Blake Desjarlais

[Committees of the House, November 29th, 2023]

So you would rather have undocumented people.

[Committees of the House, November 29th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I want to narrow down a very troubling reality facing Canadians, the terrible reality facing workers. We know from recent reports, particularly reports throughout COVID, and reports before that, that temporary foreign workers often face circumstances that are simply undignified. We heard just recently that some temporary foreign workers have died. Some others have found themselves in situations where they are undocumented. There needs to be far more oversight. Ultimately, the government must implement the process that was promised to the workers: having a “status for all” commitment to ensure that a worker who toils the soil here in Canada, pays taxes and does everything right, and still finds themself in a position where the government does not accept them, will find justice.

When will the government ensure status for all, for all the workers who give tirelessly to this country?

[Persons with Disabilities, November 28th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, people living with disabilities are children, parents, grandparents, community members, our neighbours and our fellow Canadians, and they deserve to live in dignity.

The few in Alberta who get some provincial support know it is not enough and feel they are being trapped in continual poverty. New Democrats and disability advocates fought to secure a national Canada disability benefit, but the Liberals are delaying.

Edmontonians living with a disability do not have time to wait. When will the government implement a fully funded Canada disability benefit?

[Business of Supply, November 28th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, it is no secret that the Conservatives have tabled this opposition day motion today when we could have been talking about so many things. New Democrats supported this motion because we believe that farmers deserve a break. However, we do not believe that Conservatives and Liberals would take seriously the issues that are present to Canadians, including a crumbling health care system that lacks funding from this place and a terrible situation when it comes to our economy, where we are looking backward rather than forward. We need to be debating the protections of workers today in this place. Time is of the essence.

Why is it that, from what the member believes, the Conservatives would take a whole day of the important business of this place to speak to how they themselves have always participated in the Senate? Now, all of a sudden, these same members, who have Conservative senators within the caucus who they meet with every Wednesday, are asking for that debate in this place. Canadians deserve so much better, If this is the type of leadership the Conservatives have in this place today, members can imagine what they will do tomorrow.

[Public Services and Procurement, November 21st, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's public service workers stepped up during the pandemic and every day since to deliver the critical services Canadians rely on. How did the government thank them? With a disastrous rollout to a new health care plan. Workers are paying thousands of dollars out of pocket for their medication and health care, and are waiting months to be reimbursed, which is forcing families to make impossible decisions. The Liberals' lack of urgency to act just shows how out of touch they are.

When will the government stop delaying and fix this mess so workers can have the benefits they have earned?

[Committees of the House, November 8th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to the concurrence motion about the audit in the public accounts committee report tabled by our Auditor General in relation to the greening government strategy.

The greening government strategy is something that, unfortunately, at committee we spent not all that much time on, and I am quite surprised today to see the Conservatives' move to speak an awful lot about it. I think it is indicative of their actions in this place. Nonetheless, I am happy to rise to speak to our findings, because it is always a good opportunity for New Democrats, particularly when Conservatives want to speak about the government's record and our country's record on climate change. It is important that we take the lessons of our past to hopefully plot a better future. Today is no exception to that, and I will be speaking about that a bit in my speech. I will speak directly to the report in just a moment so I can highlight for Canadians that in the report, which dealt largely with a strategy by the Treasury Board Secretariat to develop a greening government strategy, part of the strategy was to look at ways the government could better procure items that could reduce greenhouse emissions, as well as reduce its emissions through its systems.

With respect to that, the environment commissioner found two really troubling things. One is that the plan that was audited, the greening government strategy itself, lacked enough detail to suggest to the commissioner that it would be sufficient. The most particular, and probably the biggest, glaring concern I had with the report, as a member of the committee, was the fact that it lacked an approach to deal with key risks and making sure the strategy would achieve its ultimate goal, which is to reach net zero in its operations by 2050. If there is not enough detail to ensure that the government can get to a net-zero strategy by 2050, in addition to not understanding the risks of achieving it while simultaneously investing in these things, it is important for Canadians to have further transparency. I think that is what the Auditor General's office, by way of the environment commissioner, is calling for.

It is important to note that the recommendations that were outlined by the environment commissioner's report spoke specifically to two departments, National Defence and Transport Canada, understandably, as both are very large ministries that procure a lot of things. Also, in our fight against climate change, we understand that cars and carbon-emitting fuels that are high in intensity, like gasoline, which are still available in markets across Canada today, are still high-polluting. It is no different with government-procured fleets that include a variety of vehicles. We heard in testimony from some of the officials at committee about a plan to try to find ways to reduce emissions by way of procurement. Knowing that those are our two largest ministries, it is going to be really important to deal with the greening government strategy in an appropriate way to see tangible outcomes, maybe even by way of providing details on how many vehicles will be replaced in x amount of time with vehicles that emit less carbon, or electric vehicles. That is a tangible recommendation that I think could be included in the greening government strategy, which right now lacks that level of detail, according to the environment commissioner.

It begs the question of how seriously the government, in its totality, is actually taking its fight against the climate crisis. We have seen, for example, the really troubling debate over the last few days and weeks on the Liberals' decision to create a “carve-out” for Atlantic Canada in relation to the carbon tax. New Democrats supported Conservatives in that, not because we disagree with climate change, which is the reason Conservatives did it, but because we understand that, when it comes to our principles with respect to taxation in this country, we must apply those things equally, and we have seen an unequal application of that. The provinces were very loud and clear on that, and we heard those things. We made the reasonable decision to ensure that we could help at a time when the cost of living is so bad. That is why New Democrats fought to put forward a motion today that we thought was reasonable and a good invitation to the Liberals and Conservatives to see whether we could make life more affordable for Canadians while also tackling climate change.

I thought it was a very reasonable plan. It would have had lowered emissions. By making sure that programs like a free heat pump program are easily accessible and free, we would actually find homes reducing their emissions.

Conservatives always comment on how this is a bad solution because it is going to get too cold in Canada and, at the same time, they say that the solution to the climate crisis is “technology”. Those two things cannot necessarily be true if heat pumps are, in fact, the leading technology in this country and one that is improving in quality, affordability and efficiency, in terms of dealing with Canadian climate.

These are true facts of these technologies that are important for Canadians to partake in and important for us to continue to invest in. They reduce our emissions while also reducing Canadians' reliance on extensive high-carbon-emitting fuels. It is a good thing for Canadians.

We wanted to ensure that we could pay for that kind of program, in addition to ensuring that we remove GST from all home heating, including electric heating, which would save all Canadians everywhere and put money right in their pockets.

The last point of that motion was to ensure that we could actually pay for these things. It is important that, in a climate crisis context, we take into consideration the culprits of the crisis, those who have profited off those industries that are high-carbon-emitting.

They have gotten away with it in large part without having to pay their fair share, in relation to the direct impact they have had on our environment, on our lands, on our planet. It is now time that they play an incredible role and an important role in financing, so that we can see the outcomes we want to see across our country and meet our goals, both domestic and abroad, to ensure that we reduce our carbon emissions.

It is the responsible thing to do.

It was unfortunate to see the Liberals and the Conservatives join together to defeat our motion. It is unfortunate but not all that surprising. They are both parties that we have seen continuously dole out billions of dollars to oil and gas without ever having the courage to attempt to roll some of the profits back, in order to help Canadians.

We have seen other governments, for example, do this. In the United Kingdom, we have seen Conservatives bring in a windfall tax on oil and gas there. There is a Conservative government in place there. I was happy to see that they have seen the good reason and logic. They understand that when oil, as a commodity, is at the highest price it has been in a long time, it is not by chance that those oil companies have done that. The market is largely doing that due to its fluctuating nature, to ensure that parts of that windfall could be absorbed by the government in order to stabilize prices, but also to ensure that the government could finance its programs and services.

Our plan looked at using the finances from a windfall tax like that here in Canada to directly finance the solutions that would result in lower emissions, like getting free heat pumps across Canada, a leading technology in both its efficiency and affordability.

This report is evidence, clearly, of the government's lack of courage and also its lack of attention to detail in actually attempting to do the things it says. I do not discredit Canadians for that.

It is okay to be critical of a government, to call them out for important and very obviously credible things that this report highlights, including a lack of detail in a strategy dealing with the greening of the government and not understanding the risks of not achieving that plan.

When dealing with the climate crisis, we have to know those things full well and if we do not, we should endeavour to understand them.

I think that it is incumbent upon us to take this report and the tabling and the recommendations found in it to be our canary in the coal mine, to suggest that our government is not taking climate change seriously. It is time and it is important now to remedy those things with real solutions, to lower our emissions while also tackling the affordability crisis Canadians are facing right now.

We can do that if we work together. I am certain that, with the opportunity that was present earlier today, if we had worked together then, we could have made life different for so many Canadians, for the better.

[Committees of the House, November 8th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I have spent some time with the member in our Standing Committee on Public Accounts, and I quite enjoy our time there. I find ourselves often agreeing, in particular when it comes to environmental work.

When I received the report from the environment commissioner, I was quite shocked that, with the current government in particular, which touts being one of the most environmentally friendly there has ever been, we see damning reports. How would the member rate the government on environmental issues, given the auditor's responses?

[Committees of the House, November 8th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his speech. I think it is a tough job that he has to continue, and I think that endurance is admirable. However, what is not admirable is that this report outlines clearly that the commissioner found that the government actually lacked the ability to manage key risks, which prevents it from meeting its strategy by 2050.

What does the member have to say about how the government can rectify something like this? If it has a plan that says the commitment is to be net zero by 2050 but does not understand the risks associated with getting there, how is it going to be able to get there?

[Business of Supply, November 7th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona for his hard work and his incredible contributions in this chamber. To my own knowledge, in much of this, he is a good teacher and a very wise person. I am sure that many in the chamber have benefited from his wise advice.

To make it very clear, New Democrats believe that taking GST off home heating is important because we represent Canadians as far north as Nunavut, for example, and as far south as Victoria, as well as everywhere in between. What we know about those Canadians and their experience is that winters get cold. Those cold winters imply that we need to ensure that the cost of heating is as low as possible. One way to do that is to remove GST from home heating.

That is going to affect more Canadians, put more money back into Canadians' pockets and actually ensure that home heating is as low as it can possibly be. The government, at that time, will stand with Canadians.

New Democrats, especially, stand with Canadians. We hope that the government and the Conservatives will also stand with Canadians as we contemplate removing GST.

[Business of Supply, November 7th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, that is one of the better questions asked today, because it contemplates the revenue side of Canada's economy. I would like to suggest to the member to think about this in two ways. One, yes, there would be revenue generation from the windfall taxes on oil and gas companies that would amount to $4 billion to $5 billion. As a matter of fact, when we invest that amount of money in Canadians in terms of looking at the difference between the investment versus the impact to our economy if we did not do those things, we would see that is actually a larger amount.

To put it in perspective, if we can prevent a climate disaster, for example, by mitigating the increase in our global temperatures by 1.5°C ideally or by 2°C maximally, we could save Canadians billions of dollars if we take action on that now. It is not only a question of revenue but also a question of how much we could save in terms of the direct impact to our infrastructure and to Canadians' way of life in future years.

I agree with the member. There need to be more solutions to the revenue side of things, and I welcome co-operation between the Bloc Québécois and the New Democrats to find those solutions.