Joël Godin

[Laurentian University in Sudbury, April 14th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, with whom I have the privilege of serving on the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

I will provide her with some information. From 2009 to 2015, investments did not increase. From 2015 to 2021, there were no investments in institutions.

My colleague attended yesterday's committee meeting. Representatives from Campus Saint-Jean pointed out that there were no increases during that whole time.

I invite my colleague to do the math with me. From 2009 to 2015 is six years. From 2015 to 2021 is also six years. We cannot change the past, but we can change the future. What we do know is that if the Liberal government remains in power, the French fact will be in trouble.

[Laurentian University in Sudbury, April 14th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, it is important to be able to see what is happening in the institutions. In the preamble, there are indicators that call on us to react, observe and demand accountability. It is not interference. It is about holding those in charge accountable.

On the other hand, we have a responsibility to ensure that everything is going well. In this case, we could see this problem coming a mile off. Let me be clear: We are going to see more problems at other post-secondary institutions. We have to put mechanisms in place to protect our institutions and, most importantly, to protect the French fact.

[Laurentian University in Sudbury, April 14th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for granting the NDP's request for an emergency debate.

I think tonight's debate transcends partisanship. As parliamentarians, we have to think about this situation. I listened to the member for Sudbury and sensed a lot of emotion in his speech. This is happening right in his backyard, in his community. As he mentioned, he represents the people of Sudbury. His friends and family members who study or work at Laurentian University do not know what will happen to them.

I thank the Speaker for granting the request by the member from the other opposition party. It is very commendable, and I wanted to highlight that.

My thoughts go out to the member for Sudbury. I was sad to hear during his speech that he will not be running in the next election. I had the chance to work with him on a number of files. I appreciate him greatly. It is unfortunate that we may never run into each other in person again. If he is listening, I send him and his wife my regards.

I want to talk about the importance of emergency debates and their criteria. House of Commons Standing Order 52 states the following regarding requests for leave:

(1) Leave to make a motion for the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration must be asked for after the ordinary daily routine of business as set out in sections (3) and (4) of Standing Order 30 is concluded.

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to belabour the point, but I thank you once again for granting the request for tonight's debate.

I am saddened to see the people of that region having to face a loss and reduction in services in addition to the pandemic. The pillars of the French fact in northern Ontario have been shaken. It is sad because these people should not have to face this on top of a pandemic. I think we have to be aware of that and work together to find solutions.

This is what happens when a government has had no vision for more than five years. The Minister of Official Languages has been in office since 2015. I respect the minister. In fact, I told her so yesterday at the Standing Committee on Official Languages. The fact remains that she is not taking action. She is holding consultations. Earlier, her colleague said the minister was promoting the French fact and the two official languages and that she was very present. However, she is always in reaction mode. The government seems to wait until the house is on fire before taking action.

Recently, in December, a white paper on official languages was proposed to us, but it is just another case of postponing decisions and having to hold more consultations to make sure that whatever is put in place some day will be effective. However, that day might be too late, and new consultations will need to be launched. It is important to act. That white paper is no solution.

I met with people from the Canadian Association of University Teachers, or CAUT. They were speaking out against the insolvency situation that started on February 1. This is the first time a Canadian public university has become insolvent. I heard the comments from the CAUT representatives. They are urging the federal government to work with the Province of Ontario to provide the funding that Laurentian University needs and to help bilingual and francophone post-secondary institutions. Given the vital role that these post-secondary institutions play in meeting Canada's current and future challenges, they recommend that the federal government develop a national strategy with the territories and provinces, in order to provide sufficient stable funding to promote high-quality post-secondary education.

I met with these people on February 17. They filed for bankruptcy protection on February 1. Today is April 14. The Minister of Official Languages may have a plan, and Monday's budget may contain some solutions. However, these people filed for bankruptcy protection on February 1. As a member of Parliament, I met with faculty representatives on February 17. There was no reaction until Monday, April 12. As I said before, the government is waiting for the house to catch fire before it reacts.

Mr. Speaker, last fall, we requested an emergency debate on the decline of the French fact in Quebec, especially in Montreal. We are here tonight to discuss Laurentian University, which is in financial straits. What does tomorrow hold?

I have the privilege of sitting on the Standing Committee on Official Languages. Yesterday, the committee heard from the minister and other stakeholders. The stakeholders mentioned that we could not wait for the Official Languages Act to be updated. If Laurentian University is in trouble today, other Canadian universities will also have problems in the future, be it tomorrow or the next day.

Does the government want to turn its back on post-secondary institutions that teach linguistic minorities? If so, it had better tell us. It is not taking action, and that does not sit well with me. I have to talk about what the Conservative Party of Canada has done. I am not trying to be opportunistic. As soon as our new leader was appointed, we presented a clear plan. In the first 100 days of a Conservative government, we will invest the money to sustain our institutions, defend the French fact and protect official language minority communities.

Today, we have to come together because the problem is bigger than the 28 programs that were cut. It is a society-wide problem. As long as Canada has two official languages, and as long as the people of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier place their trust in me, I will rise in the House to defend the French fact. We have to roll up our sleeves and find solutions that give Canadian citizens access to education in French.

Our professors and our students have been wronged. Down the line, that will either stifle our French language or ignite it.

In closing, I would like to read a brief excerpt from the preamble to the Official Languages Act:

...to respect the constitutional guarantees of minority language educational rights and to enhance opportunities for all to learn both English and French;

That is what the preamble to the Official Languages Act says, so I think the minister needs to act immediately.

[Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2020, April 14th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley for his question.

Yes, we are asking that Bill C-14 be split in two. We agree with offering help to Canadians, but we do not agree with writing a blank cheque. At the beginning of the pandemic—

[Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2020, April 14th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from London—Fanshawe.

The opposition is made up of three different parties, and we have just identified three groups of Canadians that the government is neither serving nor helping. Other members mentioned students and farmers, and I talked about young business owners who are non-arm's length tenants.

This is a great opportunity for the current government to take meaningful action to honour its commitment to these groups, who are not receiving the help the Prime Minister said they would.

[Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2020, April 14th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Shefford.

As I mentioned earlier, the government is always going around boasting that they help everybody: young people, seniors, businesses, families, farmers. They say, “No problem, we help everybody.”

That is simply not true, and there are concrete examples. I invite my colleague to contact the Minister of Finance so that we can work together to convince the government. Our role as members of the opposition is to make sure the government comes up with solutions and honours its commitments.

[Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2020, April 14th, 2021]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my esteemed colleague, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader. I will take the time he has used in his question.

Can he tell us what is going to happen in the future? The answer is very simple. No, he cannot. The current government continues to make promises and not keep them, as usual.

I would like my colleague to withdraw his comment because what I said is based on actual fact. Only 2% of Canadians have received both doses of the vaccine. As of yesterday, 11% of the population in Great Britain had received both doses, and that figure was 25% in the United States.

I invite my colleague to withdraw his comment.

[Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2020, April 14th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I will take the opportunity to speak directly to the Canadian public.

The last few months have been a unique time for us all. We are in a pandemic. In the last few days, the situation seems to have become more fraught, and some citizens have been protesting. Here in Canada, the right to protest is a legitimate right, and when a protest is held in a civilized manner, it is respectable. I urge the people who are protesting by causing mayhem, destroying public property, and attacking businesses and restaurants that are really having a hard time and are not responsible for the present situation, to protest in a civil fashion. I would like to ask the Canadian public to follow public health guidelines, not to give up and not to let their guard down. The vaccines are coming. Unfortunately, in Canada, they are very slow in coming, but they are coming. I am asking the Canadian public not to let their guard down, but to keep their spirits up for a few more weeks. Hopefully, it will only be weeks, and not months. As I said, in Canada, the vaccines are slow in coming, but they are coming. I think it is important to point that out.

The current government eagerly dangled the first vaccines in front of Canadians in December in an attempt to dazzle us. To evaluate the government's strategy, we need look no further than our plummeting global ranking. In December, with a few hundred thousand vaccines, we were ranked first or second. After that, it was radio silence. Sure, Canadians got a nice Christmas gift, but then we dropped to second, and now our ranking is plummeting. It was all smoke and mirrors, and we cannot forget that.

We need to look at how we have dropped in the global rankings. It is rather shameful for us, as Canadians, to be in this position. Canada is used to being a leader, but the current government is not showing much leadership here. Canada looks pretty pathetic with just 2% of Canadians having received both doses. By comparison, Great Britain ranks five spots ahead us, with 11% of its citizens having received both doses. Worse yet, 25% of our neighbours in the United States have gotten both vaccinations, which is 12 times our rate. Our Prime Minister says that he has a good strategy, but we must have different definitions of “good”.

What is the Prime Minister's plan to remedy the situation and protect Canadians? I do not know. I do not want to hear that this is because Canada does not manufacture vaccines. That is just an excuse. Look at Chile. It found ways to get vaccines. Chile has one of the highest vaccination rates after Israel and the United Arab Emirates.

Today, I am participating in the discussion on Bill C-14, an act to implement certain provisions of the economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 30, 2020 and other measures. This bill establishes the spending power set out in the fall economic statement, amends the Income Tax Act to top up the Canada child benefit, closes the loophole in the second version of the Liberals' legislation on commercial rent assistance, amends the Canada student grants and loans program and the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act to waive interest on student loans by 2021, amends the Food and Drugs Act to deal with shortages of therapeutic products, and amends the Borrowing Authority Act and the Financial Administration Act to increase the federal government's borrowing limits.

I want to focus on two things. The bill closes the loophole in the second version of the Liberals' legislation on commercial rent assistance, referring to the Canada emergency rent subsidy or CERS.

This is what the government says about the Canada emergency rent subsidy:

Canadian businesses, non-profit organizations, or charities who have seen a drop in revenue during the COVID-19 pandemic may be eligible for a subsidy to cover part of their commercial rent or property expenses, starting on September 27, 2020, until June 2021. This subsidy will provide payments directly to qualifying renters and property owners, without requiring the participation of landlords. If you are eligible for the base subsidy, you may also be eligible for lockdown support if your business location is significantly affected by a public health order for a week or more.

We know that businesses create jobs and bring in revenue for the federal government. They pay taxes and create wealth.

This program has its share of shortcomings. I said as much to the Minister of Finance and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance. They both told me that they would resolve the problem. They have a prime opportunity to modify the program.

The program is there to help. In the spring, it was geared to landlords. Renters whose businesses were closed, who were victims, could get a subsidy: 25% from the federal government, 25% from the provincial government, 25% from the landlord and 25% from the renter.

I will give one example among many from my riding. I want to speak for all Canadian businesses that are victims of this rule, and I urge the government to rectify the situation.

The business that owned the closed property qualified for the subsidy. Now, even though the circumstances are the same and the business is the same, only the renter can apply for the CERS, not the property owner. In the example I am talking about, the renter is the son of one of the shareholders in the company that owns the building. Because his father is a shareholder, he is not entitled to the subsidy.

Everywhere we turn, we hear that the current Prime Minister's Liberal government is there to help all Canadians: seniors, youth, families and businesses. I just want to help the government get back on track.

This spring, there was a clause in the program concerning non-arm’s length relationships stating that, if a property owner has a non-arm’s length relationship with an otherwise eligible tenant, then the lease must be on fair market terms, the total gross rent payable under the lease cannot be higher than fair market rent, and the lease must not have been created or amended after April 1, 2020.

This clause is clear. It is in writing. We should use it. All we have to do is cut and paste to apply it to the new program of last September.

Do we really want to help businesses? The government has a strange way of showing it. However, it now has the opportunity to get back on track and fix the situation. If it does not do so in this bill, I hope it will do it in its budget next week. We are talking about young entrepreneurs who got help from their parents in the past and who need help today to grow their businesses. We all know that people need more help at the start of their careers than at the end.

Since we are short on time, I will proceed to the next point. The government is asking for a blank cheque. We have seen how the government controls spending: it does not, and it has no plan. We in the official opposition are prepared to take the necessary measures to help the government help honest Canadians. However, we do not want to give it a blank cheque.

We asked the government to split the bill, but so far it has not agreed to our request. I would ask the government to be reasonable and to find solutions to help our young entrepreneurs.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, April 12th, 2021]

With regard to the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy (CERS) and the Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance (CECRA) program: (a) how many businesses and organizations qualified for CECRA but were not eligible for CERS due to restrictions on groups under the CERS program; (b) why did the government decide to exclude businesses receiving CECRA from the CERS program; (c) did the government take into account whether or not organizations are considered completely separate for tax purposes when determining eligibility, and, if not, why not; (d) was this decision intentional, or to what extent did the government forget it or make a mistake, and, if so, will the government change the qualification criteria; and (e) is there an appeal mechanism or recourse for businesses or organizations that were denied CERS, and, if so, what are the details?

[COVID-19 Emergency Response, March 25th, 2021]

Mr. Speaker, on February 16, I asked the Minister of Finance a question. A business in my riding is having problems with the commercial rent assistance program because they are non-arm's-length tenants. The minister told me that she wanted to help all businesses who needed this support. Several businesses need this assistance in order to avoid declaring bankruptcy. A month and a half later, we still do not have anything for small and medium-sized businesses.

Will the minister fix the program and show some respect for our businesses on the brink?