Bill C-13 (Historical)

Keeping Canada's Economy and Jobs Growing Act

An Act to implement certain provisions of the 2011 budget as updated on June 6, 2011 and other measures

Part 1 of this enactment implements income tax measures and related measures proposed in the 2011 budget. Most notably, it
(a) introduces the family caregiver tax credit for caregivers of infirm dependent relatives;
(b) introduces the children’s arts tax credit of up to $500 per child of eligible fees associated with children’s artistic, cultural, recreational and developmental activities;
(c) introduces a volunteer firefighters tax credit to allow eligible volunteer firefighters to claim a 15% non-refundable tax credit based on an amount of $3,000;
(d) eliminates the rule that limits the number of claimants for the child tax credit to one per domestic establishment;
(e) removes the $10,000 limit on eligible expenses that can be claimed under the medical expense tax credit in respect of a dependent relative;
(f) increases the advance payment threshold for the Canada child tax benefit to $20 per month and for the GST/HST credit to $50 per quarter;
(g) aligns the notification requirements related to marital status changes for an individual who receives the Canada child tax benefit with the notification requirements for the GST/HST credit;
(h) reduces the minimum course-duration requirements for the tuition, education and textbook tax credits, and for educational assistance payments from registered education savings plans, that apply to students enrolled at foreign universities;
(i) allows the tuition tax credit to be claimed for eligible occupational, trade and professional examination fees;
(j) allows the reallocation of assets in registered education savings plans for siblings without incurring tax penalties;
(k) extends to the end of 2013 the temporary accelerated capital cost allowance treatment for investment in machinery and equipment in the manufacturing and processing sector;
(l) expands eligibility for the accelerated capital cost allowance for clean energy generation and conservation equipment;
(m) extends eligibility for the mineral exploration tax credit by one year to flow-through share agreements entered into before March 31, 2012;
(n) expands the eligibility rules for qualifying environmental trusts;
(o) amends the deduction rates for intangible capital costs in the oil sands sector;
(p) aligns the tax treatment to investments made under the Agri-Québec program with that of investments under AgriInvest;
(q) introduces rules to strengthen the tax regime for charitable donations;
(r) introduces anti-avoidance rules for registered retirement savings plans and registered retirement income funds;
(s) introduces rules to limit tax deferral opportunities for individual pension plans;
(t) introduces rules to limit tax deferral opportunities for corporations with significant interests in partnerships;
(u) extends the tax on split income to capital gains realized by a minor child; and
(v) extends the dividend stop-loss rules to dividends deemed to be received on the redemption of shares held by certain corporations.
Part 1 also implements other selected income tax measures and related measures. Most of these measures were referred to in the 2011 budget as previously announced measures. Most notably, it
(a) accommodates an increase in the annual contribution limit to the Saskatchewan Pension Plan and aligns its tax treatment with that of other tax-assisted retirement vehicles;
(b) clarifies that the “financially dependent” test applies for the purposes of provisions that permit rollovers of the assets of a deceased taxpayer’s registered retirement savings plan or registered retirement income fund to an infirm child or grandchild’s registered disability savings plan;
(c) ensures that the alternative minimum tax does not apply in respect of securities that are subject to the election under section 180.01 of the Income Tax Act;
(d) clarifies the rules applicable to the scholarship exemption for post-secondary scholarships, fellowships and bursaries; and
(e) amends the pension-to-registered retirement savings plan transfer limits in situations where the accrued pension amount was reduced due to the insolvency of the employer and underfunding of the employer’s registered pension plan.
Part 2 amends the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006 to implement the softwood lumber ruling rendered by the London Court of International Arbitration on January 21, 2011.
Part 3 amends the Customs Tariff in order to simplify it and reduce the customs processing burden for Canadians by consolidating similar tariff items that have the same tariff rates and removing end-use provisions where appropriate. The amendments also simplify the structure of some provisions and remove obsolete provisions.
Part 4 amends the Customs Tariff to introduce new tariff items to facilitate the processing of low value non-commercial imports arriving by post or by courier.
Part 5 amends the Canada Education Savings Act to make the additional amount of a Canada Education Savings grant that is available under subsection 5(4) of that Act available to more than one of the beneficiary’s parents, if they share custody of the beneficiary, they are eligible individuals as defined in section 122.6 of the Income Tax Act and the beneficiary is a qualified dependant of each of them.
Part 6 amends the Children’s Special Allowances Act and a regulation made under that Act respecting payments relating to children under care.
Part 7 amends the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act to provide that the maximum aggregate amount of outstanding student loans is to be determined by regulation, to remove the power of the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development to deny certificates of eligibility, and to change the limitation period for the Minister to take administrative measures. It also authorizes the Minister to forgive portions of family physicians’, nurses’ and nurse practitioners’ student loans if they begin to work in under-served rural or remote communities.
Part 7 also amends the Canada Student Loans Act to authorize the Minister to forgive portions of family physicians’, nurses’ and nurse practitioners’ guaranteed student loans if they begin to work in under-served rural or remote communities.
Part 8 amends Part IV of the Employment Insurance Act to provide a temporary measure to refund a portion of employer premiums for small business. An employer whose premiums were $10,000 or less in 2010 will be refunded the increase in 2011 premiums over those paid in 2010, to a maximum of $1,000.
Part 9 provides for payments to be made to provinces, territories, municipalities, First Nations and other entities for municipal infrastructure improvements.
Part 10 amends the Canadian Securities Regulation Regime Transition Office Act so that funding for the Canadian Securities Regulation Regime Transition Office may be fixed through an appropriation Act.
Part 11 amends the Wage Earner Protection Program Act to extend in certain circumstances the period during which wages earned by individuals but not paid to them by their employers who are bankrupt or subject to receivership may be the subject of a payment under that Act.
Part 12 amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to repeal certain provisions that provide for mandatory retirement. It also amends the Canada Labour Code to repeal a provision that denies employees the right to severance pay for involuntary termination if they are entitled to a pension. Finally, it amends the Conflict of Interest Act.
Part 13 amends the Judges Act to permit the appointment of two additional judges to the Nunavut Court of Justice.
Part 14 provides for the retroactive coming into force of section 9 of the Nordion and Theratronics Divestiture Authorization Act in order to ensure the validity of pension regulations made under that section.
Part 15 amends the Canada Pension Plan to include amounts received by an employee under an employer-funded disability plan in contributory salary and wages.
Part 16 amends the Jobs and Economic Growth Act to replace the reference to the Treasury Board Secretariat with a reference to the Chief Human Resources Officer in subsections 10(4) and 38.1(1) of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.
Part 17 amends the Department of Veterans Affairs Act to include a definition of dependant and to provide express regulation-making authority for the provision of certain benefits in non-institutional locations.
Part 18 amends the Canada Elections Act to phase out quarterly allowances to registered parties.
Part 19 amends the Special Retirement Arrangements Act to permit the reservation of pension contributions from any benefit that is or becomes payable to a person. It also deems certain provisions of An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to pensions and to enact the Special Retirement Arrangements Act and the Pension Benefits Division Act to have come into force on December 14 or 15, 1994, as the case may be.
Part 20 amends the Motor Vehicle Safety Act to allow residents of Canada to temporarily import a rental vehicle from the United States for up to 30 days, or for any other prescribed period, for non-commercial use. It also authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting imported rental vehicles, as well as their importation into and removal from Canada, and makes other changes to the Act.
Part 21 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to clarify the legislative framework pertaining to payments under tax agreements entered into with provinces under Part III.1 of that Act.
Part 22 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to change the residency requirements of certain commissioners.

Keeping Canada's Economy and Jobs Growing Act

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government is so proud of its budget. But according to the chief economist at BMO Nesbitt Burns, Sherry Cooper, the misplaced belief that the road to economic prosperity is paved by near-term fiscal tightening, as espoused by our own Prime Minister and British Prime Minister David Cameron last week, shows we have learned nothing from Herbert Hoover's response to the Great Depression.

Does my colleague not realize that it is dangerous for the Canadian economy to go ahead with the planned cuts?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what is dangerous, and we are hearing this loud and clear from people in the great Kenora riding, is that they do not want a $10 billion tax bill. That is what is dangerous.

We heard just today that our unemployment rate is now down to 7.1%. There are 60,000 more jobs this month alone. That is a trajectory we want to celebrate.

I ask my colleagues across the floor to take a look at what Canada's economic action plan has done in their communities, such as putting up facilities and structures that have made the difference, employing people, putting people to work and increasing our tax base through higher employment levels, not by jacking up taxes by $10 billion.

That, with the greatest of respect that I can muster on that point, would be a dangerous thing.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talked about a $10 billion tax increase, but that is exactly what the Conservatives have done. This year with payroll tax increases and next year with payroll tax increases, it is projected that for employment insurance and CPP premiums, another $10 billion will be deducted from workers' salaries.

Why does he say that we want a $10 billion tax increase when they have already done it?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this gives me an opportunity to talk about the importance of small business in the great Kenora riding.

Obviously small business is the economic engine of the country, but in our vast region, it is really what keeps our economy rolling. Providing a temporary hiring credit for small business to keep corporate taxes low for those small businesses to thrive is really the kind of dynamic economic environment the government can support for small businesses.

In that regard, my constituents are very pleased with that policy position.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, before the hon. member for Kenora leaves, I want him to know that I agree with him on two things: one, pickerel is very good; and two, small business tax reductions are always positive. However, I will tell him that the multinational corporate tax rates the Conservatives are planning would be wrong because they would shift the tax burden from multinational corporations to small businesses and individuals.

While I am speaking to Bill C-13, I would remind members that it is the Conservatives who increased payroll taxes for this year and it is the Conservatives who will once again increase payroll taxes next year. I would remind them that every economist out there, every student who studies economics, every person who understands fiscal responsibility knows it is payroll taxes and income taxes that are a drain on our society. It is simply wrong that hard-working people have to pay those exorbitant taxes, yet the multinational corporations get further tax cuts.

I remind this House that in the 1960s corporate tax rates were in the 40% range and tax rates for individuals were in the 20% range, but now they have completely flipped around. Corporate tax rates have gone down to 15% but tax rates for individuals are into the high 40% range. This is why Canadians say they are taxed too much. Add provincial and municipal taxes to that and there is outrage. Yet the Conservatives constantly say that it is the NDP that would raise taxes.

With the greatest respect, I remind everyone that it is the Conservatives who raise these taxes. That is the truth.

There is something that Bill C-13 and all the Conservatives' budget implementation bills never talk about. I have scoured the pages of all the Conservatives' budgets and not once did I see the two words “food banks”. Twenty-seven senators were appointed by the Prime Minister in one year at a cost over 20 years of $100 million. The Conservatives are still appointing their hacks and flacks to the Senate, but here is their economic action plan for the poor: there is none.

In February 2006 when the Conservatives took power, there were 604,000 Canadians using food banks, but now, 910,000 Canadians are using food banks. It is bad enough that some Canadians would have to beg for food for themselves and their families, but what is worse is that in the city of Calgary, the richest city in Canada, in 2005 a food bank opened up for veterans only. Fifty-eight veterans were there as the first customers of that food bank. The volunteers at the food bank do a wonderful job looking after those veterans. Last year over 200 veterans used that food bank in the richest city in the country.

As a person who was born in Holland, whose parents were liberated by those heroes, I say that is a sin, a shame and the fault of the Conservative government that the heroes of our country would have to do that. The ones who passed away we honour in our Memorial Chamber as we do those who are buried in over 72 countries around the world. It is a sin and a shame. The Conservatives should hang their heads in shame. As we celebrate Thanksgiving with our friends and families, I can go to a store and buy food. Most of my friends and family will purchase their food at a store or go to a farm to get their food. But many veterans and their families and many other Canadians will have to go to a food bank.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if you yourself have ever used a food bank, but I volunteer at one in my riding. It is the most humbling, upsetting experience to see people who at one time had a job have to stand in line at a food bank. They are asked a million questions about who they are in order to get food. This is occurring in one of the richest countries in the world. All projections are that next year there will be a million Canadians who have to use a food bank. That is the entire population of New Brunswick and P.E.I.

Is that the track record of the Conservatives? Unfortunately, yes. That is a shame. Does their budget talk about that? No.

Here is another thing about their budget. The Conservatives crow and brag about a $3,000 tax credit for firefighters. All the firefighters think that they are getting $3,000 out of that, but they are not. They are getting 15% of $3,000 to a maximum of $450. They already get a $1,000 tax credit. Therefore, it is either or. They do not tell us that in the budget.

The $500 arts credit is not $500. It is 15% of $500. It is $75. It is similar to when we buy an item and the company offers a mail-in rebate. Most Canadians will not hold onto those receipts and subject themselves to an audit to get $75. It is a myth. It would be good if they said it was $500 clear. If they said it was $3,000 clear for paramedics and firefighters that would be good. However, it is simply not true. It is similar to when they gave parents $1,200 a year to look after their own kids through the child tax benefit. That is not true at all. That $1,200 is taxable. They did not tell us that when it came out in the budget.

These are the sneaky ways the Conservatives try to pull the wool over the eyes of many Canadians. It is time to stop picking on the sheep of this country. They should not be pulling the wool over anyone's eyes. They should at least try to be honest and forthright about what they are doing. It is absolutely incredible.

I look at this issue in terms of veterans and their families. I will give the government credit in that there have been some improvements since it has come here.

I will give the government top marks for the income splitting plan on pensions, which is a very good thing to do for seniors. I personally thank the hon. members for that because I plan to use it if and when I ever leave politics. I know some of the Conservatives would like me to leave a little earlier, and I appreciate their sentiment. That is a good plan. However, it does not help anybody who is poor. It does not help anybody who is using a food bank. It does not help anyone who is homeless.

While I am speaking of the homeless, is it not a shame that a growing number of those veterans who once wore this country's uniform are homeless?

I will add an anecdote to this. A few years ago we had the consecration of the Queen's colours at the Garrison Grounds in Halifax. Governor General Michaëlle Jean came down. She was wearing a military uniform. She said one of the most poignant things I have ever heard. She said, “I am so proud as a Canadian to wear this uniform because when I was a little girl in Haiti I was afraid of uniforms”. This shows us the type of country we have.

I ask the Conservatives to stop looking after their corporate buddies, to stop the $50 million slush fund for their ridings, to stop getting gold-embossed cards, and to stop taking Challenger jets or helicopters to fly from fishing camps to lobster festivals. We call that “Dingwalling”. When the front bench starts to “Dingwall” the Canadian people it means a level of arrogance is setting in. That is when the backbenchers start getting nervous. I have been around long enough to see what happened when the Liberals did that. The government is not entitled to its entitlements, but Canadians are entitled to proper governance.

Bill C-13 does absolutely nothing for the poor and the homeless veterans of the country, or for the aboriginals on reserves who unfortunately are committing suicide at a record rate. These are the issues facing our country.

Most of us can look after ourselves and we do a good job of it. However, there are millions who deserve the government's attention. I ask that the government, once and for all, have a national food strategy so that Canadians will no longer have to line up at a food bank to get sustenance, especially during Thanksgiving weekend.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, what a load of garbage coming from the member. Whenever we have brought a proposal forward, whether it was to support our military, to support our veterans or to help unemployed people, the member and his party have voted against it every single time. He gets up in front of the cameras and feigns indignation as if he actually cares about the people that we on this side of the House are trying to help. However, when the member gets the opportunity what does he do? He stands in his place and votes against those very same Canadians that the government has been helping since we were elected. He does so on every single issue.

To make matters worse, when the NDP had an opportunity to stop a Liberal government from slashing funding for health care, for social programs and education what did it do? It cut a deal with that same Liberal government to keep it in office as opposed to throwing it out.

The member has to answer to his constituents and to Canadians why it is that every time he had the opportunity to vote for Canadians with the government he stood in his place and voted against them.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, as I am a six time member of Parliament, I think my constituents have answered that question well.

Let us go back to what the member said about serving Canadians. In 2005, the current Prime Minister wrote and signed a letter to Joyce Carter of Cape Breton which said that if the Conservatives formed government, every single widow and widower of a World War II and Korean veteran would immediately get VIP service. Two years after that, less than 10% of the widows and widowers had received help. Does the member think I would vote for that? Absolutely not.

The same Prime Minister, who was then in opposition, and Greg Thompson were at a meeting in Gagetown. He said that every person affected by chemical spraying in Gagetown from 1958 to 1984 would be compensated by the government. The fact is there were 300,000 people who could have qualified, but less than 5,000 received compensation.

If the member wonders why I stand to criticize and vote against them, I do it because their promises are false and hollow.

The fact is that the many veterans and people affected by chemical spraying, as well as the widows and widowers of our heroes deserve much better from the government.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for talking about the vulnerable and those who go hungry.

This has been Feeding Toronto's Hungry Students Week. We feed 110,000 children every morning. One child in four goes to school hungry. Hungry children cannot learn. Their learning capabilities are affected by how recently they have eaten. Malnutrition in early life can limit long-term intellectual development. We know that access to safe and healthy food is a right of every individual. Canada is one of the few industrialized countries without a national nutrition program.

Does the hon. member think that the federal government should be talking with the provinces and territories to end child hunger in this country?

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, that is a sensible question. My hon. colleague is a very compassionate member of the House of Commons, as is the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, who I hope recovers well from her hip surgery.

The government should not just be talking to the provinces and territories, I would highly recommend it also talk with school boards, new immigrant groups and various groups that can help. The reality is that 110,000 people in the largest city in Canada rely on volunteers for food. Teachers should be teaching; they should not be serving buffets to children, but thank God they and the parents do because without them, those kids would not have a hope.

If the member went back five years, I bet she would find that there were a lot less than 110,000. Now more and more people are having to do that. Unfortunately, that is the track record of the Conservative Government of Canada.

[Tarik Brahmi, NDP, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore for his explanations. He has talked about a very interesting subject, the effect of announcements made with regard to tax credits. There is a difference between refundable tax credits and those that are not. I would like him to speak more about the use of these announcements to mask credits that are not what they purport to be.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, this is a smoke and mirrors game. The government gives and then takes away. An example would be Bill C-55. The government moved ahead on the veterans charter and rightfully so. That was a good thing. We asked for a much bigger door, but what it did was make the benefit taxable. It calls the NDP the tax and spend party. The Conservative Party is the give and tax party.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great honour and privilege for me to rise in the House today to once again speak on our budget.

This budget is extremely important for Canadians and the citizens of my riding. We are taking their concerns and their needs into account. Consequently, I strongly encourage the opposition to support our initiatives.

I am proud to speak to various points in budget 2011 which my constituents are eager to see implemented.

As our government introduces legislation for its low tax plan, I would like to note the support we have received from Canadians for our focus on protecting existing jobs, creating new jobs, securing Canada's recovery from the global economic recession, and improving the well-being of Canadians over the long term.

Canadians were proud to learn that Canada has the strongest job growth record in the G7. In fact, as was mentioned in question period today, we added another 60,000 net new jobs to the economy.

However, Canadians understand that we are not immune to global economic turbulence and that it is essential for us to implement the next phase of our economic action plan.

In my riding, especially, businesses are looking forward to the new temporary hiring credit, which would lessen the financial burden of additional hiring. As a rural riding, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell has a large number of agricultural businesses. I have heard from the farming community that the hiring credit is particularly good news for farm operations that are looking to expand.

That is only one of many positive examples.

Implementation of this hiring credit comes just after 2011 was designated the Year of the Entrepreneur by our government. Recognition for hard-working entrepreneurs could not be more timely because they make a vital contribution to the survival of our communities. As we all know, they are engines of the local economy and job creation, especially in the rural areas of ridings such as mine.

Our government promised to help small businesses get through these difficult economic times. Businesses in Glengarry—Prescott—Russell are not immune to these difficult times and will benefit tremendously from this measure in the 2011 budget.

Since the federal election in May, we have been promising Canadians that we would phase out the per vote direct subsidy of political parties over the next few years.

We will now deliver on that promise, which will save taxpayers up to $30 million a year. Eliminating this subsidy is what Canadians want because it ensures that political parties remain in close touch with them. That is what the opposition is afraid of. Parties will have to focus their efforts on fundraising to replace this lost public revenue. If they want Canadians to donate to their party they will need to be more relevant to Canadians. That is what the opposition parties are afraid of, their irrelevancy.

If Canadians believe in a party and its policies, they will donate their hard-earned money to see that party elected and its initiatives implemented. That is the way it should be.

Our government is committed to strengthening integrity and accountability in government and political activity. Unlike the outrageous claims made by the opposition, this will not restrict political activity to the rich.

It is ironic that in one breath the opposition accuses our government of catering to the rich and then in the next breath proposes to raise the donation limit so that richer Canadians could donate more. It does not make any sense.

The average donation from our party supporters varies between $150 and $200, which means that currently, Canadians are giving well below the limit. What the opposition is saying is not true. In reality, Canadians donating these amounts are not rich. Supporters of the various political parties are what we could call average Canadians who want to help the political party of their choice. And having a choice is important to Canadians.

Governments have a duty to use taxpayer dollars wisely and only in the public interest, especially at a time of fiscal restraint when families are struggling to make ends meet.

The fact is that Canadian families are struggling right now. That is especially true when loved ones become sick and need help getting the necessary care. The new tax credit for caregivers will allow them to get back up to a maximum of $2,000 of the approved expenses for taking care of infirm dependent relatives, including, for the first time, spouses, common law partners and minor children.

For those who have not experienced caring for loved ones with infirmities, it is difficult to imagine the pain and difficulty families can face from day to day. Over the years, I have been graced with the opportunity to meet with caregivers from across my riding. They are good people facing unexpected challenges, emotionally and financially, in order to provide for their loved ones. They play a vital role in supporting their loved ones, often elderly parents. They often must take time off from work, which further adds to their stress. Financial support is a critical component for them. Our commitment to the tax credit is a clear sign that our government understands the desire of Canadians to remain independent in their own homes for as long as possible.

At this time I would like to highlight a third element of our keeping Canada's economy and jobs growing act, which is the children's arts tax credit for programs associated with children's artistic, cultural, recreational and developmental activities.

As a father of five children, I am well aware of the cost, but also the benefits of giving children a solid foundation in the arts. My children have taken piano lessons, singing lessons and violin lessons. I have seen the arts help them to grow in confidence, self-discipline, creativity, and it has also been a form of recreation. I know that our family is not alone in this.

Thousands of parents in my riding understand the value of the arts to a child's development. Glengarry—Prescott—Russell is a riding that hosts a number of cultural events to celebrate its proud heritage, and the arts hold a very important place in those celebrations. Thousands of parents are already paying for lessons for their children even if that expense puts pressure on the family budget. We know that this type of tax credit works. We implemented the children's fitness tax credit in order to encourage children to remain active and it is working. Health experts keep telling us that children need to be physically active. They tell us we must encourage them to do so and that active video games are not enough. Our government is doing its part to offer more financial options to families in order to stimulate their children and ensure their development.

I spoke about this a lot during the May election and I mentioned it in the House in June, but I am proud to mention it again. Our government is committed to delivering a $3,000 tax credit to volunteer firefighters.

Volunteer firefighters play a vital role in serving our communities. They put themselves at great risk for the safety of our neighbours. In a rural riding such as mine, volunteer firefighters are indispensable. I have met with these firefighters time and again, and they are overwhelmingly pleased by our government's commitment to this initiative. We said we would deliver strong financial support to recognize the critical work done by our volunteer firefighters and that is exactly what we are doing.

We want to thank Canadians for electing a majority government. Doing so allows us to implement legislative measures that will help all Canadians and will help the country weather the global economic storm.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the member's intervention. While there are many missing pieces in the government's plan, one is the growing gap between those who have and those who have less.

The government would say that it has brought in a low tax plan, but there is a problem, and this is very important for the member's riding where there is a lot of poverty. The plan does not help those who are on the margins. We see fewer and fewer people able to make ends meet and having an arts tax credit does not mean much.

Where is the plan from the government to actually deal with the wider prosperity gap in this country? Tax cuts do not cut it. We are seeing tax credits where people cannot afford music lessons.

What is the government doing about the poor, particularly urban poor, because there is a lot of poor in his riding?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when we are addressing poverty, the best way to address it is to create jobs. People want to work. They want to have a job to raise their families and they do not want to have to rely on the government to do so.

As I mentioned, we announced 61,000 net new jobs that had been created in September. Our track record, since 2009, is the net creation of over 660,000 new jobs. This is putting Canadians to work, so that they can earn what they need to raise their families.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked a minister about the need for a national nutrition program in Canada, so no child goes to school hungry. I was dismayed to receive talking points back on a completely different topic, albeit important, when 40% and 62% of elementary and secondary school students go to school hungry.

New data from the Toronto District School Board shows that the top benefits of a morning meal program are that it helps 86% of children who would not get the opportunity to eat. It improves student health by 74% and increases the intake of milk and dairy products by 71%. More powerful, 78% of grade 10 students who ate morning meals were on track for graduation compared to 61% who only ate a few days.

Does the member think that the government should be having discussions with the provinces and territories regarding a national nutrition program?