Christine Moore

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, we need to recognize the contributions made by indigenous communities. If they had not been there when Abitibi—Témiscamingue was settled, it is likely that none of my ancestors would have survived and I would not be in the House today.

We are here today because indigenous peoples have done so much for us from the time Canada was founded. By recognizing the historical impact they have had on all our lives, we can better understand why it is so important to issue an apology for what was done to them. They made many sacrifices to help us in the past, and we betrayed them atrociously.

An apology by Pope Francis is something that is definitely missing, but, besides that, there is still a lot of work to be done towards reconciliation. The next step is to formally ask Pope Francis for an apology, to continue the reconciliation process, and to recognize how much indigenous communities have contributed and helped us become what we are today.

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, one simple way to show support is to take the time to listen to the stories of elders in our indigenous communities, to really listen. That is not always easy. Those stories may make us cry, but it is important to be present, to listen to the stories, and to give elders as much time as they need. All parliamentarians can engage in the simple act of opening our hearts to what happened and reaching out to those communities for reconciliation.

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, as we have just seen, it is easy to apologize when we are willing and able to acknowledge our mistakes. Thank you for the apology. I should mention that I will be sharing my time with the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River.

Today, we are debating an important motion, which contains three key words for understanding the essence of the motion itself. Those words are “truth”, “reconciliation”, and “healing”.

Getting to the truth is one of the major problems experienced by many indigenous residential school survivors. Sadly, even today, many Catholic institutions still refuse to grant access to documents about their operations and what happened in the residential schools. Their refusal to make this information available is extremely detrimental. It is also incomprehensible to many Catholics, because the truth is a central tenet of Catholicism and a core value for all Catholics. There is a reason why lying is considered to be a sin.

If these entities were to allow access to these documents, it could really help people from various communities understand the situation and why things were done that way. Terrible things happened in residential schools. Many members have talked about that. Mothers and fathers do not know where their children are buried, for example. Having access to those documents could help them finally find out the truth and would fill in a missing part of their family's history.

As I said before, what happened in the residential schools is unspeakable, and the effects are still being felt today. Young people in indigenous communities are still feeling the effects. Children were taken away from their parents, and residential school survivors have had trouble developing parenting skills and remembering how to raise children according to their traditions. Not enough time has passed by to make any generation forget the residential schools and what they were about.

These were all tragic and terrible events. These people cannot move on unless they get an apology. When the Conservatives were in office, prime minister Harper apologized in the House on behalf of the government. That apology was made in co-operation with the party leaders at the time, particularly Mr. Layton, who offered his advice about how important an apology was for many residential school survivors.

Religion is still very important for many indigenous seniors who were raised in the Catholic Church. It has strong roots in indigenous communities. I have been to funerals where many indigenous seniors were in attendance. I saw how important their faith was to them. An apology from the Pope on behalf of the Catholic Church would mean a lot to them and would help them to move on to reconciliation and healing.

Through reconciliation, people are able to accept that, although what happened to them will unfortunately always be part of their lives, they can move on.

It is an extremely difficult part of the process that requires a great deal of work. Acknowledgement of what happened in the past and an apology would help people to move on to the healing stage. Healing is an extremely important part of the Algonquin traditions in my community. The Pope's acknowledgement of past events would go a long way to helping elders in indigenous communities feel supported and understood.

I am therefore calling on all members in the House to put themselves in the shoes of the traumatized residential school victims. Sadly, some members in the House are among those victims and can attest to what they experienced. Many of them can clearly articulate why a papal apology is so important.

Personally, I am a Catholic. I was baptized. I never expected the progress we have seen under Pope Francis. He has talked about homosexuals. I hope that Pope Francis will understand what we are asking for and offer an apology. I have seen him venture into territory that I never would have expected him to have the courage to enter into. I am hopeful that he will apologize if the House sends him a unanimous message and clearly explains why it is so important for the indigenous peoples in our ridings. It would be a significant step toward truth and reconciliation. It is not always easy to get an apology, but in this situation a united front would send a clear message. I hope that every one of us understands that it is important for the victims to turn the page.

We often talk about physical and psychological healing, but spiritual healing is extremely important. I sincerely believe that spiritual hearing, for all those who are still Roman Catholic, requires a papal apology. It would help them heal and reconcile with their faith. Many sick seniors are asking for this apology, and I sincerely believe that by receiving it before they die, they will be able to live out their last days in peace.

For Canada in general, this apology would signify that the Pope acknowledges the events of the past and understands what indigenous people went through. Although the means we use may be different, I believe that we all want to embrace truth and reconciliation. I sincerely hope that we are ready to rise to ask for this apology in the hope that the Pope is listening and will understand the message of indigenous peoples.

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, would it be possible to check the rotation? We heard from the member for Timmins—James Bay, then from the minister and two Conservative members. I think it would normally be the NDP's turn next, but unfortunately I was not recognized, so I would like to know what is going on with the rotation.

[Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, April 25th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, before I begin my speech, I would like to take a moment to say how surprised I am at the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent's remarks.

His remarks were germane to the debate at second reading stage. The bill has since been amended, clearing up the issues he raised in his speech. I am somewhat surprised, as he is usually so thorough and never cuts corners when studying legislation. To my great surprise, he seems to have failed to understand the nature of the proposed amendments.

Allow me to recap so that everyone understands this bill's history. When it was first introduced, it sought to give preferential treatment to wood and to prioritize its use in federal buildings. It was then referred to a committee, where experts appeared to explain in simple terms that wood did not need preferential treatment and that there was no need to prioritize it over other materials. The problem is that the use of wood is often not even considered. The industry has often said that it does not need preferential treatment and that all it wants is to make sure builders consider wood. The bill was amended accordingly.

For example, architecture students are not even taught that they can use wood or they are given only a few hours of instruction on the subject over the course of the entire program. That is why people do not often think to use wood. We do not even get to where we can consider its potential benefits.

As amended, the legislation will ensure that people know to ask. When building a structure, they will consider the building materials available to them and weigh the environmental benefits of using non traditional materials. If they see that there is a significant advantage to using wood, they may decide to do so.

There is, in fact, no preferential treatment. The market will still be free. Every industry can promote the advantages of its own materials. The wood industry is simply asking us to consider using wood. It is confident that it can convince people to use wood without getting preferential treatment because it knows that its products have a lot to offer in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and carbon capture, on top of having a positive impact on the Canadian construction industry.

We therefore went from a preferential approach, in the first incarnation of the bill, to a comparative approach, whereby markets remain free. No one is being forced. The bill simply states that any potential repercussions on the environment will be considered and taken into account. That is the main difference between the original bill and where we are now. If we only look at what wood has to offer, all its benefits become clear.

I have seen a concrete example of this in my riding. For the longest time, the Long Point First Nation community did not have a school. It was very sad. The children had been attending a school in the next town that was shut down by the school board. The school was in really bad shape. It even had mould. The kids spent years in a makeshift classroom in a gymnasium with no windows. This had serious repercussions on the kids' morale.

The town finally got a new school designed by an architect who had a really incredible vision. The school is in the shape of a beehive. There are hexagons in every part of the school, and it is built entirely out of wood. It is extraordinary. The children are now in a learning environment that motivates them. The atmosphere is completely different. This clearly shows how it is possible to build beautiful buildings out of wood.

It is a really long drive, since the town is quite far away, but if anyone has a chance to come and see the school some day, they will see how amazing it is. It is a perfect example of just how effectively wood can be used.

I think everyone can appreciate a bill like the one my colleague introduced, especially in its current form, with the Liberals' amendment. I know that they worked with my colleague in committee to get everyone to agree on the amendment so that the bill would be acceptable to everyone. In its current form, it is an excellent bill that meets the reasonable demands and needs of the industry. It can have a significant impact on the forestry industry and on the environment, since the use of wood has environmental benefits. Buildings are not built to be destroyed, but when they must be destroyed, those built out of wood have a much smaller environmental impact. Furthermore, they have a lesser impact on the local community and on the surrounding wildlife.

I think that the use of wood is a forward-looking solution. Large buildings can be built quickly and at a lower cost. Wood-construction technologies have evolved quite a bit. What was unthinkable before is now easily achievable. Changes have made it possible to build wood structures that are more than six storeys. Some buildings in my riding were built with a lot of wood, which gives the projects a unique touch. We can be proud of raising awareness of the use of wood in building construction.

The forestry industry has been mismanaged in recent years. In the last Parliament, I moved a motion on a national forestry strategy, and I moved it again during this Parliament because it is still current. Although my colleague's measure is extremely important, if we really want to support the forestry industry, we have to develop several strategies, and the federal, provincial, and municipal governments, along with the industry and the indigenous communities, will have to sit down together.

Together we can come up with all sorts of solutions to find the way forward for our forestry industry, which has a lot to offer. The problem is that we tend to overlook all that it can bring to the Canadian economy, not to mention the various products we use. Sometimes we end up missing out because we failed to consider a particularly interesting option that did not necessarily require preferential treatment to be successful. Sometimes a simple idea can spark the best solution. If no one tell us to determine the viability of a solution, it remains an unexplored idea and we are no further ahead.

I hope that hon. members will consider my colleague's bill. I also hope that the Conservative members will take the time to read the amendment in order to fully understand its scope, since it changes the bill considerably. I also think that it is time for the Conservatives to adapt their speech to the new version.

Lastly, I had the chance to meet the forest committee of the Union des municipalités du Québec. The committee members have a lot of concerns about the forestry sector and I think they deserve to get more support. It is a multi-pronged challenge, especially when it comes to the skills shortage. We have to do better when it comes to the forestry. I invite my colleagues to vote in favour of my colleague's bill.

[Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, April 25th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, a few years ago, I had a motion to have a national strategy on forestry. Does my colleague think that having a national strategy on forestry could help in completing this bill and bring another focus that could not be included, which would help the forest industry which is currently having a hard time?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, April 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the government could have proposed all kinds of measures to help people who are struggling to make ends meet. I introduced a private member's bill featuring a budget measure that had the support of some Conservative members. It sought to eliminate the GST on basic baby products. This is a simple measure that can really help parents who simply need to buy these products. All parents buy things like diapers. This measure would have been easy to include in the budget, but sadly, the Liberals did not. I know that this measure has the support of some Conservative members. It is a very simple measure that the Liberals could have implemented to help low-income Canadians. They did not. This shows that the Liberals have their own vision and are not thinking about the daily reality facing people who are struggling to meet their family's basic needs when shopping at the grocery store, for example.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, April 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, if the Liberals ever decided to eliminate all of the loopholes CEOs use to hide money in tax havens, we would probably have enough money to do some much more useful things for rural regions. It would be dishonest to state that not a single positive measure can be found in these 566 pages. However, on average, I believe that the bad outweighs the good in this 566-page budget. When the time comes to vote on a 566-page budget, we have to find a balance. Unfortunately, the Liberals do not deserve my vote on this budget, because there are not enough measures for people in rural areas. Out of respect for my rural constituents, I cannot support a budget that does not do enough for them.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, April 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, obviously, there are many, many things to say about the budget, considering the record number of pages, 566 to be exact, and the fact that it amends 44 laws. It would be exhausting, but I could probably talk about it for three days. Unfortunately, I do not have three days to analyze the budget. Thus, I will concentrate on issues specific to rural areas because it is very important to understand what this budget means for people living there.

Our rural communities face many issues on a daily basis. Unfortunately, the government never has any solutions for them, and sometimes there is a real lack of understanding. For example, the labour shortage is a huge problem in rural areas. There is a shortage of not just skilled workers but also of unskilled workers. What this means is that we cannot find people to work in fast food chains, scrub the floors, all the basic tasks that require no specialized skills. People could fill these jobs quickly. Companies have closed their doors because they were unable to continue operations for lack of workers. Some companies have had to cut their hours. Companies operating as a franchise are threatened by their head office because they are unable to meet their contractual obligations due to a lack of workers. In the meantime, many migrants have crossed the border. Many people in my region are wondering if these people could be of some help to them. They have jobs for everyone who is prepared to work and no special skills are required.

Furthermore, housing prices are lower in Abitibi—Témiscamingue. There are some cities where housing prices have risen significantly, but a house in Rouyn-Noranda still costs three times less than a house in Toronto. Why can the government not inform immigrants who come here wanting to work, and whose unemployment rate is typically much lower than in the general population, that rural regions offer not only job opportunities, but a chance to build a new life?

There is no shortage of immigrant success stories to draw from. We have only to think of the late Ulrick Chérubin, who was born in Haiti and served as mayor of Amos for 17 years. He made an immeasurable contribution to Abitibi—Témiscamingue and made quite an impact on the community as Quebec's first black mayor. He was widely known as a staunch champion of the regions. There are many more examples of immigrants successfully integrating into the Abitibi—Témiscamingue region. They made the choice to not just live in Abitibi—Témiscamingue, but to become a part of the community. However, it is apparently impossible for the government to let new immigrants know that there are opportunities waiting for them in rural regions. The jobs available would be entry-level jobs, but filling them would have an impact on the economy and help us keep local businesses open. However, the government is not lifting a finger to help.

I touched on housing. Abitibi—Témiscamingue has been grappling with a housing shortage for a decade or so. Businesses are thinking about leaving because they cannot find housing for potential future workers. Instead of finding places for people to live locally, they end up in fly-in, fly-out situations. It is absolutely ridiculous. If the government builds social housing units, that will free up housing that is not at all affordable for people who have to pay rent they really cannot afford. If people have access to social housing, that will free up housing for people who can pay. I think that is important. Many other rural regions have housing shortages, but the government does not seem to understand. Every time they announce social housing programs, they talk about having to build 48-unit buildings. How about offering the people of Abitibi—Témiscamingue projects that actually meet their needs?

Can we get projects whose administrative demands are realistic given the size of our population? I think that would be entirely appropriate.

With regard to fly-in, fly-out systems, have my colleagues ever seen the price of airline tickets in Abitibi—Témiscamingue? It would almost be easier to book a flight from Rouyn-Noranda to Paris, then forget about Paris and get off in Montreal. It is cheaper to do that than to fly from Rouyn-Noranda to Montreal. It is completely ridiculous. What is more, in many regions of Quebec, there is a monopoly, unlike in Ontario where there are often at least two competing companies. That has a major impact. If I drive 45 minutes more to Timmins, Ontario, it generally costs $400 to $500 less for a return flight to the same destination than it does if I depart from Rouyn-Noranda. It takes me an hour and fifteen minutes to drive to Rouyn-Noranda and two hours and fifteen minutes to drive to Timmins. It is completely ridiculous.

This has a major impact on the economy because many workers use regional airports. Employees and executives often need to travel quickly from one place to another. Companies cannot send them by road because it takes three days, one day for the meeting and two days of driving, not to mention two nights accommodations, whereas, if they fly, employees can go and come back in the same day. Air transport is used extensively by companies, but if they have to pay ridiculously high prices, then they will be forced to move because that is not good for business.

There are some people that fight every day to stay in Abitibi—Témiscamingue, even if it would be much easier to leave. Take for example, Steve Jolin, also known as Anodajay, who owns Disques 7ième Ciel and does great work in support of Quebec's rap and hip-hop scene. It would be much easier for him to move to Montreal and manage his business from there, but he chooses to remain in the region. If there are no concrete measures to help our entrepreneurs to continue to work from the regions, very little progress will be made. This sort of thing directly impacts the economy.

One of the major problems is the infamous cell phone. I do not know how many times I have asked the minister about it. Every time I ask questions about half of our region being without cellphone service, even on major highways with a lot of traffic, the response I get is about the Internet. Those folks over there do not even know the difference between Internet and cellular service, or perhaps they simply cannot understand that there are places with no cellphone coverage. I would venture to say that the places in Abitibi—Témiscamingue where cellphones do not work outnumber those where they do. I think it is high time that the members opposite understood that without cellphones, it is very difficult for regional economies to work. It is very difficult for businesses, and a lot of time is wasted. Imagine if you had to go to a meeting and, in the end, after driving an hour to get there, you find out that the meeting is cancelled and you have to turn right around and go back home. You will have wasted two hours of your day, driving for nothing. Meanwhile, if you had a cellphone that worked all along the route, you would have gotten the message that your meeting had been cancelled and not to drive all the way there for nothing. It is as simple as that, but unfortunately, they just do not get it.

Another thing is the mineral exploration tax credit. For years, we have been pleading with the Conservatives and now the Liberals to make it permanent instead of extending it year after year. Mining companies need to be able to plan their exploratory work over the long term. When metal prices are low, it is the perfect time to explore for deposits that they can mine once mineral prices go up. In order to do that, they need to be able to plan, but that is hard to do when they are never sure if the tax credit is going to come back. Furthermore, consultation-related expenses are not eligible for the tax credit. This means that consulting local populations, especially indigenous communities, to find out what they think about the possibility of exploration work and how they view the situation is not even considered part of the mineral exploration process. It is viewed as something that should be done, but unfortunately, an attitude like that toward consultation and mining work makes it all too clear that natural resource companies are not being encouraged to think about consultation and social acceptability.

Unfortunately, this budget does not meet the expectations of rural Canadians. I am extremely disappointed. I will now take questions.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, April 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, since my colleague represents the Brandon area, with its high population of military personnel and veterans, given its proximity to the military base, I would like to know whether he finds that the changes made to veterans' pensions in the Liberal budget are consistent with the promises the Liberals made in the election campaign or whether he thinks that the Liberals are incapable of keeping any of their promises in the budget they presented.