Bill C-14 (Historical)

Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2020

An Act to implement certain provisions of the economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 30, 2020 and other measures

Part 1 amends the Income Tax Act to provide additional support to families with young children as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic progresses. It also amends the Children’s Special Allowances Act to provide a similar benefit in respect of young children under that Act. As part of the Government’s response to COVID-19, it amends the Income Tax Act to provide that an expense can qualify as a qualifying rent expense for the purposes of the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy (CERS) when it becomes due rather than when it is paid, provided certain conditions are met.
Part 2 amends the Canada Student Loans Act to provide that, during the period that begins on April 1, 2021 and ends on March 31, 2022, no interest is payable by a borrower on a guaranteed student loan and no amount on account of interest is required to be paid by the borrower.
Part 3 amends the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act to provide that, during the period that begins on April 1, 2021 and ends on March 31, 2022, no interest is payable by a borrower on a student loan and no amount on account of interest is required to be paid by the borrower.
Part 4 amends the Apprentice Loans Act to provide that, during the period that begins on April 1, 2021 and ends on March 31, 2022, no interest is payable by a borrower on an apprentice loan and no amount on account of interest is required to be paid by a borrower.
Part 5 amends the Food and Drugs Act to authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations
(a) requiring persons to provide information to the Minister of Health; and
(b) preventing shortages of therapeutic products in Canada or alleviating those shortages or their effects, in order to protect human health.
It also amends that Act to provide that any prescribed provisions of regulations made under that Act apply to food, drugs, cosmetics and devices intended for export that would otherwise be exempt from the application of that Act.
Part 6 authorizes payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund
(a) to the Government of Canada’s regional development agencies for the Regional Relief and Recovery Fund;
(b) in respect of specified initiatives related to health; and
(c) for the purpose of making income support payments under section 4 of the Canada Emergency Response Benefit Act.
Part 7 amends the Borrowing Authority Act to, among other things, increase the maximum amount of certain borrowings and include certain borrowings that were previously excluded in the calculation of that amount. It also makes a related amendment to the Financial Administration Act.

Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2020

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

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am paraphrasing, but toward the beginning of his speech, the member said the government has not been doing much to support existing jobs. That is probably one of the most ludicrous statements I have heard in the House.

I will recap for the member. In period one, there were 3.6 million jobs; in period two, 3.9 million; in period three, 4.2 million; and in period four, 4.1 million. The job numbers stay consistent up to periods nine, 10 and 11: there were 3.3 million, 2.5 million and 1 million jobs. These are the job numbers in the country, and each period is reflective of a one-month period from the beginning of the pandemic. This is the number of jobs in this country that have been supported by the Canada emergency wage subsidy.

How is it possible, when so much of our economy is being supported by the government right now through this program, that the member can say the government is not doing anything to support existing jobs?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, despite the volume, the reality of what I said is completely true. It is evident in the member's question. He is measuring success by the amount of money the government is shovelling out the door, instead of looking at our unemployment rate and seeing that Canada has a very high unemployment rate, even relative to many other countries that are similarly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We have spent substantially more than many other peer countries, yet we have higher unemployment.

What I talked about in my speech is the importance of measuring results, not just saying that we spent a bunch of money so look at how great we are. We should be measuring the results and the impact.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. I am reminded of Félix Leclerc, who said the best way to kill a man is to pay him to do nothing.

What is needed in order to jump-start the economy are vaccines. Two provisions in Bill C-14 will help speed up distribution, but our dependence on foreign vaccines will increase further because the Patent Act was not updated before September 30.

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the importance of reviewing the Patent Act, in relation to the highly specialized resources we have in Quebec and Canada.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I very much appreciate the quotation that my colleague shared at the beginning of her question. I think it underlines the fact that work is not just about earning money. Positively, for many people work is about their engagement with and their investment in the community. It is a way of earning income but is so much more than just a way of earning income.

To her question about the Patent Act, perhaps a longer discussion can happen on that at some point. I do think we need to work to increase domestic vaccine manufacturing capacity. We have called on the government to have a plan on vaccines and are regularly doing so, recognizing how far behind the government is. We see clearly the government's failure in procuring a necessary supply of vaccine, as now it is trying to draw supply that is generally focused on helping developing countries. This demonstrates how much it has failed to secure the necessary domestic supply of vaccine, and it is showing up in the numbers as well.

There are many areas we need to look at about how to do this better.

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, as we have seen over the decades, a number of trade agreements have gutted our manufacturing base in Canada and refocused us on exporting raw materials, such as raw bitumen and raw logs. We are seeing this problem right now with vaccines and the lack of pharmaceutical capacity in this country. We used to have a lot of capacity for this. We used to be a leader in vaccine manufacturing and providing vaccines around the world.

What does the hon. member think we should be focusing on here? Have we had the wrong focus? Should we be doing more on the value-added side and less exporting of raw materials? As we are seeing with the death of a pipeline—

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

The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is important to underline, in response to that question, that generally the data suggests Canada has benefited significantly as a result of most of the trade agreements that it has entered into and that they have been associated with significant economic growth in Canada.

There are many opportunities in different industries, including in value added, but we have to emphasize competitiveness as opposed to building up insulation—

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

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to speak in the House.

As part of the discussion on the November 30 economic statement, I would like to provide some concrete examples of the impact the crisis is having on my riding, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, and the measures that need to be put in place to help the people and organizations back home.

There is also the issue of the need for the current government to be transparent on spending and the fact that it is unacceptable that it has not introduced a proper budget in more than two years. I think this is an ideal opportunity to reiterate the Bloc Québécois's calls for a green economic recovery.

The opposition does more than just criticize. As parliamentarians, it is important to acknowledge the government whenever it does something right. I must say that, as far as the Lower St. Lawrence and the Gaspé are concerned, the fact that Bill C-14 promises additional funding for the regional relief and recovery fund is important because many of our businesses still need support.

In Chaleur Bay, in the Gaspé, the Maison d'aide et d'hébergement L'Émergence, which provides emergency support for women who are victims of domestic violence and their children, will soon open a second-hand shop that will fund the organization's services and help women return to the job market. L'Émergence has already received $80,000 from the RRRF program. That is not peanuts. I applaud the commitment of the organization and its director to helping women and families dealing with domestic violence. Without this funding, this project would have been in jeopardy.

In Matapédia-et-les-Plateaux, the Corporation de développement économique also received funding from the RRRF program. This spring, a welcome centre will be set up for visitors touring the Route des belvédères, a route of magnificent locations in the Gaspé that are still not very well known. The $56,000 provided by the RRRF program is vital to the coordination of the project. The fact that the federal government is maintaining and enhancing its investments in this program, which gives the RCM a lot of room to manoeuvre, is all important.

On a somewhat less positive note, I want to talk about health care. The flaws in Quebec's health care network were exposed by the pandemic, but this situation is completely ignored in the Liberal government's economic statement. Bill C-14 does not provide a substantial and sustainable increase in health transfers, but it does allow for additional restrictions and oversight from federal government. My colleagues who have already spoken have made it clear that the federal government's approach does not respect Quebec's jurisdictions, especially with respect to health care. This government wants to interfere in how the provinces manage themselves, but it has yet to present a clear and transparent budget since the beginning of this pandemic. Transparency is a whole other story. I will get back to it later.

Quebec's experience with long-term care for seniors, for example, is a prime example of the impact of underfunding health care. A report on the investigation of a seniors' residence in my riding, Résidence des Bâtisseurs de Matane, was released last week. The investigation had been done in response to complaints, and the report outlined some serious issues with the care provided to residents, and in particular the most vulnerable and incapacitated ones.

Let us be clear. We are not talking about a lack of standards or a flawed monitoring system within the institution. The report is clear. The crux of the problem is the lack of resources to ensure the well-being of seniors. There is therefore absolutely no point in having the federal government create more standards. What the government needs to do is invest to address the desperate shortage of qualified personnel.

The shortage of workers in health care, and, incidentally, in many other areas, is a major problem in my region. The heartbreaking situation of seniors living in the Résidence des Bâtisseurs de Matane is a perfect illustration of the results of federal cuts to health transfers. Perhaps the current government needs to be reminded that with an aging population comes an increased need for long-term care. Since the health care transfers to Quebec were not increased, services for the most vulnerable seniors in our society have gone downhill throughout Quebec's health care system.

Successive Quebec governments have had to adjust to a decrease in available funding for health care. They have turned over responsibility for some care to private companies, but private means profit. That is how things work in a capitalist society.

I think it is fairly obvious that privatization is not the best approach to health care for a population as vulnerable as the elderly because it prioritizes profit over care.

I would like to take advantage of this opportunity to reiterate the Bloc Québécois's expectation for increased health transfers for Quebec and the provinces. They are united in their demand for more money, Quebec's National Assembly supports that demand, and if the federal government is truly concerned about our seniors, it must agree and increase its annual share of Quebec's health care costs to 35% on an ongoing basis.

The Fédération des médecins spécialistes du Québec supports this demand. Members may recall that in 2019, the provinces, Quebec and the territories were covering 45% of health care costs compared to the Canadian government's measly 22%.

According to the Conference Board of Canada, the way things are going, the federal share of health care funding will slide to 20% by 2026. We need to stop the bleeding now.

Another sector that could certainly use some extra attention is tourism. The tourism industry is vital to the Gaspé and Bas-Saint-Laurent, two regions that overlap in my riding. The tourism industry in the Gaspé accounts for more than 3,000 jobs in high season, 1,300 businesses, more than 785,000 visitors per year, and revenues estimated at more than $380 million annually. In the summer of 2019 alone, the economic benefits of this industry totalled $271 million, making that a record year. In the Bas-Saint-Laurent region, tourism is also an essential economic sector, accounting for some 850 businesses, 7,800 jobs, 1,143,000 visitors per year, and over $345 million in economic benefits annually. We must absolutely support this industry, which is among those most affected by the pandemic.

Hotel operators, promoters and presenters of cultural events, restaurant owners and tour operators have been asking us for many weeks about the terms and conditions of the highly affected sectors credit availability program. More than two months after the program was announced in the fall economic statement and one month after the launch of the HASCAP by the minister responsible, the government finally announced the terms and conditions of the program.

However, from day one of the pandemic, the Bloc Québécois has talked about the importance of developing assistance programs that are adapted to the reality of each industry and each region. Standardized approaches are not working. In May, the Bloc was very clearly calling for targeted assistance for seasonal industries, the tourism industry in particular. Some programs such as the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program were not well suited to these sectors.

When the government comes up with a game plan for the economic recovery it will have to consider the needs of the regions. In fact, it should be thinking about that right now. The federal government needs to understand how important the tourism industry is to the economic vitality of many regions in Quebec, including the ones I represent.

Let us now talk about the Canada recovery benefit. Many workers back home, including indigenous workers, have had to deal with unreasonable delays due to having to navigate the machinery of the federal government. I am thinking about a self-employed worker from Saint-Omer in Chaleur Bay who waited eight weeks for the federal government to verify whether she was eligible for the Canada recovery benefit, which blocked CRB payments. Finally, the lockdown was lifted in her sector and she went back to work. Nevertheless, eight weeks without income is a long time. We understand the need for these verifications, but the government assured us it had the necessary staff to do the work quickly. Obviously that is not the case, and it has not been since the start of the pandemic.

People without any income who need support are not getting anything. Others, who should not be eligible and who could be working, are receiving multiple cheques. We are asking for a little more diligence, and for the government to accelerate its audits.

Also, economic recovery goes hand in hand with significant spending. It is more crucial than ever that the government be transparent. The Parliamentary Budget Officer denounced the lack of transparency and accountability in federal finances. The government has not presented any fiscal anchors to ensure that spending is viable in the long term, nor has it presented a budget since the beginning of its mandate, which is not only unacceptable, but irresponsible as well. The federal government should be helping citizens, organizations and businesses, but it should also be accountable to the House and to the public. It should be accountable in particular to the younger generation, the young Canadians who will be living with the costs of this economic recovery, those who are also demanding a green recovery.

In its recovery plan, the Bloc Québécois puts forward green transition measures involving the use of hydroelectricity and other clean energies such as biomass, wind power, solar energy and geothermal energy. Canada must stop basing its economic recovery on the fossil fuel industry. The economic recovery should not be accompanied by an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. We need to invest in sectors that reduce our environmental footprint and that will have long-term economic benefits for Quebec and Canada.

Businesses here, such as Lion Electric in Saint-Jérôme, a manufacturer of zero-emission heavy vehicles, are already benefiting from the transition. We can reduce our net greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050, as the government intends to do, but we need to implement policies that go well beyond what we have seen so far. Action is urgently needed.

The government should seize the opportunity and show that it is truly a green government, that it really has an ecological conscience and that it wants to ensure the well-being and survival of its regions.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Bloc member's intervention should serve as an example to my Conservative colleagues as to what a proper speech should be like. She was by no means flattering to the government. She addressed her concerns and also mentioned at the beginning what she liked about the bill, but most importantly, she stuck to the content of the bill, which was extremely refreshing. If this ever gets to committee, I hope she will have the opportunity to have her concerns addressed there.

I did pick up on one particular thing the member talked about. That was about the possibility of delays with respect to the CERB and other government programs. This bill has been in the House now for seven days; most budget bills are only here for five days. There is no doubt that there are going to be delays in services to Canadians as a result of the tactics that the Conservatives are using right now.

Is the member concerned about the delays that might occur for Canadians as a result of this bill being held up by the Conservatives?

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question and his kind words. As I said at the beginning of my speech, I think it is important to acknowledge the government whenever it does something right. However, there are a number of times when it got it wrong, and we need to acknowledge that, too.

The government has a busy schedule, in particular because of the prorogation of Parliament last summer, as you will recall. As a result of the prorogation, several bills were put on the back burner, including the one on medical assistance in dying, which still has not been dealt with. Several businesses here are waiting for the assistance this bill, which we are still discussing, could provide. I would therefore not be too quick to blame the Conservatives for any delays, because I think that the government bears a share of the responsibility for the situation. Let us work together to pass these bills promptly.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Speaker, I too would like to compliment the member on her excellent speech.

The member was talking a little about the long-term care crisis in Quebec and other provinces, and the fact that it has a lot to do with resources. Could the member expand upon whether she believes it is better for a few Ottawa bureaucrats to fix the Quebec long-term care health system or whether it would be better done in the provinces?

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his very relevant question.

We cannot repeat it often enough: There is plenty of health care expertise in Quebec and the provinces. The federal government's job is easy: All it needs to do is to increase health transfer payments and pay us the amounts we are still waiting for.

We see the problems this is causing. Certain colleagues have pointed out that only a tiny portion of the money spent by the government since the beginning of the pandemic has been allocated to our health care systems. In a cruel twist of irony, we are in the middle of a health crisis. I think that it is high time that the federal government funnel more funds into health care. Once it has done so, Quebec and the provinces, which have the necessary expertise, can hire staff for our long-term care facilities and perhaps even increase personal care workers' salaries. They can do what they want with the money. The role of the federal government is to provide the funds.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, there is much in the hon. member's speech that I agree with. She spoke to the needs of tourism operators in her region and the fact that the current support programs have not necessarily met their unique needs.

This speaks very closely to the situation in northwest B.C., where so many tourism operators in places like Haida Gwaii have lost an entire tourism business season and stand to lose another one. The current programs have not met their needs.

Perhaps the member could speak to how she sees the programs being improved so that small tourism operators could make it through this pandemic in one piece and look forward to prosperous days ahead.