Debates of April 3rd, 2014

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question about what is not in this bill. This bill does little to help young people find work. At this stage in a young Canadian's life, failing to find work will have a negative impact on the rest of his life.

I would like my colleague to comment on that.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

It is a good question because the Standing Committee on Finance has looked at the issue of youth employment and is still studying it today. Since at least the beginning of the financial crisis and therefore the economic crisis of 2008, the youth unemployment rate has consistently been roughly twice that of the general population. It is around 14% to 15%.

I think it is good that the committee is meeting to discuss this. What is more, the NDP moved a motion at the Standing Committee on Finance to study the issue of youth employment and to come up with solutions; however, those solutions are missing from this budget implementation bill.

There are solutions out there. I know that the NDP is looking at a number of possibilities for creating incentives for hiring young people, including tax incentives. It has worked for countries like Germany. We have to be able to take the best practices and try to incorporate them as much as possible to deal with the issue directly, but the budget implementation bill does not do that.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I too rise in the House to express my opposition to this omnibus process that is clearly calling into question the ability of parliamentarians to properly represent their constituents through informed debate on very specific issues. Instead, everything is thrown into an omnibus bill.

I would like to ask my esteemed colleague the following. The government could have done a lot of things in this bill. I believe with all my heart that the future of this country, and probably the future of all the industrialized countries of the world, depends on the creation of new, clean technologies in order to meet our energy needs. The eco-energy program could have been brought back, for example.

Could my esteemed colleague enlighten us by explaining what other similar measures could have been put in this bill in order to help future generations?

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Pontiac is quite right.

Regardless of what government members may propose in the speeches we are about to hear, judging by the two speeches we have heard this morning, there will be no mention of the opportunities that the government has missed, such as moving to the energy transition that we will have to make eventually or genuinely stimulating the economy in a productive fashion. The eco-energy program is an excellent initiative.

The government always forgets about tax multipliers. Investments are not all equal. Investments in infrastructure and in low-income Canadians, through employment insurance, have a much greater impact on the economy than cuts to income and sales taxes for companies and individuals.

The government should consider its own recommendations, recommendations made by its own finance department, in order to come up with measures that will really help the Canadian economy and not the measures we find here.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague and those who elected him to Parliament. He does an exceptional job.

I would like him to comment for us on the tax credit that has not been renewed in the Bill C-31. This is the tax credit the NDP proposed in 2011 that stimulates job creation by helping small business with hiring. As the Conservatives should know, when small businesses in Canada do well, Canada does well.

Can my colleague tell us the consequences for small business if this tax credit is not renewed?

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is an issue that I could have addressed, but we are only given so much time for our speeches.

People call this measure a tax credit but it is actually an EI premium credit that was granted to SMEs for each person they hired. SMEs are the biggest driver of job creation in this country. For two years, the government gave SMEs a holiday from paying employment insurance premiums for creating new jobs.

This measure was renewed each year until now. We were very much in favour of this measure. We supported the government and we even included this measure in our 2011 platform. This credit did great things. We even wanted to take this one step further by proposing a second credit, not only for job creation, but also for job retention.

The government must consider such initiatives and support them. However, instead, it quietly decided to discontinue this tax credit. Nevertheless, many organizations found it useful, including the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, as did the members on this side of the House. We have always supported SMEs in their efforts to grow and level the playing field so that they can prosper. We are very disappointed. The government is on the wrong track, and the answers that are being given by the Minister of Finance are not at all reassuring for Canadians or the economic community.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to discuss the bill on economic action plan 2014. I will be sharing my time with the hon. Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.

It is a great honour for me to speak in favour of the economic action plan and its implementation.

As a chartered accountant, I am very impressed by the contents of the plan and the opportunities it creates for Canada's economy. As a mother, I appreciate that it makes Canadian families a priority, and as the member for Winnipeg South Centre, I am proud of the means it makes available to communities to improve infrastructure and services.

As everyone knows, our Conservative government is working to create jobs, ensure economic growth and secure long-term prosperity for all Canadians—not just our generation, but all future generations.

Our economic action plan 2014 includes numerous measures to promote our country's economic growth. I would like to talk about some of those measures.

For example, we are going to be connecting Canadians with available jobs, training people for jobs that actually exist, and providing new graduates with real opportunities. We are going to have more paid internships for young Canadians, investing $55 million to create paid internships for recent graduates in both small and medium-sized business and high-demand fields. We are going to be supporting job creation and innovation.

We will support job creation, innovation and trade.

Over the next decade, we will invest $1.5 billion in post-secondary research through the Canada first research excellence fund.

We will promote Canadian-made products, develop a “Made in Canada” campaign to promote high-quality Canadian products here and around the world, and work with our partners to reduce internal barriers to trade.

We want to ensure responsible resource development, conserve Canada's natural heritage and invest in infrastructure and transportation, specifically through the conservation of recreational fisheries and further investment in infrastructure.

We want to expand tax relief for health-related items and services, cap wholesale wireless rates to make telecommunications services more affordable, crack down on cross-border price discrimination, and much more.

We will establish a $200-million national disaster mitigation program to help communities prepare for natural disasters.

The economic action plan looks to return to a balanced budget in 2015. As a chartered accountant and the member for Winnipeg South Centre, I am proud to be a member of the government that has made this commitment to taxpayers. Unlike previous governments, we will not do it at just any price. That is a very important point. We respect taxpayers.

For example, major transfers to the provinces for health care, education and other services that Canadians depend on will also continue to increase to record levels. While we are controlling departmental spending, federal support to Canadians, such as seniors' benefits, will continue to grow.

Our Conservative government is squarely focused on what matters to Canadians: job creation, economic growth and Canada's long-term prosperity. With the help of Canada's economic action plan, the Canadian economy has seen the best economic performance among all G7 countries in recent years, both during the global recession and throughout the recovery. In addition, Canada is the only G7 country that has received the highest possible rating—AAA—from all major credit rating agencies.

Canada's net debt-to-GDP ratio is, by far, the lowest in the G7. For the sixth straight year, the World Economic Forum has deemed Canada's banking system to be the most stable in the world.

For example, the International Monetary Fund, the IMF, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the OECD, have both projected that Canada will have among the strongest economic growth among all G7 countries in the years to come. That is a remarkable accomplishment.

Since the end of the recession in July 2009, over one million net new jobs have been created in Canada. Over 85% of them are full-time jobs, and close to 80% are in the private sector.

Unlike the high-tax NDP and Liberals, our Conservative government believes in low taxes and leaving money where it belongs: in the pockets of hard-working Canadian families and job-creating businesses. We are cutting every kind of tax: personal, consumption, business, excise and more. I have many examples of how we are doing that, but I do not think I have time to share them.

It is important that the people of Canada recognize that we are here for all Canadians. We are doing things for young Canadians and older Canadians. For example, the youth employment strategy, the YES program, would help young Canadians get the skills and work experience they need to transition to the workplace. It is an important investment of $330 million per year. To streamline and modernize the Canada student loans program, we are investing $123 million. This is among other previously established initiatives to support our young people.

It is also important to recognize what we have done to help senior citizens. They are the beneficiaries of our historic and landmark creation, the tax-free savings account, TFSA. It has been beneficial to senior citizens, as neither income earned in a TFSA nor withdrawals from a TFSA affect their federal income-tested benefits and credits, such as the guaranteed income supplement.

I am proud of this legislation. I am proud of our economic action plan 2014.

I look forward to taking any questions from my colleagues on this important budget.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Winnipeg South Centre for her speech. We are both members of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.

I want to talk about something that directly affects my constituents in Beauport—Limoilou. I asked a question about this issue on Tuesday. A committee called Vigilance train Limoilou was created and launched a Facebook page yesterday. Tomorrow it will hold a press conference. One of the clauses in this monstrous bill will allow cabinet's decisions on changes to safety standards for the transportation of dangerous goods be kept secret.

My colleague from Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques was right to conclude his speech by talking about the government's lack of transparency. I would like to ask my colleague how she can condone enshrining this secret cult in law?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague on the other side of the House needs to understand that our government is focused on job creation, economic growth and long-term prosperity. These are the goals of economic action plan 2014.

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is about the high, in fact record level of personal debt. It is now $1.66 for every $1 of annual income. This is the debt that individuals in Canada owe.

For all the talk of the Conservatives about how many jobs have been created since the very depths of the recession, which they always use as the starting point, the individual debt has increased. At the same time, the government's debt has increased under the Conservative government, and across the country, in the personal accounts of Canadians.

Why did the budget not try to tackle the personal debt issue that has been increasing over the last several years?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, this question is terrifyingly misguided. The Conservative government is placing money in the pockets of Canadians because it believes in Canadians and their competency and capacity to make the right decisions for themselves and their families. That is unlike the previous government, which balanced the budget on the backs of our children and seniors. Our children's education transfer payments were cut and our seniors' health transfers were cut.

We are balancing the budget responsibly, as every family has to.

It is absolutely crucial that the hon. member understands the difference of approach. We have put $3,400 in the pockets of each family. We do not want to have concerns like this.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for her wonderful speech. I find her to be a great colleague to work with.

My question is very short, due to time. In this budget implementation act, there is a provision that would allow the automatic entry of people who would receive an HST or GST cheque into the program, so that people with low incomes, or seniors and pensioners, no longer have to apply. We are cutting red tape here. We are making sure that the people who deserve the support get it.

I know that the member has a lot of seniors in her riding. I would like to hear her comments.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right. The members of my constituency are absolutely delighted. They are also delighted that the Conservative Government of Canada has taken 380,000 seniors off the tax rolls.

The concern in my province in particular is that our province has not matched that generosity, but it certainly is a help for seniors. I concur with the red tape reduction. The example I used in my remarks to the House is that TFSA earnings do not in any way impinge on GIS payments.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-31, the economic action plan 2014 act, no. 1. It is not often that I rise during debates on legislation, but I want to share a few thoughts on this particular bill. That is because I believe this bill and our recent budget, which it would implement, are of particular importance to my constituents in York—Simcoe.

Under the leadership of the Prime Minister, our government has stayed true to our commitment to strengthen the economy for all Canadians and has remained determined to see our plan through.

Last Friday, I was proud to introduce this bill on behalf of the Minister of Finance. It constitutes our latest initiative, focusing on our key priorities: creating jobs and economic growth, supporting and protecting families, and returning to balanced budgets in 2015. This bill would implement initiatives to connect my constituents with available jobs, invest in infrastructure, and expand our focus on trade and responsible resource development.

My constituents are pleased to see action connecting them with available jobs and fostering job creation. York—Simcoe is a hard-working riding. People are proud to work with their hands to do real things to see a positive result at the end of a day of hard work. This is a budget for them and for their children.

Apprenticeship training plays an important role in Canada's education system, and is a key provider of the vital skills and knowledge necessary to power and grow the Canadian economy. Recognizing this, economic action plan 2014 no. 1 would provide apprentices registered in the Red Seal trades with access to interest-free loans of up to $4,000 for a period of technical training. I want to ensure that my young constituents are given real opportunities to find jobs and build careers. Many are doing so, getting jobs in Ontario or courageously striking out and moving west for opportunity. In either case, I want them to be given that chance.

In York—Simcoe, we are experienced with the use of temporary foreign workers. The country's most valuable market gardening in our fertile Holland Marsh muck soils depends heavily on temporary foreign workers from abroad who fill tasks that are impossible to get filled locally, but that has always been done carefully. Unfortunately, in recent years we have seen failures in the temporary foreign workers program elsewhere in Canada, where officials have approved foreign workers despite the ready availability of Canadians qualified and willing to do the work. Some of my constituents have been affected by this situation.

It is not acceptable. Our government remains committed to a temporary foreign worker program that operates in the national interest, so included in this bill are measures to ensure that Canadians would be given the first opportunity at available jobs by strengthening the labour market opinion process.

The bill also would continue our commitment to support families like those in York—Simcoe. In last year's Speech from the Throne, we committed to lower prices and greater competition in the telecommunications market. In this bill, we would make significant progress by capping wholesale domestic wireless roaming rates. Further support for families is included through a proposed increase, to $15,000, of the maximum amount of the adoption expense tax credit to help make adoption more affordable for families.

We would also make changes to ensure the tax system reflects the evolving nature of the health care system and the health care needs of Canadians. This includes exempting naturopathic doctors and acupuncturist services from the goods and services tax, or the harmonized sales tax, as it is in Ontario now. In York—Simcoe, my constituents increasingly rely on alternative health care providers, and this measure would help them in real and tangible ways.

The measures set out in economic action plan 2014 have one very important element in common with all of our previous budgets: they will produce results for Canadians and their economy.

In 2009, after the worst global economic downturn since the Great Depression, our government introduced its first economic action plan. Since then, the economic policies that we have put in place through our economic action plans have been extraordinarily successful. The reality is that Canada is an economic leader among the major developed countries of the G7. While economic uncertainty is still a reality for many developed economies, our economic action plans have enabled Canada to recoup all of the jobs lost during the recession, and more.

Since our first economic action plan, our government has created more than a million net new jobs. That is the strongest job growth performance of all the G7 countries during the recovery. Nearly all of the jobs created since 2009 have been full-time positions, 85% are in the private sector and over two-thirds are in high-paying industries.

As well, Canada's real gross domestic product is significantly above pre-recession levels, the best performance in the G7 again.

Despite all of these accomplishments and despite what is obviously a plan that works for Canadians and their economy, the opposition continues to oppose our important economic initiatives at every opportunity.

Most important to York—Simcoe is the fact that this budget bill has us on track to eliminate the deficit and balance the budget in 2015. That matters to them because they understand that government debt is their debt, and they understand that when the opposition opposes our measures, it is because the opposition wants bigger government, higher spending, higher taxes, more deficits, and deeper debt. This is not what York—Simcoe residents want from Ottawa.

From my time as the Minister of International Trade, I can tell the House that our government's ability to propose concrete measures to complement our already sound framework and to steer them through Parliament in a timely manner makes Canada stand out among developed economies.

In contrast, in many other countries saw political paralysis rein and governments collapse. All the while those other domestic economies cried out for help. People abroad would say to me that they had confidence in Canada's government. Contrasting us with the U.S. and much of Europe, they would say that at least we can get things done in Canada.

Getting things done has been an important hallmark of this government. We have actively worked to facilitate a hard-working, orderly, and productive House of Commons. In York—Simcoe, constituents usually ask me why it takes so long to get things done in Parliament. They tell me that they elected us to make decisions.

Bill C-31—Time Allocation Motion

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, with my hard-working, results-oriented constituents in mind, to facilitate the certainty of being able to come to a decision on this bill, I move:

That, in relation to Bill C-31, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures, not more than three further sitting days after the day on which this Order is adopted shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and

that, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the third day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The motion is in order. Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who may wish to ask questions to rise in their places now so that the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in the question period.

Thank you. We will proceed in a fashion similar to a normal question and comment period. Members will have about a minute or a minute and 15 seconds to put a question and also for the government to respond.

Questions, the hon. minister for Burnaby—New Westminster.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. We are not ministers yet, but it is certainly coming, especially after this quite despicable act. It is coming. On October 19, 2015, you will be calling many of the folks on the NDP side as ministers, so we appreciate your getting the practice in right now.

We had the government House leader, soon to be opposition House leader, rise in this House and speak to the budget. This is a rare thing. He has not done this very often.

The problem with time allocation is that he is now shutting out most members of Parliament from being able to speak to this budget bill. Most members of the opposition, but also dozens of Conservatives, have not spoken to a single government bill since the beginning of the session. They are being told by the government House leader that their constituents do not have the right to be represented in the House of Commons. If their constituents do not have the right to have them stand up on their behalf and speak to this bill, most members of the opposition and most members of government are being disenfranchised. That is appalling. It is over 60 times now that the government has shut down debate. Hundreds of members of Parliament will be disenfranchised by this action.

The simple question is this: given how low the credibility of the current government is with the Canadian public, how does it have the nerve to cut hundreds of members of Parliament out of the budgetary process?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as the House knows, Canadians gave our government a very strong mandate to govern and to focus on the economy. At the point of the last election, all Canadians knew that with the economy in the midst of a global downturn, there was only one party they had faith in to take control of Canada's economy and help build and create jobs.

Canadians expect their government and the opposition to move this type of legislation forward. They expect the government to take decisions and to take action on the commitments that we have already brought forward in the budget. That is what our government has done in the House of Commons over the years that we have served as the Government of Canada.

Our government has faced continued attempts by the opposition, as we saw again this morning, to delay and obstruct these important bills with amendments that are really just calling for the shutdown of the entire budget package. We have seen the opposition filibuster.

We certainly look forward to continued debate here in the House of Commons.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it was with absolute astonishment that I saw the head of the Conservative Party stand up and move time allocation on something so big and so complicated as a bill that would have such an enormous impact on this country of ours as we move forward. Does the member have any shame at all that his party can sit back and allow this to go forward without having proper debate?

I would ask the member this. How many different bills are in the bill we are talking about? There must be 50 or 60, if not more, changes of significance to major things that are going on in our country. Does he not have any shame or concern about the impact that would have on Canadians?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, many of us still remember 2005, the last time the member had the opportunity to sit in government. That Liberal government's last budget implementation bill did much the same. It amended many different bills, dozens of different pieces of legislation.

Let us be clear. It is not the size of the budget legislation that the opposition cares about. It is not about which bills are in or which are not. We have had much larger budget implementation acts or bills in the past. It is that the opposition wants to stop the necessary and vital economic reforms that are in this bill.

Even though the opposition likes to suggest otherwise, it has been common practice to include various measures in a bill and in the subsequent budget implementation bill. That has been common practice. This is nothing new or groundbreaking. The opposition would have the Canadian public believe that these are extraordinary measures that have never been implemented in the past. Budget implementation bills often deal with legislation from different departments, with monies and so forth, so it is nothing that is new or groundbreaking. It simply reflects the central role of a budget to a government's agenda.

That is what this implementation act does. It brings forward the mandate and the agenda that we have to continue to bring forward positive policy that will help create jobs and build prosperity for all Canadians in a very fragile recovery.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if I understand the minister of state's argument, it is that the Conservatives are just like the former Liberal government, only on steroids. Is that his argument in defence of this action?

This omnibus budget implementation act, which follows a long series of similar bills, is over 350 pages and almost 500 clauses in length, and contains so many changes that have never been brought forward in a budget bill. I just want to highlight two that are of particular concern to so many of my constituents in Parkdale—High Park, and I am sure members are hearing this across the country.

First of all, with the changes around FATCA, a totally new bill is housed within Bill C-31 that would affect so many people who happen to hold Canadian-American citizenship, and is doing so without answering vital questions around privacy and what it would mean to people's private banking information. We need to have a thorough debate on that.

A second change is to rail safety. My riding is bounded by three railway lines, and people are very concerned about rail safety. When I read in the bill that the government would be able to change and repeal a wide variety of railway safety regulations without even telling the public, I think Canadians deserve a debate on that.

My question for the minister of state is how can he justify suppressing the democratic right to debate such fundamental changes the Conservative government would make?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, again, we did have the opportunity to listen to a number of speeches this morning from the government and the opposition sides. With all due respect, the opposition brought forward concerns regarding the FATCA agreement, which this member has talked about, and there are many people across Canada who are questioning exactly what FATCA is. Let me say that the agreement addresses those concerns.

The agreement addresses the concerns that Canadians had when the United States imposed certain regulations based on the treaties it has with many different countries. Consequently, this government responded very quickly and negotiated a very solid intergovernmental agreement, or IGA, with the Americans. It is an agreement that relies on the existing tax framework under the Canada-U.S. tax treaty.

CRA will not assist the Americans, it will not assist the IRS, in collecting U.S. taxes. Also, there are no new taxes being implemented through FATCA, and no new taxes that Canadians need to worry about. In our negotiations, we obtained a number of significant concessions that would not normally have been included, such as not including RRSPs in disclosure, not including RDSPs, not including tax-free savings accounts, and many others.

Again, FATCA is a policy that is here basically to safeguard Canadians.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I found it odd in several respects as this debate started that the member for York—Simcoe mentioned that people in his riding told him that they just wanted things done. If I lived in his riding, I would tell him, quite frankly, that he does not get out much, because what we are looking at here is something that is getting done, but not in a way that people feel is right for the country. I think it is irresponsible for the Conservatives to say that they just want to get it done quickly by using things such as this omnibus legislation.

The minister of state talked about the practices back in 2005 when the Liberals were in power. I remember that time and was here when the Conservatives took particular issue with the fact that the Atlantic accords were within the budget legislation. The Conservatives wanted these as a separate vote, and they got their way because of the Conservative members from Newfoundland Labrador. Things have changed. One, there are no Conservative members from Newfoundland and Labrador, among other things.

So, if the Conservatives did not like it then, when will they start practising what they used to preach?

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we very much look forward to the next election when we will have members from Newfoundland and Labrador sitting in the Conservative caucus again so that Newfoundland and Labrador can have a voice not only in the caucus but also in cabinet. I think that member has recognized the problem that Newfoundland and Labrador does not have those opportunities. That said, we have many very strong members of Parliament from Atlantic Canada and across the country who are standing up and talking about the issues that are affecting Newfoundland and Labrador.

We look forward and anticipate, after the next election, Conservative members of Parliament from Newfoundland and Labrador.

[Marc-André Morin, NDP, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like our Conservative, tax-cutting heroes—who have allegedly liberated taxpayers—to tell us about the 125,000 workers who use the Champlain Bridge each day.

What will those workers do when they wake up to find that they have to pay a tax to get to work and another to get back home at night?