Bill C-31 (Historical)

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures

Part 1 implements income tax measures and related measures proposed in the February 11, 2014 budget. Most notably, it
(a) increases the maximum amount of eligible expenses for the adoption expense tax credit;
(b) expands the list of expenses eligible for the medical expense tax credit to include the cost of the design of individualized therapy plans and costs associated with service animals for people with severe diabetes;
(c) introduces the search and rescue volunteers tax credit;
(d) extends, for one year, the mineral exploration tax credit for flow-through share investors;
(e) expands the circumstances in which members of underfunded pension plans can benefit from unreduced pension-to-RRSP transfer limits;
(f) eliminates the need for individuals to apply for the GST/HST credit and allows the Minister of National Revenue to automatically determine if an individual is eligible to receive the credit;
(g) extends to 10 years the carry-forward period with respect to certain donations of ecologically sensitive land;
(h) removes, for certified cultural property acquired as part of a gifting arrangement that is a tax shelter, the exemption from the rule that deems the value of a gift to be no greater than its cost to the donor;
(i) allows the Minister of National Revenue to refuse to register, or revoke the registration of, a charity or Canadian amateur athletic association that accepts a donation from a state supporter of terrorism;
(j) reduces, for certain small and medium-sized employers, the frequency of remittances for source deductions;
(k) improves the Canada Revenue Agency’s ability to provide feedback to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada; and
(l) requires a listing of outstanding tax measures to be tabled in Parliament.
Part 1 also implements other selected income tax measures. Most notably, it
(a) introduces transitional rules relating to the labour-sponsored venture capital corporations tax credit;
(b) requires certain financial intermediaries to report to the Canada Revenue Agency international electronic funds transfers of $10,000 or more;
(c) makes amendments relating to the introduction of the Offshore Tax Informant Program of the Canada Revenue Agency;
(d) permits the disclosure of taxpayer information to an appropriate police organization in certain circumstances if the information relates to a serious offence; and
(e) provides that the Business Development Bank of Canada and BDC Capital Inc. are not financial institutions for the purposes of the Income Tax Act’s mark-to-market rules.
Part 2 implements certain goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) measures proposed in the February 11, 2014 budget by
(a) expanding the GST/HST exemption for training that is specially designed to assist individuals with a disorder or disability to include the service of designing such training;
(b) expanding the GST/HST exemption for services rendered to individuals by certain health care practitioners to include professional services rendered by acupuncturists and naturopathic doctors;
(c) adding eyewear specially designed to treat or correct a defect of vision by electronic means to the list of GST/HST zero-rated medical and assistive devices;
(d) extending to newly created members of a group the election that allows members of a closely-related group to not account for GST/HST on certain supplies between them, introducing joint and several (or solidary) liability for the parties to that election for any GST/HST liability on those supplies and adding a requirement to file that election with the Canada Revenue Agency;
(e) giving the Minister of National Revenue the discretionary authority to register a person for GST/HST purposes if the person fails to comply with the requirement to apply for registration, even after having been notified by the Canada Revenue Agency of that requirement; and
(f) improving the Canada Revenue Agency’s ability to provide feedback to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada.
Part 2 also implements other GST/HST measures by
(a) providing a GST/HST exemption for supplies of hospital parking for patients and visitors, clarifying that the GST/HST exemption for supplies of a property, when all or substantially all of the supplies of the property by a charity are made for free, does not apply to paid parking and clarifying that paid parking provided by charities that are set up or used by municipalities, universities, public colleges, schools and hospitals to operate their parking facilities does not qualify for the special GST/HST exemption for parking supplied by charities;
(b) clarifying that reports of international electronic funds transfers made to the Canada Revenue Agency may be used for the purposes of the administration of the GST/HST;
(c) making amendments relating to the introduction of the Offshore Tax Informant Program of the Canada Revenue Agency;
(d) permitting the disclosure of confidential GST/HST information to an appropriate police organization in certain circumstances if the information relates to a serious offence; and
(e) clarifying that a person cannot claim input tax credits in respect of an amount of GST/HST that has already been recovered by the person from a supplier.
Part 3 implements excise measures proposed in the February 11, 2014 budget by
(a) adjusting the domestic rate of excise duty on tobacco products to account for inflation and eliminating the preferential excise duty treatment of tobacco products available through duty free markets;
(b) ensuring that excise tax returns are filed accurately through the addition of a new administrative monetary penalty and an amended criminal offence for the making of false statements or omissions, consistent with similar provisions in the GST/HST portion of the Excise Tax Act; and
(c) improving the Canada Revenue Agency’s ability to provide feedback to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada.
Part 3 also implements other excise measures by
(a) permitting the disclosure of confidential information to an appropriate police organization in certain circumstances if the information relates to a serious offence; and
(b) making amendments relating to the introduction of the Offshore Tax Informant Program of the Canada Revenue Agency.
In addition, Part 3 amends the Air Travellers Security Charge Act, the Excise Act, 2001 and the Excise Tax Act to clarify that reports of international electronic funds transfers made to the Canada Revenue Agency may be used for the purposes of the administration of those Acts.
Part 4 amends the Customs Tariff. In particular, it
(a) reduces the Most-Favoured-Nation rates of duty and, if applicable, rates of duty under the other tariff treatments on tariff items related to mobile offshore drilling units used in oil and gas exploration and development that are imported on or after May 5, 2014;
(b) removes the exemption provided by tariff item 9809.00.00 and makes consequential amendments to tariff item 9833.00.00 to apply the same tariff rules to the Governor General that are applied to other public office holders; and
(c) clarifies the tariff classification of certain imported food products, effective November 29, 2013.
Part 5 enacts the Canada–United States Enhanced Tax Information Exchange Agreement Implementation Act and amends the Income Tax Act to introduce consequential information reporting requirements.
Part 6 enacts and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 6 provides for payments to compensate for deductions in certain benefits and allowances that are payable under the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act, the War Veterans Allowance Act and the Civilian War-related Benefits Act.
Division 2 of Part 6 amends the Bank of Canada Act and the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act to authorize the Bank of Canada to provide banking and custodial services to the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Division 3 of Part 6 amends the Hazardous Products Act to better regulate the sale and importation of hazardous products intended for use, handling or storage in a work place in Canada in accordance with the Regulatory Cooperation Council Joint Action Plan initiative for work place chemicals. In particular, the amendments implement the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals with respect to, among other things, labelling and safety data sheet requirements. It also provides for enhanced powers related to administration and enforcement. Finally, it makes amendments to the Canada Labour Code and the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act.
Division 4 of Part 6 amends the Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act to authorize individuals to transport beer and spirits from one province to another for their personal consumption.
Division 5 of Part 6 amends the Judges Act to increase the number of judges of the Superior Court of Quebec and the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta.
Division 6 of Part 6 amends the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act to prohibit parliamentarians from contributing to their pension and accruing pensionable service as a result of a suspension.
Division 7 of Part 6 amends the National Defence Act to recognize the historic names of the Royal Canadian Navy, the Canadian Army and the Royal Canadian Air Force while preserving the integration and the unification achieved under the Canadian Forces Reorganization Act and to provide that the designations of rank and the circumstances of their use are prescribed in regulations made by the Governor in Council.
Division 8 of Part 6 amends the Customs Act to extend to 90 days the time for making a request for a review of a seizure, ascertained forfeiture or penalty assessment and to provide that requests for a review and third-party claims can be made directly to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness.
Division 9 of Part 6 amends the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency Act to provide for the dissolution of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Board and to repeal the requirement for the President of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency to submit a comprehensive report every five years on the Agency’s activities and on the impact those activities have had on regional disparity.
Division 10 of Part 6 dissolves the Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation and authorizes, among other things, the transfer of its assets and obligations, as well as those of its subsidiaries, to either the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency or Her Majesty in right of Canada as represented by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services. It also provides that the employees of the Corporation and its subsidiaries are deemed to have been appointed under the Public Service Employment Act and includes provisions related to their terms and conditions of employment. Furthermore, it amends the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency Act to, among other things, confer on the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency the authority that is necessary for the administration, management, control and disposal of the assets and obligations transferred to the Agency. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts and repeals the Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation Act.
Division 11 of Part 6 provides for the transfer of responsibility for the administration of the programs known as the “Online Works of Reference” and the “Virtual Museum of Canada” from the Minister of Canadian Heritage to the Canadian Museum of History.
Division 12 of Part 6 amends the Nordion and Theratronics Divestiture Authorization Act to remove certain restrictions on the acquisition of voting shares of Nordion.
Division 13 of Part 6 amends the Bank Act to add regulation-making powers respecting a bank’s activities in relation to derivatives and benchmarks.
Division 14 of Part 6 amends the Insurance Companies Act to broaden the Governor in Council’s authority to make regulations respecting the conversion of a mutual company into a company with common shares.
Division 15 of Part 6 amends the Motor Vehicle Safety Act to support the objectives of the Regulatory Cooperation Council to enhance the alignment of Canadian and U.S. regulations while protecting Canadians. It introduces measures to accelerate and streamline the regulatory process, reduce the administrative burden for manufacturers and importers and improve safety for Canadians through revised oversight procedures and enhanced availability of vehicle safety information.
The amendments to the Railway Safety Act and the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992 modernize the legislation by aligning it with the Cabinet Directive on Regulatory Management.
This Division also amends the Safe Food for Canadians Act to authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting activities related to specified fresh fruits and vegetables, including requiring a person who engages in certain activities to be a member of a specified entity or organization. It also repeals the Board of Arbitration.
Division 16 of Part 6 amends the Telecommunications Act to set a maximum amount that a Canadian carrier can charge to another Canadian carrier for certain roaming services.
Division 17 of Part 6 amends the Canada Labour Code to allow employees to interrupt their compassionate care leave or leave related to their child’s critical illness, death or disappearance in order to take leave because of sickness or a work-related illness or injury. It also amends the Employment Insurance Act to facilitate access to sickness benefits for claimants who are in receipt of compassionate care benefits or benefits for parents of critically ill children.
Division 18 of Part 6 amends the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act to provide that fees fixed under that Act for the use of a facility provided by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency under the Safe Food for Canadians Act as well as fees fixed for services, products and rights and privileges provided by the Agency under that Act are exempt from the application of the User Fees Act.
Division 19 of Part 6 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to, among other things, enhance the client identification, record keeping and registration requirements for financial institutions and intermediaries, refer to online casinos, and extend the application of the Act to persons and entities that deal in virtual currencies and foreign money services businesses. Furthermore, it makes modifications in regards to the information that the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada may receive, collect or disclose, and expands the circumstances in which the Centre or the Canada Border Services Agency can disclose information received or collected under the Act. It also updates the review and appeal provisions related to cross-border currency reporting and brings Part 1.1 of the Act into force.
Division 20 of Part 6 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 2 to, among other things,
(a) require certain applications to be made electronically;
(b) provide for the making of regulations regarding the establishment of a system of administrative monetary penalties for the contravention of conditions applicable to employers hiring foreign workers;
(c) provide for the termination of certain applications for permanent residence in respect of which a decision as to whether the selection criteria are met is not made before February 11, 2014; and
(d) clarify and strengthen requirements related to the expression of interest regime.
Division 21 of Part 6 amends the Public Service Labour Relations Act to clarify that an adjudicator may grant systemic remedies when it has been determined that the employer has engaged in a discriminatory practice.
It also clarifies the transitional provisions in respect of essential services that were enacted by the Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 2.
Division 22 of Part 6 amends the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006 to clarify how payments to provinces under section 99 of that Act are to be determined.
Division 23 of Part 6 amends the Budget Implementation Act, 2009 so that the aggregate amount of payments to provinces and territories for matters relating to the establishment of a Canadian securities regulation regime may be fixed through an appropriation Act.
Division 24 of Part 6 amends the Protection of Residential Mortgage or Hypothecary Insurance Act and the National Housing Act to provide that certain criteria established in a regulation may apply to an existing insured mortgage or hypothecary loan.
Division 25 of Part 6 amends the Trade-marks Act to, among other things, make that Act consistent with the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks and add the authority to make regulations for carrying into effect the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks. The amendments include the simplification of the requirements for obtaining a filing date in relation to an application for the registration of a trade-mark, the elimination of the requirement to declare use of a trade-mark before registration, the reduction of the term of registration of a trade-mark from 15 to 10 years, and the adoption of the classification established by the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks.
Division 26 of Part 6 amends the Trade-marks Act to repeal the power to appoint the Registrar of Trade-marks and to provide that the Registrar is the person appointed as Commissioner of Patents under subsection 4(1) of the Patent Act.
Division 27 of Part 6 amends the Old Age Security Act to prevent the payment of Old Age Security income-tested benefits for the entire period of a sponsorship undertaking by removing the current 10-year cap.
Division 28 of Part 6 enacts the New Bridge for the St. Lawrence Act, respecting the construction and operation of a new bridge in Montreal to replace the Champlain Bridge and the Nuns’ Island Bridge.
Division 29 of Part 6 enacts the Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada Act, which establishes the Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada (ATSSC) as a portion of the federal public administration. The ATSSC becomes the sole provider of resources and staff for 11 administrative tribunals and provides facilities and support services to those tribunals, including registry, administrative, research and analysis services. The Division also makes consequential amendments to the Acts establishing those tribunals and to other Acts related to those tribunals.
Division 30 of Part 6 enacts the Apprentice Loans Act, which provides for financial assistance for apprentices to help with the cost of their training. Under that Act, apprentices registered in eligible trades will be eligible for loans that will be interest-free until their training ends.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1

[The Acting Speaker, Barry Devolin]

Before I go to the hon. member, I would remind all hon. members that they ought not to refer to their colleagues or ministers by their given names, but rather by their title or riding.

The hon. member for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad my colleague raised the question, because I am sure his intent is virtuous, but his facts are ill-informed. In fact, in this budget we see $40 million invested in our youth, and the genius of that investment is that the money is to go through small and medium-size enterprises so it can be leveraged.

These youth will gain experience through internships and apprenticeships that will enable them to broaden their life experience, which is even more valuable than the money that will come to them. The money is essential as well, and the money will certainly enable those small and medium-size enterprises to hire the students. It is a boost to the economy. It is a boost to the specific companies that take advantage of this benefit. Most importantly, it is a support for our youth who are the leaders of tomorrow.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Minister of State and Chief Government Whip]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to rise today to speak in support of the budget implementation act. This is a very significant budget. There are two things that I would love to highlight in the budget that are particularly meaningful to me.

This year's budget is a major step forward in balancing Canada's books, and its success is a direct result of the Prime Minister's leadership, good judgment, and world-leading economic stewardship. Having created 1.1 million jobs since the recession, today Canada has the strongest job record in the developed world. We have almost balanced the budget, and we have done so while increasing transfers to provinces, investing in infrastructure and skills training, delivering real support for families, and keeping taxes low. This is a remarkable achievement.

For the sake of the members opposite, and particularly for the leader of the Liberal Party, I would like to clarify that balancing the budget did not happen all by itself. It happened because the Prime Minister has remained focused on the economy and on the priorities of our families and our communities. It happened because we have looked for ways to use taxpayers' money more responsibly and more effectively.

Even as we have focused on bringing the budget back to balance, we have continued to look for new opportunities to invest in meaningful measures that accomplish a lot with a little. It is two of these measures that I wish to emphasize today. They are two measures included in budget 2014 that are very meaningful for me and for many others, and for which I strongly and actively advocated.

The first is Lindsey's law. In budget 2014, our government committed up to $8.1 million over five years and $1.3 million per year on an ongoing basis to create a national DNA-based missing persons index.

My connection with this issue began in August 2013, when I met Judy Peterson for the first time at a teddy bear picnic in my riding. The picnic was in remembrance of her daughter, Lindsey, and took place in the community where Lindsey had disappeared 20 years earlier, in 1993. By the time this community was added to my riding in 1997, Judy had already moved away. By the time we met last summer, she had been championing a national DNA-based data bank of missing persons for most of the intervening years.

We had the opportunity to talk. She told me about what she has been through since Lindsey went missing in 1993 and how a national data bank would allow the DNA of missing persons to be compared with DNA collected through crime scene investigations.

I was shocked to learn that without a data bank, every time investigators want to test DNA from a crime scene, they have to ask the family's permission. The family does not have the option of providing blanket permission to compare against an existing sample, so they have to go through the roller coaster of emotions between hope and disappointment every time the cross-reference fails to end in certainty.

Even worse than getting these calls is not getting them. Without a data bank in place, it is much harder for investigators to link an individual crime scene with missing persons. Even when provinces have good cross-checking systems in place, they currently do not extend beyond the provincial border. Even if the missing person's family can have confidence that their loved one has not been found in their own province, there are currently too many barriers to have the same confidence with crime scenes in another jurisdiction.

A national missing persons index would solve these problems. Investigators would automatically be able to run crime scene DNA against the missing persons index all across the country and with other jurisdictions. The families would not have to go through the pain of wondering every time a search was done. In addition, this measure would be an important tool for solving crimes related to missing persons.

It was impossible not to be moved by this message, and I promised Judy that I would advocate for it in Ottawa. That job was, of course, made much easier by the fact that my colleagues quickly saw the merit in the approach and supported my efforts to move this measure forward. I will admit that when the budget speech was read and I saw Judy in the House of Commons gallery as the finance minister acknowledged all of the work she had done, it was the most memorable and emotional moment of my 20 years in Ottawa.

There was a second item in the budget that was also meaningful to me. I was an early supporter of the idea of the volunteer firefighters tax credit and was proud when our government was able to introduce this measure. However, even from the earliest days I believed that it should also include search and rescue volunteers.

Over the years, I have gotten to know a number of ground and marine search and rescue volunteers in my riding. I know how dedicated and passionate they are about what they do. They give their time, juggle their training commitments with their family, friends, and work life, and make significant personal investments in gear and training, all so that when the phone rings Sunday night at midnight, they can gear up and head out into the rain instead of going back to sleep. They are volunteers who will not hesitate to head into inclement weather and dangerous environments. They work in rough seas, swift water, high-angle terrain, mountains, and forests. They develop and maintain a high skill level as well as a profound sense of professionalism that is not diminished at all by the fact that they are not paid.

In the early fall of 2013, I was approached by search and rescue volunteers in my riding. They made such a strong case for recognition that I felt I had to take a more active role in promoting a search and rescue volunteer tax credit. Again I enjoyed great support among my colleagues, and together we were able to make it happen.

The search and rescue volunteer tax credit is not about paying volunteers. It is about recognizing the unique role that search and rescue volunteers, like volunteer firefighters, play in our communities and the sacrifices they make to keep us safe. I am proud of these volunteers in my riding and across Canada and I am happy to see their efforts recognized.

These are two examples that are meaningful to me, but I would like to point out that many items in the budget are there because MPs listened to their constituents and brought their message back to Ottawa. It is a testament to our budget process that items highlighted in the budget speech in front of the nation can begin with a conversation, with consultation, and with thoughtfulness and compassion.

For all that we do here, it is very satisfying to see the ingenuity of ordinary Canadians find its way to the national stage and to know that as members of Parliament, we had an opportunity to play a small role in making important and progressive changes happen.

[The Acting Speaker, Barry Devolin]

The time for government orders has expired, so the questions and comments for the Minister of State and Chief Government Whip will take place when this matters returns before the House.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-31, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my dear colleague, the hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.

It is always an honour for me to rise in the House to represent my constituents in the great riding of Pontiac. However, today, I am speaking out against the fact that a bill with such a large scope is being examined in such a short period of time. This undermines Parliament's work by preventing members from thoroughly examining the bill and its impact. This is the fifth time that the Conservatives have tried to avoid parliamentary scrutiny of their regressive economic agenda by using an omnibus budget bill. The issues put forward in these bills are important and deserve serious consideration.

That is what my constituents expect from their MP and that is what Canadians expect from parliamentarians and from their democratic institutions. We are well aware that this is another budget implementation bill designed to sneak in hundreds of changes through the back door, without their being examined properly, for the very partisan and ideological purposes of the governing Conservative Party.

The bill is over 350 pages long and contains over 500 clauses. It changes dozens of laws and contains many measures that were not even mentioned in the budget statement. I would like to point out that, after only 25 minutes of debate, after only one person had a chance to speak, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons decided to put an end to the debate by moving a closure motion. That is shameful. It is simply atrocious.

The decisions made in the budget and the budget implementation bill are meant to be made for Canadians. It is their money the government is spending, and it must do so wisely. However, the bill does not address the real concerns of Canadians. It sets out austerity measures that make life less affordable for Canadians. These measures are stifling Canada's economic growth at a time when wages are stagnant, jobs are less stable and household debt is rising and reaching record levels. What is worse, there is nothing in the budget or the budget bill to help the 300,000 additional Canadians who have become unemployed since the recession to find work or to replace the 400,000 jobs lost in the manufacturing sector under the Conservative government. The government needs to think about future generations when making budget decisions.

I came back to politics because my daughters, Sophia and Gabrielle, are now six and four. When I would look at them as babies in their cribs, I remember asking myself what kind of future we would be leaving them. My leader often likes to say that we will be the first generation to leave less to our children than what we ourselves received. We will be leaving them an economic, environmental and social deficit. He is right. The future must be different. In the future, we must live in greater harmony with our brothers and sisters from all countries and in greater harmony with the planet. We need to think about future generations and about preserving that harmony when we govern and make budget choices.

This bill does not do enough to preserve this harmony. We need to focus on new technologies to reduce our dependence on oil, which leads to global conflict and causes environmental degradation. That is why my party supports investing in a 21st century economy based on clean technology.

This could come in the form of the following measures: restore the eco-energy retrofit – homes program; support the renewable energy sector to help Canada grow and prosper in the new global economy; help the industry take advantage of clean technology markets by supporting research and development for these energies; adopt an action plan to abolish the $1.3 billion in subsidies being handed out to the fossil fuel industry; support specialized training to prepare workers for the green jobs of the future; carry out a study on ways to increase value-added domestic production in the clean energy sector; and lastly, increase access to information and transparency regarding the enforcement of and compliance with environmental legislation.

Furthermore, there is almost nothing in this bill to address the lack of infrastructure in our communities. This bill could have addressed Canada's serious infrastructure deficit by cancelling the $5.8 billion in cuts to local infrastructure set out in the last budget.

We need new infrastructure—roads especially—in Pontiac. We need to work with the provinces and territories to stop the erosion of the municipal tax base by developing a long-term infrastructure plan for cities, towns, suburbs and rural communities.

Why not invest part of the proceeds from the 700 MHz auction in developing broadband Internet infrastructure in remote rural parts of the country? That could stimulate an entire economy of online businesses. Access to high-speed Internet is critical to small and medium-sized businesses in my region.

The government could also have simplified the process rural communities have to go through to request and receive funding for infrastructure projects. It is not hard to take steps to improve Canada's productivity. The government should update our infrastructure by doubling the gas tax transfer to municipalities. That is a very simple and practical measure. However, in this bill, the government made choices that will benefit only the rich and the biggest corporations in the country. Why do the biggest ones always come out on top with this government?

As the Treasury Board critic, it is my job to criticize choices about services to Canadians. Canadians expect to get good services in exchange for their tax dollars, but the Conservatives are betraying them by making these cuts.

It is not overstating things to say that there is a crisis around access to health care services in the Pontiac. Even so, this government is determined to cut $36 billion from provincial health transfers.

In addition, the employment insurance reform was really hard on seasonal workers in my riding. We could also deal with the tax haven issue and find new sources of revenue for the government so that Canadians can get the services they are entitled to.

The last thing I want to say is that my children's future is the reason I am speaking today. We have to make different choices, choices that are more environmentally friendly, socially sound and responsible.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate my colleague's comments.

He spoke about his children and the impact climate change will have going forward. We recently learned that the situation is worse than we thought. The very harsh winter we had is evidence of that. It was very hard on infrastructure in northern Ontario communities. Water pipes burst. Many homes were without water, and that is still a problem right now.

I am wondering if my colleague could tell us more about the infrastructure deficit. Some of the infrastructure in Chapleau dates from the world wars. Can he talk about how we should be investing in municipalities, not cutting their funding?

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, investing in infrastructure would clearly stimulate the economy in my riding. The needs of municipalities must be taken into consideration.

Municipalities are far removed from power. They need many things, including infrastructure for water, waste, roads and community centres, for example.

We need a national infrastructure strategy to ensure that municipalities with the greatest need have access to funds that would enable them to stimulate their own economy by building and renovating infrastructure in their communities.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I would like thank the hon. member for Pontiac for his speech here today, and I will note two things from his remarks with respect to broadband Internet.

I invite the member to look at the digital Canada 150 plan being announced by the Minister of Industry today, which has over $300 million invested for rural broadband Internet.

However, more specifically, the member suggested that the funding from the latest wireless spectrum auction be applied to some of these investments. I wonder whether he recognizes that the investments made by carriers acquiring that spectrum is not a lump sum; it is received by the government and amortized over several decades.

Would the hon. member comment on the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent, announced just today, on rural broadband Internet?

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it might surprise my hon. colleague, but I actually think that the $300 million is a good measure. In fact, I ensured that all of my communities were aware of it.

Of course, the devil is in the details, and one may ask whether that investment of $300 million across a country as large as ours is targeted enough. There are concerns in my community as to where that money would go, whether it would go more to the largest corporations and businesses that deal with this kind of service and not directly to the communities for building infrastructure in those communities that are the poorest and that need it the most. I am hopeful, but I am waiting to see how the money will be made accessible to the communities like mine that truly need it.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by congratulating my colleague from Pontiac on his excellent speech and his excellent presentation. He did a fine job explaining the NDP's concerns over the new budget implementation bill currently before us. I often see him rise in the House and stand up for the interests of his constituents. I want to commend him on his excellent work.

I am proud to join my voice to those of my colleagues to firmly oppose this new omnibus bill. This should come as no surprise from the Conservatives. They do not seem to know how to work any other way. This is the fifth time we are dealing with a such a massive bill and this underhanded approach to avoiding parliamentary oversight. The fact is, everyone here was elected for the same reason. Canadians sent us here to represent them and to stand up for their interests. When we look at the actions of this government and the bills it introduces, we see that it seems to be taking into account only the small percentage of Canadians who voted the Conservatives into power. Unfortunately, our system is designed in such a way that we have a Conservative majority government, but that does not mean that the majority of Canadians voted for the Conservatives. I would say that the majority of Canadians are rather disgusted with the abuse of trust and abuse of power committed by the government. The Conservatives are supposed to be working for Canadians in the best interest of the country. However, that is not what we are seeing.

The Conservatives try to hide their regressive agenda from Canadians on a regular basis. Today, we barely heard one speech, and it was a Conservative speech that was far from objective. After 25 minutes, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons rose and introduced another time allocation motion. Once again, he could not even get through one half hour of debate. He managed to listen to one of my official position colleagues for barely five minutes and then he said that that was enough, that he knew very well that we would just blame them and shine a spotlight on all the problems with Bill C-31. For that reason, we are once again facing closure, which quite frankly is an abuse of the House. I no longer know how many time allocation motions have been imposed, but I can guarantee you that it is a considerable number.

As I was saying, Bill C-31 is another omnibus bill. It is a massive document with more than 350 pages and over 500 clauses that will amend dozens of laws. Furthermore, the bill would impose a number of measures that were not included in the budget.

Canadians must start learning the cues. The Conservatives use the same arguments with each new budget because it is the same principle every time. They tell us that there is nothing new in there, that everything was in the budget, and so on. They really take Canadians for fools. No one in this country believes them. I do not know who they are trying to convince, perhaps themselves, by repeating the same arguments that are not very convincing. However, quite honestly, no one trusts them.

Canadians also understand that it is impossible for MPs to do a proper job in the short period of time allocated by the Conservatives. I mentioned the size and content of this bill. We have just a few hours to debate it, raise issues and ask the government questions. We rarely get answers but, as MPs, it is part of our job to ask questions and try to get answers. After that, the procedure in committee is rather complicated. Even there, there is very little the members can do.

In any case, it is a known fact that the government does not listen. The opposition could propose an excellent amendment that would remedy problems with this document. Obviously, there are some mistakes in the 350 pages that were hastily thrown together on anything and everything. It takes the government some time. The government will think about it for several months. Time and time again, the opposition will raise the various problems inherent in the government's bills.

Eventually, someone will say—perhaps in a whisper—that the opposition was right and there is a problem with the bill. The Conservatives are a prime example of this. When they decided to charge GST and HST on the parking revenue of hospitals, the NDP objected. It did not make sense to take that money at the expense of people who are already vulnerable, who are going through difficult times and whose loved ones are suffering in the hospital. The Conservatives told themselves that there was no better way to fill the government coffers and deepen human misery than to take money from the pockets of people who are visiting their loved ones in the hospital.

A few months later, the Conservatives realized that the NDP was right and decided to backpedal. However, it took time. Had they listened to us from the outset, had they been more open-minded and had they not been so uncompromising and demagogic, we would not be where we are today. I would not be wasting my time pointing these things out.

Although Canadians were aware of the problem caused by this government, the government did nothing for months until it could no longer stand the pressure. These are the types of situations created by omnibus bills, massive documents filled with regressive propaganda. I urge all Canadians to flip through this bill. They are in for some nasty surprises. The Conservatives are cutting short debate so that Canadians find out as little as possible about what is in the bill. The Conservatives are preparing for the election in 2015 and they are seeing their poll support plummet across the country.

It is not just in Quebec that Canadians are starting to push the Conservatives aside and realize that they are not a viable option for ensuring the well-being of our country and equal opportunity for all Canadians. Canada is welcoming fewer and fewer people in need and refugees because of this government's incomprehensible decisions. We are losing our identity bit by bit, an identity that people abroad appreciated and respected, because of measures that the government is hiding in various omnibus bills. That is unfortunate.

I would like to have the opportunity to consult with Conservative members to see if they know what they are voting on. I am certain that the vast majority of them have absolutely no idea what is in Bill C-31. It is more than 350 pages long, so I doubt that they have read the entire thing. It is easy for them because the Prime Minister's Office feeds them lines and then they regurgitate them in public. They have done a great job so far.

We in the NDP are insisting on our right to debate in the House and raise our constituents' concerns. We want to do the work that Canadians sent us here to do. The Conservatives are becoming increasingly complacent and do not seem to be taking that aspect of our work seriously anymore. I think it is abusive.

Earlier this week, we moved a motion that clearly criticized the Conservatives' systematic abuse of public funds, specifically in relation to the use of Challenger jets. That is another ethical problem that proves that the Conservatives do not care about the real interests of Canadians.

This budget does not contain a single measure to create new jobs. What is worse, it eliminates the small business hiring tax credit that was proposed by the NDP. In my riding, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, there are a lot of small businesses. Once again, the government is eliminating a good idea that was proposed by the NDP. It is very easy for the Conservatives to say that we vote against all of their measures. Offering a small gift here and there in an inherently insulting document does not mean that the opposition will vote for the bill. It is outrageous. If I were the Conservatives, I would be embarrassed to use that type of argument to try and discredit the opposition.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, in her speech on the bill, my colleague did not actually say much about the measures in the bill.

She talked about the process and the number of pages and she was very partisan. I would have liked to hear her suggestions and further comments on the contents of bill. I want to give her the chance to do that in the next two minutes.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I can understand why the member for Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière might not really like it when I talk about the process.

The Conservatives want to convince Canadians that it is not important. They do not seem to think it is very important to let opposition members talk and express the interests and concerns of the people they represent. They want to persuade us that we should let them do as they please now that they have been elected and Canadians have given them a mandate.

Frankly, nobody buys that, and it is not up to me to mouth Conservative propaganda. We know that this budget does absolutely nothing to help Canadian families or create jobs. It is just more propaganda. It is not up to me to elaborate on it.

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will talk about content, since it is worth talking about.

Veterans Ombudsman Guy Parent said that more than 400 veterans in Canada have severe disabilities and are not eligible for the Canadian Forces pension plan.

The budget implementation bill would compensate veterans who received benefits between May 29, 2012, and September 30, 2012.

Why does the bill not mention the amounts deducted between 2006 and 2012?

I know that the member's riding is very close to a military base.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question, and yes, the Valcartier military base is in my riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.

However, in addition to that, I am the daughter of soldiers. Both of my parents are in the forces, and my grandfather is a Korean War veteran. For me, how we treat our military personnel and our veterans is therefore very important.

I am very proud to be a member of a political party that recognizes the social contract that unites us with our veterans, unlike this government, which is trying to use this absolutely appalling argument as a legal defence in Canada and set a precedent in that regard. It is absolutely inconceivable.

I am having a really hard time answering my colleague. I do not know why there is no compensation for our veterans in the bill. I cannot understand it. Actually, I would like the government to answer that, because it is completely unacceptable.