Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet

[Canadian Bill of Rights, May 3rd, 2016]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-264, An Act to amend the Canadian Bill of Rights (right to housing).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River for seconding this bill. The bill would amend the Canadian Bill of Rights to include the right to proper housing for all at a reasonable cost and free of unreasonable barriers.

Having a roof over one's head is a basic necessity. People who live on the streets do not know where they will sleep that night, whether they will eat, or where to find shelter from the bitter cold. It is much harder for them to find work, and their lives are very precarious. This affects their physical and mental health.

In Canada, at least 235,000 people experience this every year. Canada has recognized the right to housing internationally. It must do so in its own federal laws as well.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Criminal Code, May 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, given that the member is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, does she have any more information she can give us regarding the funding that will be allocated to palliative care?

As she knows, no funding was allocated for that purpose in the latest budget, nor are there any new commitments set out in Bill C-14. Can she give us a little more information in that regard?

[Criminal Code, May 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, earlier an hon. member talked about respecting provincial jurisdictions.

Does the government know how it is going to ensure that the practice will not be too different from one end of the country to the other? In other words, how will it prevent fragmentation while respecting provincial jurisdiction?

[Air Canada, May 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, that was not a clear or specific answer.

This government shows no interest in supporting aerospace workers and their families. It would rather give Air Canada carte blanche with Bill C-10, which sacrifices the jobs and quality of life of 2,600 families. The government does not even have the courage to let us have an in-depth debate on this issue in Parliament.

Is the Prime Minister not ashamed of abandoning the workers like this, especially after he joined them in their protest?

[Air Canada, May 2nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, this weekend, the Prime Minister was proud to say that Quebec's voice is being heard in Ottawa. However, when it comes to assistance for Bombardier, the government has been feeding us the same old lines for months.

The Liberals did not present any kind of plan to support the aerospace industry during the election campaign, nor have they done so since taking office. We are talking about an industry that provides direct employment for 76,000 Canadians, and over half of those jobs are in Quebec.

Will the Prime Minister finally recognize how important this sector is to our economy and present a clear plan for the aerospace industry?

[Business of the House, April 21st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it you will find consent for the following motion:

That, at the conclusion of today's debate on the opposition motion in the name of the Member for Berthier—Maskinongé, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred until Tuesday, May 3, 2016, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

[Business of Supply, April 21st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals keep saying that it will take some time, that they need to examine the issue, and that they are taking the time to do it right. I think my colleague just proved that it does not need to take so long. In the meantime, many milk producers are losing a great deal of money, as much as $220 million a year. I did the math, and we are talking about three-quarters of a million dollars a day for dairy producers. A lot of people are being affected by this, particularly in my province, Quebec. In a unanimous vote, the National Assembly called on the federal government to do something about this immediately.

Does my colleague agree that we need to think more about the dairy farmers and less about politics right now?

[Housing, April 20th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I have some very specific questions about what the parliamentary secretary just said, and I would appreciate some specific answers.

He spoke about the national housing strategy. He talked about consultations. I would like to know whether there will be consultations, and we can ignore what people are telling us, or whether there will be a partnership. Will the decisions be made together? The groups want to know.

The groups also want to know the deadline for planning this strategy. Are we talking about six months, one year, or eight years?

The other question has to do with retrofitting. We hear about energy retrofitting, but is that the only kind? For example, if the elevators in the towers in Toronto need to be replaced, can that be included, even if it is not an energy issue?

[Housing, April 20th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, my first questions tie into my colleague's and will be about renewing social housing agreements. There could be negative outcomes for 365,000 social housing units. This is not just about the housing units; it is about the people who live in those homes: the men, women and children who could be in jeopardy if the agreements are not renewed. We are talking about a $1.7-billion budget.

Some dollar amounts were specified in the budget. The minister has talked about them too. For example, we have heard about $15 million per year for two years, but that is just for certain agreements that involve the federal government directly. Agreements handled by the provinces seem to be funded by the agreement on affordable housing, which is how the Conservatives did it in recent years. I think there are some problems with that and some things that need clarifying. That is why I am asking the parliamentary secretary for some clarification this evening.

For instance, the $15 million a year over two years is only a short-term measure. Two years is not very long. Unfortunately, this creates uncertainty and can have a negative effect. Let me explain. Consider the example of a co-operative that must choose between two renters but does not know whether, at the end of those two years, the rent subsidies will be renewed. If it has the choice between two tenants, one who can afford to pay the market price and the other who needs a long-term subsidy because he cannot work, it may give priority to the tenant who can pay.

This means that social housing is at risk of disappearing because of that. In addition, it could also make some already difficult, precarious situations even worse for certain people and certain households. As we know, waiting lists are already quite long. A lot of people are living in this kind of uncertainty.

I would also like to know if that is an indication that the Liberal government intends to continue the federal government's withdrawal from social housing that has occurred over the past 20 years. Ever since the government stopped building social housing 20 years ago, there have been some very negative repercussions. There has been no new construction since the 1990s, and ever since then the housing situation has deteriorated. Many people are even talking about a housing crisis.

Something else is missing from the budget. There is absolutely no mention of the lapsed agreements. What will happen to those people? Some people have lost their rent subsidies, and they have very difficult decisions to make: will they pay for food or will they pay the rent? It is therefore not surprising that there is a lot of child poverty.

The provinces and territories must cost-match most of the investment in affordable housing. What will happen if the province or territory does not have the money for that? According to the member for Spadina—Fort York, this money will be put into the federal gas tax fund. However, this fund goes to infrastructure, not housing. Thus, we would lose the money for housing.

Furthermore, developers could use the incentives to build affordable housing for a few years and then jack up the rent, which is another risk. We need long-term agreements to prevent that.

[The Budget, April 11th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, there is actually money for affordable housing in this budget. However, one thing that concerns us is that most of those investments have to be matched by the provinces and territories.

What will happen to this budget if the provinces and territories do not have the funds to match the federal investments? Will the government simply keep the money in its coffers? What will happen to that money if it is not spent?