Alex Nuttall

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, May 31st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I think the point of the 400 amendments is that the budget should be deleted. When we look at it, we have had nothing but issue after issue with it. We want the government to go back to the drawing board, not to go back to the taxpayer and take from those who have the least in our society and give to millionaires and billionaires, but to help those people whom it keeps taking from to find a better life for themselves. If the member wants to focus on a single amendment, he can. However, the reality is that your government first said it would do it, then ran away from that promise, and then realized that it had to do it. Quite frankly, it should go back to the drawing board—

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, May 31st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to stand to speak about the budget implementation act.

I would like to start with some facts, which may appear at first glance, to be astounding. The Department of Finance and the Parliamentary Budget Officer have predicted that the budget will not be balanced until 2045.

My kids will not see a balanced budget until they are older than I am right now, and that is unacceptable. During that time frame, there will be an estimated $450 billion in additional debt racked up, for a total of roughly $1.1 trillion. It is our youth who will have to pay all of this back. The future our youth inherit is not the one that we inherited. Our youth are being left behind. We are currently sitting at 11.1% unemployment, while in the United States, the youth unemployment rate sits at only 8.4%. Now our youth will have to live with the shackles of this increased debt.

GDP is up 0.1% in two years. Eighty per cent of middle-class Canadians are feeling the tax increases since the government came into office. There was a $60-billion increase in spending in the last two and a half years, up roughly 20%.

There is no doubt there that a spending problem exists within the Liberal government. Quite frankly, we can look almost anywhere to see it.

Corporate welfare is something I have spoken about over and over again. Why are we taxing Canadians who can barely make ends meet and giving those dollars to millionaires and billionaires so they can make more money? It seems to be done without a strategy or understanding the effects. It seems to be done without a clear measurement as to what is a success or a failure. I have examples: the Bombardier bailout just under a year ago; the superclusters, which were in the last budget and continued in this budget, $900 million going to superclusters, mainly into urban areas, that were recommended by a committee, struck by the industry minister, that included people in charge of superclusters, like the MaRS in Toronto.

A few weeks ago, the Conservatives started saying no to corporate welfare when it came to Kinder Morgan. We did not want government dollars used to prop up the private sector in this circumstance. Not in our wildest dreams did the Conservatives believe we would see corporate welfare enacted when it came to Kinder Morgan, in fact, an outright nationalization of the entire program.

I would like to congratulate some people in the House, such as the member for Vancouver Quadra, the member for Pontiac, and the member for Burnaby North—Seymour, on owning one of the largest oil transportation companies in Canada. I thought they were environmental activists. Usually I would say, “If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.” What the Liberal government has done is first beat the oil industry and then it has joined it. Ironically, growth in the oil and gas sector last year was what drove our economy. Without the oil and gas sector, we would have had exactly zero growth.

This is not because of the Liberals, this is not because of the federal government; it is despite them. In the oil and gas sector, they have caused a lot of instability, because they have continued to attack it. When I look at Kinder Morgan, it makes me think the government has neglected what lies beneath our feet and has opted to rely on what is between the Prime Minister's ears. It is a failing strategy.

The Prime Minister created a carbon tax of $50 per tonne to put in through 2023. After he did that, creating instability in the oil and gas sector, and in fact across our entire economy, threatening the way those who earn the least in our society actually make ends meet, he realized the ramifications of that decision. The ramifications are that projects like Kinder Morgan can no longer make it. They are no longer viable. The private sector has realized that, and then the Prime Minister realized it, and at the last second, he said he was going to step in, take money from people who earn almost nothing and invest it in this project the private sector is abandoning.

It is very interesting when we break down the carbon tax and look at the effect it is going to have on the average family. With fuel costs, there is the cost of actually producing that gasoline. It is about 50% of what we pay at the pump. Then there are provincial and federal excise taxes. Those taxes were originally put in place to deal with the ramifications of pulling out of that original resource. Then we have our new carbon tax that is being put in place on top of that. The government does not stop reaching into our pockets at the fuel pump, but says that it will charge HST on top of that. That is another 13%.

The carbon tax is going to cost average families $2,500 per year. What does that mean? It means higher food costs, higher gas costs, and higher costs of everything Canadians consume. That is the three-year legacy of the Liberal government. The fact that middle-class Canadians do not have trust funds seems to be lost on the Prime Minister and the finance minister. The legacy that we see over and over again, in budget after budget, is that the government can take and take from Canada's middle class, that it can take and take from the economy, and it can put that money wherever it sees fit. Then when it realizes that is not working, the government will take and take to buy a failing project whose failure, by the way, the government was responsible for in the beginning by introducing more and more taxes.

It is more taxes on payrolls; more taxes on gasoline as a result of the carbon tax; more taxes on Canadians across this country. That does not even begin to deal with the fact of red tape and environmental assessment after environmental assessment, the issues and regulations that constantly hold down the Canadian economy. The Liberal government constantly holds down Canada's poorest people who are looking for jobs, who are searching for that next job, who are looking for growth, and who want to create a new life for their families.

Those are the effects of the Liberal budget. Those are the effects we have seen from three years of Liberal government. The family tax cut is gone. The arts and fitness tax credits have disappeared. The education and textbook tax credit is nowhere to be seen. The life vision of young Canadians is not the one we inherited, the one in which we believed that if we went out to work day in and day out, it would be easy. Manufacturing is not creating more jobs in Canada. The oil and gas sector, while it is moving forward, has seen incredible setbacks. The housing sector, while on fire, is preventing our young people from being able to actually access a home and own it for the first time.

These are the issues that we are seeing in the Canadian economy. It is these budgets that are driving this ship.

[Net Neutrality, May 22nd, 2018]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise this evening to talk to Motion No. 168. I would like to thank the member for Oakville for bringing the motion forward. I would also like to thank the member for Beauce, who is our critic for innovation, science, and economic development, for supporting it.

Motion No. 168 is about net neutrality. It is about equal opportunity and equal access to information and the Internet.

Net neutrality is the notion that Internet service providers should treat all content that runs on their networks equally. That includes whatever the source or application is, in any direction the content is headed.

All content on the Internet should be available to consumers and it needs to be available at an equal cost and speed. These consumers include youth and people with disabilities. That is why equal access to information is so important.

I look to my own riding and to southwestern Ontario where we have seen an investment by the federal and provincial governments as well as the different wards throughout the region in the neighbourhood of $200 million to $300 million to ensure that high speed Internet access is provided. This investment mirrors what happens in many urban centres where we see infrastructure on smaller levels present for pre-WIFI and other opportunities to have free access or equal access to the Internet.

The reality is that much of the infrastructure that is brought forward and installed or implemented throughout Canada has some sort of source of government dollars. For this reason, the citizens of Canada are the ones who are actually investing in this infrastructure to begin with. We are the ones who are making it so that the Internet can be seen by so many across the country.

As the critic for youth sport and disability, I understand the positive impacts that net neutral brings for young Canadians and Canadians living with disabilities. The motion would help both groups overcome barriers they often had to deal with by allowing greater access and more equal access.

The motion calls on the House of Commons to recognize the importance of net neutrality as a main reason for the ongoing success of the Internet. Net Neutrality has the potential to significantly continue to benefit Canadians. It allows Canadians to access their content of choice without having unnecessary restrictions put in place by Internet service providers.

I will get into some specifics of the motion.

It is important for the House to recognize that the Internet has continued to thrive due to the principles put in place by net neutrality. These principles are transparency, freedom, and innovation. The motion is set to recognize Canada's strong net neutrality rules already in place. The rules are grounded in the Telecommunication Act and are enforced by the CRTC.

With an open Internet, there is a free flow of information for Canadians. The free flow of information is key for many aspects of a Canadian's life, and those are only becoming greater and greater year after year. They include freedom of expression, diversity, education, entrepreneurship, innovation, and democracy. These are the skills that youth can carry forward into their personal development, their business development, and their educational development. Access to more education online is vital to the development of our young people and vital to our ability to compete around the world. This is beneficial for the future economic and social prosperity of all Canadians.

We have no reason to limit the freedom of Canadians when it comes to access to the Internet. It would not make sense. The House must express its firm support for net neutrality and the continued preservation of open access to the Internet, of equal access to the Internet.

The House must continue to support the Internet free from unjust discrimination and interference so people can access the content of their choice at the rate they choose.

There is not just bipartisan but multi-partisan support for the motion. Un a sense, we have an obligation to see this motion pass. Members among all parties have supported and continue to support net neutrality. A Liberal member has written and moved this motion. Members from the NDP support Motion No. 168. Members from the Conservative Party support the motion. Net neutrality is one of the reasons for the continued success of the Internet, and it is getting support from all parties. It is up to us to ensure the next generation of Canadians has equal access to the information and opportunities that are found online.

We all have the opportunity to make a positive change in the lives of Canadians, especially youth and people living with disabilities, ensuring they have an equal opportunity to access all the information needed for the different matters they go through in their lives, and we have to do this collectively.

In order for this to happen, it is essential that we continue to support Motion No. 168 today and, quite frankly, in the future, at every opportunity reinforcing our support. All Canadians should have access to the content of their choice in accordance with the law. I feel this is something on which everyone in the House of Commons can probably agree.

Through our collective support, it also gives us an opportunity for net neutrality to expand in the future. It is important for net neutrality to be a guiding principle in both the Telecommunications Act and the Broadcasting Act. It should explore opportunities to further enshrine legislation and protect the equal opportunities that Canadians have. If this is to happen, the principles behind net neutrality must be included in new legislation. Principles of freedom must be enshrined.

We do not want to waste this opportunity. Our collective support would be for nothing and future generations, quite frankly, would be at risk. This is something simple that we can use to help our youth and certainly those living with disabilities.

Just a few weeks ago, we debated a motion regarding access to services for persons living with disabilities and having a single website. The motion was moved by the New Democratic Party to allow people at home to access a single website to find out what services would be available to them. This further falls in line with what we see with respect to net neutrality, ensuring that when they access that space, they are not overcharged because it is not perhaps something that falls in line with what the Internet service provider would want to put at a high speed or a low rate.

There is no reason for us to limit the freedom of Canadians to access information. As young people go through the education system, they need to be able to access information around the world to ensure they are competitive in elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education. It is becoming more and more critical that this net neutrality be maintained. That is why we are calling on the government to continue working on this important issue. I, along with many others, will keep a close eye on the government's next steps.

I would like to thank all members of the House for listening to my speech. It is an important topic that will influence the lives of many Canadians. Youth will have more access to education. People with disabilities will have a greater quality of life and easier access to government programs. We can make a positive change for people in our constituencies and around the country. Net neutrality is a way to give Canadians more freedom and more information to make better decisions.

With better access to the Internet, Canadians are able to educate themselves more, innovate more, and freely express themselves in the means they choose. I thank everyone for listening to the importance of net neutrality today. I look forward to working with members to better the lives of Canadian citizens and maintaining equality in access to information.

[Visitability, April 30th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to stand and speak to this motion today. Too often, when we search for a definition of “visitability”, it comes up as “no results found”. I think this is one of the major reasons why we are discussing this matter today. Therefore, I rise to talk about Motion No. 157 and the importance of visitability.

This is a measure of a place's ease for people with disabilities: in other words, how accessible and easily visited a location can be. This is a subject that is often overlooked. I would like the House to recognize how much of an impact visitability can have on Canadians of all ages and abilities. More specifically, this motion can help Canadians with disabilities all over the country.

However, while the motion is a good start, more work needs to be done on the subject, which is why I am asking the Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities to include visitability in the upcoming accessibility legislation. I hope to see some concrete measures put in place when that legislation finally does come out. It is legislation that we have been waiting for patiently for two and a half years.

This motion would emphasize the efforts of companies, contractors, and builders who are already ensuring that there are visitability principles in new construction. It would work to encourage those who are doing this currently, and encourage those who are not to take up the banner. We want to influence future construction projects to become more accessible. We need to set a higher standard of visitability than what we currently have, which is why we fully support Motion No. 157, as I know many members in the House do.

I would like to thank the member for Tobique—Mactaquac for sponsoring this motion. His efforts are appreciated. I believe many other members in the House feel the same way.

This is an area that has always been and will continue to be close to my heart. I have family members who have benefited from visitability, as well as family members who have suffered due to lack of it. My mother was injured in a car accident when I was 10 years old. She was unable to walk and sustained a permanent head injury. I can tell members that I have been in places, whether visiting doctors, friends, family members, or in fact her own residence, where visitability was a major issue. It showed me how important this subject is to Canadians. I want to continue to build upon the hard work that has been put in by the member.

I believe this is something that would help many people in our country. I do not think I am alone in wanting to help Canadians. I think that everyone in the House wants to improve visitability for persons with disabilities in our country. I know that we can do better than we are doing right now.

Historically, our party has given a lot of support to Canadians living with disabilities, and I am very proud of this. I am proud that the Conservative Party helped those who needed it. One way we have supported the community of those living with disabilities is through tax credits. Our previous government introduced the home accessibility tax credit and the home renovation tax credit.

The home accessibility tax credit allowed Canadians with disabilities or those over 65 to save 15% on up to $10,000 in renovations to their residence, which is considerable for anyone. This allowed individuals to pay for walk-in bathtubs, wheel-in showers, and wheelchair ramps. It is a great benefit to any Canadian in need by significantly improving ease of access and visitability.

Next, the home renovation tax credit was introduced in 2009. One in three households took advantage of it. It saved three million Canadians an average of $700 and was certainly a huge success. It was our future plan to make this credit a permanent fixture.

These two credits helped Canadians increase visitability in their own homes. The previous Conservative government demonstrated its support for Canadians living with disabilities. We plan to continue this support. Every single Canadian has to be valued, no matter who he or she is. There is no reason why we cannot keep up this effort. We are doing so thorough this motion today, as well as through the legislation we are waiting for from the government.

This motion is not about any single party. It is certainly not about our party. It is a motion that I consider non-partisan in nature, which is why we as a House need to support it in unity. It is about how we can help Canadians live their best life through visitability.

All of us know someone who could benefit from improved visitability. It could be one's grandparents, mom, dad, or even children. It could be a neighbour, and it could be a friend. It is essential that visitability be included in the upcoming accessibility legislation.

We all have the potential to make a positive impact in our communities, and we must take up this fight now to ensure that it happens. We need to ensure that this becomes a reality, and we need to ensure that no partisanship creeps in. This is not a Conservative, Liberal, or even an NDP issue. It is the responsibility of each member of this House to ensure that action is taken. We need action.

I have faith that the new minister will look at this motion and ensure that the legislation that comes to the House reflects what the House is going to ask, which is that visitability become a core piece of any piece of legislation drafted with the accessibility act.

I, like many others, will be keeping a close eye on the upcoming accessibility legislation. We are patiently waiting to see whether visitability will be taken seriously. I hope the minister is taking this subject seriously, but if not, we will find out, hopefully very soon. Two and a half years is far too long to wait for a piece of legislation that was promised to this house immediately upon the forming of the government.

At this point, we are on our third minister for persons with disabilities. We have seen a stop and start on at least two occasions, and quite frankly, at this point, I am not sure where the legislation sits. It is unfortunate that through the issues the government has had with regard to those fulfilling this role, Canadians have not been put first and at the centre. If they were, we would not be sitting here two and a half years later with absolutely no information to move forward with.

It is important to recognize that the member's motion is coming from a government MP, someone who is sits on the government side. It shows that it is not just us on this side of the House who are patiently waiting for this legislation to come forward. It is actually members on all sides of this House who are saying that we need to act and ensure that the government is moving forward with an accessibility act, a piece of its platform, something that was promised upon the immediate forming of the government.

It is not just members of this House who are waiting patiently, and they are definitely not the most important people, either. There are Canadians from coast to coast to coast who are saying that we absolutely need to have legislation put in place. We need to recognize the difficulties persons with disabilities struggle with in society every day and do everything we can to ensure that they have the opportunity to be part of our society in a meaningful way.

I know I am probably near the end of my allotted time. I would just like to call upon the minister to stand in the House and tell us when the legislation is going to come, explain what the priorities are going to be, and respond to this motion by ensuring that visitability will be the cornerstore of what we see coming forward in the accessibility bill.

I am thankful for the opportunity to speak today. Again, I would like to thank the member for graciously bringing forth this motion to the House.

[Visitability, April 30th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his commitment to visitability, accessibility, and persons with disabilities.

We have been waiting in the House for a very long time for an accessibility act, for more legislation to come forward, and we are now two and a half years in. What is the member's expectation in terms of the work that has been put into this specific motion being carried out in an upcoming bill provided by the minister for persons with disabilities? When does the member expect that to come to the House? Again, we are two and a half years into this four-year term.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 29th, 2018]

With regard to loans and repayable contributions issued by the government during the 2016 calendar year: (a) what are the details, including (i) amount, (ii) date, (iii) recipient, (iv) purpose; and (b) for each loan and repayable contribution in (a), how much has been repaid to the government, as of February 8, 2018?

[Canada Summer Jobs Program, March 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, for months now my colleagues and I have been speaking against the Liberal's values test on jobs for youth. I am happy to see that the minister intends on scrapping it. By getting rid of the attestation, the government has admitted it was wrong about this in the first place. However, so far, nothing has been done to fix the situation for this year.

I have met with hundreds of organizations since last December, and they are all saying the same thing. Thousands of underprivileged youth will not get to go to summer camps this year. Thousands of university students will be without summer jobs this year. Thousands of homeless people will not get the same shelter support this year. Thousands of impoverished seniors will not receive health care support this year.

The government needs to act now to ensure the youth this year have the same opportunities they have had each and every year before.

[Interim Estimates, March 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I want to confirm that the vote for the member for Saint Boniface—Saint Vital will not be counted based on the fact that he was not sitting in his seat at the end of the vote count.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 21st, 2018]

With regard to the Prime Minister’s trips to the riding of Scarborough—Agincourt in November and December of 2017: (a) what are the amounts and details of all expenses related to the trips; (b) what are the details of all official government business conducted on the trip; (c) what amount has been received by the Receiver General for Canada from the (i) Liberal Party of Canada, (ii) Official Agent for the Liberal Party of Canada by-election campaign in Scarborough—Agincourt, (iii) Official Agent for the Liberal Party of Canada by-election campaign in Scarborough—Agincourt for reimbursement related to the Prime Minister’s trips; and (d) what are the details of any payment received in (c), including (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) description of expenses for which taxpayers were reimbursed, (iv) sender?

[Business of Supply, March 1st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure there was a question there, but I would like to respond to my hon. colleague. We certainly appreciate the member's support.

We will continue to ensure, as a party, that all Canadians are respected and represented. That is what we are asking the government to do here today. We are asking it to allow all of us to be a part of this incredible mosaic we call Canada.