Mike Lake

Mr. Speaker, it is increasingly evident that the Liberal environment and energy policy is an unmitigated disaster. The Liberal carbon tax has been resoundingly rejected as just a tax on Canadians that will have literally no impact on global emissions. Even with significant Canadian taxpayer dollars spent, there is a broad consensus that we will still not meet our greenhouse gas emission commitments. Will the government confirm today that despite all of its bluster, it will not in fact meet our Paris Agreement targets?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister keeps pointing to research funding as cover for not supporting the Canadian autism partnership. Does he understand how ridiculous this is?Four members of the partnership working group are among the world's top autism researchers: Lonnie Zwaigenbaum from the University of Alberta, Stelios Georgiades from McMaster University, Jonathan Weiss from York University, and Stephen Scherer from SickKids. These researchers want their research to actually be used to benefit Canadian families who desperately need it.When will the Prime Minister stop hiding behind our world-class researchers and support them in helping Canadians with autism?

Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?

Mr. Speaker, in his rambling justification of his vote against the Canadian autism partnership, the Liberal House leader's parliamentary secretary said: I disagree with members who say that it is 10¢ a day for this, or it is only $19 million. I can assure you that every one of the constituents I represent would argue that a million dollars is a lot of money. He will get no argument from this side on that last point. However, as the Liberal Prime Minister racks up a deficit over 25,000 times that $1 million, how is it possible that Canadians living with autism were left behind?

Mr. Speaker, prior to budget 2017, nearly half of the Liberal caucus advocated for the Canadian autism partnership, and many said so directly to autism stakeholders.Last month, on World Autism Awareness Day, more than a dozen Liberal MPs showed up for the photo op, but on Tuesday, in a vote, clearly strong-armed by Liberal leadership, all but one Liberal MP voted against the creation of the Canadian autism partnership. Why, on something so critically important, after so much work by so many exceptional Canadians, is the Prime Minister playing such a heavy hand?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Liberal cabinet indicated that it will not support the Canadian autism partnership in today's vote.Canadians who have indicated support include the vast majority of Canada's autism community, plus the Canadian Association for Community Living, UNICEF Canada, Plan International Canada, Save the Children Canada, World Vision Canada, Global Citizen, Hayley Wickenheiser, Elliotte Friedman, and many others.My question for the minister is this. In just a few minutes, can Canadians living with autism count on the fact that Liberal MPs will have the freedom to stand up for them?

Mr. Speaker, with 24 hours until the Canadian autism partnership vote, the Liberals have still not signalled their support. They talk about research, but researchers themselves want to see their work actually used to benefit families. They talk about transfers to provinces, while some Canadian families mortgage their homes to fund evidence-based early intervention or adult programs. The experts, the incredible self-advocates, and Canadian families have worked tirelessly for years to get to this point. Can they count on their Minister of Health to stand up for them and support this motion tomorrow?

Mr. Speaker, Liberals in the House today have spoken a lot about important past Conservative investments in autism research and surveillance. The Canadian autism partnership was created to put that world-leading knowledge to use with a meaningful impact for Canadians with autism. The investment: a modest $3.8 million a year. Again, one dime per Canadian.We did not get an answer yesterday and have gotten none so far this morning, so I will try again. Will the minister commit today to funding the Canadian autism partnership?

Mr. Speaker, it has now been 253 days since the finance minister rejected the Canadian autism partnership, and it is very clear that the government has no idea how it is going to replace it. This broad partnership would have worked with autism organizations and governments across the country, providing expert advice on issues facing people with autism, issues exactly like the serious one raised by Autism Canada in regard to the disability tax credit. Families are using words like “frustrating”, “maddening”, and “heartbreaking” to describe the situation, but most of all what they want to know is what the government is doing to fix this.

Mr. Speaker, that sounds like a no to me, so I will try this again. The Canadian Autism Partnership Working Group, along with a team of amazing self-advocates in the Canadian Autism Spectrum Disorders Alliance, worked for almost two years on this. They are requesting $3.8 million per year, a dime per Canadian, a dime, to fund a partnership that will meaningfully improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of Canadians.Will the Liberal government commit today to funding the Canadian Autism Partnership?

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the parliamentary secretary answers a question that the minister refused to answer yesterday.Given that support for the carbon tax, which forms the backbone of the Liberals' climate plan, is literally disintegrating around it and given that even in the best case scenario there are huge gaps between emissions projections and the Paris targets, how many billions of Canadian taxpayer dollars is the government projecting will have to be spent on overseas carbon credits in order to make up for the Liberals' climate plan shortfalls?

Mr. Speaker, with Manitoba coming out strongly against the Liberal government's carbon tax this week, the Prime Minister's signature initiative now has the support of just two provincial governments. I asked the environment minister a clear question yesterday, and today I hope for an actual answer. There seems to be a clear consensus among experts on all sides of the issue that the government will not come close to meeting its international climate change commitments. Could the minister confirm that the government is in fact not on track to meet its Paris agreement targets?

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asks why we would not want to see the government run a deficit. First of all, it is not exactly the same thing. There was a global financial crisis, and leaders around the world took measures to coordinate their approaches at a fiscal level to ensure that, as a world, we were able to pull forward. Canada took a leadership role in that, along with other countries. New Democrats, who were in the House during that time, demanded more spending all the time, as they do almost every day in the House of Commons.Why is it that we do not want to go down that road today? It is because we saw what happened with Liberal governments in the past. We saw the devastating cuts that they had to make to health care and post-secondary education, and they threw them on the backs of the provinces. Provinces like Ontario and Alberta and others had to respond to that because suddenly the transfers were turned off. As a government, we were able to get our budget back to balance coming out of the global crisis. We were able to do that while dramatically increasing investments at the same time in transfers for health care, social services, and education, as the member for York—Simcoe so aptly mentioned in his comments. That is important. As we move forward as a country, and if we are going to avoid the types of decisions that a previous Liberal government had to make and governments around the world have to make in terms of cutting really important services for their voters, balanced budgets are critical. We hope that NDP members will support this important motion.

Mr. Speaker, I would have to look at the record in terms of the actual numbers for that. The member can check the record on this. It is really easy to find news articles. If my colleague was to Google the word “coalition” he might find that in 2008 his leader of the day tried to form a coalition with the Bloc and the NDP to take over the Conservative government of the day, because we could not spend enough to satisfy them at that time, immediately after an election campaign. We took a world-leading approach to the global financial crisis. Organizations around the world, from the OECD to the World Economic Forum to the IMF, praised Canada's approach in that crisis, partly because we delivered the stimulus quickly. We came out of the crisis faster than other countries. We did that despite the fact that Liberal members of Parliament demanded more spending and longer spending. We would still be running deficits today if the Liberals had had their way.

Mr. Speaker, in response to an earlier question on autism from the Leader of the Opposition, the Prime Minister talked of his government “highlighting the work that we continue to do.” The trouble is, his government is doing the exact opposite.In 2015, our government funded a world-class Canadian autism partnership working group. The Liberal budget just rejected the request for funding to allow that critical work to continue. Could the Prime Minister please explain how his government can find nearly $400 million for a company that says it does not need it, and not find $4 million a year to help Canadian families living with autism who desperately need it?

Mr. Speaker, Manitoba joins a growing number of provinces in saying a firm no to a national carbon tax. The Liberal carbon tax plan is clearly in shambles, and the minister cannot even tell us how much her tax will reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. Experts on all sides are now saying that the Prime Minister's plan is nowhere near meeting its international commitments.Therefore, my question for the minister is clear: Will she confirm today that her government will not meet its Paris agreement emissions targets?

Mr. Speaker, the minister's repeated use of people with disabilities as strategic pieces in her political game is not okay.My son Jaden has autism and he cast his first vote in October. The Elections Canada folks were absolutely wonderful in helping him through that process. Having a referendum on which voting system to use will have absolutely no impact on Jaden's ability to vote. Will the minister please call a referendum and let all Canadians, including every Canadian with a disability, have their say on this important issue?

Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister even know that in addition to the vast majority of Canada's autism community, the Canadian autism partnership has received overwhelming support from every part of our country: the Canadian Association for Community Living, UNICEF Canada, Plan Canada, Save the Children Canada, World Vision Canada, Global Citizen, Hayley Wickenheiser, Elliotte Friedman, and many more. Conservative, NDP, and Green members were unanimous in our support for Canadians living with autism, yet every single Liberal, but one, voted against the partnership. Could the Prime Minister please explain this decision?

Mr. Speaker, in our balanced budget of 2015, Prime Minister Harper and finance minister Joe Oliver established an expert working group tasked with the creation of a Canadian autism partnership to support those living with autism, their families, and caregivers. The current leader of the opposition, who was then health minister, officially launched the working group that summer. This world-leading team of Canadians has completed its work and reported back to the Liberal health minister with a business plan and a request for support Can Canadians living with autism and their families count on the minister's support for this important initiative?

Mr. Speaker, as this is the first time I am standing in the House in this new Parliament, I will start by thanking the voters of Edmonton—Wetaskiwin for their strong support in this last election. We got just a little more than 45,000 votes, which was the fifth highest vote total in the country. There was strong support for our Conservative record over the past decade for a balanced budget and significant leadership in navigating our country's course through the global economic slowdown of 2008.I want to take the opportunity to thank my kids, Jaden and Jenae, who played an increased role in the campaign and also play an increasing role in my position as a member of Parliament, in coming on the road and helping me do a lot of the work that I do on autism. Many people know that my 20-year-old son has autism, and many people in this room have received a high-five from him at some time or another. I thank them for sharing me with constituents and stakeholders, both in the constituency and across the country.I will also take this chance to thank my mom, Bonnie, and her husband, Dale, for their tireless support. One of the highlights of my week is driving with my mother to the airport. It is our time together. When we do not get any other time to spend together, we get 20 minutes when she comes to pick me up, sometimes at 5:30 in the morning, and takes me to the airport. It is a great opportunity for us to catch up.I will also take the opportunity to thank my staff in both my Edmonton and Ottawa offices, who do and have done phenomenal work over 10 years in support of what we get a chance to do.Finally, and I think it is important in the context of what we are talking about today, I want to thank the officials at Industry Canada. I had the opportunity to be the parliamentary secretary for eight years at Industry, and those public servants were absolutely phenomenal during that time in supporting me. I was always amazed at how they could take a complicated topic and within half an hour give a briefing that would help me look sometimes like an expert, which may be debatable from different sides of the House. However, the work they do is phenomenal and it was a great pleasure to work with them in addition to the ministerial staff and ministers that I got a chance to work with.On the topic we are talking about today, as we went through the election campaign I heard, and have heard a lot since, about the importance of balanced budgets, and the importance of that Conservative leadership that we have shown on the economy over the last decade. I also heard a lot about the strength of the Canadian middle class. There was a recognition of that as I was on the campaign trail. However, there were a lot of things being said during the campaign that were not entirely true. I think we still hear some of that coming from the government side today in the image it is trying to portray.I will focus today on three Liberal fictions that I have seen over the last several months as we have been going through this.First, there is a fiction that Canada's middle class is struggling. Certainly we all want Canadians to be better off. We all want to create an environment where all Canadians can succeed, no matter their level of wealth, their job, or position in life. However, the fact is that Canada's middle class is the strongest in the world. It is not the former Conservative government that is saying that. It is not our Conservative members of Parliament who are saying that. The New York Times reported on the Luxembourg Income Study, which put forward a paper that talked about Canada being number one in the world in terms of income levels at the 30th, 40th, and 50th income percentiles. These are independent organizations that have said that. Notwithstanding that, the Liberals, during the election campaign and even now, continue to talk about the struggling Canadian middle class. Andrew Coyne put it brilliantly when he wrote back in May that: Introducing his “fairness for the middle class” tax plan, [the Liberal leader] waxed lyrical about a golden time, still within memory, when opportunity beckoned and the sun shone year ’round. Coyne continued: Of course, there was no such era. It was just something to say--the same myth-making on which the entire plan is based. In Liberal mythology, the middle class is forever to be “struggling”, forgotten, falling behind. Coyne concluded by saying: But then, every line of the Liberal story is a fraud. The middle class isn't struggling: the $53,000 the median family earned after tax in 2012 is an all-time high--24% more than in 1997, after inflation. The rich aren't pulling away from the rest of us: the share of all income going to the top 1% has been falling steadily since 2006. At 10.3 per cent, it is back to where it was in 1998. I will give the final word to none other than a prominent conservative speaker, Hillary Clinton, who said: Canadian middle-class incomes are now higher than in the United States. They are working fewer hours for more pay, enjoying a stronger safety net, living longer on average, and facing less income inequality. The fact of the matter is that this notion that Canada's middle class is struggling that the Liberals campaigned on is a complete fiction.A second fiction, and the one we are debating today, is the fact that they inherited a deficit. I say “fact”. I put quotation marks around that because the fact is that the Department of Finance has confirmed that Canada posted a $1-billion surplus up to November 2015, when the Liberals took office.That is very important because there have been a lot of things said today and over the course of the last several months. It very important to notice that in addition to the $1-billion surplus, we increased funding for the Canada health transfer by 6% over that year period and a 3% increase in the Canada social transfer over that period. That is a $1.5-billion increase in these two important transfers.After the 2008 global financial crisis, the Conservative government laid out a comprehensive stimulus plan and a seven-year plan to get back to budget balance. It was interesting to hear the Liberal member opposite allude to that earlier in his question. I know he is a new member and that he has maybe not had the benefit of doing a Google search before he asked the question, but if he did, he would find statement after statement by Liberal members of Parliament, from opposition members from all sides, absolutely demanding that the government spend more money, that we spend on a broader range of programs, and that we extend that spending. Of course, during that time, members will remember that our plan was targeted, it was time-limited, and our spending was designed to expire and we laid out a solid plan to get back to budget balance. However, time and again, every single day, Liberal members of Parliament stood and demanded more spending and demanded that spending be made permanent.It is a bit of a mythological world, I guess, that the Liberals live in over there, but hopefully today will clarify some of that record.Finally, I will deal with the last fiction, the fiction that they will only run $10-billion deficits every year.First, I underline the word “only”, because only $10 billion in deficit is a ridiculous way of phrasing it in the first place. Clearly, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has looked at the facts and projected that the deficits will be billions of dollars higher over the years. In fact, we are talking tens of billions of dollars higher—so high, in fact, that Liberal members cannot even clarify it. They have no way of quantifying what those numbers will be.Let me just close by saying that this is my first time in opposition. I very much look forward to holding the government to account. I want to avoid going back to the time when the Liberal government of the day, a former Trudeau government back in the 1970s, took steps to increase deficits and run massive deficits, starting the cycle in the first place and another Liberal government then had to slash spending on health care and social service and education transfers by billions of dollars.We hope that mistake will not be made by the government. We will oppose those types of measures every step of the way. On this important motion, we hope that we will have the support of all members of the House.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister keeps pointing to research funding as cover for not supporting the Canadian autism partnership. Does he understand how ridiculous this is?Four members of the partnership working group are among the world's top autism researchers: Lonnie Zwaigenbaum from the University of Alberta, Stelios Georgiades from McMaster University, Jonathan Weiss from York University, and Stephen Scherer from SickKids. These researchers want their research to actually be used to benefit Canadian families who desperately need it.When will the Prime Minister stop hiding behind our world-class researchers and support them in helping Canadians with autism?

Mr. Speaker, in his rambling justification of his vote against the Canadian autism partnership, the Liberal House leader's parliamentary secretary said: I disagree with members who say that it is 10¢ a day for this, or it is only $19 million. I can assure you that every one of the constituents I represent would argue that a million dollars is a lot of money. He will get no argument from this side on that last point. However, as the Liberal Prime Minister racks up a deficit over 25,000 times that $1 million, how is it possible that Canadians living with autism were left behind?

Mr. Speaker, in response to an earlier question on autism from the Leader of the Opposition, the Prime Minister talked of his government “highlighting the work that we continue to do.” The trouble is, his government is doing the exact opposite.In 2015, our government funded a world-class Canadian autism partnership working group. The Liberal budget just rejected the request for funding to allow that critical work to continue. Could the Prime Minister please explain how his government can find nearly $400 million for a company that says it does not need it, and not find $4 million a year to help Canadian families living with autism who desperately need it?

Mr. Speaker, in Alberta there has long been significant government support for people with autism. Other Canadian families have not had the same experience, some mortgaging their homes to get help they desperately need. In 2015, our government appointed a dozen world-leading Canadians to develop a Canadian autism partnership. After two years' work, they presented the health minister with a strong plan and a relatively modest budget ask. As the government continues to spend with such reckless abandon, can the minister please explain why the Liberals decided to take a hard line toward Canadians with autism?

Mr. Speaker, that sounds like a no to me, so I will try this again. The Canadian Autism Partnership Working Group, along with a team of amazing self-advocates in the Canadian Autism Spectrum Disorders Alliance, worked for almost two years on this. They are requesting $3.8 million per year, a dime per Canadian, a dime, to fund a partnership that will meaningfully improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of Canadians.Will the Liberal government commit today to funding the Canadian Autism Partnership?

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the parliamentary secretary answers a question that the minister refused to answer yesterday.Given that support for the carbon tax, which forms the backbone of the Liberals' climate plan, is literally disintegrating around it and given that even in the best case scenario there are huge gaps between emissions projections and the Paris targets, how many billions of Canadian taxpayer dollars is the government projecting will have to be spent on overseas carbon credits in order to make up for the Liberals' climate plan shortfalls?

Mr. Speaker, with 24 hours until the Canadian autism partnership vote, the Liberals have still not signalled their support. They talk about research, but researchers themselves want to see their work actually used to benefit families. They talk about transfers to provinces, while some Canadian families mortgage their homes to fund evidence-based early intervention or adult programs. The experts, the incredible self-advocates, and Canadian families have worked tirelessly for years to get to this point. Can they count on their Minister of Health to stand up for them and support this motion tomorrow?

Mr. Speaker, prior to budget 2017, nearly half of the Liberal caucus advocated for the Canadian autism partnership, and many said so directly to autism stakeholders.Last month, on World Autism Awareness Day, more than a dozen Liberal MPs showed up for the photo op, but on Tuesday, in a vote, clearly strong-armed by Liberal leadership, all but one Liberal MP voted against the creation of the Canadian autism partnership. Why, on something so critically important, after so much work by so many exceptional Canadians, is the Prime Minister playing such a heavy hand?

Mr. Speaker, the minister's repeated use of people with disabilities as strategic pieces in her political game is not okay.My son Jaden has autism and he cast his first vote in October. The Elections Canada folks were absolutely wonderful in helping him through that process. Having a referendum on which voting system to use will have absolutely no impact on Jaden's ability to vote. Will the minister please call a referendum and let all Canadians, including every Canadian with a disability, have their say on this important issue?

Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister even know that in addition to the vast majority of Canada's autism community, the Canadian autism partnership has received overwhelming support from every part of our country: the Canadian Association for Community Living, UNICEF Canada, Plan Canada, Save the Children Canada, World Vision Canada, Global Citizen, Hayley Wickenheiser, Elliotte Friedman, and many more. Conservative, NDP, and Green members were unanimous in our support for Canadians living with autism, yet every single Liberal, but one, voted against the partnership. Could the Prime Minister please explain this decision?

Mr. Speaker, Liberals in the House today have spoken a lot about important past Conservative investments in autism research and surveillance. The Canadian autism partnership was created to put that world-leading knowledge to use with a meaningful impact for Canadians with autism. The investment: a modest $3.8 million a year. Again, one dime per Canadian.We did not get an answer yesterday and have gotten none so far this morning, so I will try again. Will the minister commit today to funding the Canadian autism partnership?

Mr. Speaker, I would have to look at the record in terms of the actual numbers for that. The member can check the record on this. It is really easy to find news articles. If my colleague was to Google the word “coalition” he might find that in 2008 his leader of the day tried to form a coalition with the Bloc and the NDP to take over the Conservative government of the day, because we could not spend enough to satisfy them at that time, immediately after an election campaign. We took a world-leading approach to the global financial crisis. Organizations around the world, from the OECD to the World Economic Forum to the IMF, praised Canada's approach in that crisis, partly because we delivered the stimulus quickly. We came out of the crisis faster than other countries. We did that despite the fact that Liberal members of Parliament demanded more spending and longer spending. We would still be running deficits today if the Liberals had had their way.

Mr. Speaker, as this is the first time I am standing in the House in this new Parliament, I will start by thanking the voters of Edmonton—Wetaskiwin for their strong support in this last election. We got just a little more than 45,000 votes, which was the fifth highest vote total in the country. There was strong support for our Conservative record over the past decade for a balanced budget and significant leadership in navigating our country's course through the global economic slowdown of 2008.I want to take the opportunity to thank my kids, Jaden and Jenae, who played an increased role in the campaign and also play an increasing role in my position as a member of Parliament, in coming on the road and helping me do a lot of the work that I do on autism. Many people know that my 20-year-old son has autism, and many people in this room have received a high-five from him at some time or another. I thank them for sharing me with constituents and stakeholders, both in the constituency and across the country.I will also take this chance to thank my mom, Bonnie, and her husband, Dale, for their tireless support. One of the highlights of my week is driving with my mother to the airport. It is our time together. When we do not get any other time to spend together, we get 20 minutes when she comes to pick me up, sometimes at 5:30 in the morning, and takes me to the airport. It is a great opportunity for us to catch up.I will also take the opportunity to thank my staff in both my Edmonton and Ottawa offices, who do and have done phenomenal work over 10 years in support of what we get a chance to do.Finally, and I think it is important in the context of what we are talking about today, I want to thank the officials at Industry Canada. I had the opportunity to be the parliamentary secretary for eight years at Industry, and those public servants were absolutely phenomenal during that time in supporting me. I was always amazed at how they could take a complicated topic and within half an hour give a briefing that would help me look sometimes like an expert, which may be debatable from different sides of the House. However, the work they do is phenomenal and it was a great pleasure to work with them in addition to the ministerial staff and ministers that I got a chance to work with.On the topic we are talking about today, as we went through the election campaign I heard, and have heard a lot since, about the importance of balanced budgets, and the importance of that Conservative leadership that we have shown on the economy over the last decade. I also heard a lot about the strength of the Canadian middle class. There was a recognition of that as I was on the campaign trail. However, there were a lot of things being said during the campaign that were not entirely true. I think we still hear some of that coming from the government side today in the image it is trying to portray.I will focus today on three Liberal fictions that I have seen over the last several months as we have been going through this.First, there is a fiction that Canada's middle class is struggling. Certainly we all want Canadians to be better off. We all want to create an environment where all Canadians can succeed, no matter their level of wealth, their job, or position in life. However, the fact is that Canada's middle class is the strongest in the world. It is not the former Conservative government that is saying that. It is not our Conservative members of Parliament who are saying that. The New York Times reported on the Luxembourg Income Study, which put forward a paper that talked about Canada being number one in the world in terms of income levels at the 30th, 40th, and 50th income percentiles. These are independent organizations that have said that. Notwithstanding that, the Liberals, during the election campaign and even now, continue to talk about the struggling Canadian middle class. Andrew Coyne put it brilliantly when he wrote back in May that: Introducing his “fairness for the middle class” tax plan, [the Liberal leader] waxed lyrical about a golden time, still within memory, when opportunity beckoned and the sun shone year ’round. Coyne continued: Of course, there was no such era. It was just something to say--the same myth-making on which the entire plan is based. In Liberal mythology, the middle class is forever to be “struggling”, forgotten, falling behind. Coyne concluded by saying: But then, every line of the Liberal story is a fraud. The middle class isn't struggling: the $53,000 the median family earned after tax in 2012 is an all-time high--24% more than in 1997, after inflation. The rich aren't pulling away from the rest of us: the share of all income going to the top 1% has been falling steadily since 2006. At 10.3 per cent, it is back to where it was in 1998. I will give the final word to none other than a prominent conservative speaker, Hillary Clinton, who said: Canadian middle-class incomes are now higher than in the United States. They are working fewer hours for more pay, enjoying a stronger safety net, living longer on average, and facing less income inequality. The fact of the matter is that this notion that Canada's middle class is struggling that the Liberals campaigned on is a complete fiction.A second fiction, and the one we are debating today, is the fact that they inherited a deficit. I say “fact”. I put quotation marks around that because the fact is that the Department of Finance has confirmed that Canada posted a $1-billion surplus up to November 2015, when the Liberals took office.That is very important because there have been a lot of things said today and over the course of the last several months. It very important to notice that in addition to the $1-billion surplus, we increased funding for the Canada health transfer by 6% over that year period and a 3% increase in the Canada social transfer over that period. That is a $1.5-billion increase in these two important transfers.After the 2008 global financial crisis, the Conservative government laid out a comprehensive stimulus plan and a seven-year plan to get back to budget balance. It was interesting to hear the Liberal member opposite allude to that earlier in his question. I know he is a new member and that he has maybe not had the benefit of doing a Google search before he asked the question, but if he did, he would find statement after statement by Liberal members of Parliament, from opposition members from all sides, absolutely demanding that the government spend more money, that we spend on a broader range of programs, and that we extend that spending. Of course, during that time, members will remember that our plan was targeted, it was time-limited, and our spending was designed to expire and we laid out a solid plan to get back to budget balance. However, time and again, every single day, Liberal members of Parliament stood and demanded more spending and demanded that spending be made permanent.It is a bit of a mythological world, I guess, that the Liberals live in over there, but hopefully today will clarify some of that record.Finally, I will deal with the last fiction, the fiction that they will only run $10-billion deficits every year.First, I underline the word “only”, because only $10 billion in deficit is a ridiculous way of phrasing it in the first place. Clearly, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has looked at the facts and projected that the deficits will be billions of dollars higher over the years. In fact, we are talking tens of billions of dollars higher—so high, in fact, that Liberal members cannot even clarify it. They have no way of quantifying what those numbers will be.Let me just close by saying that this is my first time in opposition. I very much look forward to holding the government to account. I want to avoid going back to the time when the Liberal government of the day, a former Trudeau government back in the 1970s, took steps to increase deficits and run massive deficits, starting the cycle in the first place and another Liberal government then had to slash spending on health care and social service and education transfers by billions of dollars.We hope that mistake will not be made by the government. We will oppose those types of measures every step of the way. On this important motion, we hope that we will have the support of all members of the House.

Mr. Speaker, in our balanced budget of 2015, Prime Minister Harper and finance minister Joe Oliver established an expert working group tasked with the creation of a Canadian autism partnership to support those living with autism, their families, and caregivers. The current leader of the opposition, who was then health minister, officially launched the working group that summer. This world-leading team of Canadians has completed its work and reported back to the Liberal health minister with a business plan and a request for support Can Canadians living with autism and their families count on the minister's support for this important initiative?

Mr. Speaker, with Manitoba coming out strongly against the Liberal government's carbon tax this week, the Prime Minister's signature initiative now has the support of just two provincial governments. I asked the environment minister a clear question yesterday, and today I hope for an actual answer. There seems to be a clear consensus among experts on all sides of the issue that the government will not come close to meeting its international climate change commitments. Could the minister confirm that the government is in fact not on track to meet its Paris agreement targets?

Mr. Speaker, it is increasingly evident that the Liberal environment and energy policy is an unmitigated disaster. The Liberal carbon tax has been resoundingly rejected as just a tax on Canadians that will have literally no impact on global emissions. Even with significant Canadian taxpayer dollars spent, there is a broad consensus that we will still not meet our greenhouse gas emission commitments. Will the government confirm today that despite all of its bluster, it will not in fact meet our Paris Agreement targets?

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asks why we would not want to see the government run a deficit. First of all, it is not exactly the same thing. There was a global financial crisis, and leaders around the world took measures to coordinate their approaches at a fiscal level to ensure that, as a world, we were able to pull forward. Canada took a leadership role in that, along with other countries. New Democrats, who were in the House during that time, demanded more spending all the time, as they do almost every day in the House of Commons.Why is it that we do not want to go down that road today? It is because we saw what happened with Liberal governments in the past. We saw the devastating cuts that they had to make to health care and post-secondary education, and they threw them on the backs of the provinces. Provinces like Ontario and Alberta and others had to respond to that because suddenly the transfers were turned off. As a government, we were able to get our budget back to balance coming out of the global crisis. We were able to do that while dramatically increasing investments at the same time in transfers for health care, social services, and education, as the member for York—Simcoe so aptly mentioned in his comments. That is important. As we move forward as a country, and if we are going to avoid the types of decisions that a previous Liberal government had to make and governments around the world have to make in terms of cutting really important services for their voters, balanced budgets are critical. We hope that NDP members will support this important motion.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Liberal cabinet indicated that it will not support the Canadian autism partnership in today's vote.Canadians who have indicated support include the vast majority of Canada's autism community, plus the Canadian Association for Community Living, UNICEF Canada, Plan International Canada, Save the Children Canada, World Vision Canada, Global Citizen, Hayley Wickenheiser, Elliotte Friedman, and many others.My question for the minister is this. In just a few minutes, can Canadians living with autism count on the fact that Liberal MPs will have the freedom to stand up for them?

Mr. Speaker, Manitoba joins a growing number of provinces in saying a firm no to a national carbon tax. The Liberal carbon tax plan is clearly in shambles, and the minister cannot even tell us how much her tax will reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. Experts on all sides are now saying that the Prime Minister's plan is nowhere near meeting its international commitments.Therefore, my question for the minister is clear: Will she confirm today that her government will not meet its Paris agreement emissions targets?

Mr. Speaker, it has now been 253 days since the finance minister rejected the Canadian autism partnership, and it is very clear that the government has no idea how it is going to replace it. This broad partnership would have worked with autism organizations and governments across the country, providing expert advice on issues facing people with autism, issues exactly like the serious one raised by Autism Canada in regard to the disability tax credit. Families are using words like “frustrating”, “maddening”, and “heartbreaking” to describe the situation, but most of all what they want to know is what the government is doing to fix this.