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

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Madam Speaker, I think it would be largely irresponsible for the government to use the budgetary process or the fiscal snapshot process to enable the Liberal Party to position itself favourably for an election. There has been a lot of commentary in the media and even some hints from the Prime Minister and senior Liberals about that possibility.

We should be focused on actually helping Canadians. We should be focused on getting through this pandemic as quickly as possible. We should be focused on giving people back their liberties and freedoms as quickly as possible by procuring vaccines, implementing the use of rapid tests and other therapeutics that will help us get back to life as normal, as soon as possible. That should be job number one for every member of Parliament in the House of Commons: getting us through this situation as quickly and painlessly as possible both financially and when it comes to our mental health and our businesses. That is job one. It should be the focus of everyone.

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, we know Bill C-14 seeks to continue the pandemic relief strategy by implementing provisions from the fall economic statement. While its segments cover a breadth of topics, I would narrow my discussion on the bill to two topics today. I would begin with amendments made to the Income Tax Act to provide additional support to families with young children as the COVID-19 pandemic progresses. I believe that across party boundaries we may find that supporting Canada's youth, and young children in particular, is something on which we may find common ground.

Bill C-14 proposes amendments to the children's special allowances program to provide a similar benefit with respect to young children under that program. The CSA program provides payments to federal and provincial agencies and institutions, such as children's aid societies, that care for children. The monthly CSA payment is equal to the maximum Canada child benefit payment plus the child disability payment.

I am proud to say these benefits originated from Conservative government initiatives such as the Canada child tax benefit. This was a tax-free monthly payment available to eligible Canadian families to help with the cost of raising children. It was enacted under former prime minister Brian Mulroney in response to a commitment made by Parliament in November 1989 to eradicate child poverty in Canada by the year 2000. The CCTB could incorporate the national child benefit, a monthly benefit for low-income families with children, and the child disability benefit, a monthly benefit for families caring for children with severe and prolonged mental or physical disabilities.

Following the 2006 federal election, the newly elected, Stephen Harper-led Conservative government created the universal Canada child benefit, a new benefit of up to $1,200 annually for children under age six. The UCCB Act received royal assent on June 22, 2006, and UCCB was paid the first time in July 2006. In the 2010 Canadian federal budget, the UCCB was made shareable between shared-custody parents and in that instance, the payment was evenly split between parents, each receiving $50 per month. The measure entered into force in July 2011.

Though our nation, sadly, did not meet the aspirational goal of eradicating child poverty by the year 2000, we have made progress. Since its inception, the Canada child benefit has lifted about 300,000 Canadian children out of—

[An hon. member]

This is rubbish.

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

Can I remind the hon. members who are not speaking to please put their microphones on mute?

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I assure you that this is not rubbish. This is actually the Canada child tax benefit, which has lifted about 300,000 Canadian children out of poverty and helped reduce child poverty by 40% from 2013 to 2017. We should all work to continue to protect Canada's children and youth. One of our largest duties as parliamentarians is to ensure that future generations of Canadians have a safe and prosperous Canada to call their home.

This leads me to measures taken for our teens and young adults, which is my second point. Bill C-14 proposes amendments to the Canada Student Loans Act, Canada Student Financial Assistance Act and Apprentice Loans Act. It seeks to provide that, during the upcoming fiscal year, no interest is to be accrued or paid on existing student loans. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated that this would cost the government $315 million in unearned revenue for the 2021-22 fiscal year, and limit revenue generated to $5 million for the next fiscal year. Given how marginal this expense is compared with the extravagance of less responsible and more poorly planned programs, I must ask why the government would allow interest on student loans to resume accrual in the first place?

The Liberals had months to reassess and act on student loan interest measures and did nothing until it was too late. Now students have had months of unnecessary interest accrual due to what has become all too common: Liberal incompetence.

Student debt in Canada is a major burden for more than 50% of Canadian post-secondary students. The effects of student debt are well documented, and impact debt holders' fiscal, financial and mental well-being.

During the early days of the ongoing pandemic, national student loan repayments were paused, with instructions given that the loan repayments would restart in October 2020. In November, however, preplanned payments were not coming out of many accounts and many people were confused. When students checked their loan accounts, they were surprised to find that their payments were shown as being past due and highlighted in red. Automatic payments were fully set up, yet payments did not come out. By November, all student loan accounts were shown as being past due, and many people were worried that this would negatively affect their credit scores.

I heard at that time that few people were able to get through to the government hotline, frequently facing long hold times, transfers and mysteriously dropped calls. When someone actually got through to the hotline, there was a wait of around 98 minutes. To make matters worse for young Canadians, the government website for repayment had crashed. Students were informed that their payments would be coming out immediately; however, some borrowers who logged in and made their past-due payments had to worry about double payments. If the loan came out automatically later that day, it created a huge issue for people on a fixed income. While this situation is now resolved, it did not need to occur in the first place and it stands as a testimony to our government's lack of foresight.

Mismanagement again occurred through CERB payments going to dependent teens who normally would have earned less income working part-time than the handouts the government gave. Much like our vaccine rollout, which was promised to occur at a certain time and has had the goalposts moved, we have been met with consistent failures to deliver, as more and more money is thrown at our problems in half-hearted attempts to appear as if the government is doing something meaningful.

As we stand here today, Canadians go without vaccines and face uncertainty respecting the health and security of their families. It is inexcusable that the current Liberal government has failed Canadians on multiple fronts, that our nation now ranks 52nd in vaccine rollout and that the climbing national debt burden will still be felt by my great-grandchildren. Even if the government persists in ignoring this generation, it will have to answer to these future generations. If our government truly wishes to help Canadian students and youth, I would encourage it to consider working toward a balanced budget and not to bury future generations under insurmountable debt.

Because the members opposite are so fond of asking for solutions to help dig them out of their holes, I would encourage the government to do more.

The government could increase the scope of debt forgiveness on student loans and retroactively cancel interest that should not have accrued through the legislative gap of its own making. It could encourage employers to do more by offering an employer-sponsored student loan repayment assistance benefit. Those are options we have yet to see put on the table.

While I support Bill C-14 for doing something, I think we must all acknowledge it is too little, too late for Canadian students and youth.

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

Madam Speaker, the member spoke quite a bit about the debt and the burden of the debt. He seemed to be quite critical of the amount of debt that has had to be taken on to support Canadians during this pandemic, so my question for him is quite simple. Why did he support it? All the measures that have been brought before the House to spend money over the last 11 months or so during the pandemic have been adopted by unanimous consent.

Why did he not say that he did not want to support it and not give unanimous consent to that? Why did the Conservatives and every party vote in favour of it?

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, this is a common misunderstanding the hon. member across has been perpetrating. The Liberals seem to understand this as a black and white, one or zero, yes or no world. We can help Canadians on the one hand, but at the same time we could do it right so we do not waste so much of the taxpayers' or future generations' money. Besides that, we knew, even before the pandemic, the Liberals had been spending like there was no tomorrow. We know that Canada began 2020 with a deficit of $40 billion. That was prior to the World Health Organization declaring the pandemic, so the members opposite have been in the habit of misspending, spending large and mismanaging the file. That is why we are here to oppose them.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have some concerns about support for workers.

I am not sure if the member is aware of the troubling figures released by the Institut de la statistique du Québec regarding job losses in certain economic sectors that are not recovering. The unemployment rate among young part-time workers is very high.

How does the member plan to support these sectors that are in crisis and, in particular, young people, during the economic recovery? Investments will be required.

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is a huge problem we are facing. Future generations will be taking up an insurmountable amount of debt because the current government has been spending recklessly and is incapable of spending on relief and recovery money. As we speak, the situation is dire. This is where we think the Conservative idea is what will respond best in Quebec, as well as in other provinces. We believe Canadians, including and especially our younger generations, would hugely benefit from a paycheque economy rather than credit card debt. This is where we think the government owes so much to Canadians. It has not been able to put us back on track for a recovery. For example, it dropped the ball entirely on—

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

I have a quick question here for you. More than 30 years ago, the Conservatives—

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

Remember that the question is not put to me, but through me.

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

I apologize, Madam Speaker. My question is for the member.

It was observed 30 years or so ago that Liberals defined compassion as how many people the government could help. The Conservatives define compassion as how many people the government does not have to help.

Would the member say that this debate is really framed in those terms? The Conservatives keep talking about how we reduce the unemployment rate and the Liberals keep talking about how much money they are going to spend.

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, absolutely. This is where the difference in philosophy between the two parties could not be more clear. We want Canadians to—

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

We will have to leave it at that.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Peace River—Westlock.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill C-14. This is a baby budget or the fiscal update. It is not a full budget. We are in unprecedented times in that the country has been without a budget for almost 1,000 days, maybe more now.

The government will tell us that we are in unprecedented times, given COVID, and that is true. Nonetheless, during the Second World War, we still managed to have budgets and we still managed to have this place operate, holding the government to account, to give a reference for where all the money was being spent.

Bill C-14 would raise the debt ceiling. We are now a country with over a trillion dollars of debt, and the government is running out of room to take on more debt. The government has to come to Parliament and ask it to authorize a larger debt.

It is very interesting that there is no projection about where the debt is going. We are over a trillion dollars already. It is anticipated that the deficit will continue, that we are spending way more money than we are taking in as a country. It is anticipated that over the next number of years that deficit will continue.

What is fascinating about the request to raise the debt ceiling is that even given the exorbitantly high, unprecedented debt that we are taking on today, and the deficit that we have this year, and last year, given the trends, one would expect that once we get used to living with COVID and we get our economy opened up again that this deficit would start to go down over time. Three to five years out, we would expect that we would be reducing our deficit, not our debt, but our deficit. The debt cap that the Liberals are asking for is several hundreds of billions of dollars more than what is projected out, say, five years, and that is interesting.

Why do the Liberals need a slush fund? Why are the Liberals asking for much more room in the debt ceiling than they need? That is the big question I have with Bill C-14.

The Liberals always say that they are taking care of Canadians by spending all this money. That is true; they are spending a lot of money. However, the question is this. Are we getting a Rolls Royce for all that money or are we getting a K-car? If they are spending a lot of money and getting nothing in return, then they are wasting money. If they are spending a lot of money but getting more value than that money being spent, good on them. That is what we want to see.

The trouble is that we have spent billions and billions of dollars and we have seen no economy reopening. No vaccines are showing up. Thousands of businesses across the country are going bankrupt. There is no end in sight.

We are seeing the largest debt and deficit in Canadian history, unprecedented debt levels, yet there is no end in sight as to when the COVID pandemic will come to an end.

I read in the newspaper this morning that the United States was vaccinating, per day, more people than Canada had vaccinated in its entirety.

We might hear people saying that they are doing their best. However, we do not even have a budget to compare that to. We do not have a projection. When people buy a new car, they look at the market, they look at what they need in a car, the options they want, the colour they want. Then they look at their bank account to see if they have enough money for that car or they have a little more money to get that screen in the car.

If they then find out that the car they want, say a nice Dodge Challenger, is $87,000 but then they go into the marketplace and find one for $65,000, which is a lot of money for a car, it is still $20,000 less than what they thought they would spend. Therefore, it is a good deal. However, if they spend $100,000 on their new Dodge Challenger and it turns out the car is in writeoff status and cannot be insured, then they have a problem. They have spent more money than they needed to and have a car that does not work.

When it comes to the vaccines, Canada is at the back of the line. Not only are we at the back of the line, we spent all this money, unprecedented levels of debt, and we are not even in the line. We are at the food bank. We spent the money and did not get anything.

I am not sure if members know this, but essentially all manufacturers of the vaccines take a percentage of the vaccines they produce and put it with a not-for-profit organization to help out the rest of the world that is unable to afford these vaccines, much the same way a food bank works. Folks who can will donate food to the food banks and those who cannot purchase food can go to that food bank. This way everybody gets food.

We are at a point in time where we have spent all our money, have received nothing and are now raiding the food bank, not because we do not have enough money but we have spent our money foolishly. Now we have to go to the food bank of vaccines to get vaccines.

Last, on vaccines, the government brags endlessly about the suite of vaccines it has bought. That is like telling everybody how many fire departments we have contracted to come fight a fire in our house. We tell our wives not to worry because we have contracted 75 fire departments, which will take fours hours to show up, when, in reality, only one fire department five minutes away would be helpful. By the time those fire departments show up the house will have burned down.

This is what we are talking about with this suite of vaccines about which the government keeps bragging. It is amazing how we have the largest suite, the largest portfolio of vaccines of any country in the world, which is really great. However, if they cannot be delivered in a timely manner, what is the point? When one's house in on fire, one needs the fire department there a minute ago, not four hours from now. It does not matter how many fire departments have been contracted to come to the rescue, if they are four hours away, the house has burned down before they show up.

We spent a lot of money and the government is asking us to raise the debt ceiling with no real rationale as to why it has to be as high as it is. I could see it if it were to match general projections, but why is it significantly higher than it needs to be? We have seen how we have raided the vaccine food bank when we are a wealthy country and have spent unprecedented amounts of money. We may have a Rolls Royce for all the money we spent, but it is a 1991, not a 2021. While 1991 may be the best year, I was looking for the 2021 edition of the Rolls Royce, not a K-car, not the 1991.

Last, there is no doubt that a large suite of vaccines is great, but a timely delivery of those vaccines is as important as how many vaccines we have and, in some cases, maybe more important.