Mike Morrice

[Seniors, June 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary not just for his kind words, but for actually answering the questions that were offered this evening. I think a respectful approach and a discourse that feels exactly like that are what we should see more of in this place.

I understand that he might not be able to share more about when the safe long-term care act would be introduced, so I wonder, with this final bit of time we have available, if he could share his reflections on why no new funds were allocated in the most recent budget, recognizing there is a crisis we are still in. Is there more specificity he can offer for what would be in the safe long-term care act? What can all parliamentarians do to advance it more quickly, recognizing that a crisis requires urgent action?

[Seniors, June 2nd, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the chance to come back to a question I asked of the Prime Minister about a month or so ago.

I asked the question because it was on long-term care. Back in 2019, when I was knocking on doors in my community, I heard concerns from neighbour after neighbour, both those who had a parent in care and those who were caregivers, about the crisis they saw as a result of decades of underinvestment.

It is an example of how the pandemic really only made things worse, because if we fast-forward to 2021, we all know that the crisis in long-term care exploded in the pandemic.

In my community, for example—and I have shared this story in the House before—I will not forget anytime soon speaking with a woman who was sharing how her mom had been waiting in hospital for a bed in long-term care for three months. As she told this story, I could see the tears streaming down her face.

I also spoke with a personal support worker who shared, and she was being honest, that “I am not giving four hours of care a day; I am lucky if I am able to give four minutes of care a day.”

It is obvious that this crisis continues in long-term care, and we are not out of the woods yet. In fact, in the most recent numbers I have available on the wait times for long-term care, in the summer of 2021 there were still 52,000 people on the wait-list.

Last year, we heard in the Liberal platform and from the Prime Minister himself that billions of dollars were being promised for long-term care. He shared the words that nothing was off the table when it comes to addressing the crisis in long-term care, but if we fast-forward to what was in the budget, and I looked right through it, long-term care was only mentioned once, and when it was mentioned, it was only about funds that were previously allocated.

There was also no mention of the safe long-term care act, despite this being part of the agreement between the NDP and the Liberals, one of the few really key new items.

This is what prompted my question to the Prime Minister at the time and my continued concern when it comes to addressing the crisis.

To offer some ideas on what could be done, we need look no further than what the former member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, Paul Manly, had proposed in Motion No. 77. He proposed eliminating the wait times; paying long-term care staff adequately for their work, and providing benefits and paid sick leave; implementing a basic care guarantee that would ensure that we have a minimum of four hours of regulated personal care per day for every resident; taking the profit out of long-term care and transitioning long-term care facilities to non-profit and co-operative management structures; and introducing a safe long-term care act modelled after the Canada Health Act to be sure that it establishes national standards for care and staffing.

In the Prime Minister's response, he shared that the government is working with provinces and territories.

Tonight, for the parliamentary secretary, I have three questions I would love to hear more about.

First of all, does he and the governing party recognize that the crisis in long-term care continues?

Second, when, specifically, will the governing party follow through on what they have already promised: tabling the safe long-term care act?

Finally, if he can provide an update as to whether work is being done with provinces and territories, exactly what work is being done?

[Canada National Parks Act, June 1st, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise this evening to speak with respect to Bill C-248, the private member's bill put forward by the member for Windsor West to create a national urban park, Ojibway urban park in particular.

I want to start by highlighting that this park would not involve any private property whatsoever. It would connect several pieces of publicly owned lands that, if connected, would create one larger 900-acre national urban park. It is important to pause to share more about why national urban parks are so important.

As we have heard, not only are they home in this case to hundreds of endangered species, but they also provide mitigation of flooding due to climate change, providing a natural heritage area that the community can enjoy, appreciate and use with respect to healthy living and ecotourism. It is also worth pausing to reflect on nature deficit disorder, a term that refers to what happens when people are disconnected from their natural surroundings.

If we had more national urban parks, I wonder how this might affect the thinking even in this very place. Given the larger systemic challenges we face, such as the climate crisis, if we had more urban green space that Canadians across the country and parliamentarians were enjoying, I wonder how that might affect some of the thinking that goes into decisions we are making with respect to the climate crisis, for example, or decisions we are not making.

It is also important to point out how this aligns with what Parks Canada has already put forward with respect to their interests in establishing at least one new national park in every province or territory across the country and how it aligns with existing plans from the governing party and commitments it has made to protect up to 25% of land by 2025 and up to 30% by 2030. It strikes me that we ought to be making the most of every opportunity we have to go more quickly in protecting biodiversity across the country.

I also want to pause to give kudos to the member for Windsor West for bringing forward legislation like this. In my view, this is actually how democracy is supposed to function. The member has been advocating with respect to this national urban park since 2013, when he made the first request of the federal government, listening to the interests of those across his community and collaborating with others to find consensus to move forward. I will point out that he has received the support of Caldwell First Nation and of Chief Duckworth in particular in a letter shared on April 11 that encourages all parliamentarians to support Bill C-248.

I will point out it has also been unanimously supported by Windsor City Council. In my view, these are exactly the kinds of indications for why a parliamentarian should look to choose a topic such as this, knowing that work has been put in, that consultations have been had, that members here should be listening to their communities first and foremost. It should also be community ahead of party, and that members, based on what they hear, should then be advocating in support of those interests. In my view, that is exactly what the member for Windsor West has done, and doing the same would allow us to move more quickly toward ensuring we have more nationally protected areas and a new national urban park.

I am less interested in who gets the credit for it and more in ensuring we support whoever is bringing forward ideas to this place to ensure that we move more quickly to protect urban areas. It is for this reason that the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands and I will both be supporting this legislation. I was encouraged to hear the member for Essex supporting it as well, and I am encouraged to hear a biologist among us, the member for South Okanagan—West Kootenay, also voicing his support.

I will point out that in some ways this has been a difficult day, that there were some votes in which there was not as much alignment as I would have liked, but at least consensus can be achieved on this debate, and I am hopeful that the bill will go to committee as quickly as possible.

[Health, June 1st, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, this is it. The Prime Minister has one last opportunity before we vote on Bill C-216. A national crisis requires federal leadership. There are moms, such as Irene and Angela, who are with us today, and the tens of thousands more across the country, who have lost loved ones to a poisoned drug supply.

The Prime Minister can put people's lives ahead of politics. He can turn around right now and give his caucus permission to support having expert input at committee. Will he do it?

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the speech by the member for Berthier—Maskinongé, and although we do agree on a lot of things, that is not the case today.

Does my colleague understand that he and I, as white men, do not face certain systemic barriers? If so, does he agree that more needs to be done to remove these systemic barriers?

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Waterloo for her powerful speech. In particular, she mentioned the progress that Wilfrid Laurier University and the University of Waterloo in our community are making. I wonder if she would be open to elaborating more on the impact it has had as they have made progress with respect to equity, diversity and inclusion.

[Roger Farwell, May 30th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to share today about my friend Roger Farwell.

Roger was not only an architect, a community builder and a champion of arts and culture, he was one who was deeply devoted to his family and his community. He passed away tragically last summer, and yesterday family and friends came together to celebrate his life and legacy.

Waterloo region is known as a barn-raising community, where people come together to support each other. Over his life, Roger received nearly every prestigious award our community offers to recognize leadership and service, including our highest honour, the Barnraiser Award, which was inspired by former governor general David Johnston.

Roger was the consummate barnraiser. He gave to others, worked quietly behind the scenes, and expected nothing in return. In so many ways, Roger was the best of our community.

As we continue to mourn the loss of Roger, I want to extend my deepest condolences to his wife, Cathy, and the rest of his family. We send them all our love and wish them strength as they continue to grieve. Together we will do our best to make Roger proud.

[Online News Act, May 30th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, at times in the past, I have supported time allocation when there has been reasonable debate on a particular bill. For government to function, it is important for respectful debate to take place. I agree with the minister about the importance of Bill C-18. In fact, I was looking forward to hearing various perspectives in this place on the legislation.

In this case, as others have shared, we have had a total of two hours of debate on a Friday afternoon before moving to time allocation. Can the minister share why he feels this is so necessary, and why this is the only option available to the governing party to move ahead with respectful debate in this place?

[Business of Supply, May 19th, 2022]

Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for her genuine contribution to this conversation. I will cede the rest of my time to the member for Courtenay—Alberni.

[Business of Supply, May 19th, 2022]

Mr. Chair, I do appreciate the role that PSPC has to play and the work that the minister is doing in it.

My final question is this: How are we to trust any of these strategies and commitments, though, in light of the reality of the same commitments to expanding and building the Trans Mountain pipeline?