Damien Kurek

[Privilege, December 4th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, not very often will I defend the NDP whatsoever, but I find it interesting that the NDP would be opposed to an example that gets to the very heart of what we are discussing. In that case, it was the physical—

[Privilege, December 4th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, it is troubling that we are forced to have this discussion in this place. I will reference another privilege discussion that I observed a number of years ago under a previous Speaker, under a previous government. The reason I reference it will become very apparent shortly.

It happened to be an NDP member at the time, who was on the opposition bench in the official opposition under former prime minister Stephen Harper and the then Conservative government. There was a discussion about the privileges of a member being violated because the security guards did not allow ease of access to the chamber in the old Centre Block, which, of course, is a little different circumstance than now. An extended discussion took place about the particular NDP member's ability to access the House of Commons and that in the likelihood that ability was hindered in any way, it would have been a violation of the member's privilege, a privilege that is guarded so dearly.

Most people watching would hear of the idea of a question of privilege and probably have many questions about what the big deal is. When it comes to the privileges we have in this place, they are so carefully guarded, because that is the mechanism for which we are able to represent the people who send us here to perform our sacred duties.

When it comes to the discussion that took place on that question of privilege on the few moments that an NDP member was unable to enter this place in a timely manner, which could have led to her not being able to perform her duties, there is a direct correlation to the discussion we are having here today because—

[Privilege, December 4th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, it is incredibly disappointing that other parties would suggest a Speaker's history, the understanding of the rules of this place and the essential elements that allow us to do our jobs—

[Points of Order, November 30th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, it is simply to say that the point the Leader of the Opposition was making was exactly in support of first nations, who have pointed out, in summary, that the carbon tax has a disproportionate effect on first nations. It is shameful that other parties in this place would refuse to acknowledge that same fact and would try to play games as opposed to acknowledging that first nations want the tax axed.

[Points of Order, November 30th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, it is really unfortunate that the member, while condemning Conservatives, refused to condemn the minister who used the exact same word in her reply.

I would quote from a statement released by the Chiefs of Ontario representing 133 indigenous communities. It states that, “Chiefs of Ontario and Attawapiskat First Nation have filed a judicial review”—

[Committees of the House, November 30th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, the speech of my colleague from Calgary speaks to some of the radical shifts that are taking place in the technological landscape in our country and our world. If a government is not willing to be responsive to that, it puts not only our country at an economic disadvantage, but also at a security disadvantage.

I wonder if my colleague could speak further about some of the challenges. If we are not responsive to the issues surrounding specifically AI, that puts our nation at a significant disadvantage. Right now, we are already lagging behind and if the government is unwilling to be responsive, we will simply lag further behind.

[Committees of the House, November 30th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote.

[National Framework for a School Food Program Act, November 29th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to stand in this place to debate the issues that are so important to Canadians.

Since we are talking about an issue that deals with education, and I will get to the substance of the bill in a moment, I want to give a shout-out to a young lady from B.C. whose name is Abigail. I had a chance to have a visit with her in the hallway prior to coming into this debate, and she informed me that she plans to be Canada's second female prime minister. I send a big shout-out to Abigail, a very bright young lady in elementary school. It just speaks to the incredible potential that exists across this country in our young people.

We are talking about one of the fundamental issues our country is facing, which is the affordability of food. There are three things I hope to be able to address in the short time I have here before us. The first is that, when it comes to the idea of a school lunch program, the idea of this sort of thing sounds great. However, as with many things that get talked about in the nation's capital, studies, reports and frameworks in this case do not feed kids.

I will start by emphasizing something because our country needs real action to ensure we can address the affordability crisis so many are facing. It is leading to kids going to school hungry and families making difficult decisions about whether to pay for rent, home heating or groceries. The first point I would like to make in this debate tonight is that food has become unaffordable for so many in our country, and it should not be that way.

Let me emphasize how fundamentally advantaged Canada is when it comes to being a producer of high-quality food products. We have the space, the capacity, the expertise and the experience to produce the world-class, quality food people need not only here in our own country but also around the world. Certainly it is a travesty that we are seeing approximately two million visits to food banks per month in our country when we have been blessed with such incredible capacity here at home. It is truly a tragedy.

We see the underlying causes of that. The fact that we have to talk about some of the issues surrounding kids going to school hungry is absolutely tragic. However, we have before us a very simple step in the right direction. It is a bill, currently sitting in the Senate, that would address some of the challenges, and it is the common-sense Conservative bill, Bill C-234, which would remove the carbon tax on all types of farm fuels and home heating. It would allow for the price of food to be brought down in our country. It would ultimately help families, our people from coast to coast to coast, because of course our north is deeply affected by the price of food, yet the bill is unfortunately being stalled.

We have to ensure that folks are able to have prosperous jobs, so we can address some of the challenges we are talking about. It has been raised several times in the debate tonight, and it is fundamentally important. In the short time I have, I will get into some of the jurisdictional challenges momentarily, but we have to acknowledge how important it is to ensure our society functions well, for civil society begins to deteriorate when people cannot afford food. The actions of left-leaning ideologies are directly forcing prices in this country to rise, and that is truly a travesty.

As a fifth-generation farmer of on my family's farm in Alberta's special areas, I was discouraged today by the fact that the Prime Minister did not offer support for farmers but said he will meet with them to tell them how they should or should not do their business. Truly, it is that attitude that farmers do not need. Left-leaning ideologies need to get out of the way to let farmers grow crops and raise livestock to ensure we have that high-quality food.

The second point I will make in the short time I have is that this bill is actually an admission of Liberal failure. In two of their election platforms, I believe in 2015 and 2021, the Liberals promised to have a national lunch program, yet they were unable to fulfill that. This is an admission of that failure. I would—

[Canada Labour Code, November 27th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, on the same point of order, I know one of the issues for some of my colleagues on this, and in light of the discussion that was had after question period today, is that, when it comes to the conduct and speech of members, there needs to be an equal application of the rules across party lines.

The accusations the government House leader made during question period certainly call into question whether or not those rules are being fairly applied. Therefore, when it comes to decorum in the House, it is absolutely incumbent upon all members. Certainly for my part, I will always be happy to defend the things I say and endeavour to speak the truth.

[Canada Labour Code, November 27th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the speech my colleague from Alberta gave. I would ask him to reflect on how it seems like the NDP has highlighted a number of challenges it sees with this bill, although it plans to support it. We recently saw media reports that, if the Liberals do not get pharmacare done this year, it is willing to amend their confidence and supply coalition agreement.

I wonder if my colleague from St. Albert—Edmonton would have any reflections on whether the NDP has any integrity left in standing up for the principles that it supposedly ran on in the last election. It certainly seems to me as though NDP members are nothing more than sellouts.