Kody Blois
Kings—Hants, Nova Scotia · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I will give the Conservatives credit. They are now talking about actual measures that could support affordability, but I would ask them where they have been for the last number of months and years.”
“Mr. Speaker, we recognize that there are challenges across the country. That is exactly why we cut taxes for 22 million Canadians. It is why we have put in the groceries and essentials rebate. It is why we have doubled down on social programs that matter for everyday Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, may I respectfully ask why that member votes against the measures that support the good people of Oshawa and the people across this country? As we said in the last answer, we are here fighting for Canadian industry and business. That member has voted against tax cuts for Canadians.”
“Madam Speaker, what I find quite remarkable is that in the Conservatives' questions there is never a recognition that the U.S. administration has imposed tariffs on some of our key sectors in this country. We are continuing to make the case to try to remove them.”
“Madam Speaker, we know the challenges for certain sectors in the Canadian economy on aluminum, on steel, on auto and forestry. Our Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade and our ambassador in Washington, Janice Charette, who has been appointed, are engaging with the U.S. administration. The member talked about jobs.”
“I give credit to the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Health , who have focused quite intensely on the ability to have an economic lens around the decisions of what was formerly called the Pest Management Regulatory Agency and also of the CFIA.”
The complete record
Every one of 674 lines we hold for Kody Blois, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 14.
“I think it is important for the House, obviously, to talk about the relationship between Canada and the United Kingdom and the relationships we are seeking to forge with deeper ties in the Indo-Pacific and with growing economies where we would have the ability to export the products that the world needs in either goods or services. It should be incumbent on all members of Parliament in the House to, yes, scrutinize the legislation that is before us, but also to not take undue time and slow this bill down, because ultimately, when we think about the allies and partnerships that we have, one of the most mature relationships we have is with the United Kingdom.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise today to speak to Bill C-13 , which is for the accession of the United Kingdom to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership. CPTPP is the initialism we use, and it is a relatively straightforward bill. The CPTPP has 11 original countries. Canada is a founding member of the trans-Pacific partnership, alongside countries like Australia, Chile, Mexico, Singapore, Brunei, Japan, New Zealand, Vietnam, Malaysia and Peru, and the United Kingdom would be the first non-foundational member to join the CPTPP.”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. I must admit that I missed part of it. Still, I was a bit surprised that I did not hear him talk about the measures in the budget for the agriculture and agri-food sector, given that I know that my hon. colleague represents a rural riding in Quebec that has a lot of farmers. The budget includes $120 million to enhance business risk management programs, as well as an additional $75 million for the AgriMarketing program, which is crucial in helping us export Quebec and Canadian products around the world. There are also millions of dollars in investments for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to promote free trade in general. Why is my colleague going to vote against measures that are important for Canadian and Quebec farmers, including those in his riding?”
“Kody Blois: Madam Speaker, why do you not give the member for Central Newfoundland a question? I would be happy to do that. With UC, I think we should do it.”
“Madam Speaker, I know my hon. colleague from Hamilton Centre is a strong champion for the steel sector. When we think about Hamilton, when we think about Sault Ste. Marie and when we think about our communities in Regina and across this country, it is a foundational pillar of the Canadian economy and it is under duress because of section 232 tariffs from the United States. The government has taken a number of measures, including most recently limiting the ability for steel to be imported from elsewhere around the world. We have measures in place, including around EI, to help support workers who are being impacted. We are focused on a procurement strategy that will be absolutely focused on being able to build out Canadian steel production. It is a difficult time, but the government is focused on what we can do. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Hon.”
“Madam Speaker, I believe that, along with renewable energies and clean energy, nuclear energy is an essential part of the solution when it comes to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. The nuclear energy sector remains essential for our country, and we have the necessary capacity to provide safe energy. Of course, there is a process in place to ensure that waste disposal is done safely. It is a federally regulated process.”
“Just to be clear, veterans' pensions are going to continue to be indexed moving forward on the basis of either the CPI or the public sector basket of goods, whichever is higher. That has not changed. I hope he can make sure that record is very clear out in the public domain.”
“Madam Speaker, I know the hon. member will make sure that he carries the correct message forward about what is and what is not happening, because there has been a lot out there in the news. What the government is doing in the budget and proposing is actually just moving the price of cannabis through a medicinal licence from $8.50 down to six dollars a gram. There has not been any change to the indexing of veterans' pensions. There has been a slight change around the provincial aggregate in terms of what it is. If the member is suggesting there are veterans who have been getting letters asking for $89,000, I am happy to work across the aisle to get the correct information and make sure we work on that collectively.”
“This is important for small and medium-sized businesses across this country, including in my riding. The last thing is debt. We will hear Conservatives suggest that the fiscal track is unsustainable, but the Parliamentary Budget Officer has confirmed that the fiscal track is sustainable. We have a AAA credit rating, which S&P and Moody's put in place. We have the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7 and the second-lowest deficit in the G7. Also, when the Conservatives were in government in 1990, 35¢ of every dollar was being spent on debt management. Right now, it is less than 10¢. The Conservatives stand up and suggest that the fiscal track is unsustainable, but this is simply not true.”
“I give credit to the Minister of Agriculture , who was in Mexico supporting the development of markets for apples from the Annapolis Valley and beef products from the country. There are good things happening. Conservatives have a bit to answer for as it relates to that question. On forestry, there are a number of critical supports, including ITCs for biomass and waste, which are really important. I also want to talk about small businesses. This budget is clarifying the carbon rebate for small businesses, which is important. We are also putting in a productivity superdeduction, which is the ability of small businesses to write off capital expenditures, within one fiscal year, against their taxable income for the types of investments that increase productivity.”
“In Kings—Hants, these are extremely important to our regional economy. Agriculture is mentioned throughout this budget, and we have increased the program commitments. This is extremely important. There are measures in this budget that I highlighted for the member for Barrie South—Innisfil , and I have been chastising my Conservative colleagues throughout this fall session because there was nothing in the Conservative platform for agriculture. Objectively, this is the first time in a long time that the Liberal Party has a better platform for agriculture. This budget delivers on programs that increase business risk management tools and support agri-marketing for export development.”
“While I am on my feet, I want to say to the men and women who volunteer their time to protect our communities that we could not be more grateful, which is exactly why we increased the volunteer tax credit, as well, in the last fiscal update. This infrastructure is going to be important. One of the goals I want to see this infrastructure funding support, through the $17-billion FPT stream, is a new recreation complex for the County of Kings. This is a project that might be between $80 million and$100 million. It will need federal financing. This is something I am focused on and want to get done. As it relates to West Hants and East Hants, some of the areas we are focused on are certainly housing and water development to support our growing communities. I will make a quick mention of agriculture and forestry.”
“There is one thing I am very proud of, and maybe not all new members of Parliament know this: For the longest time, the former gas tax fund, now the CCBF, did not allow those municipal transfers to support fire hall infrastructure. I think of all the members' ridings that have volunteer fire departments. This is something we changed to allow municipalities to use that federal transfer to support fire hall infrastructure. Although it may not be needed in Montreal, Vancouver, Toronto and even Halifax, it is sure needed in small communities like Maitland, Brooklyn, Kentville and areas around Canning. There are so many volunteer fire departments.”
“However, as former County of Kings mayor Peter Muttart said, the infrastructure underground, like waste-water and water infrastructure, is not sexy but sure is essential. If we are looking to build out housing, grow our communities or update existing infrastructure, we need to make sure those programs are in place. Under the investing in Canada infrastructure plan, the government made significant investment, but we have to make sure it is renewed. This budget contains 51 billion dollars' worth of infrastructure spending, first through the Canada community-building fund, which is a direct transfer through the provinces to municipalities that supports infrastructure across this country.”
“(1040) It is also something we need to think through strategically because the existing infrastructure channels and bilaterals do not always take into account the growth that will be forthcoming. I had the opportunity to talk to the Minister of National Defence about this, along with his deputy minister, at the Halifax International Security Forum. It is something we need to do more on, but this is a generational investment. I was certainly disappointed to see some members of the House vote against our Canadian Armed Forces on that measure. Let us now talk about infrastructure. We have had generational infrastructure investment in Kings—Hants. Our communities are growing, and I certainly take a lot of pride in seeing the resilience of our regional economy in the Annapolis Valley and in Hants County.”
“As the community grows, there is tremendous opportunity in that domain as well. We need to make sure we are there on housing. That will be something I am working for. It is worth noting that Nova Scotia has 2.5% of the Canadian population, but 20% of the personnel of the Canadian Armed Forces are located in Nova Scotia, and 40% of defence assets in this country are in my home province. That represents a great source of pride but also an opportunity to have, as we build up defence capacity in this country, an ability to grow our communities with it, whether from a procurement perspective or just through additional membership and support for the Canadian Armed Forces. This is something I am going to be working on.”
“When I think about 14 Wing Greenwood, I think about the fact that the P-8, the Poseidon aircraft, will be replacing the CP-140. That should be coming online in the next year or two. It will add additional full-time equivalent opportunities at Greenwood, along with the RPAS, a remotely piloted aircraft system. There is a number between 500 and 700 full-time equivalent jobs that will be coming to 14 Wing Greenwood. That is good news for our Canadian Armed Forces. It is good news for 14 Wing Greenwood. It is good news for our communities in the Annapolis Valley. One of the things I am working on as a parliamentarian, alongside the hon. member for Acadie—Annapolis , is building additional housing. We need to make sure there is requisite housing, of course, primarily for our Canadian Armed Forces members.”
“As parliamentarians, we are supporting measures that increase capacity and support for the Canadian Armed Forces. That is why the government is investing $81 billion over the next five years. This is not only to meet our 2% target of GDP spent on defence by the end of this fiscal year. It is also to work toward 3.5% of GDP and an additional 1.5% of GDP that can be connected to defence. This is extremely important. What does it mean at home in my own riding? I think about 14 Wing Greenwood, Camp Aldershot and the men and women who live in our communities and put on that uniform every day to defend our country. The government has already supported a long-overdue pay increase for the Canadian Armed Forces, and we are building out additional capacity.”
“There were consistent investments in the last government to improve that. I do not think they went far enough. I am very pleased to see, under the new government and new Prime Minister , a firm and strong commitment to increase defence spending in this country. We are living in an uncertain world. We see war in eastern Europe. We see war and conflict in the Middle East. We see changes around making sure we can protect our Arctic security. All of that means we have to invest in our men and women in uniform. I think about my aunt, Mary Blois, who served proudly for 30-plus years in the Canadian Armed Forces. I am very proud of her contribution. I am proud of my family's contribution to the Canadian Armed Forces through multiple generations. We as Canadians need to be proud, but we also need to make sure it is not just pride.”
“There is a lot of economic duress that Canadians are facing. The Prime Minister and the government have been very focused on introducing measures here at home that help grow the Canadian economy and build out resiliency in our trade relationships, in order to make sure we are able to control what happens at home. Yes, we are engaging, as a government and as parliamentarians, as we should be, to make sure we build out trading links around the world, but we have to control what we can do at home. I am going to use the remaining time I have to highlight three or four areas that I think are extremely important at this moment in time, and that matter. First of all, I want to talk about defence spending. Now, when the Liberal government took over in 2015, defence spending under the Conservative Party had fallen below 1% of GDP.”
“Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to rise this morning to speak to Bill C-15 , which is the budget implementation act. For Canadians at home, these are the actual legal and legislative measures the government is introducing to move forward with what it introduced in the budget. It is a great opportunity to talk about what the government is intending to do to help support the Canadian economy in a difficult time. It was great to see a 2.6% increase in the GDP in the last quarter and, in the last jobs report, 67,000 jobs added. However, I think I would be remiss if I did not highlight the fact that, given what is happening around the world, the U.S. administration changing its trade policy and tariffs implicating some of the critical sectors in our country, this is not a moment we should take lightly.”
“Madam Speaker, the member opposite represents a rural riding, as do I in Nova Scotia. I do not know how many farmers he may have, but I certainly think about the opposition party, which holds rural seats. I was very disappointed in the platform of the Conservative Party in April. There was not one single policy platform for the agriculture sector. The member represents a rural riding. I am wondering if he is willing to talk to the leader of the official opposition , the member for Battle River—Crowfoot, to see whether that can be something the Conservative Party actually stands for. I worry it is a constituency that the party has taken for granted. I am wondering if the member has any comment on that.”
“Madam Speaker, I presume during the time that member was in government that the difference in the price of gasoline between United States and Canada was equally not similar. I think maybe he ought to ask himself that question on that side. I recognize that this government is focused on what we can control in this country. However, the member opposite should get up more often, because too many of the colleagues around him would suggest that inflation and some of the affordability challenges are tied only to domestic policy and not to other international events. We are focused on what we can control in this country, and we are going to take care of that.”
“We wanted to make sure that we had a policy we could bring forward that would help support the environment and tackle the ability to reduce emissions, but do so in a way that brings Canadians together. The member is right, and it is a question all members in this House need to ask themselves. We need to get this bill done before Christmas, and hopefully, with her help and the help of other colleagues, we can make that happen.”
“Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for her work in this place, and for highlighting the work and the importance of this bill and what it means to everyday Canadians. Bill C-4 is about a tax cut for 22 million Canadians. It is also about removing the GST on new homes for first-time homebuyers, as the member mentioned. I can imagine that there are many people in her own riding who would benefit from that type of program as we work to build out housing across this country. On the elimination of the consumer carbon price, as the Prime Minister said, it was a program that became highly divisive, depending on which region one was in.”
“Madam Speaker, I do not have exact purview ultimately on the host leader and the team that put this together, but my understanding from the conversations we had is that the reason the provision is in there is to address something that all Canadian political parties agree upon, which is that we need a unified system around data management and the disclosure therein as parties collect information. The reason we are going back to 2000 is to make sure that there is a period in time where we can all agree that the information that may have been collected since that period is unified and handled from a data storage perspective so that we can be protecting the rights of Canadians in terms of the information that may be collected by political parties.”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. The situation is indeed difficult right now. I imagine that these jobs losses at the trucking company are related to the tariffs and the situation between the United States and Canada. That is precisely why we made changes to the EI system. We wanted to make it available to workers who are feeling the impacts of the U.S. trade war and the U.S. tariffs. That is also why this government is focusing on creating major projects. We want to stimulate the economy to support workers and to work with them despite the current circumstances. I am certainly available to work with my colleagues from Quebec and across the country to come up with solutions to address local situations in this context.”
“Depending on one's circumstances, one could receive more. The important point is one could receive up to $840 a year. It will depend on one's circumstances. However, if that member and that party had their way, seniors would not have had an increase in the last 10 years.”
“What I can tell the seniors at home across this country and in my own riding, Madam Speaker, is that when this government introduced measures to actually increase old age security to be able to strengthen support for seniors, the Conservative Party voted against them. We always, as colleagues, want to do what we can to support Canadians, to be able to put programs on the table. That same member would tell this House that the government is spending too much. If we put forth another measure that actually puts more money back in the pockets of seniors, the Conservatives consistently vote against these things. The member voted against even a $50 increase because he suggested it was too much money back to Canadians. Again, the Conservatives need to pick a lane. I would also like to highlight that it is an average of $50.”
“That is the metric we should be using. We should recognize that this government is taking measures to reduce it from just under 10¢ and bring it down lower, but the Conservatives are ludicrous to stand in this House and suggest that we are on a financial cliff anywhere near where we were when they were in government in 1990. I wish I had more time. When I was a new MP, 20 minutes was a long time. It is not anymore. Maybe we can start doing 30-minute sessions sometime. I do have 10 minutes in questions, so keep them short and we will go through a bunch of them.”
“This includes for the Canadian Armed Forces by making the investment in the equipment and the infrastructure that it needs. I think about my good friends at 14 Wing Greenwood and the work that its members do. It is in Acadie—Annapolis, but it supports many jobs and livelihoods in Kings—Hants. We need to go back to basics. We have to compare apples to apples. In 1990, the Conservatives of the day were spending 35¢ for every single dollar of the federal budget on servicing debt in this country. Right now, we are below 10¢ of every dollar being spent. This government is working to be able to reduce that, but we need to put that into context. The Conservatives stand up and suggest it is going to be the next generation who pays this debt. If that were the case, I would not be standing here because under them, it was 35¢ for every dollar.”
“We hear about it from the Conservatives and they would suggest that the financial track of the country is not sustainable. I would point out that as much as they like to quote the Parliamentary Budget Officer's comments from two months ago before the budget was released, they never quote the Parliamentary Budget Officer's most recent comments when he said the financial track of this country is “sustainable”. Maybe one of the hon. members on the other side will at least start quoting that metric. Of course, this government is looking at recalibrating spending. The government has a plan to reduce the size of the Government of Canada over the next number of years. We have a plan to balance the operating budget within three years, while also making room for larger capital spends.”
“We need to be talking about this a bit more. I do want to talk about child care as an affordability measure. We have reduced child care fees in this country. We have been talking, as a country and as a civil society, for almost 50 years about the importance of national child care. The Liberal government introduced child care. I had the Secretary of State for children and youth in my riding. We were on the ground this weekend talking about what that means through the lens of the communities in West Hants in my riding. We have talked to proponents who have seen the expansion, the build-out of that program and what it means for families. We never hear that from the opposition benches. Those are policies that the Conservative Party is either very silent on or is outright against. I do want to take time to talk about debt.”
“I would challenge the Conservatives to point to a single measure they have in their tool kit that they are willing to come out and support that actually reduces emissions and also supports rural communities. The biofuel policy is the best example of that. It actually invests in Canadian farmers primarily in western Canada and the Conservatives choose not to support it. There is very little policy about what they would actually do. In fact, in April, the Conservatives' platform called for spending more taxpayers' dollars to reduce emissions. Is that not remarkable? Instead of using the small-c ingenuity of the private sector, the Conservatives would like to spend more taxpayers' dollars to accomplish less and turn their backs on the policies that actually support farmers in their own backyard. It is madness.”
“I think, undoubtedly, there is going to be some consolidation in the sector, but that is a program that allows a scalability for farmers across this country. There are some federal parameters around that. I think we can do more on the affordability side. Feeding kids is health care. It is affordability. It is a good educational program and it can be a rural development tool. Speaking of rural development, I have to highlight this again. At a time when our farmers could use support from the Conservatives, particularly in western Canada, around canola, they continue to not want to support any policy that actually demonstrably reduces emissions in this country and supports rural communities.”
“Then there are small farmers trying to get into the industry, who might not come from a farm family but are interested in contributing to our food systems, and they do not have the economies of scale to be able to sell into a federal system. By letting each province control how it procures good healthy food to go into the bellies of our children in this country, we can use the national school food program as a tool to support more farmers in this country, to build up small and medium-sized farmers to make sure they have a future. (1625) It is important because we are going to need more farmers. The RBC report by John Stackhouse mentioned we need about 10,000 farmers over the next decade.”
“The program is a policy, and members can disagree about the government's track broadly, but to call “garbage” a program that should be universally supported among all members of Parliament, of the House, is disappointing. I want to make the point that we have to use the program as a way to support local farmers. I think about my own riding of Kings—Hants, and there are kind of two tiers. There are operators of larger farms in my own riding in Nova Scotia who are able to sell into a federal food system, so to speak, whether that is Sobeys, Real Canadian Superstore or larger industrial markets. Maybe some of the farmers are exporting around the world.”
“I want to take a moment to talk about what it can mean for Canadian agriculture in this country. We are making permanent the national school food program, a program that is about making sure young kids can have a great start and no kid will have to go to school hungry. The Conservatives voted against it. I was deeply disappointed that the member for Central Newfoundland called the program to feed hundreds of thousands of children through the national school food program, in connection and in co-operation with provinces and territories in this country, “garbage”. He has yet to apologize. It is a program that is benefiting children in his riding, but he chose to call it garbage. He has not explained why, and the Conservative Party has not even suggested why it supports the member's saying it. It is terrible.”
“The Liberal government revolutionized the Canada child benefit to make sure it is now targeted to the people who need it the most. In Kings—Hants, it represents almost $16 million of direct support for families. I have talked to single mothers who said they would not be able to put their young children in sports, for example, or be able to participate in the community or buy groceries without the Canada child benefit program. It is an important measure. The Conservatives voted against it consistently throughout the last number of Parliaments. They do not admit that, even under the Harper government, it was a response to a program that created no nuance in terms of supporting the people who most needed help. The national school food program is such an important program.”
“Our government is focused on being able to move those forward. They are also on top of the continuation of affordability programs that have been put in place. One of the legacies of the last prime minister's tenure, when we look back in 30 or 40 years, will be the introduction of social programs the Liberal government has committed to protecting that directly benefit Canadians while at the same time recalibrate federal spending to ensure that we can be sustainable over time. With respect to the Canada child benefit, because the member for Edmonton West talked about targeted programs, under the Harper government, millionaires were getting child benefit cheques of the same amount as was a single mother in my riding with next to no means to her name. That is the legacy of the last Conservative government in this country.”
“I do want to talk about Canada summer jobs. The government is also introducing 30,000 additional Canada summer jobs per year; that means there will be up to 100,000 jobs across the country. In Kings—Hants, this is a big deal for small organizations, not-for-profit organizations and small businesses that benefit from the Canada summer jobs program, and as a source for getting young people into opportunities that could be their first job. It could be building a job that allows them to be able to move on to what might come next in their career. These are important measures we are introducing for youth, and they are on top of the youth employment strategy, the YESS program, which is focused on creating internships and opportunities for youth in strategic sectors across this country.”
“The measure would allow 5.5 million Canadians to benefit from automatic tax filing that would make them eligible for the programs the government either previously introduced or is moving forward in introducing, of which they would be benefactors. That is important. The member for Edmonton West , who stood up a few speakers ago, never really mentioned that. He talked about equity around programs and taxes. The automatic tax filing program is a prime example of where the government is being very targeted in trying to support the most vulnerable people in our country, and it is a good public policy measure that I think all members of the House should want to support. It would ensure that Canadians make sure they are being compliant with CRA, that they are getting benefits and that we are able to track that accordingly.”
“tariffs that have been put in place on products that are inbound to the United States. We never hear that level of nuance from the opposition benches. There are the impacts of climate change, forest fires and disruption. There are a number of reasons for price increases and challenges. The government is focused on what we can control, in order to be able to support Canadians. The Prime Minister has been very clear on that. I do think, in that context, that it is important to talk about other affordability measures the government has introduced. (1620) Automatic tax filing is one measure that has not received sufficient attention in the House. It is something the government introduced in the budget as part of the budget implementation act.”
“We can talk about those, but they go outside the range of what is reasonable on an everyday basis. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Kody Blois: Madam Speaker, I look forward to my colleagues' being able to answer. There is no real rationality. Some members are better than others, but there is no recognition that maybe a war in eastern Europe, a war in the Middle East and some global conflicts can have an impact on supply chains. There is no recognition that actually there are U.S. tariffs being imposed by the President, not in terms of section 232 tariffs on Canadian industry that the government is working to engage and remove, but in terms of how tariffs on products that actually transit through the United States on their way to Canada may be higher as a result of U.S.”
“That is opposition, but most Canadians understand, for example, that we do not produce coffee in the country, so when we get a coffee, it comes from other countries. Therefore when the price point goes up, maybe that has to do with where the coffee beans originate. I have heard Conservative members list items we do not produce in this country and then suggest that it is the Prime Minister 's fault or the government's fault. Yes, scrutiny of a government is exactly what we do as parliamentarians, but it is a bit of a fallacy, is it not, when the Conservatives suggest it is government policy that is leading to higher costs. I do think we need to be thoughtful around that. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Kody Blois: Madam Speaker, there are certainly some policies, as I hear the members opposite saying.”
“Beyond this bill, I believe it is equally important to have a conversation about other affordability-related initiatives in Canada. Something occurred to me while I was listening to the speeches by my Conservative Party colleagues. I am not sure how to say it in French. [ English ] One would think that the Conservatives think that Canada is within a snow globe, that Canada is isolated, and that in terms of all the decisions that happen in Canada, there is no global influence on price impact or what we are feeling as Canadians, essentially, that the global economy does not exist and that we are in a snow globe. I think it is an unfortunate approach. I understand that 10 years in opposition is frustrating. The Conservatives are going to raise things, they are going to push and they want the government to do better. That is fine.”
“Furthermore, the tax cut for Canadians complements this measure because, in a way, it is equivalent to the carbon pricing cheques and rebates that were in place during the previous Parliament. I am a relatively young member of Parliament. Right now, young people are having a tough time finding housing. That is exactly why our government put forward various initiatives to build more homes. We also want to target young Canadians by making easier for them to own their own home. That is why our government introduced a measure to remove the GST for first-time new homebuyers. This is an important measure. My riding is home to a lot of young people my age with families. This measure is extremely important to families in Kings—Hants considering that the average home costs $1 million. This is going to make a big difference in my riding.”
“As the Conservative members mentioned, these savings will depend on a person's income because our tax system is progressive. Some people may benefit more than others, but this tax cut will affect 22 million Canadians, which is very important in these circumstances. This tax cut is directly related to the government's decision to do away with consumer carbon pricing. I served as an MP in the previous Parliament. I represent a rural riding, and I have always spoken out very strongly about the need to change our national policies. (1615) I am glad that the first act of this Prime Minister and this new government was to eliminate consumer carbon pricing. It was the Prime Minister's first decision on taking office, and I support that measure. I think it is the right approach.”
“The Conservatives do not like talking about that, and I can see that some of the opposition members are getting a bit angry with me, but that is okay. The reason why we are here today is to discuss and debate Bill C-4. The bill is relatively simple, but it is very important to address the issue of affordability and the cost of living in Canada. I would like to take the time today to talk about this bill, as well as about other government initiatives to help Canadians in general. First, the bill seeks to lower taxes for 22 million Canadians across the country. I am talking about lowering the tax rate for Canadians in the first tax bracket from 15% to 14%. This measure will save families up to $840 a year and individuals up to $420 a year in taxes.”
“I hope the rural members who represent large agricultural constituencies are going to remind the leader of the official opposition , who now represents Battle River—Crowfoot, to actually do something to support Canadian farmers so we do not get into the same situation again, because it is not good policy for the Conservative Party to be taking farmers in this country for granted. It is a constituency I do not think the Conservatives are actually servicing very well. Maybe we can have some more conversation on that at some point. I want to make sure we finish that. [ Translation ] I am rising today to speak to Bill C-4 . I think it is interesting to talk about how there is absolutely nothing for our farmers in the Conservatives' platform.”