Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

DAN ALBAS -- What became obvious early on was that due to being an omnibus bill some measures were not supported by all parties

As I write this week’s report, the House of Commons special COVID Committee has just adjourned until next week.

The Liberal Government was to introduce a new bill today, an omnibus bill, to propose measures and revisions to the various COVID-19 assistance response programs.

One of these measures was a new, one-time non taxable $600 payment (expected mid August) that would help some -- but not all -- Canadians living with a disability. It would go to only those who have been approved for the Disability Tax Credit (DTC).

What became obvious early on was that due to this being an omnibus bill, some measures were not supported by all parties.

As an example, the NDP opposed to penalties for citizens who intentionally defrauded the Canadian Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) benefit program.

The Bloc Québécois also had various demands, such as that the Liberal Government providing a fiscal update that, despite hundreds of billions in spending, the government has refused to account for.

At one point things looked promising as the Liberal government agreed to split the omnibus bill so that a separate bill, proposing the one time $600 disability payment, could be potentially debated and passed independently.

However, the Liberal government wanted their legislation to pass all stages in less than a single day, while the Conservative opposition has been clamouring for the responsible return of Parliament.

One that would follow health protocols with less than 50 MP's, but would allow Parliamentarians to scrutinize the proposed bills, have a regular question period, request emergency debates and file questions on the order paper.

Unfortunately, the Liberal government rejected this proposal.

As the minority Liberal government only needs the support of one party to pass legislation forward, some have suggested that by refusing to make a concession to any of the three opposition parties, the Liberals engineered this failure.

Why would a minority government engineer a failure?

Simply to present an argument to Canadians that a minority Parliament is not working and to build a case for a majority and an election.

I do not necessarily buy into this argument as the Liberals, by their own admission, have other means to deliver the one time disability tax credit payment through the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA) without this bill by using an Information Sharing Agreement.

Information Sharing Agreements are regularly used by government agencies such as CRA to communicate with other federal departments on important benefits like the Canada Child Benefit, Old Age Security or the Guaranteed Income Supplement or GST credit.

When the Liberals wanted to sideline regular sittings of Parliament, they were able to make a deal with the NDP to do so. That deal, to possibly provide 10 days of paid sick leave, was largely an issue that requires Provincial governments to support if it is to occur.

In this case, all of the demands from the opposition parties depended on actions from the Liberal government and it would appear these demands were considered too significant to be met.

My question this week:

Were opposition parties correct to stick to their demands or should the Liberals have made a concession with one or more of the parties to move a split bill forward?”

I can be reached at:
Email: Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca

Toll Free: 1-800-665-8711

 

Dan Albas ... the Conservative Member of Parliament for the riding of Central Okanagan – Similkameen – Nicola ... is currently the Shadow Minister for Employment, Workforce Development & Disability Inclusion.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...

Labels

Show more