Kevin Lamoureux
Winnipeg North, Manitoba · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, when we take a look at this particular legislation, or any other piece of legislation or budgetary measures that the government has brought in since the last election, when Canadians elected a new Prime Minister and a new government, we will find that listening to Canadians is the top priority.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want the member to recognize the degree to which the Conservative Party always wants to talk down the economy. It brings me to yesterday, when we found out that the Prime Minister went to the G7 and that 13 new deals were signed off, with countries such as Japan, Italy, Denmark, France, Germany, Netherlands and Portugal, fi…”
“Mr. Speaker, since the last election, just over a year ago, when Canadians voted for our current Prime Minister and a new government, we have been listening to the people of Canada. Members will see that listening in every aspect of our legislative agenda and our budgetary measures.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on my friend's comment that we live in the real world. The real world is looking pretty good in terms of where Canada has been since the last federal election. We have a Prime Minister who has been out and about, attracting literally billions of dollars in commitments of investment.”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciated to a certain degree the member's comments when he made reference to the issue of the process. However, I would ask him to realize that, over the years, things have changed considerably. We saw time allocation used during Stephen Harper's government a record number of times.”
“Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling a petition from a number of individuals. Actually, over 1,000 people have signed the petition. The petitioners are looking for a sense, from both the provincial Government of Manitoba and Ottawa, of working together to try to come up with a solution to deal with Manitoba's unique situation related to our wo…”
The complete record
Every one of 3,647 lines we hold for Kevin Lamoureux, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 39 of 73.
“Mr. Speaker, the member opposite might be a new member, but he has been schooled well by the Conservative Party in the sense that I understand he participated in that very filibuster with regard to the hate legislation. I think he brought up something about his dog and that his wife likes cats, or he likes dogs and his wife likes cats. I do not know all the details of it, but the point is that he is a quick learner and he knows how to filibuster, apparently. At the end of the day, when we talk about what Canadians and the constituents the member represents want, they want bail reform legislation. It is important. This is the question: Why will the Conservative Party not allow the bail reform legislation to become law?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is truly amazing to hear Conservative members use a filibuster to try to justify their disappointing actions, which I have witnessed for weeks now. I cannot believe that they are accusing the government of not wanting to see its own legislation pass. Today is a good example of it. When will the Conservatives stop filibustering the budget implementation bill? They have been on it for days and days. They have zero credibility on the interests of serving Canadians, quite frankly.”
“Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour of tabling, in both official languages, the government's responses to nine petitions. These returns will be tabled in electronic format.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party of Canada, in particular the leader of the Conservative Party , just does not get it. It is about building Canada strong. The support for Canadians is there in the budget. While every Liberal member of Parliament and the Prime Minister are focused on building Canada strong, Conservative Party members are solely focused on the party's best interest. It is time they put Canadians' interests first. That means allowing legislation such as bail reform legislation and budget legislation to pass. There is only one thing standing in the way of their passage: the Conservative Party of Canada and the leader of the Conservative Party . They should get off their back ends and get to work.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize that, as a government, whether it is the budget implementation bill or the agenda of expanding trade opportunities for Canada with other trading partners, this is a government, this is a Prime Minister , solely focused on building a strong Canada and making Canada the strongest of the G7 countries. What we need is more of a buy-in from the Conservative Party by allowing substantive legislation to pass, whether it is Bill C-15 , the budget implementation act, or the bail reform legislation, which is being denied for one reason and one reason alone: the Conservative Party and its self-interest. Does the member not agree that the Conservative Party needs to start putting Canadians ahead of its own political party?”
“They need to give their heads a collective shake, wake up and start putting the interests of Canadians ahead of their own party. Would the member not agree that it is about time?”
“Madam Speaker, there are many aspects of the member's comments that I would challenge him on. The issue for me is the ongoing belief that the Conservatives do not want things to pass in the House. They have convinced themselves that it is the government that does not want things passed, whether it is the budget implementation bill we are talking about today, on which the Conservatives continue to talk and talk as opposed to allowing it to go to a committee, or whether it is the bail reform legislation. There is one reason the bail reform legislation is not going to become law: the Conservative Party of Canada. That is the reason Canadians are being denied bail reform laws, yet the Conservatives are acting as though they were in some wonderland, believing they have nothing to do with it.”
“We just had another member who stood up and spoke about the bail reform legislation and somehow tried to imply that it was the Liberals who were preventing it. Whether it is the budget bill or the bail reform bill, Canadians understand and need to know that it is the Conservative Party of Canada that is preventing its passage. Would—”
“Madam Speaker, as members know, just a number of months ago, Canada elected a new Prime Minister and a new government. When I reflect on what the member actually said, he raised concerns about jobs, but we have seen in excess of 50,000 jobs created in each of the last three months. That is the reality of it. When we talk about productivity, and the Conservatives have been talking a lot about productivity, one of the greatest gains in productivity is in our manufacturing industry. Of course, the Conservatives do not reference those sorts of things. However, my real beef with the Conservative Party of Canada today is how self-serving its members are in regard to their own political best interest.”
“Madam Speaker, I found that very distasteful. I listened to what the member said. Quite frankly, he wants to feed into some sort of anger and generate anger. There is no corruption. There is a lot of transparency. There is a whole lot of accountability. Maybe Conservative Party members need to look in the mirror because, if they really and truly believe half of what they say, this bill would have passed to a committee stage, where it could have been broken down and where it would have numerous standing committees dealing with it. There is nothing being hidden here, other than a Conservative agenda that is purely self-interested. They make character assassinations and allegations they cannot support. It is disgusting, and the member should be ashamed of himself.”
“Madam Speaker, Bill C-15 is a part of the picture of building Canada strong. We talk a great deal about how the Prime Minister and the government are trying to advance the interests of Canadians. We do that every day. Contrast that with the members of the Conservative Party, who want to continue to filibuster legislation and prevent legislation from passing. There are significant changes that could be brought in through the budget implementation legislation, yet the Conservatives continue to not allow the bill to go to committee. While the government of the day is focused on serving the interests of Canadians, we see the opposition party is more focused on its own self-serving political interests than on Canadians. When is that going to stop and when are we going to see this legislation be allowed to go to committee?”
“Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I extend to my friend across the way condolences on the loss of David, as well as a special shout-out to his wife, Caro. I know that this has been a very difficult time. Prior to having this discussion, we had a very short chat regarding the issue. It is admirable that we have substantive legislation before us that would send a very powerful message of caring and wanting to do what we can as legislators. I appreciate that. I had the chance to go over the legislation, and the question I have for the member is this. To what degree is he open to having some favourable amendments to provide assurances that we are moving in the right direction if we can get the bill to the committee stage?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to amplify the fact that the Canadian economy is doing relatively well, with a new Prime Minister and a government focused on building Canada strong through bringing down barriers so there is more trade within Canada. We have seen significant commitments going into the billions of dollars toward major projects. We have seen expanded trading opportunities. Today we heard the jobs announcement. In the last three months alone, over 150,000 jobs have been created. However, through this entire process, we see the Conservative Party doing what it can to prevent legislation from passing. Whether it is the budget, good legislative reform or changes in bail, the Conservative Party seems to be in the way of Canadians being able to realize even greater benefits.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to emphasize that going out of the election, we made a commitment to Canadians on a number of different fronts. I want to highlight some very good news that came out today. We have now had three months in a row where we have had substantial job growth. In September, 60,000 jobs were created; 28,000 of those were in the manufacturing industry. We had 67,000 jobs in October. The vast majority of those were actually in the province of Ontario. There were also 60,000 this month, or I should say in November. That is significant growth. Does the member not agree that jobs matter and are a great indicator in terms of how—”
“Mr. Speaker, if the government's response to Questions Nos. 474 , 475 , 476 , 477 , 478 , 479 , 480 , 481 , 482 , 483 , 484 , 485 , 486 , 487 , 488 , 489 , 490 , 491 , 492 , 493 , 494 , 495 and 496 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.”
“Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to seven petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.”
“Mr. Speaker, talk about fake outrage. Time and time again, we get the Conservative Party of Canada preventing legislation from being able to pass, even the budget legislation and the implementation of the budget. Day after day, we hear Conservative bafflegab, as opposed to them allowing legislation to go through. Day after day, we hear obstruction on important legislation, such as bail reform legislation to make our communities safer. Whether it is providing supports for Canadians or providing a sense of security, the Conservative Party is more focused on the Conservative Party than it is on Canadians. Shame on them.”
“Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of good news that has been coming out over the last few months related to jobs. If members take a look at the month of September, there were over 50,000 jobs created. Most of that was in manufacturing. In the month of October, there were over 50,000 jobs created. Most of that was in the province of Ontario. Today, we got an announcement of 60,000-plus jobs. In total, that is well over 150,000 jobs. That is actually good news. The members opposite should recognize when good news hits them in the face and say this is a good way for our building a strong—”
“Mr. Speaker, this is ironic coming from a member who sat around, along with the leader of the Conservative Party , with Stephen Harper. When we look at Stephen Harper's record of low productivity, he will recognize that it was a disaster. He did not do anything for the productivity of Canadians during that miserable 10 years, and the member sat around in that caucus. On the deficit situation, we are, in fact, when it comes to the debt, number one on a pro-rated basis in the G7. We are number two in the G7 on the deficit situation. We have a new Prime Minister who has a background that is going to help get the job done. Why was the member such a failure when he was part of government back then?”
“The Conservative Party is the biggest stumbling block in Canada today in terms of progressive measures to help Canadians.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada and the Prime Minister do care about Canadians. That is one of the reasons we have the budget that we presented. It does a lot of the things the member says that it does not do. Whether it is the issue of affordability or building a stronger and healthier Canada, there is lots of stuff in there for the Conservatives to recognize and vote in favour of. Of course, they have a different approach when it comes to serving Canadians. They are more interested in their own political party's interests as opposed to Canadian interests. When will the Conservative Party realize that it is time to start moving legislation through the House of Commons, whether it is the budget implementation bill or bail reform legislation?”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that the Prime Minister is the Prime Minister and the leader of the Conservative Party and the Conservative team will do whatever they can to achieve power. They genuinely believe the best way to do that is to attack the Prime Minister and his character at all costs. That is a fact. I believe that Canadians will see through the self-interests of the Conservative Party and the character assassination that it continuously does, whether it is justified or not. I can say that in this case, it is not justified. The Conservatives need to dial it back. At the end of the day, we should be looking for incredible people to be members of Parliament, to be ministers, to be the Prime Minister and so forth.”
“That is not to mention the amount of travelling he is doing to build bridges and get more investment to come to Canada. There is the potential for trade agreements with the Philippines and India. Look at what has happened in Indonesia. We have legislation before us today to deal with England and Northern Ireland. Why? It is because we have a very active Prime Minister who is out and about working hard day in and day out for Canadians in every region of the country, and all the Conservatives want to do is attack his character. I find that very unfortunate, and I believe Canadians will see through the Conservative tactic.”
“Yes, he does have investments, much as many Conservatives do, and he has been highly successful. Are the Conservatives saying he is not qualified to be the Prime Minister? He is following the rules, but they want to attack the Prime Minister personally, believing that by doing that, it is politically advantageous for the Conservatives. They want Canadians to think there is something wrong with the leader of the Liberal Party. I would contrast the leader of the Liberal Party with the leader of the Conservative Party any day, anywhere, especially given the economic times and challenges we have. The Prime Minister has done an incredible job of working with premiers and indigenous leaders and bringing in Bill C-5 to build one Canadian economy and build Canada strong.”
“I am sure the member would agree, because it was Stephen Harper who brought it in to ensure that a sense of accountability, transparency and ethical behaviour was taking place. We have a Prime Minister who met the requirements even before he became the Prime Minister. He has a blind trust. We have some of the most rigorous rules in the world, but that is not good enough for the Conservatives. The road to power for the Conservatives is to personally attack the leader of the Liberal Party. Let us look at who the leader of the Liberal Party is and his background. He was appointed to be the governor of the Bank of Canada by Stephen Harper. He was appointed to be the governor of the Bank of England. He has incredible, impeccable experience in understanding an economy.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an interesting process we are in. The Conservatives continue with what I have always said is character assassination. With the new Prime Minister , right away they want to attack his personal integrity. I just did a very quick Google search, and I asked about Conservative MPs who have invested in Brookfield. Members would be surprised. The leader of the Conservative Party appears to have some indirect interest in companies associated with Brookfield. The deputy leader of the Conservative Party has stocks in Brookfield. There are a number of others. I do not necessarily know their ridings, so I cannot say them by name. If I had leave to do that, I would be more than happy to share the names. The point is that at the end of the day, Canada has a fairly rigorous system.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would acknowledge that it is a number of concern, just like when it was just under 14%, which I believe was back in 2013. That is when the member's party leader sat around the cabinet table and the Conservatives were cutting programs such as the Canada summer jobs program. Yes, I was concerned back then, because I want to be there to support the young people of Canada, and we do need to give special attention to that, whether it was back in 2013 when it was high or at the number it is today. Fortunately, we have a government that is committed to supporting youth through different programs, as I have already mentioned, with direct and indirect supports, working with different jurisdictions, and, of course, through something I am a big fan of, supporting the Canada summer jobs program.”
“I think he is selling the budget short by not recognizing the hundreds of millions of dollars incorporated within the budget to support things, as I say, like apprenticeship training and programs to support post-secondary institutions, not to mention equalization and transfer payments that go to provinces. We have to recognize the role that provinces play. I had a tour of, I think it was Boeing or StandardAero, where they talked about working with Ottawa, the province and Red River College in ensuring that they are able to meet the needs of the future workforce. There is a great deal of co-operation that needs to take place, and it is taking place for anyone to see, unless, of course, they have their eyes closed.”
“They were a concern when we had high youth unemployment under Stephen Harper. For individuals who are 55 plus or even 50 plus, it could be very difficult to try to find a job when they are having to retire because their company either has let them go or maybe even has closed or whatever it might be. We recognize that there are issues that need to be looked at and given special consideration, and we see that in the budget. It is the very same budget that the member opposite, who says that he is concerned about youth unemployment, is voting against.”
“Back in the day, when Stephen Harper was the prime minister, the Conservatives cut that program significantly, but if we take a look, we can see that the Canada summer jobs program is one of the ways in which young people can get the type of work that could see them ultimately develop a career. At the end of the day, we can take a look at the overall numbers in terms of jobs. My friend was talking about looking forward to seeing the stats coming out tomorrow, and I, too, look forward to the stats. I think, overall, Canada is doing quite well, because we have seen an increase overall in the number of jobs created since the Prime Minister was elected. That is an important stat to recognize. Yes, there are certain areas that cause a great deal of concern. Young people are always a concern.”
“Mr. Speaker, I disagree with the member. I believe that the government has invested, and we do not say that the only jobs out there and available for young people are if they get university degrees. With regard to technical institutes, I think of everywhere from Red River College Polytech, which does outstanding work, to the University of Manitoba, which also does outstanding work. Quite frankly, there are other forms of apprenticeship programs that are offered through trade unions and others, all of which the government supports, if not directly, then indirectly, through anything from transfer payments to direct cash in support of things like apprenticeship programs with a special focus on young people. A good example, in terms of the contrast between the Liberals and the Conservatives, would be the Canada summer jobs program.”
“Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I understand what it is the leader of the Green Party is saying. We have major investments being made, from teachers associations and teachers unions to health care professionals unions and larger corporations. Wanting a rate of return has always been a priority. The member made reference to the province of Quebec. A lot of that investment goes outside of the province of Quebec in constantly looking for rates of return. That is not to say, absolutely not, that the legislation cannot be looked at. I am encouraged she has raised the issue. Maybe we could have some more dialogue with respect to the CPP and the manner in which it does its investments. Personally, as an individual, I would be interested in having a discussion of that nature.”
“If we were hearing that the rate of return was not in the best interests of the CPP, then I would suggest that we definitely revisit it. The member said we should see more investment into Canada. I like to think that the CPP is looking at ways it might be able to contribute more with respect to investments here in Canada. However, I would like to look at the government, which has seen the value of the CPP. I think it was Justin Trudeau who, through negotiations with the provinces, finally got them on board so we could get more money going into the CPP. That is so more money would be going out to individuals so that, when they retire, they would receive more money. I think that is a very important aspect of the CPP.”
“What I would be interested in knowing is if the member ever thought of having it brought to a standing committee, which could look into the possibilities. I think it is important that, as much as possible, we allow the CPP to be at arm's length from government. I do not believe the government should be instructing it on business or investments. The board has the expertise within to make good decisions. All in all, the CPP has done well with respect to the amount of return on its investments. Any investor will tell us that, at times some investments might not deliver what the expectation is, so there will be some losses. I think we have to look at the bigger and broader picture, which is that hopefully it has ensured that there is a good rate of return.”
“The point is that the CPP is a critically important program, if I could use the word program, for all Canadians, because of the contributions that employees and employers contribute so we have the cash flow coming into the CPP, which is entrusted to an arm's-length board to invest those scarce resources in order to be able to pay out when the time comes. It was interesting when the leader asked why we do not do more here in Canada. I know the CPP has partners from different places in the world where there are joint investments made. I do have confidence in the board. The leader made reference to potential scandals that have taken place. I am not familiar with the ones she has referenced. Maybe she could provide a bit more information on that.”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the leader of the Green Party bringing the issue of the Canada pension plan up and how it distributes the funds it is ultimately responsible for. As the government House leader indicated, there are substantial funds there, and we would like to believe we have significant investments in Canada. The member made reference to percentages. I think it might be a little higher than 12%. It is definitely higher than 12% when we factor in that some of the investments, I suspect, and I cannot provide great details on it, would be going into the United States. They might be investments that indirectly, or possibly even directly to a certain degree, end up being investments in Canada too.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am curious to know why the member opposite continuously wants to vote against the investments that the federal government is making, not only in the province of Alberta as a whole, but also in the constituency she represents, through good, sound social programming?”
“Mr. Speaker, in some ways I appreciate what the member is saying, but in other ways I would challenge her thinking. The Conservatives talk about sympathy toward individuals experiencing difficult times, yet we see them call programs like the national food program “garbage”, even the previous speaker from the Conservative Party. We have talked about the dental care program and pharmacare, in particular for dealing with diabetes, and the ways the government is providing fiscal responsibility, which shows that inflation is under control. There are many things the government is doing. The question is, why does the member not act based on the words she is saying?”
“Mr. Speaker, let us pick up on the caring attitude. I want to go back to the dental program and the pharmacare program, as well as to focus on the national school food program. When we take a look at the national school food program, this has been an issue for generations. When I was elected back in 1988, in the Manitoba legislature, people were talking about children going to school on an empty stomach. For generations, nothing was done to deal with that issue. There were kids going to school who were not able to learn. This is not just me saying this; professionals are also saying this. The Prime Minister made that program permanent, and that is good for the overall nation, for all children in every region. Does the member not agree that it has been an issue for many years?”
“Mr. Speaker, back in the last federal election, the Prime Minister made a commitment to Canadians, a commitment to build one Canada economy, to build Canada strong and to look for investments. After we passed Bill C-5 , over $60 billion was invested in the first five projects alone. He is bringing provinces together, looking at expanding export markets and just doing a phenomenal job in terms of attracting investments into Canada. In the budget, we have a budget that is investing, again, in Canadians and investing in Canada as a nation in terms of its infrastructure. It is a holistic approach to delivering for Canadians. What we have seen coming from the Conservative Party—”
“Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot about inflation. I just had a quick look. The leader of the Conservative Party was actually a parliamentary secretary under Stephen Harper. There was an election in 2011. In the year 2011, the inflation rate was actually 2.91%. In the last eight months or so, the inflation rate under the current Prime Minister has been around 2.2%. Could the member share his thoughts on how we deal with issues like inflation as we support Canadians through programs that are provided, for example, in the budget? Should he not be supporting the budget, so that we can make life more affordable for Canadians?”
“The Liberal government and the Prime Minister do not need to take advice from the Conservative party when it comes to either deficit or debt.”
“Madam Speaker, I think we should do a bit of a fact check with respect to deficits and debts. The member made reference to when Stephen Harper came into government. He inherited a multi-billion dollar surplus and converted that into a multi-billion dollar deficit, and that was before the recession. When we take a look at the G7, which the member wants to compare us to, when it comes to the debt, we are the lowest of the G7. When it comes to the deficit, we are the second lowest in the G7. If we want to contrast the debt, we can take a look at when the Conservative leader was sitting in the Conservative caucus with Stephen Harper. The deficit was actually higher than it is in today's budget when we factor in inflation.”
“The member is saying that if someone who is collecting GIS gets a job for $25,000 a year, the Conservatives would not claw back the GIS. Does that mean they would enhance the OAS to match what they would be giving as a replacement for the so-called clawback? In other words, their policy stinks.”
“Mr. Speaker, I can recall, in the 2010 by-election, knocking on doors during the German Canadian Congress. There were a number of homes in that particular block, where seniors were saying to me they cannot even afford to get the medications they require, so much so that some of them were actually eating dog food, pet food. I want to fast-forward to our health care investments, housing investments, pharmacare investments and dental care program investments. There is the age 75-plus enhancement. We have increased the guaranteed income supplement, which lifted literally thousands of seniors out of poverty. Contrast this with a Conservative government and the member's leader . They wanted to increase the age of eligibility for the OAS from 65 to 67. Just now the member said that they were not going to claw back the GIS.”
“Madam Speaker, the Bloc's response to the budget implementation bill does not surprise me. It is somewhat unfortunate that, despite the amount of investment, whether in the port of Montreal through the major projects program, which would mean literally tens of thousands of jobs, or the expansion through the military expenditure, which is going to do well for Quebec's aerospace industry, not to mention the investments in arts programs and the supports for the French language, we find the Bloc working in coalition with the Conservative Party of Canada to vote for and ultimately cause an election. That is the major objective of the Bloc party. I am wondering if he would recognize that he seems to be putting the Bloc's best interest ahead of the people of Quebec, as opposed to what the people of Quebec would want to see in the budget.”
“Mr. Speaker, members of the Liberal caucus came here today in anticipation of debating the budget implementation bill. We are concerned about the issues that Canadians are concerned about. It deals with issues like, for example, the tax break for 22 million Canadians and the many ways in which the government is supporting Canadians and building a stronger Canada. I am wondering if the member can provide his thoughts as to why it is that we are not debating the budget today, but rather the Conservative agenda. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“Mr. Speaker, I wanted my colleague to expand upon an idea. If we have a flashback to the election just a number of months ago, the Prime Minister and Liberal candidates across the country made a commitment to bail reform, which was supported by provinces, law enforcement officers and Canadians as a whole. Today we have bail reform legislation. The only thing preventing it from becoming law is the Conservative Party of Canada, just like the hate legislation, which is supported by many. Can my colleague provide his thoughts on how Canadians are the victims of Conservative self-serving interests?”
“Mr. Speaker, the amount of misinformation and misleading information pumped out through social media and emails by the Conservative Party really does a disservice to all Canadians. The member spoke about the committee. Now, the Conservative Party wants to use tax dollars to tour the country to spread even more misinformation. It is truly amazing. As opposed to dealing with hate messaging and the hate being experienced by many Canadians, the Conservatives are obstructing the legislation and want taxpayers to pay for a tour of more misinformation. Instead of exploiting Canadians, why do the Conservatives not allow the legislation to pass?”
“Mr. Speaker, I know the government House whip as a Christian, and it is distasteful for the member to say what he just put on the record. We would ask that he withdraw the comments and apologize. An hon. member: Zero chance. Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Then he should leave the chamber. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”