Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are not happy that an agreement that was working very well is being scrapped.The Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed a motion expressing its great disappointment with budget 2017. There is nothing for forestry, for transportation, or for cheese producers, and nothing is done about tax havens. When Ottawa calls the shots, Quebec will always be left wanting.Instead of swallowing this nonsense and acting like doormats, for goodness sake, would the 40 Liberal members from Quebec stop undermining the interests of Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, this Liberal budget is full of bluster and bafflegab. A few gems include innovation through superclusters, or this one about offsetting derivative positions in straddle transactions, or even better, capping stock options for the super-richoh, wait; that did not make it into the budget. That was in the Liberal platform. This is nothing but a backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget. Way back on page 150 is a $1.2 billion cut to fighting climate change. To all those Canadians who believed the Liberals in Paris were serious about fighting climate change, how can they betray their commitment to them now?
Mr. Speaker, it is the first time the PCO has needed private island guidelines.The Prime Minister has increased taxes on Canadians who use Uber or public transit to get to work, because the Prime Minister has made it very clear he needs the extra cash to pay for his caviar and champagne when he travels to private islands. The Prime Minister is so out of touch that he is raising taxes on struggling Canadians to fund his lavish lifestyle, and Canadians are getting fed up.Will the Prime Minister actually stand and answer questions of behalf of struggling Canadians or will he just sit there with a smug look on his face, while he daydreams about his next vacation?
Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can be absolutely assured that every Canadian law is being enforced by the RCMP and by the CBSA. As well, we are honouring all of our obligations under international law.The hon. gentleman should know that when people cross the border in irregular fashion, they are apprehended, they are identified, they are fingerprinted. Their biographical and biometric information is collected. That is checked against every Canadian database and the appropriate international databases for immigration or criminal activity. If it is warranted, suspects are detained.
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what the Conservative government was focused on. That was on balancing the budget. For Canada's beleaguered energy workers, yesterday's budget was a kick in the teeth. While our biggest competitor, the United States, is cutting red tape and taxes and making its energy sector more attractive to job creators, the Liberals are jacking up taxes and punishing oil and gas exploration. It is almost as though they want to phase out the energy sector. Our energy sector employs those middle-class Canadians that the government pretends to care about. Why did the Liberals go out of their way in this budget to kick energy workers in the teeth when they are already down?
Mr. Speaker, while the government's gender budget sounded good, the budget lacks real action for women: not a penny to legislate equal pay for work of equal value; not a cent for child care this year; zero new money for shelters for women fleeing violence; nothing to make birth control more affordable; and only a fraction of what is needed for a strategy to end violence against women. Once again, women are being asked to wait. If gender equality really matters to the government, why were women shortchanged again?
Mr. Speaker, while this Prime Minister is being paid to dig us deeper into debt and to go sunbathing with his family on the taxpayers dime, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is out in the cold launching the celebrations for the 150th anniversary of Confederation. Like the Prime Minister, she is favouring her Liberal cronies.Can the Prime Minister, who has once again increased the tax burden of Canadians, justify spending $127,000 on a vacation paid for by taxpayers, who will be paying back his deficit for decades to come?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what this budget means for a hard-working taxpayer. Let us call him Joe. Joe takes the bus to work every day, and at the end of the day, he likes to go to the pub with his buddies for a beer. He is a responsible guy, so he always uses Uber to get home. What does this budget do for Joe? First of all, it taxes his bus pass. It takes away his tax credit for his bus pass. It taxes the beer he has at the pub. It even slaps a tax on his Uber ride.What exactly does the Prime Minister have against people like Joe?
Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to set the record straight.Contrary to what the Liberals think, Parliament belongs to Canadians. They elected all of us to represent them. Contrary to what the Prime Minister thinks, not everyone likes him. Most Canadians do not approve of the deficits he is running. Most Canadians find his insatiable appetite for spending taxpayers' money unacceptable. Why does the Prime Minister want to silence Canadians who do not think like him? Why does he want to muzzle the opposition members and his own backbenchers?We will not let him do that.
Mr. Speaker, the same Liberals who regularly attacked Stephen Harper for his use of the gag are now flat out resorting to the guillotine to shut down debate. Amending the rules that govern how our democracy works should never be done by just one party, no matter the party.Thus, will the Liberal government commit, here and now, to not changing the rules unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, this government has gone out of its way to approve three pipelines. Those are decisions that will put energy workers in Alberta and Saskatchewan to work. What this government could accomplish in one year, that government could not accomplish in 10 years. That is what we have been doing, because we care about putting energy workers to work.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister's arrogant attitude with how he spends tax dollars, but now this behaviour is starting to creep into the House of Commons. He has proposed a plan to limit his attendance in question period to once a week, which in fact, is actually only one hour a week, and give all of his colleagues Fridays off. I just want to remind the Prime Minister that while he was campaigning he said, Sunlight is the world's best disinfectant. My question is: What dirt is he trying to hide?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal budget was nothing but bad news for the Canadian Armed Forces. The Liberals have cut another $8.5 billion, which means they have cut a total of $12 billion in just two years. Major investments have been punted down the road for two decades, and there is not enough money to buy the equipment our forces need. This is worse than the Liberals' decade of darkness. Today they are dragging our troops back into the Dark Ages.When will the minister start serving the brave men and women in uniform instead of being a patsy to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?
Mr. Speaker, budget 2017 was an opportunity to meet the needs of Canadian seniors, but the Liberal government told them to keep waiting. The Canadian Medical Association said, Budget 2017 fails Canada's seniors. CARP said, financial security for seniors not on the agenda. Divide and conquer deals with the provinces are not the solution. We need a national seniors strategy. Why did yesterday's budget leave Canadian seniors wanting and waiting?
Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, the Liberal budget just sounds like a Seinfeld show. It is about nothing.The Liberals had a choice. They could have eliminated the tax loophole that is costing us $800 million a year and benefits only the wealthiest 1%, but no, they decided not to keep that promise. Instead of going after and taking down their millionaire friends, who did they go after? They went after people who take the bus in the morning.Why are the Liberals getting rid of this tax credit that helps families and promotes public transit while maintaining the gifts for their millionaire friends?
Mr. Speaker, closing the CEO stock option tax loophole would have generated $725 million every year, and as a bonus it would have helped the Liberals keep one of their promises. What a concept that is. Instead, what the Liberals are doing is they are refusing to give $155 million to finally end discrimination against first nations children.The question is simple, and please can the Liberals deliver the response for once without their pre-written talking points. Why protect rich CEOs instead of protecting first nations children?
Mr. Speaker, this goes well beyond an innocent discussion paper. The government House leader should not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.However, if she is serious about that, if she is really truly sincere that her motives are pure, will she now stand in her place and tell this House that she accepts that her government has no mandate to change the rules of democracy over the united objections of the opposition? If she will not, then it is pretty clear that her protests of innocence are even more shallow than they sound.
Mr. Speaker, the House leader is in on this charade too, and the Liberal members even know it. They know this is not a discussion paper. They know this is an edict from the Prime Minister's Office. The House leader just said that she asked the committee; she is asking it to do her dirty work.My question is for the Liberal members of Parliament. I know there are some hard-working people with integrity on that side. Will any of them stand up, show some independence, and say no to the Prime Minister and no to the House leader, who has completely botched this for all of you?
Mr. Speaker, ever since Quebec managed to pry labour matters from the hands of the Canadian government, we have created the best labour market training system in North America.However, once again, Ottawa is going back on its word. The government cannot be counted on. After the Harper government, which tried to make us fit into the Canadian mould, now it is the Liberals who are reneging on the labour market agreement, which was so hard to reach. Why is it that whenever something is working well, Ottawa has to stick its nose in and tear everything down?
Mr. Speaker, the one comment I would like to make, once again, has to do with how Canada's regions have been abandoned, especially our forestry regions. The Quebec National Assembly reminded us of this today. The agricultural sector is going to have to fight with six high-tech sectors for additional funding for its own development, even though all Canadians eat every day, and food security is extremely important. In my view, the choices this government is making go against the well-being of our society.Does the Prime Minister want to punish farmers and all Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the government House leader tried to defend the Prime Minister's use of the Privy Council Office to help him on a trip to Alberta for the Medicine HatCardstonWarner by-election. She claimed it was to help prepare the PM for government business, but that is complete nonsense. The trip had only one purpose: for the Prime Minister to appear at Liberal Party campaign events. There was no government business. Why does the Prime Minister believe it is okay to use public servants to campaign for the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, sunny ways are indeed gone. They have been replaced by an attempt to unilaterally and quietly ram through changes to the rules that govern our democracy. This is nothing less than a massive government power grab, which is only meant to help the Prime Minister avoid accountability.Is there anyone on the Liberal benches with the courage to stand up and tell the Prime Minister that this is not why they came to Ottawa?
Mr. Speaker, not only is there nothing in the budget for the dairy industry, but also there is still no news on granting tariff quotas under CETA.We now hear talk about a proposal to resolve the softwood lumber issue by sacrificing our supply management system. That is completely unacceptable. The Liberals already hurt our industry during the negotiations and have yet to come up with fair and equitable compensation. My question is simple:Can the government confirm today that it will not sacrifice our supply management system or our forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, do not get me wrong, Joe sounds like a great guy, but I want to ask about Peter. Last night, Canadians watched Peter Mansbridge flat out ask the finance minister why he refuses to come clean on when the Liberals will finally balance the budget. As always, the finance minister refused to answer his simple question of when?Why has the term balanced budget become a dirty word to the government and to the finance minister, and when will Peter and Joe and all of us see a balanced budget here in this country?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is a well-known rule that committees are meant to be masters of their own domain, and we have all been told that the motion to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that was presented by the hon. member for Coast of BaysCentralNotre Dame is not being coordinated by the government. In question period today, the government House leader said, I have asked the committee to expand the scope of the study, and she went on from there.I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to enforce the well-known rule on committee independence and tell the government House leader to stay out of it before she makes matters even worse.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has lost touch with average Canadians. I can imagine it is easy to miss the challenges that everyday Canadians are facing when he is busy jet-setting to billionaire island, but $127,000. Even the most out-of-touch Hollywood celebrity would blush at this type of spending, and 17 hundred bucks to feed a family of five on a three hour flight. Why does the Prime Minister think taxpayers should be on the hook for this type of extravagance?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's budget raises taxes on people like Joe, whether it is for beer, wine, or spirits, but that is really ironic, because that same budget contains the tab for $1,700 worth of drinks and snacks during the Prime Minister's three hour flight to a private island getaway over the holidays.What message does the Prime Minister think he is sending to a taxpayer like Joe when he raises Joe's taxes while helping himself to free drinks on the house?
Mr. Speaker, every single day when I come to the Department of National Defence, it is about serving our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces. We are committed to making sure that the Canadian Armed Forces have all the tools necessary to do their work. We have planned increases that we are committed to. This is about flowing the money and making sure that the money is there for the projects that we have committed to in the years that it is required. We have an defence policy that is going to be coming out shortly, and I look forward to launching that and showing to all Canadians our commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of being seated next to a finance minister who reluctantly ran a deficit to stimulate the Canadian economy while it was going through the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. He did so reluctantly.This week, the minister talked about success in business. I am very happy for him and his success. If he had run a deficit in his business the way he is doing here in government, that would have been disgraceful.The government is doing away with the public transit tax credit. It portrays itself as all green and environmental. Why did it get rid of that credit? They say it was small and underutilized, but that seems like one more reason to keep it around.
Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight for Canadians.We have proposed a number of ideas in a discussion paper in order to modernize Parliament. Some of these ideas have been misinterpreted. Let us be clear: the Liberals are not recommending that the Prime Minister come to question period only once a week. We are trying to encourage a debate on how to improve accountability in the House. Let there be no mistake: our Prime Minister will be more accountable, not less accountable.
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister really does believe we can work better in this place. Just today, I have Sarah, who is my University of Toronto women in House program person, who is shadowing me on the Hill. She has seen a lot of the stuff that has taken place here. She has asked me some tough questions with regard to some of the stuff that went on yesterday and today. It is important that we have this meaningful conversation. I am sure she, too, will be reading the discussion paper and be a part of it. I know many members have women following them today so one day they too can occupy even more seats in the House.
Mr. Speaker, the budget has clearly laid bare the Liberal governments choices. While, exactly two weeks ago, the Liberals voted to close the tax loophole for CEOs, they did not do so in their budget. No, instead they scrapped the public transit tax credit and cut $1.25 billion from the fund to combat climate change. Here is a simple question: why have the Liberals chosen to protect wealthy CEOs instead of the environment?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, Manitoba saw the largest weekend influx of illegal migrants entering the province from the U.S. so far this year. Dozens continue to pour into border communities like Emerson, and the numbers are only growing. To make matters worse, the Prime Minister's reckless tweets have led many to believe that entering Canada through the proper channels is just a suggestion. Will the Prime Minister stand up for the rule of law, stand up for our border communities and condemn this illegal activity, or will he continue to encourage it?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to force changes to how the House operates through the procedures and House affairs committee without all-party support. This is wrong. I feel bad for the talented and principled backbench members opposite who are also uncomfortable with this. Why is the Liberal backbench willing to watch the Liberal front bench betray years of tradition of the House and integrity of their party?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget would invest $2.7 billion to help unemployed and underemployed Canadians get the skills they need for their next and better job, and $470 million for adult workers so they can go back to school, upgrade their skills, and upgrade their credentials. We would make changes to the EI system so that, when Canadians take self-funded training, they do not lose their EI benefits. This would help Canadian workers
Since when does a cabinet minister or House leader give orders to a committee anyway, Mr. Speaker?The government House leader is ignoring the long-held tradition of getting all-party agreement for an overhaul of the way that democracy works in this place. If the House leader's argument that the government of such a warm and loving Prime Minister could not possibly harm our democracy with the power grab now under way, I wonder if she might speculate with us what the majority government of a prime minister like, say, Kevin O'Leary would do with all that power?
Mr. Speaker, our predecessors did not make the investments they should have, which resulted in excessively slow growth. Now we have to invest in Canadian families and infrastructure to boost our growth rate. This is very important to our fiscal position. These investments will put Canada in a better position in the future.
Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning the Prime Minister's need for security and no one has questioned his right to take a vacation. Everyone knows when the Prime Minister does things, it costs a lot of money. What taxpayers are questioning is why, when he knows that everything he does costs taxpayers money, did he choose a vacation to a remote exclusive island. He knew that this would be very expensive for taxpayers. Why did he do it?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I noted that the government's attempt to give itself carte blanche to unilaterally rewrite the Standing Orders is opposite to the practices of most recent Liberal and Conservative administrations, but the tradition goes back much further. On December 28, 1867, our first set of Standing Orders was adopted by unanimous consent. Consensus for major changes to the Standing Orders was good enough for prime ministers from Sir. John A. to Stephen Harper. Will the current Prime Minister not acknowledge that consensus is still the right approach even though it is 2017?
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister held unprecedented levels of public consultation so we could actually respond to the very real challenges they face. It was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to families with children who needed it the most so they could actually do what they needed to do for their families. What was consistent throughout it all? The Conservatives voted against it every time.
Mr. Speaker, let me just clarify to the member opposite that we are absolutely committed to tackling climate change, and if he looks at the budget, he will see the numbers are there. We are putting in place the measures that are necessary to do our made-in-Canada plan on climate change. We put in money to enhance opportunities in clean tech. However, let me quote others. Clean Energy Canada said, We're pleased that the new federal budget makes smart investments for clean energy and climate action in Canada. Équiterre said that today's budget puts in place the necessary resources to implement the new climate plan. Climate Action Network said, Today's budget provides the financial backing we need to begin the serious work of implementing Canada's climate framework....We are getting it right. We are taking action on climate change, and I hope the member will support us.
Mr. Speaker, technological change has shown us that we must continue to encourage innovation in our country. In order to provide tangible help to those who are worried about being left behind, the government has already stressed the importance of giving Canadian workers the tools they need to succeed in the new economy.Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour explain to the House what this government is doing to make sure that Canadians can get the training they need to find and keep good, well-paying jobs?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the children and grandchildren of Joe, because the grandchildren of Joe will have to pay for the bad administration of that Liberal government, which uses deficits and makes debt. This is totally unacceptable.That party got elected on talk of small $10-billion deficits and a return to balanced budgets in 2019. The reality is that the deficits are three times greater than expected and there is no plan to return to balanced budgets.I have a very simple question for the minister. I know that the minister and I speak the same language and I would like him to understand me. In what year will Canada return to a balanced budget? In what year?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our taking office, no such policy existed. This government is working hard for middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join them. This government has had unprecedented levels of public consultations to ensure that we can respond to the very real challenges that Canadians are facing. This government will continue to work hard for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the vision we have put in place for the Canada 150 celebrations. Four themes will be celebrated throughout the year: young people, the environment, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and diversity and inclusiveness. We will make sure that in funding the celebrations and various projects across the country, there will be an equitable regional distribution. Of course, I hope all Canadians across the country and of all political stripes will join in the celebrations.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would not interfere in the work of committees, but that is exactly what he is doing. The Prime Minister's staff, over the last number of days, have been at the procedure and House affairs committee, telling the Liberal backbenchers to block the opposition's simple and reasonable request that we have collaboration and consensus on changes to the rules. Will the Prime Minister back off and let the Liberal members do their job, as he promised that he would do?
Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We strengthened the middle class by reducing their taxes while asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a little more. That continues to be our focus, because we know it is very important to have a fair tax system. We will continue with our plan. We found expenditures that must be reviewed so we can ensure that our system continues to be fair. There will be consultations in the coming weeks and months to explain our programs.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to rush through permanent changes to the rules of the House of Commons. These changes will undermine the opposition's ability to hold the Prime Minister to account and will allow him to be here only once a week.In the House, we represent the views of our constituents and all Canadians. It is an honour and a privilege to be here, not an inconvenience.Will the Prime Minister stop avoiding accountability and immediately abandon his plan to change the rules?
Mr. Speaker, I am taking part in a discussion that includes all members and all Canadians because we want to work with them and we want them to participate in this discussion. Our government knows that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace. Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, effective, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, I really do believe that we can have more meaningful conversation and debate in this place. I believe that when it comes to challenging the integrity of individuals, that is for the member to choose to do. I believe that is not needed in the conversation that I would like to have, and that is why I am saying let us have a conversation, let us have a discussion. The member knows very well, as I told him last night, that I actually appreciate a lot of the work that he does. I hope that we can continue working better together, because I believe this place needs to be modernized. It is a commitment we made to Canadians in the electoral campaign. It is something on which Canadians agree that all members in this place need to work better together.
Mr. Speaker, we built our agenda, our plan, based on Joe. What we have done for Joe is we have reduced his taxes. If Joe is a single guy, we have reduced his taxes by $330. If Joe has a family, he has more money for his family because of our Canada child benefit. Most importantly for Joe, our investments in transit mean he is going to get to and from home more rapidly. What Joe knows is that he is going to have, over the long term, the ability to have a great job, an exciting job, because we are going to invest in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, in relation to the point of privilege, I want to add my two cents to the question of privilege raised by my hon. colleague the House Leader of the Official Opposition, and I will conclude my remarks by asking for unanimous consent for a motion.There is no doubt that the minister's actions were inappropriate, but more to the point, they were entirely misplaced. The lack of respect in dealing with the bill in question firmly rests on the shoulders of the government House leader not the Conservatives. The government made the decision to try to shoehorn the debate on Bill C-17 into the tiny 30-minute window before the budget. It was not the opposition that did that. Perhaps the minister should just march on down the front bench and channel her anger where it actually belongs. She should demand that the government House leader call it for debate this afternoon or maybe even for all day tomorrow.I would like to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion, that the order of the day for tomorrow, Friday, March 23, 2017, shall be Bill C-17, an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act. Let us just get on with it.
Mr. Speaker, we decided that it was very important to make decisions in sectors where Canada has a comparative advantage.One sector that is very important to us is the agri-food sector. We decided that we should be a global leader in this sector. That is why we decided to focus on that sector and to ensure that people have the training needed to lead the way.
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear to all of us in the House. Canadians are ambitious and seek new opportunities every day. Whether they are looking to start their own businesses, to export to new markets or to scale up their operations, they need our support.While we have been working hard to open doors and create opportunities for Canadians, it is clear that the global economy continues to change. What new commitments has the government made in budget 2017 to help Canadian businesses flourish in this changing economy?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to set the record straight. The discussion paper talks about the better use of our time as members of Parliament. On Friday our schedule here is only half a day, so let us talk about moving those hours to other days of the week. We talk about working hard just like Canadians do. Hard-working Canadians in most offices in Canada start their day at 9 a.m. or even earlier. Why can the House of Commons not consider that?Let us talk about doing that so that we can be back in our ridings to not only serve Canadians but to be able to engage with them and listen to their concerns, listen to their constructive feedback, so we can better serve them in this place.
Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that I shared with members of Parliament as well as Canadians was to encourage us to have a conversation, a discussion. What I have recognized is that there are many misconceptions in regard to the discussion paper. I will share information in regard to Friday sittings. We know that on Fridays the House of Commons sits for only half a day. We are saying why not reallocate that time to other days. The House of Commons starts at 10 a.m. on some days. Most Canadians start their day at 9 a.m. or earlier. Why can the House of Commons not do that? Let us have that important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to give the Prime Minister four days off a week, prevent members from doing their job in committees, and limit the speaking time of all members. Motion No. 6 was nothing compared to this attempt by the Prime Minister to take total and permanent control of Parliament. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons claims she wants to discuss this, but at the same time has ordered her MPs to pass these changes in committee in a backroom on Parliament Hill.When will the Prime Minister put his house in order? When will he finally show some respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that this place needs to be modernized. We need to have this conversation. We need to have this discussion. Every single member of Parliament has a role and responsibility. I recognize that members on both sides of this place have responsibilities, and we want to ensure that we have important conversations. Within this place, members of Parliament have the opportunity to hold the government to account. We believe that within the ridings, constituents have the ability to hold their members of Parliament to account, and that is why I believe that important work is done here in the House as well as in the ridings.
Mr. Speaker, documents show that in October, the Privy Council Office was directed by the Prime Minister to produce a regional backgrounder on Medicine Hat during the by-election. The Prime Minister had no government events in Medicine Hat. He was only there to campaign. The PCO was also ordered to provide tech support and uploaded a video from the campaign stop with the PM and the Liberal candidate. In light of the actions of the Prime Minister in Medicine Hat, today, when the Prime Minister is campaigning in MarkhamThornhill, will PCO staff be ordered to campaign with him yet again?
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is well aware that we support supply management. She is well aware that I announced $350 million for the dairy sector, $250 million for the farmers, $100 million for the processors.Along with it, yesterday's budget announced $70 million for agricultural science and innovation, $950 million for super clusters, $200 million for clean technology.This government supports supply management and the agricultural sector.
Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. Our government recognizes that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace.Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, predictable, efficient, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to working with all the provinces. I know that with the Province of Quebec we have spoken with the minister responsible for education, and the provincial government is very pleased with the investments that have been made by this government. We will continue to invest in all Canadians so that they are given the skills they need to work in tomorrow's economy, as well as to develop well-paying jobs for today.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance presented the governments plan. It is an ambitious, visionary plan that makes middle-class families the priority, both in Bourassa and elsewhere in Canada.Can the Minister of Finance tell us why he only chose certain sectors of the economy in his budget?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected our government on a plan to grow the economy and strengthen the middle class. We are delivering on that commitment. Over the last seven months, almost 250,000 jobs were created, the majority of which were full-time jobs. This is the most job growth we have seen in over a decade. This is evidence that our plan is working. Yesterday, we continued to build off those investments, good work we are doing for Canadians. One of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council Office to develop guidelines surrounding the reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our government taking office, no such policy existed.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to continue on our plan to make a real difference for our country over the long term. What we started with was dealing with middle-class anxiety. What we talked about yesterday was a second chapter in our plan: how we can create great long-term jobs in sectors where Canada can be globally competitive. We are going to do this in a way that will ensure that Canadians can go for great opportunities in the future, and we will ensure that we deal with the most vulnerable as we can.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about what Sally and Joanne and Mary-Ann will see in the future. I want to talk about the fact that what we are doing is taking the very best balance sheet among the G7 countries, the lowest net debt to GDP, and we are making investments that an optimistic country needs to make. Unfortunately, the people before us were focused on austerity. We are focused on growth. We are looking at how we can make investments to make a difference. That growth is what is going to make sure that our country stays successful over the long run.
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this question because it gives me an opportunity to talk about the fantastic news in our budget yesterday, as it relates to health, and that includes the health of seniors. We were able to announce additional investments in the order of $11 billion that would go to home care, including palliative care, that would go to mental health, and that includes seniors' needs, like dementia, so we would be able to support them. It included things like $11 billion for housing that would include social housing to support seniors. There was so much good news in the budget. I look forward to working with colleagues to put that work into place.
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly these hypotheticals and these speculations that the committee has the ability to deal with. That is why we are saying let us have this conversation, let us have this discussion. It is because these are important concerns that Canadians are facing, and we are saying let us have this discussion. That is why I had introduced a discussion paper. I know the committee members sat late once again yesterday. I did visit the members of the committee to thank them for their work. I believe that they are having a meaningful conversation and I think it is important that they continue that conversation. My door will remain open so that we can all work better together.
Mr. Speaker, let us think about children and grandchildren for a moment. As we worry about children and grandchildren, what we think about is this: How can our country be a world leader? How can we be successful? What we can do is be optimistic and make investments in the future growth of this country. That is exactly what we are going to do. We are focused on places where our country has a comparative advantage. We are focused on how we can give our children and our grandchildren the education, training, and skills to be successful. That will lead to a higher rate of growth. That will lead to good economic outcomes.
Mr. Speaker, as I have shared many times in the House, yes, a discussion paper was released to all members of Parliament, and it was also released to Canadians, so we could have a meaningful conversation, a substantial discussion on Standing Orders and how we govern in this place. It is unfortunate that a lot of the ideas within the paper have been misrepresented. This is why I encourage all people to be part of the conversation so we can find a made-in-Canada solution for Parliament and the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House on this traditional territory the day after a feminist budget was tabled in the House, with the first-ever gender statement acknowledging that our policies and our actions in the House affect women and men and people of different genders differently. One hundred million dollars was committed for the gender-based violence strategy, the first Canada has ever had; $7 billion for child care; $11 billion for affordable housing.We have many priorities and much work to do. This was a great budget for women and girls everywhere and
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier this afternoon, this budget was the best news on health that we have seen in a decade, with fantastic news in so many areas; not only the new investments that I referred to earlier, but we have a growing Canada health transfer that would give to the provinces more than $200 billion over the next five years. As we work with the provinces and territories in delivering health care, they would be able to do advanced care for Canadians of all particular needs. We also have new money for early learning and child care in the order of $7 billion that would be of great assistance to families affected by
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has shared so well, it was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes for the 1% of wealthiest Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to his family and the children who need it the most to ensure that they get the most.When it comes to the travel that the member opposite is referring to, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and their guests as well.
Mr. Speaker, we know that the measures in our budget are very important for all of Canada, including Quebec. It is very important to invest in affordable housing and in our health care system, in Quebec and across the country. We will continue with our program to improve the level of economic growth. It is important to create jobs. At present, the unemployment rate is lower than when we came to power. It is currently 6.6%, and it was 7.1% at the outset. Our program
Mr. Speaker, it is this government that actually increased funding to committees so that they could do the important work that they need to do. We actually believe in the committee process because it is the committee that can actually study legislation and study ideas way better than we do in this place, and that is exactly what we have asked the committee to do.With respect to the discussion paper, I have asked the committee to broaden the scope of the study they already have in place in regard to the Standing Orders. I believe it is a meaningful conversation that all members need to have. I encourage all members, as well as all Canadians, to participate.
Mr. Speaker, once again allow me to set the record straight for Canadians. The discussion paper talks about a better use of members' time. On Fridays, we are only required to be here for half an hour. It would be realistic to move those hours to other days of the week. Most offices in Canada start their workday at 9 a.m. The House of Commons could as well.The goal behind this option is to enable us to be in our ridings on Fridays so that we can meet with our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, as I have just shared, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned event, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official government duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned events, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided with briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business. The Prime Minister is the prime minister after all.
Mr. Speaker, in budget 2017 we propose to help make communities healthier and more inclusive, invest in faster and more efficient public transit, and build more cultural and recreational centres and affordable housing.Our government is investing more than $180 billion in neighbourhoods and modern and resilient communities, and these projects are well under way with more than 1,400 projects approved totalling over $15 billion.In my riding, 6,000 families are better off thanks to this budget. Millions of families throughout Canada are better off. That makes me very proud.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for NewmarketAurora for his work on trade and his interest in innovation.It is a great budget for NewmarketAurora in terms of innovation. Through our innovation and skills plan, we will create jobs, we will help our companies and our economy and citizens thrive in a rapidly changing world.That same innovation and skills plan also aims to help 10,000 more young Canadians to get the skills and training they need in today's economy through work integrated learning and co-ops. There are $1.26 billion in a strategic innovation fund that will create a one-stop shop and a more efficient and coordinated way for us innovate.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about
Mr. Speaker, it is very important to be an optimistic country and to make investments in the future, but we also need to know in which particular sectors we have a comparative advantage. That is exactly what we have done.We decided to be the world leader in very important sectors where there will be high-quality jobs in the future. We chose six sectors that are key to our childrens and grandchildrens future. We will consider ways of providing the necessary training for the good jobs of the future.
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are not happy that an agreement that was working very well is being scrapped.The Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed a motion expressing its great disappointment with budget 2017. There is nothing for forestry, for transportation, or for cheese producers, and nothing is done about tax havens. When Ottawa calls the shots, Quebec will always be left wanting.Instead of swallowing this nonsense and acting like doormats, for goodness sake, would the 40 Liberal members from Quebec stop undermining the interests of Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, this Liberal budget is full of bluster and bafflegab. A few gems include innovation through superclusters, or this one about offsetting derivative positions in straddle transactions, or even better, capping stock options for the super-richoh, wait; that did not make it into the budget. That was in the Liberal platform. This is nothing but a backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget. Way back on page 150 is a $1.2 billion cut to fighting climate change. To all those Canadians who believed the Liberals in Paris were serious about fighting climate change, how can they betray their commitment to them now?
Mr. Speaker, it is the first time the PCO has needed private island guidelines.The Prime Minister has increased taxes on Canadians who use Uber or public transit to get to work, because the Prime Minister has made it very clear he needs the extra cash to pay for his caviar and champagne when he travels to private islands. The Prime Minister is so out of touch that he is raising taxes on struggling Canadians to fund his lavish lifestyle, and Canadians are getting fed up.Will the Prime Minister actually stand and answer questions of behalf of struggling Canadians or will he just sit there with a smug look on his face, while he daydreams about his next vacation?
Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can be absolutely assured that every Canadian law is being enforced by the RCMP and by the CBSA. As well, we are honouring all of our obligations under international law.The hon. gentleman should know that when people cross the border in irregular fashion, they are apprehended, they are identified, they are fingerprinted. Their biographical and biometric information is collected. That is checked against every Canadian database and the appropriate international databases for immigration or criminal activity. If it is warranted, suspects are detained.
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what the Conservative government was focused on. That was on balancing the budget. For Canada's beleaguered energy workers, yesterday's budget was a kick in the teeth. While our biggest competitor, the United States, is cutting red tape and taxes and making its energy sector more attractive to job creators, the Liberals are jacking up taxes and punishing oil and gas exploration. It is almost as though they want to phase out the energy sector. Our energy sector employs those middle-class Canadians that the government pretends to care about. Why did the Liberals go out of their way in this budget to kick energy workers in the teeth when they are already down?
Mr. Speaker, while the government's gender budget sounded good, the budget lacks real action for women: not a penny to legislate equal pay for work of equal value; not a cent for child care this year; zero new money for shelters for women fleeing violence; nothing to make birth control more affordable; and only a fraction of what is needed for a strategy to end violence against women. Once again, women are being asked to wait. If gender equality really matters to the government, why were women shortchanged again?
Mr. Speaker, while this Prime Minister is being paid to dig us deeper into debt and to go sunbathing with his family on the taxpayers dime, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is out in the cold launching the celebrations for the 150th anniversary of Confederation. Like the Prime Minister, she is favouring her Liberal cronies.Can the Prime Minister, who has once again increased the tax burden of Canadians, justify spending $127,000 on a vacation paid for by taxpayers, who will be paying back his deficit for decades to come?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what this budget means for a hard-working taxpayer. Let us call him Joe. Joe takes the bus to work every day, and at the end of the day, he likes to go to the pub with his buddies for a beer. He is a responsible guy, so he always uses Uber to get home. What does this budget do for Joe? First of all, it taxes his bus pass. It takes away his tax credit for his bus pass. It taxes the beer he has at the pub. It even slaps a tax on his Uber ride.What exactly does the Prime Minister have against people like Joe?
Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to set the record straight.Contrary to what the Liberals think, Parliament belongs to Canadians. They elected all of us to represent them. Contrary to what the Prime Minister thinks, not everyone likes him. Most Canadians do not approve of the deficits he is running. Most Canadians find his insatiable appetite for spending taxpayers' money unacceptable. Why does the Prime Minister want to silence Canadians who do not think like him? Why does he want to muzzle the opposition members and his own backbenchers?We will not let him do that.
Mr. Speaker, the same Liberals who regularly attacked Stephen Harper for his use of the gag are now flat out resorting to the guillotine to shut down debate. Amending the rules that govern how our democracy works should never be done by just one party, no matter the party.Thus, will the Liberal government commit, here and now, to not changing the rules unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, this government has gone out of its way to approve three pipelines. Those are decisions that will put energy workers in Alberta and Saskatchewan to work. What this government could accomplish in one year, that government could not accomplish in 10 years. That is what we have been doing, because we care about putting energy workers to work.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister's arrogant attitude with how he spends tax dollars, but now this behaviour is starting to creep into the House of Commons. He has proposed a plan to limit his attendance in question period to once a week, which in fact, is actually only one hour a week, and give all of his colleagues Fridays off. I just want to remind the Prime Minister that while he was campaigning he said, Sunlight is the world's best disinfectant. My question is: What dirt is he trying to hide?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal budget was nothing but bad news for the Canadian Armed Forces. The Liberals have cut another $8.5 billion, which means they have cut a total of $12 billion in just two years. Major investments have been punted down the road for two decades, and there is not enough money to buy the equipment our forces need. This is worse than the Liberals' decade of darkness. Today they are dragging our troops back into the Dark Ages.When will the minister start serving the brave men and women in uniform instead of being a patsy to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?
Mr. Speaker, budget 2017 was an opportunity to meet the needs of Canadian seniors, but the Liberal government told them to keep waiting. The Canadian Medical Association said, Budget 2017 fails Canada's seniors. CARP said, financial security for seniors not on the agenda. Divide and conquer deals with the provinces are not the solution. We need a national seniors strategy. Why did yesterday's budget leave Canadian seniors wanting and waiting?
Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, the Liberal budget just sounds like a Seinfeld show. It is about nothing.The Liberals had a choice. They could have eliminated the tax loophole that is costing us $800 million a year and benefits only the wealthiest 1%, but no, they decided not to keep that promise. Instead of going after and taking down their millionaire friends, who did they go after? They went after people who take the bus in the morning.Why are the Liberals getting rid of this tax credit that helps families and promotes public transit while maintaining the gifts for their millionaire friends?
Mr. Speaker, closing the CEO stock option tax loophole would have generated $725 million every year, and as a bonus it would have helped the Liberals keep one of their promises. What a concept that is. Instead, what the Liberals are doing is they are refusing to give $155 million to finally end discrimination against first nations children.The question is simple, and please can the Liberals deliver the response for once without their pre-written talking points. Why protect rich CEOs instead of protecting first nations children?
Mr. Speaker, this goes well beyond an innocent discussion paper. The government House leader should not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.However, if she is serious about that, if she is really truly sincere that her motives are pure, will she now stand in her place and tell this House that she accepts that her government has no mandate to change the rules of democracy over the united objections of the opposition? If she will not, then it is pretty clear that her protests of innocence are even more shallow than they sound.
Mr. Speaker, the House leader is in on this charade too, and the Liberal members even know it. They know this is not a discussion paper. They know this is an edict from the Prime Minister's Office. The House leader just said that she asked the committee; she is asking it to do her dirty work.My question is for the Liberal members of Parliament. I know there are some hard-working people with integrity on that side. Will any of them stand up, show some independence, and say no to the Prime Minister and no to the House leader, who has completely botched this for all of you?
Mr. Speaker, ever since Quebec managed to pry labour matters from the hands of the Canadian government, we have created the best labour market training system in North America.However, once again, Ottawa is going back on its word. The government cannot be counted on. After the Harper government, which tried to make us fit into the Canadian mould, now it is the Liberals who are reneging on the labour market agreement, which was so hard to reach. Why is it that whenever something is working well, Ottawa has to stick its nose in and tear everything down?
Mr. Speaker, the one comment I would like to make, once again, has to do with how Canada's regions have been abandoned, especially our forestry regions. The Quebec National Assembly reminded us of this today. The agricultural sector is going to have to fight with six high-tech sectors for additional funding for its own development, even though all Canadians eat every day, and food security is extremely important. In my view, the choices this government is making go against the well-being of our society.Does the Prime Minister want to punish farmers and all Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the government House leader tried to defend the Prime Minister's use of the Privy Council Office to help him on a trip to Alberta for the Medicine HatCardstonWarner by-election. She claimed it was to help prepare the PM for government business, but that is complete nonsense. The trip had only one purpose: for the Prime Minister to appear at Liberal Party campaign events. There was no government business. Why does the Prime Minister believe it is okay to use public servants to campaign for the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, sunny ways are indeed gone. They have been replaced by an attempt to unilaterally and quietly ram through changes to the rules that govern our democracy. This is nothing less than a massive government power grab, which is only meant to help the Prime Minister avoid accountability.Is there anyone on the Liberal benches with the courage to stand up and tell the Prime Minister that this is not why they came to Ottawa?
Mr. Speaker, not only is there nothing in the budget for the dairy industry, but also there is still no news on granting tariff quotas under CETA.We now hear talk about a proposal to resolve the softwood lumber issue by sacrificing our supply management system. That is completely unacceptable. The Liberals already hurt our industry during the negotiations and have yet to come up with fair and equitable compensation. My question is simple:Can the government confirm today that it will not sacrifice our supply management system or our forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, do not get me wrong, Joe sounds like a great guy, but I want to ask about Peter. Last night, Canadians watched Peter Mansbridge flat out ask the finance minister why he refuses to come clean on when the Liberals will finally balance the budget. As always, the finance minister refused to answer his simple question of when?Why has the term balanced budget become a dirty word to the government and to the finance minister, and when will Peter and Joe and all of us see a balanced budget here in this country?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is a well-known rule that committees are meant to be masters of their own domain, and we have all been told that the motion to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that was presented by the hon. member for Coast of BaysCentralNotre Dame is not being coordinated by the government. In question period today, the government House leader said, I have asked the committee to expand the scope of the study, and she went on from there.I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to enforce the well-known rule on committee independence and tell the government House leader to stay out of it before she makes matters even worse.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has lost touch with average Canadians. I can imagine it is easy to miss the challenges that everyday Canadians are facing when he is busy jet-setting to billionaire island, but $127,000. Even the most out-of-touch Hollywood celebrity would blush at this type of spending, and 17 hundred bucks to feed a family of five on a three hour flight. Why does the Prime Minister think taxpayers should be on the hook for this type of extravagance?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's budget raises taxes on people like Joe, whether it is for beer, wine, or spirits, but that is really ironic, because that same budget contains the tab for $1,700 worth of drinks and snacks during the Prime Minister's three hour flight to a private island getaway over the holidays.What message does the Prime Minister think he is sending to a taxpayer like Joe when he raises Joe's taxes while helping himself to free drinks on the house?
Mr. Speaker, every single day when I come to the Department of National Defence, it is about serving our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces. We are committed to making sure that the Canadian Armed Forces have all the tools necessary to do their work. We have planned increases that we are committed to. This is about flowing the money and making sure that the money is there for the projects that we have committed to in the years that it is required. We have an defence policy that is going to be coming out shortly, and I look forward to launching that and showing to all Canadians our commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of being seated next to a finance minister who reluctantly ran a deficit to stimulate the Canadian economy while it was going through the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. He did so reluctantly.This week, the minister talked about success in business. I am very happy for him and his success. If he had run a deficit in his business the way he is doing here in government, that would have been disgraceful.The government is doing away with the public transit tax credit. It portrays itself as all green and environmental. Why did it get rid of that credit? They say it was small and underutilized, but that seems like one more reason to keep it around.
Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight for Canadians.We have proposed a number of ideas in a discussion paper in order to modernize Parliament. Some of these ideas have been misinterpreted. Let us be clear: the Liberals are not recommending that the Prime Minister come to question period only once a week. We are trying to encourage a debate on how to improve accountability in the House. Let there be no mistake: our Prime Minister will be more accountable, not less accountable.
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister really does believe we can work better in this place. Just today, I have Sarah, who is my University of Toronto women in House program person, who is shadowing me on the Hill. She has seen a lot of the stuff that has taken place here. She has asked me some tough questions with regard to some of the stuff that went on yesterday and today. It is important that we have this meaningful conversation. I am sure she, too, will be reading the discussion paper and be a part of it. I know many members have women following them today so one day they too can occupy even more seats in the House.
Mr. Speaker, the budget has clearly laid bare the Liberal governments choices. While, exactly two weeks ago, the Liberals voted to close the tax loophole for CEOs, they did not do so in their budget. No, instead they scrapped the public transit tax credit and cut $1.25 billion from the fund to combat climate change. Here is a simple question: why have the Liberals chosen to protect wealthy CEOs instead of the environment?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, Manitoba saw the largest weekend influx of illegal migrants entering the province from the U.S. so far this year. Dozens continue to pour into border communities like Emerson, and the numbers are only growing. To make matters worse, the Prime Minister's reckless tweets have led many to believe that entering Canada through the proper channels is just a suggestion. Will the Prime Minister stand up for the rule of law, stand up for our border communities and condemn this illegal activity, or will he continue to encourage it?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to force changes to how the House operates through the procedures and House affairs committee without all-party support. This is wrong. I feel bad for the talented and principled backbench members opposite who are also uncomfortable with this. Why is the Liberal backbench willing to watch the Liberal front bench betray years of tradition of the House and integrity of their party?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget would invest $2.7 billion to help unemployed and underemployed Canadians get the skills they need for their next and better job, and $470 million for adult workers so they can go back to school, upgrade their skills, and upgrade their credentials. We would make changes to the EI system so that, when Canadians take self-funded training, they do not lose their EI benefits. This would help Canadian workers
Since when does a cabinet minister or House leader give orders to a committee anyway, Mr. Speaker?The government House leader is ignoring the long-held tradition of getting all-party agreement for an overhaul of the way that democracy works in this place. If the House leader's argument that the government of such a warm and loving Prime Minister could not possibly harm our democracy with the power grab now under way, I wonder if she might speculate with us what the majority government of a prime minister like, say, Kevin O'Leary would do with all that power?
Mr. Speaker, our predecessors did not make the investments they should have, which resulted in excessively slow growth. Now we have to invest in Canadian families and infrastructure to boost our growth rate. This is very important to our fiscal position. These investments will put Canada in a better position in the future.
Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning the Prime Minister's need for security and no one has questioned his right to take a vacation. Everyone knows when the Prime Minister does things, it costs a lot of money. What taxpayers are questioning is why, when he knows that everything he does costs taxpayers money, did he choose a vacation to a remote exclusive island. He knew that this would be very expensive for taxpayers. Why did he do it?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I noted that the government's attempt to give itself carte blanche to unilaterally rewrite the Standing Orders is opposite to the practices of most recent Liberal and Conservative administrations, but the tradition goes back much further. On December 28, 1867, our first set of Standing Orders was adopted by unanimous consent. Consensus for major changes to the Standing Orders was good enough for prime ministers from Sir. John A. to Stephen Harper. Will the current Prime Minister not acknowledge that consensus is still the right approach even though it is 2017?
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister held unprecedented levels of public consultation so we could actually respond to the very real challenges they face. It was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to families with children who needed it the most so they could actually do what they needed to do for their families. What was consistent throughout it all? The Conservatives voted against it every time.
Mr. Speaker, let me just clarify to the member opposite that we are absolutely committed to tackling climate change, and if he looks at the budget, he will see the numbers are there. We are putting in place the measures that are necessary to do our made-in-Canada plan on climate change. We put in money to enhance opportunities in clean tech. However, let me quote others. Clean Energy Canada said, We're pleased that the new federal budget makes smart investments for clean energy and climate action in Canada. Équiterre said that today's budget puts in place the necessary resources to implement the new climate plan. Climate Action Network said, Today's budget provides the financial backing we need to begin the serious work of implementing Canada's climate framework....We are getting it right. We are taking action on climate change, and I hope the member will support us.
Mr. Speaker, technological change has shown us that we must continue to encourage innovation in our country. In order to provide tangible help to those who are worried about being left behind, the government has already stressed the importance of giving Canadian workers the tools they need to succeed in the new economy.Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour explain to the House what this government is doing to make sure that Canadians can get the training they need to find and keep good, well-paying jobs?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the children and grandchildren of Joe, because the grandchildren of Joe will have to pay for the bad administration of that Liberal government, which uses deficits and makes debt. This is totally unacceptable.That party got elected on talk of small $10-billion deficits and a return to balanced budgets in 2019. The reality is that the deficits are three times greater than expected and there is no plan to return to balanced budgets.I have a very simple question for the minister. I know that the minister and I speak the same language and I would like him to understand me. In what year will Canada return to a balanced budget? In what year?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our taking office, no such policy existed. This government is working hard for middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join them. This government has had unprecedented levels of public consultations to ensure that we can respond to the very real challenges that Canadians are facing. This government will continue to work hard for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the vision we have put in place for the Canada 150 celebrations. Four themes will be celebrated throughout the year: young people, the environment, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and diversity and inclusiveness. We will make sure that in funding the celebrations and various projects across the country, there will be an equitable regional distribution. Of course, I hope all Canadians across the country and of all political stripes will join in the celebrations.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would not interfere in the work of committees, but that is exactly what he is doing. The Prime Minister's staff, over the last number of days, have been at the procedure and House affairs committee, telling the Liberal backbenchers to block the opposition's simple and reasonable request that we have collaboration and consensus on changes to the rules. Will the Prime Minister back off and let the Liberal members do their job, as he promised that he would do?
Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We strengthened the middle class by reducing their taxes while asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a little more. That continues to be our focus, because we know it is very important to have a fair tax system. We will continue with our plan. We found expenditures that must be reviewed so we can ensure that our system continues to be fair. There will be consultations in the coming weeks and months to explain our programs.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to rush through permanent changes to the rules of the House of Commons. These changes will undermine the opposition's ability to hold the Prime Minister to account and will allow him to be here only once a week.In the House, we represent the views of our constituents and all Canadians. It is an honour and a privilege to be here, not an inconvenience.Will the Prime Minister stop avoiding accountability and immediately abandon his plan to change the rules?
Mr. Speaker, I am taking part in a discussion that includes all members and all Canadians because we want to work with them and we want them to participate in this discussion. Our government knows that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace. Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, effective, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, I really do believe that we can have more meaningful conversation and debate in this place. I believe that when it comes to challenging the integrity of individuals, that is for the member to choose to do. I believe that is not needed in the conversation that I would like to have, and that is why I am saying let us have a conversation, let us have a discussion. The member knows very well, as I told him last night, that I actually appreciate a lot of the work that he does. I hope that we can continue working better together, because I believe this place needs to be modernized. It is a commitment we made to Canadians in the electoral campaign. It is something on which Canadians agree that all members in this place need to work better together.
Mr. Speaker, we built our agenda, our plan, based on Joe. What we have done for Joe is we have reduced his taxes. If Joe is a single guy, we have reduced his taxes by $330. If Joe has a family, he has more money for his family because of our Canada child benefit. Most importantly for Joe, our investments in transit mean he is going to get to and from home more rapidly. What Joe knows is that he is going to have, over the long term, the ability to have a great job, an exciting job, because we are going to invest in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, in relation to the point of privilege, I want to add my two cents to the question of privilege raised by my hon. colleague the House Leader of the Official Opposition, and I will conclude my remarks by asking for unanimous consent for a motion.There is no doubt that the minister's actions were inappropriate, but more to the point, they were entirely misplaced. The lack of respect in dealing with the bill in question firmly rests on the shoulders of the government House leader not the Conservatives. The government made the decision to try to shoehorn the debate on Bill C-17 into the tiny 30-minute window before the budget. It was not the opposition that did that. Perhaps the minister should just march on down the front bench and channel her anger where it actually belongs. She should demand that the government House leader call it for debate this afternoon or maybe even for all day tomorrow.I would like to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion, that the order of the day for tomorrow, Friday, March 23, 2017, shall be Bill C-17, an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act. Let us just get on with it.
Mr. Speaker, we decided that it was very important to make decisions in sectors where Canada has a comparative advantage.One sector that is very important to us is the agri-food sector. We decided that we should be a global leader in this sector. That is why we decided to focus on that sector and to ensure that people have the training needed to lead the way.
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear to all of us in the House. Canadians are ambitious and seek new opportunities every day. Whether they are looking to start their own businesses, to export to new markets or to scale up their operations, they need our support.While we have been working hard to open doors and create opportunities for Canadians, it is clear that the global economy continues to change. What new commitments has the government made in budget 2017 to help Canadian businesses flourish in this changing economy?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to set the record straight. The discussion paper talks about the better use of our time as members of Parliament. On Friday our schedule here is only half a day, so let us talk about moving those hours to other days of the week. We talk about working hard just like Canadians do. Hard-working Canadians in most offices in Canada start their day at 9 a.m. or even earlier. Why can the House of Commons not consider that?Let us talk about doing that so that we can be back in our ridings to not only serve Canadians but to be able to engage with them and listen to their concerns, listen to their constructive feedback, so we can better serve them in this place.
Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that I shared with members of Parliament as well as Canadians was to encourage us to have a conversation, a discussion. What I have recognized is that there are many misconceptions in regard to the discussion paper. I will share information in regard to Friday sittings. We know that on Fridays the House of Commons sits for only half a day. We are saying why not reallocate that time to other days. The House of Commons starts at 10 a.m. on some days. Most Canadians start their day at 9 a.m. or earlier. Why can the House of Commons not do that? Let us have that important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to give the Prime Minister four days off a week, prevent members from doing their job in committees, and limit the speaking time of all members. Motion No. 6 was nothing compared to this attempt by the Prime Minister to take total and permanent control of Parliament. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons claims she wants to discuss this, but at the same time has ordered her MPs to pass these changes in committee in a backroom on Parliament Hill.When will the Prime Minister put his house in order? When will he finally show some respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that this place needs to be modernized. We need to have this conversation. We need to have this discussion. Every single member of Parliament has a role and responsibility. I recognize that members on both sides of this place have responsibilities, and we want to ensure that we have important conversations. Within this place, members of Parliament have the opportunity to hold the government to account. We believe that within the ridings, constituents have the ability to hold their members of Parliament to account, and that is why I believe that important work is done here in the House as well as in the ridings.
Mr. Speaker, documents show that in October, the Privy Council Office was directed by the Prime Minister to produce a regional backgrounder on Medicine Hat during the by-election. The Prime Minister had no government events in Medicine Hat. He was only there to campaign. The PCO was also ordered to provide tech support and uploaded a video from the campaign stop with the PM and the Liberal candidate. In light of the actions of the Prime Minister in Medicine Hat, today, when the Prime Minister is campaigning in MarkhamThornhill, will PCO staff be ordered to campaign with him yet again?
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is well aware that we support supply management. She is well aware that I announced $350 million for the dairy sector, $250 million for the farmers, $100 million for the processors.Along with it, yesterday's budget announced $70 million for agricultural science and innovation, $950 million for super clusters, $200 million for clean technology.This government supports supply management and the agricultural sector.
Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. Our government recognizes that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace.Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, predictable, efficient, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to working with all the provinces. I know that with the Province of Quebec we have spoken with the minister responsible for education, and the provincial government is very pleased with the investments that have been made by this government. We will continue to invest in all Canadians so that they are given the skills they need to work in tomorrow's economy, as well as to develop well-paying jobs for today.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance presented the governments plan. It is an ambitious, visionary plan that makes middle-class families the priority, both in Bourassa and elsewhere in Canada.Can the Minister of Finance tell us why he only chose certain sectors of the economy in his budget?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected our government on a plan to grow the economy and strengthen the middle class. We are delivering on that commitment. Over the last seven months, almost 250,000 jobs were created, the majority of which were full-time jobs. This is the most job growth we have seen in over a decade. This is evidence that our plan is working. Yesterday, we continued to build off those investments, good work we are doing for Canadians. One of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council Office to develop guidelines surrounding the reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our government taking office, no such policy existed.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to continue on our plan to make a real difference for our country over the long term. What we started with was dealing with middle-class anxiety. What we talked about yesterday was a second chapter in our plan: how we can create great long-term jobs in sectors where Canada can be globally competitive. We are going to do this in a way that will ensure that Canadians can go for great opportunities in the future, and we will ensure that we deal with the most vulnerable as we can.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about what Sally and Joanne and Mary-Ann will see in the future. I want to talk about the fact that what we are doing is taking the very best balance sheet among the G7 countries, the lowest net debt to GDP, and we are making investments that an optimistic country needs to make. Unfortunately, the people before us were focused on austerity. We are focused on growth. We are looking at how we can make investments to make a difference. That growth is what is going to make sure that our country stays successful over the long run.
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this question because it gives me an opportunity to talk about the fantastic news in our budget yesterday, as it relates to health, and that includes the health of seniors. We were able to announce additional investments in the order of $11 billion that would go to home care, including palliative care, that would go to mental health, and that includes seniors' needs, like dementia, so we would be able to support them. It included things like $11 billion for housing that would include social housing to support seniors. There was so much good news in the budget. I look forward to working with colleagues to put that work into place.
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly these hypotheticals and these speculations that the committee has the ability to deal with. That is why we are saying let us have this conversation, let us have this discussion. It is because these are important concerns that Canadians are facing, and we are saying let us have this discussion. That is why I had introduced a discussion paper. I know the committee members sat late once again yesterday. I did visit the members of the committee to thank them for their work. I believe that they are having a meaningful conversation and I think it is important that they continue that conversation. My door will remain open so that we can all work better together.
Mr. Speaker, let us think about children and grandchildren for a moment. As we worry about children and grandchildren, what we think about is this: How can our country be a world leader? How can we be successful? What we can do is be optimistic and make investments in the future growth of this country. That is exactly what we are going to do. We are focused on places where our country has a comparative advantage. We are focused on how we can give our children and our grandchildren the education, training, and skills to be successful. That will lead to a higher rate of growth. That will lead to good economic outcomes.
Mr. Speaker, as I have shared many times in the House, yes, a discussion paper was released to all members of Parliament, and it was also released to Canadians, so we could have a meaningful conversation, a substantial discussion on Standing Orders and how we govern in this place. It is unfortunate that a lot of the ideas within the paper have been misrepresented. This is why I encourage all people to be part of the conversation so we can find a made-in-Canada solution for Parliament and the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House on this traditional territory the day after a feminist budget was tabled in the House, with the first-ever gender statement acknowledging that our policies and our actions in the House affect women and men and people of different genders differently. One hundred million dollars was committed for the gender-based violence strategy, the first Canada has ever had; $7 billion for child care; $11 billion for affordable housing.We have many priorities and much work to do. This was a great budget for women and girls everywhere and
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier this afternoon, this budget was the best news on health that we have seen in a decade, with fantastic news in so many areas; not only the new investments that I referred to earlier, but we have a growing Canada health transfer that would give to the provinces more than $200 billion over the next five years. As we work with the provinces and territories in delivering health care, they would be able to do advanced care for Canadians of all particular needs. We also have new money for early learning and child care in the order of $7 billion that would be of great assistance to families affected by
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has shared so well, it was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes for the 1% of wealthiest Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to his family and the children who need it the most to ensure that they get the most.When it comes to the travel that the member opposite is referring to, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and their guests as well.
Mr. Speaker, we know that the measures in our budget are very important for all of Canada, including Quebec. It is very important to invest in affordable housing and in our health care system, in Quebec and across the country. We will continue with our program to improve the level of economic growth. It is important to create jobs. At present, the unemployment rate is lower than when we came to power. It is currently 6.6%, and it was 7.1% at the outset. Our program
Mr. Speaker, it is this government that actually increased funding to committees so that they could do the important work that they need to do. We actually believe in the committee process because it is the committee that can actually study legislation and study ideas way better than we do in this place, and that is exactly what we have asked the committee to do.With respect to the discussion paper, I have asked the committee to broaden the scope of the study they already have in place in regard to the Standing Orders. I believe it is a meaningful conversation that all members need to have. I encourage all members, as well as all Canadians, to participate.
Mr. Speaker, once again allow me to set the record straight for Canadians. The discussion paper talks about a better use of members' time. On Fridays, we are only required to be here for half an hour. It would be realistic to move those hours to other days of the week. Most offices in Canada start their workday at 9 a.m. The House of Commons could as well.The goal behind this option is to enable us to be in our ridings on Fridays so that we can meet with our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, as I have just shared, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned event, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official government duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned events, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided with briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business. The Prime Minister is the prime minister after all.
Mr. Speaker, in budget 2017 we propose to help make communities healthier and more inclusive, invest in faster and more efficient public transit, and build more cultural and recreational centres and affordable housing.Our government is investing more than $180 billion in neighbourhoods and modern and resilient communities, and these projects are well under way with more than 1,400 projects approved totalling over $15 billion.In my riding, 6,000 families are better off thanks to this budget. Millions of families throughout Canada are better off. That makes me very proud.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for NewmarketAurora for his work on trade and his interest in innovation.It is a great budget for NewmarketAurora in terms of innovation. Through our innovation and skills plan, we will create jobs, we will help our companies and our economy and citizens thrive in a rapidly changing world.That same innovation and skills plan also aims to help 10,000 more young Canadians to get the skills and training they need in today's economy through work integrated learning and co-ops. There are $1.26 billion in a strategic innovation fund that will create a one-stop shop and a more efficient and coordinated way for us innovate.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about
Mr. Speaker, it is very important to be an optimistic country and to make investments in the future, but we also need to know in which particular sectors we have a comparative advantage. That is exactly what we have done.We decided to be the world leader in very important sectors where there will be high-quality jobs in the future. We chose six sectors that are key to our childrens and grandchildrens future. We will consider ways of providing the necessary training for the good jobs of the future.
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, while this Prime Minister is being paid to dig us deeper into debt and to go sunbathing with his family on the taxpayers dime, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is out in the cold launching the celebrations for the 150th anniversary of Confederation. Like the Prime Minister, she is favouring her Liberal cronies.Can the Prime Minister, who has once again increased the tax burden of Canadians, justify spending $127,000 on a vacation paid for by taxpayers, who will be paying back his deficit for decades to come?
Mr. Speaker, the House leader is in on this charade too, and the Liberal members even know it. They know this is not a discussion paper. They know this is an edict from the Prime Minister's Office. The House leader just said that she asked the committee; she is asking it to do her dirty work.My question is for the Liberal members of Parliament. I know there are some hard-working people with integrity on that side. Will any of them stand up, show some independence, and say no to the Prime Minister and no to the House leader, who has completely botched this for all of you?
Mr. Speaker, budget 2017 was an opportunity to meet the needs of Canadian seniors, but the Liberal government told them to keep waiting. The Canadian Medical Association said, Budget 2017 fails Canada's seniors. CARP said, financial security for seniors not on the agenda. Divide and conquer deals with the provinces are not the solution. We need a national seniors strategy. Why did yesterday's budget leave Canadian seniors wanting and waiting?
Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning the Prime Minister's need for security and no one has questioned his right to take a vacation. Everyone knows when the Prime Minister does things, it costs a lot of money. What taxpayers are questioning is why, when he knows that everything he does costs taxpayers money, did he choose a vacation to a remote exclusive island. He knew that this would be very expensive for taxpayers. Why did he do it?
Mr. Speaker, the same Liberals who regularly attacked Stephen Harper for his use of the gag are now flat out resorting to the guillotine to shut down debate. Amending the rules that govern how our democracy works should never be done by just one party, no matter the party.Thus, will the Liberal government commit, here and now, to not changing the rules unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, sunny ways are indeed gone. They have been replaced by an attempt to unilaterally and quietly ram through changes to the rules that govern our democracy. This is nothing less than a massive government power grab, which is only meant to help the Prime Minister avoid accountability.Is there anyone on the Liberal benches with the courage to stand up and tell the Prime Minister that this is not why they came to Ottawa?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, Manitoba saw the largest weekend influx of illegal migrants entering the province from the U.S. so far this year. Dozens continue to pour into border communities like Emerson, and the numbers are only growing. To make matters worse, the Prime Minister's reckless tweets have led many to believe that entering Canada through the proper channels is just a suggestion. Will the Prime Minister stand up for the rule of law, stand up for our border communities and condemn this illegal activity, or will he continue to encourage it?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to force changes to how the House operates through the procedures and House affairs committee without all-party support. This is wrong. I feel bad for the talented and principled backbench members opposite who are also uncomfortable with this. Why is the Liberal backbench willing to watch the Liberal front bench betray years of tradition of the House and integrity of their party?
Mr. Speaker, in relation to the point of privilege, I want to add my two cents to the question of privilege raised by my hon. colleague the House Leader of the Official Opposition, and I will conclude my remarks by asking for unanimous consent for a motion.There is no doubt that the minister's actions were inappropriate, but more to the point, they were entirely misplaced. The lack of respect in dealing with the bill in question firmly rests on the shoulders of the government House leader not the Conservatives. The government made the decision to try to shoehorn the debate on Bill C-17 into the tiny 30-minute window before the budget. It was not the opposition that did that. Perhaps the minister should just march on down the front bench and channel her anger where it actually belongs. She should demand that the government House leader call it for debate this afternoon or maybe even for all day tomorrow.I would like to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion, that the order of the day for tomorrow, Friday, March 23, 2017, shall be Bill C-17, an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act. Let us just get on with it.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the children and grandchildren of Joe, because the grandchildren of Joe will have to pay for the bad administration of that Liberal government, which uses deficits and makes debt. This is totally unacceptable.That party got elected on talk of small $10-billion deficits and a return to balanced budgets in 2019. The reality is that the deficits are three times greater than expected and there is no plan to return to balanced budgets.I have a very simple question for the minister. I know that the minister and I speak the same language and I would like him to understand me. In what year will Canada return to a balanced budget? In what year?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned events, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided with briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business. The Prime Minister is the prime minister after all.
Mr. Speaker, as I have just shared, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned event, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official government duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal budget was nothing but bad news for the Canadian Armed Forces. The Liberals have cut another $8.5 billion, which means they have cut a total of $12 billion in just two years. Major investments have been punted down the road for two decades, and there is not enough money to buy the equipment our forces need. This is worse than the Liberals' decade of darkness. Today they are dragging our troops back into the Dark Ages.When will the minister start serving the brave men and women in uniform instead of being a patsy to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, the Liberal budget just sounds like a Seinfeld show. It is about nothing.The Liberals had a choice. They could have eliminated the tax loophole that is costing us $800 million a year and benefits only the wealthiest 1%, but no, they decided not to keep that promise. Instead of going after and taking down their millionaire friends, who did they go after? They went after people who take the bus in the morning.Why are the Liberals getting rid of this tax credit that helps families and promotes public transit while maintaining the gifts for their millionaire friends?
Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to rush through permanent changes to the rules of the House of Commons. These changes will undermine the opposition's ability to hold the Prime Minister to account and will allow him to be here only once a week.In the House, we represent the views of our constituents and all Canadians. It is an honour and a privilege to be here, not an inconvenience.Will the Prime Minister stop avoiding accountability and immediately abandon his plan to change the rules?
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about
Mr. Speaker, this government has gone out of its way to approve three pipelines. Those are decisions that will put energy workers in Alberta and Saskatchewan to work. What this government could accomplish in one year, that government could not accomplish in 10 years. That is what we have been doing, because we care about putting energy workers to work.
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are not happy that an agreement that was working very well is being scrapped.The Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed a motion expressing its great disappointment with budget 2017. There is nothing for forestry, for transportation, or for cheese producers, and nothing is done about tax havens. When Ottawa calls the shots, Quebec will always be left wanting.Instead of swallowing this nonsense and acting like doormats, for goodness sake, would the 40 Liberal members from Quebec stop undermining the interests of Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, do not get me wrong, Joe sounds like a great guy, but I want to ask about Peter. Last night, Canadians watched Peter Mansbridge flat out ask the finance minister why he refuses to come clean on when the Liberals will finally balance the budget. As always, the finance minister refused to answer his simple question of when?Why has the term balanced budget become a dirty word to the government and to the finance minister, and when will Peter and Joe and all of us see a balanced budget here in this country?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our taking office, no such policy existed. This government is working hard for middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join them. This government has had unprecedented levels of public consultations to ensure that we can respond to the very real challenges that Canadians are facing. This government will continue to work hard for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, it is the first time the PCO has needed private island guidelines.The Prime Minister has increased taxes on Canadians who use Uber or public transit to get to work, because the Prime Minister has made it very clear he needs the extra cash to pay for his caviar and champagne when he travels to private islands. The Prime Minister is so out of touch that he is raising taxes on struggling Canadians to fund his lavish lifestyle, and Canadians are getting fed up.Will the Prime Minister actually stand and answer questions of behalf of struggling Canadians or will he just sit there with a smug look on his face, while he daydreams about his next vacation?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to give the Prime Minister four days off a week, prevent members from doing their job in committees, and limit the speaking time of all members. Motion No. 6 was nothing compared to this attempt by the Prime Minister to take total and permanent control of Parliament. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons claims she wants to discuss this, but at the same time has ordered her MPs to pass these changes in committee in a backroom on Parliament Hill.When will the Prime Minister put his house in order? When will he finally show some respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can be absolutely assured that every Canadian law is being enforced by the RCMP and by the CBSA. As well, we are honouring all of our obligations under international law.The hon. gentleman should know that when people cross the border in irregular fashion, they are apprehended, they are identified, they are fingerprinted. Their biographical and biometric information is collected. That is checked against every Canadian database and the appropriate international databases for immigration or criminal activity. If it is warranted, suspects are detained.
Mr. Speaker, this Liberal budget is full of bluster and bafflegab. A few gems include innovation through superclusters, or this one about offsetting derivative positions in straddle transactions, or even better, capping stock options for the super-richoh, wait; that did not make it into the budget. That was in the Liberal platform. This is nothing but a backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget. Way back on page 150 is a $1.2 billion cut to fighting climate change. To all those Canadians who believed the Liberals in Paris were serious about fighting climate change, how can they betray their commitment to them now?
Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of being seated next to a finance minister who reluctantly ran a deficit to stimulate the Canadian economy while it was going through the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. He did so reluctantly.This week, the minister talked about success in business. I am very happy for him and his success. If he had run a deficit in his business the way he is doing here in government, that would have been disgraceful.The government is doing away with the public transit tax credit. It portrays itself as all green and environmental. Why did it get rid of that credit? They say it was small and underutilized, but that seems like one more reason to keep it around.
Mr. Speaker, once again allow me to set the record straight for Canadians. The discussion paper talks about a better use of members' time. On Fridays, we are only required to be here for half an hour. It would be realistic to move those hours to other days of the week. Most offices in Canada start their workday at 9 a.m. The House of Commons could as well.The goal behind this option is to enable us to be in our ridings on Fridays so that we can meet with our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would not interfere in the work of committees, but that is exactly what he is doing. The Prime Minister's staff, over the last number of days, have been at the procedure and House affairs committee, telling the Liberal backbenchers to block the opposition's simple and reasonable request that we have collaboration and consensus on changes to the rules. Will the Prime Minister back off and let the Liberal members do their job, as he promised that he would do?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is a well-known rule that committees are meant to be masters of their own domain, and we have all been told that the motion to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that was presented by the hon. member for Coast of BaysCentralNotre Dame is not being coordinated by the government. In question period today, the government House leader said, I have asked the committee to expand the scope of the study, and she went on from there.I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to enforce the well-known rule on committee independence and tell the government House leader to stay out of it before she makes matters even worse.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I noted that the government's attempt to give itself carte blanche to unilaterally rewrite the Standing Orders is opposite to the practices of most recent Liberal and Conservative administrations, but the tradition goes back much further. On December 28, 1867, our first set of Standing Orders was adopted by unanimous consent. Consensus for major changes to the Standing Orders was good enough for prime ministers from Sir. John A. to Stephen Harper. Will the current Prime Minister not acknowledge that consensus is still the right approach even though it is 2017?
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what the Conservative government was focused on. That was on balancing the budget. For Canada's beleaguered energy workers, yesterday's budget was a kick in the teeth. While our biggest competitor, the United States, is cutting red tape and taxes and making its energy sector more attractive to job creators, the Liberals are jacking up taxes and punishing oil and gas exploration. It is almost as though they want to phase out the energy sector. Our energy sector employs those middle-class Canadians that the government pretends to care about. Why did the Liberals go out of their way in this budget to kick energy workers in the teeth when they are already down?
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear to all of us in the House. Canadians are ambitious and seek new opportunities every day. Whether they are looking to start their own businesses, to export to new markets or to scale up their operations, they need our support.While we have been working hard to open doors and create opportunities for Canadians, it is clear that the global economy continues to change. What new commitments has the government made in budget 2017 to help Canadian businesses flourish in this changing economy?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to set the record straight. The discussion paper talks about the better use of our time as members of Parliament. On Friday our schedule here is only half a day, so let us talk about moving those hours to other days of the week. We talk about working hard just like Canadians do. Hard-working Canadians in most offices in Canada start their day at 9 a.m. or even earlier. Why can the House of Commons not consider that?Let us talk about doing that so that we can be back in our ridings to not only serve Canadians but to be able to engage with them and listen to their concerns, listen to their constructive feedback, so we can better serve them in this place.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has lost touch with average Canadians. I can imagine it is easy to miss the challenges that everyday Canadians are facing when he is busy jet-setting to billionaire island, but $127,000. Even the most out-of-touch Hollywood celebrity would blush at this type of spending, and 17 hundred bucks to feed a family of five on a three hour flight. Why does the Prime Minister think taxpayers should be on the hook for this type of extravagance?
Mr. Speaker, let me just clarify to the member opposite that we are absolutely committed to tackling climate change, and if he looks at the budget, he will see the numbers are there. We are putting in place the measures that are necessary to do our made-in-Canada plan on climate change. We put in money to enhance opportunities in clean tech. However, let me quote others. Clean Energy Canada said, We're pleased that the new federal budget makes smart investments for clean energy and climate action in Canada. Équiterre said that today's budget puts in place the necessary resources to implement the new climate plan. Climate Action Network said, Today's budget provides the financial backing we need to begin the serious work of implementing Canada's climate framework....We are getting it right. We are taking action on climate change, and I hope the member will support us.
Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. Our government recognizes that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace.Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, predictable, efficient, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, the budget has clearly laid bare the Liberal governments choices. While, exactly two weeks ago, the Liberals voted to close the tax loophole for CEOs, they did not do so in their budget. No, instead they scrapped the public transit tax credit and cut $1.25 billion from the fund to combat climate change. Here is a simple question: why have the Liberals chosen to protect wealthy CEOs instead of the environment?
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the government House leader tried to defend the Prime Minister's use of the Privy Council Office to help him on a trip to Alberta for the Medicine HatCardstonWarner by-election. She claimed it was to help prepare the PM for government business, but that is complete nonsense. The trip had only one purpose: for the Prime Minister to appear at Liberal Party campaign events. There was no government business. Why does the Prime Minister believe it is okay to use public servants to campaign for the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget would invest $2.7 billion to help unemployed and underemployed Canadians get the skills they need for their next and better job, and $470 million for adult workers so they can go back to school, upgrade their skills, and upgrade their credentials. We would make changes to the EI system so that, when Canadians take self-funded training, they do not lose their EI benefits. This would help Canadian workers
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance presented the governments plan. It is an ambitious, visionary plan that makes middle-class families the priority, both in Bourassa and elsewhere in Canada.Can the Minister of Finance tell us why he only chose certain sectors of the economy in his budget?
Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that I shared with members of Parliament as well as Canadians was to encourage us to have a conversation, a discussion. What I have recognized is that there are many misconceptions in regard to the discussion paper. I will share information in regard to Friday sittings. We know that on Fridays the House of Commons sits for only half a day. We are saying why not reallocate that time to other days. The House of Commons starts at 10 a.m. on some days. Most Canadians start their day at 9 a.m. or earlier. Why can the House of Commons not do that? Let us have that important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, as I have shared many times in the House, yes, a discussion paper was released to all members of Parliament, and it was also released to Canadians, so we could have a meaningful conversation, a substantial discussion on Standing Orders and how we govern in this place. It is unfortunate that a lot of the ideas within the paper have been misrepresented. This is why I encourage all people to be part of the conversation so we can find a made-in-Canada solution for Parliament and the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, closing the CEO stock option tax loophole would have generated $725 million every year, and as a bonus it would have helped the Liberals keep one of their promises. What a concept that is. Instead, what the Liberals are doing is they are refusing to give $155 million to finally end discrimination against first nations children.The question is simple, and please can the Liberals deliver the response for once without their pre-written talking points. Why protect rich CEOs instead of protecting first nations children?
Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight for Canadians.We have proposed a number of ideas in a discussion paper in order to modernize Parliament. Some of these ideas have been misinterpreted. Let us be clear: the Liberals are not recommending that the Prime Minister come to question period only once a week. We are trying to encourage a debate on how to improve accountability in the House. Let there be no mistake: our Prime Minister will be more accountable, not less accountable.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's budget raises taxes on people like Joe, whether it is for beer, wine, or spirits, but that is really ironic, because that same budget contains the tab for $1,700 worth of drinks and snacks during the Prime Minister's three hour flight to a private island getaway over the holidays.What message does the Prime Minister think he is sending to a taxpayer like Joe when he raises Joe's taxes while helping himself to free drinks on the house?
Mr. Speaker, our predecessors did not make the investments they should have, which resulted in excessively slow growth. Now we have to invest in Canadian families and infrastructure to boost our growth rate. This is very important to our fiscal position. These investments will put Canada in a better position in the future.
Mr. Speaker, every single day when I come to the Department of National Defence, it is about serving our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces. We are committed to making sure that the Canadian Armed Forces have all the tools necessary to do their work. We have planned increases that we are committed to. This is about flowing the money and making sure that the money is there for the projects that we have committed to in the years that it is required. We have an defence policy that is going to be coming out shortly, and I look forward to launching that and showing to all Canadians our commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, technological change has shown us that we must continue to encourage innovation in our country. In order to provide tangible help to those who are worried about being left behind, the government has already stressed the importance of giving Canadian workers the tools they need to succeed in the new economy.Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour explain to the House what this government is doing to make sure that Canadians can get the training they need to find and keep good, well-paying jobs?
Mr. Speaker, ever since Quebec managed to pry labour matters from the hands of the Canadian government, we have created the best labour market training system in North America.However, once again, Ottawa is going back on its word. The government cannot be counted on. After the Harper government, which tried to make us fit into the Canadian mould, now it is the Liberals who are reneging on the labour market agreement, which was so hard to reach. Why is it that whenever something is working well, Ottawa has to stick its nose in and tear everything down?
Mr. Speaker, it is very important to be an optimistic country and to make investments in the future, but we also need to know in which particular sectors we have a comparative advantage. That is exactly what we have done.We decided to be the world leader in very important sectors where there will be high-quality jobs in the future. We chose six sectors that are key to our childrens and grandchildrens future. We will consider ways of providing the necessary training for the good jobs of the future.
Mr. Speaker, this goes well beyond an innocent discussion paper. The government House leader should not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.However, if she is serious about that, if she is really truly sincere that her motives are pure, will she now stand in her place and tell this House that she accepts that her government has no mandate to change the rules of democracy over the united objections of the opposition? If she will not, then it is pretty clear that her protests of innocence are even more shallow than they sound.
Mr. Speaker, documents show that in October, the Privy Council Office was directed by the Prime Minister to produce a regional backgrounder on Medicine Hat during the by-election. The Prime Minister had no government events in Medicine Hat. He was only there to campaign. The PCO was also ordered to provide tech support and uploaded a video from the campaign stop with the PM and the Liberal candidate. In light of the actions of the Prime Minister in Medicine Hat, today, when the Prime Minister is campaigning in MarkhamThornhill, will PCO staff be ordered to campaign with him yet again?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that this place needs to be modernized. We need to have this conversation. We need to have this discussion. Every single member of Parliament has a role and responsibility. I recognize that members on both sides of this place have responsibilities, and we want to ensure that we have important conversations. Within this place, members of Parliament have the opportunity to hold the government to account. We believe that within the ridings, constituents have the ability to hold their members of Parliament to account, and that is why I believe that important work is done here in the House as well as in the ridings.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected our government on a plan to grow the economy and strengthen the middle class. We are delivering on that commitment. Over the last seven months, almost 250,000 jobs were created, the majority of which were full-time jobs. This is the most job growth we have seen in over a decade. This is evidence that our plan is working. Yesterday, we continued to build off those investments, good work we are doing for Canadians. One of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council Office to develop guidelines surrounding the reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our government taking office, no such policy existed.
Mr. Speaker, while the government's gender budget sounded good, the budget lacks real action for women: not a penny to legislate equal pay for work of equal value; not a cent for child care this year; zero new money for shelters for women fleeing violence; nothing to make birth control more affordable; and only a fraction of what is needed for a strategy to end violence against women. Once again, women are being asked to wait. If gender equality really matters to the government, why were women shortchanged again?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what this budget means for a hard-working taxpayer. Let us call him Joe. Joe takes the bus to work every day, and at the end of the day, he likes to go to the pub with his buddies for a beer. He is a responsible guy, so he always uses Uber to get home. What does this budget do for Joe? First of all, it taxes his bus pass. It takes away his tax credit for his bus pass. It taxes the beer he has at the pub. It even slaps a tax on his Uber ride.What exactly does the Prime Minister have against people like Joe?
Mr. Speaker, it is this government that actually increased funding to committees so that they could do the important work that they need to do. We actually believe in the committee process because it is the committee that can actually study legislation and study ideas way better than we do in this place, and that is exactly what we have asked the committee to do.With respect to the discussion paper, I have asked the committee to broaden the scope of the study they already have in place in regard to the Standing Orders. I believe it is a meaningful conversation that all members need to have. I encourage all members, as well as all Canadians, to participate.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about what Sally and Joanne and Mary-Ann will see in the future. I want to talk about the fact that what we are doing is taking the very best balance sheet among the G7 countries, the lowest net debt to GDP, and we are making investments that an optimistic country needs to make. Unfortunately, the people before us were focused on austerity. We are focused on growth. We are looking at how we can make investments to make a difference. That growth is what is going to make sure that our country stays successful over the long run.
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly these hypotheticals and these speculations that the committee has the ability to deal with. That is why we are saying let us have this conversation, let us have this discussion. It is because these are important concerns that Canadians are facing, and we are saying let us have this discussion. That is why I had introduced a discussion paper. I know the committee members sat late once again yesterday. I did visit the members of the committee to thank them for their work. I believe that they are having a meaningful conversation and I think it is important that they continue that conversation. My door will remain open so that we can all work better together.
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House on this traditional territory the day after a feminist budget was tabled in the House, with the first-ever gender statement acknowledging that our policies and our actions in the House affect women and men and people of different genders differently. One hundred million dollars was committed for the gender-based violence strategy, the first Canada has ever had; $7 billion for child care; $11 billion for affordable housing.We have many priorities and much work to do. This was a great budget for women and girls everywhere and
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister held unprecedented levels of public consultation so we could actually respond to the very real challenges they face. It was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to families with children who needed it the most so they could actually do what they needed to do for their families. What was consistent throughout it all? The Conservatives voted against it every time.
Mr. Speaker, not only is there nothing in the budget for the dairy industry, but also there is still no news on granting tariff quotas under CETA.We now hear talk about a proposal to resolve the softwood lumber issue by sacrificing our supply management system. That is completely unacceptable. The Liberals already hurt our industry during the negotiations and have yet to come up with fair and equitable compensation. My question is simple:Can the government confirm today that it will not sacrifice our supply management system or our forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, we know that the measures in our budget are very important for all of Canada, including Quebec. It is very important to invest in affordable housing and in our health care system, in Quebec and across the country. We will continue with our program to improve the level of economic growth. It is important to create jobs. At present, the unemployment rate is lower than when we came to power. It is currently 6.6%, and it was 7.1% at the outset. Our program
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to continue on our plan to make a real difference for our country over the long term. What we started with was dealing with middle-class anxiety. What we talked about yesterday was a second chapter in our plan: how we can create great long-term jobs in sectors where Canada can be globally competitive. We are going to do this in a way that will ensure that Canadians can go for great opportunities in the future, and we will ensure that we deal with the most vulnerable as we can.
Mr. Speaker, we built our agenda, our plan, based on Joe. What we have done for Joe is we have reduced his taxes. If Joe is a single guy, we have reduced his taxes by $330. If Joe has a family, he has more money for his family because of our Canada child benefit. Most importantly for Joe, our investments in transit mean he is going to get to and from home more rapidly. What Joe knows is that he is going to have, over the long term, the ability to have a great job, an exciting job, because we are going to invest in Canada.
Since when does a cabinet minister or House leader give orders to a committee anyway, Mr. Speaker?The government House leader is ignoring the long-held tradition of getting all-party agreement for an overhaul of the way that democracy works in this place. If the House leader's argument that the government of such a warm and loving Prime Minister could not possibly harm our democracy with the power grab now under way, I wonder if she might speculate with us what the majority government of a prime minister like, say, Kevin O'Leary would do with all that power?
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is well aware that we support supply management. She is well aware that I announced $350 million for the dairy sector, $250 million for the farmers, $100 million for the processors.Along with it, yesterday's budget announced $70 million for agricultural science and innovation, $950 million for super clusters, $200 million for clean technology.This government supports supply management and the agricultural sector.
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister really does believe we can work better in this place. Just today, I have Sarah, who is my University of Toronto women in House program person, who is shadowing me on the Hill. She has seen a lot of the stuff that has taken place here. She has asked me some tough questions with regard to some of the stuff that went on yesterday and today. It is important that we have this meaningful conversation. I am sure she, too, will be reading the discussion paper and be a part of it. I know many members have women following them today so one day they too can occupy even more seats in the House.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier this afternoon, this budget was the best news on health that we have seen in a decade, with fantastic news in so many areas; not only the new investments that I referred to earlier, but we have a growing Canada health transfer that would give to the provinces more than $200 billion over the next five years. As we work with the provinces and territories in delivering health care, they would be able to do advanced care for Canadians of all particular needs. We also have new money for early learning and child care in the order of $7 billion that would be of great assistance to families affected by
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has shared so well, it was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes for the 1% of wealthiest Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to his family and the children who need it the most to ensure that they get the most.When it comes to the travel that the member opposite is referring to, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and their guests as well.
Mr. Speaker, I really do believe that we can have more meaningful conversation and debate in this place. I believe that when it comes to challenging the integrity of individuals, that is for the member to choose to do. I believe that is not needed in the conversation that I would like to have, and that is why I am saying let us have a conversation, let us have a discussion. The member knows very well, as I told him last night, that I actually appreciate a lot of the work that he does. I hope that we can continue working better together, because I believe this place needs to be modernized. It is a commitment we made to Canadians in the electoral campaign. It is something on which Canadians agree that all members in this place need to work better together.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the vision we have put in place for the Canada 150 celebrations. Four themes will be celebrated throughout the year: young people, the environment, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and diversity and inclusiveness. We will make sure that in funding the celebrations and various projects across the country, there will be an equitable regional distribution. Of course, I hope all Canadians across the country and of all political stripes will join in the celebrations.
Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We strengthened the middle class by reducing their taxes while asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a little more. That continues to be our focus, because we know it is very important to have a fair tax system. We will continue with our plan. We found expenditures that must be reviewed so we can ensure that our system continues to be fair. There will be consultations in the coming weeks and months to explain our programs.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister's arrogant attitude with how he spends tax dollars, but now this behaviour is starting to creep into the House of Commons. He has proposed a plan to limit his attendance in question period to once a week, which in fact, is actually only one hour a week, and give all of his colleagues Fridays off. I just want to remind the Prime Minister that while he was campaigning he said, Sunlight is the world's best disinfectant. My question is: What dirt is he trying to hide?
Mr. Speaker, the one comment I would like to make, once again, has to do with how Canada's regions have been abandoned, especially our forestry regions. The Quebec National Assembly reminded us of this today. The agricultural sector is going to have to fight with six high-tech sectors for additional funding for its own development, even though all Canadians eat every day, and food security is extremely important. In my view, the choices this government is making go against the well-being of our society.Does the Prime Minister want to punish farmers and all Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this question because it gives me an opportunity to talk about the fantastic news in our budget yesterday, as it relates to health, and that includes the health of seniors. We were able to announce additional investments in the order of $11 billion that would go to home care, including palliative care, that would go to mental health, and that includes seniors' needs, like dementia, so we would be able to support them. It included things like $11 billion for housing that would include social housing to support seniors. There was so much good news in the budget. I look forward to working with colleagues to put that work into place.
Mr. Speaker, we decided that it was very important to make decisions in sectors where Canada has a comparative advantage.One sector that is very important to us is the agri-food sector. We decided that we should be a global leader in this sector. That is why we decided to focus on that sector and to ensure that people have the training needed to lead the way.
Mr. Speaker, I am taking part in a discussion that includes all members and all Canadians because we want to work with them and we want them to participate in this discussion. Our government knows that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace. Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, effective, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for NewmarketAurora for his work on trade and his interest in innovation.It is a great budget for NewmarketAurora in terms of innovation. Through our innovation and skills plan, we will create jobs, we will help our companies and our economy and citizens thrive in a rapidly changing world.That same innovation and skills plan also aims to help 10,000 more young Canadians to get the skills and training they need in today's economy through work integrated learning and co-ops. There are $1.26 billion in a strategic innovation fund that will create a one-stop shop and a more efficient and coordinated way for us innovate.
Mr. Speaker, let us think about children and grandchildren for a moment. As we worry about children and grandchildren, what we think about is this: How can our country be a world leader? How can we be successful? What we can do is be optimistic and make investments in the future growth of this country. That is exactly what we are going to do. We are focused on places where our country has a comparative advantage. We are focused on how we can give our children and our grandchildren the education, training, and skills to be successful. That will lead to a higher rate of growth. That will lead to good economic outcomes.
Mr. Speaker, in budget 2017 we propose to help make communities healthier and more inclusive, invest in faster and more efficient public transit, and build more cultural and recreational centres and affordable housing.Our government is investing more than $180 billion in neighbourhoods and modern and resilient communities, and these projects are well under way with more than 1,400 projects approved totalling over $15 billion.In my riding, 6,000 families are better off thanks to this budget. Millions of families throughout Canada are better off. That makes me very proud.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to working with all the provinces. I know that with the Province of Quebec we have spoken with the minister responsible for education, and the provincial government is very pleased with the investments that have been made by this government. We will continue to invest in all Canadians so that they are given the skills they need to work in tomorrow's economy, as well as to develop well-paying jobs for today.
Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to set the record straight.Contrary to what the Liberals think, Parliament belongs to Canadians. They elected all of us to represent them. Contrary to what the Prime Minister thinks, not everyone likes him. Most Canadians do not approve of the deficits he is running. Most Canadians find his insatiable appetite for spending taxpayers' money unacceptable. Why does the Prime Minister want to silence Canadians who do not think like him? Why does he want to muzzle the opposition members and his own backbenchers?We will not let him do that.
Mr. Speaker, while this Prime Minister is being paid to dig us deeper into debt and to go sunbathing with his family on the taxpayers dime, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is out in the cold launching the celebrations for the 150th anniversary of Confederation. Like the Prime Minister, she is favouring her Liberal cronies.Can the Prime Minister, who has once again increased the tax burden of Canadians, justify spending $127,000 on a vacation paid for by taxpayers, who will be paying back his deficit for decades to come?
Mr. Speaker, the House leader is in on this charade too, and the Liberal members even know it. They know this is not a discussion paper. They know this is an edict from the Prime Minister's Office. The House leader just said that she asked the committee; she is asking it to do her dirty work.My question is for the Liberal members of Parliament. I know there are some hard-working people with integrity on that side. Will any of them stand up, show some independence, and say no to the Prime Minister and no to the House leader, who has completely botched this for all of you?
Mr. Speaker, budget 2017 was an opportunity to meet the needs of Canadian seniors, but the Liberal government told them to keep waiting. The Canadian Medical Association said, Budget 2017 fails Canada's seniors. CARP said, financial security for seniors not on the agenda. Divide and conquer deals with the provinces are not the solution. We need a national seniors strategy. Why did yesterday's budget leave Canadian seniors wanting and waiting?
Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning the Prime Minister's need for security and no one has questioned his right to take a vacation. Everyone knows when the Prime Minister does things, it costs a lot of money. What taxpayers are questioning is why, when he knows that everything he does costs taxpayers money, did he choose a vacation to a remote exclusive island. He knew that this would be very expensive for taxpayers. Why did he do it?
Mr. Speaker, the same Liberals who regularly attacked Stephen Harper for his use of the gag are now flat out resorting to the guillotine to shut down debate. Amending the rules that govern how our democracy works should never be done by just one party, no matter the party.Thus, will the Liberal government commit, here and now, to not changing the rules unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, sunny ways are indeed gone. They have been replaced by an attempt to unilaterally and quietly ram through changes to the rules that govern our democracy. This is nothing less than a massive government power grab, which is only meant to help the Prime Minister avoid accountability.Is there anyone on the Liberal benches with the courage to stand up and tell the Prime Minister that this is not why they came to Ottawa?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, Manitoba saw the largest weekend influx of illegal migrants entering the province from the U.S. so far this year. Dozens continue to pour into border communities like Emerson, and the numbers are only growing. To make matters worse, the Prime Minister's reckless tweets have led many to believe that entering Canada through the proper channels is just a suggestion. Will the Prime Minister stand up for the rule of law, stand up for our border communities and condemn this illegal activity, or will he continue to encourage it?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to force changes to how the House operates through the procedures and House affairs committee without all-party support. This is wrong. I feel bad for the talented and principled backbench members opposite who are also uncomfortable with this. Why is the Liberal backbench willing to watch the Liberal front bench betray years of tradition of the House and integrity of their party?
Mr. Speaker, in relation to the point of privilege, I want to add my two cents to the question of privilege raised by my hon. colleague the House Leader of the Official Opposition, and I will conclude my remarks by asking for unanimous consent for a motion.There is no doubt that the minister's actions were inappropriate, but more to the point, they were entirely misplaced. The lack of respect in dealing with the bill in question firmly rests on the shoulders of the government House leader not the Conservatives. The government made the decision to try to shoehorn the debate on Bill C-17 into the tiny 30-minute window before the budget. It was not the opposition that did that. Perhaps the minister should just march on down the front bench and channel her anger where it actually belongs. She should demand that the government House leader call it for debate this afternoon or maybe even for all day tomorrow.I would like to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion, that the order of the day for tomorrow, Friday, March 23, 2017, shall be Bill C-17, an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act. Let us just get on with it.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the children and grandchildren of Joe, because the grandchildren of Joe will have to pay for the bad administration of that Liberal government, which uses deficits and makes debt. This is totally unacceptable.That party got elected on talk of small $10-billion deficits and a return to balanced budgets in 2019. The reality is that the deficits are three times greater than expected and there is no plan to return to balanced budgets.I have a very simple question for the minister. I know that the minister and I speak the same language and I would like him to understand me. In what year will Canada return to a balanced budget? In what year?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned events, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided with briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business. The Prime Minister is the prime minister after all.
Mr. Speaker, as I have just shared, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned event, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official government duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal budget was nothing but bad news for the Canadian Armed Forces. The Liberals have cut another $8.5 billion, which means they have cut a total of $12 billion in just two years. Major investments have been punted down the road for two decades, and there is not enough money to buy the equipment our forces need. This is worse than the Liberals' decade of darkness. Today they are dragging our troops back into the Dark Ages.When will the minister start serving the brave men and women in uniform instead of being a patsy to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, the Liberal budget just sounds like a Seinfeld show. It is about nothing.The Liberals had a choice. They could have eliminated the tax loophole that is costing us $800 million a year and benefits only the wealthiest 1%, but no, they decided not to keep that promise. Instead of going after and taking down their millionaire friends, who did they go after? They went after people who take the bus in the morning.Why are the Liberals getting rid of this tax credit that helps families and promotes public transit while maintaining the gifts for their millionaire friends?
Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to rush through permanent changes to the rules of the House of Commons. These changes will undermine the opposition's ability to hold the Prime Minister to account and will allow him to be here only once a week.In the House, we represent the views of our constituents and all Canadians. It is an honour and a privilege to be here, not an inconvenience.Will the Prime Minister stop avoiding accountability and immediately abandon his plan to change the rules?
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about
Mr. Speaker, this government has gone out of its way to approve three pipelines. Those are decisions that will put energy workers in Alberta and Saskatchewan to work. What this government could accomplish in one year, that government could not accomplish in 10 years. That is what we have been doing, because we care about putting energy workers to work.
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are not happy that an agreement that was working very well is being scrapped.The Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed a motion expressing its great disappointment with budget 2017. There is nothing for forestry, for transportation, or for cheese producers, and nothing is done about tax havens. When Ottawa calls the shots, Quebec will always be left wanting.Instead of swallowing this nonsense and acting like doormats, for goodness sake, would the 40 Liberal members from Quebec stop undermining the interests of Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, do not get me wrong, Joe sounds like a great guy, but I want to ask about Peter. Last night, Canadians watched Peter Mansbridge flat out ask the finance minister why he refuses to come clean on when the Liberals will finally balance the budget. As always, the finance minister refused to answer his simple question of when?Why has the term balanced budget become a dirty word to the government and to the finance minister, and when will Peter and Joe and all of us see a balanced budget here in this country?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our taking office, no such policy existed. This government is working hard for middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join them. This government has had unprecedented levels of public consultations to ensure that we can respond to the very real challenges that Canadians are facing. This government will continue to work hard for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, it is the first time the PCO has needed private island guidelines.The Prime Minister has increased taxes on Canadians who use Uber or public transit to get to work, because the Prime Minister has made it very clear he needs the extra cash to pay for his caviar and champagne when he travels to private islands. The Prime Minister is so out of touch that he is raising taxes on struggling Canadians to fund his lavish lifestyle, and Canadians are getting fed up.Will the Prime Minister actually stand and answer questions of behalf of struggling Canadians or will he just sit there with a smug look on his face, while he daydreams about his next vacation?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to give the Prime Minister four days off a week, prevent members from doing their job in committees, and limit the speaking time of all members. Motion No. 6 was nothing compared to this attempt by the Prime Minister to take total and permanent control of Parliament. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons claims she wants to discuss this, but at the same time has ordered her MPs to pass these changes in committee in a backroom on Parliament Hill.When will the Prime Minister put his house in order? When will he finally show some respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can be absolutely assured that every Canadian law is being enforced by the RCMP and by the CBSA. As well, we are honouring all of our obligations under international law.The hon. gentleman should know that when people cross the border in irregular fashion, they are apprehended, they are identified, they are fingerprinted. Their biographical and biometric information is collected. That is checked against every Canadian database and the appropriate international databases for immigration or criminal activity. If it is warranted, suspects are detained.
Mr. Speaker, this Liberal budget is full of bluster and bafflegab. A few gems include innovation through superclusters, or this one about offsetting derivative positions in straddle transactions, or even better, capping stock options for the super-richoh, wait; that did not make it into the budget. That was in the Liberal platform. This is nothing but a backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget. Way back on page 150 is a $1.2 billion cut to fighting climate change. To all those Canadians who believed the Liberals in Paris were serious about fighting climate change, how can they betray their commitment to them now?
Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of being seated next to a finance minister who reluctantly ran a deficit to stimulate the Canadian economy while it was going through the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. He did so reluctantly.This week, the minister talked about success in business. I am very happy for him and his success. If he had run a deficit in his business the way he is doing here in government, that would have been disgraceful.The government is doing away with the public transit tax credit. It portrays itself as all green and environmental. Why did it get rid of that credit? They say it was small and underutilized, but that seems like one more reason to keep it around.
Mr. Speaker, once again allow me to set the record straight for Canadians. The discussion paper talks about a better use of members' time. On Fridays, we are only required to be here for half an hour. It would be realistic to move those hours to other days of the week. Most offices in Canada start their workday at 9 a.m. The House of Commons could as well.The goal behind this option is to enable us to be in our ridings on Fridays so that we can meet with our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would not interfere in the work of committees, but that is exactly what he is doing. The Prime Minister's staff, over the last number of days, have been at the procedure and House affairs committee, telling the Liberal backbenchers to block the opposition's simple and reasonable request that we have collaboration and consensus on changes to the rules. Will the Prime Minister back off and let the Liberal members do their job, as he promised that he would do?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is a well-known rule that committees are meant to be masters of their own domain, and we have all been told that the motion to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that was presented by the hon. member for Coast of BaysCentralNotre Dame is not being coordinated by the government. In question period today, the government House leader said, I have asked the committee to expand the scope of the study, and she went on from there.I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to enforce the well-known rule on committee independence and tell the government House leader to stay out of it before she makes matters even worse.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I noted that the government's attempt to give itself carte blanche to unilaterally rewrite the Standing Orders is opposite to the practices of most recent Liberal and Conservative administrations, but the tradition goes back much further. On December 28, 1867, our first set of Standing Orders was adopted by unanimous consent. Consensus for major changes to the Standing Orders was good enough for prime ministers from Sir. John A. to Stephen Harper. Will the current Prime Minister not acknowledge that consensus is still the right approach even though it is 2017?
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what the Conservative government was focused on. That was on balancing the budget. For Canada's beleaguered energy workers, yesterday's budget was a kick in the teeth. While our biggest competitor, the United States, is cutting red tape and taxes and making its energy sector more attractive to job creators, the Liberals are jacking up taxes and punishing oil and gas exploration. It is almost as though they want to phase out the energy sector. Our energy sector employs those middle-class Canadians that the government pretends to care about. Why did the Liberals go out of their way in this budget to kick energy workers in the teeth when they are already down?
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear to all of us in the House. Canadians are ambitious and seek new opportunities every day. Whether they are looking to start their own businesses, to export to new markets or to scale up their operations, they need our support.While we have been working hard to open doors and create opportunities for Canadians, it is clear that the global economy continues to change. What new commitments has the government made in budget 2017 to help Canadian businesses flourish in this changing economy?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to set the record straight. The discussion paper talks about the better use of our time as members of Parliament. On Friday our schedule here is only half a day, so let us talk about moving those hours to other days of the week. We talk about working hard just like Canadians do. Hard-working Canadians in most offices in Canada start their day at 9 a.m. or even earlier. Why can the House of Commons not consider that?Let us talk about doing that so that we can be back in our ridings to not only serve Canadians but to be able to engage with them and listen to their concerns, listen to their constructive feedback, so we can better serve them in this place.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has lost touch with average Canadians. I can imagine it is easy to miss the challenges that everyday Canadians are facing when he is busy jet-setting to billionaire island, but $127,000. Even the most out-of-touch Hollywood celebrity would blush at this type of spending, and 17 hundred bucks to feed a family of five on a three hour flight. Why does the Prime Minister think taxpayers should be on the hook for this type of extravagance?
Mr. Speaker, let me just clarify to the member opposite that we are absolutely committed to tackling climate change, and if he looks at the budget, he will see the numbers are there. We are putting in place the measures that are necessary to do our made-in-Canada plan on climate change. We put in money to enhance opportunities in clean tech. However, let me quote others. Clean Energy Canada said, We're pleased that the new federal budget makes smart investments for clean energy and climate action in Canada. Équiterre said that today's budget puts in place the necessary resources to implement the new climate plan. Climate Action Network said, Today's budget provides the financial backing we need to begin the serious work of implementing Canada's climate framework....We are getting it right. We are taking action on climate change, and I hope the member will support us.
Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. Our government recognizes that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace.Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, predictable, efficient, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, the budget has clearly laid bare the Liberal governments choices. While, exactly two weeks ago, the Liberals voted to close the tax loophole for CEOs, they did not do so in their budget. No, instead they scrapped the public transit tax credit and cut $1.25 billion from the fund to combat climate change. Here is a simple question: why have the Liberals chosen to protect wealthy CEOs instead of the environment?
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the government House leader tried to defend the Prime Minister's use of the Privy Council Office to help him on a trip to Alberta for the Medicine HatCardstonWarner by-election. She claimed it was to help prepare the PM for government business, but that is complete nonsense. The trip had only one purpose: for the Prime Minister to appear at Liberal Party campaign events. There was no government business. Why does the Prime Minister believe it is okay to use public servants to campaign for the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget would invest $2.7 billion to help unemployed and underemployed Canadians get the skills they need for their next and better job, and $470 million for adult workers so they can go back to school, upgrade their skills, and upgrade their credentials. We would make changes to the EI system so that, when Canadians take self-funded training, they do not lose their EI benefits. This would help Canadian workers
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance presented the governments plan. It is an ambitious, visionary plan that makes middle-class families the priority, both in Bourassa and elsewhere in Canada.Can the Minister of Finance tell us why he only chose certain sectors of the economy in his budget?
Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that I shared with members of Parliament as well as Canadians was to encourage us to have a conversation, a discussion. What I have recognized is that there are many misconceptions in regard to the discussion paper. I will share information in regard to Friday sittings. We know that on Fridays the House of Commons sits for only half a day. We are saying why not reallocate that time to other days. The House of Commons starts at 10 a.m. on some days. Most Canadians start their day at 9 a.m. or earlier. Why can the House of Commons not do that? Let us have that important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, as I have shared many times in the House, yes, a discussion paper was released to all members of Parliament, and it was also released to Canadians, so we could have a meaningful conversation, a substantial discussion on Standing Orders and how we govern in this place. It is unfortunate that a lot of the ideas within the paper have been misrepresented. This is why I encourage all people to be part of the conversation so we can find a made-in-Canada solution for Parliament and the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, closing the CEO stock option tax loophole would have generated $725 million every year, and as a bonus it would have helped the Liberals keep one of their promises. What a concept that is. Instead, what the Liberals are doing is they are refusing to give $155 million to finally end discrimination against first nations children.The question is simple, and please can the Liberals deliver the response for once without their pre-written talking points. Why protect rich CEOs instead of protecting first nations children?
Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight for Canadians.We have proposed a number of ideas in a discussion paper in order to modernize Parliament. Some of these ideas have been misinterpreted. Let us be clear: the Liberals are not recommending that the Prime Minister come to question period only once a week. We are trying to encourage a debate on how to improve accountability in the House. Let there be no mistake: our Prime Minister will be more accountable, not less accountable.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's budget raises taxes on people like Joe, whether it is for beer, wine, or spirits, but that is really ironic, because that same budget contains the tab for $1,700 worth of drinks and snacks during the Prime Minister's three hour flight to a private island getaway over the holidays.What message does the Prime Minister think he is sending to a taxpayer like Joe when he raises Joe's taxes while helping himself to free drinks on the house?
Mr. Speaker, our predecessors did not make the investments they should have, which resulted in excessively slow growth. Now we have to invest in Canadian families and infrastructure to boost our growth rate. This is very important to our fiscal position. These investments will put Canada in a better position in the future.
Mr. Speaker, every single day when I come to the Department of National Defence, it is about serving our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces. We are committed to making sure that the Canadian Armed Forces have all the tools necessary to do their work. We have planned increases that we are committed to. This is about flowing the money and making sure that the money is there for the projects that we have committed to in the years that it is required. We have an defence policy that is going to be coming out shortly, and I look forward to launching that and showing to all Canadians our commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, technological change has shown us that we must continue to encourage innovation in our country. In order to provide tangible help to those who are worried about being left behind, the government has already stressed the importance of giving Canadian workers the tools they need to succeed in the new economy.Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour explain to the House what this government is doing to make sure that Canadians can get the training they need to find and keep good, well-paying jobs?
Mr. Speaker, ever since Quebec managed to pry labour matters from the hands of the Canadian government, we have created the best labour market training system in North America.However, once again, Ottawa is going back on its word. The government cannot be counted on. After the Harper government, which tried to make us fit into the Canadian mould, now it is the Liberals who are reneging on the labour market agreement, which was so hard to reach. Why is it that whenever something is working well, Ottawa has to stick its nose in and tear everything down?
Mr. Speaker, it is very important to be an optimistic country and to make investments in the future, but we also need to know in which particular sectors we have a comparative advantage. That is exactly what we have done.We decided to be the world leader in very important sectors where there will be high-quality jobs in the future. We chose six sectors that are key to our childrens and grandchildrens future. We will consider ways of providing the necessary training for the good jobs of the future.
Mr. Speaker, this goes well beyond an innocent discussion paper. The government House leader should not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.However, if she is serious about that, if she is really truly sincere that her motives are pure, will she now stand in her place and tell this House that she accepts that her government has no mandate to change the rules of democracy over the united objections of the opposition? If she will not, then it is pretty clear that her protests of innocence are even more shallow than they sound.
Mr. Speaker, documents show that in October, the Privy Council Office was directed by the Prime Minister to produce a regional backgrounder on Medicine Hat during the by-election. The Prime Minister had no government events in Medicine Hat. He was only there to campaign. The PCO was also ordered to provide tech support and uploaded a video from the campaign stop with the PM and the Liberal candidate. In light of the actions of the Prime Minister in Medicine Hat, today, when the Prime Minister is campaigning in MarkhamThornhill, will PCO staff be ordered to campaign with him yet again?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that this place needs to be modernized. We need to have this conversation. We need to have this discussion. Every single member of Parliament has a role and responsibility. I recognize that members on both sides of this place have responsibilities, and we want to ensure that we have important conversations. Within this place, members of Parliament have the opportunity to hold the government to account. We believe that within the ridings, constituents have the ability to hold their members of Parliament to account, and that is why I believe that important work is done here in the House as well as in the ridings.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected our government on a plan to grow the economy and strengthen the middle class. We are delivering on that commitment. Over the last seven months, almost 250,000 jobs were created, the majority of which were full-time jobs. This is the most job growth we have seen in over a decade. This is evidence that our plan is working. Yesterday, we continued to build off those investments, good work we are doing for Canadians. One of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council Office to develop guidelines surrounding the reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our government taking office, no such policy existed.
Mr. Speaker, while the government's gender budget sounded good, the budget lacks real action for women: not a penny to legislate equal pay for work of equal value; not a cent for child care this year; zero new money for shelters for women fleeing violence; nothing to make birth control more affordable; and only a fraction of what is needed for a strategy to end violence against women. Once again, women are being asked to wait. If gender equality really matters to the government, why were women shortchanged again?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what this budget means for a hard-working taxpayer. Let us call him Joe. Joe takes the bus to work every day, and at the end of the day, he likes to go to the pub with his buddies for a beer. He is a responsible guy, so he always uses Uber to get home. What does this budget do for Joe? First of all, it taxes his bus pass. It takes away his tax credit for his bus pass. It taxes the beer he has at the pub. It even slaps a tax on his Uber ride.What exactly does the Prime Minister have against people like Joe?
Mr. Speaker, it is this government that actually increased funding to committees so that they could do the important work that they need to do. We actually believe in the committee process because it is the committee that can actually study legislation and study ideas way better than we do in this place, and that is exactly what we have asked the committee to do.With respect to the discussion paper, I have asked the committee to broaden the scope of the study they already have in place in regard to the Standing Orders. I believe it is a meaningful conversation that all members need to have. I encourage all members, as well as all Canadians, to participate.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about what Sally and Joanne and Mary-Ann will see in the future. I want to talk about the fact that what we are doing is taking the very best balance sheet among the G7 countries, the lowest net debt to GDP, and we are making investments that an optimistic country needs to make. Unfortunately, the people before us were focused on austerity. We are focused on growth. We are looking at how we can make investments to make a difference. That growth is what is going to make sure that our country stays successful over the long run.
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly these hypotheticals and these speculations that the committee has the ability to deal with. That is why we are saying let us have this conversation, let us have this discussion. It is because these are important concerns that Canadians are facing, and we are saying let us have this discussion. That is why I had introduced a discussion paper. I know the committee members sat late once again yesterday. I did visit the members of the committee to thank them for their work. I believe that they are having a meaningful conversation and I think it is important that they continue that conversation. My door will remain open so that we can all work better together.
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House on this traditional territory the day after a feminist budget was tabled in the House, with the first-ever gender statement acknowledging that our policies and our actions in the House affect women and men and people of different genders differently. One hundred million dollars was committed for the gender-based violence strategy, the first Canada has ever had; $7 billion for child care; $11 billion for affordable housing.We have many priorities and much work to do. This was a great budget for women and girls everywhere and
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister held unprecedented levels of public consultation so we could actually respond to the very real challenges they face. It was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to families with children who needed it the most so they could actually do what they needed to do for their families. What was consistent throughout it all? The Conservatives voted against it every time.
Mr. Speaker, not only is there nothing in the budget for the dairy industry, but also there is still no news on granting tariff quotas under CETA.We now hear talk about a proposal to resolve the softwood lumber issue by sacrificing our supply management system. That is completely unacceptable. The Liberals already hurt our industry during the negotiations and have yet to come up with fair and equitable compensation. My question is simple:Can the government confirm today that it will not sacrifice our supply management system or our forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, we know that the measures in our budget are very important for all of Canada, including Quebec. It is very important to invest in affordable housing and in our health care system, in Quebec and across the country. We will continue with our program to improve the level of economic growth. It is important to create jobs. At present, the unemployment rate is lower than when we came to power. It is currently 6.6%, and it was 7.1% at the outset. Our program
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to continue on our plan to make a real difference for our country over the long term. What we started with was dealing with middle-class anxiety. What we talked about yesterday was a second chapter in our plan: how we can create great long-term jobs in sectors where Canada can be globally competitive. We are going to do this in a way that will ensure that Canadians can go for great opportunities in the future, and we will ensure that we deal with the most vulnerable as we can.
Mr. Speaker, we built our agenda, our plan, based on Joe. What we have done for Joe is we have reduced his taxes. If Joe is a single guy, we have reduced his taxes by $330. If Joe has a family, he has more money for his family because of our Canada child benefit. Most importantly for Joe, our investments in transit mean he is going to get to and from home more rapidly. What Joe knows is that he is going to have, over the long term, the ability to have a great job, an exciting job, because we are going to invest in Canada.
Since when does a cabinet minister or House leader give orders to a committee anyway, Mr. Speaker?The government House leader is ignoring the long-held tradition of getting all-party agreement for an overhaul of the way that democracy works in this place. If the House leader's argument that the government of such a warm and loving Prime Minister could not possibly harm our democracy with the power grab now under way, I wonder if she might speculate with us what the majority government of a prime minister like, say, Kevin O'Leary would do with all that power?
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is well aware that we support supply management. She is well aware that I announced $350 million for the dairy sector, $250 million for the farmers, $100 million for the processors.Along with it, yesterday's budget announced $70 million for agricultural science and innovation, $950 million for super clusters, $200 million for clean technology.This government supports supply management and the agricultural sector.
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister really does believe we can work better in this place. Just today, I have Sarah, who is my University of Toronto women in House program person, who is shadowing me on the Hill. She has seen a lot of the stuff that has taken place here. She has asked me some tough questions with regard to some of the stuff that went on yesterday and today. It is important that we have this meaningful conversation. I am sure she, too, will be reading the discussion paper and be a part of it. I know many members have women following them today so one day they too can occupy even more seats in the House.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier this afternoon, this budget was the best news on health that we have seen in a decade, with fantastic news in so many areas; not only the new investments that I referred to earlier, but we have a growing Canada health transfer that would give to the provinces more than $200 billion over the next five years. As we work with the provinces and territories in delivering health care, they would be able to do advanced care for Canadians of all particular needs. We also have new money for early learning and child care in the order of $7 billion that would be of great assistance to families affected by
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has shared so well, it was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes for the 1% of wealthiest Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to his family and the children who need it the most to ensure that they get the most.When it comes to the travel that the member opposite is referring to, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and their guests as well.
Mr. Speaker, I really do believe that we can have more meaningful conversation and debate in this place. I believe that when it comes to challenging the integrity of individuals, that is for the member to choose to do. I believe that is not needed in the conversation that I would like to have, and that is why I am saying let us have a conversation, let us have a discussion. The member knows very well, as I told him last night, that I actually appreciate a lot of the work that he does. I hope that we can continue working better together, because I believe this place needs to be modernized. It is a commitment we made to Canadians in the electoral campaign. It is something on which Canadians agree that all members in this place need to work better together.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the vision we have put in place for the Canada 150 celebrations. Four themes will be celebrated throughout the year: young people, the environment, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and diversity and inclusiveness. We will make sure that in funding the celebrations and various projects across the country, there will be an equitable regional distribution. Of course, I hope all Canadians across the country and of all political stripes will join in the celebrations.
Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We strengthened the middle class by reducing their taxes while asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a little more. That continues to be our focus, because we know it is very important to have a fair tax system. We will continue with our plan. We found expenditures that must be reviewed so we can ensure that our system continues to be fair. There will be consultations in the coming weeks and months to explain our programs.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister's arrogant attitude with how he spends tax dollars, but now this behaviour is starting to creep into the House of Commons. He has proposed a plan to limit his attendance in question period to once a week, which in fact, is actually only one hour a week, and give all of his colleagues Fridays off. I just want to remind the Prime Minister that while he was campaigning he said, Sunlight is the world's best disinfectant. My question is: What dirt is he trying to hide?
Mr. Speaker, the one comment I would like to make, once again, has to do with how Canada's regions have been abandoned, especially our forestry regions. The Quebec National Assembly reminded us of this today. The agricultural sector is going to have to fight with six high-tech sectors for additional funding for its own development, even though all Canadians eat every day, and food security is extremely important. In my view, the choices this government is making go against the well-being of our society.Does the Prime Minister want to punish farmers and all Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this question because it gives me an opportunity to talk about the fantastic news in our budget yesterday, as it relates to health, and that includes the health of seniors. We were able to announce additional investments in the order of $11 billion that would go to home care, including palliative care, that would go to mental health, and that includes seniors' needs, like dementia, so we would be able to support them. It included things like $11 billion for housing that would include social housing to support seniors. There was so much good news in the budget. I look forward to working with colleagues to put that work into place.
Mr. Speaker, we decided that it was very important to make decisions in sectors where Canada has a comparative advantage.One sector that is very important to us is the agri-food sector. We decided that we should be a global leader in this sector. That is why we decided to focus on that sector and to ensure that people have the training needed to lead the way.
Mr. Speaker, I am taking part in a discussion that includes all members and all Canadians because we want to work with them and we want them to participate in this discussion. Our government knows that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace. Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, effective, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for NewmarketAurora for his work on trade and his interest in innovation.It is a great budget for NewmarketAurora in terms of innovation. Through our innovation and skills plan, we will create jobs, we will help our companies and our economy and citizens thrive in a rapidly changing world.That same innovation and skills plan also aims to help 10,000 more young Canadians to get the skills and training they need in today's economy through work integrated learning and co-ops. There are $1.26 billion in a strategic innovation fund that will create a one-stop shop and a more efficient and coordinated way for us innovate.
Mr. Speaker, let us think about children and grandchildren for a moment. As we worry about children and grandchildren, what we think about is this: How can our country be a world leader? How can we be successful? What we can do is be optimistic and make investments in the future growth of this country. That is exactly what we are going to do. We are focused on places where our country has a comparative advantage. We are focused on how we can give our children and our grandchildren the education, training, and skills to be successful. That will lead to a higher rate of growth. That will lead to good economic outcomes.
Mr. Speaker, in budget 2017 we propose to help make communities healthier and more inclusive, invest in faster and more efficient public transit, and build more cultural and recreational centres and affordable housing.Our government is investing more than $180 billion in neighbourhoods and modern and resilient communities, and these projects are well under way with more than 1,400 projects approved totalling over $15 billion.In my riding, 6,000 families are better off thanks to this budget. Millions of families throughout Canada are better off. That makes me very proud.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to working with all the provinces. I know that with the Province of Quebec we have spoken with the minister responsible for education, and the provincial government is very pleased with the investments that have been made by this government. We will continue to invest in all Canadians so that they are given the skills they need to work in tomorrow's economy, as well as to develop well-paying jobs for today.
Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to set the record straight.Contrary to what the Liberals think, Parliament belongs to Canadians. They elected all of us to represent them. Contrary to what the Prime Minister thinks, not everyone likes him. Most Canadians do not approve of the deficits he is running. Most Canadians find his insatiable appetite for spending taxpayers' money unacceptable. Why does the Prime Minister want to silence Canadians who do not think like him? Why does he want to muzzle the opposition members and his own backbenchers?We will not let him do that.
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to set the record straight.Contrary to what the Liberals think, Parliament belongs to Canadians. They elected all of us to represent them. Contrary to what the Prime Minister thinks, not everyone likes him. Most Canadians do not approve of the deficits he is running. Most Canadians find his insatiable appetite for spending taxpayers' money unacceptable. Why does the Prime Minister want to silence Canadians who do not think like him? Why does he want to muzzle the opposition members and his own backbenchers?We will not let him do that.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to working with all the provinces. I know that with the Province of Quebec we have spoken with the minister responsible for education, and the provincial government is very pleased with the investments that have been made by this government. We will continue to invest in all Canadians so that they are given the skills they need to work in tomorrow's economy, as well as to develop well-paying jobs for today.
Mr. Speaker, in budget 2017 we propose to help make communities healthier and more inclusive, invest in faster and more efficient public transit, and build more cultural and recreational centres and affordable housing.Our government is investing more than $180 billion in neighbourhoods and modern and resilient communities, and these projects are well under way with more than 1,400 projects approved totalling over $15 billion.In my riding, 6,000 families are better off thanks to this budget. Millions of families throughout Canada are better off. That makes me very proud.
Mr. Speaker, let us think about children and grandchildren for a moment. As we worry about children and grandchildren, what we think about is this: How can our country be a world leader? How can we be successful? What we can do is be optimistic and make investments in the future growth of this country. That is exactly what we are going to do. We are focused on places where our country has a comparative advantage. We are focused on how we can give our children and our grandchildren the education, training, and skills to be successful. That will lead to a higher rate of growth. That will lead to good economic outcomes.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for NewmarketAurora for his work on trade and his interest in innovation.It is a great budget for NewmarketAurora in terms of innovation. Through our innovation and skills plan, we will create jobs, we will help our companies and our economy and citizens thrive in a rapidly changing world.That same innovation and skills plan also aims to help 10,000 more young Canadians to get the skills and training they need in today's economy through work integrated learning and co-ops. There are $1.26 billion in a strategic innovation fund that will create a one-stop shop and a more efficient and coordinated way for us innovate.
Mr. Speaker, I am taking part in a discussion that includes all members and all Canadians because we want to work with them and we want them to participate in this discussion. Our government knows that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace. Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, effective, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, we decided that it was very important to make decisions in sectors where Canada has a comparative advantage.One sector that is very important to us is the agri-food sector. We decided that we should be a global leader in this sector. That is why we decided to focus on that sector and to ensure that people have the training needed to lead the way.
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this question because it gives me an opportunity to talk about the fantastic news in our budget yesterday, as it relates to health, and that includes the health of seniors. We were able to announce additional investments in the order of $11 billion that would go to home care, including palliative care, that would go to mental health, and that includes seniors' needs, like dementia, so we would be able to support them. It included things like $11 billion for housing that would include social housing to support seniors. There was so much good news in the budget. I look forward to working with colleagues to put that work into place.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister's arrogant attitude with how he spends tax dollars, but now this behaviour is starting to creep into the House of Commons. He has proposed a plan to limit his attendance in question period to once a week, which in fact, is actually only one hour a week, and give all of his colleagues Fridays off. I just want to remind the Prime Minister that while he was campaigning he said, Sunlight is the world's best disinfectant. My question is: What dirt is he trying to hide?
Mr. Speaker, the one comment I would like to make, once again, has to do with how Canada's regions have been abandoned, especially our forestry regions. The Quebec National Assembly reminded us of this today. The agricultural sector is going to have to fight with six high-tech sectors for additional funding for its own development, even though all Canadians eat every day, and food security is extremely important. In my view, the choices this government is making go against the well-being of our society.Does the Prime Minister want to punish farmers and all Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We strengthened the middle class by reducing their taxes while asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a little more. That continues to be our focus, because we know it is very important to have a fair tax system. We will continue with our plan. We found expenditures that must be reviewed so we can ensure that our system continues to be fair. There will be consultations in the coming weeks and months to explain our programs.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the vision we have put in place for the Canada 150 celebrations. Four themes will be celebrated throughout the year: young people, the environment, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and diversity and inclusiveness. We will make sure that in funding the celebrations and various projects across the country, there will be an equitable regional distribution. Of course, I hope all Canadians across the country and of all political stripes will join in the celebrations.
Mr. Speaker, I really do believe that we can have more meaningful conversation and debate in this place. I believe that when it comes to challenging the integrity of individuals, that is for the member to choose to do. I believe that is not needed in the conversation that I would like to have, and that is why I am saying let us have a conversation, let us have a discussion. The member knows very well, as I told him last night, that I actually appreciate a lot of the work that he does. I hope that we can continue working better together, because I believe this place needs to be modernized. It is a commitment we made to Canadians in the electoral campaign. It is something on which Canadians agree that all members in this place need to work better together.
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has shared so well, it was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes for the 1% of wealthiest Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to his family and the children who need it the most to ensure that they get the most.When it comes to the travel that the member opposite is referring to, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and their guests as well.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier this afternoon, this budget was the best news on health that we have seen in a decade, with fantastic news in so many areas; not only the new investments that I referred to earlier, but we have a growing Canada health transfer that would give to the provinces more than $200 billion over the next five years. As we work with the provinces and territories in delivering health care, they would be able to do advanced care for Canadians of all particular needs. We also have new money for early learning and child care in the order of $7 billion that would be of great assistance to families affected by
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister really does believe we can work better in this place. Just today, I have Sarah, who is my University of Toronto women in House program person, who is shadowing me on the Hill. She has seen a lot of the stuff that has taken place here. She has asked me some tough questions with regard to some of the stuff that went on yesterday and today. It is important that we have this meaningful conversation. I am sure she, too, will be reading the discussion paper and be a part of it. I know many members have women following them today so one day they too can occupy even more seats in the House.
Since when does a cabinet minister or House leader give orders to a committee anyway, Mr. Speaker?The government House leader is ignoring the long-held tradition of getting all-party agreement for an overhaul of the way that democracy works in this place. If the House leader's argument that the government of such a warm and loving Prime Minister could not possibly harm our democracy with the power grab now under way, I wonder if she might speculate with us what the majority government of a prime minister like, say, Kevin O'Leary would do with all that power?
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is well aware that we support supply management. She is well aware that I announced $350 million for the dairy sector, $250 million for the farmers, $100 million for the processors.Along with it, yesterday's budget announced $70 million for agricultural science and innovation, $950 million for super clusters, $200 million for clean technology.This government supports supply management and the agricultural sector.
Mr. Speaker, we built our agenda, our plan, based on Joe. What we have done for Joe is we have reduced his taxes. If Joe is a single guy, we have reduced his taxes by $330. If Joe has a family, he has more money for his family because of our Canada child benefit. Most importantly for Joe, our investments in transit mean he is going to get to and from home more rapidly. What Joe knows is that he is going to have, over the long term, the ability to have a great job, an exciting job, because we are going to invest in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to continue on our plan to make a real difference for our country over the long term. What we started with was dealing with middle-class anxiety. What we talked about yesterday was a second chapter in our plan: how we can create great long-term jobs in sectors where Canada can be globally competitive. We are going to do this in a way that will ensure that Canadians can go for great opportunities in the future, and we will ensure that we deal with the most vulnerable as we can.
Mr. Speaker, we know that the measures in our budget are very important for all of Canada, including Quebec. It is very important to invest in affordable housing and in our health care system, in Quebec and across the country. We will continue with our program to improve the level of economic growth. It is important to create jobs. At present, the unemployment rate is lower than when we came to power. It is currently 6.6%, and it was 7.1% at the outset. Our program
Mr. Speaker, not only is there nothing in the budget for the dairy industry, but also there is still no news on granting tariff quotas under CETA.We now hear talk about a proposal to resolve the softwood lumber issue by sacrificing our supply management system. That is completely unacceptable. The Liberals already hurt our industry during the negotiations and have yet to come up with fair and equitable compensation. My question is simple:Can the government confirm today that it will not sacrifice our supply management system or our forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister held unprecedented levels of public consultation so we could actually respond to the very real challenges they face. It was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to families with children who needed it the most so they could actually do what they needed to do for their families. What was consistent throughout it all? The Conservatives voted against it every time.
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly these hypotheticals and these speculations that the committee has the ability to deal with. That is why we are saying let us have this conversation, let us have this discussion. It is because these are important concerns that Canadians are facing, and we are saying let us have this discussion. That is why I had introduced a discussion paper. I know the committee members sat late once again yesterday. I did visit the members of the committee to thank them for their work. I believe that they are having a meaningful conversation and I think it is important that they continue that conversation. My door will remain open so that we can all work better together.
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House on this traditional territory the day after a feminist budget was tabled in the House, with the first-ever gender statement acknowledging that our policies and our actions in the House affect women and men and people of different genders differently. One hundred million dollars was committed for the gender-based violence strategy, the first Canada has ever had; $7 billion for child care; $11 billion for affordable housing.We have many priorities and much work to do. This was a great budget for women and girls everywhere and
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about what Sally and Joanne and Mary-Ann will see in the future. I want to talk about the fact that what we are doing is taking the very best balance sheet among the G7 countries, the lowest net debt to GDP, and we are making investments that an optimistic country needs to make. Unfortunately, the people before us were focused on austerity. We are focused on growth. We are looking at how we can make investments to make a difference. That growth is what is going to make sure that our country stays successful over the long run.
Mr. Speaker, it is this government that actually increased funding to committees so that they could do the important work that they need to do. We actually believe in the committee process because it is the committee that can actually study legislation and study ideas way better than we do in this place, and that is exactly what we have asked the committee to do.With respect to the discussion paper, I have asked the committee to broaden the scope of the study they already have in place in regard to the Standing Orders. I believe it is a meaningful conversation that all members need to have. I encourage all members, as well as all Canadians, to participate.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what this budget means for a hard-working taxpayer. Let us call him Joe. Joe takes the bus to work every day, and at the end of the day, he likes to go to the pub with his buddies for a beer. He is a responsible guy, so he always uses Uber to get home. What does this budget do for Joe? First of all, it taxes his bus pass. It takes away his tax credit for his bus pass. It taxes the beer he has at the pub. It even slaps a tax on his Uber ride.What exactly does the Prime Minister have against people like Joe?
Mr. Speaker, while the government's gender budget sounded good, the budget lacks real action for women: not a penny to legislate equal pay for work of equal value; not a cent for child care this year; zero new money for shelters for women fleeing violence; nothing to make birth control more affordable; and only a fraction of what is needed for a strategy to end violence against women. Once again, women are being asked to wait. If gender equality really matters to the government, why were women shortchanged again?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that this place needs to be modernized. We need to have this conversation. We need to have this discussion. Every single member of Parliament has a role and responsibility. I recognize that members on both sides of this place have responsibilities, and we want to ensure that we have important conversations. Within this place, members of Parliament have the opportunity to hold the government to account. We believe that within the ridings, constituents have the ability to hold their members of Parliament to account, and that is why I believe that important work is done here in the House as well as in the ridings.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected our government on a plan to grow the economy and strengthen the middle class. We are delivering on that commitment. Over the last seven months, almost 250,000 jobs were created, the majority of which were full-time jobs. This is the most job growth we have seen in over a decade. This is evidence that our plan is working. Yesterday, we continued to build off those investments, good work we are doing for Canadians. One of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council Office to develop guidelines surrounding the reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our government taking office, no such policy existed.
Mr. Speaker, documents show that in October, the Privy Council Office was directed by the Prime Minister to produce a regional backgrounder on Medicine Hat during the by-election. The Prime Minister had no government events in Medicine Hat. He was only there to campaign. The PCO was also ordered to provide tech support and uploaded a video from the campaign stop with the PM and the Liberal candidate. In light of the actions of the Prime Minister in Medicine Hat, today, when the Prime Minister is campaigning in MarkhamThornhill, will PCO staff be ordered to campaign with him yet again?
Mr. Speaker, this goes well beyond an innocent discussion paper. The government House leader should not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.However, if she is serious about that, if she is really truly sincere that her motives are pure, will she now stand in her place and tell this House that she accepts that her government has no mandate to change the rules of democracy over the united objections of the opposition? If she will not, then it is pretty clear that her protests of innocence are even more shallow than they sound.
Mr. Speaker, it is very important to be an optimistic country and to make investments in the future, but we also need to know in which particular sectors we have a comparative advantage. That is exactly what we have done.We decided to be the world leader in very important sectors where there will be high-quality jobs in the future. We chose six sectors that are key to our childrens and grandchildrens future. We will consider ways of providing the necessary training for the good jobs of the future.
Mr. Speaker, ever since Quebec managed to pry labour matters from the hands of the Canadian government, we have created the best labour market training system in North America.However, once again, Ottawa is going back on its word. The government cannot be counted on. After the Harper government, which tried to make us fit into the Canadian mould, now it is the Liberals who are reneging on the labour market agreement, which was so hard to reach. Why is it that whenever something is working well, Ottawa has to stick its nose in and tear everything down?
Mr. Speaker, technological change has shown us that we must continue to encourage innovation in our country. In order to provide tangible help to those who are worried about being left behind, the government has already stressed the importance of giving Canadian workers the tools they need to succeed in the new economy.Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour explain to the House what this government is doing to make sure that Canadians can get the training they need to find and keep good, well-paying jobs?
Mr. Speaker, every single day when I come to the Department of National Defence, it is about serving our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces. We are committed to making sure that the Canadian Armed Forces have all the tools necessary to do their work. We have planned increases that we are committed to. This is about flowing the money and making sure that the money is there for the projects that we have committed to in the years that it is required. We have an defence policy that is going to be coming out shortly, and I look forward to launching that and showing to all Canadians our commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's budget raises taxes on people like Joe, whether it is for beer, wine, or spirits, but that is really ironic, because that same budget contains the tab for $1,700 worth of drinks and snacks during the Prime Minister's three hour flight to a private island getaway over the holidays.What message does the Prime Minister think he is sending to a taxpayer like Joe when he raises Joe's taxes while helping himself to free drinks on the house?
Mr. Speaker, our predecessors did not make the investments they should have, which resulted in excessively slow growth. Now we have to invest in Canadian families and infrastructure to boost our growth rate. This is very important to our fiscal position. These investments will put Canada in a better position in the future.
Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight for Canadians.We have proposed a number of ideas in a discussion paper in order to modernize Parliament. Some of these ideas have been misinterpreted. Let us be clear: the Liberals are not recommending that the Prime Minister come to question period only once a week. We are trying to encourage a debate on how to improve accountability in the House. Let there be no mistake: our Prime Minister will be more accountable, not less accountable.
Mr. Speaker, closing the CEO stock option tax loophole would have generated $725 million every year, and as a bonus it would have helped the Liberals keep one of their promises. What a concept that is. Instead, what the Liberals are doing is they are refusing to give $155 million to finally end discrimination against first nations children.The question is simple, and please can the Liberals deliver the response for once without their pre-written talking points. Why protect rich CEOs instead of protecting first nations children?
Mr. Speaker, as I have shared many times in the House, yes, a discussion paper was released to all members of Parliament, and it was also released to Canadians, so we could have a meaningful conversation, a substantial discussion on Standing Orders and how we govern in this place. It is unfortunate that a lot of the ideas within the paper have been misrepresented. This is why I encourage all people to be part of the conversation so we can find a made-in-Canada solution for Parliament and the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that I shared with members of Parliament as well as Canadians was to encourage us to have a conversation, a discussion. What I have recognized is that there are many misconceptions in regard to the discussion paper. I will share information in regard to Friday sittings. We know that on Fridays the House of Commons sits for only half a day. We are saying why not reallocate that time to other days. The House of Commons starts at 10 a.m. on some days. Most Canadians start their day at 9 a.m. or earlier. Why can the House of Commons not do that? Let us have that important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance presented the governments plan. It is an ambitious, visionary plan that makes middle-class families the priority, both in Bourassa and elsewhere in Canada.Can the Minister of Finance tell us why he only chose certain sectors of the economy in his budget?
Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. Our government recognizes that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace.Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, predictable, efficient, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, the budget has clearly laid bare the Liberal governments choices. While, exactly two weeks ago, the Liberals voted to close the tax loophole for CEOs, they did not do so in their budget. No, instead they scrapped the public transit tax credit and cut $1.25 billion from the fund to combat climate change. Here is a simple question: why have the Liberals chosen to protect wealthy CEOs instead of the environment?
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the government House leader tried to defend the Prime Minister's use of the Privy Council Office to help him on a trip to Alberta for the Medicine HatCardstonWarner by-election. She claimed it was to help prepare the PM for government business, but that is complete nonsense. The trip had only one purpose: for the Prime Minister to appear at Liberal Party campaign events. There was no government business. Why does the Prime Minister believe it is okay to use public servants to campaign for the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget would invest $2.7 billion to help unemployed and underemployed Canadians get the skills they need for their next and better job, and $470 million for adult workers so they can go back to school, upgrade their skills, and upgrade their credentials. We would make changes to the EI system so that, when Canadians take self-funded training, they do not lose their EI benefits. This would help Canadian workers
Mr. Speaker, let me just clarify to the member opposite that we are absolutely committed to tackling climate change, and if he looks at the budget, he will see the numbers are there. We are putting in place the measures that are necessary to do our made-in-Canada plan on climate change. We put in money to enhance opportunities in clean tech. However, let me quote others. Clean Energy Canada said, We're pleased that the new federal budget makes smart investments for clean energy and climate action in Canada. Équiterre said that today's budget puts in place the necessary resources to implement the new climate plan. Climate Action Network said, Today's budget provides the financial backing we need to begin the serious work of implementing Canada's climate framework....We are getting it right. We are taking action on climate change, and I hope the member will support us.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has lost touch with average Canadians. I can imagine it is easy to miss the challenges that everyday Canadians are facing when he is busy jet-setting to billionaire island, but $127,000. Even the most out-of-touch Hollywood celebrity would blush at this type of spending, and 17 hundred bucks to feed a family of five on a three hour flight. Why does the Prime Minister think taxpayers should be on the hook for this type of extravagance?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to set the record straight. The discussion paper talks about the better use of our time as members of Parliament. On Friday our schedule here is only half a day, so let us talk about moving those hours to other days of the week. We talk about working hard just like Canadians do. Hard-working Canadians in most offices in Canada start their day at 9 a.m. or even earlier. Why can the House of Commons not consider that?Let us talk about doing that so that we can be back in our ridings to not only serve Canadians but to be able to engage with them and listen to their concerns, listen to their constructive feedback, so we can better serve them in this place.
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear to all of us in the House. Canadians are ambitious and seek new opportunities every day. Whether they are looking to start their own businesses, to export to new markets or to scale up their operations, they need our support.While we have been working hard to open doors and create opportunities for Canadians, it is clear that the global economy continues to change. What new commitments has the government made in budget 2017 to help Canadian businesses flourish in this changing economy?
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what the Conservative government was focused on. That was on balancing the budget. For Canada's beleaguered energy workers, yesterday's budget was a kick in the teeth. While our biggest competitor, the United States, is cutting red tape and taxes and making its energy sector more attractive to job creators, the Liberals are jacking up taxes and punishing oil and gas exploration. It is almost as though they want to phase out the energy sector. Our energy sector employs those middle-class Canadians that the government pretends to care about. Why did the Liberals go out of their way in this budget to kick energy workers in the teeth when they are already down?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I noted that the government's attempt to give itself carte blanche to unilaterally rewrite the Standing Orders is opposite to the practices of most recent Liberal and Conservative administrations, but the tradition goes back much further. On December 28, 1867, our first set of Standing Orders was adopted by unanimous consent. Consensus for major changes to the Standing Orders was good enough for prime ministers from Sir. John A. to Stephen Harper. Will the current Prime Minister not acknowledge that consensus is still the right approach even though it is 2017?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is a well-known rule that committees are meant to be masters of their own domain, and we have all been told that the motion to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that was presented by the hon. member for Coast of BaysCentralNotre Dame is not being coordinated by the government. In question period today, the government House leader said, I have asked the committee to expand the scope of the study, and she went on from there.I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to enforce the well-known rule on committee independence and tell the government House leader to stay out of it before she makes matters even worse.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would not interfere in the work of committees, but that is exactly what he is doing. The Prime Minister's staff, over the last number of days, have been at the procedure and House affairs committee, telling the Liberal backbenchers to block the opposition's simple and reasonable request that we have collaboration and consensus on changes to the rules. Will the Prime Minister back off and let the Liberal members do their job, as he promised that he would do?
Mr. Speaker, once again allow me to set the record straight for Canadians. The discussion paper talks about a better use of members' time. On Fridays, we are only required to be here for half an hour. It would be realistic to move those hours to other days of the week. Most offices in Canada start their workday at 9 a.m. The House of Commons could as well.The goal behind this option is to enable us to be in our ridings on Fridays so that we can meet with our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of being seated next to a finance minister who reluctantly ran a deficit to stimulate the Canadian economy while it was going through the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. He did so reluctantly.This week, the minister talked about success in business. I am very happy for him and his success. If he had run a deficit in his business the way he is doing here in government, that would have been disgraceful.The government is doing away with the public transit tax credit. It portrays itself as all green and environmental. Why did it get rid of that credit? They say it was small and underutilized, but that seems like one more reason to keep it around.
Mr. Speaker, this Liberal budget is full of bluster and bafflegab. A few gems include innovation through superclusters, or this one about offsetting derivative positions in straddle transactions, or even better, capping stock options for the super-richoh, wait; that did not make it into the budget. That was in the Liberal platform. This is nothing but a backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget. Way back on page 150 is a $1.2 billion cut to fighting climate change. To all those Canadians who believed the Liberals in Paris were serious about fighting climate change, how can they betray their commitment to them now?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to give the Prime Minister four days off a week, prevent members from doing their job in committees, and limit the speaking time of all members. Motion No. 6 was nothing compared to this attempt by the Prime Minister to take total and permanent control of Parliament. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons claims she wants to discuss this, but at the same time has ordered her MPs to pass these changes in committee in a backroom on Parliament Hill.When will the Prime Minister put his house in order? When will he finally show some respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can be absolutely assured that every Canadian law is being enforced by the RCMP and by the CBSA. As well, we are honouring all of our obligations under international law.The hon. gentleman should know that when people cross the border in irregular fashion, they are apprehended, they are identified, they are fingerprinted. Their biographical and biometric information is collected. That is checked against every Canadian database and the appropriate international databases for immigration or criminal activity. If it is warranted, suspects are detained.
Mr. Speaker, it is the first time the PCO has needed private island guidelines.The Prime Minister has increased taxes on Canadians who use Uber or public transit to get to work, because the Prime Minister has made it very clear he needs the extra cash to pay for his caviar and champagne when he travels to private islands. The Prime Minister is so out of touch that he is raising taxes on struggling Canadians to fund his lavish lifestyle, and Canadians are getting fed up.Will the Prime Minister actually stand and answer questions of behalf of struggling Canadians or will he just sit there with a smug look on his face, while he daydreams about his next vacation?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our taking office, no such policy existed. This government is working hard for middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join them. This government has had unprecedented levels of public consultations to ensure that we can respond to the very real challenges that Canadians are facing. This government will continue to work hard for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, do not get me wrong, Joe sounds like a great guy, but I want to ask about Peter. Last night, Canadians watched Peter Mansbridge flat out ask the finance minister why he refuses to come clean on when the Liberals will finally balance the budget. As always, the finance minister refused to answer his simple question of when?Why has the term balanced budget become a dirty word to the government and to the finance minister, and when will Peter and Joe and all of us see a balanced budget here in this country?
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are not happy that an agreement that was working very well is being scrapped.The Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed a motion expressing its great disappointment with budget 2017. There is nothing for forestry, for transportation, or for cheese producers, and nothing is done about tax havens. When Ottawa calls the shots, Quebec will always be left wanting.Instead of swallowing this nonsense and acting like doormats, for goodness sake, would the 40 Liberal members from Quebec stop undermining the interests of Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to rush through permanent changes to the rules of the House of Commons. These changes will undermine the opposition's ability to hold the Prime Minister to account and will allow him to be here only once a week.In the House, we represent the views of our constituents and all Canadians. It is an honour and a privilege to be here, not an inconvenience.Will the Prime Minister stop avoiding accountability and immediately abandon his plan to change the rules?
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about
Mr. Speaker, this government has gone out of its way to approve three pipelines. Those are decisions that will put energy workers in Alberta and Saskatchewan to work. What this government could accomplish in one year, that government could not accomplish in 10 years. That is what we have been doing, because we care about putting energy workers to work.
Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?
Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, the Liberal budget just sounds like a Seinfeld show. It is about nothing.The Liberals had a choice. They could have eliminated the tax loophole that is costing us $800 million a year and benefits only the wealthiest 1%, but no, they decided not to keep that promise. Instead of going after and taking down their millionaire friends, who did they go after? They went after people who take the bus in the morning.Why are the Liberals getting rid of this tax credit that helps families and promotes public transit while maintaining the gifts for their millionaire friends?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal budget was nothing but bad news for the Canadian Armed Forces. The Liberals have cut another $8.5 billion, which means they have cut a total of $12 billion in just two years. Major investments have been punted down the road for two decades, and there is not enough money to buy the equipment our forces need. This is worse than the Liberals' decade of darkness. Today they are dragging our troops back into the Dark Ages.When will the minister start serving the brave men and women in uniform instead of being a patsy to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned events, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided with briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business. The Prime Minister is the prime minister after all.
Mr. Speaker, as I have just shared, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned event, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official government duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the children and grandchildren of Joe, because the grandchildren of Joe will have to pay for the bad administration of that Liberal government, which uses deficits and makes debt. This is totally unacceptable.That party got elected on talk of small $10-billion deficits and a return to balanced budgets in 2019. The reality is that the deficits are three times greater than expected and there is no plan to return to balanced budgets.I have a very simple question for the minister. I know that the minister and I speak the same language and I would like him to understand me. In what year will Canada return to a balanced budget? In what year?
Mr. Speaker, in relation to the point of privilege, I want to add my two cents to the question of privilege raised by my hon. colleague the House Leader of the Official Opposition, and I will conclude my remarks by asking for unanimous consent for a motion.There is no doubt that the minister's actions were inappropriate, but more to the point, they were entirely misplaced. The lack of respect in dealing with the bill in question firmly rests on the shoulders of the government House leader not the Conservatives. The government made the decision to try to shoehorn the debate on Bill C-17 into the tiny 30-minute window before the budget. It was not the opposition that did that. Perhaps the minister should just march on down the front bench and channel her anger where it actually belongs. She should demand that the government House leader call it for debate this afternoon or maybe even for all day tomorrow.I would like to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion, that the order of the day for tomorrow, Friday, March 23, 2017, shall be Bill C-17, an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act. Let us just get on with it.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to force changes to how the House operates through the procedures and House affairs committee without all-party support. This is wrong. I feel bad for the talented and principled backbench members opposite who are also uncomfortable with this. Why is the Liberal backbench willing to watch the Liberal front bench betray years of tradition of the House and integrity of their party?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, Manitoba saw the largest weekend influx of illegal migrants entering the province from the U.S. so far this year. Dozens continue to pour into border communities like Emerson, and the numbers are only growing. To make matters worse, the Prime Minister's reckless tweets have led many to believe that entering Canada through the proper channels is just a suggestion. Will the Prime Minister stand up for the rule of law, stand up for our border communities and condemn this illegal activity, or will he continue to encourage it?
Mr. Speaker, sunny ways are indeed gone. They have been replaced by an attempt to unilaterally and quietly ram through changes to the rules that govern our democracy. This is nothing less than a massive government power grab, which is only meant to help the Prime Minister avoid accountability.Is there anyone on the Liberal benches with the courage to stand up and tell the Prime Minister that this is not why they came to Ottawa?
Mr. Speaker, the same Liberals who regularly attacked Stephen Harper for his use of the gag are now flat out resorting to the guillotine to shut down debate. Amending the rules that govern how our democracy works should never be done by just one party, no matter the party.Thus, will the Liberal government commit, here and now, to not changing the rules unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning the Prime Minister's need for security and no one has questioned his right to take a vacation. Everyone knows when the Prime Minister does things, it costs a lot of money. What taxpayers are questioning is why, when he knows that everything he does costs taxpayers money, did he choose a vacation to a remote exclusive island. He knew that this would be very expensive for taxpayers. Why did he do it?
Mr. Speaker, budget 2017 was an opportunity to meet the needs of Canadian seniors, but the Liberal government told them to keep waiting. The Canadian Medical Association said, Budget 2017 fails Canada's seniors. CARP said, financial security for seniors not on the agenda. Divide and conquer deals with the provinces are not the solution. We need a national seniors strategy. Why did yesterday's budget leave Canadian seniors wanting and waiting?
Mr. Speaker, the House leader is in on this charade too, and the Liberal members even know it. They know this is not a discussion paper. They know this is an edict from the Prime Minister's Office. The House leader just said that she asked the committee; she is asking it to do her dirty work.My question is for the Liberal members of Parliament. I know there are some hard-working people with integrity on that side. Will any of them stand up, show some independence, and say no to the Prime Minister and no to the House leader, who has completely botched this for all of you?
Mr. Speaker, while this Prime Minister is being paid to dig us deeper into debt and to go sunbathing with his family on the taxpayers dime, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is out in the cold launching the celebrations for the 150th anniversary of Confederation. Like the Prime Minister, she is favouring her Liberal cronies.Can the Prime Minister, who has once again increased the tax burden of Canadians, justify spending $127,000 on a vacation paid for by taxpayers, who will be paying back his deficit for decades to come?
Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to set the record straight.Contrary to what the Liberals think, Parliament belongs to Canadians. They elected all of us to represent them. Contrary to what the Prime Minister thinks, not everyone likes him. Most Canadians do not approve of the deficits he is running. Most Canadians find his insatiable appetite for spending taxpayers' money unacceptable. Why does the Prime Minister want to silence Canadians who do not think like him? Why does he want to muzzle the opposition members and his own backbenchers?We will not let him do that.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to working with all the provinces. I know that with the Province of Quebec we have spoken with the minister responsible for education, and the provincial government is very pleased with the investments that have been made by this government. We will continue to invest in all Canadians so that they are given the skills they need to work in tomorrow's economy, as well as to develop well-paying jobs for today.
Mr. Speaker, in budget 2017 we propose to help make communities healthier and more inclusive, invest in faster and more efficient public transit, and build more cultural and recreational centres and affordable housing.Our government is investing more than $180 billion in neighbourhoods and modern and resilient communities, and these projects are well under way with more than 1,400 projects approved totalling over $15 billion.In my riding, 6,000 families are better off thanks to this budget. Millions of families throughout Canada are better off. That makes me very proud.
Mr. Speaker, let us think about children and grandchildren for a moment. As we worry about children and grandchildren, what we think about is this: How can our country be a world leader? How can we be successful? What we can do is be optimistic and make investments in the future growth of this country. That is exactly what we are going to do. We are focused on places where our country has a comparative advantage. We are focused on how we can give our children and our grandchildren the education, training, and skills to be successful. That will lead to a higher rate of growth. That will lead to good economic outcomes.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for NewmarketAurora for his work on trade and his interest in innovation.It is a great budget for NewmarketAurora in terms of innovation. Through our innovation and skills plan, we will create jobs, we will help our companies and our economy and citizens thrive in a rapidly changing world.That same innovation and skills plan also aims to help 10,000 more young Canadians to get the skills and training they need in today's economy through work integrated learning and co-ops. There are $1.26 billion in a strategic innovation fund that will create a one-stop shop and a more efficient and coordinated way for us innovate.
Mr. Speaker, I am taking part in a discussion that includes all members and all Canadians because we want to work with them and we want them to participate in this discussion. Our government knows that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace. Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, effective, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, we decided that it was very important to make decisions in sectors where Canada has a comparative advantage.One sector that is very important to us is the agri-food sector. We decided that we should be a global leader in this sector. That is why we decided to focus on that sector and to ensure that people have the training needed to lead the way.
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this question because it gives me an opportunity to talk about the fantastic news in our budget yesterday, as it relates to health, and that includes the health of seniors. We were able to announce additional investments in the order of $11 billion that would go to home care, including palliative care, that would go to mental health, and that includes seniors' needs, like dementia, so we would be able to support them. It included things like $11 billion for housing that would include social housing to support seniors. There was so much good news in the budget. I look forward to working with colleagues to put that work into place.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister's arrogant attitude with how he spends tax dollars, but now this behaviour is starting to creep into the House of Commons. He has proposed a plan to limit his attendance in question period to once a week, which in fact, is actually only one hour a week, and give all of his colleagues Fridays off. I just want to remind the Prime Minister that while he was campaigning he said, Sunlight is the world's best disinfectant. My question is: What dirt is he trying to hide?
Mr. Speaker, the one comment I would like to make, once again, has to do with how Canada's regions have been abandoned, especially our forestry regions. The Quebec National Assembly reminded us of this today. The agricultural sector is going to have to fight with six high-tech sectors for additional funding for its own development, even though all Canadians eat every day, and food security is extremely important. In my view, the choices this government is making go against the well-being of our society.Does the Prime Minister want to punish farmers and all Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We strengthened the middle class by reducing their taxes while asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a little more. That continues to be our focus, because we know it is very important to have a fair tax system. We will continue with our plan. We found expenditures that must be reviewed so we can ensure that our system continues to be fair. There will be consultations in the coming weeks and months to explain our programs.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the vision we have put in place for the Canada 150 celebrations. Four themes will be celebrated throughout the year: young people, the environment, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and diversity and inclusiveness. We will make sure that in funding the celebrations and various projects across the country, there will be an equitable regional distribution. Of course, I hope all Canadians across the country and of all political stripes will join in the celebrations.
Mr. Speaker, I really do believe that we can have more meaningful conversation and debate in this place. I believe that when it comes to challenging the integrity of individuals, that is for the member to choose to do. I believe that is not needed in the conversation that I would like to have, and that is why I am saying let us have a conversation, let us have a discussion. The member knows very well, as I told him last night, that I actually appreciate a lot of the work that he does. I hope that we can continue working better together, because I believe this place needs to be modernized. It is a commitment we made to Canadians in the electoral campaign. It is something on which Canadians agree that all members in this place need to work better together.
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has shared so well, it was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes for the 1% of wealthiest Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to his family and the children who need it the most to ensure that they get the most.When it comes to the travel that the member opposite is referring to, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and their guests as well.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier this afternoon, this budget was the best news on health that we have seen in a decade, with fantastic news in so many areas; not only the new investments that I referred to earlier, but we have a growing Canada health transfer that would give to the provinces more than $200 billion over the next five years. As we work with the provinces and territories in delivering health care, they would be able to do advanced care for Canadians of all particular needs. We also have new money for early learning and child care in the order of $7 billion that would be of great assistance to families affected by
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister really does believe we can work better in this place. Just today, I have Sarah, who is my University of Toronto women in House program person, who is shadowing me on the Hill. She has seen a lot of the stuff that has taken place here. She has asked me some tough questions with regard to some of the stuff that went on yesterday and today. It is important that we have this meaningful conversation. I am sure she, too, will be reading the discussion paper and be a part of it. I know many members have women following them today so one day they too can occupy even more seats in the House.
Since when does a cabinet minister or House leader give orders to a committee anyway, Mr. Speaker?The government House leader is ignoring the long-held tradition of getting all-party agreement for an overhaul of the way that democracy works in this place. If the House leader's argument that the government of such a warm and loving Prime Minister could not possibly harm our democracy with the power grab now under way, I wonder if she might speculate with us what the majority government of a prime minister like, say, Kevin O'Leary would do with all that power?
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is well aware that we support supply management. She is well aware that I announced $350 million for the dairy sector, $250 million for the farmers, $100 million for the processors.Along with it, yesterday's budget announced $70 million for agricultural science and innovation, $950 million for super clusters, $200 million for clean technology.This government supports supply management and the agricultural sector.
Mr. Speaker, we built our agenda, our plan, based on Joe. What we have done for Joe is we have reduced his taxes. If Joe is a single guy, we have reduced his taxes by $330. If Joe has a family, he has more money for his family because of our Canada child benefit. Most importantly for Joe, our investments in transit mean he is going to get to and from home more rapidly. What Joe knows is that he is going to have, over the long term, the ability to have a great job, an exciting job, because we are going to invest in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to continue on our plan to make a real difference for our country over the long term. What we started with was dealing with middle-class anxiety. What we talked about yesterday was a second chapter in our plan: how we can create great long-term jobs in sectors where Canada can be globally competitive. We are going to do this in a way that will ensure that Canadians can go for great opportunities in the future, and we will ensure that we deal with the most vulnerable as we can.
Mr. Speaker, we know that the measures in our budget are very important for all of Canada, including Quebec. It is very important to invest in affordable housing and in our health care system, in Quebec and across the country. We will continue with our program to improve the level of economic growth. It is important to create jobs. At present, the unemployment rate is lower than when we came to power. It is currently 6.6%, and it was 7.1% at the outset. Our program
Mr. Speaker, not only is there nothing in the budget for the dairy industry, but also there is still no news on granting tariff quotas under CETA.We now hear talk about a proposal to resolve the softwood lumber issue by sacrificing our supply management system. That is completely unacceptable. The Liberals already hurt our industry during the negotiations and have yet to come up with fair and equitable compensation. My question is simple:Can the government confirm today that it will not sacrifice our supply management system or our forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister held unprecedented levels of public consultation so we could actually respond to the very real challenges they face. It was this government that lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Canadians. It was this government that introduced the Canada child benefit to give more money to families with children who needed it the most so they could actually do what they needed to do for their families. What was consistent throughout it all? The Conservatives voted against it every time.
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly these hypotheticals and these speculations that the committee has the ability to deal with. That is why we are saying let us have this conversation, let us have this discussion. It is because these are important concerns that Canadians are facing, and we are saying let us have this discussion. That is why I had introduced a discussion paper. I know the committee members sat late once again yesterday. I did visit the members of the committee to thank them for their work. I believe that they are having a meaningful conversation and I think it is important that they continue that conversation. My door will remain open so that we can all work better together.
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House on this traditional territory the day after a feminist budget was tabled in the House, with the first-ever gender statement acknowledging that our policies and our actions in the House affect women and men and people of different genders differently. One hundred million dollars was committed for the gender-based violence strategy, the first Canada has ever had; $7 billion for child care; $11 billion for affordable housing.We have many priorities and much work to do. This was a great budget for women and girls everywhere and
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about what Sally and Joanne and Mary-Ann will see in the future. I want to talk about the fact that what we are doing is taking the very best balance sheet among the G7 countries, the lowest net debt to GDP, and we are making investments that an optimistic country needs to make. Unfortunately, the people before us were focused on austerity. We are focused on growth. We are looking at how we can make investments to make a difference. That growth is what is going to make sure that our country stays successful over the long run.
Mr. Speaker, it is this government that actually increased funding to committees so that they could do the important work that they need to do. We actually believe in the committee process because it is the committee that can actually study legislation and study ideas way better than we do in this place, and that is exactly what we have asked the committee to do.With respect to the discussion paper, I have asked the committee to broaden the scope of the study they already have in place in regard to the Standing Orders. I believe it is a meaningful conversation that all members need to have. I encourage all members, as well as all Canadians, to participate.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what this budget means for a hard-working taxpayer. Let us call him Joe. Joe takes the bus to work every day, and at the end of the day, he likes to go to the pub with his buddies for a beer. He is a responsible guy, so he always uses Uber to get home. What does this budget do for Joe? First of all, it taxes his bus pass. It takes away his tax credit for his bus pass. It taxes the beer he has at the pub. It even slaps a tax on his Uber ride.What exactly does the Prime Minister have against people like Joe?
Mr. Speaker, while the government's gender budget sounded good, the budget lacks real action for women: not a penny to legislate equal pay for work of equal value; not a cent for child care this year; zero new money for shelters for women fleeing violence; nothing to make birth control more affordable; and only a fraction of what is needed for a strategy to end violence against women. Once again, women are being asked to wait. If gender equality really matters to the government, why were women shortchanged again?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that this place needs to be modernized. We need to have this conversation. We need to have this discussion. Every single member of Parliament has a role and responsibility. I recognize that members on both sides of this place have responsibilities, and we want to ensure that we have important conversations. Within this place, members of Parliament have the opportunity to hold the government to account. We believe that within the ridings, constituents have the ability to hold their members of Parliament to account, and that is why I believe that important work is done here in the House as well as in the ridings.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected our government on a plan to grow the economy and strengthen the middle class. We are delivering on that commitment. Over the last seven months, almost 250,000 jobs were created, the majority of which were full-time jobs. This is the most job growth we have seen in over a decade. This is evidence that our plan is working. Yesterday, we continued to build off those investments, good work we are doing for Canadians. One of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council Office to develop guidelines surrounding the reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our government taking office, no such policy existed.
Mr. Speaker, documents show that in October, the Privy Council Office was directed by the Prime Minister to produce a regional backgrounder on Medicine Hat during the by-election. The Prime Minister had no government events in Medicine Hat. He was only there to campaign. The PCO was also ordered to provide tech support and uploaded a video from the campaign stop with the PM and the Liberal candidate. In light of the actions of the Prime Minister in Medicine Hat, today, when the Prime Minister is campaigning in MarkhamThornhill, will PCO staff be ordered to campaign with him yet again?
Mr. Speaker, this goes well beyond an innocent discussion paper. The government House leader should not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.However, if she is serious about that, if she is really truly sincere that her motives are pure, will she now stand in her place and tell this House that she accepts that her government has no mandate to change the rules of democracy over the united objections of the opposition? If she will not, then it is pretty clear that her protests of innocence are even more shallow than they sound.
Mr. Speaker, it is very important to be an optimistic country and to make investments in the future, but we also need to know in which particular sectors we have a comparative advantage. That is exactly what we have done.We decided to be the world leader in very important sectors where there will be high-quality jobs in the future. We chose six sectors that are key to our childrens and grandchildrens future. We will consider ways of providing the necessary training for the good jobs of the future.
Mr. Speaker, ever since Quebec managed to pry labour matters from the hands of the Canadian government, we have created the best labour market training system in North America.However, once again, Ottawa is going back on its word. The government cannot be counted on. After the Harper government, which tried to make us fit into the Canadian mould, now it is the Liberals who are reneging on the labour market agreement, which was so hard to reach. Why is it that whenever something is working well, Ottawa has to stick its nose in and tear everything down?
Mr. Speaker, technological change has shown us that we must continue to encourage innovation in our country. In order to provide tangible help to those who are worried about being left behind, the government has already stressed the importance of giving Canadian workers the tools they need to succeed in the new economy.Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour explain to the House what this government is doing to make sure that Canadians can get the training they need to find and keep good, well-paying jobs?
Mr. Speaker, every single day when I come to the Department of National Defence, it is about serving our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces. We are committed to making sure that the Canadian Armed Forces have all the tools necessary to do their work. We have planned increases that we are committed to. This is about flowing the money and making sure that the money is there for the projects that we have committed to in the years that it is required. We have an defence policy that is going to be coming out shortly, and I look forward to launching that and showing to all Canadians our commitment to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's budget raises taxes on people like Joe, whether it is for beer, wine, or spirits, but that is really ironic, because that same budget contains the tab for $1,700 worth of drinks and snacks during the Prime Minister's three hour flight to a private island getaway over the holidays.What message does the Prime Minister think he is sending to a taxpayer like Joe when he raises Joe's taxes while helping himself to free drinks on the house?
Mr. Speaker, our predecessors did not make the investments they should have, which resulted in excessively slow growth. Now we have to invest in Canadian families and infrastructure to boost our growth rate. This is very important to our fiscal position. These investments will put Canada in a better position in the future.
Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight for Canadians.We have proposed a number of ideas in a discussion paper in order to modernize Parliament. Some of these ideas have been misinterpreted. Let us be clear: the Liberals are not recommending that the Prime Minister come to question period only once a week. We are trying to encourage a debate on how to improve accountability in the House. Let there be no mistake: our Prime Minister will be more accountable, not less accountable.
Mr. Speaker, closing the CEO stock option tax loophole would have generated $725 million every year, and as a bonus it would have helped the Liberals keep one of their promises. What a concept that is. Instead, what the Liberals are doing is they are refusing to give $155 million to finally end discrimination against first nations children.The question is simple, and please can the Liberals deliver the response for once without their pre-written talking points. Why protect rich CEOs instead of protecting first nations children?
Mr. Speaker, as I have shared many times in the House, yes, a discussion paper was released to all members of Parliament, and it was also released to Canadians, so we could have a meaningful conversation, a substantial discussion on Standing Orders and how we govern in this place. It is unfortunate that a lot of the ideas within the paper have been misrepresented. This is why I encourage all people to be part of the conversation so we can find a made-in-Canada solution for Parliament and the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that I shared with members of Parliament as well as Canadians was to encourage us to have a conversation, a discussion. What I have recognized is that there are many misconceptions in regard to the discussion paper. I will share information in regard to Friday sittings. We know that on Fridays the House of Commons sits for only half a day. We are saying why not reallocate that time to other days. The House of Commons starts at 10 a.m. on some days. Most Canadians start their day at 9 a.m. or earlier. Why can the House of Commons not do that? Let us have that important conversation.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance presented the governments plan. It is an ambitious, visionary plan that makes middle-class families the priority, both in Bourassa and elsewhere in Canada.Can the Minister of Finance tell us why he only chose certain sectors of the economy in his budget?
Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. Our government recognizes that the work members do here in the House and in their ridings is important. During the election campaign, we vowed to modernize Parliament and turn it into a 21st-century workplace.Our objective has always been to ensure that Parliament is relevant to Canadians and that the House is accountable, predictable, efficient, and transparent.
Mr. Speaker, the budget has clearly laid bare the Liberal governments choices. While, exactly two weeks ago, the Liberals voted to close the tax loophole for CEOs, they did not do so in their budget. No, instead they scrapped the public transit tax credit and cut $1.25 billion from the fund to combat climate change. Here is a simple question: why have the Liberals chosen to protect wealthy CEOs instead of the environment?
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the government House leader tried to defend the Prime Minister's use of the Privy Council Office to help him on a trip to Alberta for the Medicine HatCardstonWarner by-election. She claimed it was to help prepare the PM for government business, but that is complete nonsense. The trip had only one purpose: for the Prime Minister to appear at Liberal Party campaign events. There was no government business. Why does the Prime Minister believe it is okay to use public servants to campaign for the Liberal Party?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget would invest $2.7 billion to help unemployed and underemployed Canadians get the skills they need for their next and better job, and $470 million for adult workers so they can go back to school, upgrade their skills, and upgrade their credentials. We would make changes to the EI system so that, when Canadians take self-funded training, they do not lose their EI benefits. This would help Canadian workers
Mr. Speaker, let me just clarify to the member opposite that we are absolutely committed to tackling climate change, and if he looks at the budget, he will see the numbers are there. We are putting in place the measures that are necessary to do our made-in-Canada plan on climate change. We put in money to enhance opportunities in clean tech. However, let me quote others. Clean Energy Canada said, We're pleased that the new federal budget makes smart investments for clean energy and climate action in Canada. Équiterre said that today's budget puts in place the necessary resources to implement the new climate plan. Climate Action Network said, Today's budget provides the financial backing we need to begin the serious work of implementing Canada's climate framework....We are getting it right. We are taking action on climate change, and I hope the member will support us.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has lost touch with average Canadians. I can imagine it is easy to miss the challenges that everyday Canadians are facing when he is busy jet-setting to billionaire island, but $127,000. Even the most out-of-touch Hollywood celebrity would blush at this type of spending, and 17 hundred bucks to feed a family of five on a three hour flight. Why does the Prime Minister think taxpayers should be on the hook for this type of extravagance?
Mr. Speaker, allow me to set the record straight. The discussion paper talks about the better use of our time as members of Parliament. On Friday our schedule here is only half a day, so let us talk about moving those hours to other days of the week. We talk about working hard just like Canadians do. Hard-working Canadians in most offices in Canada start their day at 9 a.m. or even earlier. Why can the House of Commons not consider that?Let us talk about doing that so that we can be back in our ridings to not only serve Canadians but to be able to engage with them and listen to their concerns, listen to their constructive feedback, so we can better serve them in this place.
Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear to all of us in the House. Canadians are ambitious and seek new opportunities every day. Whether they are looking to start their own businesses, to export to new markets or to scale up their operations, they need our support.While we have been working hard to open doors and create opportunities for Canadians, it is clear that the global economy continues to change. What new commitments has the government made in budget 2017 to help Canadian businesses flourish in this changing economy?
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what the Conservative government was focused on. That was on balancing the budget. For Canada's beleaguered energy workers, yesterday's budget was a kick in the teeth. While our biggest competitor, the United States, is cutting red tape and taxes and making its energy sector more attractive to job creators, the Liberals are jacking up taxes and punishing oil and gas exploration. It is almost as though they want to phase out the energy sector. Our energy sector employs those middle-class Canadians that the government pretends to care about. Why did the Liberals go out of their way in this budget to kick energy workers in the teeth when they are already down?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I noted that the government's attempt to give itself carte blanche to unilaterally rewrite the Standing Orders is opposite to the practices of most recent Liberal and Conservative administrations, but the tradition goes back much further. On December 28, 1867, our first set of Standing Orders was adopted by unanimous consent. Consensus for major changes to the Standing Orders was good enough for prime ministers from Sir. John A. to Stephen Harper. Will the current Prime Minister not acknowledge that consensus is still the right approach even though it is 2017?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is a well-known rule that committees are meant to be masters of their own domain, and we have all been told that the motion to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that was presented by the hon. member for Coast of BaysCentralNotre Dame is not being coordinated by the government. In question period today, the government House leader said, I have asked the committee to expand the scope of the study, and she went on from there.I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to enforce the well-known rule on committee independence and tell the government House leader to stay out of it before she makes matters even worse.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would not interfere in the work of committees, but that is exactly what he is doing. The Prime Minister's staff, over the last number of days, have been at the procedure and House affairs committee, telling the Liberal backbenchers to block the opposition's simple and reasonable request that we have collaboration and consensus on changes to the rules. Will the Prime Minister back off and let the Liberal members do their job, as he promised that he would do?
Mr. Speaker, once again allow me to set the record straight for Canadians. The discussion paper talks about a better use of members' time. On Fridays, we are only required to be here for half an hour. It would be realistic to move those hours to other days of the week. Most offices in Canada start their workday at 9 a.m. The House of Commons could as well.The goal behind this option is to enable us to be in our ridings on Fridays so that we can meet with our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of being seated next to a finance minister who reluctantly ran a deficit to stimulate the Canadian economy while it was going through the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. He did so reluctantly.This week, the minister talked about success in business. I am very happy for him and his success. If he had run a deficit in his business the way he is doing here in government, that would have been disgraceful.The government is doing away with the public transit tax credit. It portrays itself as all green and environmental. Why did it get rid of that credit? They say it was small and underutilized, but that seems like one more reason to keep it around.
Mr. Speaker, this Liberal budget is full of bluster and bafflegab. A few gems include innovation through superclusters, or this one about offsetting derivative positions in straddle transactions, or even better, capping stock options for the super-richoh, wait; that did not make it into the budget. That was in the Liberal platform. This is nothing but a backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget. Way back on page 150 is a $1.2 billion cut to fighting climate change. To all those Canadians who believed the Liberals in Paris were serious about fighting climate change, how can they betray their commitment to them now?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to give the Prime Minister four days off a week, prevent members from doing their job in committees, and limit the speaking time of all members. Motion No. 6 was nothing compared to this attempt by the Prime Minister to take total and permanent control of Parliament. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons claims she wants to discuss this, but at the same time has ordered her MPs to pass these changes in committee in a backroom on Parliament Hill.When will the Prime Minister put his house in order? When will he finally show some respect for Parliament?
Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can be absolutely assured that every Canadian law is being enforced by the RCMP and by the CBSA. As well, we are honouring all of our obligations under international law.The hon. gentleman should know that when people cross the border in irregular fashion, they are apprehended, they are identified, they are fingerprinted. Their biographical and biometric information is collected. That is checked against every Canadian database and the appropriate international databases for immigration or criminal activity. If it is warranted, suspects are detained.
Mr. Speaker, it is the first time the PCO has needed private island guidelines.The Prime Minister has increased taxes on Canadians who use Uber or public transit to get to work, because the Prime Minister has made it very clear he needs the extra cash to pay for his caviar and champagne when he travels to private islands. The Prime Minister is so out of touch that he is raising taxes on struggling Canadians to fund his lavish lifestyle, and Canadians are getting fed up.Will the Prime Minister actually stand and answer questions of behalf of struggling Canadians or will he just sit there with a smug look on his face, while he daydreams about his next vacation?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we did after taking office was to ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to develop guidelines surrounding reimbursement of travel by sitting prime ministers, their families, and guests. Prior to our taking office, no such policy existed. This government is working hard for middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join them. This government has had unprecedented levels of public consultations to ensure that we can respond to the very real challenges that Canadians are facing. This government will continue to work hard for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, do not get me wrong, Joe sounds like a great guy, but I want to ask about Peter. Last night, Canadians watched Peter Mansbridge flat out ask the finance minister why he refuses to come clean on when the Liberals will finally balance the budget. As always, the finance minister refused to answer his simple question of when?Why has the term balanced budget become a dirty word to the government and to the finance minister, and when will Peter and Joe and all of us see a balanced budget here in this country?
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are not happy that an agreement that was working very well is being scrapped.The Quebec National Assembly has just unanimously passed a motion expressing its great disappointment with budget 2017. There is nothing for forestry, for transportation, or for cheese producers, and nothing is done about tax havens. When Ottawa calls the shots, Quebec will always be left wanting.Instead of swallowing this nonsense and acting like doormats, for goodness sake, would the 40 Liberal members from Quebec stop undermining the interests of Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to rush through permanent changes to the rules of the House of Commons. These changes will undermine the opposition's ability to hold the Prime Minister to account and will allow him to be here only once a week.In the House, we represent the views of our constituents and all Canadians. It is an honour and a privilege to be here, not an inconvenience.Will the Prime Minister stop avoiding accountability and immediately abandon his plan to change the rules?
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about
Mr. Speaker, this government has gone out of its way to approve three pipelines. Those are decisions that will put energy workers in Alberta and Saskatchewan to work. What this government could accomplish in one year, that government could not accomplish in 10 years. That is what we have been doing, because we care about putting energy workers to work.
Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?
Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, the Liberal budget just sounds like a Seinfeld show. It is about nothing.The Liberals had a choice. They could have eliminated the tax loophole that is costing us $800 million a year and benefits only the wealthiest 1%, but no, they decided not to keep that promise. Instead of going after and taking down their millionaire friends, who did they go after? They went after people who take the bus in the morning.Why are the Liberals getting rid of this tax credit that helps families and promotes public transit while maintaining the gifts for their millionaire friends?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal budget was nothing but bad news for the Canadian Armed Forces. The Liberals have cut another $8.5 billion, which means they have cut a total of $12 billion in just two years. Major investments have been punted down the road for two decades, and there is not enough money to buy the equipment our forces need. This is worse than the Liberals' decade of darkness. Today they are dragging our troops back into the Dark Ages.When will the minister start serving the brave men and women in uniform instead of being a patsy to the Prime Minister?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned events, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided with briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business. The Prime Minister is the prime minister after all.
Mr. Speaker, as I have just shared, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned event, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official government duties. As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the children and grandchildren of Joe, because the grandchildren of Joe will have to pay for the bad administration of that Liberal government, which uses deficits and makes debt. This is totally unacceptable.That party got elected on talk of small $10-billion deficits and a return to balanced budgets in 2019. The reality is that the deficits are three times greater than expected and there is no plan to return to balanced budgets.I have a very simple question for the minister. I know that the minister and I speak the same language and I would like him to understand me. In what year will Canada return to a balanced budget? In what year?
Mr. Speaker, in relation to the point of privilege, I want to add my two cents to the question of privilege raised by my hon. colleague the House Leader of the Official Opposition, and I will conclude my remarks by asking for unanimous consent for a motion.There is no doubt that the minister's actions were inappropriate, but more to the point, they were entirely misplaced. The lack of respect in dealing with the bill in question firmly rests on the shoulders of the government House leader not the Conservatives. The government made the decision to try to shoehorn the debate on Bill C-17 into the tiny 30-minute window before the budget. It was not the opposition that did that. Perhaps the minister should just march on down the front bench and channel her anger where it actually belongs. She should demand that the government House leader call it for debate this afternoon or maybe even for all day tomorrow.I would like to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion, that the order of the day for tomorrow, Friday, March 23, 2017, shall be Bill C-17, an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act. Let us just get on with it.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to force changes to how the House operates through the procedures and House affairs committee without all-party support. This is wrong. I feel bad for the talented and principled backbench members opposite who are also uncomfortable with this. Why is the Liberal backbench willing to watch the Liberal front bench betray years of tradition of the House and integrity of their party?
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend, Manitoba saw the largest weekend influx of illegal migrants entering the province from the U.S. so far this year. Dozens continue to pour into border communities like Emerson, and the numbers are only growing. To make matters worse, the Prime Minister's reckless tweets have led many to believe that entering Canada through the proper channels is just a suggestion. Will the Prime Minister stand up for the rule of law, stand up for our border communities and condemn this illegal activity, or will he continue to encourage it?
Mr. Speaker, sunny ways are indeed gone. They have been replaced by an attempt to unilaterally and quietly ram through changes to the rules that govern our democracy. This is nothing less than a massive government power grab, which is only meant to help the Prime Minister avoid accountability.Is there anyone on the Liberal benches with the courage to stand up and tell the Prime Minister that this is not why they came to Ottawa?
Mr. Speaker, the same Liberals who regularly attacked Stephen Harper for his use of the gag are now flat out resorting to the guillotine to shut down debate. Amending the rules that govern how our democracy works should never be done by just one party, no matter the party.Thus, will the Liberal government commit, here and now, to not changing the rules unilaterally, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning the Prime Minister's need for security and no one has questioned his right to take a vacation. Everyone knows when the Prime Minister does things, it costs a lot of money. What taxpayers are questioning is why, when he knows that everything he does costs taxpayers money, did he choose a vacation to a remote exclusive island. He knew that this would be very expensive for taxpayers. Why did he do it?
Mr. Speaker, budget 2017 was an opportunity to meet the needs of Canadian seniors, but the Liberal government told them to keep waiting. The Canadian Medical Association said, Budget 2017 fails Canada's seniors. CARP said, financial security for seniors not on the agenda. Divide and conquer deals with the provinces are not the solution. We need a national seniors strategy. Why did yesterday's budget leave Canadian seniors wanting and waiting?
Mr. Speaker, the House leader is in on this charade too, and the Liberal members even know it. They know this is not a discussion paper. They know this is an edict from the Prime Minister's Office. The House leader just said that she asked the committee; she is asking it to do her dirty work.My question is for the Liberal members of Parliament. I know there are some hard-working people with integrity on that side. Will any of them stand up, show some independence, and say no to the Prime Minister and no to the House leader, who has completely botched this for all of you?
Mr. Speaker, while this Prime Minister is being paid to dig us deeper into debt and to go sunbathing with his family on the taxpayers dime, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is out in the cold launching the celebrations for the 150th anniversary of Confederation. Like the Prime Minister, she is favouring her Liberal cronies.Can the Prime Minister, who has once again increased the tax burden of Canadians, justify spending $127,000 on a vacation paid for by taxpayers, who will be paying back his deficit for decades to come?