Parliamentary Speeches

Madam Speaker, what an ironic question from the centralist Bloc. BQ members say they want to be independent, but what they really want is to be dependent. Every day, they rise in the House to call for a bigger, stronger federal government. We do the exact opposite of that. The member asked whether the federal government should give the municipalities money. At the federal level, we are responsible for the money we spend. Yes, I will make sure the money we spend is used to build affordable housing for Canadians, not the overpriced new builds we are seeing now. Are municipalities actually in the best position to handle this? Unfortunately, big cities like Toronto and Vancouver have done a very bad job. We are done saying yes to everything these incompetent mayors and local politicians ask for. They are the ones causing this housing crisis. The Conservative government will demand affordable housing. We will get rid of the guardians of privilege and get more houses built. That is plain old common sense, and that is what we are going to do.

Madam Speaker, the average veteran could buy a house for half of what he or she pays right now. Housing was actually affordable when we were in government. When I was the responsible minister, people could get a house with half the mortgage payment, or rent an apartment with half the rent, or make half the down payment or spend a third less of their paycheque on monthly payments. That was the reality. What we have now is a costly coalition of the Liberals and the NDP that protect the privileged by blocking housing construction. That is why the working class, the good, decent working class people who used to support the NDP, are abandoning that party as it has joined with the elitists over in the Liberal Party, and they are now standing for the common-sense Conservatives.

Mr. Speaker, he has reached out to reassure him on the subject. That might have been something to do two years ago. Two years ago, in July 2021, the government had a CSIS document showing that an agent for the dictatorship in Beijing was arranging to sanction and punish the family of a Canadian MP because of how he voted on the floor of the House of Commons. Yet, for two years, this Prime Minister's government kept that agent accredited with diplomatic immunity, allowing him to abuse countless other Canadians of Chinese origin. How can we believe anything he says about protecting our national interests?

Mr. Speaker, we can forgive the member for Wellington—Halton Hills for not feeling reassured. Nobody should feel reassured. The Prime Minister says that my question was false. What was false in it? We know there was a July 2021 document, two years ago, showing that an agent for the dictatorship in Beijing was threatening the family of a Canadian MP because he had stood up for human rights on the floor of this House of Commons. Now, normally that would be a criminal offence for anyone to do, but this individual has immunity granted by this government. Has the Prime Minister taken away that immunity and kicked the diplomat out of Canada, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, I have to confess that, until 48 hours ago, I would have agreed that no government would ever sit on threats of this nature over two years long. However, unfortunately, what we have learned is that it is exactly what this Prime Minister did. The government knew, in July of 2021, that an agent acting for the dictatorship in Beijing, accredited to work at the consulate in Toronto, was threatening a family member of a Canadian parliamentarian, and the Prime Minister's government knew about it and did absolutely nothing. Why?

Mr. Speaker, the minister is right that it would be outrageous for a government minister to know that a foreign agent was granted credentials by the government to carry out threats against an MP's family because of a vote held in the House of Commons. That would be outrageous. The only way we can know if it actually happened is if the minister tells us when he saw this briefing note or any related information showing that the MP's family was threatened. When did he learn of it?

Mr. Speaker, and yet he did absolutely nothing other than to hold a meeting with the MP after the information became public. The Prime Minister was not interested in protecting Canadians; he was interesting in protecting his political reputation. The Prime Minister has the power to kick this diplomat out. Think of it: If a Canadian had threatened an MP or his family over a vote in the House, that Canadian would be in jail. This individual cannot be arrested because of diplomatic immunity granted by the current government, which is something the Prime Minister could take away any time he wants. Why is he keeping this agent in our country, threatening our people?

Mr. Speaker, we do have to put the partisanship aside. It would have been a non-partisan act for the government to protect the MP's family, even though he is from another party. It would have been a non-partisan act to strip away the diplomatic immunity and kick this foreign agent out of country, yet the government did not do that. We now need to know the facts. The briefing note showing these threats occurred was produced in July 2021. When did the minister find out?

Mr. Speaker, this is a question of the gravest importance. There is a member of Parliament, of the House of Commons, whose family has been threatened because of the way he voted here. How can we defend national security on the floor of the House of Commons if our family members are being threatened based on the votes that we cast? We need to know whether the government is protecting us against that, or we cannot do our work. Therefore, I will ask this one last time: When did the minister know that these threats were directed at this MP's family?

Mr. Speaker, today, we learned that Beijing worked to punish an MP's family member for the way that MP voted here in the House of Commons. The intelligence agencies and the government were aware of these actions for two years, but the Prime Minister did not inform the MP in question and did not expel the diplomat in Toronto who was orchestrating all this. That diplomat is still on the website of the Chinese consulate in Toronto. Why?

Mr. Speaker, members of Parliament cannot vote in the interests of Canada while their family members are being threatened as a consequence of those votes. It is unacceptable, as the Prime Minister said, which is why it is so strange that he accepted it. His government produced a briefing note that exposed these threats to the MP's family two years ago, yet the diplomat who worked to punish a Canadian MP's family is still in Canada, when the Prime Minister could have expelled him. Why did he not expel this diplomat?

Mr. Speaker, that is just false. He did not immediately take action. He took action after the media found out about it. His government has known that a Canadian MP had his family threatened because that MP voted for human rights in the House of Commons. He knew about that for two years, and he did exactly nothing. Furthermore, the same diplomat who orchestrated these threats against the MP's family still works in the Toronto consulate at Beijing, even though the Prime Minister has the power to expel him. Will he expel him today?

Mr. Speaker, yet he did accept it for two years. The same briefing note indicated two years ago that Beijing saw Canada as uniquely vulnerable to its interference because we have no foreign interference laws to stop them. The laws that exist in the United States and Australia to force those paid by foreign dictatorships to register are not in existence here in Canada. CSIS warned him about this in the summer of 2021. On what date will we get a foreign influence registry to protect Canadians against these abuses?

Mr. Speaker, that is more administrative and bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo to conceal his inaction. It is now required that one registers if one lobbies for the food bank, but it is not required to register if one does paid work on behalf of a foreign dictatorship to influence Canadian politics. Let us move over to police stations. The Prime Minister's public safety minister claimed that all Beijing's police stations have been closed. Today, two of those police stations said that they are open, and they are operating right here in Canada. Why is the Prime Minister allowing a foreign dictatorship to run police stations on our soil?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has to answer these questions. He has known now for two years that the family of a member of Parliament was harassed and threatened with other penalties because of how he voted on human rights in the House of Commons. For two years, the Prime Minister did nothing to protect the family or to punish the Canadian-based Beijing diplomat who orchestrated the entire attack against that family. Could the Prime Minister confirm whether the responsible diplomat from Beijing will be expelled by the end of the business day today?

Mr. Speaker, at least I got a direct answer. I asked if he would stand up and, of course, he did not stand up. It is very clear that the Prime Minister knew for two years that Beijing thought Canada was uniquely vulnerable to its bullying and interference because we do not have anti-foreign interference laws, unlike the Australians and Americans. For two years after his intelligence bodies warned him of that, he did absolutely nothing. Will he stand up and do his job now?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has to stop hiding behind his ministers. The vacation is over. He has work to do. He wants to talk about taking partisanship out of it. One non-partisan thing to do would have been to recognize that a Conservative MP, or any MP for any party, had his family threatened because of a vote cast on this floor. It would have been to take immediate action against the diplomats who made those threats. That would have been the non-partisan thing to do. Why did he not do it?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is running out of ministers to hide behind. While he sits there and smirks, we have a country that is under foreign influence by a dictatorship that has actually opened police stations in this country. According to a report put out just today, there are two police stations run by Beijing operating in Montreal as we speak. Will the Prime Minister stand up now and tell us how he will close down these police stations?

Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the Prime Minister is so afraid to stand up. Maybe it is because he is ashamed that he did absolutely nothing for two years, knowing that a Canadian MP was threatened by a foreign dictatorship. He did not even send the offending diplomat home, and now he has been exposed for it. Then, he puts up a whole myriad of ministers to hide behind, one of whom claimed before that the Chinese police stations were closed. We learn now that they are open. Given that we cannot believe the minister, why does the Prime Minister not stand up and speak for himself? When will he close these stations?

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of this Prime Minister, one in five Canadians are skipping meals and 1.5 million have to go to food banks just to eat. We have a government that is costing 50% more because of red tape and a strike at the same time. What is the Prime Minister doing? He is going to New York on vacation with fancy people who have a lot of money, but not much common sense. When will the Prime Minister and his government get back to work?

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of the Prime Minister, Canadians are broke and the government is broken. Here we have one in five Canadians skipping meals because they cannot afford the price of food. Nine in 10 young people say they cannot afford housing, and no wonder, as the Prime Minister has doubled rent, doubled mortgage payments and doubled down payments. Crime is raging out of control on our streets, and there is the biggest federal strike in Canadian history. What is the Prime Minister's priority? Why, it is another vacation, this time to New York to hang out with people who have lots of money but not a lot of common sense. When will the Prime Minister and his government get back to work?

Mr. Speaker, they consider the best deal to be paying 50% more tax dollars on bureaucracy and ending up with a strike regardless. The average Canadian household has to spend $1,300 more in federal tax just for bureaucracy, and people are not getting the services they are paying for. This is on top of 40-year highs in inflation, a doubling in housing costs and jobs that are leaving our country because the Prime Minister's gatekeepers are standing in the way. Why does the Prime Minister not turn his plane around, get back to Ottawa, do his job and get his government back to work?

Wow, Mr. Speaker, are they ever out of touch, telling Canadians they have never had it so good. Well, the 1.5 million people eating at food banks, some of them asking for help with medical assistance in dying because they are too hungry and miserable to go on, might beg to disagree with that rosy picture over there. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister is expatriating our jobs to other countries. Most recently, we have Glencore, an ethically challenged company, threatening to take over one of the oldest resource companies in Canadian history, Teck Resources. Will the government protect the thousands of jobs at stake and our minerals by blocking this takeover?

Mr. Speaker, what we need to do is bring home more control over our resources so it is in the hands of Canadians, rather than ship our jobs overseas, as the Prime Minister has been doing for eight years. We can do that by getting rid of the gatekeepers to quickly build natural gas liquefaction facilities; by getting rid of the gatekeepers so we can have tidal power developed, which is clean and green, in Atlantic Canada; by getting rid of the gatekeepers to build more hydroelectric dams in Quebec; and finally by blocking this foreign takeover by an unethical overseas company. Will the Prime Minister finally bring it home for Canada and block this takeover?

Mr. Speaker, when he said $900-and-something, I thought for a moment that this was the price of his New York hotel room. Then I thought, “No, that cannot be true. It will be in the thousands.” He is spreading disinformation again. He promised he was going to censor misinformation. Why does he not censor himself? We can look at the information coming from the Parliamentary Budget Officer that he appointed. This demonstrates that the average Canadian will spend at least $1,500 more in taxes than they get back in rebates. The Liberals call this report a prop. It is from the Parliamentary Budget Officer that they appointed. They are called facts. Will he finally listen to them?

Mr. Speaker, according to our intelligence services, the Beijing dictatorship gave $140,000 to the Trudeau Foundation. The purpose of this donation was to influence the Liberal leader, who is now the Prime Minister. Alexandre Trudeau is the person who made arrangements for this donation from China. Any other person would have been called to appear here, in Parliament, to answer questions. Will the Prime Minister support a motion to invite Alexandre Trudeau to appear before a parliamentary committee to answer questions about this donation, whose purpose was to influence the Prime Minister?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is insulting Canadians' intelligence by trying to convince them he has no ties to the Trudeau Foundation, when its donors pay for his vacations and his brother facilitated a donation to the foundation from China that was intended to influence the Prime Minister. If he truly has nothing to hide, will he support a motion to invite Alexandre Trudeau to appear before a parliamentary committee to answer questions, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, what he delivered is a bureaucracy that costs $20 billion more. That is $1,300 per Canadian family in additional costs related to that spending, and they are getting fewer services. Public servants are on strike, so taxpayers cannot even get answers to their tax questions before the filing deadline on Monday. Given that Canadian taxpayers are not getting the services they pay for, is it time for them to go on strike as well?

Mr. Speaker, all he has delivered is a bureaucracy that costs $20 billion more per year. That is $1,300 per Canadian family, a 50% increase, and for what? It is for immigration services not being delivered, for veterans who cannot get answers to their requests, and now for taxpayers who will not be able to get answers to their tax questions before the filing deadline on Monday. Given that Canadian taxpayers are not getting the services they pay for, is it time for them to go on strike as well?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot believe he is having to explain something to the leader of the NDP. Talking down to a member of his own coalition government just demonstrates how arrogant and out of touch this Prime Minister has become. Today, for example, he will hop on his private jet and fly off on vacation to hang out with the stars and give self-important and self-indulgent speeches at Canadian taxpayers' expense. He will do this while he is putting in place a 41¢-a-litre carbon tax that will cost the average family $1,500 more. Why does he not axe the trip and axe the tax?

Mr. Speaker, it is now clear why he wants to censor the Internet. He does not want Canadians to go and find out which of us is telling the truth. It would be very easy for them. I encourage them to google “A Distributional Analysis of the Federal Fuel Charge under the 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan” and go to page 3. Anyone watching can google it now and see that the Prime Minister is deliberately misinforming the House of Commons. He is stating that Canadians will be better off, when clearly the average household will pay $1,500 more in taxes than they get back. Would the Prime Minister like me to have one of the pages send this document over so he can read it?

Mr. Speaker, he does not have an environmental plan; he has a tax plan. Since he brought in the carbon tax, he has not succeeded in reaching a single emissions reduction target. That is because taxing people for something they have no choice but to use does not change the environment. Canadians have to drive and heat their homes. Instead of putting the burden on himself, the Prime Minister chooses to put it on the working class, 60% of whom will pay more in taxes than they get back in rebates. Why does he not cancel his hypocritical, high-flying lifestyle and the tax at the same time?

Mr. Speaker, the big task I have ahead is cleaning up the mess that he will leave me. He wants me to hold a big parade for him because he has made another promise. This is the guy who said that he spent billions of dollars on the Infrastructure Bank but has not completed a single project. He said it would only cost $7 billion to build the Trans Mountain pipeline. It is up to $30 billion, and it is not even built. He said his $89 billion of spending on housing affordability would make things affordable, but house prices have doubled. Why is it that the more he spends, the worse things get?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to be in the way of Canadians. He wants to bring in a 41¢-a-litre tax on Nova Scotians, which he claims will help the environment. Meanwhile, a project that would have actually helped the environment, the sustainable marine project, would have used tidal energy, the waves of the ocean, to generate electricity. That project has been cancelled because the Prime Minister's federal bureaucracy was too slow and incompetent to approve it. Now the company is getting up and leaving. How does this sound? Why does the Prime Minister not get out of the way of Nova Scotians, let them generate clean electricity, and cancel the carbon tax that is on their backs?

Mr. Speaker, members just witnessed, once again, the demagoguery of a Prime Minister who divides to distract. He calls indigenous Canadians in Nunavut, who hunt for sustenance, Americans. He calls our patriotic farmers, who use rifles for pest control, Americans. He calls decent, hard-working, law-abiding citizens, who have never broken a law in their lives, Americans because they disagree with his plan to ban hunting rifles. Will he stop dividing to distract and start going after the real criminals?

Mr. Speaker, he put all the resources into going after licensed law-abiding, trained and tested firearms' owners, who are statistically the least likely people to commit a crime. Meanwhile, he has turned loose onto our streets repeat violent offenders who have committed literally dozens of violent offences. In Vancouver, under his bail regime, the same 40 people had to be arrested 6,000 times. That is what he has brought to our streets: crime, chaos, drugs and disorder. Why will he not start going after the real criminals with common sense in our justice system?

Mr. Speaker, he banned BB guns, paint guns and the hunting rifles of indigenous and rural Canadians, but enough about that. Let us just have the facts. Under the Conservative government, violent crime went down 22%. Under the Prime Minister, it has gone up 32%. There has been a 92% increase in violent gang crime under the Prime Minister. Those are the facts. Will he listen to the facts and the common sense and go after the real violent criminals, instead of targeting law-abiding rifle owners and hunters?

Mr. Speaker, the average Canadian household would have to spend 63% of its pre-tax income to make monthly payments on the average home, something that is mathematically impossible. Some are now having to pay $2,400 to rent a room in a townhouse, not the whole townhouse, but a room, and the privilege of having five or six other roommates with them, after house prices and housing costs have doubled under the Prime Minister. How did he spend so much to achieve such bad results?

Mr. Speaker, he has an accelerator. I have news for him: People cannot live in an accelerator; they have to live in a house or apartment. Under the Prime Minister's leadership, the cost of an average two-bedroom apartment has doubled from $1,172 to $2,205. The cost of an average mortgage payment has doubled to over $3,000 and now the share of their monthly income that people have to spend to own the average home is two-thirds, which is by far a record-smashing number. Again, how did the Prime Minister spend so much to achieve such horrible results for homebuyers?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's main criticism against the former Conservative government is that our housing programs were not expensive enough. If only it had been more expensive to taxpayers, then it would have been a better program. Yes, it is true: This Prime Minister is the heavyweight champion of government spending. The problem is he keeps delivering the worst possible results. House costs have doubled under this Prime Minister and then they are more expensive for the taxpayers who have to fund his incompetent programs at the same time. Why does he not, instead, stop wasting the money and start delivering more houses?

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the results. Under the previous Conservative government, the average mortgage payment on the average home, newly purchased, was $1,400. Now, eight years later, it is $3,200. The Prime Minister has delivered a 100% increase in mortgage costs, all while bringing in an $89-billion taxpayer-funded boondoggle in the housing program. Once again, why will he not end the government waste and get out of the way so we can build affordable housing in this country?

Mr. Speaker, government deficits are driving up interest and mortgage rates on homebuyers, and government gatekeepers are preventing home construction. We rank second last for housing permit times in all of the OECD, and we have the fewest houses per capita in the G7 even though we have the most land to build on. That is the Prime Minister's record. His solution is to give tens of billions of dollars more to the same municipal gatekeepers in order to block construction again. Why does he not link the infrastructure dollars that the feds give to the cities to the number of houses that actually get built?

Mr. Speaker, when Canadians are forced to live in tents, or spend $2,500 to rent a single room in a townhouse or are stuck in their parents' basement until they are 35 years old, he better believe I am going to fight for more housing. It would be nice if he fought for someone other than himself and his gatekeeper friends. The Prime Minister's solution is to build up these municipal gatekeeping bureaucracies with federal, deficit-financed tax dollars, which means it will be even slower to get anything built. Why does he not link the number of dollars that cities get for infrastructure to the number of houses they allow to get built?