OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

House of Commons Debates Volume 151 No. 259 1st SESSION 44th PARLIAMENT Thursday, November 30, 2023 Speaker: The Honourable Greg Fergus HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) COMMONS DEBATES November 30, 2023 DEBATES No. 259 No. 259 N o 259 Volume 151 259 30 11 2023 2023/11/30 10:05:00 Débats de la Chambre des communes House of Commons Debates House Of Commons 1 44

The House met at 10 a.m. Prayer

Routine Proceedings Routine Proceedings

(1005) [ English ] Government Response to Petitions

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to three petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.

[ Translation ] Committees of the House Health

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 16th report of the Standing Committee on Health entitled “Strengthening the Oversight of Breast Implants”, which we hope will bring some hope to those women who have been the victims of adverse effects of breast implants. Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

[ English ] Finance

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP) :

Motion for concurrence Mr. Speaker, I move that the 12th report of the Standing Committee on Finance, presented on Wednesday, November 1, be concurred in. I am very pleased to have occasion to bring this important matter to the floor of the House of Commons, because there is an important decision pending for the Minister of Finance , which is whether to approve the RBC-HSBC merger. What we are debating today is a very concrete and simple recommendation of the finance committee of the House of Commons in its 12th report to the House.

It was very clear that a majority of finance committee members do not support that merger going ahead. There are at least a couple of main reasons why New Democrats are concerned about this merger going ahead. The first is that, as we know, right now Canadians are living through very difficult circumstances. Their household budgets are under severe stress because of rising interest rates and because of the rising costs of all sorts of necessities of life, whether that is housing, home heating or groceries. Every little thing right now means a lot to Canadians who are struggling to make ends meet.

We know that even before the pandemic, something like half of Canadian households were only $200 away from insolvency at the end of the month, and that has only gotten harder. We see the effects in our communities, whether that is the longer and longer lines at food banks for people struggling to feed their families or the fact that more and more folks are homeless and living on the street. I just had the opportunity to travel with the finance committee to many different cities across the country, and that was a common theme, no matter whether we were on the east coast or the west coast.

There are tons of folks right now who are no longer housed, and the problem of homelessness is increasingly visible as more and more Canadians cannot make their rent payment at the end of the month or cannot make their mortgage payment and have nowhere to go. Indeed, some Canadians who are gainfully employed cannot find a place to live that they can afford. It is no longer the case that it is just folks who are not able to get a job or who have a disability and are not able to work who are finding themselves homeless.

We are also hearing from folks who do have a reasonable monthly income, what would have been considered reasonable just a few years ago, that they cannot afford a place to live. They have to figure out how to work a full day and go back somewhere to a tent or a spot they found under a building with a bit of shelter, feed themselves, go to sleep, wake up and look presentable in the morning to go back to work, which is certainly a real challenge and not one that I would wish on anyone. That is why we need a government that is going to act with a much stronger sense of urgency in respect of the housing crisis.

One of the other things Canadians have struggled with for a long time is the fees that banks impose to do business at their institutions: to hold deposits and write cheques, or, more and more, to withdraw from ATMs and do e-transfers. We know that in Canada, Canadians pay high fees for that. One of the reasons they pay high fees is that we do not have a competitive banking sector in Canada. We pretty much have five big banks with over 90% market share when it comes to banking in Canada. Think about that. That is not a lot of players in the market.

In economics they call that an oligopoly, and while it may not be an oligopoly on paper, it is certainly an oligopoly in practice. Now what we have is one of Canada's largest banks, RBC, proposing to eat up the seventh-largest bank in Canada. The difference between those two banks is considerable. HSBC is not a huge player, but it is a scrappy player. If we were to look up mortgage rates right now, I think it is offering mortgages at over 70 basis points lower than what RBC is offering them at. Historically, HSBC has offered mortgage rates that are considerably lower than those at RBC.

(1010) The government, in the fall economic statement, rightly announced something the New Democrats have been calling for: Folks with insured mortgages will be able to shop around and transfer their mortgage without having to undergo the stress test again. This is exactly the kind of move that Canadians would be looking to make. If they have a mortgage with RBC, they may well want to go to an institution like HSBC that is offering over half a percentage less in the rate for a mortgage.

Clearing the way so they would not have to do a stress test is important, but it is not going to matter if HSBC gets gobbled up by RBC and then offers the same rate as RBC. That means Canadians will have won the right to transfer without having to undergo the stress test, but would no longer have somewhere to transfer to that is offering a better rate.

That is why New Democrats think it is important that the government say no to this merger to preserve one of the few players not in the big five in Canada, particularly when they have a track record of exactly the kind of effect we would hope to get from competition, which is competitive pricing on mortgage rates and other services. We know the big five have been relatively unchallenged, and Transcona went through this since I was elected. The TD branch on the corner of Regent and Bond shut down. There are not a lot of bank branches in my community anymore.

Thankfully, Manitoba has a strong credit union movement that I am very proud of. I am a proud member of a couple of credit unions. There are many in Manitoba. I know a former board member of one of those credit unions is in the House today. It is a wonderful thing. It is really only because of the credit unions in Manitoba that we continue to have local branch banking available in my community. The big banks have all but fled in an attempt to reduce costs. That leaves consumers wanting the kind of traditional relationship they had at a local branch, but they are unable to get it.

Why is it that the big banks can get away with that? It is because they do not have sufficient competition. As I said, I am glad I live in a province where the credit union movement is filling an important void with respect to banking services. I am also glad to say that I get my banking services at a credit union. That was in jeopardy not that long ago when the government was looking at changing the Bank Act to outlaw talking about banking at credit unions. I am glad that common sense prevailed and people can say they bank at a credit union.

The banks did not get their way on that, just as I hope that the big banks are not going to get their way with this merger, because competition will provide lower rates for Canadians. I do not want to mislead anyone. It is not that HSBC is some kind of second environmental coming or something, but it was the first bank to offer green bonds. It has made some pretty serious commitments and backed them up with investment plans to lower the emissions profile of its investments.

That is exactly the kind of thing we need to start seeing in the financial sector if Canada is going to meet the legal climate commitments we have signed on to in the Paris Agreement and elsewhere. RBC, on the other hand, is the bank that does the most fossil fuel-heavy investment in Canada today. It is an important player, for instance, in the government's TMX project and put up a lot of capital for that.

It is very invested in growing fossil fuel infrastructure in Canada, despite the fact that the oil and gas sector in Canada is extracting more barrels of oil today than at any other point in our history, which is easy to forget in the kinds of debates we have about the oil and gas sector on the floor of this place. For those who say that the industry is in distress or on the verge of extinction, let us take a deep breath and look at the facts. The fact is that the oil and gas industry in Canada is more prolific today than at any other point in our history.

That does not necessarily mean that it is employing more people than it has ever employed, because as technology advances, jobs for workers and the profitability and productivity of the oil and gas industry are on separate paths.

(1015) The truth is that oil and gas companies are able to extract more and make more money than ever with fewer workers. The continued advancement and increase in extraction are no longer tied in the same way they used to be to the creation of jobs for people in Canada, which is not to say that there are not a lot of jobs in the oil and gas sector or that this is not important. It is to say that we need to find the right level of extraction that is sustainable for the planet and that provides a strong economic basis for Alberta and other parts of the country where that industry is really important.

All of that is to say that RBC is being driven to grow and grow, with no sense of sustainability or what would be a sustainable rate of extraction. Therefore, both on the environmental front and on the consumer protection front, there are strong reasons to oppose this merger. It is why opposition parties on the finance committee sent a very clear message by working together that this was not a good idea. I do not know that the Conservatives would endorse some of the environmental concerns I have raised on the floor today. I wish they would.

I think Canada would be a better place if we could talk more about these issues in a serious way and about how to get Canada's emissions under control. I know that is not a conversation we want to have, but I am glad we can at least agree on the need for more competition and financial services and what that would mean for Canadians. It is an important signal the government should not ignore that so many parties in this place, for their own reasons, do not think this merger is a good idea.

We are going to hear at some point from Conservatives on this matter, and Canadians should take what they have to say with a grain of salt. They talk a lot about the Competition Bureau these days and the importance of competitiveness.

Of course, this merger was looked at by the Competition Bureau, but not under the new framework that is on its way both through Bill C-56 , which just passed in committee last night and is going to make some important changes to the Competition Act, and through, if we look at the ways and means motion, the budget implementation act the government will be tabling presumably after a vote on the ways and means motion. More changes to the Competition Act are coming there.

(1020) This merger was not reviewed with any of the new powers that would be afforded to the Competition Bureau. It was reviewed under a regime at the Competition Bureau that even the federal government itself recognizes as being deficient. We know in the past that, for instance, Conservatives have talked about wanting to have independent officers doing work without political interference. I have certainly heard that at committee. I am glad to hear that, but I remember them setting up the Parliamentary Budget Office under Stephen Harper in the early days. It was a good thing they did that when they did.

Then the Parliamentary Budget Officer started saying things they did not like, and shockingly, the campaign of character assassination began. Kevin Page, who was the Parliamentary Budget Officer, came under direct attack by the Harper government. It was not that great an outing for the Harper government after all. Conservatives did the right thing initially, but they could not stay the course because they cannot stand any criticism and react badly as soon as someone starts calling them out for things they would prefer to get away with.

Canadians should be taking some of the remarks the Conservatives are making today as an opposition party with a grain of salt when it comes to their desire for an independent Competition Bureau. I certainly hope that in the future, if we have a Conservative government, we will not see that government decide to attack the competition commissioner if he starts telling them things they do not want to hear. The whole point of having those independent offices is to be able to do that. We saw it again with David Johnston, who is someone they held up at one point.

They held him up to the point that they were willing to appoint him as Governor General of the country. Then, when he started saying and doing things they did not like, a campaign of character assassination began. That was unfortunate because it detracted from the important point, which was that, when it came to being a special rapporteur on foreign interference, that was not the right way to proceed. Making it about David Johnston detracted from the important point, which was that it was a bad process and what we really needed was a public inquiry.

I am proud to say that New Democrats stayed the course and finally put that process on track. I do not think the personal attacks against David Johnston were helpful in that regard because they detracted from the main issue. Conservatives were so concerned with attacking David Johnston that it took them a long time to work with us in the right way to get that process back on track.

This is just another example of Conservatives claiming they want certain people in positions of authority to be able to make pronouncements on what the government of the day is doing, but then as soon as those pronouncements are not in line with their partisan lines, all of a sudden it is a problem and an affront to democracy, and the character assassination begins. It is important we take this moment when Conservatives are prepared to do the right thing. Those moments are few and far between. We should not waste the opportunity.

The government itself should be listening and taking the opportunity to do the right thing and say no to a merger that would both set the private financial sector back in green financing, potentially, and maintain and reinforce the lack of competition that Canadians have already been suffering under for too long. They have had to pay some of the highest banking fees, even as those same banks reduce services in their communities and close local branches.

Those are some of the reasons we think it is really important that the government take this opportunity and not do what it did on the Rogers-Shaw deal, which was to ultimately cave to those big corporate interests. We talk a lot in here, rightly, about corporate-controlled Conservatives, but we should not forget that the Liberals do their fair share of corporate service here in this place. After all, that is the true coalition in Parliament: Liberals and Conservatives serving Canada's corporate sector.

We have a real opportunity here, one of those few and far between moments, when the Conservatives are prepared to do the right thing in opposition. Let us seize the day. With the Rogers-Shaw merger, and the minister likes to say he put conditions on it and everything else, some of the things we would expect to happen did happen. Somebody from B.C. called me up and said that he had been a Shaw customer. When the merger happened, Rogers sent him a new SIM card, and he had to figure out how to put it in his phone and everything else. He had not done it yet.

It took him a couple of months, as household administration sometimes does, and I am sure there are many Canadians listening who are sympathetic to the fact that sometimes it is hard to stay on top of all those things, particularly if there is a technological component one is not familiar with. What happened is that, with this merger that was not going to have any negative consequences for Canadian consumers, he started getting a bill from Shaw because he had not changed the SIM card yet, and he was getting a bill from Rogers.

He was getting two bills from the same company for one cellphone, if members can believe that. Unfortunately, I can because I know what it is like to deal with some of these big telecom companies and other corporate oligopolies, whatever the sector. The fact is that it is very hard to get justice as a consumer. That has been true for Canadians in respect of the big five banks, and this merger is not going to help. It is going to take a smaller player out of the market that is doing its work to be scrappy and to offer competitive rates.

That is not what Canadians need, especially not in a time of economic and financial strain. What they need is more competition to be able to deliver lower prices and take a bit of that strain off their household budget, just as the government is bringing in new rules to make it easier to transfer one's mortgage. When one's term is up is not the time to take competitors out of the market that are offering lower rates. HSBC is one of those very banks, with its lower offering, that Canadians will be looking to in order to save money in their monthly household budget.

Let us make sure those options are there, just as Canadians get the freedom to transfer their mortgage, without having to undergo another stress test.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian banking system is sound, stable and free from political interference. It has served Canadians well through the 2008 great recession and during the COVID recession as well. Why do members opposite continue to politicize a pillar of our economy?

Mr. Daniel Blaikie :

Mr. Speaker, of course most companies in an oligopoly are sound and secure. That is kind of the point, is it not? They have the market power to ensure that their own business is sound and secure. The problem is they are doing that on the backs of Canadian consumers. We want to see more competition in the financial sector so Canadians do not have to pay for the soundness, security and peace of mind of bank CEOs. We think that is backward. We also think it is the job of this place to ensure that Canadians' interests are put first, not the interests of wealthy bankers.

That is why we continue to say it is important to not approve the merger and keep a scrappy smaller player in the market to provide more competitive pricing to Canadians.

(1025) Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, I think the Conservatives and the NDP, surprisingly, agree that competition is broken in Canada. We certainly, at the finance committee, agreed that the HSBC-RBC merger is a product of that broken system. There are broken laws that we have to fix. Everyone has brought new laws in. The biggest thing that would change banking in Canada would be consumer-led banking or open banking. Does the member agree with the bill I have brought forward, that this party has brought forward, which would push the government to bring competition to Canada? That means consumer-led banking, with many different fintechs, would compete and lower the price of banking for Canadians.

Mr. Daniel Blaikie :

Mr. Speaker, I do support open banking. I think that is really important. For folks watching at home who may not be familiar with the term, open banking just means that one should own one's financial data. When one is banking with an institution, it should not be able to say that one cannot take this information and share it with another institution. That is one's information. It is one's finances. It is one's money.

If one wants another institution to know the facts about one's account, the current financial institution that one banks with should have an obligation to share that without a bunch of silly business or putting up walls or making it difficult for one to shop around and get a better price. As I say, we believe that there is not enough competition in the financial sector today and that Canadian consumers are paying a serious price for that. That needs to change. That is why we oppose the HSBC-RBC merger. It is why we support open banking.

[ Translation ]

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, a little earlier this year, The Canadian Press reported the following:

According to a report, Royal Bank of Canada was the biggest fossil fuel financier in the world last year after providing over $42 billion U.S. in funding in 2022, $3 billion U.S. more than in 2021.

Of that amount, $4.8 billion went to the oil sands and $7.4 billion went to hydraulic fracking extraction.

According to the same report, since the Paris climate agreement was adopted in 2016, RBC has provided over $253.98 billion U.S. in funding to fossil fuel companies.

I am wondering about the climate accountability of these big banks. Does the Government of Canada not also have a responsibility to legislate to force these banks to phase out their investments in fossil fuels and instead encourage investments in clean energy?

Mr. Daniel Blaikie :

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. I think that one very important point raised by this acquisition relates to the environment. Clearly, RBC's strategy is based on endlessly increasing its investments in industries that produce greenhouse gases. I think that is one of the major issues the government needs to consider when deciding whether to approve this acquisition. We need a clear green taxonomy for the financial industry and for institutions that truly want to start greening their portfolios beyond mere greenwashing.

The government has a role to play in encouraging institutions to make green investments like HSBC does. We do not want to see an institution like this gobbled up by one like RBC, which is clearly intent on increasing the greenhouse gases in its portfolio.

(1030) [ English ]

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to ask if the member could expand on corporate greed and what really underlies these decisions to amalgamate and buy out competitors. Could the member for Elmwood—Transcona explain how this hurts consumers?

Mr. Daniel Blaikie :

Mr. Speaker, one of the important issues at play in changes to the Competition Act, for example, if we look at the private member's bill of the NDP leader, the member for Burnaby South , is the question of killer acquisitions, which is when companies buy up smaller competitors before they get the market share to become competitors to the bigger players in the industry. We have a bank that is quite small compared to the big five, but it has shown that it is willing to price its products competitively, and Canadians can benefit from that if they so choose.

They are going to have a better opportunity to benefit from that after new rules come in not requiring them to take a stress test when they transfer their mortgage. That will not help very much if the smaller player that is offering better rates disappears between now and when those measures come into effect. Absolutely, corporations, in the name of gathering up market shares and making bigger profits, do try to acquire and shut down smaller competitors that are undermining what otherwise is a pretty comfortable pricing environment for those bigger players.

It is something that is not in the interests of Canadians. It is in the interests of those larger companies, which already have dominance within their market, and it is something that, as legislators for the public interest, we should be concerned about stopping, not encouraging.

(1035) Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that really concerns people in my riding is the disappearance of financial institutions in neighbourhoods where it is not seen as being financially convenient for them to be in that big business market. One of the things we had been pushing for is postal banking. The government did start it, but not successfully. Even though it was successful on the ground, it seems the government has abandoned that pilot project. How can that also help, with just credit unions providing an alternative for people to have more power over their banking situation?

Mr. Daniel Blaikie :

Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, it is certainly a concern for folks in my riding as they have watched bank branches close and access to financial services get more difficult for those who care to do it in person. There are still a lot of people in Canada who want to have a direct face-to-face relationship with the people who are in charge of their savings. Postal banking would be a great way to do this. As I said, I am very proud of the credit union movement in Manitoba.

I think it has showed that, if smaller financial institutions, such as credit unions, can have brick and mortar branches in our communities, sometimes more than one for the same credit union, it is certainly possible for the larger banks to do it, but it is something that should not fall through the cracks. I think that, through the infrastructure of Canada Post, we have an excellent opportunity to make sure that banking services are available in every community, in addition to whatever the private financial market, through credit unions, banks or others, would provide.

Mr. Philip Lawrence (Northumberland—Peterborough South, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the NDP's support on our motion. Will the NDP join us in delivering more than just words and, in fact, deliver action in voting non-confidence if the government allow this merger?

Mr. Daniel Blaikie :

Mr. Speaker, I would gently remind the member that we are actually debating my motion of concurrence today. I was very glad that they brought the issue forward at the finance committee with my support. I think that shows that it really is

an act of true collaboration. As for confidence votes, we will take those as they come. As long as the government continues to deliver on the CASA commitments, we will continue this Parliament. We are certainly in the midst of some important negotiations on pharmacare. That is an issue that we think is election worthy. I am not sure that having a corporate-controlled Conservative government is the answer for Canadians if these guys are willing to approve the merger.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I am committed to giving a short speech today. Motion On that note, I move:

That the debate be now adjourned.

The Deputy Speaker :

The question is on the motion. If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

Mr. Mark Gerretsen :

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that it be carried on division.

Mr. Philip Lawrence :

Mr. Speaker, we would request a recorded division.

The Deputy Speaker :

Call in the members.

(1115) (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

(Division No. 462)

YEAS Members Aldag Alghabra Ali Anand Anandasangaree Angus Arseneault Arya Ashton Atwin Bachrach Badawey Bains Baker Battiste Beech Bendayan Bennett Bibeau Bittle Blaikie Blair Blaney Blois Boissonnault Boulerice Bradford Brière Cannings Carr Casey Chagger Chahal Champagne Chatel Chen Chiang Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Collins (Victoria) Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Damoff Davies Desjarlais Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Drouin Dubourg Duclos Duguid Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Erskine-Smith Fillmore Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fragiskatos Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Gainey Garrison Gazan Gerretsen Gould Green Hajdu Hanley Hardie Hepfner Holland Housefather Hughes Hussen Hutchings Iacono Idlout Ien Jaczek Johns Jones Jowhari Julian Kayabaga Kelloway Khalid Koutrakis Kusmierczyk Kwan Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lapointe Lattanzio Lauzon LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lightbound Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacGregor MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maloney Martinez Ferrada Masse Mathyssen May (Cambridge) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLeod Mendès Mendicino Miao Miller Morrice Morrissey Murray Naqvi Noormohamed O'Connell O'Regan Petitpas Taylor Powlowski Qualtrough Robillard Rodriguez Rogers Romanado Rota Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Scarpaleggia Schiefke Serré Sgro Shanahan Sheehan Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Singh Sorbara Sousa St-Onge Sudds Tassi Taylor Roy Thompson Trudeau Turnbull Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Vandal Vandenbeld Virani Weiler Wilkinson Yip Zahid Zarrillo Zuberi -- 174

NAYS Members Aboultaif Aitchison Albas Allison Arnold Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Barsalou-Duval Beaulieu Bergeron Berthold Bérubé Bezan Blanchet Blanchette-Joncas Bragdon Brassard Brock Brunelle-Duceppe Calkins Caputo Carrie Chabot Chambers Champoux Chong Cooper Dalton Davidson DeBellefeuille Deltell Desbiens Desilets Doherty Dowdall Dreeshen Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Ellis Epp Falk (Provencher) Ferreri Findlay Fortin Gallant Garon Gaudreau Généreux Genuis Gill Gladu Godin Goodridge Gourde Gray Hallan Hoback Jeneroux Kelly Khanna Kitchen Kmiec Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Lake Lantsman Larouche Lawrence Lehoux Lemire Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Liepert Lloyd Lobb Maguire Majumdar Martel Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McLean Melillo Michaud Moore Morantz Morrison Motz Muys Nater Normandin Patzer Paul-Hus Pauzé Perkins Perron Plamondon Poilievre Rayes Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Rood Ruff Savard-Tremblay Scheer Schmale Seeback Shields Shipley Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Small Soroka Steinley Ste-Marie Stewart Strahl Stubbs Thériault Therrien Thomas Tolmie Uppal Van Popta Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vignola Vis Vuong Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Williams Williamson Zimmer -- 143

PAIRED Members Deltell Fast Guilbeault Joly Lalonde Ng Tochor Trudel -- 8

The Deputy Speaker :

I declare the motion carried. Motion agreed to

[ Translation ]

Hon. Steven MacKinnon :

Mr. Speaker, the app did not provide any photo for the member for Drummond. Would you check into that please?

The Deputy Speaker :

The issue was resolved on the screen at the last minute. I thank the hon. member for raising this matter.

(1120) [ English ] Industry and Technology

Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)

moved: Motion

That it be an instruction to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology that, during its consideration of Bill C-27,

An Act to enact the Consumer Privacy Protection Act, the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal Act and the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts, the committee be granted the power to divide the bill into two pieces of legislation:

(

a) Bill C-27A,

an Act to enact the Consumer Privacy Protection Act, and

an Act to enact the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal Act, containing

Part 1,

Part 2, and the schedule, to

section 2; and

(

b) Bill C-27B,

an Act to enact the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act, containing

Part 3.

He said: Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed that we are not talking about housing, and about RBC and HSBC, in the House today. After eight years, this country is in the worst housing crisis we have ever had. We just have to talk to any constituent to see exactly what is happening. Before I get into that, I want to mention that I will be splitting my time today with the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill .

When we talk about housing, it is absolute ludicrous that there are families right now that cannot afford the mortgage they do have, if they are so lucky to have a home, and also that those who are renting are finding that rents have doubled. We are hearing, across all of our communities, that homelessness has doubled. I met with the police chief and the mayor from my city last week, and we talked about detox centres. It is not only a housing crisis that has put people on the street; it is also a major drug, mental health and addictions crisis that is putting people into precarious situations.

Oftentimes things are out of control and they cannot handle it. We had 66 overdoses in one week in Belleville, Ontario. It is just out of hand. Housing should be announced as a crisis in this country. At the end of the day, after four years of talking, and after eight years, housing is in such dire straits. Of course, we look to competition to be the answer for that. Every single government has brought that forward and talked about competition. However, it has really been just drip, drip, drip. There has been one little policy or one little change, but no major competition.

For the most part, it would bring in consumer-led banking, which would mean that many companies, fintech companies, could provide different options for consumers. The second part of that would be to ensure that we really look at stopping major bad deals that have happened under the existing Competition Act. The speed of competition is really bad right now. There are major oligopolies in the banking sector. Six companies have 93% of all of the banking and 87% of all of the mortgages in Canada. The HSBC rates right now are 81 basis points lower than the RBC rates.

This morning, HSBC is at 6.14% for a five-year variable mortgage rate, versus RBC at 6.95%. We can see what that means for competition. The Competition Bureau is really a policing agency that is not supposed to prosecute but is supposed to look at competition in terms of a law enforcement society. We have all watched Law and Order . I don't remember their names, but the two detectives are supposed to bring the culprits in, and then, of course, there is the judicial system to tackle that.

The speed for competition law is about 100 kilometres an hour, when competition in housing should be a school zone; the speed should be 15 to 20 kilometres an hour so we look at slowing things down, blocking mergers such as HSBC's being bought by RBC, which would become the biggest bank in Canada by buying the seventh-biggest bank.

My bill, the consumer-led banking bill, if it were to push the government to bring legislation to the House, would ensure that we change one thing in the Banking Act: to ensure that people's personal data, which should be theirs, could be shared, with their consent, with other banking institutions. Doing so would create real, meaningful competition in the banking sector. That is exactly what we are looking at with Bill C-27 . Bill C-27 is about protecting data. It is looking at personal data for Canadians. I have spoken extensively about that in the House, about how our children's data is not protected right now.

All of our children, at one point, have an iPad or an Amazon firestick, or they are on personal phones. Right now, data protection is so bad in Canada that all of that data can be scraped, and it is owned by companies, not by the children. It is sold to other companies. Of course, we have not talked about the Privacy Act in Canada's not having been updated since 1987, way before the iPod. It was way before the time when we had technology and the Internet, as explosive as it is, which puts our children's data at risk.

(1125) However, the government, in its speed, in not adhering to speed signs, has sometimes been talking and making announcements as quickly as it can, and certainly not bringing action forward as quickly as it can. It has taken a year for the government to put Bill C-27 , after its introduction in the House, into committee where it is now. The biggest problem with the legislation and the out-of-control speed of the government on announcements and on talking, not speed of action, was that the Liberals combined an AI bill with Bill C-27.

The minister at the time said that this was because it was what the Liberals needed to do and that we would be the first jurisdiction across the world to do it. However, they were so speedy in announcing that they were doing it instead of doing it. They did not even do public consultation. We had no chance for public consultation when the AIDA was thrown into the act as the third

section of Bill C-27 . So far, we have had about nine or 10 committee meetings about Bill C-27 . Every witness so far has basically said that the AIDA, the third

section of the act, is terrible and it is weak. The bill would not do the things we need to do, because we did not have public consultation and did not look really prudently at legislation that should have had public consultation and public input that would have listened to the industry. AI in Canada is pretty scary because it is evolving quicker than we can look at it. It is not scary enough to say that we need to put in placeholder legislation and do something that is above that and different. No, it is scary enough that we have to do it right, which means that we slow it down.

Just through testimony so far and because of the importance of the issue and how bad AIDA is, combined with the bill, we see that it will delay the better part of the bill, the first two parts of Bill C-27 . The first two parts deal with updating privacy and the digital charter, but also with the tribunal. The tribunal, which is still up for discussion, is taking from the Competition Act a process by which, if a privacy commissioner made a ruling or recommendation against an individual or against a corporation, at the end of the day, that tribunal would allow the option for an individual to have a second reading.

The problem is that the tribunal in the Competition Act is not all that great either, which we saw with the Rogers and Shaw merger. The Competition Tribunal was utilized to review a merger of Rogers and Shaw, which was rejected by the Competition Bureau. The make-up of the Competition Tribunal is supposed to be three experts in privacy law, only three, so there is a lot of debate on that. The first two parts of the bill are so complex. The third part throws the whole bill into a spin. The recommendation we are making is one we have made before.

However, after hearing testimony in committee, we have recommended to separate the third part of the bill, which really needs to be scrapped because it is so weak. The recommendation about the bill would be to make it a separate vote. Probably the biggest argument for this is that it could save the first two parts of the bill, because we do need to update privacy legislation. With respect to the most important part, which is owning one's data, I am going to go back to why that is so important with competition in banking.

Right now, the only way to get people's credit-card and banking-statement data, which is theirs, is a method called “screen scraping”, which means that people give their safe word to another institution so they can go into their bank account and see their information. This is wrong. The U.K. and Australia have outlawed that because it is absolutely wrong, but it is a practice we allow in Canada. Consumer-led banking would ensure that people own their data, and, on their consent, they move that data to new competitors.

New competitors could then bank them and provide better service, lower cost and more competition in Canada. We have to separate the third part of the bill. AI is extremely scary. It is extremely important. I know that the next speaker is going to speak very profoundly on that. She is an expert on it.

(1130) Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, members who were listening to my colleague across the way's comments would hear possibly a bit of hypocrisy. When we think about it, the last time we had six major grocery giants in Canada, one of them, Shoppers Drug Mart, was consumed under Stephen Harper. Shoppers was providing competition to the big five, and Loblaws ultimately bought it out. I wonder whether my colleague across the way would agree that maybe Stephen Harper messed up in terms of competition on groceries by allowing Shoppers to be consumed by Loblaws. Does the member have an opinion on that aspect of the competition when he references competition here in Canada?

(1135) Mr. Ryan Williams :

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about hypocrisy. The government has voted to shut down debate on competition in the banking sector in Canada today, and there is a housing crisis that is the largest and the worst in the whole world. Then again, the member likes to talk about Stephen Harper. The member must be so proud today that he was mentioned in The Globe and Mail editorial that talked about his party's obsession with Stephen Harper. Over here, we have our glasses of water, and every time Harper is mentioned, we drink.

There is always lots of water to drink, because the member likes to blame everything on Stephen Harper. However, the reality is that there have been 12 mergers in competition, in banking and in telecom approved under the government's watch over the last eight years. This includes propane company mergers, Sobeys and IGA, and Sobeys and Farm Boy. The government, over the last eight years, has approved so many mergers. That is hypocrisy.

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Bay of Quinte for raising again today the issue of open banking. I think it is really important that Canadians own their own data. We see a problem in the financial sector where financial institutions put up barriers to Canadians' being able to share their own information about their own financial situation with other financial institutions in order to be able to compare apples to apples when it comes to shopping around for a better price.

Of course, we see other instances, often in the medical system, for example, where patients are told that they do not own their information, and that if they want to transfer information from one health service provider to another, the information is proprietary to the offerer of the service. It can be quite costly, difficult and onerous to be able to procure one's own information and transfer it to another health care institution.

I wonder whether the member would like to speak more generally to the kind of principles around consumers of various types of services being able to own their information and to make it easily portable for them so they can engage in the activity of trying to find the best service. This could be service either at the best price or even in the context of systems where they are not having to pay for those services but still want to be able to get better service by shopping around.

Mr. Ryan Williams :

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to hear the member talk positively about consumer-led banking, but I am extremely disappointed that, after speaking this morning, he voted with the government, as he often does, to shut down debate on the RBC and HSBC merger, which is going to hurt Canadians. RBC is trying to buy 800,000 mortgage holders, which is a great thing for RBC, because it would just take them out of the market and move them into its bank.

However, the reality is that 10% of Vancouver mortgage holders and 5% of Toronto's mortgage holders, in the hottest and third-hottest housing markets in all of the world, are going to be gobbled up by RBC. There is an 85-basis-point difference in mortgage rates today between the two competitors. We are going to have more people who need help in Vancouver and Toronto. They will be falling behind and paying more. By the way, it is about $400 a month more on a $500,000 mortgage, which is low for a mortgage. We should have been allowed to debate this today. There should have been a vote to shut the merger down.

I am disappointed in the member because he shut debate down.

Mr. Pat Kelly (Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, I want to refocus the discussion back on the matter at hand, which is splitting Bill C-27 . I would like the member to comment on the inadequacy of the bill, the weakness that he has found in it and why it is so important that we get it split into proper components such we can debate them and have them voted on separately.

Mr. Ryan Williams :

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his hard work and for contributing to the debate. Bill C-27 has a lot of different aspects, but here are the worst parts of them. There is a provision called “legitimate interests”, which allows businesses to collect data, but there is no real definition as to what they can use that data for. It is so obscure that, right now, without a clear definition, we are not going to be able to get it through. There is no instance in the purpose clause or in the bill of privacy being a fundamental right, and that is something Conservatives have been fighting for.

We are the only party, really, fighting to have that in. When it comes to AIDA, the third part we are trying to split off, when I asked witnesses at committee about three weeks ago to rate it from one to 10, one being bad and 10 being the best, six out of seven rated it a one out of 10. That piece, without public consultation, which did not happen, needs to go. It needs to be split off, and that is why we are asking for the motion.

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad we are debating the motion today, because today is the one-year anniversary of the release of a generational, society-changing technology, and that, of course, is ChatGPT. I think I was the first legislator in the world to stand up in a parliament and say “Hey guys, have a look at this.” Since that time, over 80% of Fortune 500 companies are now integrating ChatGPT technology. Legislators around the world are trying to deal with the vast societal implications of the release of the technology.

Also, the world is trying to grapple with the fact that the technology was released into the world without any sort of comprehensive regulations around the development of large language models and the large-scale deployment of this type of technology, and then without a lot of thought to use. The other thing is that, in the last year, we have had to build, internationally, parliamentary capacity for legislators both to understand the technical aspects of how artificial intelligence has the capacity to impact our society and to try to look at how our regulatory systems can meet the challenge.

Our systems are notoriously non-nimble and slow, and this is why there should be no partisan divide on the fact that the motion should pass. The Artificial Intelligence and Data Act should be hived off. Without offence to the government, the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act was developed about a year or a year and a half prior to the deployment of ChatGPT. It is like developing regulations for scribes, putting them forward and debating regulations for scribes, after the printing press was deployed around the world. That is really the transformational change we are dealing with.

Taking a partisan hat off, civil society, academia and industry all need to be consulted, and we need to go back to the drawing board on a lot of places in the bill. As my colleague for Bay of Quinte talked about, this is something that the Standing Committee on Industry has heard over and over again from every witness it has had.

However, it is also important to split the bill to give the government an opportunity to better coordinate with other jurisdictions around the world that are trading partners with Canada, are already well ahead of us and are close to passing their own artificial intelligence regulations. For example, the European Union is already well down the path, as is the United States. Frankly, we also need to include the global south in the conversation. We need to be working with the global south, as it impacts the global south.

I am pleased to announce that the Canadian Group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union successfully passed a motion at the IPU's last assembly in Rwanda a few week ago, and that Canada will be a co-rapporteur on the Standing Committee on Human Rights to develop a motion specifically to do this, to build capacity for parliamentarians around the world to learn about the impacts of artificial intelligence, to take that back to their respective political parties and legislatures and to ensure that all voices are being heard. This is one of the reasons we have to pass the motion before us today.

I want to echo what my colleague for Bay of Quinte said. I think there is one testimony that sums up why AIDA has to be hived off so the privacy components of Bill C-27 can proceed. I will read from Barry Sookman, senior counsel at McCarthy Tétrault, who argued that AIDA fails to adequately shield the public from potential risks associated with high-impact AI systems. He also said that the centralized power that was envisioned in this pre-ChatGPT legislation undermines the structure of parliamentary sovereignty, adding that “AIDA sets a dangerous precedent”.

(1140) These are Canadian legal experts who have made the argument that the implications of implementing under-considered legislation on an issue as impactful as artificial intelligence is extremely risky. Any flaw in AI regulation could affect millions of people, exposing companies to class action lawsuits of historic proportions. It could also expose the public, our constituents, to risks, because we have not thought this through. This issue is so huge. It has the capacity for so much societal transformation that the bill must be hived off.

Members from all political parties need to be engaged in robust, fulsome debate with all aspects of Canadian society. They need to think about this in three silos. The first is the way that artificial intelligence is developed. It has come to light over the last year that ChatGPT was developed using extremely low-paid labour in the global south. These low-paid labourers were exposed to violent child pornography imagery to help train the large language model. There are no global regulations or standards around this. That needs to change.

The other thing there is really no global standards for, certainly not in Canada, is the protection of intellectual property when it comes to training large language model systems. This is highly problematic. We are already seeing precedent-setting legal cases coming forward in other jurisdictions, which could have extreme impacts on Canadian businesses, the ownership of IP and also how we promulgate and respect our trade agreements with other partners. A lot of our trade agreements did not consider artificial intelligence. The second is the development of artificial intelligence.

The fact that ChatGPT was released on the public, where a hundred million users are using this on such a regular basis without thought to what that means, is like releasing a pharmaceutical onto the public with no clinical trials, with no data. As a country, we need to think about how we research these products, how we allow research and innovation, but also we need to ensure that the societal impacts are thought about in an ethical framework prior to deployment. The last thing is that I want to encourage colleagues to join the parliamentary caucus on emerging technology.

I have colleagues who are sitting here today who I know have such a heart for these issues. This debate has been in a non-partisan manner. It has been collaborative and it has been great. Just briefly, there is the impact of AI on democracy with deepfakes, with the spread of information, and on labour and the disruption of labour. Will we see AI replacement workers? Is that being considered in any legislation? These things need to be considered in an AI regulatory framework: cross-jurisdictional issues, the issues of human rights, the issues of autonomous weapons.

I could go on and on, because the bill needs a separate vote. Probably, the government needs an opportunity to go back to the drawing board to internalize the situation. This needs to happen now, though. I think that this is a no-brainer. I think there is a lot of consensus in the House of Commons for that. I would like to see agreement in the House on this matter and it be put to a vote. With that, I move: Motion

That the debate be now adjourned.

(1145) The Deputy Speaker :

The question is on the motion. If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

Mr. Damien Kurek :

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote.

The Deputy Speaker :

Call in the members.

During the taking of the vote:

(1225) [ Translation ]

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille :

Mr. Speaker, could someone please check the member for Battlefords—Lloydminster 's photo? It looks like she is not identifiable in her photo.

The Deputy Speaker :

We will check.

(1230) [ English ]

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

(Division No. 463)

YEAS Members Aboultaif Albas Allison Arnold Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Berthold Bezan Block Bragdon Brassard Brock Calkins Caputo Carrie Chambers Chong Cooper Dalton Davidson Deltell Doherty Dowdall Dreeshen Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Ellis Epp Falk (Provencher) Ferreri Findlay Gallant Généreux Genuis Gladu Godin Goodridge Gourde Gray Hallan Hoback Jeneroux Kelly Khanna Kitchen Kmiec Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Lake Lawrence Lehoux Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Liepert Lloyd Lobb Maguire Majumdar Martel Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McLean Melillo Moore Morantz Morrice Morrison Motz Muys Nater Patzer Paul-Hus Perkins Poilievre Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Rood Ruff Scheer Schmale Seeback Shields Shipley Small Soroka Steinley Stewart Strahl Stubbs Thomas Tolmie Uppal Van Popta Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vis Vuong Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Williams Williamson Zimmer -- 112

NAYS Members Aldag Alghabra Ali Anand Anandasangaree Angus Arseneault Arya Ashton Atwin Bachrach Badawey Bains Baker Barsalou-Duval Battiste Beaulieu Beech Bendayan Bennett Bergeron Bérubé Bibeau Bittle Blaikie Blair Blanchette-Joncas Blaney Blois Boissonnault Boulerice Bradford Brière Brunelle-Duceppe Cannings Carr Casey Chabot Chagger Chahal Champagne Champoux Chatel Chen Chiang Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Collins (Victoria) Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Damoff Davies DeBellefeuille Desbiens Desilets Desjarlais Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Dong Drouin Dubourg Duclos Duguid Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Erskine-Smith Fillmore Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fortin Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Gainey Garon Garrison Gaudreau Gazan Gerretsen Gill Gould Green Hajdu Hanley Hardie Hepfner Holland Housefather Hughes Hussen Hutchings Iacono Ien Jaczek Johns Jones Jowhari Julian Kayabaga Kelloway Khalid Koutrakis Kusmierczyk Kwan Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lantsman Lapointe Larouche Lattanzio Lauzon LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lemire Lightbound Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacGregor MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maloney Martinez Ferrada Masse Mathyssen May (Cambridge) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLeod Mendès Mendicino Miao Michaud Miller Morrissey Murray Naqvi Noormohamed Normandin O'Connell O'Regan Pauzé Perron Petitpas Taylor Plamondon Powlowski Qualtrough Rayes Robillard Rodriguez Rogers Romanado Rota Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Savard-Tremblay Scarpaleggia Schiefke Serré Sgro Shanahan Sheehan Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Singh Sorbara Sousa Ste-Marie St-Onge Sudds Tassi Taylor Roy Thériault Therrien Thompson Trudeau Turnbull Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Vandal Vandenbeld Vignola Virani Weiler Wilkinson Yip Zahid Zarrillo Zuberi -- 203

PAIRED Members Deltell Fast Guilbeault Joly Lalonde Ng Tochor Trudel -- 8

The Deputy Speaker :

Motion negatived I declare the motion defeated. Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the games the Conservatives continue to play to stop debate on the important issues of the day for Canadians is no surprise. At the end of the day, the very same bill, Bill C-27 , is the one on which they moved the concurrence motion. Let there be no doubt that the Conservatives oppose the legislation. This is yet another tactic being used to filibuster legislation, legislation that is important to Canadians in many different ways. In this situation, we are talking about the privacy of the digital charter, which is so very important. It also talks about AI, which impacts every Canadian.

My question for the member opposite is this. Why do Conservatives continue to play a destructive role on the floor of the House of Commons in an irresponsible fashion? We see this virtually on a daily basis. The best example that comes to my mind is when they filibustered and voted against the Canada-Ukraine agreement. Shame on them.

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC) :

Madam Speaker, I have been here during my colleague's time in the House. In his role as House leader, he does not understand what we just voted on. The motion that I moved would have adjourned debate on this topic so the question could have been put to the House, we could have split the bill and the government could have had the opportunity to undertake some of the activities that have already been raised in the House. It was a motion to move forward.

Therefore, I would ask him to avail himself of a better understanding of procedure in the House, rather than to cast aspersions on colleagues with respect to a very serious matter, which is moving Canada forward in alignment with the world on regulations and protections around artificial intelligence.

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC) :

Madam Speaker, the speech of my colleague from Calgary speaks to some of the radical shifts that are taking place in the technological landscape in our country and our world. If a government is not willing to be responsive to that, it puts not only our country at an economic disadvantage, but also at a security disadvantage. I wonder if my colleague could speak further about some of the challenges. If we are not responsive to the issues surrounding specifically AI, that puts our nation at a significant disadvantage. Right now, we are already lagging behind and if the government is unwilling to be responsive, we will simply lag further behind.

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner :

Madam Speaker, there are no rules around the development of this technology. IP can be stolen. Labour can be exploited. There are no rules around the deployment. This technology is highly disruptive and could be used for things like autonomous weapons. There are no rules around that either. However, there are also potential benefits. Because our country is so far behind the rest of the world on this topic and has not engaged civil society, academia or industry in a meaningful way, or international partners, we are becoming an unstable place for investment and we are rapidly going to lose talent.

The brain drain for AI is real and people are rapidly leaving our country. The government needs to rethink a bill that it developed two years before the launch of large language model technologies like ChatGPT, separate it out from the privacy bill, engage civil society, industry and academia and move forward.

Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC) :

Madam Speaker, artificial intelligence obviously depends on models and information that it scoops up off the Internet. There are two sources of information to build the AI model: low-wage workers working sometimes in deplorable conditions and also AI scanning through places like Google or DuckDuckGo or other browser engines. It hoovers up data and images. When AI picks up AI images and information, it becomes extremely brittle. I think this is an opportunity to have that type of idea implemented in legislation, to address the problem of AI-generated information and images off of AI-generated information and images. I would like the member to speak to that.

(1235) Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner :

Madam Speaker, I think what my colleague highlights is a problem where the technology is changing so much faster than either the government's or Parliament's current ability to be nimble and flexible and move quickly. Just to reference the government deputy House leader's response, this is not a time for the typical theatrics we might see in the House. This bill needs to be split and the government needs to go back to the drawing board. We need to see movement on this immediately. I implore the House.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Motion Madam Speaker, I move:

That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.

[ Translation ]

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) :

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

Mr. Tom Kmiec :

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

[ English ]

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) :

Call in the members.

(1320) (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

(Division No. 464)

YEAS Members Aldag Alghabra Ali Anand Anandasangaree Angus Arseneault Arya Atwin Bachrach Badawey Bains Baker Battiste Beech Bendayan Bennett Bibeau Bittle Blaikie Blair Blaney Blois Boissonnault Boulerice Bradford Brière Cannings Carr Casey Chagger Chahal Champagne Chatel Chen Chiang Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Collins (Victoria) Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Damoff Davies Desjarlais Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Dong Drouin Dubourg Duclos Duguid Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Fillmore Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fragiskatos Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Gainey Garrison Gazan Gerretsen Gould Green Hajdu Hanley Hardie Hepfner Holland Housefather Hussen Hutchings Iacono Idlout Ien Jaczek Johns Jones Jowhari Julian Kayabaga Kelloway Khalid Koutrakis Kusmierczyk Kwan Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lapointe Lattanzio Lauzon LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lightbound Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacGregor MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maloney Martinez Ferrada Masse Mathyssen May (Cambridge) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLeod Mendès Mendicino Miao Miller Morrissey Murray Naqvi Noormohamed O'Connell O'Regan Petitpas Taylor Powlowski Qualtrough Robillard Rodriguez Rogers Romanado Rota Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Scarpaleggia Schiefke Serré Sgro Shanahan Sheehan Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Singh Sorbara Sousa St-Onge Sudds Tassi Taylor Roy Thompson Trudeau Turnbull Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Vandal Vandenbeld Virani Weiler Wilkinson Yip Zahid Zarrillo Zuberi -- 171

NAYS Members Aboultaif Aitchison Albas Allison Arnold Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Barsalou-Duval Beaulieu Bergeron Berthold Bérubé Bezan Blanchet Blanchette-Joncas Block Bragdon Brassard Brock Brunelle-Duceppe Calkins Caputo Carrie Chabot Chambers Champoux Chong Cooper Dalton Davidson DeBellefeuille Deltell Desbiens Desilets Doherty Dowdall Dreeshen Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Ellis Epp Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster) Falk (Provencher) Ferreri Findlay Fortin Gallant Garon Gaudreau Généreux Genuis Gill Gladu Godin Goodridge Gourde Gray Hallan Hoback Hughes Jeneroux Kelly Khanna Kitchen Kmiec Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Lake Lantsman Larouche Lawrence Lehoux Lemire Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Liepert Lloyd Lobb Maguire Majumdar Martel Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McLean Melillo Michaud Moore Morantz Morrison Motz Muys Nater Normandin Patzer Paul-Hus Pauzé Perkins Perron Plamondon Poilievre Rayes Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Rood Ruff Savard-Tremblay Scheer Schmale Seeback Shields Shipley Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Small Soroka Steinley Ste-Marie Stewart Strahl Stubbs Thériault Therrien Thomas Tolmie Uppal Van Popta Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vignola Vis Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Williams Williamson Zimmer -- 145

PAIRED Members Deltell Fast Guilbeault Joly Lalonde Ng Tochor Trudel -- 8

The Deputy Speaker :

I declare the motion carried. Motion agreed to

[ Translation ]

Hon. Soraya Martinez Ferrada :

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I had some technical difficulties when I was trying to change my vote, and I would like to request unanimous consent to change my vote.

The Deputy Speaker :

Does the hon. member have unanimous consent to change her vote?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

Government Orders Government Orders

[ English ] Ways and Means Motion No. 19

Hon. Gary Anandasangaree (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance)

Motion for concurrence moved that a ways and means motion to introduce a bill entitled

An Act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 21, 2023 and certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023 , be concurred in.

The Deputy Speaker :

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair. The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux :

I would request a recorded vote, please.

The Deputy Speaker :

Call in the members.

(1405) (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

(Division No. 465)

YEAS Members Aldag Alghabra Ali Anand Anandasangaree Angus Arseneault Arya Ashton Atwin Bachrach Badawey Bains Baker Battiste Beech Bendayan Bennett Bibeau Bittle Blaikie Blair Blaney Blois Boissonnault Boulerice Bradford Brière Cannings Carr Casey Chagger Chahal Champagne Chatel Chen Chiang Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Collins (Victoria) Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Damoff Davies Desjarlais Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Dong Drouin Dubourg Duclos Duguid Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Erskine-Smith Fillmore Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fragiskatos Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Gainey Garrison Gerretsen Gould Green Hajdu Hanley Hardie Hepfner Holland Housefather Hughes Hussen Hutchings Iacono Ien Jaczek Johns Jones Jowhari Julian Kayabaga Kelloway Khalid Koutrakis Kusmierczyk Kwan Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lapointe Lattanzio Lauzon LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lightbound Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacGregor MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maloney Martinez Ferrada Masse Mathyssen May (Cambridge) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLeod Mendès Mendicino Miao Miller Morrice Morrissey Murray Naqvi Noormohamed O'Connell O'Regan Petitpas Taylor Powlowski Qualtrough Robillard Rodriguez Rogers Romanado Rota Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Scarpaleggia Schiefke Serré Sgro Shanahan Sheehan Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Singh Sorbara Sousa St-Onge Sudds Tassi Taylor Roy Thompson Trudeau Turnbull Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Vandal Vandenbeld Virani Weiler Wilkinson Yip Zahid Zarrillo Zuberi -- 173

NAYS Members Aboultaif Aitchison Albas Allison Arnold Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Barsalou-Duval Beaulieu Bergeron Berthold Bérubé Bezan Blanchet Blanchette-Joncas Block Bragdon Brassard Brock Brunelle-Duceppe Calkins Caputo Carrie Chabot Chambers Champoux Chong Cooper Dalton Davidson DeBellefeuille Deltell Desbiens Desilets Doherty Dowdall Dreeshen Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Ellis Epp Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster) Falk (Provencher) Ferreri Findlay Fortin Gallant Garon Gaudreau Gazan Généreux Genuis Gill Gladu Godin Goodridge Gourde Gray Hallan Hoback Idlout Jeneroux Kelly Khanna Kitchen Kmiec Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Lake Lantsman Larouche Lawrence Lehoux Lemire Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Liepert Lloyd Lobb Maguire Majumdar Martel Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McLean Melillo Michaud Moore Morantz Morrison Motz Muys Nater Normandin Patzer Paul-Hus Pauzé Perkins Perron Plamondon Poilievre Rayes Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Rood Ruff Savard-Tremblay Scheer Schmale Seeback Shields Shipley Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Small Soroka Steinley Ste-Marie Strahl Stubbs Thériault Therrien Thomas Tolmie Uppal Van Popta Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vignola Vis Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Williams Williamson Zimmer -- 145

PAIRED Members Deltell Fast Guilbeault Joly Lalonde Ng Tochor Trudel -- 8

The Deputy Speaker :

Motion agreed to I declare the motion carried. The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.

[ Translation ] Business of the House

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and, if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion:

That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, the House do now proceed to Statements by Members followed by Oral Questions, and that the usual allotment of time be afforded for each rubric.

[ English ]

The Deputy Speaker :

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. It is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay. (Motion agreed to)

Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2023

Hon. Gary Anandasangaree (for the Minister of Finance)

Bill C-59. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-59,

an act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 21, 2023 and certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023 . (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

The Speaker :

The hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle is rising on a point of order.

Hon. Andrew Scheer :

Mr. Speaker, I believe I heard my colleague from the NDP move to seek unanimous consent, which was granted. It was that immediately following the vote, we would go right into Statements by Members and that the time provided would not be affected by the length of time that the vote took. I think anything that has happened between that motion being adopted and statements starting should be null. We should go right into statements, have the full 15 minutes for statements, and then go on to question period. That is my understanding of what the motion would have prescribed and what the House just agreed with.

The Speaker :

I thank the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle for raising that issue. It seems that there might have been a delay in terms of how that motion should have been presented. The original intention of the motion, of course, was to bring forward the ways and means bill. It should have been presented after the Chair had read out that the bill would be read the first time and printed. After moving on, that motion should have come forward. Nothing has changed in terms of the intention of the motion and in terms of making sure that we are following the procedures of the House. I thank the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle for his understanding in this matter.

Statements by Members Statements by Members

[ English ]

Mr. Shafqat Ali :

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday in this chamber, the leader of the official opposition recklessly labelled a car explosion in the U.S. near the Rainbow Bridge as a “terrorist attack”. The Conservative leader's characterization of the event shocked many Canadians, including me. I was terrified and instantly prayed to God hoping that no Muslim was involved in this incident. Jumping to such baseless and emotive language without verification and spreading misinformation demonstrate a serious lack of judgment, especially at a time when the conflict in the Middle East has led to an increase in Islamophobia and anti-Semitism—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

(1410) The Speaker :

Colleagues, I invite you all to listen to your whips. One person has the floor at this time for the purpose of making a statement. I am going to ask the hon. member for Brampton Centre to start his statement from the top.

Mr. Shafqat Ali :

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday in this chamber, the leader of the Conservative Party recklessly labelled a car explosion in the U.S. near the Rainbow Bridge as a “terrorist attack”. The Conservative leader's characterization of the event shocked many Canadians, including me. I was terrified and instantly prayed to God hoping that no Muslim was involved in this incident. Jumping to such baseless and emotive language without verification and spreading misinformation—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

I would ask the hon. member for Prince Albert and the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan to please restrain themselves so the Chair can listen to the statement. I am having trouble listening to the statement.

Mr. Rick Perkins: So are we.

The Speaker: I will ask the member for South Shore—St. Margarets to respect the Chair. The hon. member for Brampton Centre, from the top, please.

Mr. Shafqat Ali :

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday in this chamber, the leader of the official opposition recklessly labelled a car explosion in the U.S. near the Rainbow Bridge as a “terrorist attack”. The Conservative leader's characterization of the event shocked many Canadians, including me—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

I have asked members to exercise restraint three times. The hon. member for Brampton Centre, from the top, without interruption, please.

Mr. Shafqat Ali :

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday in this chamber, the leader of the official opposition recklessly labelled a car explosion in the U.S. near the Rainbow Bridge as a “terrorist attack”. The Conservative leader’s characterization of the event shocked many Canadians, including me. I was terrified and instantly prayed to God hoping that no Muslim was involved in this incident. Jumping to such baseless and emotive language without verification and spreading misinformation—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

I know members value the opportunity they have to make statements that are very important to them and their constituents. We are now running behind because this is the fourth time I have stood on my feet on this issue. It will be the last before I start cutting statements from today's list that has been provided to me. I will ask all members to please keep themselves under control so that all statements that were planned can be given today. The hon. member for Brampton Centre, from the top, please.

(1415) Mr. Shafqat Ali :

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday in this chamber, the leader of the official opposition recklessly labelled a car explosion in the U.S. near the Rainbow Bridge as a “terrorist attack”. The Conservative leader’s characterization of the event shocked many Canadians, including me. I was terrified and instantly prayed to God hoping that no Muslim was involved in this incident.

Jumping to such baseless and emotive language without verification and spreading misinformation demonstrate a serious lack of judgment, especially at a time when the conflict in the Middle East has led to an increase in Islamophobia and anti-Semitism here at home. The leader of the Conservative Party tries to criticize every issue for political gain by spreading fear and—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

Since there are no points of order allowed at this time, I would invite the hon. whip to approach the Chair while we move on to the next statement.

Message of Peace

Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, recent incidents targeting our Jewish and Muslim communities concern all of us deeply. Many Canadians, including my colleagues in the House, are being targeted based on their religious or cultural backgrounds, and this is unacceptable to everyone. Let us stand together as a testament that Canadians value each other as colleagues and as fellow citizens, and that it is paramount to support the right of each other’s communities to enjoy peace and security in Canada. Canada has always been a country where peace, tolerance, mutual understanding and kindness are of utmost importance.

Prejudice and hatred have no place in our nation. We must rise above division, extending compassion and support to all. Canadians made their kindness a worldwide brand, and there is no better branding for us than this. Let us be grateful for what we have and unite around peace and tranquility in Canada.

[ Translation ] Johanne Joannette

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, we know that buying local is crucial. However, to benefit from local goods and services, we need entrepreneurs with solid regional and national roots. The Acton region understands this extremely well. The Acton business community owes a great deal to Johanne Joannette, who headed the local chamber of commerce for 22 years. Under Johanne's leadership, the chamber thrived. It moved into the iconic Acton Vale train station, developed tourism in the region, hired young people during the summer, took charge of the region's agri-food fair and launched the Gala Distinction.

Johanne passed the torch to Kassandra Lévesque last year, but she was still working at the chamber two days a week. Today is her last day there, and I know she is tuning in. I can say with certainty that she has not abandoned the region, however, because she is now a municipal councillor for the town of Acton Vale. I would like to thank Johanne for all she has done.

Maison des jeunes L'Ouverture

Mr. Emmanuel Dubourg (Bourassa, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the Maison des jeunes L'Ouverture is marking its 40th year in Montreal North, in the riding of Bourassa. Under the leadership of its director, Sheilla Fortuné, this youth centre plays a vital role in young people's academic and social success. It is a place where young people thrive, because it is theirs. The organization has created various programs to empower young people, including the annual street basketball tournament that has helped some of these youths go on to play for the prestigious NBA. It brings me joy to underscore this anniversary, since I myself took advantage of this organization's services when I was younger, taking

part in soccer and dance when the late Félix Saint-Élien was director. I congratulate the board of directors, the employees and the volunteers who are guiding our youth toward success.

(1420) [ English ] Christmas

Mr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, Christmas is fast approaching. It is a special time of year for so many reasons. In every part of this great country, people are feeling excited and preparing for quality time and holiday cheer. Along with all the busy shopping, there is so much charity, goodwill and solace that is inspired by the season. It happens all over the world. People of many different ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds celebrate Christmas, even in predominantly Muslim countries such as Indonesia, where my sister lives.

Christmas brings peace and unity during difficult times, including war and economic depression, but every so often there comes along a Scrooge or a grinch who wants to steal Christmas. This time around, it is the Canadian Human Rights Commission saying “bah, humbug”. It released a new report suggesting that our public celebration of Christmas is somehow a form of religious intolerance and discrimination. It is just another ridiculous example of woke ideology after eight years of the out-of-touch Liberal government.

However, no matter what they say, I will join the overwhelming majority of Canadians and celebrate Christmas wholeheartedly. I wish everyone a merry Christmas.

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville North—Burlington, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, November is Woman Abuse Prevention Month, which recognizes the need to drive awareness and education surrounding abuse against women. Two weeks ago, I had the privilege of attending the From Wallet to Wealth gala, organized by the amazing Whitney Hammond. The gala raised $70,000 for Halton Women's Place, which provides a 24-hour information and support line, outreach services and emergency shelter services for those in need of a safe space. As a new initiative, purple benches are located in Oakville and Burlington as part of the Barb's Bench project.

The project began in Nova Scotia to honour Barbara Baillie and victims of violence against women; it is a reminder that intimate partner violence still exists as a major threat to women everywhere. This month and every day, let us take action to end femicide and gender-based violence.

Housing Initiative in Richmond Hill

Mr. Majid Jowhari (Richmond Hill, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, this Monday marked a milestone for Richmond Hill and a significant leap forward in our fight against the housing crisis. I was pleased to join the hon. Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities in announcing an agreement to fast-track over 780 housing units in Richmond Hill. This initiative is a catalyst for over 41,500 homes in the coming decade, fuelled by a $31-million investment from the housing accelerator fund.

This will address the long-standing barrier to housing construction and accelerate the creation of not only increased housing density but also much-needed affordable units across the community. I congratulate the municipality for this milestone and I am proud to witness our government's historic investment in our community. It demonstrates what can be achieved with innovation, collaboration and a steadfast resolve to address the housing needs of Canadians in Richmond Hill and across Canada.

Together, we are forging a future of strong, accessible and thriving communities, affirming our commitment to affordability and prosperity for all Canadians.

Diabetes Awareness Month

Mr. Chris d'Entremont (West Nova, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise on this last day of Diabetes Awareness Month to recognize and thank the patients, advocates, researchers and health care professionals in our communities who continue to work extremely hard to combat this chronic disease. This subject is very important to me. As a type 1 dad and co-chair of the all-party caucus on juvenile diabetes, I know the serious health impacts it has on patients living with the disease and their families.

This year marks the 102nd anniversary of Canada's discovery of insulin, and while its discovery was a game-changer for the millions of people living with the disease, there is still much more work to do. With more than 200,000 new cases diagnosed each year, diabetes is the most common chronic disease across our country. As Diabetes Awareness Month comes to an end, I invite all my colleagues to keep conversations around diabetes awareness going. Thus, we can better support all those living with this chronic disease and, one day, find a cure to defeat it.

(1425) [ Translation ] Jewish Refugees

Hon. Marco Mendicino (Eglinton—Lawrence, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, today we mark the expulsion of nearly one million Jews from Arab countries and Iran following the creation of the State of Israel. Their expulsion was motivated by persecutions, pogroms and genocide. [ English ] Many Jewish families found safe harbour in Canada, a significant number of whom put down roots in my riding of Eglinton—Lawrence. Despite their exceptional contributions, Jews have continued to face a torrent of anti-Semitism.

Tragically, the October 7 terrorist attack in Israel has exacerbated this hate: Jewish day schools have been shot at, synagogues firebombed, students swarmed on campuses and businesses accosted. As Canadians, we should universally condemn these appalling incidents, and those responsible must be brought to justice by law enforcement. We must also strengthen Holocaust remembrance and education. Today, B’nai Brith is hosting a virtual commemoration of the story of Jews who were expelled from Arab countries and Iran.

I encourage all to visit its website and learn, because it is only through learning, education and respect that we can ultimately defeat anti-Semitism and hatred in all its forms.

[ Translation ] Carbon Tax

Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of inflationary spending, Canadians can simply no longer afford to pay for this Prime Minister 's costs. Today we learned that Canada's GDP declined by 1.1% in the last quarter, the fifth consecutive decline, while that of our American neighbours rose by 5.2%. This is very bad news for Canadians struggling to make ends meet, for the millions waiting in lines at food banks because this government's inflationary policies are raising the price of everything. We can do something now to help Canadians.

This Prime Minister can help lower food prices by taking immediate action: asking Liberal senators to vote immediately in favour of Bill C‑234 and stop obstructing the Senate. Unfortunately, this week, the Liberals voted with the Bloc to maintain the tax on farmers, increasing the cost of food here for everyone. Instead of giving Canadians the help they need, the Liberals and their allies in the Bloc are trying to make everything more expensive. Voting for the Bloc is costly.

Only the common-sense Conservatives will transform misfortune into hope by abolishing the tax on everything and reducing food, gas, and heating costs for all Canadians.

[ English ] The Economy

Mr. Dan Muys (Flamborough—Glanbrook, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, we were alarmed but not surprised this week to learn that food bank use in Ontario is at an all-time high. We have seen a similar increase in my home community of Hamilton. What is particularly concerning is that there has been an 82% increase in people with jobs who are relying on food banks. The erosion of the middle class, under eight years of the Liberal-NDP government, is another reason why the Prime Minister is just not worth the cost.

With Scotiabank confirming that 2% of rate hikes are attributable to reckless spending and deficits by the Liberals, mortgage renewals are the latest gut punch that is going to hit household budgets. I heard this at a Diwali celebration this past weekend and at the Christmas kettles the week before. Canadians are very concerned. I want to say to Hamiltonians and Ontarians that the common-sense Conservatives hear them and are fighting for them. Under the leadership of the hon. member for Carleton , we are going to deliver powerful paycheques and restore the middle-class dream for Canadians once again.

[ Translation ] Karl Tremblay

Mr. Stéphane Lauzon (Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday evening at the Bell Centre, we paid a moving tribute to Karl Tremblay, the soul of the Cowboys Fringants, who left us too young, too soon. In that iconic place, we celebrated his music's indelible impact on our lives. The meaningful melodies and poignant lyrics resonated in our hearts, a reminder of Karl's exceptional musical legacy. In front of a vibrant crowd, we shared memories and expressed our gratitude to this outstanding artist. I thank Karl for his years of devotion to Quebec's cultural scene. His legacy will endure. Tuesday evening, the Bell Centre resonated with the sound of his timeless passion. His voice will live on forever. I wish him bon voyage.

(1430) [ English ] Thornloe Cheese Factory

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, the Thornloe Cheese factory is a symbol of the resilience, skill and determination of the Témiscamingue dairy region. The various blends of Asiago, Charlton, blue and the incredible devil's rock cheese have won all kinds of awards. That is why people in the north were so shocked by the news that Gay Lea Foods is closing the plant and walking away from the region, but not so fast. The people in northern Ontario are determined to keep this value-added food processing operation, and the farmers have a winning track record. In 2006, Parmalat announced its decision to shut the plant.

Rallies were held, and a clear message was sent: Parmalat could leave, but the dairy quota would stay. The same message was sent to Gay Lea. I worked with the Témiscamingue dairy committee to save the plant in 2006 and will be at its side to get Thornloe back up and running. When negotiations begin with a new buyer, it is essential that FedNor and the federal government are at the table to help with the necessary upgrades, so Thornloe continues to produce a world-class product. Our farmers have a simple message: They love the north, and they will fight for Thornloe.

[ Translation ] Tremblant World Cup

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, after Chamonix, Val Gardena and Courchevel, it is Mont Tremblant's turn this weekend to host the World Cup women's giant slalom race. What a source of pride for the entire Laurentides—Labelle region and for Quebec. The International Ski Federation chose Mont Tremblant because it tops many lists as the number one ski resort in eastern North America. The know-how of an entire region is being honoured and recognized. The mood will be supercharged and joyous as we watch high-level athletes shred the slopes. I invite everyone to come. The pedestrian village will be abuzz with concerts.

On Saturday, I will have the honour of personally handing out an award. It is my immense pleasure to wish the athletes and organizers a fabulous World Cup 2023.

[ English ] Carbon Tax

Mr. Gary Vidal (Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the Prime Minister is just not worth the cost. Do members know who agrees with that statement? It is the Chiefs of Ontario, who filed a judicial review today against the Liberal government's carbon tax. The Chiefs of Ontario are rightly claiming that the Liberal carbon tax is leaving first nations communities worse off and is intentionally designed to ignore their situations.

This liberal carbon tax disproportionately affects first nations, and the Ontario chiefs are asking why a carbon tax carve-out was only given to a region in Canada where the Prime Minister was tanking in the polls. They are left to deal with the unfair burden this tax places on their communities as they struggle to heat their homes and feed their families. Let us remember that it was the Prime Minister who claimed the relationship with first nations is the most important one to him and his government.

That clearly is not true, as the Prime Minister is forcing first nations to go to court to finally be heard in their demands to axe the carbon tax for the children, seniors and families living in their communities.

Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada

Mr. Shafqat Ali (Brampton Centre, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday in this chamber, the leader of the official opposition recklessly labelled a car explosion in the U.S. near the Rainbow Bridge as a “terrorist attack”. The Conservative leader's characterization of the event shocked many Canadians, including me. I was terrified and instantly prayed to God hoping that no Muslim was involved in this incident.

Jumping to such baseless and emotive language without verification and spreading misinformation demonstrate a serious lack of judgment, especially at a time when the conflict in the Middle East has led to an increase in Islamophobia and anti-Semitism here at home. The leader of the Conservative Party tries to politicize every issue by spreading fear and misleading Canadians. Canadians deserve better. This leader is just not worth the risk.

(1435) Holiday Events

Mr. John Nater (Perth—Wellington, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, as we embark on the Christmas season, we celebrate the spirit of giving that exists in communities across Perth—Wellington. I am always amazed by the generosity of so many people who give so freely of their time and talents in the service of others. This year marks the 35th anniversary of To Stratford With Love, a community dinner organized by the Kneider family where 1,000 people may enter as strangers but leave as friends. In the town of Minto, David and Jean Anderson will once again host their annual Christmas Day dinner for all who wish to share a meal.

I thank all those who are filling Christmas hampers, organizing toy drives and raising funds so that others may have a merry and bright Christmas. Finally, in the spirit of giving, I encourage all who are able, to donate blood this Christmas season. For those who are battling leukemia, like Kelly Byers, and countless others who need this gift of life, rolling up our sleeves is the least we can do and is a small action that can have a big impact.

Canada's Walk of Fame

Mr. Taleeb Noormohamed (Vancouver Granville, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, Canada's Walk of Fame is a national non-profit charitable organization that inspires Canadians by proudly shining a light on extraordinary Canadian achievers and their successes. This Saturday, Canada's Walk of Fame will celebrate a history-in-the-making 25th anniversary gala.

As Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, I look forward to attending this truly inclusive celebration of Canadian achievers: athletes, actors, legends, Olympians, musicians, filmmakers, storytellers, humanitarians, entrepreneurs, philanthropists, titans of science and innovation, and the next generation of heroes. From the Honourable Rosalie Abella to Avril Lavigne and from Kardinal Offishall to my friends Drew and Jonathan Scott, this event will highlight the incredible talent of Canadians from all walks of life and the incredibly inspirational role that they play every day.

The event will inspire and unify us, and remind us of the richness of talent that these remarkable Canadians from every corner of this great country share with us and the world every day.

Oral Questions Oral Questions

[ Translation ] The Economy

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the Prime Minister has sucked the joy out of Christmas for children and replaced it with misery. Across Quebec, 27,000 youngsters have asked for a gift as part of the 29th annual Opération Père Noël. One of the letters reads, “I'm 13 years old and I would like a gift card to buy something so we can have a good meal on Christmas.” The fact that young people are asking for boots and snowsuits is unheard of, according to the co-ordinator. When will the Prime Minister reverse his inflationary taxes and deficits so our children can experience the joy of Christmas?

[ English ]

Hon. Anita Anand (President of the Treasury Board, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House, we will always invest in our economy and help vulnerable Canadians at the same time. That is why our Canada child benefit has lifted almost 500,000 children out of poverty. That is why we put in place $10-a-day child care. It is so families can go back to work. That is why we are stabilizing grocery prices with the law we introduced in the House today, and we encourage every member of the House to vote in favour of it.

[ Translation ]

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Minister of Environment is imposing a tax that punishes single mothers, farmers and small businesses. Meanwhile, we learn that he has flown 60,000 kilometres around the world, in business class of course. His climate change co-ordinator has flown the equivalent of circling the Earth four times. When will the government stop with the hypocrisy and taxes?

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I think any Canadians who are watching us will see where the real hypocrisy is happening. The Conservative leader has been against all of our investments in green energy, including green aluminum, green steel and battery plants across the country. I have never heard the Leader of the Opposition speak in favour of the Canadian economy, the energy transition or Canadian workers. On this side of the House, we will always fight for workers and for the green economy.

(1440) [ English ]

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years, we have entered the next phase of the Prime Minister 's economic misery. We have seen “just inflation”, and today we have learned that Canada is in a state of stagflation as our economy has shrunk by 1.1% in the most recent quarter while the American economy boomed at 5%. This is the result of high taxes, big deficits and crippling red tape. At the same time as prices are rising for Canadians, their wages are falling. The economy is now smaller than it was on a per capita basis five years ago. Why is the American economy roaring while the Prime Minister 's economy is snoring?

Hon. Anita Anand (President of the Treasury Board, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, despite the trite rhymes coming from the other side of the House, I would like to remind everybody in the House that we actually have an economic plan, unlike the opposition. Our GDP today is at 4.1% above prepandemic levels. That is higher than Italy, the European Union, France and Germany, and the IMF projects that Canada will have the highest economic growth in the G7 in 2024. That is an economic plan at work.

Carbon Pricing

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the economy is smaller today than it was five years ago on a per capita basis, and the IMF projects Canada will have the worst economic growth over the next six years and the next 40 years. This is the result of high tax hypocrisy. It has come out that the environment minister , after punishing single moms, small business owners and farmers for heating their homes and driving their vehicles, has flown 60,000 kilometres. His climate change chair has flown the equivalent of going around the world four times, and now they are off with 70,000 other people at an air-conditioned dome in the desert in a petrostate. Why will they not park the jet, end the hypocrisy and axe the tax?

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, there is one number that the Conservative leader will not talk about. It is that Canada ranked third in the world for foreign direct investment. Yesterday, Dow Chemical announced one of its largest investments in 126 years in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta. This is going to be thousands of jobs and hundreds of thousands of hours of construction. This is how one leads the economy. This is how one leads a country. This is how one leads to bring investment to this country.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, I think he wants to lead the party, while his Prime Minister leads the economy into a ditch. The high tax hypocrisy knows no bounds. Now first nations are speaking up. First there were the revolting Liberal MPs, who were worried about losing their seats because of the Prime Minister 's tax on home heat. Then it was other premiers refusing to collect the tax. Then it was farmers fighting for their ability to produce food without taxes, and now it is first nations.

Over 100 first nations communities have taken the government to court because it is violating the rights of our first people with the carbon tax on rural and remote people. When will the Liberals stop violating the constitutional rights of first nations and axe the tax?

Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Indigenous Services and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, first of all, they are not “our first people”. They are first nations, which are independent first nations. This government for—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Hon. Patty Hajdu: Listen to that, Mr. Speaker. The colonialism from the Conservatives in this place will just not quit. Mr. Speaker, I will say that, on this side, we respect first nations. We know that they are leaders. That is why we have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in first nations to ensure equity in water, child welfare and housing, and we will continue to do so.

[ Translation ]

The Speaker :

The hon. member for La Prairie. [ English ]

An hon. member: It is called hypocrisy.

The Speaker: Would the hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot please wait his turn to ask a question? [ Translation ] The hon. member for La Prairie.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

Mr. Alain Therrien (La Prairie, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, Quebec alone takes in as many asylum seekers as all the other provinces combined. Believe it or not, it has cost Quebeckers $460 million, even though asylum claims fall under federal jurisdiction. Quebeckers should not have to foot the bill on their own on behalf of Canadians. They also do not deserve the arrogance being shown by the Minister of Immigration , who is from Quebec, I might add, and who likes to say that Ottawa is not an ATM. It is a shame that we have to go over the head of a minister from Quebec in order to find a solution that respects Quebeckers, but that is what we have to do.

We have no choice. I am therefore appealing to the Minister of Finance . Will she reimburse Quebeckers?

(1445) Hon. Dan Vandal (Minister of Northern Affairs, Minister responsible for Prairies Economic Development Canada and Minister responsible for the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, there is a global migration crisis, and Canada is part of it. We have a moral obligation to act. Responsibility for asylum seekers is shared between Quebec and Canada, and this is an ongoing conversation between us.

Mr. Alain Therrien (La Prairie, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, it took a minister from New Brunswick for the federal government to finally realize how generous Quebeckers have been to asylum seekers. On Tuesday, the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs recognized that Quebec's public services and community organizations are overwhelmed. Meanwhile, Quebeckers spent $460 million on asylum seekers even though that is a federal government responsibility. On Tuesday, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said he would talk to his colleague, the Minister of Finance . Has he done so? When will he send that $460‑million cheque to Quebec?

Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Minister of Transport, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I am glad my colleague recognizes the work that my colleague and friend, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs , has done. There was a very positive meeting with Minister Roberge in Quebec City. I myself meet regularly with various ministers in Mr. Legault's government. That means we have a robust collaborative relationship. The Bloc Québécois wants to convince us that things are not working, that there is conflict here, but the only conflict is the one the Bloc Québécois is trying to provoke among Quebeckers. There is no conflict because we are working together.

[ English ] Public Safety

Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the U.S. officially charged an Indian government employee with attempting to assassinate a member of the Sikh community in New York. The target was on the very same list as Sikh Canadian Hardeep Singh Nijjar, who was murdered in Surrey. These new allegations make Sikh Canadians feel even more unsafe. Meanwhile, the Conservative leader is siding with the Modi government and blaming Canada. What is the government doing to ensure the safety of Sikh Canadians amid these serious allegations?

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP, with its policing partners across the country, are very engaged with the Sikh community and other communities across the country, which understandably feel an increased threat level with respect to what the U.S. justice department filed in a court in the United States yesterday. It is obviously a source of concern. It is understandable in the Sikh community. The RCMP continues to collaborate with American law enforcement partners and will do everything necessary to ensure the safety of Canadians.

[ Translation ] Families, Children and Social Development

Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, our hearts sank when we learned that, this year, children in Quebec are asking Santa Claus for warm clothes and food instead of gifts. Opération père Noël is reporting a record increase in requests for basic items. So far, it has received 27,000 requests, up 2,000 from last year. That says a lot about the economic difficulties that families are facing. How is the government going to tackle this crisis?

Hon. Anita Anand (President of the Treasury Board, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House, we are here to continue building an economy that works for everyone. That is why we introduced a bill in the House today to build the economy for children, seniors and small businesses and to lower the cost of groceries. That is our plan. I encourage everyone in the House to vote for our plan.

[ English ] Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, in an interview with CFRA's Bill Carroll, Dr. Barry Dworkin reported the case of a United Kingdom doctor who came to Canada, fully qualified and ready to practise, who was denied the ability to take a work simply because she was self-employed, which is an obvious paperwork snafu. She joins the 20,000 immigrants to Canada who are doctors who cannot work, and the 32,000 nurses. Why will the government not take my common-sense plan to bring in a blue seal professional standard that would allow immigrant doctors, nurses and other professionals to quickly prove they are qualified, get to work, earn powerful cheques and serve patients in need?

(1450) Mr. Paul Chiang (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, we are working in partnership with the Ontario government to help re-establish all foreign doctors, making sure they can get accredited.

The Economy

Mr. Jasraj Singh Hallan (Calgary Forest Lawn, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of the Liberal-NDP government, it is not worth the cost. While the U.S. economy is booming with a growth of 5.2%, Canada's economy is shrinking. Canada will have the worst GDP-per-capita growth in all developed nations. In fact, U.S. GDP per person will be $80,000 while Canada's will only be $50,000. Never has a government spent and taxed so much on Canadians with so little to show for it. Will the finance minister stand up today to tell Canadians why she is taking more from them and making them poorer?

Ms. Rachel Bendayan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, while the Conservatives continue to talk down the economy, I will ask members to allow me to add in a few more facts. We have ensured that 1.1 million additional jobs are available to Canadians since the end of the pandemic. That is important because those are well-paying jobs. Wages have actually increased and outpaced inflation in this country. The report that my Conservative colleague cites indicates that there was a significant upwards revision of Canada's growth in the second quarter in this country.

Mr. Philip Lawrence (Northumberland—Peterborough South, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of the NDP-Liberal government, the financial gap between Americans and Canadians has never been larger. The average GDP per capita in the United States is over $80,000. In Canada, it is merely $50,000. Unbelievably, the situation is getting worse. The growth in the United States was over 5% this year. In Canada, it is shrinking by more than 1%. When will the government finally take responsibility for failing Canadians, and change direction to adopt a common-sense plan led by a common-sense leader?

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

Once again, I would encourage all members, especially the member for Timmins—James Bay , to wait their turn to ask a question.

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the member gives me the opportunity to talk about an American investment that just happened yesterday. In fact, Dow Chemical made one of the largest investments in 126 years of history. It is going to invest more than $10 billion in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta for the first net-zero ethylene plant in the world. We are going to be producing green plastics. We are going to create jobs. We are going to grow the economy. That is a plan for the future, and we are going to put it in place.

Mr. Philip Lawrence (Northumberland—Peterborough South, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the reality is this. The more the government spends, the poorer Canadians get. Over the last eight years, the government has imposed a record tax burden on Canadians, levels of debt and deficit never seen before in our country. The result is the worst per capita growth rate since the Great Depression. There is record food bank usage, with two million Canadians going to a food bank every month. Why are those Liberals so hell-bent to bankrupt Canadians?

Ms. Rachel Bendayan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, our job as a government has been to balance compassion with fiscal responsibility, and that is exactly what we have done. We are there for Canadians with the Canada child benefit. We are there for families with supports. We are there for our seniors with supports. When the member opposite talks about being there for Canadians, I wonder why that very member has been filibustering our motion on the Canada pension plan in the finance committee for weeks now. We will continue to be there for Canadians.

[ Translation ]

Mr. Pierre Paul-Hus (Char