Bill C-20 (Historical)

An Act respecting further COVID-19 measures

Part 1 amends the Income Tax Act to revise the eligibility criteria for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) in order to support those employers hardest hit by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It also extends the CEWS to November 21, 2020, with the ability to extend the CEWS by regulation to no later than December 31, 2020, and provides a revised calculation of the CEWS for the fifth and subsequent qualifying periods. Finally, it makes amendments to the Income Tax Act and the Income Tax Regulations to ensure that the CEWS operates effectively.
Part 2 amends the Pension Act, the Department of Veterans Affairs Act, the Children’s Special Allowances Act and the Veterans Well-being Act to authorize the disclosure of information for the purpose of the administration of a program to provide a one-time payment to persons with disabilities for reasons related to COVID-19. It also amends the Income Tax Act to authorize the use by officials, or disclosure to Government of Canada officials, of taxpayer information solely for the purpose of that one-time payment. Finally, it provides that any amount payable in relation to the administration of the program to provide that one-time payment is to be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Part 3 enacts the Time Limits and Other Periods Act (COVID-19) which addresses the need for flexibility in relation to certain time limits and other periods that are established by or under Acts of Parliament and that are difficult or impossible to meet as a result of the exceptional circumstances produced by COVID-19. In particular, the enactment
(a) suspends, for a maximum of six months, certain time limits in relation to proceedings before courts;
(b) temporarily enables ministers to suspend or extend time limits and to extend other periods in relation to specified Acts and regulations for a maximum of six months; and
(c) provides for the transparent exercise of the powers it confers and for Parliamentary oversight over the exercise of those powers.

Further COVID-19 Measures Act

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, that was one comment. My other comment is based on a question that I had posed and that the Conservatives also posed. It is the question of how the economy is doing today compared to the way it was. It is a fair question.

We can look at the pre-pandemic economy, from prior to coronavirus. Coronavirus has had a very profound impact not only on Canada's economy but also on the economy around the world. This is something that is affecting every country, and some countries are doing a better job than others in terms of managing and providing for their citizens. Generally speaking, prior to the pandemic, Canada's economy was doing exceptionally well. When we compare it to the Stephen Harper days, members will find that it was doing exceptionally well, especially in terms of job creation.

There will always be a different approach from a Conservative administration than there will be from a Liberal administration. A Liberal government understands and appreciates the role a national government can play in providing the incentives necessary to support the economy and to move us forward in terms of creating jobs, opportunities and hope. We provide individuals who do not have much, through tax incentives and directed grants, the ability to become that much better off. We have demonstrated that very clearly.

What I want to say to Canadians today is that when the pandemic started and it was necessary for the government to engage, the government, without hesitation, made it very clear that it did not want Canadians to have to worry about paying bills. We wanted to ensure that Canadians knew we were going to be there for them in a very real and tangible way.

A Conservative member was being somewhat critical and said that the Liberals spent a lot of money. Yes, we have spent a lot of money. However, I believe that money has been well spent. If we listen to Conservatives, we do not hear any of them saying to cut back on any of the specific program dollars we have allocated. Conservatives recognize that programs like CERB are helping more than eight million people. Over eight million people are being helped by CERB.

We must remember that the CERB program started from nothing. Previously, there was no CERB program. It came into its very existence because of the coronavirus. That process, from the creation of the program to its getting money into the pockets of Canadians, happened relatively quickly. The program was not that complicated. It was more important that we put money in the pockets of Canadians so they could buy groceries, pay their bills and stay in their homes. That was the priority of this government, and we have seen the results.

The impact the coronavirus has had is second to no other. We would have to go back generations and generations to find this type of economical and social impact. There are people who have had to go through a great deal of hardship. I send my condolences to the families and friends of those who have passed from the coronavirus, to those who have been infected and to the individuals going through some very difficult times.

I recognize, appreciate and value the work of essential workers. We often talk about health care workers or first responders, as we should, and recognize the important role they have played. What about the long haul truck drivers who are ensuring groceries get to the supermarkets we are so dependent upon? What about the taxi drivers who are driving individuals to health care facilities?

Many essential workers have stepped up to ensure that we are able to continue to provide the types of services that are absolutely critical for us as a society. I express my appreciation, and the government's appreciation, to all those individuals who continue to contribute to the lives of individuals in a very real way.

There comes a point when we recognize that it is not just the government's cabinet ministers who sit around the table. The leader of the New Democrat Party said the NDP forced the Liberals to do this or that. If we listen to the leader of the NDP, everything we have ever done is because the NDP forced us to. The reality is that this government listens to what Canadians are saying. We introduce the programs. I was on virtual phone calls every day to the cabinet indirectly providing input, as many of my colleagues were. There were technical briefings provided for all members of the House. It did not matter which political party members were part of.

With regard to the coronavirus, our Prime Minister challenged us to consult and work with our constituents and report what we needed to do to ensure that Canada comes out okay. There should be no surprise that when we generate programs from nothing that there is going to be a need for modification of those programs. One would expect that.

I made reference to the Canada emergency response benefit allotment of $2,000. It was very simple so that we could get money into the pockets of Canadians as quickly as possible. I remember the former government House leader would say that small business is the backbone of Canada's economy. Other members have said likewise. We understand that if we want to see the economy grow, or minimize the negative impact on the economy, we have to recognize the important role that small businesses play and support them. This government is doing just that.

We see that through loans and from dialogue created with financial institutions, in terms of their important obligations to businesses and directing money through wage subsidies. That is what this legislation is changing. It is taking into consideration many changes that are necessary. These things are having a very real impact. They are not necessarily all coming from the mind of the leader of the New Democratic Party. These are flowing from ideas from constituencies and from Canadians in every region of our country. This is a government that is committed to working with other levels of government. It is brilliant. We just committed $19 billion to help restart the economy working with the provinces.

From the get-go, we have understood how important it was to work with the different levels of government because we each have a very important role to play in serving our constituents and Canadians. The Minister of Employment embodies a great deal of what many of us hope to achieve, and she shared that in some of her comments, if not directly, then indirectly. I will be a little more direct. The minister is very passionate about disabilities. We saw that with the historic disability accessibility legislation we brought in last year. It was quite a moment. I was not only happy for Canadians, but I felt good that a minister who felt so strongly about that issue was able to see it come to light.

Today, she was talking about the importance of somehow fixing the disability system and the way we allocate money out, whether it is tax credits or direct cash. What provides me comfort is that we have ministers like that, who are so committed to trying to make a difference, who share that personal story and are prepared to fight for those individuals with disabilities. It is individuals such as her, and I would suggest that she does not have a monopoly on it, because many, if not all of us in our own way, either directly or indirectly, try to influence government policy.

For myself, I can think of a wide spectrum of things that I would like to kindly gesture the government to move toward. There is no end to the things that I would like to see happen, but I recognize that it takes time. I think one of the issues that will come out of the coronavirus is that we will see a number of future modifications to programs that will be in the long-term best interest of a wide spectrum of people. I am anxious to see those types of changes take place in the coming years.

I want to highlight the impact at the grassroots level, and what is happening at the grassroots level today, compared to January or the beginning of February. For example, I have many constituents who travelled to India, particularly Punjab, and to the Phillippines, on holidays. They were enjoying their holiday, but unfortunately, with the coronavirus and the shutdown of airports and all sorts of issues, thousands of individuals were trapped abroad, hundreds from my own riding. For many, it has taken weeks, if not months, to ultimately be able to return, but we do not really hear about those examples.

The examples we typically hear about are of small businesses having a difficult time being able to keep their doors open, and it does become an issue of cash flow. When we look at the wage subsidy program, I believe it is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 2.5 million jobs that have been subsidized to date. I believe this is the minimum; it is probably quite a bit more than that, but I am not 100% sure. I can tell members that many of those jobs would have completely disappeared without the wage subsidy program. When an employer might have just as well laid someone off indefinitely, that program provided the employer an option instead. As a direct result, two million to three million Canadians were able to continue with the jobs they had.

I make reference to the eight million people in the CERB program. I am very much interested to see how that shakes out in the riding of Winnipeg North, but I do know there are tens of thousands of people in my home province of Manitoba. I hate to imagine what the economic plight of many of those individuals who have collected the CERB would have been like had it not been for that program. I have a family member who was dependent on that program. We all have friends and know of others who needed that sort of general program to be there as a backstop to support Canadians. I am very proud of that particular program.

When we think of other ways in which we can support Canadians, the Canada child benefit program allows for a direct deposit of cash into the accounts of families. Some of those families, because of COVID-19, are that much more challenged. The government brought through a top-up for the Canada child benefit program, helping thousands of people in virtually every province. I know I often refer to the Canada child benefit program. Under a normal situation, just over $9 million every month goes into the riding of Winnipeg North. That was topped up because it is easily identified and it is a good way to get money into the pockets of Canadians.

The GST affects us all. Somewhere in the neighbourhood of 12 million people benefited from the GST one-time payment also.

One of the things I am very proud of is that many of us have been wanting to support seniors. I tabled a petition earlier today about how we can support seniors. I am very grateful that the current Minister of Seniors, through an email, said she would love to be able to speak to the group at a meeting of my committee on seniors. It was wonderful. Seniors are important to all of us. It was so nice to see that we were able to create one-time payments for individuals on OAS. For the poorest seniors in Canada, we gave a separate increase to the GIS, which totalled about $500 for individuals who qualified for the GIS and OAS increase.

The point of this is to recognize that the coronavirus changed things profoundly. This government worked with everyone it could to ensure it could provide programming to make sure that Canadians would get out of this coronavirus situation and be well served when it comes time to restart the economy. We are starting to see that today. We are in a better position today to deal with a second wave, if it occurs, because of the hard work of legislators in the House of Commons and because of the fine work being done by the provinces, city councils, non-profits and private individuals.

With that, I will leave myself open for questions.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Madam Speaker, it has been a very entertaining free market of speech topics today by the member opposite. There are so many channels he changed. It is typical of a remote-control handler. One thing is that he did not stop at the WE channel. He did not touch on that.

Why does he not tell us about his Prime Minister's scandalous contract with the WE foundation to benefit his Prime Minister's, and his cabinet's, friends?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, speaking of channel changers, the Conservatives since day one have always been on the same channel of character assassination. It does not matter what issue is facing Canadians, the Conservatives really do not care. They are more focused on character assassination.

I did not comment on the WE charity because we have spent billions and billions of dollars. We have brought in new programs. We have been trying to minimize the negative impact of the coronavirus on Canadians as a whole. We are getting our country in a position where we will be stronger and healthier going forward. We are remaining focused on doing work for Canadians. That is our priority.

We will let the Conservatives dwell at the bottom of the cellar and figure out the crisis, or how they can attack what character next on the agenda.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I really enjoyed watching my colleague beat his chest and go on about economic growth to find out who did more, the Liberals or the Conservatives.

Since I would like to help them reconcile, I will simply tell my colleague that the parties are a lot alike in times of crisis because the Liberals and the Conservatives have the same tendencies.

By that I mean that the Liberals were quick to support the oil and gas industry. One figure that comes to mind is the $500 million that was given to Coastal GasLink. That $500 million from the Business Development Bank of Canada, the BDC, was equivalent to what was spent on Quebec's entire forestry strategy from 2017 to 2020. The government gave $500 million to one project and the same amount to the entire forestry industry over three years.

They have reconciled, but can my colleague explain to me why there is a double standard for the forestry industry and the oil industry in times of crisis?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, that is not reconciliation. The Conservatives say we have shut down the oil industry. The member opposite just said that we have opened up a whole new area. I guess the difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives and New Democrats, and possibly even the Bloc, is that Liberals recognize that the environment and the economy can in fact go hand in hand.

If we do the proper environmental work and consultations with different levels of government, indigenous people and stakeholders, we can develop the economy and protect the environment. I guess that is where Liberals differ from what I would qualify as the unholy alliance of the Conservatives and New Democrats. I will leave the Bloc out, for now.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am glad to be here today to hear on the record the credit being given to our party for pushing the Liberal government to do the right thing. Unfortunately, those who are just tuning in may think that the member for Winnipeg North is the only member of the Liberal Party who gets a chance to speak in the House.

The question is simple. We need to know the answer right here on the record. I would like to hear the member's thoughts on this. When the Liberals first proposed a program for people struggling to get by on the disability tax credit, they left out 60% of people with disabilities. The second attempt they have brought here today leaves out 40% of people living with a disability.

Will the hon. member acknowledge that this disability tax credit program leaves out everybody who is designated on ODSP provincially?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the last thing I would want to do is to give the impression I know everything about all things.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

I do not know the details the member is referencing, but what I can tell the House is that as a government, we have been developing programs that have been to the benefit of Canadians as a whole. There has been special targeting of seniors, and now individuals with disabilities.

There are opportunities going forward, no doubt, as we see in this legislation, for modifications or changes. There are ongoing discussions that take place with provinces. I made reference to the $19 billion restart program that incorporates health. I do not know all of the details, but where it is valid for us to make some changes or to ensure that we have the support necessary to do that, I am glad we have a government in Ottawa that is open to listening.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is always interesting to hear the hon. member. I am glad he acknowledged that he does not know all things about all things, so I appreciate his moment of transparency in that regard.

I would make a quick note, before my simple question, regarding the rewriting of history. I was speaking with another colleague just before coming back to the House, and we said how incredible it is that this year started out with what very well could have been the issue of the year, which was the rail blockade. For the member to suggest that the economy was moving along in the right direction prior to COVID is a rewriting of history in an epic way, so I would encourage the member to look carefully at his government's record in that regard.

One of the things I have heard from many constituents about a number of the programs, including the wage subsidy, is that they are concerned about the complexities associated with the application and the accounting. For large corporations that have accounting departments, legal teams and whatnot, it is quite straightforward: They send the application to their department and it gets all sorted out. However, for a small business, a mom-and-pop shop or those smaller entities that need the support, I do not think that increasing the complexity of the wage subsidy was the right direction, so I would certainly like to hear from the member across the way how he can reconcile the increasing of complexities in the program.

Instead of increasing the complexity, should it not have been made simpler, especially for those small and medium-sized enterprises, to access these applications with ease so the economy can get moving in the right direction again?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, first, with regard to the indigenous issue or the blockades that were taking place, there were actually a number of issues, as there are in any given year, that made it to the national level. I know there was an airplane that was tragically shot down, which many people, at least on this side of the House, felt very passionate about, and I would like to think all members of the House did. There were a number of different issues.

I was here for a number of those years when Stephen Harper was the prime minister. If we do a cross-comparison, we will find, in terms of economic performance, that we did better 2:1 when it came to issues like jobs, compared to the Harper administration. That is the type of history we cannot change, and that is what I was referencing.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my good friend from Winnipeg North for his impassioned speech.

I want to talk about big cities. As a member representing part of the city of Toronto, I got a lot of feedback from the mayor, as well as local city councillors such as my counterpart Jennifer McKelvie, on the need for us to support cities with a safe restart. There is $19 billion that has been allocated, and we have an agreement with the provinces to invest in cities to make sure we have a safe restart. Can my friend tell us how this will impact his home province of Manitoba and what kind of direct supports the City of Winnipeg will be getting as a result of this agreement?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is important to recognize that municipalities in general, whether smaller rural municipalities or larger urban centres, are more challenged in terms of being able to generate the revenues necessary in order to perform many of the responsibilities they have. Public transit would be a good example, or even, to a certain degree, child care support in the provinces. The federal restart program goes a long way in supporting municipalities and encouraging provinces to become engaged to ensure that we have things such as child care, which enables—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Calgary Skyview.

As the member of Parliament for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, I welcome this rare opportunity to participate in a parliamentary debate ever since democracy was shut down by the government. The legislation before us today, Bill C-20, consists of several random diversionary payouts and other changes that more properly should have had extensive examination in a parliamentary committee before being passed into law.

I support helping Canadians who are struggling with the unprecedented events of our time, like the COVID-19 pandemic. I do not support the transfer of large amounts of taxpayer dollars to organizations that personally benefit family members of Liberal MPs. The decision to accept an unconfirmed, unsolicited proposal from an unregistered lobbyist representing an organization that had members of the Prime Minister's family, and perhaps others with close association to the Liberal Party, on its payroll in the amount of hundreds of thousands of dollars, is a level of corruption beyond the comprehension of most Canadians.

When the Canada student service grant was announced, WE Charity was not in the announcement. Even after sordid detail after sordid detail was revealed, the Prime Minister defended his ethical lapse in the same way he responded to groping a female reporter and dressing up in blackface. He repeatedly lied: deny, deny, deny. He could get away with that in a neutered media. The floor of the House of Commons, however, is another matter.

The amount of money in the WE Charity scandal is staggering: almost $1 billion. What reasonable Canadians fear is that this revelation of payments to individuals directly associated with the Liberal Party is the tip of the iceberg. There is a reason the Prime Minister is hiding from Canadians by not facing Parliament, conveniently taking a so-called vacation day, a “we” day. The Prime Minister likes his daily cuckoo-clock appearances where he can avoid actual questions. Awarding an unsolicited contract with no fair, competitive tendering process should require resignations. The fact that the contract was awarded to an organization with family members of Liberal MPs on the payroll is indefensible.

Let us look at where the millions in administration fees were going until somebody pulled the plug, waiting for the heat to die down. WE Charity has been effectively described as operating like a cult. First was its scheme to pay for volunteer labour and next was the plan to pay students for volunteer labour at below minimum wage. That proposal raised a few eyebrows, except now we have learned this is how the WE organization operated its various companies: with naive, idealistic young people put on a salary and then being required to work 60 to 70 hours a week. The salary was calculated at a normal 37-and-a-half-hour week, so effectively, the WE Charity found a loophole to get around provincial minimum wage laws.

With the backing of the federal government, WE Charity figured it found another loophole to avoid minimum wage laws. If young people complained, they were shamed into accepting workplace conditions by being reminded that the school children who donated their pennies, nickels and dimes to the WE Charity expected all the money to go to help underprivileged children in Africa. Little did those school children know that their pennies were being collected to buy commercial real estate in downtown Toronto and to pay fat speaking fees to family members of Liberal MPs. This is what happens when Parliament is shut down and people with no ethics or scruples are in charge. There is a total lack of accountability.

Let us look more closely at the legislation before us today. Of all of the measures contained in Bill C-20, I am particularly interested in measures that support Canadians living with disabilities. Bill C-20 proposes to direct a payment to individuals who qualify for the disability tax credit.

Seven years ago, I introduced a private member's bill, Bill C-462, restricting the fees charged by promoters of the disability tax credit. My intention for bringing that legislation before Parliament was straightforward. I wanted to see increased protection for disabled Canadians from the predatory practices of certain individuals who referred to themselves as “tax credit promoters”. They see the tax credit as an opportunity to profit on the reduced circumstances of others.

The disability tax credit is a non-refundable tax credit that reduces the amount of income tax that either individuals living with disabilities or their supporting persons have to pay. Parliament voted in this tax credit, with the recognition that Canadians with disabilities faced extra financial challenges. Bill C-20 proposes payments of up to $600 for Canadians living with disabilities.

My constituents question whether the reason for the lump sum payment contained in Bill C-20 can be accepted at face value or whether it is a taxpayer inducement to get Canadians to forget about the WE Charity corruption scandal.

When I found out that some individuals were being charged 20%, 30% or as much as 40% of the tax credit, I thought that Liberal members of Parliament agreed that those kinds of charges were unfair. This is especially true when considering that the purpose of the disability tax credit is to support Canadians living with serious disabilities.

As the member of Parliament that includes Garrison Petawawa, I am acutely aware of the number of Canadians living with disabilities who are in my riding. The soldiers and veterans in my community are at a greater risk for a number of disabilities because of the sacrifices they have made for our country. The tax credit is of special importance to them.

In bringing forward Bill C-462, I also wanted my constituents and all other Canadians to know that they could access their local member of Parliament regarding any federal tax credit, without being charged a percentage of the tax credit. Seven years ago my private member's legislation to help disabled Canadians received unanimous support of that Parliament. Even the current Prime Minister, who at that time was an opposition MP on the WE Charity speaker circuit, voted to support my legislation.

What happened? There was an unfortunate change in government. Canadians are still waiting for the regulations for that legislation to be enacted.

Why the delay? The change of government brought the usual Liberal hangers on, the lobbyists who look for ways to game the system at the expense of other Canadians. Liberal lobbyists derailed protections for disabled Canadians with the full support of the Prime Minister and his party.

Disabled Canadians are some of the most vulnerable in our society. With all the money the federal government is shovelling out the door, like today's legislation and the WE Charity scandal, and without the proper scrutiny of Parliament, money intended to help Canadians goes elsewhere.

These same disability tax consultants saw a big payday when the Canada emergency response benefit, CERB, was introduced. One such consultant started offering a service that charged clients a fee of $160 to assist them with their CERB application. This is what can be read on its website, “We have no upfront fee, you pay us only when you get your CERB payment. Due to these rough times, Canada Tax Reviews has reduced our fee from 33 per cent to an 8 per cent fee for this program.” Every four weeks, those who still have not found jobs have to reapply for CERB. Each time a person uses that tax consultant to apply for CERB, as fees vary, a $160 is charged. That is a payday of almost $1,000 to a tax consultant from somebody who collects the full CERB, someone who could have used that money to pay rent or to put food on the table.

If the government audits a taxpayer and finds that he or she did not qualify for CERB, that taxpayer will be required to pay back the full amount, including any fees paid to tax consultants. If the government had carried through with the will of Parliament and implemented Bill C-462, an act restricting the fees charged by promoters of the disability tax credit, the abuses happening today would not be happening.

Bill C-20 needs to go before a parliamentary committee the same way the sweetheart $912 million Canadian student service grant contract to a Liberal insider should have. Canadians deserve no less. The last time I looked, Canada was still a democracy. It is time Canada started acting like one.