Parliamentary Speeches

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that supposedly the government took this so seriously that it actually slow walked the legislation. The foreign agent registry was supposed to be tabled last year. Actually, I was informed by a source that this legislation was already drafted last year. The consultation had been completed. However, months later, finally we see the legislation. The government is not exactly on the ball in trying to fight foreign interference. Notwithstanding those who are impacted, the government knew long ago and did not even bother to ensure that they were informed, to the point where a member's family could be in jeopardy. Then it did not do anything about it until there was a leak. That does not build a whole lot of confidence for me in terms of what the government is doing to tackle foreign interference. There is new information on which the government needs to take action. We will have to wait and see about that. With respect to working collaboratively, yes, of course, but not in the interest of trying to hide information. I just wanted to point that out.

Mr. Speaker, I fear that if I were to use those adjectives, I would be kicked out of the House, as they would be unparliamentary. However, let me just say this. The government was asleep at the wheel. What we have learned from the commissioner is that, and we are not alone in being targeted by foreign interference activities, Canada is way behind the eight ball. Canada was basically not there, despite continual warnings. That is the reality. Hence, we are here today. We are learning that more and more members of Parliament are being targeted. I should also add that other actions need to be taken. Take, for example, what is happening in the United States with TikTok and the actions being taken in trying to prevent foreign interference activities that can occur through that platform. What is the Liberal government doing? Nothing. I think that kind of tells us everything.

Mr. Speaker, on the issues around the bill itself, of course, it needs to go through the House and it needs to go to committee, to have it invite the diaspora community, in particular, to share its comments around it. In talking with the people in the broader public, most of them are just so relieved that, finally, we have this legislation before us. It is going to be really important to ensure that there is not going to be some disinformation campaign out there, trying to say what the bill is and what it is not. That is critical as well. However, much work needs to be done to get this through the system. I also want to emphasize that the bill, in and of itself, is not the answer to all the foreign interference activities. We already know, on investigation, that, yes, the bill would create some offenses that would allow for potential prosecution, but a lot of the aspects hinge on other actions that the government can take, for example, nominations. On the question around nominations, and I have already highlighted the potential impact for the nomination that took place in Don Valley North, what action will the government take with respect to nominations? On the question around independence of these matters, it is also all the different agencies within government that, frankly, are not exactly independent and need to follow up on foreign interference activities.

Madam Speaker, one thing I would like to mention and point out to the Conservative members is that dead people do not detox. I have spent probably the vast majority of my political life fighting for a four-pillars approach, which includes prevention, harm reduction, policing and treatment to deal with the opioid crisis. Right now, statistics show, and the numbers do not lie, that Alberta is the leading province in the number of drug poisoning deaths. Alberta does not have decriminalization. That is the reality. What is more important? Is it for Conservatives to play their political games at the expense of people who are struggling and mothers who are losing their loved ones, or is it more important for them to put the facts before them and take a four-pillars approach that includes the harm reduction that saves lives for Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, during the inquiry, concerns around the participation of busloads of Chinese foreign students and falsified documents for the Don Valley North nomination came to light. The commissioner noted that Chinese foreign interference activities could have made a difference as to who was nominated in Don Valley North. The Chinese media reported that the nomination was won by 14 votes. The Prime Minister cannot continue to pretend there is nothing to see here. Based on the damning findings, what action will the Prime Minister take now?

Mr. Speaker, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and other advocates have called on the Liberals to end Canada's rights-violating immigration detention system. This system traumatizes people seeking safety. Provinces have ended immigration detention in their jurisdictions. Instead of following their lead, the federal government plans to lock up migrants and asylum seekers in federal prisons. They also want to codify this practice into law. This is in violation of international human rights standards. When will the government stop jailing people who are seeking safety and a better life?

With regard to the temporary public policy to facilitate temporary resident visas (TRV) for certain extended family affected by the crisis in Gaza, since January 9, 2024: (a) how many crisis web form applications have been received by the department, and how many sponsored individuals are represented; (b) how many unique reference codes have been issued and how many anchors and sponsored individuals are represented; (c) how many crisis web form applications have been rejected and (i) how many sponsored individuals are represented, (ii) what was the reason for the rejection; (d) how many crisis web form applications are still being processed and how many sponsored individuals are represented; (e) how many unique reference codes have been used to complete TRV applications; (f) how many TRV applicants have completed biometric processing at a biometric collection processing site prior to January 9, 2024; (g) how many TRV permits have been issued to those who have completed their biometrics prior to January 9, 2024; (h) how many TRV applicants have completed biometric processing at a biometric collection service point since January 9, 2024, and how many of them have been issued a TRV permit; (i) how many TRV applications have been rejected, and what was the reason for rejection; (j) how many TRV applications have been stamped and approved; (k) how many successful applicants were sent to the Israeli Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) to be allowed to exit Gaza to migrate to Canada; (l) how many TRV applicants have had personal details, which were shared in the application process, other than a full name, date of birth, sex, passport or national ID details, mobile phone number, or current location by district, shared with Israeli authorities; and (m) how many TRV applicants have had information disclosed or additional background information forms shared with Israeli authorities?

With regard to application backlogs and processing times at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada to date: (a) how many temporary resident applications, permanent resident applications, and citizenship applications are in backlog, broken down by individual stream, including pilot programs; (b) what is the month-to-month reduction or increase in the number of applications in backlog, broken down by each individual stream, including pilot programs for the previous 60 months; and (c) how many applications have been processed and accepted for each individual stream, broken down by year, and by province or territory?

Mr. Speaker, I have much to say about the budget. I am going to focus on one area, the issue around lifting people out of poverty, more particularly for people with disabilities. I am absolutely disappointed with the budget. For people with disabilities, the budget includes only a $6-a-day level of support. That is what the disability benefit amounts to. It would not lift people with disabilities out of poverty; it would make them marginally less poor. Meanwhile, the government does not take on big corporations and put forward an excess windfall tax so that it could take those resources and ensure that the people who are most vulnerable in our community are supported. Will the member tell his own government to step up for people with disabilities and make sure that they are indeed lifted out of poverty, and not just with the $6-a-day support in budget 2024?

Madam Speaker, Canada is faced with a housing crisis. The NDP forced the Liberal government to take some action with respect to that in budget 2024. However, that is not good enough. As the government gives with one hand, it is taking with the other. The rent-geared-to-income subsidies funded by CMHC to provinces and territories will end for many of those programs. That means we will lose thousands of homes because of the ending of these rent-geared-to-income subsidies. Will the member call on the government to renew the rent-geared-to-income subsidies from CMHC for all non-profits?

Madam Speaker, the member spoke about taxation and the issue around taxes. What I do not see in budget 2024 is a windfall tax, an excessive profit tax, for example. We know there is a high rate of inflation and people are struggling with food prices. We also see a free pass being given to the corporate sector. In fact, the Conservatives and Liberals have aided and abetted this practice and refused to increase the corporate tax rate. If the government increased it to 15% to 20%, that would bring $16 billion a year into the treasury to support a variety of different measures. Would the member call for the government to do what is right for all Canadians, which is to put forward an excessive profit tax?

Mr. Speaker, the priority processing for the lifeboat scheme for Hong Kongers has gone from six months to 21 months. Processing delays for their PR applications means that work permits and study permits are going to expire, medical coverage will end, and dependent children will no longer be able to access education. Hong Kongers will be sent back to face an escalation of arbitrary detentions and arrests because of the draconian safeguarding national security bill. Will the minister resume the six-month priority processing average for Hong Kongers and automatically renew their work and study permits as they wait?

Mr. Speaker, I rise to table petition e-4731, signed by 12,429 people across Canada. The petitioners note that Canadian citizens and permanent residents have beloved family members in Gaza and that, under existing policy, these family members are subject to visa application requirements that are often impossible to meet due to limited working bureaucracy infrastructure inside Gaza and/or their inability to travel to a Canadian visa office. They further note that current policy only allows for children and spouses to be sponsored for permanent residency, excluding siblings, parents and grandparents. They note that Canada has demonstrated an ability to facilitate visa-less travel at time of departure for spouses and children from Gaza to Canada; that Canada has supported the travel and reunification of families in international crises before, such as the Canada-Ukraine authorization for emergency travel and permanent residence policy for Ukrainian nationals with family members in Canada, including siblings, children, parents, grandparents and spouses; and that the Canadian government can update its policies governing eligibility for travel and residency as it chooses. Therefore, the petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to immediately create direct pathways for the emergency travel of Palestinians to Canada and establish a policy for permanent residence for immediate and extended Palestinian family members in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, as of March 23, the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance in Hong Kong has passed, escalating arbitrary arrests, detentions and imprisonment for Hong Kongers who protested the implementation of the national security law in 2020. The Liberals say that they stand with Hong Kong, yet the IRCC's processing time for the Hong Kong lifeboat scheme went from six months to 21 months. Hong Kong Link reports that over 8,000 applications are stuck, and while people wait, their work permits and study permits are expiring. They have lost jobs, health care coverage and access to education for their children. Priority processing of these applications needs to continue. To help cut the red tape and to expedite processing, I am calling on the government to automatically renew temporary permits of PR applicants from Hong Kong and to eliminate duplication for criminal record checks. Canada must prevent human rights defenders and pro-democracy activists seeking safety from being forced to return to Hong Kong.

Mr. Speaker, the median rent in Vancouver is now over $3,000. Finding a place in B.C. is a full-time job for renters, as greedy landlords evict tenants to hike rent even higher. The Liberal government continues to let corporate landlords and greedy housing profiteers off the hook. Meanwhile, the Conservative leader would rather let his real estate executive buddies and developer friends maximize profits on the backs of Canadians. The NDP is proposing a fund to protect renters by keeping affordable homes available. Will the Liberals include this measure in budget 2024 to make rent affordable for Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the fact that the polluters should pay. The NDP, of course, agrees. The PBO report stated that Canada could generate $4 billion in revenues from a windfall profits tax. When the NDP called for big oil to pay what it owes to help families, the Liberals sided with the Conservatives, voted it down and would not support it. Why are the Liberals more interested in protecting corporate profits than helping working people?

Mr. Speaker, after two months, I am aware of nearly 2,000 loved ones in Gaza who are still waiting to receive a code from IRCC to reunite with their families in Canada. Clearly, the 1,000 arbitrary cap is a problem. Even for those with codes, not one person has made it to safety, and not even people whose biometrics are completed. Meanwhile, families are reporting that their loved ones have been killed in an air strike. Why can Canada not get people across the border when other countries can? What will it take for the minister to lift that cap?

With regard to federal spending on housing, between February 1, 2015, and November 1, 2015: (a) did the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) reduce federal funding for any housing initiatives during this period, and, if so, how much funding was cut under each initiative; (b) did CMHC executives receive any bonus compensation, and, if so, what is the average and median bonus compensation received; (c) did CMHC’s total operational expenses increase or decrease during this period; (d) were there any changes to CMHC’s risk management policies or risk appetite framework during this period, and, if so, what were the changes and did they contribute to an increase in processing time for approval of housing projects and, if so, what was the average and median length of the additional delays; (e) how many federal housing funding announcements were made by the minister responsible for housing during this period; (f) how much housing funding was announced by the minister responsible for housing during this period; and (g) how many new units of non-profit housing, social housing, and co-op housing were completed during this period?

Mr. Speaker, more than eight million people in Sudan have been displace through 10 months of war. This has been devastating for people in Sudan and for their family members in Canada. The special immigration measure for Ukrainians set important standards, and it should apply everywhere else. Canada showed that we can help those facing war and persecution when 220,000 Ukrainians got to safety. However, the Liberals put an arbitrary 1,000-person limit for people in Gaza and 3,250 for Sudan. Will the minister lift these caps so that no Canadians with families in war zones are discriminated against?

Madam Speaker, absolutely, anti-scab legislation is necessary and we need to get on board. The NDP has tried to move it forward eight times in the last 15 years, and finally the moment has arrived. One of the issues we have concerns with is that it is not a perfect piece of legislation. However, this is what we have. On the implementation date in the legislation, it is extremely long, at 18 months. Does the member think that needs to be shortened?

Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank the member for sharing his personal family story with us. It takes a lot of courage to do that, and I really do appreciate it. In part of his speech he also noted that his family is well resourced, with heroes in his family as well as with financial resources. It is fantastic, to be able to support a family member in this way. With that said, in my community of Vancouver East we have many family members who do not have those kinds of resources, so what I fear is that people might look at MAID as an option, and of course it is not an option. When we need to do is ensure that the proper resources are in place to support people through difficult times. To that end, my question is this: For the government to consider all of these issues, how important is it to ensure that all families have access to resources to properly support them through difficult times?

Mr. Speaker, on every Valentine's Day since 1992, led by indigenous matriarchs, 2SLGBTQ+ members and family members in the Downtown Eastside, the community takes to the streets to honour and grieve the loss of missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and the gender diverse. Each year as we march, the drumming unites our heartbeats and eagles circle in the sky. Their spirits live within us. This act of remembrance is an expression of love, respect and solidarity for families and survivors. Our community stands united in the call for justice. We demand full implementation of all 231 calls for justice. We demand action, and not just empty words. We demand accountability and measurable progress. The CBC reported that, as of June 2023, only two of the 231 calls for justice had been completed, and more than half have not even been started. This is unconscionable. In honour of—

Madam Speaker, my French is not up to par, so je m'excuse. My first language is Chinese, and I had to learn English as a second language, so I have many languages to learn, to be sure. On the issue of the motion, what I am hearing, and what I understand through reading the motion, is that the key point, aside from consulting, which is absolutely critical, is ensuring that the federal government also provides the necessary resources to Quebec, other provinces and territories to help them have the capacity to resettle newcomers. What we are seeing, of course, is that the federal government has fallen short in this regard. The member mentioned in his speech the issue of debt, so my question is this: Would he also agree that the federal government needs to provide the necessary resources to support Quebec, along with other provinces and territories, in successfully helping newcomers resettle?

Madam Speaker, we all know that the immigrant community contributes to Canada in more ways than I can articulate. We all know that in this House. What is important for provinces, for Quebec and for territories is having the resources that are necessary to help with the resettlement process. The federal government's policy is such that asylum seekers, for example, do not get federal resources. Until more recently, there was huge pressure for the government to come in with some resources. On the whole, the federal government is not there. I think that is also part of the problem and the tension that is created in the communities. Will the minister actually review the policy to ensure that asylum seekers who come to Canada are fully supported, so they are able to properly resettle in Canada?

Madam Speaker, I know that the Conservatives fancy themselves as friends of the immigrant community, but let us not forget that they brought in cessation, which said to refugees who came to Canada that they could not return to their country of origin for any reason. Even in the case when Saddam Hussein did not exist any more, if a person came from that place, they were not allowed to return to that country of origin to visit a dying family member. Also, they took away the ability for a second-generation born to pass on their Canadian citizenship to their children, which was being challenged in the court, and the court found it be unconstitutional. Would the Conservatives reduce immigration target numbers? Is that their common-sense policy that they are not telling Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the logic of Liberal members is to blame the victim. They are subject to exploitation, so they blame them and stop them from coming. That is their logic. To the point about migrant workers, many migrant workers come to Canada and are subject to exploitation, yet the government will not give them landed status on arrival, which would allow them to have full status and protection. Would the member call on the government to stop the exploitation by ensuring migrant workers get full status upon arrival?

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to enter into this debate today, and of course we are talking about newcomers. We are talking about the capacity for Quebec, and other provinces and territories, to successfully resettle newcomers. We are talking about the federal government needing to properly consult Quebec, other provinces and territories on Canada's immigration targets. All of that is absolutely valid, and we should be engaging in that discussion. I want to point out very clearly that we just heard the government's parliamentary secretary blame the victims. The Liberals' approach is to say that we have too many newcomers, and they have decided to first pick on international students and put a cap on the number of international students. They claim that they are doing that because they want to protect them from exploitation. I do not know in what universe it is normal to actually say it is the victims' fault. It reminds me of old debates, back in the day, when women facing domestic violence were being blamed. The women facing violence were being blamed, not the abusers, and that is absolutely shameful. Now we have Conservative members saying that they have a common-sense approach, and that they are so good and love newcomers. They were specifically asked the clear question of whether they would reduce the immigration target numbers. Did they answer the question? No, they did not. They will not answer questions clearly. They speak in euphemisms and slang. They talk in such a way that they can make a clip out of it, but they do not actually answer the question. They will say that we should not look at their record and that it was so long ago. My goodness, the record of who one is stands for what one believes in and where one's values are. Let us be clear. For the immigrant community, the refugee community, the Conservatives brought in cessation laws so that refugees facing persecution would not be allowed to return to their country of origin, and if they did, they would lose their Canadian status. This is even in the cases where the threat that caused them to flee their country of origin no longer exists, even if they want to go back to visit a dying loved one. If they were to return, they would be subject to cessation and lose their status in Canada. This is the Conservatives' record. The current leader of the Conservatives was part of the administration that oversaw all of this, and he agreed with it. As well, on the Conservatives' record on how they treat immigrant communities, they brought in a law that second-generation Canadians born abroad would no longer be allowed to pass on their Canadian citizenship to their children. In Ontario, families brought this to court, and the Ontario court found it to be unconstitutional. This is the result of the Conservatives' record. Conservatives want to talk about what a great job they did in dealing with backlogs. I still remember back in 2015, when I was first elected, and I came to the House and was the NDP immigration critic, which I continue to be. One of the first issues people brought to my attention was the long delay in the processing of spousal reunification. Family members told stories of how much pain and suffering they had had to endure as a result of the separation because of 10 years of the Harper administration. According to the Conservatives, we are to just forget about that and pretend it did not happen. Let us just be clear about where Conservatives stand and what their record has been. I could go on for days about that, but I only have 10 minutes for this entire speech, and I want to spend a bit of time talking about the value of newcomers and how they contribute to Canada. Their being here helps to fill the gaps that exist in the labour force. They pay their taxes and support our local economy. Just to be clear on the demographics of things—

Mr. Speaker, the contributions from newcomers are significant. There are 1.6 million newcomers and immigrants engaged in the health care sector at a time when we have a significant skilled labour shortage in the health care sector. They are doctors, nurses and care aids. They are the people who care for us when we are sick and who care for our families when we need them the most. During COVID, they were there, risking their lives to take care of our loved ones. Who else are newcomers? They are people who help build houses. Of the immigrant community, 20% are engaged in the construction sector where we need them to build the infrastructure and to build the houses we desperately need. They are people who put food on our tables. They are people who do the farming work where there is a significant skilled labour shortage. I can go on about their contributions, so I will say this: When Canada is faced with a housing crisis, do not blame the immigrant community. Do not blame the migrant workers. They are not at fault. Who is at fault? It is the successive Liberal and the Conservative governments that failed Canadians by not ensuring that Canada builds the housing that is needed and that is affordable for Canadians. The Conservatives cancelled the co-op housing program, and the Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing program and left the whole thing to the private sector to deal with. When we have, 30 years later, a significant housing crisis, do not blame newcomers for that; blame the governments that failed Canadians in that regard. I want to add one other thing, in terms of contributions of newcomers. They also create jobs. A third of the businesses in our communities are created by immigrants. They hire Canadians, and they actually create employment as well. Just so that everybody understands, do not blame immigrants. We need the federal government to also step up to ensure that provinces, Quebec and territories are properly resourced. To that end, for successful resettlement, I am going to move an amendment. I move: That the motion be amended by adding the following: “d) call on the government to table in the House, within 100 days, a report on the gap between the resources that are needed to align federal immigration targets in 2024 and the capacity of Quebec, provinces and territories to successfully resettle newcomers; and e) call on the government to table in the House, within 100 days, a plan to ensure adequate resources are provided to Quebec, provinces and territories to support the successful resettlement of newcomers.” That is what is needed. Do not blame the newcomers. Hold the people to account, and that would be the government that needs to step up and do the job in support of provinces, Quebec and territories.

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to thank my colleague for his collaborative approach. I enjoy working with him at the immigration committee and most certainly in the House as well. On the question around immigration, there are issues that need to be addressed, and we need to ensure that in addressing these issues, newcomers are not to blamed. I hope the amended motion is passed in the House. I have no idea where the Liberal government members are going to go. I have no idea where the Conservatives are going to go. They did not indicate in this debate that they would actually support it. I would wait to see, and I do hope that the motion passes. It is very important to make sure that proper processes are in place, that proper resources are in place and that proper information is in place. The issue around the gap between what is needed for provinces, Quebec and the territories, and what the resources are from the federal government needs to be in place and needs to be put on the table so that newcomers are not being blamed for the problems, the housing crisis and others, that Canadians are faced with.

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. The NDP has always stood and supported the principle that if one is good enough to work, one is good enough to stay. If one is good enough to study here, one is good enough to stay. That principle ought to apply. The truth of the matter is this: between successive Liberal and Conservative governments, they have brought a significant number of people with temporary status, whether they are students or workers, to the tune of over half a million people, over 500,000 people and counting, into the country without permanent status. Those individuals are subject to exploitation, and we know that. The government knows that. What are they doing about it? Not a heck of a lot. It is time to recognize them and to give them full status so that we can ensure that exploitation is eliminated for these individuals.

Mr. Speaker, I will tell members what is owed to Canadians. The government brings in immigration policies that set people up for exploitation. The government brings in immigration policies that blame newcomers for the problems it has created. Look at what has happened with the international students. Who is the government blaming? It is blaming international students for exploitation. What sort of joke is this? The government is proceeding accordingly because of what it is. That tells us a whole lot about who the Liberals are.

Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the Conservatives are now saying “Oh, get tough on crime,” yet when the Harper administration was in government, between 2010 and 2015, it cut close to $600 million from the RCMP budget and laid off 1,100 CBSA officers. To boot, on crime prevention, it underspent $28 million that had already been allocated. The Conservative leader now continues to call for cuts to the RCMP's budget, as well as to the CBSA's. The member talked about the port, and I absolutely agree. The federal government disbanded the port police in my riding back in 1997, and we have seen the fallout as a result of that. Would the member support what the NDP has been calling for all along, which is that the government should in fact ensure that the port police is restored?

Mr. Speaker, Palestinian Canadian families are desperate to bring their loved ones to safety in Canada. The rollout of the special immigration measure for Gaza is riddled with problems. People have been rejected without any explanation. Some are rejected then later approved with exactly the same application. Now officials are saying the 1,000 cap has almost been reached, yet many have not received the code from IRCC to move on to the next stage. What action is the minister taking to clean up this mess, and will he remove the arbitrary cap without further delay to save lives?

With regard to the opening of a First Home Savings Account (FHSA): (a) how many licensed FHSA issuers have been approved by the government to date; (b) how many FHSAs have been opened to date; (c) are individuals who own residential property or properties that are not their principle residence considered a first-time home buyer for the purpose of opening an FHSA; and (d) do the individuals in (c) qualify to open an FHSA, and, if so, how many have opened an FHSA?

With regard to federal housing investments, between February 1, 2006, and October 1, 2015, broken down (i) by province or territory and by year: (a) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of non-profit or community housing and how many units were developed; (b) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of cooperative housing and how many units were developed; (c) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of purpose-built rental housing and how many units were developed; (d) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of housing dedicated to First Nations, Inuit, or Métis communities or delivered to Indigenous-led housing providers and how many units were developed; (e) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of single and multi-family homes and how many units were developed?

With regard to the Canada Border Security Agency’s management of immigration detention: what is the title, location, and address of each facility used for immigration detention in Canada, and for each of these facilities (i) how many detainees are currently incarcerated therein, (ii) what are the reasons for detention ranked from most to least common, (iii) what percentage of detainees are deemed ‘high-risk’, ‘dangerous’, or flight risks, (iv) what percentage of detainees are refugee claimants or asylum seekers, (v) what percentage of detainees are under 18 years of age, (vi) what is the median and mean time period of incarceration, (vii) what is the longest period of ongoing incarceration of any detainee, (viii) have immigration detainees been subject to segregation or solitary confinement at any point after March 1, 2020, and, if so, for how long on average?

Mr. Speaker, people in Halifax are having to live in fishing tents this winter because of the lack of affordable homes. Just last week, the cut-and-gut Conservatives voted no to funding community housing, and the out-of-touch Liberals keep delaying critical funding to build affordable homes. The housing minister says he wants to draw inspiration from what Canada did in wartime to fix the housing crisis. A catalogue is not going to cut it. Part of the effort involves a national rent control initiative. Will the Prime Minister bring forward rent control to curb sky-high rent?

Mr. Speaker, right here in Ottawa, the average rent for a one-bedroom has hit a record high of $2,100 a month. It is close to $3,000 in Vancouver and Toronto. It is unacceptable that the out-of-touch Liberals are delaying housing funding for another two years; people cannot afford rent now. Then there are the Conservatives, who do not even believe in community housing and would rather give handouts to luxury condo developers. Will the Liberals stop delaying and get the money out the door now to build much-needed affordable housing?

Mr. Chair, I want to thank my colleague for her advocacy, her patience and her continual fight for indigenous peoples and their rights. I want to focus my question on the issue of violence against women within the context of the cuts that would be coming, and there is $150 million targeted towards shelters. The member just raised the issue around shelters and the lack of shelters. When indigenous women are trying to flee violence, they need to be able to get to a shelter for safety. Yet, at the same time, the government is looking at cutting $150 million in shelters. In what universe is this justified? I wonder if the member could comment on that.

Mr. Chair, I am very honoured tonight to enter into this debate. My colleagues from the indigenous caucus from the NDP, the member for Edmonton Griesbach, the member for Winnipeg Centre and the member for Nunavut, have consistently and persistently emphasized, both within and outside our caucus, the importance of justice and basic human rights. When they say this, they mean for all people, and most particularly when they say this, they are talking about indigenous peoples. I am dismayed. I have been here for eight years. I remember when the Prime Minister was first elected, he stood on the stage and said that there is no relationship more important than the relationship with indigenous peoples in the path toward reconciliation. What do we have to show for it eight years later? What comes to mind are incremental justice, incremental human rights and incremental progress for indigenous peoples, the first peoples of this land. As an immigrant, I came to this place and was allowed to stay by the grace of indigenous peoples, the very first people, Inuit, Métis and first nations people. However, they do not enjoy those rights. We are still talking about it. Where is the justice in that? I find it so dismaying, because the government will say that we need to address the economy and that we have to ensure we have enough resources to build Canada. We will continually hear the Conservatives say that we cannot afford to do this and we cannot afford to do that. What are we talking about? We are talking about losing supports for a total of 7.6 billion dollars' worth of programming for indigenous services, indigenous peoples. The government will say that is not a cut and not to say it is a cut. I do not know in what universe one could not describe it as a cut when those existing services will cease to exist when that $7.6 billion is lost. That equates a cut. We are talking about Jordan's principle, an important principle that says the health and services of indigenous peoples', no matter where they are, should trump all bickering between levels of government about who is going to pay for what because the health of indigenous peoples comes first. However, we are now talking about cutting supports for Jordan's principle. It is not that Jordan's principle was perfect when it was first implemented. People in Vancouver East consistently have to fight to get those services and battle the bureaucracy to justify those services, and it is not an easy fight. I think about the government's promise on the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls inquiry, the national inquiry that brought me to this place as an ally to fight for that. I was just looking today at a report card on the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls inquiry from the CBC, which reads: It’s been four years since the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls released 231 calls for justice. Those calls tackled 18 areas needing reform, including education, justice and health. To date, only two of the 231 calls have been completed — and more than half haven’t even been started, according to CBC’s analysis. How is that going for incremental justice? When we talk about incremental justice, what is the fallout? What are the implications? In this instance, we are talking about the lives of indigenous women and girls. This is a travesty in my own community, where right now the RCMP has applied to destroy evidence for cases involving indigenous women and girls. What sort of shameful exercise is that?

Mr. Chair, we know that when the Conservatives talked about indigenous peoples, indigenous women and girls, and the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls issue, they actually said that it was an “Indian issue”, not a Canadian issue. That is shameful. They continue to perpetuate those kinds of beliefs, talking about my riding as “hell on Earth”. In fact, what we need is for the government to step up to save lives. I also want to talk about housing for just a moment. Had it not been for the NDP, budget 2022 would not have had $4.3 billion directed for indigenous housing: $4 billion on distinction-based housing and $300 million for urban, rural and northern housing. Then in budget 2023, we fought again and got another $4 billion, this time for indigenous, by indigenous, urban, rural and northern indigenous housing. We knew that was not enough, and the government slow-walked the delivery of this. That, too, is unacceptable. Before we call everybody down about this, I ask the government members to look themselves in the mirror and say, “No more incremental justice. Let us do it, and do it now.”

Mr. Chair, the member for Nunavut raises the exact point. When the government does not take the necessary action to ensure services and supports are in place, to ensure that housing is actually built for urgent, unmet needs, and not just that but to ensure the basic human rights of indigenous peoples are respected, people die. TB is spread because of overcrowded housing; that is one of the chief reasons. When my colleague the member for Nunavut and I fought so hard for the government to deliver on that housing, we literally had to cry tears of pain to call on the government to take action. It is not because of me or her, but rather the people in the community whose lives depend on it. It means that much. In 2022, $4 billion and another $4 billion for 2023 is insufficient. Just to put things in context, to address the housing gap that exists for indigenous peoples would cost $135.1 billion. At the rate we are going, it is going to take some 34 years for us to get there. How many people have to die before that basic human right, whether in a home community or away from a home community, is recognized and respected?

With regard to Veterans Affairs Canada, to date: (a) how many purpose-built accessible and affordable housing units have been built or procured since November 1, 2019, to specifically address homelessness of former members of the Canadian Armed Forces and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, broken down by year and by province or territory; (b) what are the median rents for the purpose built-housing units in (a), broken down by year and by municipality; (c) how many formerly homeless veterans received access to homes through the procurement of the purpose-built housing units in (a), broken down by year and by province or territory; (d) how were federal funds allocated to construct purpose-built affordable housing for veterans experiencing homelessness across Canada; and (e) is the government aware of how many veterans are currently experiencing homelessness in Canada, and, if so, what is the most recent count?