The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15
House of Commons photo

Track Peter

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is conservatives.

Liberal MP for London Centre (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2025, with 57% of the vote.

Statements in the House

London North Centre Honour Roll December 3rd, 2020

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the House to recognize the recipients of the 4th Annual London North Centre honour roll. This initiative highlights individuals who inspire us to build a strong, supportive and inclusive community.

A remarkable number of nominations were received from a wide variety of individuals, and our volunteer selection committee completed a comprehensive review. Many of our honourees helped Londoners during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Congratulations to the following individuals who make up this year's extraordinary class: Major Jay Hancock, Charles Knott and Emily Jackson, Bev Zaifman, Lieutenant-Colonel (Retired) John William Pattison Cook, Cheryl Miller, Susan Toth, Troy Leishman, Dr. Adam Dukelow, Maissae El-Sayegh, Leroy Hibbert, Father Michael Bechard, Ken Sewchand and Nazih Elmasri, Mario Circelli, Constable Evan Harrison, Karen Perkin, Dan Flaherty and Yola Ventresca.

Congratulations again to them all. They are an outstanding example of what Londoners can do.

Housing November 2nd, 2020

Mr. Speaker, for those experiencing homelessness, COVID-19 presents a particular danger. Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development update the House about the rapid housing initiative and how it can help cities such as London? Would the minister also give specific examples of the types of projects that can be funded under the RHI?

Fania "Fanny" Goose October 23rd, 2020

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honour the remarkable life of Fania “Fanny” Goose, a constituent and long-time business leader in London who passed away in her 99th year this April.

Fanny, or the first lady of downtown, as she was also known, was a remarkable woman who experienced the best and worst our world can offer. A Holocaust survivor who came to Canada in 1949, Fanny and her husband realized the Canadian dream by founding a retail business that became a pillar of London's downtown for over 50 years.

Fanny was sought out for her direct and savvy advice. Always politically engaged, she had her finger on the pulse of the community. Fanny was kind, confident and thoughtful, and always had a positive outlook. Predeceased by her husband Jerry, she was mother to Steve Goose Garrison and Martin Goose, and loving bubbie to three grandchildren and six great-grandchildren.

May Fanny rest in eternal peace. Her legacy will live on for generations to come.

Business of Supply October 20th, 2020

Mr. Speaker, I have known the member for some time, not terribly well, but I respect his role in the House. I certainly respect the role his father played in the House, serving in the capacity of Speaker for a period of time.

I am surprised, however, that a few times today the member put on the record something that he must know to be a simple mistruth, which is that $500 million did not go to the WE Charity organization. That money was for students. There was $43 million that was going to go to WE from the government for administering the program, and that money was going to be reimbursed. I am not saying that the government did not make mistakes on the file. It did, and I said that earlier today.

Why is the member not putting facts on the record and allowing hyperbole to guide his rhetoric here today?

Business of Supply October 20th, 2020

Madam Speaker, I made it clear in my remarks earlier why I think the government is right to consider this a matter of confidence.

I would also add that the member's party, the Conservatives and the Bloc, at finance committee just a few days ago, stood in the way of Liberal members being in favour of having public servants come to the committee and explain why redactions on WE documents happened. They prevented that from going forward. We were open to learning more about redacted documents. We know that they are matter of confidence and—

Business of Supply October 20th, 2020

Madam Speaker, of course we can do many things at once. At the top of the list ought to be work for Canadians on matters that they genuinely care about. I know in my own community, emails and phone calls on WE were in very small number and they stopped in the summer.

What Canadians care about is help for their families. They care about help for businesses. They want to know more details about what the government will do with the Canada emergency business account. They want to know more details about the Canada emergency wage subsidy. They want to know more details about rent and how the federal government will assist with rent.

The games being played by the opposition, and in particular the Conservatives on this, are tremendously disappointing and confined to the Ottawa bubble. Canadians care about their everyday lives.

Business of Supply October 20th, 2020

Madam Speaker, as I mentioned in my remarks, I do not dismiss the observation that the WE Charity issue was not handled well by the government. I do not dismiss that, but let us be very clear. When the member and his colleagues use words like “corruption”, it implies something very nefarious indeed. It implies that there is a formal agreement or informal agreement between organizations and individuals and government members where government members are on the take, as I said, receiving payment in return for political favour. That has not been established, ever. I wonder if the hon. member and his colleagues would go out of this chamber and make that accusation. When they use words like “corruption”, they really have to consider what it is they are doing in this House. There is no substance to that accusation whatsoever. Yes, mistakes have been made. Corruption has not happened.

Business of Supply October 20th, 2020

Madam Speaker, it is refreshing, and if we were to canvass the opinion of colleagues on this side of the House, my hon. colleague across the way would find that all of us feel the same way.

The opposition plays a very important role, and within that, opposition day motions play a very important role. This is especially the case during times of crisis. It is an opportunity for the opposition to have an entire day to raise matters that are meaningful, and to put forward ideas that actually matter and that have an impact on the direction of the country.

We are seized now, as a country, with COVID-19. It is important for us to think about the way forward and to engage in debate on that very important issue. It is the challenge and crisis of our time. Indeed, it is, without question, the biggest crisis of our time, and certainly the most important one we have faced as Canadians since World War II.

Sacrifices have been made by Canadians throughout the country. I think about the first wave in the spring. We all saw our constituents, and we all had those conversations. There were constituents who stayed home, who kept their distance from loved ones, and it has had a tremendous impact. We will tell our children, grandchildren and future generations about it when we get past this crisis, and we will get past it.

The virus did overcome us, but it did not defeat us. The economy has suffered its largest contraction since the 1930s, and unemployment has increased to levels we have not seen in our lifetimes. Those are the facts that we see on paper and the points we see recited in the business press and newspapers, on television and online. However, it has to be said that the challenges that have been endured and the sacrifices that have been made have been those of real, everyday people.

For individuals and businesses, I cannot properly put into words what they have gone through for their country. I talk to those individuals and business owners every day, and they have had enduring questions as we have passed through the first wave and are now in the midst of a second wave. It is important that the government continue to seize itself with these matters and with this large issue.

However, I am heartened by the fact that at least there is a blueprint, a very important and concrete one, which was established during the first wave, and that is the set of programs that have held the country up, both individuals and businesses. I am thinking about the Canada emergency response benefit, CERB, in particular, which has now transitioned to the Canada recovery benefit, CRB. I am thinking about the Canada emergency business account, CEBA, and the wage subsidy that has helped so many businesses.

We heard my hon. colleague for Winnipeg Centre talk about the CERB today. There were close to nine million Canadians who benefited from that lifeline, and that is a term I do not use lightly, because it was a lifeline for so many Canadians. It ensured they could still put food on the table and take care of their bills and other expenses. Of course, the government had to act, and it did so with measures like the CERB.

I have talked to countless business owners in my community who have benefited from the Canada emergency business account and, of course, a portion of that is forgivable.

CEBA was extremely important and was an idea that came in part from the work done at committees, committees that have an important role. I will discuss the role and potential of committees in a moment. Serving on the Standing Committee on Finance, as I do, is a tremendous honour. In the spring we had an opportunity to raise ideas directly to the then finance minister, the Prime Minister and members of cabinet on what was needed. CEBA was an idea that came out of that engagement, at least in part. Certainly the bureaucracy played an important role and has advised on this and helped to design programs, and its role cannot be understated.

The wage subsidy is a very successful program. I was thrilled to see in throne speech that the government decided to continue it well into 2021. Of course we await more details on that. We could be debating such matters, but unfortunately the opposition is seized with other issues.

I mentioned the public service's extraordinary work, particularly on the CERB and getting it out to Canadians in record speed. That needs to be underlined, along with all the other work it has done. I would be remiss, and I know all members, regardless of party affiliation, would agree, if I did not mention the work done in constituency offices by our incredible office staff. In my case it is Ryan Gauss, Josh Chadwick, Asiya Barakzai and Zheger Hassan who helped me in ways I will never forget in the spring during the crisis and now in the second wave. I know we all value our staff very much engaging with constituents and picking up those phone calls. There are record number of cases coming through our offices. In fact, in my office we have seen about a 350% increase in email and call volumes. I know other MPs will have similar stories to tell this House. It is something we have all seen. We continue to rely on our staff, who have been truly tremendous in this experience.

Have mistakes been made during the COVID-19 experience? Has the federal government made mistakes? It has made mistakes. How can one not make mistakes as a government when one is in the midst of an unprecedented crisis and flying the plane and building it at the same time, so to speak? The programs the government has put in place have never been seen before, programs like the CERB and all the other programs I mentioned. As one is moving at record speed, one is certainly going to make a mistake.

Is the WE Charity issue one of those mistakes? It is. I put that on the record before at the finance committee; other Liberal members have as well. The government has done well, but can the government do better?

What we see today is an opposition day motion that completely ignores the issues of the day. The Conservatives have presented a motion intended to paralyze the government at this most critical time. They proposed a committee that would serve their partisan interests, not the interests of Canadians. There is nothing wrong with reviewing spending. The government has proposed an idea that would lead to the creation of a committee that would do just that. It would review all COVID-19 spending in a non-partisan way. That is necessary. We do need that.

However, what the Conservatives are pointing to is something quite different. They use the word “corruption”. I would caution my colleagues to be careful with the words they use. The word “corruption” implies something quite specific. It implies that members of the government are on the take and that there is some sort of agreement between members of the government and those who have been mentioned, whether it is with the WE Charity organizations and others, where payments are being received or something along those lines. Very nefarious actions are being pointed to that do not exist. Let us be careful with the words we use. I wonder if members would use the word “corruption” out of this chamber.

Of course the government is right to see this as a matter of confidence. We have seen the hypocrisy of the Conservatives when at the finance committee we could have looked at redacted documents and they turned down the idea of having public servants come to testify as to why documents were redacted. They did not want to hear from public servants.

It is time to return to the real work of Parliament. Let us have committees engage on matters of COVID-19, not some political theatre carried out by the Conservatives. We have so much work to do. We have legislation before this House on MAID, conversion therapy and sexual—

Business of Supply October 20th, 2020

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Lac-Saint-Louis.

We see a debate take place today that necessitates some comments at the outset on the importance of democracy and the role of the official opposition within that democracy.

There is no democracy without a vibrant opposition. That much is true, particularly in the Westminster parliamentary tradition where the opposition, and especially the leader of the opposition, has an opportunity to engage directly with the government each day on matters of importance to the country. This is different from, for example, a presidential system where that direct engagement is less visible. It is one of the hallmarks of the parliamentary tradition that we have here in Canada and, of course, in Britain, where we borrowed the system from. I do not discount the importance of an official opposition. I do not discount the importance—

Petitions October 2nd, 2020

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to table petition e-2636, a petition signed by nearly 3,000 Canadians from coast to coast to coast. The petition calls for the government to put in place a measure that would see menstrual products, namely tampons and pads, provided for free in all federally regulated workplaces. The petition seeks to revamp an initiative brought forward originally by this government in May 2019, an initiative that has so far gone through consultation but has not been introduced with a concrete outcome. The petitioners call on the government to take this very seriously.

I commend the individual who introduced the petition. She is a former constituent. Her name is Rachel Ettinger. She and other Canadians have been calling for this for a long time. She is a passionate advocate and champion of women's rights and human rights. The petition is a serious one.