Kevin Lamoureux

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 6th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member based on the first five or so minutes of his speech, when he talked about the prorogation of Parliament.

It is interesting. We were supposed to come back on September 21. The member is right. Instead of coming back on September 21, we came back on September 23. It was two days. For the first time in 30 plus years, we sat in the summer, with the opposition asking questions of the government, literally hundreds if not thousands of questions, and understandably so.

Why does the member believe that it was wrong for the Government of Canada to prorogue, yet the Province of Manitoba has done just that? It has prorogued. Was the Progressive Conservative premier wrong in Manitoba to have prorogued?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 6th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister and this government are very much interested in Canadians in all regions of the country. That is why we have developed these programs to support Canadians every day during this very difficult time of the pandemic.

I find it interesting that the member says we are not doing enough for oil development in the province of Alberta. The Bloc says that we are doing too much in the provinces like Alberta with respect to resource development. When I reflect, I think of the days when I was the opposition. When Stephen Harper was prime minister, the Conservatives did not build one inch of pipeline to take resources to coastal waters. It is important for people know this.

I wonder if my friend could provide his thoughts as to why Stephen Harper was such a failure—

[Questions on the Order Paper, October 6th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 5th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, it is always encouraging when MPs on both sides of the House are focused on the issue at hand, that being the pandemic, and coming up with ideas. I appreciate the fact that the NDP will be supporting the throne speech and the many fine initiatives within it. That is a very strong positive, and shows that even though we might disagree at times, we can come together in a time of need for Canadians.

We have introduced Bill C-4, which passed, that reinforced the importance of the CERB program being brought into EI and the wage subsidy program.

I wonder if the hon. member would provide some thoughts on that particular piece of legislation and how it complements the throne speech.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the throne speech, I have also listened to the leader of the Conservative party. I suggest that if we were to take both speeches and present them to a focus group, or any group of Canadians, I suspect we would find far more support for the government's throne speech, which provides all sorts of details as to what the government has been working on and goes well into the future, giving a greater sense of unity and Canadians coming together to make a difference in combatting COVID-19 and supporting the economy in all regions of our country.

I wonder if the member has actually read through the throne speech. If he has, would he not agree that there is far more detail and far more of a vision within that document than there was in the speech that was presented by the leader of the official opposition?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I take it the member did not listen to what the Minister of Finance said earlier today during question period. When we compare Canada to the United States, when we look at the number of people who ended up unemployed as a direct result of COVID-19, Canada was far more successful than the United States at getting those people re-employed as the economy started to open up. That clearly demonstrates, for example, that programs such as the wage subsidy and CERB have proven to be very successful at protecting jobs in Canada and providing the much-needed money necessary for disposal income for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

To me, everyone was able to win. Would he not agree with that assessment?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleague across the way would recognize that, when it comes to supply management, we have been a very strong advocate for it not only while we have been in government but also when we were in opposition. When we look at trade agreements, there is compensation there for supply management. We recognize the true value of supply management and we will continue to fight for its existence. In fact, it was the Liberal Party along with farmers that created the whole supply management system.

ln addition to that, we need to recognize how important that trade is. We have created and have seen new markets being created for farm products. In terms of the pork industry in the province of Manitoba, it is doing exceptionally well. There are a lot of limitations because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but generally speaking, the future for our agricultural communities is looking positive because of world demand and the protection of supply management. Would the member not agree?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I listened very closely to the government House leader and one of the reasons he answered the questions in the fashion he did was that there was a commitment from the Bloc party that had more focus on elections than it did on serving the people of Canada, in whatever region. It is unfortunate.

I am very much familiar with the history of health care and the funding thereof. I was a provincial MLA during the 1990s. The member referenced cuts, and there was a cut, but there was also a tax point transfer that was agreed upon in the early 1990s, which would have seen an even smaller percentage of federal dollars going to provincial coffers. It was Jean Chrétien who established back in the early 1990s the ongoing commitment of cash going to the provinces, and every year it has increased.

Today it seems the member opposite is saying all the Bloc wants is cash, yet the constituents I represent and, I would argue, constituents across this country want the federal government to play a role in health care. Why would he deny them that?

[Questions on the Order Paper, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Petitions, October 5th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I table a petition signed by many residents of Winnipeg North. They are calling on the government to look at ways that the OAS could be supported by looking at seniors who need the additional support.