Mike Morrice

[Privilege, December 3rd, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I want to join colleagues in giving honour to the member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke. As a newer MP in this place, I can say that he is an hon. member whom I have been really grateful to have had the chance to learn from and I am grateful for our time here to have overlapped. In my time prior to being here, he was someone I really looked up to as someone who continued to stand up for the queer community across the country. As we heard from his speech, he has had such an impact on the laws of this country in the way that so much more needs to be done.

As we close this round of speeches, though, to me it is appropriate that the member would have the last word. If the Speaker would allow me, I would remark that the tenor in this place at times, and certainly now, can get somewhat partisan. The member had some important reflections for us on how important it is that the reasons that MPs arrived here, the causes that they and their communities care about, should come first.

I wonder whether the member could offer some advice for those of us here, particularly newer members like me, on how we continue to ensure that the issues we are looking to address remain more important than the parties we happen to be here representing, and that our constituents should remain first. Can he offer some reflections for us on that?

[Government Business No. 43—Proceedings on Bill C-78, November 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, as the parliamentary secretary, I believe, knows, Greens are intending to support this measure. However, we do have some concerns, one of them being that it is not focused only on essentials. It is a pretty broad-based measure that includes video game consoles, for example, like a PS5.

The hon. member mentioned food banks specifically. He knows food banks have been calling for the government to fix the Canada disability benefit. A far more targeted measure would be one that is focused on those living disproportionately in poverty, like folks with disabilities. Can he speak to what would be needed after tonight to continue to advocate for folks with disabilities to be lifted out of poverty?

[Government Business No. 43—Proceedings on Bill C-78, November 28th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, as members know, Greens will be supporting this measure because it does offer some short-term affordability relief. It is not ideal. It is far too broad-based. It includes video game consoles, such as a PS5, which I think we can all agree are not an essential. The measure does not get to the root causes of corporate profiteering. It is far too complicated for small businesses.

It also does not have any new revenue attached to it. Why would the government not have ensured there was new revenue attached, for example through a windfall profits tax on the excess profits of the oil and gas industry?

[Government Business No. 43—Proceedings on Bill C‑78, November 27th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I will start by sharing and making clear that the Greens certainly support this GST break for two months. It is a $1.6-billion expenditure. We would put forward that there were other options the government could have started with first, for example, by more than doubling the completely inadequate Canada disability benefit. However, on balance, we would support it.

What is markedly different in the legislation to be debated tomorrow versus the draft that was provided last week is that the entire $250 vote-buying scheme is left out altogether. Now, what was left out in the original scheme, as is always the case, are people with disabilities.

My question to the parliamentary secretary is this: What will it take for the government to recognize that people with disabilities and low-income seniors are the people in this country who need some of the most support? People with disabilities make up 40% of those living in poverty across the country. When the Liberals talk about addressing affordability, why is it that people with disabilities are never included?

[Privilege, November 26th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, when I have asked other Conservative members why they want to continue this debate, on the exact same motion, for month after month, after it was approved by the House back in June, and Greens, along with others, continue to call for this to go to committee to be studied to ensure that we get accountability on the mismanagement of funds, I am told by Conservatives that they need to investigate with more of these speeches. However, in the speech we just heard, we heard mostly about carbon taxes, small businesses and car insurance and very little about SDTC.

Why is it that Conservatives feel that they need to continue this filibuster if their own members are not going to speak to the motion at hand?

[Persons with Disabilities, November 25th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, with $4.7 billion, the government could have cut chronic homelessness across the country in half and had $1.2 billion to spare. Instead, it wants to throw it at a pre-election vote-buying scheme right out of Doug Ford's playbook. Worst of all, like always, people with disabilities unable to work and already living in poverty are left out entirely.

Do people with disabilities mean so little to the government that it is not even trying to buy their votes anymore?

[Committees of the House, November 21st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the Greens agree to apply the vote and will be voting yes.

[Committees of the House, November 21st, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the Green Party agrees to apply the vote and will be voting against.

[Electoral Reform, November 20th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister recently admitted his biggest regret was breaking his promise on electoral reform and claimed he did not know how he could have done things differently. Well, he could have supported a citizens' assembly on electoral reform instead of blocking the most basic initiative to have everyday Canadians, informed by experts, explore better options. Not only did Green, Bloc and NDP MPs all vote in favour, but 39 MPs from his own party did too.

He could still do things differently right now and call a citizens' assembly. Will he do it?

[Oil and Gas Industry, November 19th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary is quite right that this government has made investments. In fact, I was at the announcement with respect to the electric buses he mentioned. What he needs to also realize is that advocates have been trying to tell this government that if it does not ensure that the funding it proposed also funds operations, we are not going to see the advances we need to increase service and reduce fares because the permanent public transit fund does not start until 2026. From Environmental Defence, for example, “A lack of public transit operating funding means buses don't show up on time, riders spend more time waiting, and fares continue to climb faster than inflation.”

Will the parliamentary secretary recognize what transit advocates have been calling for to ensure that we roll out the red carpet the way his government has already for carbon capture, where they have given tens of billions for climate distractions, and put that towards the public transit we need?