Don Davies

[Tax Break for All Canadians Act, November 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I have a simple question for my colleague. How is helping struggling Quebeckers by sending them several hundred dollars at a very expensive time during the holiday season bad for Quebeckers or for Quebec?

[Tax Break for All Canadians Act, November 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, calling parliamentarians “clowns” in this place is unparliamentary, and it is unbecoming of him. I would ask him to withdraw that comment immediately.

[Tax Break for All Canadians Act, November 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I remember when the Conservatives were for tax cuts, but maybe it is because it is the Conservatives who brought in the GST that makes them so sensitive to cutting it.

It is funny, my hon. colleague talked about pennies for cheese puffs, and he called it chump change. However, this is what the proposed GST cut will be on: children's clothing, footwear and diapers; children's car seats; food and beverages and groceries; restaurants; children's toys; and print newspapers and printed books. It is estimated that the average family will spend $2,000 on qualified goods, and if they live in Ontario or Atlantic Canada where the HST will also be removed, they will save about $360 over the two-month period.

Does my colleague say that saving people $360 is chump change? Is that what he is telling families, that $360 means so little that it is chump change to him—

[U.S. Tariffs on Canadian Products, November 26th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, Mr. Trump is apparently justifying this ridiculous assertion that Canada deserves 25% tariffs by talking about the border and also talking about Canada not hitting its defence targets. Last I checked, Canada determines, here in this chamber, and in this country, what our military spending is. It is not dictated by a foreign government.

I have a twofold question. The other thing I will mention first is that it is up to the Americans to control their border. If something is coming from Canada into the United States, that is a failure of the Americans to protect their border, not Canada.

My question for my hon. colleague is this: If we were to increase our military spending to 2% or even 3%, as certain Canadian business groups are calling for, how would he pay for it? How many billions of dollars would that mean to the Canadian budget? How would we pay for it? Does he not agree with me that it is up to the American government to protect its own borders? That is not our responsibility.

[U.S. Tariffs on Canadian Products, November 26th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, obviously, Canada and the United States have a long, mutually beneficial and important relationship, but it is very important to note that President-elect Trump has the right to make economic policy in the United States; he does not have the right to make economic policy in Canada. If he is going to pursue unfair policies like slapping a 25% tariff on probably his closest and most loyal ally and friend, Canada needs to respond accordingly.

All members will recall that during COVID, this country could not produce a domestic vaccine and had to rely on imports from China to supply health care workers with masks and gowns. We have become dangerously reliant on other countries, and this tariff situation provides an opportunity for Canada to become more self-reliant. Canada should offer incentives to Canadian businesses that create and repatriate jobs here, just as the Americans are doing in the United States, so we can build a strong, resilient Canadian economy.

Does my friend agree that this might be an opportunity for us to become stronger by creating global champions, Canadian champions, in Canada and by diversifying our trade to Europe and Asia? I ask because it is dangerous to rely on only one customer, as every business person ought to know.

[U.S. Tariffs on Canadian Products, November 26th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I took the opportunity to review the CUSMA, which is the current trade agreement that was signed by the United States, Canada and Mexico on July 1, 2020. It says that CUSMA will expire in 2036 unless it is extended before that, and the parties agreed to review the treaty every six years. This means the first review of this treaty would come up in 2026, meaning that what the President-elect of the United States has really done is threaten to abrogate and to tear up a trade agreement that was signed in good faith by all three parties.

I am wondering if my hon. colleague has any thoughts on that and what it does for a country like the United States, which claims to believe in an international rules-based order, in the World Trade Organization and in orderly managed trade. What does it say to him when the President-elect of the United States says that he would rip up an agreement signed in good faith, in violation of the terms of that agreement?

[Taxation, November 21st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians need relief. While CEOs are raking in billions of dollars in profits, families are getting gouged on things like their heating and cellphone bills, and at the grocery store.

The NDP has called on the Liberals to remove the GST on life's essentials to give Canadians a break. Instead the government responded with a partial version of what the NDP proposed. Liberals let people down and Conservatives want cuts.

Why will the Liberals not give Canadians a real break by permanently removing the GST on life's essentials?

[Privilege, November 20th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague gave a thoughtful speech. She talked a lot about “the foe”, and I am not sure from where, in her view, the foe emanates, but I want to focus and get her opinion on the foe from within. In this country, we have routinely seen the turnout for federal elections at about 60%. That seems to be the norm over successive elections. That means, and pardon my bad math, about half of Canadians do not even think their democracy is important enough to cast a ballot every four years or so.

I am wondering what she thinks is the cause of that. My own view is that it happens when there are successive political parties that promise things and then betray their promises, like when the Liberals broke their promise that 2015 would be the last election under first past the post and their promise that they would bring in a universal pharmacare system 25 years ago. When they tell Canadians they will do that sort of thing and then get in government and do not, does she feel that has a corrosive impact on our democracy and drives people away from the democratic process? Is that a legitimate foe she thinks ought to be addressed?

[Privilege, November 20th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, it is a valid concern. I have read about the same concerns from police forces. It is unusual, in fact I think unprecedented, for Parliament to order documents to be delivered directly to a police force.

Having said that, I am not sure it is illegal and I am not even sure it is necessarily impossible to do. Our police forces and the RCMP are used to executing subpoenas. They are used to getting documents. They will work with the Crown to see what the documents can and cannot be used for, subject to constitutional and charter rights. The police are used to dealing with that all the time, so I am not necessarily as convinced as my hon. colleague is that it cannot be done. It should be explored.

The real question the Liberals have to answer is what they are doing about the SDTC waste of millions and millions of dollars. I have not seen any ministerial accountability for that yet. A minister of the Crown was finally removed from cabinet today, but that is totally separate from the matter at hand. I have not seen any ministerial responsibility answerable to the taxpayers for the egregious waste of millions of taxpayer dollars through the Sustainable Development Technology fund, and that is something I would like to hear from my hon. colleague.

[Privilege, November 20th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, what a pleasure it is to work with my hon. colleague on the finance committee in a productive way. Tomorrow we are going to be voting on amendments to the upcoming budget. We will be taking all of the evidence and input that we heard from the stakeholders who came to the finance committee over the last two months and making suggestions to the government to make the Canadian economic climate better and to help the businesses we need to succeed.

To answer the member's question, it is really up to the Conservatives and the Liberals. The Conservatives have decided to grind the House to a halt for six weeks. In fact a Conservative MP publicly stated the other day that one of the side benefits is that the Conservatives have paralyzed the Liberals' attempt to bring any legislation forward. That is a real indictment of their true purpose, to make sure nothing happens. It is irresponsible, and the Liberals are irresponsible in not providing the documents that Parliament has a right to see.

As long as both main parties are putting their own partisan interests ahead of the interests of people, of Canadians, we are going to continue the logjam. It is a shame. The responsibility lies on them. They are going to have to answer to the Canadian people for wasting Parliament's time and not getting anything done for Canadians, when the New Democrats and I think the Bloc at least want to work together to get laws passed and get policies in place that will help Canadians.