces, say Alberta and Ontario, Alberta had 2,211 cases without an election, which have been going up, and in Ontario it was 3,424 cases, which have also been going up. Perhaps holding an election might actually change those results in those two provinces if Newfoundland and Labrador is the case study she wishes to look at.

That is a party that changed election law in its last term of government, had an MP convicted of cheating and lost at the Supreme Court. That is a party that, quite frankly, used Pierre Poutine, a bigoted name, to cheat in London. It is outlandish.

The Republicans in Florida could take lessons from you lot. I mean, pick a lane, are you Giuliani or are you Trump, because you sound like both of them?

[Canada Elections Act, May 7th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the Conservatives are engaged in making it easier and safer to vote as we go through uncharted territory. I am very concerned about the idea of political parties having direct oversight minute by minute during an election, although it begins to explain why the Conservative were so nervous when the Reform Party was created.

I keep hearing Atlanta Republicans talking every time Conservatives start talking about the election. On that point, the member opposite raised the concern that we would have an election right now. Could she explain why her party is so worried about having an election right now? Conservatives have yet to vote confidence in the government in one single opportunity. In fact, they are the ones triggering the election every time they vote no in a confidence motion. I do not mind the debate disagreeing with the Liberals, that is their job, but if they are afraid of an election, I would think they would not vote to have one every time they put their hand up in the House of Commons.

[Housing, April 27th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, having just heard the NDP House leader talk about solving the housing crisis with an $8-billion investment, I am a little reluctant to take the advice of the NDP on housing policy. After all, the New Democrats have already spent that money on pharmacare, fighting climate change and basic income. I am not sure how far one simple tax will stretch.

The issue is this. We are focused on delivering to Canadians housing that they can afford, is safe and is secure. We are working on rental housing. We are working on first-time homebuyers. We are working on making sure the market is regulated back to shape so that foreign investors do not find a home before Canadians do, because our goal is to get every Canadian a home. That is what the national housing strategy is investing in.

[Housing, April 27th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, the party opposite misunderstands identifying a problem with being happy about a situation. The issue was described as a serious issue, and it is in the budget we just tabled. We are taking steps to address it. We are also taking steps to address money laundering and to strengthen FINTRAC to make sure foreign speculation does not distort the housing market and protects Canadians.

Our job as a government is to build a housing system based on a human rights approach that gives Canadians the choice whether they want to rent or own, and to support the choice of programs that facilitate the realization of that dream. The party opposite was not only missing in action. It may want to take a look at its role in income trusts and the role they play in the distortion of the housing market. Jim Flaherty might have a few words—

[Housing, April 27th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, it is very good to see the Conservatives finally talk about housing. I remember a prime minister named Stephen Harper who told me once, when I was a reporter, to go read the Constitution because housing was not a federal responsibility.

Let me assure the member opposite that not only will we be taking steps to invest in first-time buyers and supporting them in crossing the bridge to home ownership, not only have we invested $75 billion in a national housing strategy to make rent more affordable, and not only have we put a tax on foreign speculators in the Canadian housing market, but we are also not done yet. There are new steps to be taken.

We believe in making sure Canadians have a choice, and that choice should be safe, affordable and secure. We will get this done. We will not take advice from the Conservatives, who were missing in action for 10 years.

[Criminal Code, April 23rd, 2021]

Madam Speaker, in my short time in politics, I have been to more funerals for young people lost to gun violence in my riding than I have for members of my own family. The Conservatives have reversed course on income trusts, they have reversed course on same-sex marriage, they have reversed course even on the price on pollution. You cannot do it for the love of Yonathan, or Q or Mikey or Reese, for 22 in Nova Scotia, for six in Quebec City, for 14 in Montreal, but for the love of God, can you do it for their families?

I broke with party ranks and supported your private member's bill. For the love of my city, for the love of the families, could you please reverse course and save these families more grief? Why can't you change your minds? Leave the gun lobby behind.

[Indigenous Affairs, April 23rd, 2021]

Madam Speaker, it is critical to understand that there is a report coming out of Parliament right now that stresses the need to co-develop a strategy around urban, rural and northern indigenous housing. We are waiting for that report and will be acting on that report.

In the meantime, I would direct the member to the rapid housing initiative, which she scoffed at. It promised to deliver 3,000 units of housing. We have now more doubled that fund, and the program has delivered close to 40% of the units to indigenous housing programs.

Our government is serious about an urban, rural and northern indigenous program. She will see the results of the budget. She will see the results of this program. However, in the meantime, we have upped our game and are investing more than any—

[Criminal Code, April 23rd, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from the east coast for his good words, and I share his analysis that we need to work through a consensus-based approach in Parliament to do what we can to make Canadians not only feel safe, but in fact be safe.

I have listened to the Conservatives, many from rural parts of the country. They talked about the need for sentencing, as if because we have made murder illegal it somehow has been stopped, simply because we have made it a criminal act. I have also heard them attack mandatory minimum sentences and talk about the increase in gun violence that has occurred underneath a regime of mandatory minimum sentences that have done nothing to stem the growth of gun violence.

I work with mothers in my riding who have lost their children to gun violence. What they are saying is that if we want to stop it, we need to invest in jobs and housing and attack systemic racism in the justice system, especially in the sentencing provisions but also within prison and the way police arrest.

I am just curious, because the member mentioned the border and because we have had several significant arrests recently in Toronto precisely because of the investments we made at the border, whether he would work with us through committee to strengthen border provisions to stop all handguns coming across the border and whether he would—

[The Budget, April 20th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I have heard a parade of Conservative MPs today talk about the need to create choice in the child care system, and “choice” is an interesting word to use.

Farmers in the Prairies can choose to take a bushel of wheat and walk it down to a road, then walk that road to Vancouver and then swim across the ocean to China to sell it or they can choose to use the system of roads the public has built, the rail system the public has built and the port system the public has built and utilize that system, choose that system, to get better results for the bushel of wheat they want to sell.

Child care is no different. We all support parents having the right to choose where to place their kids while they work or go to school, but if we do not have a system to choose between and we limit our choices to individual options, we get the same result as trying to swim wheat to China. We do not get any results.

Will the member opposite agree that if those members are going to support choice and support the market of opportunities for parents, they have to build the child care system for choices to be present for parents to make those choices they seem to think they support?