Bill C-15 (Historical)

Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1.

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 22, 2016 and other measures

Part 1 implements certain income tax measures proposed in the March 22, 2016 budget by
(a) eliminating the education tax credit;
(b) eliminating the textbook tax credit;
(c) exempting from taxable income amounts received as rate assistance under the Ontario Electricity Support Program;
(d) maintaining the small business tax rate at 10.‍5% for the 2016 and subsequent taxation years and making consequential adjustments to the dividend gross-up factor and dividend tax credit;
(e) increasing the maximum deduction available under the northern residents deduction;
(f) eliminating the children’s arts tax credit;
(g) eliminating the family tax cut credit;
(h) replacing the Canada child tax benefit and universal child care benefit with the new Canada child benefit;
(i) eliminating the child fitness tax credit;
(j) introducing the school supplies tax credit;
(k) extending, for one year, the mineral exploration tax credit for flow-through share investors;
(l) restoring the labour-sponsored venture capital corporations tax credit for purchases of shares of provincially registered labour-sponsored venture capital corporations for the 2016 and subsequent taxation years; and
(m) introducing changes consequential to the introduction of the new 33% individual tax rate.
Part 1 implements other income tax measures confirmed in the March 22, 2016 budget by
(a) amending the anti-avoidance rules in the Income Tax Act that prevent the conversion of capital gains into tax-deductible intercorporate dividends;
(b) qualifying certain costs associated with undertaking environmental studies and community consultations as Canadian exploration expenses;
(c) ensuring that profits from the insurance of Canadian risks remain taxable in Canada;
(d) ensuring that the dividend rental arrangement rules under the Income Tax Act apply where there is a synthetic equity arrangement;
(e) providing specific tax rules in respect of the commercialization of the Canadian Wheat Board, including a tax deferral for eligible farmers;
(f) permitting registered charities and registered Canadian amateur athletic associations to hold limited partnership interests;
(g) providing an exemption to the withholding tax requirements for payments by qualifying non-resident employers to qualifying non-resident employees;
(h) limiting the circumstances in which the repeated failure to report income penalty will apply;
(i) permitting the sharing of taxpayer information within the Canada Revenue Agency to facilitate the collection of certain non-tax debts; and
(j) permitting the sharing of taxpayer information with the Office of the Chief Actuary.
Part 2 implements certain goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) measures proposed in the March 22, 2016 budget by
(a) adding insulin pens, insulin pen needles and intermittent urinary catheters to the list of GST/HST zero-rated medical and assistive devices;
(b) clarifying that GST/HST generally applies to supplies of purely cosmetic procedures provided by all suppliers, including registered charities;
(c) relieving tax to ensure that when a charity makes a taxable supply of property or services in exchange for a donation and an income tax receipt may be issued for a portion of the donation, only the value of the property or services supplied is subject to GST/HST;
(d) ensuring that interest earned in respect of certain deposits is not included in determining whether a person is considered to be a financial institution for GST/HST purposes; and
(e) clarifying the treatment of imported reinsurance services under the GST/HST imported supply rules for financial institutions.
Part 2 also implements other GST/HST measures confirmed in the March 22, 2016 budget by
(a) adding feminine hygiene products to the list of GST/HST zero-rated products; and
(b) permitting the sharing of taxpayer information in respect of non-tax debts within the Canada Revenue Agency under certain federal and provincial government programs and in respect of certain programs where information sharing is currently permitted under the Income Tax Act.
Part 3 implements certain excise measures proposed in the March 22, 2016 budget by
(a) ensuring that excise tax relief for diesel fuel used as heating oil or to generate electricity is targeted to specific instances; and
(b) enhancing certain security and collection provisions in the Excise Act, 2001.
Part 3 also implements other excise measures confirmed in the March 22, 2016 budget by permitting the sharing of taxpayer information in respect of non-tax debts within the Canada Revenue Agency under certain federal and provincial government programs and in respect of certain programs where information sharing is currently permitted under the Income Tax Act.
Division 1 of Part 4 repeals the Federal Balanced Budget Act.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act to, among other things,
(a) replace “permanent impairment allowance” with “career impact allowance”;
(b) replace “totally and permanently incapacitated” with “diminished earning capacity”;
(c) increase the percentage in the formula used to calculate the earnings loss benefit;
(d) specify when a disability award becomes payable and clarify the formula used to calculate the amount of a disability award;
(e) increase the amounts of a disability award; and
(f) increase the amount of a death benefit.
In addition, it contains transitional provisions that provide, among other things, that the Minister of Veterans Affairs must pay, to a person who received a disability award or a death benefit under that Act before April 1, 2017, an amount that represents the increase in the amount of the disability award or the death benefit, as the case may be. It also makes consequential amendments to the Children of Deceased Veterans Education Assistance Act, the Pension Act and the Income Tax Act.
Division 3 of Part 4 amends the sunset provisions of certain Acts governing federal financial institutions to extend by two years, namely, from March 29, 2017 to March 29, 2019, the period during which those institutions may carry on business.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Bank Act to facilitate the continuance of local cooperative credit societies as federal credit unions by granting the Minister of Finance the authority to provide transitional procedural exemptions, as well as a loan guarantee.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act to, among other things, broaden the Corporation’s powers to temporarily control or own a domestic systemically important bank and to convert certain shares and liabilities of such a bank into common shares.
It also amends the Bank Act to allow the designation of domestic systemically important banks by the Superintendent of Financial Institutions and to require such banks to maintain a minimum capacity to absorb losses.
Lastly, it makes consequential amendments to the Financial Administration Act, the Winding-up and Restructuring Act and the Payment Clearing and Settlement Act.
Division 6 of Part 4 amends the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Act to change the membership of the committee established under that Act so that the Chairperson of the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation is replaced by that Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer. It also amends several Acts to replace references to that Chairperson with references to that Chief Executive Officer.
Division 7 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to authorize an additional payment to be made to a territory, in order to take into account the amount of the territorial formula financing payment that would have been paid to that territory for the fiscal year beginning on April 1, 2016, if that amount had been determined using the recalculated amount determined to be the gross expenditure base for that fiscal year.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the Financial Administration Act to restrict the circumstances in which the Governor in Council may authorize the borrowing of money without legislative approval.
Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Old Age Security Act to increase the single rate of the guaranteed income supplement for the lowest-income pensioners by up to $947 annually and to repeal section 2.‍2 of that Act, which increases the age of eligibility to receive a benefit.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Special Import Measures Act to provide that a finding by the President of the Canada Border Services Agency of an insignificant margin of dumping or an insignificant amount of subsidy in respect of goods imported into Canada will no longer result in the termination of a trade remedy investigation prior to the President’s preliminary determination. It also provides that expiry reviews may be initiated from a date that is closer to the expiry date of an anti-dumping or countervailing measure and makes amendments related to that new time period.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to combine the authorities for bilateral agreements and multilateral agreements into one authority for federal-provincial agreements, and to clarify that federal-provincial agreements may permit the application of provincial legislation with respect to a pension plan.
Division 12 of Part 4 amends the Employment Insurance Act to, among other things,
(a) increase, until July 8, 2017, the maximum number of weeks for which benefits may be paid to certain claimants in certain regions;
(b) eliminate the category of claimants who are new entrants and re-entrants; and
(c) reduce to one week the length of the waiting period during which claimants are not entitled to benefits.
Division 13 of Part 4 amends the Canada Marine Act to allow the Minister of Canadian Heritage to make payments to Canada Place Corporation for certain celebrations.
Division 14 of Part 4 amends the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act to authorize the Minister of Infrastructure, Communities and Intergovernmental Affairs to acquire the shares of PPP Canada Inc. on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada. It also sets out that the appropriate Minister, as defined in the Financial Administration Act, holds those shares and authorizes that appropriate Minister to conduct, with the Governor in Council’s approval, certain transactions relating to PPP Canada Inc. Finally, it authorizes PPP Canada Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries to sell, with the Governor in Council’s approval, their assets in certain circumstances.
Division 15 of Part 4 amends the Canada Foundation for Sustainable Development Technology Act to modify the process that leads to the Governor in Council’s appointment of persons to the board of directors of the Canada Foundation for Sustainable Development Technology by eliminating the role of the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of the Environment as well as the consultative role of the Minister of Industry from that process. It also amends the Budget Implementation Act, 2007 to provide that a sum may be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund to the Foundation on the requisition of the Minister of Industry and to clarify the maximum amount of that sum.

Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1

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

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for talking about tax breaks for the middle-class and for small business, and failed Liberal promises.

On the question he was just asked about middle-class tax breaks, when we looked at the middle-class tax break offered by the government, two-thirds of Canadians did not qualify for those tax breaks.

He talked about one of his constituents. We did the math. Anyone who earns $23 an hour or less gets nothing in the middle-class tax break that the Liberals have proposed. The people who benefit the most earn between $50 and $100 an hour.

I want to ask my colleague how he feels about this. In talking to my constituents, those who earn between $50 and $100 an hour, even they think it is unfair that someone earning $23 an hour or less gets nothing in the so-called middle-class tax break and that small business people, who are the economic generators, the job creators in our society, get nothing with respect to the tax break promised to them.

Maybe the member could talk a little about these false promises.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member and I share an interest in Kurdish issues, and both of us participate in a parliamentary group on it.

The member is exactly right. This budget offers very little for the supposed middle class on which it is themed. That is the very front page of it.

Going back to my constituent, Cole, a pit boss at the Deerfoot Inn & Casino, and the card dealers who work there, they are the ones deserving of a tax cut as are small business owners. Neither of them are getting it.

I, who am a higher income earners, and members of Parliament in the House, who are also higher income earners, are getting the full benefit of this supposed middle-income tax cut because of the way the tax system works.

The Liberals are actually hurting Canadians who need it the most by driving the debt up to new heights. Taxes in the future will have to be raised to pay for the spending they are engineering today.

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond Centre, BC]

Madam Speaker, today I rise to speak to the amendment put forward to strike clause 34 from Bill C-15, the budget implementation act.

Clause 34, as it stands, will amend the Income Tax Act in a manner that would increase the small business income tax rate to 10.5% instead of continuing its scheduled decrease to 9%. Right this minute, the Income Tax Act, as currently written, will continue to lower the small business tax rate down to 9%. The removal of clause 34 from Bill C-15 will be an important gesture to demonstrate the commitment that the government made to small businesses during election time. During the 2015 campaign, all parties promised to reduce the small business tax rate and continue the outlined reductions put forward by our previous Conservative government.

We understand that small businesses are the backbone of our communities and are essential for job creation and a robust economy. As a result, the government should be encouraging small business owners and ensure that they have access to low tax rates. However, the Liberals seem to think differently. This is exactly why clause 34 is so concerning. This clause seeks to break one of the key promises previously made by the current Liberal government. I strongly believe that this reduction is crucial to motivating small businesses to grow and prosper.

As the former coordinator of the small business programs at both the Vancouver Community College and Kwantlen Polytechnic University, I have trained many business owners in leadership and business development. There are many challenges that small business owners face, whether it is working long hours, sacrificing time spent with family and loved ones, or the personal expense. However, when it is time to mature as a business, and at the point of decision to expand or not, the ability to reinvest is key and perhaps the greatest challenge. The question is to expand or not to expand.

This is exactly true for female entrepreneurs. I have had the opportunity to witness the growth and prevalence of female-run businesses, through the British Columbia Women's Enterprise Centre. Tax burdens, whether personal or business, have always been a great challenge to creating access to the money they require in their own pockets to reinvest. Additionally, my involvement as one of the founders of the Ethno Business Council in B.C. and my personal business experiences both demonstrate that tax burdens weigh particularly heavily on immigrant entrepreneurs.

While I was completing my doctoral dissertation at the University of British Columbia, I focused my research on studying the business cycle of immigrant entrepreneurs. What I found then, and what I continue to witness, is that immigrant business owners require as much encouragement and assistance as possible, not as a handout, but real encouragement in low-tax policies and business development opportunities.

Over the past several months, I have continued to meet with business leaders in my own riding and from across the country. One concern continues to ring out most clear. Lower tax rates, whether federal, provincial, or municipal, are crucial to small business development. It is not for the government to choose winners and losers. However, that is exactly what we have seen. The current Liberal government has chosen small businesses as the losers.

On several occasions, the Minister of Small Business and Tourism has stood in this House and promised to reduce the tax rate for small businesses. She promised that she was working with the Minister of Finance and other colleagues to ensure that the voice of small business owners were heard. Unfortunately, that was all for nothing.

Instead, the Liberals have deliberately and blatantly left small business out of the budget and show no indication of following through on their promise. Small businesses across the country feel slighted and have witnessed first-hand the broken promises of the Liberal government. However, by accepting this motion, the Liberal government would be able to demonstrate to small businesses that it recognizes their worth and seeks to support and encourage growth for lower tax rates.

As research and data emerge regarding the government's decision to eliminate the tax rate reductions, we are gaining a clear picture of just how much this will cost our small business owners. According to the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the CFIB, this decision will cost small and medium-sized firms over $900 million, compared to the government letting the scheduled small business tax reductions stand. That is a cost of nearly $1 billion that the Liberal government is placing on our hard-working middle class. Instead of alleviating the burden on our middle class, the Liberals are actually adding to their burden.

There is no doubt that small businesses stimulate our economy and encourage growth. The president of CFIB, Dan Kelly, stated that “The simple truth is Canada's small business owners are overwhelmingly middle class. They are your mechanic, accountant, hair dresser, and landscaper, just trying to earn a living doing something they love.”

The Liberals are looking for a way to pay their debt by placing it on the backs of our small businesses. Our middle class is not responsible for the Liberals' reckless spending. This I have mentioned before. When small businesses are paying more in taxes, it means they have less money in their pocket to reinvest in their businesses. Whether these investments materialize as hiring new employees, seeking out new business opportunities, or expanding their market, each is important, and this budget will inhibit any type of growth.

I am proud to support this motion to amend Bill C-15, and I strongly encourage all members of the House to do the same. We need to invest in our small and medium businesses and provide them with tools and funding to help them succeed, not just in the start-up phase, but throughout their entire business cycle. Small business owners are counting on us. We need to demonstrate that we value their hard work.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have been listening to the hon. member opposite talk about the need for tax cuts. Putting aside the fact that taxes did not go up for small businesses, future reductions have been deferred, and taxes did go down this year.

I have been reading through all of the private members' bills that the Conservative Party has introduced in the House this term. It is quite fascinating to note that we do not find tax cuts amongst them. We found things like an act to amend the Criminal Code. We found an act to establish a national appreciation day, a much higher priority than tax cuts in terms of the private members across the way. We found an act to amend the firearms legislation and an act to amend corrections and conditional release. We did not find tax cuts as being a popular component of their private members' bills.

I am curious as to why the member herself has not brought forth a private member's bill, if the issue is that important to her.

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond Centre, BC]

Madam Speaker, our Conservative government lowered personal taxes 120 times. We do not need a measure in the bill just to reinstate our commitment to cutting small business taxes. It was in our campaign promises, as it was part of every party's commitment.

Once in power, why did the Liberal government forget about its commitments and not fulfill its promise to lower small business taxes? The Liberal government should be facing that challenge. The Liberal government should be helping our small business owners.

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

Madam Speaker, it is incredulous to me, to anyone who sits in the House on this side, that the hon. member would actually bring that up when he knows full well that it was the Liberal Party that promised to bring the small business tax rate down, and yet it is not included in the budget. However, I digress. I am not actually here to speak to that, but it is worth noting.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague about small business. In the committee of the whole last week, the Minister of Finance was asked a very pointed question as to whether in fact he had consulted with Dan Kelly of the CFIB during budget deliberations. Like an artist in Cirque du Soleil, he contorted his body in every angle without answering the question. Therefore, I would like to ask my hon. colleague a question. How important would it have been for a finance minister to meet with the president of the CFIB during budget deliberations?

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond Centre, BC]

Madam Speaker, during many of my visits and discussions with the president of the CFIB, the first concern he raised was they were not even able to secure a meeting with the finance minister. How can the government really set up a policy when the most important economic element in our whole community in Canada that creates over 95% of jobs is not even heard?

In my experience, in meeting many of the business owners, and as a former business owner myself, this is exactly who we should be listening to, small business owners and small business organizations that represent them. I mentioned the B.C. Women's Enterprise Centre, the Ethno Business Council of B.C., and all those business associations I have been consulting. We should be listening to them. This is their major concern.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, first, I would like to mention that small businesses in my area are concerned. They are trying to invest, to hire, and to develop.

I would like to ask about the overall government plan on spending. If spending for the sake of spending were true, Ontario would be the economic engine of Canada. Of course that is not true. Perhaps she could speak to that.

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond Centre, BC]

Madam Speaker, the government has said it is going to spend on infrastructure and innovation. What they are spending on is the program, and the program administration. There is no actual job creation. There is no direct benefit to any of our businesses, especially now that it is actually increasing taxes to our small businesses.

Again, to grow or not to grow, to expand or not expand, that is the question. I do not think the Liberals have a good answer to it.

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

Madam Speaker, it is a huge honour to rise to speak on Bill C-15. As a spokesperson for the NDP on small business, I am going to focus on the small business tax cuts that are not in this bill, that are going to be deleted, and the false promise by the Liberals.

As a former small business owner, as a former executive director of a chamber of commerce, and as a member of Parliament who represents a riding that has six chambers of commerce, I understand small business and know how important small business is to our communities and we support it. Small business people are the builders of our communities. They are the volunteers who sit on our boards, donate to charities and local organizations, and sit on councils in local governments. These are the people who coach our children and are innovators. They build the culture of our communities and are the backbone of our local economies.

In 2008, I was a small business owner. I remember when the largest recession hit since the 1930s. Sales plummeted and people had hard decisions to make in order to keep their businesses alive. Some businesses did not make it. It was a tough reality, and that it is the way it goes sometimes. However, what was really hard to justify were the massive bailouts for Canada's largest corporations and nothing for small business. Many small business owners saw this as completely unfair.

In the last election, small businesses felt like they were going to get a break and have a little more fairness. All three parties, including the Green Party, promised to lower taxes on small business to 9%. I have the page from the Liberal platform in my hand, in black and white, which says, “reduce the small business tax rate to 9 per cent”.

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

It's not worth the paper it's written on.

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

That is right, Madam Speaker.

How did this promise come about? In February 2015, the NDP promised that it would reduce small business taxes from 11% to 9% to give job creators a needed break. The Conservatives played politics at first by voting down the measure, but then, to their credit, inserted the small business tax reduction into budget 2015. During the election campaign, all parties, even the Green Party, supported keeping these tax cuts that would have gone to 9% by 2019.

Political parties cannot agree on the time of day, so this was significant. This was huge. Small business owners felt they could be assured that after years of breaks for big corporations, they would finally get a little help, but then the government tabled its budget. This budget bill would delete all future reductions to the small business tax rate, with no plan to bring them back at a later date. They were just deleted.

It is a fact that this bill would delete all future reductions, but not once have the Liberals acknowledged it. Instead, they say, “Who knows what will happen in future budgets”. That is not a commitment. That is not a responsible way for government to speak to small business people, the people who are the foundation of our local economies. The Liberals made a promise and they broke it. Instead of owning it, they are hiding behind political spin. They will say that they have made all kinds of other promises, on top of other promises, like personal income tax cuts and child care money that will help.

Let us look at the so-called tax cut for the middle class that does nothing for those earning $45,000 a year or less, but really benefits the people earning around $200,000. If Liberals think that most small business owners do not benefit from income taxes, then they truly do not understand the business world. Small business people count on every dollar they earn to keep their businesses going, to pay their employees, to pay their rents, and to contribute to the local economy. The child tax benefit measure will not cover the cost of child care, so it is not enough.

It was a promise. The Liberals knocked on doors, visited small businesses, held round tables, all while making their promise crystal clear. There is a word I am not allowed to say in this place, but Canadians know what it means when a promise is made on something with no intention of doing it. It starts with the letter “l”. It was a slap in the face to small business.

Some have asked if small business really need this break, and the answer is yes. Small businesses create 78% of all new jobs in the country. They are the backbone of the economy. Fifty per cent of small businesses earn less than $40,000 a year. Seventy per cent of small businesses earn less than $60,000 a year. I have this information from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.

If the government was truly interested in growing the economy and creating jobs, it would do everything it could to support small business. It is important that we keep money in our local communities and plug economic leakages. When we look at buying local and spending money in our local community, we can see the multiplier effect. When we spend money at a local business or small business in our community, 46% of that money stays in our community, versus 14% spent at a multinational. Therefore, it is very important that we invest in small businesses and make sure that we keep that money.

As we know, the parliamentary budget officer did a report that said that $2.2 billion is going to be lost to small business by getting rid of the small business cut. When we add the multiplier effect, it is a lot of money to the local economy. If we want to grow our economy, and we want to do it in a way that supports community economic development, we need to invest in small business.

I have spoken directly with small business owners across Canada. Many were counting on this. Small business owners in my community, who have a whale-watching company, told me that they were planning on using the tax cut to help purchase another boat and add to their fleet, but now they are not sure that they are going to be able to afford it. They looked at it over four years.

At the end of the day, this is about priorities and fairness. Consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments have slashed taxes for Canada's largest and most profitable corporations from 28% to 15%. We know that a lot of that money ends up being dead money. It ends up in the hands of shareholders and leaves our communities.

We need to invest in small business. If the Liberals truly wanted to, there is nothing stopping them from honouring their promise.

Some might ask how we can afford to invest in small business, the $2.2 billion to do this right. I will give an example, and it is about choices.

Budgets are about choices. Elections are about choices. The current government has a choice. There is $800 million annually being lost through shareholder stock options. CEOs are getting a tax break when they are not paying their fair share. If we close that loophole, it would more than cover the small business tax break.

The Liberal government is making a choice to give CEOs a huge tax break instead of giving it to small business people in our communities. This is very important, because when they say that we cannot afford it, we can. We know we can. It is about choices. To go back to people in our communities and tell them that we are going to choose CEOs who are not paying their fair share over small businesses is a slap in the face.

I really hope that Liberals and members of the House will vote against the bill. Vote for the people at the doors they knocked on. Vote for the people in their communities instead of voting for Canada's CEOs, those who earn the most, and make sure that they pay their fair share. The myth that CEOs will suddenly pull out and that investment will pull out if we close these tax loopholes is wrong. It is not true. Fundamentally, it is not right.

We need the government to do the right thing and make sure that those who can afford it pay their fair share, that those who need a break get a break, and that small business counts and is a priority. We need to build trust with small business people instead of continually breaking trust.

I hope government members and all members of the House will vote against the bill, vote for the small business people in their communities, vote for what is right, and vote for the promises they made.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

I have to say that this government presented the best budget to support families and the middle class. As we all know, a middle-class family with more money in its pockets spends more, and that helps to boost the economy and support small and medium-sized businesses.

I would like my colleague to explain that.

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

Madam Speaker, I do not share the same perspective about the budget. In fact, I do not see the Liberals tackling inequality or helping those who are not in the middle class join the middle class.

Again, on the middle-class tax break I talked about earlier, those who earn $23 an hour or less do not get the tax benefit. How are those people supposed to join the middle class?

When we talk about small business, the economic generators, the job creators in our communities that create 80% of jobs, they are not getting a tax break that was promised to them. The child tax benefit the Liberals are offering is not enough to cover child care.

In fact, the people who would benefit the most from the middle-class tax break earn between $100,000 and $200,000 a year. If we ask them, even they will tell us that it is unfair that someone who earns $23 an hour or less gets nothing.

To the member, I completely disagree. I think the Liberals failed to do what they promised: tackle inequality and help those who are not in the middle class join the middle class. Two-thirds of Canadians are not getting the benefit they were promised.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Madam Speaker, earlier on in a debate on this same topic, I believe it was the member for Winnipeg North who expressed to me that the small business owners in his riding were very happy with this budget. They were happy because there were so many dollars being put back into the pockets of everyday Canadians in the middle class that suddenly small businesses were going to have all of this additional cash coming in their doors. I wonder if the member might have a perspective on how that would somehow balance out with small businesses actually receiving what was promised to them in the budget initially.