Parliamentary Speeches

With regard to Canada Post: (a) what was the total amount spent on fuel in the last year; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by gasoline versus diesel; (c) what is the estimated number of litres of (i) gasoline, (ii) diesel fuel, purchased in the last year; (d) how many vehicles does Canada Post currently own; (e) what is the breakdown of vehicles owned by (i) diesel fueled, (ii) gasoline fueled, (iii) hybrid, (iv) electric; (f) what is the estimated number of kilometers driven by Canada Post vehicles last year; and (g) what is the breakdown of (a) through (f) by province or territory?

Mr. Speaker, after nine years of this NDP-Liberal government, two million Canadians per month now use the food bank. This includes seniors, veterans and members of the Canadian Armed Forces. At the Angus Food Bank, I was told that without the support of local grocers Justin & Stacey's, it would have to shut its doors. The CEO of Food Banks Canada says that food banks are becoming “unsustainable”. To make matters worse, a new report by Canada's food professor Sylvain Charlebois finds that almost 60% of Canadians now eat expired food. People are risking getting sick in order to save money on groceries. The NDP-Liberal government may talk a big game about reducing poverty, but in its Canada, soldiers line up at food banks and families eat expired food in order to make ends meet. It is time to axe the tax and restore food affordability here in Canada.

Madam Speaker, after nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, it spends more servicing the national debt than on health care. After nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, Canadian soldiers eat at food banks and veterans are living in their cars. After nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, seniors cannot afford to eat and they cannot afford to heat. After nine years, despite deficit after deficit and record debt, the problems are getting worse. Canadians know the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. When will the NDP-Liberal government admit it has a spending problem, not a revenue problem?

Mr. Speaker, while the Prime Minister tweets out sunny ways from his rooftop, food banks in Simcoe County are reporting a 100% increase in use. Last week at the Angus Food Bank, director Heather Morgan told me that active soldiers from Base Borden are regular visitors. Let that sink in. Meanwhile, Liberals hike the carbon tax by 23% and continue to delay the common-sense bill, Bill C-234. Will the Prime Minister pass Bill C-234 in its original form, axe the tax on farmers and make food more affordable for all Canadians?

With regard to government funding allocated to initiatives to alleviate homelessness, broken down by year for the next five years: (a) how much has been allocated by the government, in total and broken down by province or territory, for each department or agency that will provide such funding; (b) what are the details of all funding allocated, including the (i) project name, (ii) amount, (iii) purpose of the funding, (iv) type of project to be funded, (v) locations where the funding will be spent; (c) how much is the government projected to spend to administer programs aimed at alleviating homelessness; (d) what are the government's projections on how many homeless people, including all forms of homelessness, will exist in Canada, broken down by province or territory and major metropolitan area; and (e) for each number in (d) that increases, what is the government's rationale for projecting an increase?

Madam Speaker, after eight years, we all know that mortgages have doubled and rent has doubled. The only place in Canada where it does not seem to be the case is in the member of Kingston and the Islands' head, where our leader seems to live free. In listening to his speech, a lot of it, if it was not about our leader, was about himself and how wonderful he was doing. However, what I hear from residents is the exact opposite. Maybe the member and a lot of the Liberal elites are doing fantastic, but I am hearing the opposite. In fact, I have a copy of gas bill that came in today from a farmer in my riding. The cost of the gas supplied was $407.85 and the carbon price on that was $428.04. We are talking about a carbon price. We are talking about Canadians. Why are we not focusing on that instead of the leader, because he succeeded? The reality is that we have to realize that after a period of time—

With regard to section 3.32 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's report “Hydrogen's Potential to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions”: why did Natural Resources Canada not factor in the modelling how (i) the supply of hydrogen and associated costs that would be deployed to meet the projected demand, (ii) the existing grid and infrastructure could accommodate electrification ambitions, as well as hydrogen production from renewable generation?

With regard to exhibit 3.2 in the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's report "Hydrogen's Potential to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions": (a) in reference to the near-term phase, what are the total cost projections and current costs of the (i) development of new hydrogen supply and distribution infrastructure and mature market application, (ii) launching of pilot projects in regional hubs, including pre-commercial applications for heavy-duty trucks, transport equipment for seaport goods, power generation, heat for buildings, and industrial feedstock, (iii) development and implementation of additional policy and regulatory measures needed to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050; (b) in reference to the mid-term phase, what are the total cost projections and current costs of the (i) addition of new regional hubs, (ii) rapid expansion of adoption of fuel cell electric vehicles and transit buses, (iii) increase in new and large­scale hydrogen production, to be commercialized in regional hubs, to enable hydrogen and natural gas blending for industry and as feedstock for chemical production; and (c) in reference to the long-term phase, what are the total cost projections and current costs of (i) an increase of new commercial applications supported by supply and distribution infrastructure, (ii) the commercial launch and rapid expansion of new ways to use hydrogen in transportation, (iii) building of more dedicated hydrogen pipelines, (iv) an increase in the supply of low-carbon intensity hydrogen throughout Canada, allowing heavy-emitting industries to adapt operations to decrease carbon emissions, (v) increased production of hydrogen, which could also position Canada as a large scale exporter of hydrogen?

With regard to the $150,000,000 write-off by the Public Health Agency of Canada listed in Volume Ill of the 2023 Public Accounts of Canada for an "unfulfilled contract by a vendor": (a) who was the vendor; (b) what part of the contract was unfulfilled; (c) what is the reason the vendor gave for not fulfilling the contract; (d) was the contract awarded through a sole-source or competitive bid process; and (e) does the vendor have any connections, or have its executives made any donations, known by the government, to the Liberal Party of Canada, or to any Liberal members of Parliament, and, if so, what are the details?

Mr. Speaker, Liberal-appointed senators voted yesterday to keep the carbon tax pain on Canadian families and once again betray farmers by gutting Bill C-234. With food bank usage at a record high, the Prime Minister should have the courage to explain why he instructed senators to keep food prices high for struggling Canadians. After eight years, the NDP-Liberal government is not worth the cost. Will the Prime Minister listen to Canadians and take the carbon tax off farmers, first nations and families who are struggling to get by?

Madam Speaker, in the member opposite's past life, like me, he was a mayor. I know he is familiar with the county of Simcoe, and I represent a portion of it. There is huge disappointment with the government among many of the politicians in the area, and there are two parts to that. One is certainly the bureaucracy and the timelines to build, but there are places in my area, such a New Tecumseth, Collingwood and Clearview, where there is no infrastructure money available. It takes time. Has he not heard before from his constituents about the dire need for housing and that perhaps it is the government that has been taking up the timelines? Houses have been built that will not have water until 2028, and people have purchased them. Would the member like to comment on those two parts, the bureaucracy and the fact that there are a lot of announcements about funding but it does not seem to hit any of the local municipalities?

With regard to lockstations on the Trent Severn Waterway and the Rideau Canal, broken down by location: (a) what operational metrics are regularly collected and reported to Parks Canada management since May 19, 2023; (b) how many hours was each lockstation inoperative during regular hours of operation; (c) how many full days was each lockstation inoperative; (d) for what reason or reasons was each lockstation inoperative; and (e) for each reason in (d), how many hours or days was each lockstation inoperative as a result?

With regard to lockstations on the Trent Severn Waterway and the Rideau Canal, broken down by location: (a) what operational metrics are regularly collected and reported to Parks Canada management since May 19, 2023; (b) how many hours was each lockstation inoperative during regular hours of operation; (c) how many full days was each lockstation inoperative; (d) for what reason or reasons was each lockstation inoperative; and (e) for each reason in (d), how many hours or days was each lockstation inoperative as a result?

Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the Liberal-NDP government is desperate. Its polling numbers are in a free fall, and it will now do anything to stay in power, even telling Canadians, “Vote for us, or we'll tax you more.” In pausing his carbon tax until the next election for Atlantic Canadians only, the Prime Minister has admitted that his gimmicky carbon tax rebate did not give them more than they paid in, yet he stands here and tells rural Ontarians that we are getting more back than we pay in. He seems confused, but Canadians are not. They know that the Prime Minister cannot be trusted. They know he is not worth the cost. Seniors in my community are telling me they are worried about their heating costs. Some have even told me that they cannot buy fresh vegetables any more. When will the Prime Minister stop the games, treat all regions fairly, axe the carbon tax and give all Canadians a break?

Mr. Speaker, after eight long years, many Canadians have reached their breaking point. Seniors struggle to buy healthy food and to heat their homes. Middle-class families are using credit cards just to make ends meet. Our youth have given up on the dream of ever owning their own home. The inflationary tax and spending policies of the NDP-Liberal government have destroyed small businesses in my community. They have gutted peoples' lives, yet the government still does not have a plan to balance the budget. In fact, Liberals will say things have never been better, but Canadians know that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. Fortunately, hope is on the way. Conservatives have a common-sense plan to axe the carbon tax, lower costs, balance the budget and give people hope once again. It is time to get Canada back on track.

Mr. Speaker, rate hikes are on the rise again. The Liberals' record debt level has led to 40-year-high inflation and the highest interest rate in 22 years. Higher Liberal taxes were already making Canadians poor. Interest rates will now make owning and renting more expensive. Conservatives have been asking for a plan to balance the budget, but the NDP-Liberal coalition just laughs and spends more. The IMF now warns that Canada is at the highest risk of mortgage defaults among advanced economies. How many Canadians need to lose their homes before the government presents a plan to balance the budget?

Mr. Speaker, the number one thing that people in my community contact me about is the cost of living. High inflation, mortgage renewal increases and the carbon tax are punishing Canadians. In rural ridings like mine, there is no subway. People need to drive. A good government makes life more affordable, and the government institutes a second carbon tax instead. Carbon tax 1 will add 41¢ a litre. Carbon tax 2 will add 17¢ and, because they are Liberals, they will tax the taxes and add GST. Is 61¢ a litre enough, or is there a third carbon tax?

Mr. Speaker, inflation remains at a 40-year high, and gas prices are unaffordable and intentionally being made worse. Under the government, housing costs have doubled. Seniors are having to sell their home just to get by. Canadians struggle, while the Prime Minister continues his jet-setting ways, with a couple of days in New York with some celebrities and a week in Jamaica with a Trudeau Foundation donor. It is a good life for anyone who does not have a country to run. When is the Prime Minister going to stop his wannabe celebrity ways and get serious about the affordability crisis?

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for her recognition, quite frankly, that people are frustrated financially at this moment in time. I can honestly say that even in my riding, where I have been elected since 2019, the number of calls and emails I have had from blue-collar and middle-class Canadians has gone up drastically. I think part of the blame needs to be on the government's shoulders. We have heard again that this is a global issue. Well, at some point in time I think the government needs to reflect on that. Does the member not agree that lowering the carbon tax and putting less spending in the budget would, in the end, lower interest rates and make life better for Canadians?

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to budget 2023 on behalf of the great people of Simcoe—Grey. I was hoping to have the opportunity today to congratulate the budget for balancing itself, but alas it appears we all must still wait for that miracle. Not a day goes by when I am not contacted by a constituent who is at wit's end. Mortgages have gone up by thousands of dollars a year, and groceries, especially the healthiest of foods, cost hundreds more each week. Gas, which most people outside the major cities rely on to get to work, costs hundreds of dollars more per month. Home heating fuel, again, is hundreds more per month this winter. When one adds it all up, it can cost the average family a thousand or more dollars a month just to live in this country. Many cannot afford that, as they were just getting by before the government took office. For those who can get by still, it means having to spend all of their paycheques just to survive. RESPs are not being topped up. Retirement savings accounts are left to languish, and family emergency funds are being used to pay for the carbon tax and inflationary spending of the Liberal government. Very few are enjoying life like they used to prior to 2016. Sunny ways have turned to dark days for many in our middle class. We have seen record spending, record deficits and now record debt. However, the pain sure is not being felt by all the Liberals and their friends. There are $6,000-a-night hotels and governor generals trying to outdo one another with extravagance. While regular Canadians are digging deep in their pockets for an extra buck, Liberal ministers are handing out millions of dollars in contracts to friends and family, just like Santa Claus on Christmas morning. Liberals really have no idea how much pain there is in the country right now, and they think shuffling a few hundred bucks here and there is going to make it all better. Liberals would have us believe we have never had it so good. Their arrogance knows no bounds. Constituents who contact me with concerns about making ends meet run the gamut of Canada's demographics. These are younger people trying to make it through school; middle-class families struggling with rapidly rising house prices, transportation costs and trying to put a meal on the table; and new immigrants trying to find a rental in my area while working in a service industry job. I hear from them all and listen to the challenges they face, which are directly due to the government's economic mismanagement. The group I hear the most from is seniors. Seniors feel ignored by the government, and they are hurting. Seniors on fixed incomes are especially feeling the pinch. OAS increases are laughable, as they are just a couple of bucks. That does not help to pay for the increase in home heating or groceries, thanks to the carbon tax. Cancelling the carbon tax and cutting their income tax would be a great way to move forward. Instead, the Liberals will spend $2.5 billion more to create a gimmicky grocery rebate that does not need to be spent on groceries. It does not matter, because one does not need to show a receipt. It sounds like a good idea, but is it? Not really. The grocery rebate means $225 in a one-time payment for eligible seniors. If one thinks this cures the affordability crisis facing Canadians, one may also think the budget can balance itself. That is 62¢ a day. I know the Prime Minister does not do his own grocery shopping, so he may not be aware of how much groceries went up because of the carbon tax, but 62¢ is less than the increase in a loaf of bread. Thanks to the government, an eligible senior who gets groceries once a week will have an extra $4.34 in their pocket to cover the increased cost. That does not come close to helping the seniors who reach out to me and my office. Members need not take my word for it. Here is what some seniors in my riding have told me. Mary Glencross says, “Instead of the government giving people $250 to cover groceries, perhaps they could lower all the taxes we pay on natural gas.” Giovanni Scianni says, “Please support Canadians' call for a halt of tax increases. It's becoming more and more difficult to afford basic necessities to sustain a modest standard of living.” Eva Johnson says, “Please try to stop all these unnecessary taxes. I am a senior. We don't seem to get a tax break ever.” Ken Grubbe says, “As a senior citizen living on a fixed income, I find these increases to be both appalling and unconscionable.” Marie Romanelli says, “I know it's a choice for many whether to go into the grocery store or to heat their house. I am strongly opposed to all these extra taxes that hurt the average Canadian, including myself.” Bruce Murray says, “Being on a fixed income makes it very difficult when budgeting your finances every month. The Federal Carbon Tax has increased 57% compared to my November 2021 bill and this is utterly ridiculous and must be eliminated, once and for all!” Brian Rosenkrands says, “The Liberal government keeps insisting they are helping Canadians, but for some seniors the many years of waiting for a decent rise in their OAS payment, and the government's insistence to go ahead with all the increased taxes at this period in time, is putting some in jeopardy.” Finally, Mark Holmes says, “When is this government going to raise our CPP and OAS payments so we're ALL not living below the poverty line?” The audacity of anyone on that side talking about making life more affordable is absolutely laughable. In essence, the government is proud that it has created a food stamp program that would not actually help people afford food, but it sure indicates the damage its policies have brought on all Canadians. When the government was elected, it talked about modest, short-term deficits. We in the opposition were skeptical, and we said so. The deficits continued, with no plan in sight to balance the budget at all. Then the pandemic hit and people panicked. The government took some action. It was not always successful, and it was deaf to concerns from the opposition about the poor design of many programs. We all remember the rental assistance program, in which the landlord for a business needed to approve their tenant's application so that he or she could get no money. That program lasted for months without being corrected, but overall, most Canadians were prepared to let the government spend some money to help Canadians get by. Small deficits turned into record deficits pretty quickly with this government in charge. The pandemic is over, and it has been for a while, yet the government keeps spending. In fact, most costs of all new spending in this budget work out to $4,300 for every single Canadian family. This is 10 times what an eligible family of four would get via the new grocery rebate. Put another way, the Liberals are spending 10 times more on their own priorities than what they are putting back in the pockets of working families, and 20 times what they are providing to seniors. Often when I say that the government needs to eliminate the deficit and start paying down the debt, people will ask me, “What about health care?” The cost of servicing Canada's enormous debt continues to grow and will continue to do so as long as we the Liberal government is in power. In fact, the Prime Minister has added more debt than the previous 22 prime ministers combined. Canada's federal debt is now expected to be $1.22 trillion this year. That is $81,000 per household here in Canada, and the debt needs to be paid. Debt-servicing costs after seven years of Liberal fiscal management are predicted to be $43.9 billion this year. That is a lot of money going to service a debt that could have been spent on much-needed services, such as health care. The Liberals recently concluded a health care funding agreement with provinces, which was substantially less than what the provinces needed and what they were asking for. However, listening to the Liberals toot their own horn, one would think the provinces never had it so good, either. In Ontario, Canada's most populous province, additional federal investments in health care will equal $8.4 billion over 10 years. The Liberal debt-servicing payments are $43.9 billion per year, so the Liberals will be spending five times more per year servicing the debt than they will be providing in new support to Ontarians for health care. That is a lot of hospital beds or nurses that will not be going to Collingwood General and Marine Hospital. That is, perhaps, a brand new wing that will not be built for Stevenson Memorial Hospital in Alliston. Reckless spending has consequences. Running endless deficits has consequences. Record debt has consequences. The government has its priorities wrong. It keeps spending money to keep various interest groups satisfied, to help maintain its tenuous grip on power and to keep the leader of the fourth party in its pocket. It may work for a little while longer, but the average Canadian is tired of paying the price for the government's reckless spending and inability to get its fiscal house in order. There are 40 billion reasons to vote against this budget, but I have only one vote. That vote will be against this inflationary budget.

Madam Speaker, I will reiterate that it is a gimmicky rebate for the simple reason that we should not need to do that for Canadians. We now have 1.5 million people visiting food banks because of the policies of the Liberal government. We have people who need assistance. There is no doubt about it. However, all these increases have been created by Liberal policies. In my riding, whenever I am going out to see people, and I think maybe the member opposite should spend a lot of time doing that, I hear that that kind of money is not going to make a big difference when there is a carbon tax. On top of that, the government could lower the taxes for seniors. Those are the things I am hearing in my office. I would not be too proud of the fact that the government is giving a grocery rebate.

Madam Speaker, first of all, when we talk about announcements, I have never seen a government with more announcements and no delivery. It happens all the time. My office gets bombarded whenever the government makes an announcement, and then my staff is busy because there is no meat to what it is saying. I agree with the member that a lot of money is not spent. We could look at different departments each and every year. I am on the veterans affairs committee, and a lot of that money that has been earmarked for programs is not spent. I also think we need to respect provinces. We could do a lot better if we worked together, and we would be able to accomplish a lot more and solve a lot of the problems that we have here in Canada, from housing to health care. We need to work together and have open discussions, respecting one another. However, once again, we have a Prime Minister who likes to create division in all things, including with the provinces.

Mr. Speaker, about one in 12 Canadians has a rare disease, and sadly, most of them are children. Forty per cent of patients do not have access to appropriate drugs for their condition. On average, it takes 3.7 years and three wrong diagnoses until they even know what disease they have. When they do find out, it takes two years, on average, for public reimbursement for their medicine. That is if they are fortunate enough to have it covered or even available here in Canada. There are people working hard to make a change. This includes two passionate and tireless advocates here today from New Tecumseth, Madi and Beth Vanstone, who are working hard with the Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders to improve access to rare disease drugs. The government needs to do more to address the needs of rare disease patients, and I am happy to lend my support. Let us all get behind Canadians struggling to access basic care for their rare diseases.

Mr. Speaker, no matter what our diet is, we all want tasty, fresh and sustainable food at prices that we can afford and that ensure a fair living to those who produce it. As parliamentarians, the least we should be doing is to make growing our food more affordable. However, not all parties seem to be that way. In fact, the Liberals are slapping the punitive carbon tax on farmers to make it harder to farm and to make our food more expensive. When the Liberals are done, a 5,000-acre farm will pay $150,000 per year in carbon taxes alone. Those costs will be passed on to regular Canadians. However, we do not have to worry. The NDP leader will blame it all on the grocery stores. At a time of food insecurity and food inflation at a 40-year high, the family farm is increasingly unsustainable, but the high-tax Liberal-NDP coalition will keep increasing taxes because that is what those parties do. Only Conservatives would cancel the tax and help farmers to keep growing.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his speech today and for his many years in law enforcement. He certainly knows a lot about this file. Throughout the member's speech, the number one word he used, and we can check Hansard, was “accountability”, and also the frustration with the Liberal government on a lot of the bills that have been passed. How does he feel on this particular bill on accountability?

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his speech today. There were certain words in it that I had a bit of a challenge with. It was mostly when he was talking about the Liberal carbon tax and inflation. He said that they are probably not related and that we are talking about two different things. This week, there has not been a lot of respect from members opposite toward the Auditor General's role, and I know the Governor of the Bank of Canada said, at FINA committee, that the carbon tax has increased inflation. Does he agree with the comments from the Governor of the Bank of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, Canada is broken. Inflation is at a 40-year high. Small business insolvencies are up. Mortgage renewals will cost, on average, $7,000 more per year. The government could help by cutting carbon and home heating taxes. Liberals claim to have an environmental plan, and it is broken. In fact, Canada was ranked 58th this week in the climate change performance index behind Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran. Will the Liberal government stop making it hard for Canadians and allow them to take back control of their lives?

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to stand here this morning. One comment that was made was, I guess, that the goal is to make life more affordable. I can tell members that in my constituency office and the emails I receive, that is not the case. We always talk about how we are giving money back. That money is from the taxpayers to begin with. Does the hon. member not think it would be better, as an example, to scrap the carbon tax, so that money is in their pocket each day, instead of having people waiting and wondering whether they will get some money back for help? I guess that would be my question. Does the hon. member not think it would be better to help individuals today?

Madam Speaker, not a day goes by without a senior reaching out to me worried about how they will heat their home this winter, or a family who fears their mortgage renewal interest rate will make their home unaffordable. The cost of groceries is out of control for everyone. Trucking companies cannot get workers, and their bottom lines are being busted by the carbon tax. “Have a carbon tax rebate,” the Liberals have told them, even though everyone knows it does not come close to covering the cost. Service and hospitality sectors are cutting hours because they have no workers. We are not fully over the baby formula shortage, and now we have shortages of children’s medicine. There are so many serious challenges here right now in our country. The problems affect every industry and every demographic. All the while, the coalition government votes to keep taxes on Canadians as high as their in-flight meals and hotel rooms. The government is out of touch, and Canadians are paying the price.

Mr. Speaker, I was fortunate enough, in my prior life, to be the chair of the police board in my area, the Nottawasaga Police Services Board. I often heard from many of the top brass and those first responders, the ones who were out there on the scene, that there was a huge frustration with what has been spoken about earlier, and that is the issue of repeat offenders. They become frustrated. Do we think that this has hurt the morale of a lot of our officers in our areas because they know that, a lot of the times, the soft-on-crime is not working?

Mr. Speaker, prices are out of control in Canada. Businesses are raising prices to keep up with costs, individuals are cutting back on groceries, families are renewing their mortgages to find out that their payments are double and seniors are panicked about being able to afford their heating fuel. Canadians know that rebate cheques do not cover these costs. We need a government committed to lowering costs. Will the Liberal government cancel its plan to triple the taxes on gas, groceries and home heating?

With regard to contracts provided to consultants related to the processing of requests made under the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act (ATIP), signed since January 1, 2020: (a) what are the details of all such contracts, including for each the (i) vendor, (ii) value, (iii) date, (iv) description of services provided, (v) start and end dates of the contract, (vi) number of ATIPs processed by the consulting vendor, (vii) file number, if known; and (b) of the ATIP requests received since January 1, 2020, and broken down by month, how many have been assigned to (i) government employees, (ii) consultants for processing?

Mr. Speaker, I am rising today on a question of privilege concerning inappropriate government interference in the work of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Yesterday afternoon, my office received an email from the hon. member for London West. He forwarded an email chain concerning the preparation of drafting instructions for a report on a study the committee has been conducting on differential outcomes. According to the committee's website, it was scheduled to meet yesterday afternoon for the purpose of discussing those very drafting instructions. The email chain originated from the chair's office. It circulates a proposal prepared by the office of the member for London West and involves, understandably, the Liberal members of the committee and their staff. What makes less sense to me is that the email chain, which originated from the chair's office, also includes ministerial staffers Vanessa Cranston, the manager of Parliamentary Affairs for the Ministry of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship; Emilie Simard, an issues management advisor for the same minister; and Arielle Mantes, who has an email address in the government House leader's office and is reported in The Hill Times as a member of that minister's staff, but who the online government employee directory says is an advisor in the non-partisan Privy Council Office, also known as the Prime Minister's department, which raises a lot more questions. Not only were ministerial staff kept informed, but there was actual participation in providing direction. Ms. Cranston, the immigration minister's manager of parliamentary affairs, replied: I'd like to suggest that we broaden the prepared wording. I find this reads more like a recommendation and our goal for meeting today is to point the analysts in a direction, without explicitly asking for our conclusions to be highlighted. What did she mean by “our goal”? On whose behalf is she speaking, and what conclusions is she trying to obfuscate? It sounds like not only is the minister's staff trying to direct the conclusions of a parliamentary committee, but also to manipulate the work of non-partisan analysts supplied by the Library of Parliament in getting there. This direction was in turn forwarded to my employee by the member for London West with the instruction, “Did you take note of this?” It sounds to me like the member is rather concerned that the minister's political enforcer's word is the law. A new, aspiring government backbencher would naturally want to be on the PMO's good side. It is an open secret around here that the Prime Minister's Office, and ministers' offices, are pulling the strings on committee proceedings: something they deny at every turn, naturally. It is something else to see in cold, hard text, the direction and instruction coming from a senior staffer to the immigration minister. It is shocking, scandalous and absolutely inappropriate for the government to be interfering like this in the deliberations of a committee and the hard work of our non-partisan analysts. In my respectful opinion, this goes beyond disrespect of Parliament and is actually a contempt of Parliament. Page 81 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, explains that: There are, however, other affronts against the dignity and authority of Parliament which may not fall within one of the specifically defined privileges. Thus, the House also claims the right to punish, as a contempt, any action which, though not a breach of a specific privilege: tends to obstruct or impede the House in the performance of its functions; obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of the House in the discharge of their duties; or is an offence against the authority or dignity of the House.... The House of Commons enjoys very wide latitude in maintaining its dignity and authority through the exercise of its contempt power. In other words, the House may consider any misconduct to be contempt and may deal with it accordingly.... This area of parliamentary law is therefore extremely fluid and most valuable for the Commons to be able to meet novel situations. Throughout the Commonwealth most procedural authorities hold that contempts, as opposed to privileges, cannot be enumerated or categorized. Page 83 continues: Just as it is not possible to categorize or to delineate every incident which may fall under the definition of contempt, it is also difficult to categorize the severity of contempt. Contempts may vary greatly in their gravity; matters ranging from minor breaches of decorum to grave attacks against the authority of Parliament may be considered as contempts. The interference shown by the immigration minister's office in the work of the committee, which is actually supposed to be holding him and his department to account, not the other way, rises to this threshold of being found as a contempt of Parliament. The House must stand up for its rights and its independence. These rights are ancient, hard fought for, and must never be taken for granted. Bosc and Gagnon explain, at page 62, the early part of the arc of development of parliamentary privilege. I quote: These privileges were found to be necessary to protect the House and its Members, not from the people, but from the power and interference of the King and the House of Lords.... The House of Commons in Canada has not had to challenge the Crown, its executive or the Upper House in the same manner as the British House of Commons.... Nonetheless, the privileges enjoyed by the House and its Members are part of the Constitution and therefore are of the utmost importance; they are in fact vital to the proper functioning of Parliament. This is as true now as it was centuries ago when the English House of Commons first fought to secure these privileges and rights. Let us not roll backwards to those days when the executive subordinated the legislator to its whims. Let us not find ourselves capable of only doing what business, or writing what reports, the Prime Minister and his cabinet give us permission to. The House must stand up against interference by the executive branch by the current Liberal government at every turn. Should you find a prima facie case of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to move an appropriate motion to refer the matter to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs so that it may conduct an investigation into this behaviour and report back to the House with its findings. Before resuming my seat, I would ask for unanimous consent to table the emails in question.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to invite all Canadians to the inaugural Blue Mountain Film Festival taking place June 1 to June 5 in the town of Blue Mountains. The festival will include over 20 international and Canadian films, an industry creative forum and social events, all set in beautiful Blue Mountain Village on the shores of Georgian Bay. I want to give a special thanks to the great team behind this initiative: Patti Kendall and Marni Moreau, whose idea to create a filmfest got the ball rolling; executive director, Helen du Toit, and co-director of film programming, Diana Sanchez, who each bring a wealth of experience from international film festivals; and the incredible advisory team of Daniel Bekerman, Allison Black, Drew Fagan, Jennifer Frees, Tamara Podemski, John Rakich, Sudz Sutherland, Stephanie Azam and Tara Woodbury. I thank Mayor Soever, the Blue Mountains council and Andrew Siegwart of Blue Mountain Village for their dedication to furthering economic development in our region. I wish them a happy filmfest.

Madam Speaker, I want to be crystal clear. I do not support the government with respect to these emergency actions. My office has never been so busy. This is the busiest it has been since 2019, when I was first elected, with emails and phone calls. My constituents are disturbed by their Prime Minister and what he has said. A lot of these people who are calling me are Liberal supporters. My question for the member is this. Do you apologize for the Prime Minister's comments on racism and misogyny when you get calls, and what answer do you give?

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for his fantastic speech today. In my riding of Simcoe—Grey, even prior to the pandemic, the number one issue for me was seniors falling behind. We are certainly not in a better situation now with COVID and the rising inflation. I can say that there is a lot of frustration. We have seen a lot of rollouts from the current Liberal government during the pandemic, for example, the rent subsidy, where it had to change it in middle of the road. All that does is create confusion. Therefore, I would ask the member what his thoughts are on this. Should we not make sure that we are doing things right?

With regard to the requirement that an area must not have an unemployment rate above 6% in order for certain businesses in that area, including those in the hospitality sector, to qualify for the Temporary Foreign Workers Program: (a) has the government, including Destination Canada, done any studies or analysis on the impact of this requirement on the ability for hotel or restaurant owners to hire enough staff; (b) if the government has done any studies or analysis related to (a), what are the details, including the findings; and (c) what specific measures, if any, will the Minister of Tourism and Associate Minister of Finance take in order to alleviate this burden on the hospitality sector?

With regard to the importation of batteries for electric vehicles (EVs) into Canada and the government's concerns about current and future shortages of batteries for EVs: (a) what specific plans does the government have to improve the battery shortage faced by Canadian EV manufacturers; (b) does the government have any plans to ensure that more EV batteries are manufactured in Canada, and if so, what are the details of the plans, including the projected increase in the number of domestically manufactured batteries; (c) does the government's plan include an industry reliance on foreign produced EV batteries for Canadian manufactured vehicles, and if so, what percentage of the batteries in new Canadian EVs are expected to be foreign produced, broken down by each of the next five years; (d) what standards are in place to ensure that EV batteries imported to Canada are not made (i) from child labour, (ii) from forced labour, (iii) with materials mined by children or exploited workers; (e) have any EV batteries destined for Canada been intercepted by Canada Border Services Agency in the last five years due to concerns related to labour standards, and if so, what are the details; (f) what are the government's current assessments related to problems with the global supply chain associated with EV batteries; (g) what is the government's assessment of the impact that the United States' Buy American policy has on the shortage of batteries for Canadian EV plants; (h) what are the government's projections related to the number of new electric vehicles expected to be produced in Canada in each of the next five years; and (i) what are the government's projections related to the number of EV batteries which will be available to Canadian EV manufacturers in each of the next five years?

Mr. Speaker, I rise today for the first time in the 44th Parliament. I want to thank the good people of Simcoe—Grey for once again putting their trust in me to be their voice here in Ottawa. I also want to thank my wife, Colleen; my two daughters, Lexi and Sarah; my EDA; and the many volunteers who helped get me back to this special place. In the last Parliament, my constituents talked to me a lot about the need for high-speed Internet, more support for seniors and more support for small businesses. These remain top priorities, but the issue I am hearing about more than ever now is the record levels of debt in Canada and the overall rise in the cost of living. My constituents are concerned about the price of groceries, the cost to heat their homes and affording their mortgages if interest rates were to rise in the present market. The current government put us in this situation, and, like many Canadians, I want to see a real plan to get out: a Conservative plan.

Madam Speaker, my ears really perked up when the member opposite talked about electric vehicles. I am very proud to represent the great people in my riding of Simcoe—Grey, where Honda of Canada Manufacturing operates. One of the concerns I heard in his speech was with respect to the government's role in incentivizing people to buy electric vehicles. I had a visit last week with the president of Honda Canada. I heard some great concerns about the program and the negotiations going forward with the United States regarding the $12,500 rebate, which will not be for cars in Canada not manufactured by the big three. I am curious if the member has any comments. Has he listened to some of the auto manufacturers, and has he really heard their concerns?

Madam Speaker, I certainly agree. Seniors between 65 and 74 do not think this budget is doing enough for them. That is quite obvious and has been brought to the House many times by the parties in opposition, but my question comes to another issue that has been going on during COVID. The Liberals have had two years for this budget. For businesses that opened during the period of COVID, there have been no supports. I have had all kinds of calls to my offices. Callers are told this budget has something for everyone, but it does not have anything for them. My question to the member opposite is this: Why did the Liberals not have any supports for existing businesses during this time and why are the Liberals, once again, trying to pick winners and losers?

Madam Speaker, I was listening to the conversation, and what made me want to stand and ask a question is the partisanship of this bill. I can say quite definitely that, in my riding, this is probably the one bill that I got the most emails about, not necessarily even from my Conservative supporters. When I talk about the other parties here, these are real concerns. I am just wondering why the government, once again, is ramming through a bill that has this many concerns from this many parties. What is the goal? Why would the government have that as its goal right now, near the end of the session?

With regard to the trips of the Minister of National Defence, broken down by each trip since November 4, 2015: (a) what are the dates, points of departure, and points of arrival for trips made with military search and rescue aircraft; and (b) what are the dates, points of departure, and points of arrival for trips using Canadian Armed Forces drivers (i) between the Vancouver International Airport and his personal residence, (ii) between his personal residence and the Vancouver International Airport, (iii) between the Vancouver International Airport and his constituency office, (iv) between his constituency office and the Vancouver International Airport, (v) between his constituency office and meetings with constituents, (vi) to and from personal appointments, including medical appointments, (vii) to and from the ministerial regional offices?

Mr. Speaker, I was just sitting here listening to the member's speech and all of a sudden I jumped out of my chair when she said that there was something in the budget for everyone. I have been bombarded by calls from seniors who are 65 to 74 years old who are not getting anything. We call them “junior seniors”. In addition, it has been over a year since the pandemic, and I have new businesses that have absolutely zero support. Their stress level is at a peak. Why were they not part of the budget?