House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2025, with 34% of the vote.
Foreign Affairs January 31st, 2024
Mr. Speaker, in 2022, Canada sold more than $20 million of military equipment to Israel. Last week, the ICJ ordered Israel to take steps to prevent acts of genocide.
As a signatory to the genocide convention, Canada is bound by this decision. Our own Export and Import Permits Act also forbids these sales if there is a substantial risk they could be used to violate international law.
Given Canada supports the ICJ, will the government put in place an embargo on military exports to Israel?
Persons with Disabilities January 30th, 2024
Mr. Speaker, respectfully, the fact is that the government has not delivered the Canada disability benefit. I will agree though with the parliamentary secretary that they do need to get this right. What the disability community is trying to tell him is that the government needs to follow what is in the Canada Disability Benefit Act, and specifically, that the benefit must be barrier-free.
Stakeholders are being told that the disability tax credit may be used as a way to access the Canada disability benefit. This is in contravention of the act. It is not what the community is calling for. What I have been asking from the minister, I am asking again tonight. Very specifically, will the parliamentary secretary make it clear that the disability tax credit will not be used in delivering the Canada disability benefit because it is not barrier-free?
Persons with Disabilities January 30th, 2024
Mr. Speaker, with Parliament back this week, I am glad to rise tonight to continue pushing the government to end legislated poverty for people with disabilities and, as a significant step in this direction, to adequately fund and properly implement the Canada disability benefit with urgency. Sadly, while the Canada Disability Benefit Act was passed last June, no money has yet been set aside for the benefit. It continues to be the case to this day that 40% of those living in poverty across the country are people with disabilities.
Tonight I will focus on following up on a specific concern about how the Canada disability benefit is being designed. Here is the story: As many Canadians know, nearly every important decision about the benefit, from who is eligible to how much it is going to be, is being left to regulations that are now being drafted. Late last year, though, I began to hear from organizations that serve the disability community about how the Department of Finance is considering determining eligibility through the incredibly burdensome application for the disability tax credit. When I say “burdensome”, I mean that it is one of the most difficult government programs for a person to qualify for. People qualify by submitting a T2201 form, a 16-page form that applicants need to have their doctors complete 15 pages of.
A recent report from the Kids Brain Health Network, in collaboration with researchers from the Disability Policy Research Program and McGill University, breaks down how bad it is. First, long delays in processing applications and inconsistent knowledge of staff lead to rejections that are often viewed as arbitrary. Second, difficulties with the T2201 application form, including that it lacks clear instructions and criteria, often lead to requests for additional instructions and information and even specific wording being required for approval. Third, doctors' level of knowledge about the form itself and their level of tenacity to reapply will affect the extent to which the applicant may or may not be successful. Fourth, there is a constant need to reapply, including when recipients have lifelong conditions. As a result, there is an entire industry of disability tax credit consultants set up to charge people with disabilities simply to apply for the credit.
We should not even be having this conversation. I thought we had already solved this issue. Back when the Canada Disability Benefit Act was at committee, out of the nine amendments that got through, my team and I were successful in passing five amendments to improve the bill. One of these addressed this very issue. It changed the bill to say the following: “The Governor in Council may make regulations...respecting applications for a benefit, including regulations providing for an application process that is without barriers, as defined in section 2 of the Accessible Canada Act”.
When I proposed the amendment, I gave the example of a person with a disability who has already qualified for a program when completing their taxes, as is the case for many other benefits. This is why I asked the minister in December if the government would just follow the law that is now passed. She did not answer me at the time, so I am going to ask again tonight.
The Canada Disability Benefit Act requires the Canada disability benefit to be barrier-free. However, it is clear that the disability tax credit is full of barriers. Therefore, will the parliamentary secretary now commit to the government following the law and developing the regulations to ensure that the Canada disability benefit is barrier-free?
Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2023 January 30th, 2024
Madam Speaker, the member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley talked about the need to focus on affordability, but I did not hear him talk at all about the increased corporate profits that are leading the rising inflation we are seeing. One of those examples is the oil and gas industry. In fact, 18¢ of every dollar at the pump that folks are seeing increases on are going directly toward increased profits of the oil and gas industry, leading to $36 billion for the top five companies in 2022 alone.
Does the member support, at the very least, a windfall profit tax on even just 15% of the profits above a billion so we can invest in affordability measures across the country?
Petitions January 30th, 2024
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to present one of many petitions sought to be presented by MPs over the last few weeks.
It notes that the need for electoral reform continues to be an issue for citizens of all political persuasions. The petitioners note that politicians cannot agree on the best way forward, and they call for a new approach for developing a citizens' consensus on electoral reform.
The petitioners call on the House of Commons, first of all, to give citizens a voice on the subject of electoral reform and a right to make recommendations. More specifically, the petitioners would like to see a representative, non-partisan citizens' assembly that has the resources, the expert support and the sufficient time required to come to a citizens' consensus on recommendations to be delivered to the government.
The petitioners call on MPs of all parties to vote in support of Motion No. 86, citizens' assembly on electoral reform, which will be debated by this House and voted on in due course.
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns January 29th, 2024
With regard to formal consultations and engagements between the federal government and the provincial and territorial governments or long-term care industry organizations on the Safe Long Term Care Act: (a) what are the details of the discussions or meetings, including, for each, the (i) date and location, (ii) participants, (iii) subject matter discussed, (iv) outcome; (b) do any supporting documents related to these discussions or meetings exist, including, but not limited to, e-mails, briefing notes, memos and reports, and, if so, what are the details of such documents; (c) were any reports or briefs submitted to the federal government by the provincial or territorial governments or long-term care industry organizations, and, if so, what are the details of such documents; and (d) what is the government’s projected timeline for tabling the legislation in Parliament?
Climate Change December 13th, 2023
Madam Speaker, I am a bit concerned. The parliamentary secretary spent so much time talking about other programs this government has in place. It concerns me that I am not hearing a commitment to continue the bare minimum.
Home energy retrofits need to be incentivized by the federal government. Even the Conservatives were doing it about 20 years ago. We need to see this government commit to continue the greener homes grant program, so that homeowners can count on this funding, to continue to do really critical work to retrofit their homes.
If Liberals are looking to be climate leaders, they should recapitalize it at a rate that would actually allow for deep energy retrofits that return more back to our economy than folks would spend.
Are they going to do it?
Climate Change December 13th, 2023
Madam Speaker, I am glad to be back again tonight, this time to raise the alarm on the need for the government, not only to replenish but also to expand the greener homes grant program.
I would like to start with where I expect the parliamentary secretary and I agree, which is that this is a critical program. Launched in May 2021, it provides up to $5,000 in grants to homeowners for specific upgrades, starting with a home energy evaluation, then completing a retrofit and then a post-retrofit evaluation. These evaluations are done by charities in the green communities Canada network, like REEP Green Solutions in the Waterloo region.
These incentives are kind of like the climate action no-brainer. They save homeowners money, they reduce emissions, they create good green jobs in completing the retrofits and they actually pay for themselves, returning $2 to $5 for every dollar invested through increased revenue from taxation. They have begun to work. In 2020, homeowners across the country completed almost 32,000 retrofits and once the program was launched that went up to almost 112,000.
This is where the issues begin. First of all, the program itself only planned to do 700,000 retrofits, far too slowly, over seven years. At this slow pace it would take more than a century to retrofit the more than 11 million homes in Canada that require retrofits. Worse still, in its current form, the program only saw greenhouse gas reduction increases from 22% before the program existed to 26% afterward.
Worse still, and the reason I asked about this in question period a few weeks ago, is that the CBC is reporting that the program is running out of money three years too early. Organizations like REEP have been here before, three times in the past, having to wind down popular energy efficiency incentive programs like the greener homes grant program.
Here is what we need and what I am going to continue to advocate for. First, we need sustained, predictable funding for retrofits, a clear continuation of the greener homes grant program, which the government could do by putting funds in place in budget 2024. Second, we need the program to keep up with inflation. The greener homes grant program is modelled after a similar program that was put in place by the Harper government called ecoENERGY back in 2007. It also provided $5,000 with, of course, huge differences between then and now when it comes to the cost of completing retrofits. Third, and most importantly, we need to see a boost to the program for deep retrofits to get at least 50% energy savings through insulation, thermal efficiencies of one's home through electrifying and I know there is an excellent program in place for heat pumps, for example, and then possibly adding solar on top.
In other jurisdictions, for example in Ireland and Germany, grants can be up to $50,000. The green budget coalition, lucky for us, has already priced it out. It would be $20 billion over five years to do it. Where could we possibly find that money? I put forward a motion that prices out what we could generate just by having a windfall profit tax on the oil and gas companies that are gouging us at the pumps. It is just over the exact same amount. It is $4 billion a year. $4.2 billion, in fact, just by applying the Canada recovery dividend to big oil.
My question to the parliamentary secretary is this. Will the government, first of all, commit to continuing the greener homes grant program? Will the government expand it to focus on deep energy—
Committees of the House December 13th, 2023
Mr. Speaker, I wonder if we could seek the House's unanimous consent. It sounds like there are three petitions that are particularly timely, one from the member for South Okanagan—West Kootenay, one from the member for Courtenay—Alberni and one from the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley.
I wonder if the House might consent to hear those three particularly timely petitions.
Oil and Gas Industry December 13th, 2023
Mr. Speaker, despite climate negotiations being captured by fossil fuel interests, countries just agreed at COP28 to transition away from fossil fuels. Nonetheless, back at home, the government continues to do the opposite, wasting over $1,200 on behalf of each and every Canadian taxpayer to expand the TMX pipeline, and increasing oil production to record levels.
Why is it that the PM cannot find the money to ensure that we end legislated poverty for people with disabilities, but has tens of billions of dollars for a leaky pipeline?