Bill C-29 (Historical)

Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 2

A second 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 eligible capital property rules and introducing a new class of depreciable property;
(b) introducing rules to prevent the avoidance of the shareholder loan rules using back-to-back arrangements;
(c) excluding derivatives from the application of the inventory valuation rules;
(d) ensuring that the return on a linked note retains the same character whether it is earned at maturity or reflected in a secondary market sale;
(e) clarifying the tax treatment of emissions allowances and eliminating the double taxation of certain free emissions allowances;
(f) introducing rules so that any accrued foreign exchange gains on a foreign currency debt will be realized when the debt becomes a parked obligation;
(g) ensuring that amounts are not inappropriately received tax-free by a policyholder as a result of a disposition of an interest in a life insurance policy;
(h) preventing the misuse of an exception in the anti-avoidance rules in the Income Tax Act for cross-border surplus-stripping transactions;
(i) indexing to inflation the maximum benefit amounts and the phase-out thresholds under the Canada child benefit, beginning in the 2020–21 benefit year;
(j) amending the anti-avoidance rules in the Income Tax Act that prevent the multiplication of access to the small business deduction and the avoidance of the business limit and the taxable capital limit;
(k) ensuring that an exchange of shares of a mutual fund corporation or investment corporation that results in the investor switching between funds will be considered for tax purposes to be a disposition at fair market value;
(l) implementing the country-by-country reporting standards recommended by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development;
(m) clarifying the application of anti-avoidance rules in the Income Tax Act for back-to-back loans to multiple intermediary structures and character substitution; and
(n) introducing rules to prevent the avoidance of withholding tax on rents, royalties and similar payments using back-to-back arrangements.
Part 1 implements other income tax measures confirmed in the March 22, 2016 budget by
(a) allowing greater flexibility for recognizing charitable donations made by an individual’s former graduated rate estate;
(b) clarifying what types of investment funds are excluded from the loss restriction event rules that otherwise limit a trust’s use of certain tax attributes;
(c) ensuring that income arising in certain trusts on the death of the trust’s primary beneficiary is taxed in the trust and not in the hands of that beneficiary, subject to a joint election for certain testamentary trusts to report the income in that beneficiary’s final tax return;
(d) clarifying that the Canada Revenue Agency and the courts may increase or adjust an amount included in an assessment that is under objection or appeal at any time, provided the total amount of the assessment does not increase; and
(e) implementing the common reporting standard recommended by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development for the automatic exchange of financial account information between tax authorities.
Part 1 also amends the Employment Insurance Act and various regulations to replace the term “child tax benefit” with “Canada child benefit”.
Part 2 implements certain goods and services tax and harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) measures proposed or confirmed in the March 22, 2016 budget by
(a) adding certain exported call centre services to the list of GST/HST zero-rated exports;
(b) strengthening the test for determining whether two corporations, or a partnership and a corporation, can be considered closely related;
(c) ensuring that the application of the GST/HST is unaffected by income tax amendments that convert eligible capital property into a new class of depreciable property; and
(d) clarifying that the Canada Revenue Agency and the courts may increase or adjust an amount included in an assessment that is under objection or appeal at any time, provided the total amount of the assessment does not increase.
Part 3 implements an excise measure confirmed in the March 22, 2016 budget by clarifying that the Canada Revenue Agency and the courts may increase or adjust an amount included in an assessment that is under objection or appeal at any time, provided the total amount of the assessment does not increase.
Division 1 of Part 4 amends the Employment Insurance Act to specify what does not constitute suitable employment for the purposes of certain provisions of the Act.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Old Age Security Act to provide that, in the case of low-income couples who have to live apart for reasons not attributable to either of them, the amount of the allowance is to be based on the income of the allowance recipient only.
Division 3 of Part 4 amends the Canada Education Savings Act to replace the term “child tax benefit” with “Canada child benefit”. It also amends that Act to change the manner in which the eligibility for the Canada Learning Bond is established, including by eliminating the national child benefit supplement as an eligibility criterion and by adding an eligibility formula based on income and number of children.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Canada Disability Savings Act to replace the term “child tax benefit” with “Canada child benefit”. It also amends the definition “phase-out income”.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Royal Canadian Mint Act to enable the Royal Canadian Mint to anticipate profit with respect to the provision of goods or services, to clarify the powers of the Royal Canadian Mint, to confirm the current and legal tender status of all non-circulation $350 coins dated between 1999 and 2006 and to remove the requirement that the directors of the Royal Canadian Mint have experience in respect of metal fabrication or production, industrial relations or a related field.
Division 6 of Part 4 amends the Financial Administration Act, the Bank of Canada Act and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act to clarify certain powers of the Minister of Finance in relation to the sound and efficient management of federal funds and the operation of Crown corporations. It amends the Financial Administration Act to provide that the Minister of Finance may lend, by way of auction, excess funds out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund and, with the authorization of the Governor in Council, may enter into contracts and agreements of a financial nature for the purpose of managing risks related to the financial position of the Government of Canada. It also amends the Bank of Canada Act to provide that the Minister of Finance may delegate to the Bank of Canada the management of the lending of money to agent corporations. Finally, it amends the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act to provide that the Bank of Canada may act as a custodian of the financial assets of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 2

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

I will remind hon. members that normally everybody quiets down when the Speaker is speaking. It is in that book I quoted earlier.

It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, Foreign Affairs; the hon. member for Port Moody—Coquitlam, Fisheries and Oceans.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to stand in the House this evening to speak to Bill C-29. On behalf of the people of Niagara Centre, I rise today to speak about what this budget will mean for my community, our region, and the people and businesses that call Welland, Thorold, St. Catharines, Port Colborne, and all of the Niagara region home.

Since first being elected last year, I have participated in three federal budget consultations in my riding and throughout the Niagara region. The first was last January to ensure that the concerns and aspirations of my constituents were included in budget 2016. At this meeting, I met with over 15 social service groups, immigration groups, environmental groups, poverty groups, business associations, chambers of commerce, unions, and many other community leaders.

The second consultation last winter was with the parliamentary secretary for finance, the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, who joined me and 12 mayors from the Niagara region, the Niagara regional chair, various council members, and a number of economic development officers from the area who were all looking to re-engage with the federal government.

At both of these meetings, the message was very clear. The citizens of Niagara Centre and Niagara wanted to ensure that the federal government was helping Canadians by doing what we promised to do: first, create a business-friendly environment that keeps us competitive in a changing global economy; second, provide support for Canadians to learn new skills and knowledge to succeed in a changing world; third, partner with our provinces and municipal governments to build the core infrastructure people and businesses need to be healthy and secure and that will provide a springboard for success in the years to come; and fourth, provide returns that meet the requirements of a triple bottom-line mindset, that being economic, environmental, and social.

Last week, the member for St. Catharines and I held a pre-budget consultation for budget 2017. Much of the conversation reflected on the successes of budget 2016 and the long-term vision of the programs put forward last March. The regional chair, the mayors, business groups, social service providers, Brock University and Niagara College, and other community leaders once again came forward with their desire to build on budget 2016 and to continue to build partnerships between the federal government and the people of my riding of Niagara Centre, and, equally important, the people of the entire Niagara region.

These three formal consultations allowed me, as well as members of our community, to meet in partnership with municipal governments, social service providers, business groups, and educational institutions to discuss in an open forum how to strengthen the partnerships between these groups and the federal government while meeting the needs of hundreds of residents in my riding, middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join the middle class.

What I have been hearing from the people of Niagara Centre is how budget 2016 helps them. In my riding we have created a seniors council, a group of passionate individuals within our seniors community who meet with me and my staff throughout the year to discuss how governments and service providers can help seniors live healthy, independent, full lives. The Niagara Centre Seniors' Council supports the Old Age Security Act, which ensures that, in the case of low-income couples who have to live apart for reasons not attributable to either of them, the amount of the allowance is to be based on the income of the allowance recipient only.

In my riding we have also created a youth council, a group of engaged and inspirational young people from high school, university, and college as well as young business owners. These are the leaders of today. When this group comes together throughout the year, I am excited about Niagara Centre and the Niagara region's future. The youth council is motivated by this government's increased investments in Canadian colleges and universities, such as Brock University and Niagara College, both of which are in my riding of Niagara Centre.

They are also very supportive of the increased support for middle-class families and those working hard to join the middle class.

By increasing the amount of federal support for college tuition, they are now moving forward with more support for mental health services. They are in fact prioritizing, on behalf of all Canadians, moving forward on enhanced mental health services.

In my riding, many families are working hard to provide for their children so their kids can be successful. The Canada child benefit does just that. In early September, when so many of us were getting our kids ready to go back to school, I heard from mothers and fathers in my riding about how helpful the Canada child benefit was to them. For example, a family with an income of $65,000 a year, with two school-aged children, received a $500 tax-free cheque in September, money that was used to help pay for back-to-school supplies, clothes, registration for sports teams, cultural and theatre registrations, and nutritious foods for lunches.

My constituency office in the city of Welland had many hard-working parents from Port Colborne, Thorold, Welland, and south St. Catharines and from outside the riding come in to learn about the CCB. I have had many conversations with parents who have stopped in to thank us and tell me how the CCB has been a great help to them. As a father myself, it was incredible to see the effect this particular program had on families who want to ensure that their children have every opportunity to be successful.

Budget 2016 is an example of how the federal government can create partnerships with municipal governments, social service providers, the business community, and, equally important, hard-working Canadians to help grow our economy, support our next generation of business and innovation, and ensure that Canadians have the support they need to succeed today as well as tomorrow.

Budget 2016 focuses on partnerships that build sound infrastructure while creating good jobs with a strong focus on supporting hard-working Canadians. After three budget consultations to date, several youth and senior advisory committee meetings, and consultations with business groups, universities, colleges, anti-poverty groups, immigration groups, and various other community organizations, this is what the people of Niagara Centre have asked of their government.

Once again, it is establishing triple bottom-line results, including economic, social, and environmental. The result is that hard-working Canadians, middle-class families in Niagara and beyond, see in budget 2016 that the Government of Canada is working with them and listening to their needs and concerns to bring success today while ensuring the success of future generations. It is responsive government and responsible government.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a question I have been wanting to put to a government representative today. I know that the hon. member did not touch on it in his speech, but my question does directly relate to Bill C-29 in that we had a series of commitments from the Liberal government when it was campaigning in the election.

There is one piece, which I have to say I have been very disappointed has not been in budget 2016. I am not sure I have heard the finance minister commit to it for budget 2017.

The Liberal platform committed that all fossil fuel subsidies would be terminated, but budget 2016 includes fossil fuel subsidies for liquefied natural gas continuing until at least 2025. I do not want to put the hon. member on the spot, but perhaps he has some indication of whether that Liberal promise relating to fossil fuel subsidies will be brought in in 2017.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is something we are discussing at the moment. With all due respect, I can get back to you on the information we have to date as well on the direction we may be taking in 2017.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

Before proceeding, I want to remind hon. members to speak through the Speaker and not directly across the aisle.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his speech, the member spoke about the Canada child benefit.

On that topic, the bill did not provide for the indexing of that benefit, which represents a loss for Canadian families.

Did the government fail to index this benefit because of a lack of attention or a lack of planning?

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that was brought up by members of this caucus most recently this past week, me included, and is something that we will be looking at for 2017.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, Humber River—Black Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member sits on the transportation committee and I know from our conversations that he is interested in transportation. The minister has indicated his interest in a national transportation strategy and the region that the member comes from is an important region in Ontario. I would like to hear some comments regarding the transportation strategy.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, transportation is something that I have been working on for quite some time here in the House, as well as in my previous life as a mayor for the past 14 years. It is near and dear to my heart and those of many Canadians, with respect not only to a transportation strategy but also an overall economic strategy that would work in tandem and align itself well with an overall national transportation strategy.

We in Niagara are Ontario's first designated gateway, the first ever in the province of Ontario. Just recently, the federal government designated Niagara as Ontario's only designated foreign trade zone, the intention being that local planning and economic development activities include considering how to promote increased opportunities for cross-border trade, the movement of goods, and tourism in Niagara.

Because they are international in scale, such hubs require a significant associated transport infrastructure to facilitate the fast and efficient movement of goods and people. There is no better time to start looking at those strategies not only to promote and encourage a better economy, but also more appropriate infrastructure investments.

The result is the establishment of an economic cluster, clusters of complementary businesses, skills, professions, research facilities, arts and entertainment entities, educational institutions, and other factors combining to make cities across this nation, not just Niagara, conduits for growth and innovation.

Indeed, as the Canada Transportation Act review notes, “Transportation and communication logistics systems lend cohesion to the urban mix and provide the critical intercity and international linkages so essential to economic success.” The review also indicates that an integrated transportation system will lead to an overall enhanced and better economic global performance by this nation.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to Bill C-29, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 22, 2016 and other measures.

I would like to use this opportunity to address a number of concerns about this legislation. In particular, I would like to discuss the implications of the new infrastructure bank for rural ridings like Essex, and for the Canadian economy as a whole.

The potential privatization of our public infrastructure is extremely worrisome. When the government opens our country to private investors who control pools of capital worth trillions of dollars, it undermines the government's ability to provide effective infrastructure for Canadian communities. Private investors do not invest in Canada out of the goodness of their heart, but expect a return on their investment.

That return will come at a cost. For example, it could come at the cost of a working family's ability to put their children into hockey school. It could come at the cost of a senior's ability to pay for their already expensive prescription drugs. We need to ask ourselves if tolled highways and user fees are the best way to finance our infrastructure. What effect will privatized infrastructure projects have on the economies of smaller communities, small business owners, and the cost of living for hard-working Canadians?

The Liberals propose to raise public capital for this new infrastructure bank by selling off public assets. It then plans to raise private capital through privatizing the newly built bridges, roads, and trains. Higher fees for public transit lead directly to higher expenses for Canadians. Giving control of these new projects to private investors is outside the Liberal government's mandate. This grand plan has been termed “asset recycling”, but what it really is is “asset privatizing”.

The Liberal platform argued that the Canadian government's high credit rating would be leveraged to encourage municipalities and provinces to invest in infrastructure through low-cost financing, but this is not what the government has put forward. Instead, the Liberals want to sell off newly built infrastructure to private investors so they can finance the high rates of return for private investors.

What I am deeply concerned about is that at no time during the last election did the Liberal Party talk about introducing privatization of our infrastructure. Members may recall that the last election took place over several months, giving the Liberals ample opportunity to mention their plan. Their plan, which has now been revealed, exposes the real motive behind the proposed infrastructure bank, which is further privatization of our public infrastructure.

In my role as the member of Parliament for the people of Essex, I need to ask what this means for average working people in my community. It means tolls and user fees. Toll roads do not make life more affordable for Canadians. It means expensive bills every month.

The people in my community already know what headaches can come from private infrastructure projects. The Ambassador Bridge is privately owned and belongs to an 89-year-old billionaire who controls and holds this vital American-Canadian trade link hostage. The bridge is falling apart and is jeopardizing public safety. We desperately need the new Gordie Howe bridge to be built.

Every day, between 8,000 and 10,000 trucks cross our border. This bridge represents $700 billion in annual trade between our two nations. Last week, I met with representatives of a fish processing plant in Kingsville. They told me they were experiencing extreme backups when their delivery trucks return from Michigan. This is costing their plant time and money.

Tolls are not the way to go. As we saw with the building of Highway 407 in Toronto, one of the many failed public-private partnerships, tolls have increased so much that most people do not use the highway. How has this become a model to be replicated?

I was just speaking with my mom earlier today about this, and she said she never uses the 407 because it is so expensive. She simply cannot afford it. It costs my parents $30 for a one-way trip. They are seniors. This is an added expense that they simply cannot afford.

In my riding of Essex, small businesses create good local jobs and play an integral role in our communities. The Liberals' broken campaign pledge on the small business tax rate will cost business owners money and hurt their bottom lines. Instead of hiring that additional worker, they now have to set that money aside for taxes. Similarly, building highways that people will not be able to afford to use hurts rural communities and employers.

Employers in my riding are already struggling with attracting potential employees from the city to come to work in the county. We have no public transit, so people have to use their own vehicles to get around. I have spoken with many of these employers and they have told me about their struggles to maintain their workforces. Additional road tolls will hurt employers in rural ridings across Canada.

I am so proud of my community and its world-class production of wine. The Canadian wine industry provides an estimated annual economic benefit of $8 billion, which is a fraction of its potential value. Companies, such as Colio Estates, Cooper's Hawk, Mastronardi Estates, Oxley Estates, Colchester Ridge Estates, Muscedere, North 42 Degrees, Sprucewood Shores Estates, and Viewpointe Estates are only a few of the wineries in my region that operate incredible businesses and attract tourism dollars to our area. These wineries are local employers that look to the federal government to support their innovation. They need the government to present a budget that effectively directs public investment to high-growth industries, such as our agricultural sector. This budget does nothing for these small business owners.

Another infrastructure priority in my riding is broadband Internet. As an MP who represents rural communities across Essex, I welcome the government's commitment to improving access to broadband Internet. In my riding, we are expecting significant upgrades over the next year that will expand wireless coverage. This is welcome news.

However, if we are talking about support for farmers, the commitments in the budget fall short of the support farmers have asked for. The budget makes no provisions for promised compensation for farmers who will be hurt by trade deals like the TPP and CETA, even as the government continues to push to ratify these deals. Last week, the government finally announced a plan to compensate farmers, but it falls far short of compensating them for the losses they are expected to incur. These trade deals chip away at Canada's supply managed sectors at a time when we should be strengthening family farms and ensuring that they have the tools they need to remain viable.

There is a lot missing in the Liberals' budget. Where are the commitments to seniors who are struggling to make ends meet and plan for their retirement? Where are the commitments to invest in home care? Where are the commitments to make child care more affordable? In my constituency office, we have been helping people access the Canada child tax benefit. Just the other week, my office assisted a single mom who is struggling to access this benefit because of the onerous requirements to prove that she's estranged from her husband. We also hear regularly from parents who cannot find affordable child care, and the increased CCTB simply does not address these challenges.

We have also heard from people in my riding who have been impacted by the Phoenix pay system debacle. I have heard from students who were never properly paid this summer, and women coming back from maternity leave whose pay is interrupted. It is extremely stressful, given that most people live paycheque to paycheque and simply do not have the cash reserves to miss months of paycheques. These are the types of issues that matter to my constituents.

The Liberal Party ran on a platform of so-called real change. The budget would leave one questioning what real change means, or more ominously, who it benefits.

On October 20, we learned that the Liberals gave Credit Suisse, an investment firm specializing in privatization, the mandate to advise the Liberals on the benefits of privatizing Canadian airports. It seems like a foregone conclusion that Credit Suisse will recommend privatization. Along with concerns over increased fees for Canadians, the privatization of airports also raises concerns about security matters. There could be significant implications for travellers, and for public safety more broadly. What is next, the privatization of our border crossings?

I would like to speak more about some of my riding's infrastructure priorities. My riding of Essex is home to a short-line rail service called the Essex Terminal Railway. It is critical to the infrastructure necessary in my community. The short line rail industry made several requests of budget 2016, all of which fell on deaf ears. Clearly, investing in short-line rail would help create new opportunities to expand service and increase regional economic opportunities. We do not see that in this budget.

I urge the government to seriously rethink its infrastructure bank scheme. Privatization has many negative impacts and I am deeply concerned that this proposed bank will serve neither the interests of my constituents, nor the needs of my riding. For these reasons, I will be voting no to Bill C-29.

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

Mr. Speaker, I find it amazing that New Democrats are so critical of so many progressive announcements that have been made by this government. They committed to balancing the budget for this fiscal year. I suspect they are having a difficult time justifying how they are going to be voting.

We are lifting tens of thousands of children out of poverty; we are lifting tens of thousands of seniors out of poverty; we have reduced the age of retirement from 67 to 65; we are investing record billions of dollars into Canada's infrastructure; we are giving a tax increase to Canada's wealthiest; we are giving a tax decrease to Canada's middle class; and we are doing so much more. That is not even making reference to the Canada child benefit, which is giving out literally hundreds of millions of dollars.

How does the member justify this in her own mind? We know the limitations from the last election. The NDP said that it would balance the budget. Given that its attitude was to balance the budget, how could it not support this vote?

I could appreciate if the only thing the NDP was saying was there is too much debt in this particular budget, which there is not, because then at least I could understand why it would be in opposition to it.

How does the NDP justify voting against all those positive social policy decisions that are going to affect the lives of millions of Canadians in every region of our country?

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I find it amazing that the member opposite can stand and not speak to the fact that they are privatizing public infrastructure. This is not something that they campaigned on. This is not something that they were up front with Canadians about. This is something that they are bringing forward, as though this is the answer to all of our problems.

This will drastically hurt the middle class, whom we hear constantly from the other side of this House that they are attempting to help. Tolls and fees will hurt working-class people in Canada.

I also have a difficult time understanding why the Liberals have not raised the corporate tax rate. I also find it amazing that they have not cut taxes for small business. They have left out so many people in this budget and budget update that the list goes on and on. We can talk about seniors. Where on Earth is there some help for seniors in our communities? There are so many things that could be done in this budget that, unfortunately, we do not see; and what we do see coming forward are things that the Liberal government certainly did not campaign on.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I know the member has a similar riding to mine, hers is probably a little less rural than mine.

Specifically around the issues that hard-working Canadians face, such as filling their prescriptions and day care costs that are astronomical, this budget does not address, at all, seniors' issues dealing with a senior member of the family who may have dementia or Alzheimer's or some other issue when it involves a caregiver, even issues around palliative care that the budget does not really address at all. Would she comment on any one of those issues that this budget fails to address for average hard-working Canadian families?

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have to agree, my riding is largely rural. It consists of five municipalities. Seniors are struggling in my communities. They are in my office every day, many of them crying, which is heartbreaking, because they simply cannot afford their housing or their medication. They are having to make really difficult choices about whether they take a full dose of medication or whether they pay their hydro bill. This is unacceptable.

We often hear the government mentioning that it has increased GIS. We welcome any increase, but to think that $900 a year is going to elevate any senior in this country out of poverty, who is already living below the poverty line, is simply not the case. Unfortunately, in my riding, many of the seniors who did receive this income support had their rent increased. We saw increases in the grocery stores, things that were reflected in that increase. Seniors really have been completely left out of this budget.

When we talk about home care, there is no commitment for home care in this budget. Where is the home care that was promised in the budget, and now in this update, that we simply do not see?

There is going to be a health care cut next year by the present government that is going to drastically hurt seniors in our communities and all Canadians.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, just one year ago today, Canadians asked us to do two things: help them and their families, and grow our economy.

While the economy has grown over the past decade, we know that the growth has been too slow and its benefits have not been shared widely enough. Middle-class families see the economy growing, but they have not felt like they are getting ahead. That is why we ran on a platform to support the middle class while growing the economy.

We were among the first countries in the world to pursue an approach to growth that strengthens the middle class, and people are listening. Our approach to supporting the middle class while growing our economy is one that is garnering praise and positive attention around the world.

The Financial Times called Canada “a glimmer of light”.The Wall Street Journal called Canada “the poster child” for the International Monetary Fund’s global growth strategy. Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF, praised our approach and said that she hoped it would “go viral”.

The Economist magazine has put Canada's approach on its cover with a story in a recent issue. “Liberty moves north” was the headline. It stated that “the world owes Canada gratitude for reminding it of what many people are in danger of forgetting: that tolerance and openness are wellsprings of security and prosperity, not threats to them”.

Our budget and the government's approach earned these endorsements because, I firmly believe, we are focused on exactly the right things.

As the government, we are particularly proud of our first budget. This is a budget that puts people and families first. It introduces investments that take an essential step to grow the middle class. It is the first step of a long-term plan to restore hope and revitalize the economy for the benefit of all Canadians. It is focused on people. It is focused on growing the economy for the long term in ways that will benefit every Canadian.

The legislation we are debating today, the budget implementation act, 2016, no. 2, will complete the measures we introduced in budget 2016. This is a budget that offers a fresh boost to the core of our economy: Canada's middle class.

Since being elected, we have lowered taxes for nine million Canadians and introduced the Canada child benefit, which will help nine in 10 Canadians to be better off. Since last July, Canadians have been receiving the new Canada child benefit, which will lift 300,000 children out of poverty. It is no small feat.

Families have been seeing more money in their pockets to spend on sports programs, music lessons, and on other activities for their children this year. Better yet, the Canada child benefit is simpler, it is fairer, and it is tax free, unlike the confusing and unfair system of child benefits it replaced.

To elaborate, since July 1, families can receive up to $6,400 each year per child under six, and $5,400 for a child between six and 17 years of age. The second budget implementation act indexes this benefit to inflation to ensure that it will serve Canadians now and well into the future.

An ambitious public policy like this requires a reliable tax base, and we must remain vigilant in the face of growing problems of international tax evasion and tax avoidance. All around the world, governments are coming together to fight tax evasion and avoidance. In budget 2016, we took an important step in this fight by devoting $444 million in new funding to the Canada Revenue Agency to crack down on tax evaders.

The second budget implementation act would implement key provisions of the international fight. Under the common reporting standard, Canadian financial institutions would be expected to have procedures in place to identify accounts held by non-residents and report information on those accounts to the Canada Revenue Agency. Tax administrations in foreign jurisdictions would likewise collect information from their financial institutions about accounts held by residents of other countries including Canada. The CRA would formalize exchange arrangements with foreign jurisdictions, having verified that each jurisdiction has appropriate capacity and safeguards in place. Then the financial account information would begin to be exchanged on a reciprocal bilateral basis. The introduction of the common reporting standard is an important global development that would help enhance tax compliance and eliminate opportunities for tax evasion, a goal all members in this House share. Going forward, Canada will continue to work with the international community to ensure a coherent and consistent response to tax avoidance.

As all members of this House know, budget 2016 would also commit considerable investments to infrastructure, an important step in growing Canada's economy and in strengthening our middle class. Investments in affordable housing; investments in broadband; and investments in roads, public transit, and waste water are all investments that are important to the people of Newmarket—Aurora and, I suggest, to people across this land. This is an important facet of this budget and it is one that would help grow our economy for years to come.

Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio is the best in the G7 right now. Now is the time to borrow money. Now is the time to invest in Canadians. Now is the time to invest in long-term growth. These investments are sorely needed. I can think of no better time. I can think of no better policy that would grow the economy in the short term, in the mid-term, and in the long term than these significant and important commitments to infrastructure investments. That is why I am so proud of that component of budget 2016.

Recently in my riding of Newmarket—Aurora, we had a pre-budget 2017 town hall. I spoke with members of my regional council there and asked them to prioritize what they saw as their infrastructure priorities. I think it will shock no one in this House that things such as waste-water treatment, roads, public transportation, and, importantly, affordable housing were on the top of their list. I live in a growing part of the country. The growth has put municipal and regional governments under some strain. As their member of Parliament, I am happy to offer some support to their priorities in the form of considerable investment in infrastructure that will help my regional government and my municipal partners deliver on what is important to the great people of Newmarket and Aurora. How they play out in our own ridings is something that we all bear in mind when we consider the important policies. I for one can say that they are playing out nicely in Newmarket—Aurora. They are much needed and appreciated.

Another important component that is found in budget 2016, and of course in the implementation act here, is that we are helping young Canadians to succeed. Now more than ever it is important that post-secondary education remain affordable and accessible. Young Canadians must have access to meaningful work at the beginning of their careers, and must not be burdened by increasing student debt. Budget 2016 would make post-secondary education more affordable for students from low- and middle-income families and it would make it easier to repay student debt. Budget 2016 would also help young Canadians to gain experience and extra income and to find good jobs after graduation.

Budget 2016 represents a strong first step in our plan to put people first and to deliver the help they need now while investing for the years and decades to come. With these investments, and inspired by a sense of fairness, we are ensuring that Canada's best days lie ahead. I therefore encourage all members in this House to support this bill.