Debates of May 7th, 2024

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, that is the leftist party or, pardon me, the Liberal Party of Canada.

I will take no lessons from the Liberal Party. Why? It is because every day when we pick up the newspapers and turn on the television, we see moving accounts of mothers who cannot find housing for July 1. In Quebec, July 1 is an extremely important date. Those mothers will have to find a place to live and are resigned to the idea of having to live in their minivans.

Business owners are going bankrupt because the cost of paying down their debt and input costs is now more than they can afford. Quebec has seen a 130% increase in small business bankruptcies over the past three years. That is unacceptable.

I always wonder why the Liberals avoid talking about these issues that affect Canadians and Quebeckers every day.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to know that Quebeckers are suffering because of with the costly Conservative-Liberal coalition that panders to the Canadian oil monarchy.

Some $47 million is being spent on the Governor General every year. What do the Conservatives do? They sing God Save the King. By 2035, it is going to cost us a collective $83 billion to prop up the greedy oil industry. That cost is $18 billion for 2023 alone. In the last four years, $65 billion has gone to rich oil and gas tycoons. The Conservatives are being taken for fools. They applaud. They want more.

It is pretty simple: What is costing the people of Quebec so dearly is voting Conservative.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, hypocrisy abounds. It was the Bloc Québécois that voted for this government's $500 billion in additional spending. As a result, everything costs more now. It was the Bloc Québécois that voted for additional funding to build a pipeline. They are not about to shout it from the rooftops, but they voted in favour of additional funds to build the pipeline. The Bloc Québécois members are the ones telling Canadians and Quebeckers who use their cars to get around every day that they still do not pay enough taxes. The Bloc Québécois would like to see gasoline taxes radically increased in order to encourage people to use less gas, since it costs more. Once again, they are making citizens pay for ideologies.

That is what I call the hypocrisy of the Bloc Québécois.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, one thing that I admit I have concerns about in the budget is the lack of funding for first nations languages. We have heard clearly from the First Peoples' Cultural Council that this is a significant concern. For me, I think about the many communities that are working with North Island College in my region to set up classes to teach language. I think about ‘Namgis, which has a facility where they nest young people to learn the language, and Tla'amin, which is doing something very similar. Does the member share my concern around first nations languages in the budget?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, I share my colleague's concerns regarding the first nations. Even though my riding does not have all that many first nations representatives, I am very proud to see that Chief Billy Morin has just joined the Conservative Party. He will be a candidate for us in the next election. We are very proud to have people of that calibre working with us to improve everyday life for first nations across Canada.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to stand up on behalf of the people of Barrie—Innisfil in the House of Commons and, in this case, in particular, to discuss the budget implementation act.

If one listens to the Liberals, and I have been in the House for most of today, one would almost get the sense that Canadians have never had it so good as what they have right now.

The member for Ajax stood up before, and I recall asking him a question about Canada's productivity. We are seeing declines in productivity, investment and capital investment, other than government investment; it is at a point where our productivity is heading into developing nation status right now.

It is obvious that the ability of Canadians to have some sort of lifestyle or provide for a quality of life for themselves is clearly diminishing after nine years of the current NDP-Liberal government. There is not one day that I am in my Barrie—Innisfil office, not one phone call and not one email that is telling me that their life is better after nine years of the NDP-Liberal government. In fact, I would say that we spend most of our time, and my staff's time, in my Barrie—Innisfil office walking people in off the ledge, because they are so concerned about their economic future.

I recall that, a couple of months ago, I had a senior come into my office. Fortunately, he had a mortgage, but he had to renew it. With the new interest rates, mortgage renewal rates, the way they are, he was only going to be left with $600 at the end of the month to pay his property taxes, to pay his heat, to pay his hydro and to buy groceries. That is an indictment of nine years of failed economic policy, and it is having a severe impact on Canadians right across the country.

The budget does nothing to address that. In fact, I will subscribe to the idea that it actually makes things worse for Canadians, especially in the younger generation. In 2015, younger Canadians voted for the Prime Minister; he was talking about providing them with hope over fear and all the other things he was talking about. He said that things were going to be better for the next generation; in fact, things have gotten worse.

Young people right now do not just feel as though they have been lied to and let down. Rather, they feel as though they have been left behind after nine years of the Liberal-NDP government.

I will go one step further. Any young person whom I talk to right now does not just feel that. Young people are despondent right now, because they do not feel as though they are going to have the same opportunities as their parents had.

They have done everything right. They have gone to university. They have gotten educated. In some cases, some of them are working three or four jobs just to get by. However, because of the economic policies of the government, they still cannot afford to come up with the down payment to buy a home.

Those who have bought a home are now facing a mortgage renewal crisis that this country has not seen in generations. Moms are being kept up at night, trying to figure out how they are going to pay for their mortgages, because mortgage rates have tripled as a result of the failed economic policies of the Liberal government.

When one listens to the Liberal government, it is almost as though Liberals do not realize that they have been in government for nine years and that they have created the mess we are in right now through failed economic policies. When one injects as much liquidity into the system and one creates as much debt and deficit as we are dealing with right now, what does one think is going to happen?

The Leader of the Opposition was predicting three or four years ago that we were going to see interest rates increase as a result. The only lever that the Bank of Canada has to curb inflation is to raise interest rates.

We have heard from former Liberal finance ministers and from former Bank of Canada governors, who keep saying the same thing: It is almost as if the Bank of Canada is pressing on the brakes while the Liberal government is pouring more fuel on the inflationary fires.

There is no greater example of that than what is within the budget: There is $40 billion in additional spending and $56.1 in interest costs, just to service the debt. The debt has been doubled by the Prime Minister; his insatiable appetite to spend is putting at risk the economic prosperity of millions of young Canadians, including my kids. That $56.1 billion is more than we spend in health care transfers to the provinces, and it is almost an equal amount to what we take in on the GST.

It was the former NDP leader, Thomas Mulcair, who said just shortly after the budget that the GST is designed to pay for many of the services Canadians rely on. Every time somebody goes out and fills up their car with gas, goes out for dinner or buys a ticket to something, they pay the GST. They pay it knowing that it is designed to go towards providing for the social safety net that Canadians rely on in this country. However, right now, almost every single penny of the GST is going toward servicing the cost of the debt accumulated by the Prime Minister and the failed NDP-Liberal experiment.

As Tom Mulcair said, “It is no longer the GST. It is the DST, the debt service tax”. He could not have been more correct.

The government is hiding behind generational fairness, but the generational mess it has created for younger Canadians is not going to be fixed by the budget. It is going to be fixed by a government that lives within its means and that focuses on the revenue side of the ledger rather than solely the expense side. By that, I mean not attacking income-producing sectors of our economy that have historically created great wealth for our nation, such as our natural resource sector and agriculture sectors. Those sectors have contributed greatly to not just providing for that social safety net but also to being able to provide for Canadians.

In the natural resource sector, we have a big role to play in providing clean Canadian energy to the rest of the world, and there is no greater example of that than when the President of Germany came to Canada, begging for LNG. Energy security is the number one issue that Europe is facing right now. He came to Canada, and our Prime Minister shooed him away as though there was no business case for that. Two weeks later, the same German president signed a $27-billion deal with Qatar, which has fewer environmental, labour and human rights standards. That $27 billion could have come to Canada to be used to improve health care, education and the quality of life of not just the next generation but also future generations to come.

We have seen an increase in housing costs. We have seen rent and house prices double. We are seeing mortgage rates that, in some cases, have tripled. Hundreds of thousands of homes are now due for mortgage renewal, and these next couple of months and the budget would do nothing to allay the fears that moms have when they go to renew their mortgage, already facing an increasing affordability crisis and a housing attainability crisis.

The last thing I want to focus on is the fact that the government has raised the carbon tax again by 23%, and that is not the end of it. We are at $80 a tonne right now, and we are heading up to $170. After the 2019 election, the government said the price would never go up past $50 a tonne. We are already past that point, and it is expected to double, which is going to increase the cost of everything, such as the necessities of life, as well as housing costs, the cost of groceries and the cost of transporting goods. Everything will become more expensive in this country, and as our productivity continues to decline, so too will the quality of life of Canadians.

I am going to vote against the budget because it would do nothing to improve the quality of life for future generations or this generation today.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, let us think of the improvement in the quality of life for the thousands of young people who are going to have the opportunity to gain employment through companies like the VW plant, Canada's largest manufacturing plant; 200 football fields could fit into it. That is not to mention the Honda plant. We are not alone. Not only does the Liberal government see that, but so does the Progressive Conservative Government of Ontario, because it is also supporting these two initiatives.

We are supporting industries, and, yes, it does cost money. Can the member from the Reform Party tell us why it is that they oppose this type of investment, when we see Progressive Conservatives getting behind it?

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thought I made a pretty substantive argument as to why, in some cases, the budget was not going to work for Canadians. If the hon. member wants to sit here and hurl insults, it is his prerogative to do so.

The fact is that we do not know. In the absence of seeing any of the contracts that have been signed, either through Stellantis or Volkswagen, the only thing we know is that there are billions of dollars' worth of government subsidies being applied to these plants, on the credit card, by the way, because, again, we are at $1.4 trillion in debt. Just last week, the finance minister announced that she wanted to increase that debt ceiling by another $295 billion to $2.1 trillion.

Why does the government not provide confidence for Canadians and show just where the work is going to come from? All we are hearing right now is that there are a lot of temporary foreign workers, non-Canadians, who are going to be working in the plants. Show us the proof; that is all we ask.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, there was a time when people who voted Conservative in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada could be sure that the autonomy of their government would be respected and that the interference would stop. However, the Conservative Party voted against our motion calling for an end to interference and for the right to opt out with compensation for the provinces that did not want to implement certain programs that they already manage. It is a matter of not duplicating bills.

Can my colleague explain this disconnect? In future, what will they do to avoid this?

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Madam Speaker, I fundamentally believe that here in Ottawa, the federal government has a role to play in assisting the provinces.

However, provincial jurisdiction must be respected. Our leader respects provincial jurisdiction and will work with the premiers of every province in order to ensure that we have a confederation that is functioning and united, not divided. The Prime Minister has a tendency to divide us along regional lines, race lines, faith lines, gender lines and the house status of our neighbour, and now, by creating a new class war, he has another reason to divide people.

I believe that if we are going to have a functioning confederacy, we need a prime minister who not only respects provincial jurisdiction but also works with the provinces and provincial leaders.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, the federal budget includes a commitment to start a procurement process to replace Via Rail's long-distance fleet, some of the oldest rolling stock used by passenger trains in the whole world, built in the 1960s and sorely in need of replacement.

I wonder what the Conservative Party's position is on replacing the long-distance passenger trains that are used by Via Rail.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Madam Speaker, clearly the country is in desperate need of infrastructure replacement, and not just from a rail standpoint.

The difficulty I have with the budget, frankly, is that it does not necessarily focus all of its attention on that. I see a lot of debt and a lot of deficit. I see problems for future generations that are going to be caught up in many of the issues that the budget faces, not the least of which is the ability for young people to have hope for their future. They are being weighed down in mountains of debt and deficit as well. We need to control spending.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to the budget implementation act and how budget 2024 impacts the good people of Charlottetown, whom I am proud to represent.

I would like to start by congratulating the Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister for her hard work in judiciously addressing the most pressing priorities of Canadians while being mindful of spending. We have heard lots of discourse in recent weeks on the budget deficit, but not nearly enough on the importance of investing to meet the needs of those people who need it most.

Canadians deserve a government that can invest in the supports they need to live safe, healthy lives, while managing spending over the longer term. Far and away the most important issue for Islanders is, consistently, health care. The budget reaffirms the government's commitment to allocate $200 billion over 10 years to strengthen universal public health care. Through bilateral agreements signed by the federal government with all provinces and territories, the budget continues to work collaboratively to deliver good-quality public health care for all Canadians.

Budget 2024 also commits $1.5 billion over five years into the first national pharmacare plan. This includes free contraception, which allows every woman to choose the method of contraception that works for her and covers diabetes medication, improving the lives of 3.7 million Canadians living with diabetes. In Prince Edward Island, the 2023 pilot program improving access to affordable prescription drugs had previously reduced copays to five dollars for eligible medications used for cardiovascular disease, diabetes and mental health. The program also substantially grew the size of the formulary in Prince Edward Island to bring it on par with the other Atlantic provinces.

The national pharmacare program further expands on increasing accessibility of life-saving drugs for Canadians. In my home province of Prince Edward Island, one in three Islanders lives with diabetes or prediabetes. This investment will go a long way toward supporting them and preventing further complications by reducing the cost barrier to finding appropriate medication.

Finally, budget 2024 introduces the Canadian dental care program. Over the next year, more than nine million Canadians who are currently without health insurance will have access to the dental health care they need. I would like to underline here that I understand the apprehensions of dentists and other oral care providers in signing on to the program. The Minister of Health has been remarkably proactive in hearing these concerns and working to address them. We are already seeing progress. I am confident that providers will do the right thing and work with the federal government to address their concerns and to work in the interest of 400,000 seniors who have already signed up to the program from coast to coast.

I had the opportunity to meet in my office with a group of dentists, including the president of the Dental Association of Prince Edward Island. They went through the list of preoccupations they had with the program, but they ended on a very positive note, which is that, to a person, every single dentist and oral health care provider is there for their patients, acting in their best interests. The demand and the need for the program have been manifest by the number of people who have signed up. I am confident that health care providers will, at the end of the day, act in the best interests of their patients to help ensure the success of the program. I firmly believe that, and I have faith in them to do that. I also have faith in the minister to ensure that their concerns will be met.

The second priority I would like to talk about is housing. There are several commendable measures in the budget, too many to list, but I would like to touch on a few of them. The first is the additional $400-million investment in the housing accelerator fund, which has been fast-tracking the construction of 750,000 new homes over the next decade, since its launch.

In my province, the housing accelerator fund agreements with municipalities will lead to 895 new homes over the next three years across the province, 300 of which will be in the capital city of Charlottetown. It is a program that works. It is a program that is sought after by municipalities. It is a program that is exceptionally popular. It is a program that will continue to deliver the affordable, sustainable housing that Canadians need.

Another initiative I would like to speak to is the removal of GST on student residences in post-secondary institutions. Prince Edward Island is home to over 8,000 students. The initiative will help institutions provide safe housing for students on campus. It is something that is a preoccupation of university presidents. I have had conversations with them. It is a welcome initiative from the government, recognizing an important need both on P.E.I. and across the country.

The budget, in fact, significantly invests in post-secondary education and in the future of millennial and gen Z youth as they navigate the educational landscape. Indeed, with investments in new strategic research infrastructure and federal research support, core research grants, and increases to the Canada student grants and Canada student loans, budget 2024 sets students up for success by ensuring that anyone can have access to world-class post-secondary education without cost barriers. This will also ensure that Canada remains at the forefront of innovative research and technology in a rapidly changing global environment.

Not only does the budget work for post-secondary students, but it also establishes a national school food program, providing nutritious meals to 400,000 children from K to 12 every year. While schools remain under provincial jurisdiction, the $10-a-day child care bilateral agreements from coast to coast show that our government is more than capable of collaborating with progressive provinces and territories to support those people who need it most.

Much like the Quebec early learning and child care infrastructure informed $10-a-day child care, the Prince Edward Island school food program can serve as a successful template on which to model a national program. I was pleased to have the minister responsible tour and see the Prince Edward Island program in broad light in the last three or four months.

The program launched in 2020. It served 600,000 meals in 2023 and will serve an estimated 800,000 meals this year. There is much to learn from the structure and impacts of the program, and it can certainly be scaled up to meet national needs. The government has worked hard to lift children out of poverty, and the school food program will continue to do so, ensuring that they have access to the nutrition they need now to prepare them for tomorrow.

I would like to speak about some measures that will positively impact Prince Edward Island in particular. In budget 2024, the government proposes extending five more weeks of employment insurance payouts to seasonal workers for another two years. While this does fall short of returning Prince Edward Island to one EI zone, it does extend much-needed relief to the almost 3,000 seasonal workers on P.E.I.

Another measure in the budget is freezing the Confederation Bridge tolls and maintaining ferry fees to Nova Scotia until 2026. These measures are important in keeping travel from P.E.I. to the rest of the country affordable. It will benefit Islanders who regularly travel for work, to see their loved ones, or to access health care.

I was also pleased to see the establishment of the new Pituamkek national park reserve on the north coast of Prince Edward Island. Not only does this area have ecological significance due to its low contact with humans, but it is also important in understanding and preserving Mi’kmaq culture and settlement patterns. It is thus an important initiative that will help us interpret the past, while protecting biodiversity into the future.

Through these measures and more, budget 2024 delivers a sound plan for Canadians that I am proud to support. It solidifies the economy, supports the middle class and those working hard to join it, and truly delivers fairness for every generation.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague is the chair at the Standing Committee on Health, and I really want to commend him for the important work he does there. It is a difficult committee to be running these days, especially with the toxic drug crisis study we are doing.

My colleague is also a coastal MP and he knows how important the ghost gear fund is to coastal people for removing polystyrene or plastic pollution. Ghost gear is about 70% of the plastics we find in our oceans. We have the longest coastline in the world. We just hosted the INC-4 and what do we do in this budget? The government removed the funding for the ghost gear fund.

Will my colleague be going back to the minister and demanding that the government reinstate this world-class program?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, I can assure my colleague that the health committee is more manageable in part because of his presence.

With regard to his question on ghost gear, this problem has dramatically increased in our part of the world thanks to hurricane Fiona, so the short answer to his question is yes. This is not the time to be cutting funding for programs to retrieve ghost gear, certainly not on the east coast. The fact he is raising it means that is probably also the case on the west coast. I would be happy to work with him to advocate for the reinstatement or an increase in funding on this issue.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, as the chair of the health committee, someone who should have their finger on the pulse of the health care crisis we are facing in just about every province and territory across this country, how can he possibly go back to his constituents or any Canadian and explain that, as a result of this budget, we are paying $54.1 billion in taxpayer money just to manage the debt the Liberal government is placing on Canadians? That is more than the funding the government is transferring to the provinces and territories to cover health care.

How does he go back to his constituents and explain the government is spending more on managing the debt than it actually is helping provinces with health care?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, I will go back to my constituents with immense pride with the investments a confident country makes in its people and the investments a confident country makes in the most pressing challenges of the day. When I go back to my riding and talk about this budget, what people are going to want to know about is health care. That is job one. The answer to that is $200 billion, and I am proud to tell them this government is investing in health care.

I have absolutely no qualms about the fact that Canada has a AAA credit rating, which is something only two of the G7 countries can boast, that the debt-to-GDP ratio is among the top in the world, that the OECD has indicated we will be in that same category with respect to productivity by the end of 2025 and that we are investing massively in clean energy and the industries of tomorrow. Yes, with great pride I will be happy to talk to my constituents about this budget.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague talked about how progressive Quebec is and what great strides they have made, and he is right about that. The Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms came into force in 1976. Labour Code reforms to protect workers from scabs date back to 1977. Child care dates back to the late 1990s.

We have proven on more than one occasion that, when our tax dollars come back to us, we use them wisely for the good of the people. Why the ongoing interference in this budget?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Madam Speaker, I am from Prince Edward Island, and we always welcome federal investment. I understand Quebec's concern. Her story is very different from mine. I am convinced that the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec have a good relationship. We need to have some tough conversations. I expect the conversation to be ongoing. I hope that the provincial and federal governments will always act in the best interests of their citizens.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is good to be here to speak on behalf of the amazing people of North Island—Powell River on the budget bill.

I want to acknowledge that it is really hard times. Not only in Canada but in many countries across the planet, we are seeing massive challenges during this time. I feel fundamentally that we have to raise the bar of dignity in this country so that people can live with dignity and respect, and we know that is not happening enough.

I will talk a little bit about the things I am supportive of in this budget and also share some of my concerns.

The first thing I want to bring up is the launching of the new national school food program. My colleague, the member for Courtenay—Alberni, and I were with our leader in Comox Valley. We were standing with representatives of Lush Valley, which does tremendous work in our region providing safe, local food and works with a lot of schools in the region to make sure there is healthy food provided. What they were very clear about was that they were grateful for how much the provincial government in B.C. had stood up and given funding, but they needed to see that funding matched because the need is increasing so much.

We know that young people across Canada are faced with challenges, and it is very hard to learn when one has not had breakfast. One of the things about this program that I fundamentally believe in is that it has to be accessible for everyone. When we talk about dignity, it means making sure that what one person gets the other person gets, and that there is no feeling of “you go off and eat because we know you are poor”, which is so destructive. I am really proud of the work that is being done here. I know that Lush Valley and many organizations across my riding will be grateful for this money because it will provide food in a way that is open and friendly and make sure that nobody, even these young children, lose their dignity in that sense.

I was also happy to see the health transfer grow. It is not as much as I would necessarily like it to be, but in my riding, health care is, in some cases, at a pretty significant crisis point. The provincial government has stood up and done a lot of profound and important work, but there is still so much more that needs to be done and that needs revenue.

I think of the folks in Port Hardy. I was there not too long ago, and we were talking a lot about the fact that their emergency room is closed for several hours in the night and how hard it is when people have an emergency and they have to go to Port McNeill. From Alert Bay, they have to take a ferry now instead of going to their hospital to get the help that they need.

In my riding, there are a lot of people aging, and they want to age in place. They want to age in their communities because they know one another and they support one another. That is really important, so I am glad to see this increase. I really hope it supports these people in a meaningful way. We need to see health care being taken of. We need emergency rooms open, and we need health care to be accessible. We need to make sure that it helps people stay in their communities of choice. We have a large country, which is something unique about Canada, but we need to make sure that this increase really helps.

I appreciate as well the expanding of the Canada student loan forgiveness program to pharmacists, dentists, dental hygienists, midwives, early childhood educators, teachers, social workers, personal support workers, physiotherapists and psychologists who choose to work for rural and remote regions. This is really important, because it creates an attraction strategy to show people the beautiful places to live all across Canada. However, the one thing that concerns me about this is that I do not see anything here that would maximize retention.

We know that a lot of people go to smaller communities, they live there for a few years and all too often they will leave once their student loans are paid off, in this example specifically. We need to see support in terms of retention. When I talk to health care providers, sometimes the concerns are things like not enough child care or not enough resources for them to do some of the things they really need to do. We need those services in rural and remote communities. We know that once people settle in those communities, often their lives are so much stronger because of the close connection of the community. It is unfortunate right now because what we are seeing is this constant spinning door of people coming into the community and leaving. We really need to look at retention. I am happy this was done, but I want to see more retention.

In terms of affordability, I was happy to see some of the work done around cracking down on predatory lending. We need to make sure that there is a higher level of accountability because too many people are low-income and they are going to these lending places and are having to pay such a high level of interest that they can never catch up.

I am actually hearing this about people who are providing care for seniors. They are making so little money that they are continuing to have to borrow just to make ends meet and that creates a system that we do not want. It does concern me because the other thing we know is that, in the previous budget, we saw a commitment to making sure that the people who were providing those services would get $25, at the very least. We know that the provinces and territories have not signed on to this, so something is not working to make it attractive enough.

We need to see the wages improve for people who do that care work, who go into people's homes and help them and who go into long-term care facilities and into assisted living facilities and do that important care work. We know it is largely women and unfortunately they are not being paid enough. Therefore, I am glad that there is some accountability for these lending organizations that are very predatory, because the harms can be fundamentally bad and it really leaves people grasping.

I want to thank the member for Courtenay—Alberni for his incredible work. We saw the doubling of the volunteer firefighters tax credit and the search and rescue volunteers tax credit, from $3,000 to $6,000. This is incredible. What we need to understand is that, in rural communities, they would not be able to get insurance on their homes if it were not for the amazing people volunteering as firefighters, because that creates some safety. Therefore, we have to make sure that those amazing volunteers get more. This got us to $6,000, and we want to see it even higher because we know that people who look after our communities and keep us safe need the recognition.

I am excited about the fact that we see some money going into indigenous loan guarantee programs. We need to see indigenous communities getting the supports they need to build their businesses. We know that our legislative agenda, both provincially and federally, has been to isolate indigenous communities from participating in our economy for far too long. We are still trying to overcome some of those systemic problems, so it is good to see some movement.

I was also pleased to see a bit more tax for those who are making a ton of money off of the labour of everyday Canadians. We know that there is the implementation of a 15% global minimum tax to ensure that large multinational corporations start to pay close to their fair share, wherever they do business. That is really important because it is about time that we see that.

There are some things that did concern me about this budget. I was glad that we came along and made sure that Indigenous Services did not see the big cut in funding that was predicted and being forecast. We worked really hard to make sure that funding was not removed.

I am also very concerned about the first nations funding for languages. We have heard very clearly from the First Peoples' Cultural Council that this is a big concern. For my riding, North Island College has worked with several indigenous communities across our riding to build courses so that people can come in and learn the language. That is for everybody, and it is quite profound to see both indigenous people and non-indigenous people coming to learn the language of the first people of the territory that they live on. I think of the 'Namgis First Nation, which is creating a whole cultural revolution in its region and really helping children, often who are exposed mostly, if not 100%, to their own language first for a period of time so that the language will be strong in them. I know that Tla’amin Nation near Powell River is doing a lot of tremendous work in this area as well. Therefore, it is too bad not to see that language funding there because we know that is a key part.

I look forward to answering any questions.

Business of the House

[Gudie Hutchings, Liberal, Minister of Rural Economic Development and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, I request that the ordinary hour of daily adjournment of the next sitting be 12 midnight, pursuant to an order made on Wednesday, February 28.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to an order made on Wednesday, February 28, the minister's request to extend the sitting is deemed adopted.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-69, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the member's approach to taking us through this budget legislation and highlighting the work that is being done in a constructive way, as well as pushing the government to do more in areas that are of concern.

I, too, hear from many constituents within my riding of Waterloo. There are a diversity of perspectives and concerns. Something I want to ask about is the importance of national programming, of different political parties working together to deliver for Canadians, and finding a way, a collaborative approach, to push each other to do better and to do more.

I think about the national food program, which was referred to. A young constituent in my riding named Scarlett could not understand why some people had access to that food and others did not. To see this as part of our budget is something that she and her grandma were really excited about.

I would like to hear from the member as to the importance of finding a way forward to deliver for our constituents. Are these programs we are hearing about programs that we can take for granted, or should we be concerned with ensuring that there are protections in place to ensure that more Canadians benefit from these types of programs?

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have worked with the member for a long time at committee, and I really appreciate her work ethic.

My response is something that I hear a lot from my constituents. Sometimes we see the province doing a lot of work. In B.C. there are a lot of supports being put into place to provide food and housing, but there is not as much with the federal government pitching in as a partner to deal with these big issues, which are the result of underfunding from multiple governments, not only the Liberal government, but also Conservative governments. They are too big to have just started recently and are a cumulative reaction to being underfunded for a long time.

Therefore, I am glad this funding would be here, but we definitely need to see more resources on the ground. It just comes back to our bar of dignity and how low we are going to let people sink below it in our country.