Michelle Rempel

[Economic Adviser to the Liberal Party of Canada, November 4th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, last year, a report from an international tax watchdog accused Brookfield of dodging taxes around the world, stating, “there is an apparent pattern of aggressive tax avoidance consistent across its global operations.” It is no coincidence that last week, Brookfield, a megacorporation chaired by senior Liberal economic adviser Mark “carbon tax” Carney, announced it is moving its headquarters from Toronto to Wall Street.

Reports say Brookfield pays a measly average tax rate of 6.1%, but the average Canadian family pays a whopping 45% of their average household income in taxes. Here is the reality: Carney gets paid more if Brookfield pays less tax. While he works to make sure that his company pays less tax, he wants Canadians to pay more carbon tax, all while he is formally advising the Prime Minister on economic policies without ethics or lobbying guidelines.

This is wrong. It is time for the NDP-Liberals to stop letting this man put his own profit over the people of Canada.

[Privilege, November 4th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague talked about being the son of a veteran. I think, at this time of year, we should reflect upon a line in a poem written over 100 years ago by Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae:

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.

I often think about that line. I think the foe lives in people who seek to subjugate or to divide or to prevent us, as Canadians, from having the freedoms that are our birthright, that those men fought to protect. I am wondering if my colleague opposite could talk about why it is so important for each of us, regardless of political stripe, to take up that quarrel with the foe and what that means to him.

[Points of Order, November 1st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I wish members a happy Friday. I would just ask that we could perhaps have peace and unity in this place and carry on with debate.

[The Economy, November 1st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that Mark “carbon tax” Carney is moving Brookfield's headquarters to Wall Street to avoid paying Canadian tax. The reality is that Mark “carbon tax” Carney gets paid more if Brookfield pays less tax. The reality is that while he is helping his company pay less corporate tax, he wants every Canadian to pay more carbon tax.

Why are the Liberals letting Canada's economy again be run by a man who clearly puts profit over people?

[The Economy, November 1st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, news is breaking today that Brookfield Asset Management, a multitentacled everything corporation chaired by Mark “carbon tax” Carney, will be moving its head office out of Canada. This news comes after reports that for several years, Brookfield's effective tax rate will be well below the new global minimum tax rate of 15%. Carney is the Liberals' senior economic adviser.

Why are the Liberals letting Canada's economy be run by a man who puts profit over people?

[Government Accountability, October 30th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition put a great piece of policy forward this week. I am so glad my colleague mentioned it, and I hope he will support it. The policy is to axe the GST on homebuilding, and it was developed by anti-poverty advocates. These are people who are trying to fight for Canadians to have a break; in contrast, Mr. Carney is advising the Liberal Party in order to get rich himself. That is the difference. He is advocating for corporate interests whereas the Leader of the Opposition's policy was developed without any sort of ethical issue. Of course, I can absolutely say that. Mr. Carney, on the other hand, has a whole host of ethical issues.

The question is simple. This needs to be investigated by the lobbying commissioner. My colleague should have some shame in holding the bag on such a clear violation of, probably, the lobbying rules and other things. Mr. Carney should have some shame too. If he is such an esteemed individual, he should not be putting himself in this situation. Frankly, he should not be putting his boards up to this type of reputational risk. Seriously, it is really bad governance.

[Government Accountability, October 30th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, earlier this year, the Prime Minister appointed Mr. Carney to be his senior economic adviser, and in that role, Mr. Carney would have unfettered access, in theory, to confidential and sensitive economic information, and he would also have unfettered access to people who make policy decisions on economic policy.

The finance minister has on multiple occasions said that Mr. Carney is a very close friend of hers. In fact he is one of her children's godparents. I do not believe she has disclosed him as a close friend, which is all fine in theory, except for the fact that Mr. Carney has, as my colleague has said, multiple business interests that relate to the types of policies that the finance minister or the Prime Minister would be implementing. Now, in his new role, he is ostensibly going to be implementing or suggesting policy himself.

Therefore, clearly this is a matter for the lobbyist commissioner to look at, and I want to say why. First of all, example one is a fact: Right after Mr. Carney was appointed in the role, The Logic reported that Brookfield, the company that he chairs, had started talks with the federal government and the Canada Pension Plan fund to back a new multi-billion dollar fund that Brookfield is raising, and that Brookfield was seeking 10 billion tax dollars from the federal government for the fund. Mr. Carney is the chair of the board. Now he is sitting with power and access to be able to determine the federal budget and economic policy, and his company is asking for $10 billion. That is problem one.

Problem two is that Mr. Carney also sits on the board of Stripe, a payment service. The federal government just struck a deal with Visa and Mastercard to lower payment processing fees, but Mr. Carney's company, Stripe, has elected not to pass that savings along to small businesses, but hoard it for itself. This begs the question of why the federal government did not require Stripe to do this, as would be done in other jurisdictions. Mr. Carney is on the board. He has access to this exact policy. His purview and his access to the finance minister would give him purview to the policy.

Example number three is a very close relationship with the Telesat CEO, Dan Goldberg. Telesat was just given $6 billion by the federal government, shortly after Mr. Carney's appointment.

As another example, overseas there is actually a company admitting that Mr. Carney lobbies the government for the company's joint business ventures on behalf of Brookfield. The company is HomeServe. The CEO, Richard Harpin, in the Telegraph is reported as saying, “Mark is working on our behalf in Government and he did have a meeting on this with Rachel Reeves”, a U.K. senior economic policy person. “It was covering some other issues and the role of Brookfield as a trillion-dollar investor in the U.K. And so it wasn't just this issue,” the subsidies it was looking for, “but he did mention it.” Mr. Harpin also said, “We want to make sure that there's some money allocated to this [from the federal government], that we've got a clear direction of travel when the Budget comes out on Oct 30.”

Here is the point: There is a man who is beholden to multiple corporations who is now directly advising the finance minister, the Prime Minister and the entire governing party on economic policy, and that is wrong. It is not character assassination to say it is wrong. It is fundamentally wrong. I would say it is a character flaw of the man to not see that. I am sure he believes that is altruistic, but it is not—

[Committees of the House, October 30th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, the federal Liberal Party was actually called in front of the Privacy Commissioner for facial recognition technology that was being used in nomination contests. The need to put boundaries on its use has only become more and more acute, particularly in government, over the last several years. The government has failed to act. It did not really address the issue at all in any of its legislation.

I am wondering whether my colleague could expand upon the fact that after nine years of a government that has failed to act on a crucial issue, perhaps it is time for an election.

[Housing, October 29th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the housing accelerator fund does not actually directly build homes. Who said that? The Minister of Housing. This is the same man who juiced temporary visas knowing that students were sleeping under bridges and were performing sex acts because they could not afford rent. That minister has been allowed to fail upward. Even his caucus members know that.

When will the Prime Minister stop letting the minister fail upward while Canadians are failing to pay their rent?

[Housing, October 29th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I was dismayed that earlier in question period, in response to the Leader of the Opposition's questions on housing, the Minister of Housing treated those questions like they were a joke.

Today, Scotiabank has said that nearly 25% fewer Canadians can own a home now than when the minister took office. This is on top of the fact that housing has doubled under the government. Housing should be for everyone.

Will the minister commit to axing the federal GST on new homes so that young Canadians can afford them?