Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures

This bill was last introduced in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session, which ended in August 2021.

Sponsor

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

Part 1 implements certain income tax measures by
(a) providing relieving measures in connection with COVID-19 in respect of the use by an employee of an employer-provided automobile for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years;
(b) limiting the benefit of the employee stock option deduction for employees of certain employers;
(c) providing an adjustment for payments or repayments of government assistance in determining capital cost allowance for certain zero-emission vehicles;
(d) expanding the scope of the foreign affiliate dumping rules to further their objectives;
(e) providing change in use rules for multi-unit residential properties;
(f) establishing rules for advanced life deferred annuities;
(g) providing for an option to deduct repaid emergency benefit amounts in the year of benefit receipt and clarifying the tax treatment of non-resident beneficiaries;
(h) removing the time limitation for a registered disability savings plan to remain registered after the cessation of a beneficiary’s eligibility for the disability tax credit and modifying grant and bond repayment obligations;
(i) increasing the basic personal amount for certain taxpayers;
(j) providing a temporary special reading of certain rules relating to the child care expense deduction and the disability supports deduction for the 2020 and 2021 taxation years;
(k) providing flow-through share issuers with temporary additional time to incur eligible expenses to be renounced to investors under their flow-through share agreements;
(l) applying the short taxation year rule to the accelerated investment incentive for resource expenditures;
(m) introducing the Canada Recovery Hiring Program refundable tax credit to support the post-pandemic recovery;
(n) amending the employee life and health trust rules to allow for the conversion of health and welfare trusts to employee life and health trusts;
(o) expanding access to the Canada Workers Benefit by revising the applicable eligibility thresholds for the 2021 and subsequent taxation years;
(p) amending the income tax measures providing support for Canadian journalism;
(q) clarifying the definition of shared-custody parent for the purposes of the Canada Child Benefit;
(r) revising the eligibility criteria, as well as the level of subsidization, under the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) and Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy (CERS), extending the CEWS and the CERS until September 25, 2021, providing authority to enable the extension of these subsidies until November 30, 2021, and ensuring that the level of CEWS benefits for furloughed employees continues to align with the benefits provided through the Employment Insurance Act until August 28, 2021;
(s) preventing the use by mutual fund trusts of a method of allocating capital gains or income to their redeeming unitholders where the use of that method inappropriately defers tax or converts ordinary income into capital gains;
(t) extending the income tax deferral available for certain patronage dividends paid in shares by an agricultural cooperative corporation to payments made before 2026;
(u) limiting transfers of pensionable service into individual pension plans;
(v) establishing rules for variable payment life annuities;
(w) preventing listed terrorist entities under the Criminal Code from qualifying as registered charities and providing for the suspension or revocation of a charity’s registration where it makes false statements for the purpose of maintaining registration;
(x) ensuring the appropriate interaction of transfer pricing rules and other rules in the Income Tax Act;
(y) preventing non-resident taxpayers from avoiding Canadian dividend withholding tax on compensation payments made under cross-border securities lending arrangements with respect to Canadian shares;
(z) allowing for the electronic delivery of requirements for information to banks and credit unions;
(aa) improving existing rules meant to prevent taxpayers from using derivative transactions to convert ordinary income into capital gains;
(bb) extending to a wider array of eligible automotive equipment and vehicles the 100% capital cost allowance write-off for business investments in certain zero-emission vehicles;
(cc) ensuring that the accelerated investment incentive for depreciable property applies properly in particular circumstances; and
(dd) providing rules for contributions to a specified multi-employer plan for older members.
It also makes related and consequential amendments to the Excise Tax Act, the Air Travellers Security Charge Act, the Excise Act, 2001, the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, the Income Tax Regulations and the Canada Disability Savings Regulations.
Part 2 implements certain Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax (GST/HST) measures by
(a) temporarily relieving supplies of certain face masks and face shields from the GST/HST;
(b) ensuring that non-resident vendors supplying digital products or services (including traditional services) to consumers in Canada be required to register for the GST/HST and to collect and remit the tax on their taxable supplies to consumers in Canada;
(c) requiring distribution platform operators and non-resident vendors to register under the normal GST/HST rules and to collect and remit the GST/HST in respect of certain supplies of goods shipped from a fulfillment warehouse or another place in Canada;
(d) applying the GST/HST on all supplies of short-term accommodation in Canada facilitated through a digital platform;
(e) expanding the eligibility for the GST rebate for new housing;
(f) expanding the definition of freight transportation service for the purposes of the GST/HST;
(g) extending the application of the drop-shipment rules for the purposes of the GST/HST;
(h) treating virtual currency as a financial instrument for the purposes of the GST/HST; and
(i) clarifying the GST/HST holding corporation rules and expanding those rules to holding partnerships and trusts.
It also makes related and consequential amendments to the New Harmonized Value-added Tax System Regulations, No. 2.
Part 3 implements certain excise measures by increasing excise duty rates on tobacco products by $4.‍00 per carton of 200 cigarettes along with corresponding increases to the excise duty rates on other tobacco products.
Part 4 enacts an Act and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 4 amends the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act to, among other things,
(a) specify the steps that an assessor must follow when they review a determination of the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation with respect to the payment of compensation to certain persons;
(b) clarify that the determination of whether or not persons are entitled to compensation is to be made in accordance with the regulations;
(c) prevent a person from taking certain actions in relation to certain agreements between the person and a federal member institution by reason only of a monetary default by that institution in the performance of obligations under those agreements if the default occurs in the period between the making of an order directing the conversion of that institution’s shares or liabilities and the occurrence of the conversion;
(d) require certain federal member institutions to ensure that certain provisions of that Act — or provisions that have substantially the same effect as those provisions — apply to certain eligible financial contracts, including those contracts that are subject to the laws of a foreign state;
(e) exempt eligible financial contracts between a federal member institution and certain entities, including Her Majesty in right of Canada, from a provision of that Act that prevents certain actions from being taken in relation to those contracts; and
(f) extend periods applicable to certain restructuring transactions for financial institutions.
It also amends the Payment Clearing and Settlement Act to
(a) specify the steps that an assessor must follow when they review a determination of the Bank of Canada with respect to the payment of compensation to certain persons or entities; and
(b) clarify that systems or arrangements for the exchange of payment messages for the purpose of clearing or settlement of payment obligations may be overseen by the Bank of Canada as clearing and settlement systems.
Finally, it amends not-in-force provisions of the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act, enacted by the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, so that, under certain circumstances, an error or omission that results in a failure to meet a requirement of the schedule to the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act will not prevent a deposit from being considered a separate deposit.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Bank of Canada Act to authorize the Bank of Canada to publish certain information about unclaimed amounts.
It also amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 with respect to the transfer of pension plan assets relating to the pension benefit credit of any person who cannot be located to, among other things,
(a) limit the circumstances in which such assets may be transferred and specify conditions for the transfer; and
(b) specify the effects of a transfer on any claims that may be made in respect of those assets.
Finally, it amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act and the Bank Act to
(a) include amounts that are not in Canadian currency in the unclaimed amounts regime; and
(b) impose additional requirements on financial institutions in connection with their transfers of unclaimed amounts to the Bank of Canada and communications with the owners of those amounts.
Division 3 of Part 4 amends the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2 to exclude certain businesses from the application of a provision of the Bank Act that it enacts, which allows certain agreements that have been entered into with banks to be cancelled.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act to extend the period during which federal financial institutions governed by those Acts may carry on business to June 30, 2025.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) to
(a) provide that the entities referred to in that Act are no longer required to disclose to the principal agency or body that supervises or regulates them the fact that they do not have in their possession or control any property of a foreign national who is the subject of an order or regulation made under that Act; and
(b) change the frequency with which those entities are required to disclose to the principal agency or body that supervises or regulates them the fact that they have such property in their possession or control from once a month to once every three months.
Division 6 of Part 4 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to
(a) extend the application of Part 1 of that Act to include persons and entities engaged in the business of transporting currency or certain other financial instruments;
(b) provide that the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre make assessments to be paid by persons or entities to which Part 1 applies, based on the amount of certain expenses incurred by the Centre, and to authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting those assessments;
(c) amend the definitions of designated information to include certain information associated with virtual currency transactions and widely held or publicly traded trusts that the Centre can disclose to law enforcement or other governmental bodies;
(d) change the maximum penalties for summary conviction offences;
(e) expand the list of persons or entities that are not eligible for registration with the Centre; and
(f) make other technical amendments.
Division 7 of Part 4 enacts the Retail Payment Activities Act, which establishes an oversight framework for retail payment activities. Among other things, that Act requires certain payment service providers to identify and mitigate operational risks, safeguard end-user funds and register with the Bank of Canada. That Act also provides the Minister of Finance with powers to address risks related to national security that could be posed by payment service providers. This Division also makes related amendments to the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act and the Payment Card Networks Act.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to establish new requirements and grant new regulation-making powers to the Governor in Council with respect to negotiated contribution plans.
Division 9 of Part 4 amends the First Nations Fiscal Management Act to allow First Nations that are borrowing members of the First Nations Finance Authority to assign their rights to certain revenues payable by Her Majesty in right of Canada, for the purpose of securing financing for that Authority’s borrowing members.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to, among other things, increase the maximum amount of a fiscal stabilization payment that may be made to a province and to make technical changes to the calculation of fiscal stabilization payments.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to authorize additional payments to the provinces and territories.
Division 12 of Part 4 authorizes payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund in relation to Canada’s COVID-19 immunization plan.
Division 13 of Part 4 authorizes payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund in relation to infrastructure and amends the heading of Part 9 of the Keeping Canada’s Economy and Jobs Growing Act.
Division 14 of Part 4 authorizes amounts to be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, to a maximum total amount of $3,056,491,000, for annual payments to Newfoundland and Labrador in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Hibernia Dividend Backed Annuity Agreement.
Division 15 of Part 4 amends the Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador Additional Fiscal Equalization Offset Payments Act to authorize the Minister of Finance to make an additional fiscal equalization offset payment to Nova Scotia for the 2020–2021 fiscal year and to extend that Minister’s authority to make additional fiscal equalization offset payments to Nova Scotia until March 31, 2023.
Division 16 of Part 4 amends the Telecommunications Act to provide that decisions made by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission on whether or not to allocate funding to expand access to telecommunications services in underserved areas are not subject to review under section 12 or 62 of that Act but are subject to review by the Commission on its own initiative. It also amends that Act to provide for the exchange of information within the federal government and with provincial governments for the purpose of coordinating financial support for access to telecommunications services in underserved areas.
Division 17 of Part 4 amends the Canada Small Business Financing Act to, among other things,
(a) specify that lines of credit are loans;
(b) set a limit on the liability of the Minister of Small Business and Tourism in respect of each lender for lines of credit;
(c) remove the restriction excluding not-for-profit businesses, charitable businesses and businesses having as their principal object the furtherance of a religious purpose as eligible borrowers;
(d) increase the maximum amount of all loans that may be made in relation to a borrower under that Act; and
(e) provide that lesser maximum loan amounts may be prescribed by regulation for loans other than lines of credit, lines of credit and prescribed classes of loans.
Division 18 of Part 4 amends the Customs Act to change certain rules respecting the correction of declarations made under section 32.‍2 of that Act, the payment of interest due to Her Majesty and securities required under that Act, and to define the expression “sold for export to Canada” for the purposes of Part III of that Act.
Division 19 of Part 4 amends the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act to require the concurrence of the Minister of Finance when the Minister designated for the purposes of section 16 of that Act appoints panellists and committee members and proposes the names of individuals for rosters under Chapter 10 of the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement.
Division 20 of Part 4 amends Part 5 of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act to make certain reforms to the Social Security Tribunal, including
(a) changing the criteria for granting leave to appeal and introducing a de novo model for appeals of decisions of the Income Security Section at the Appeal Division;
(b) giving the Governor in Council the authority to prescribe the circumstances in which hearings may be held in private; and
(c) giving the Chairperson of the Social Security Tribunal the authority to make rules of procedure governing appeals.
Division 21 of Part 4 amends the definition of “previous contractor” in Part I of the Canada Labour Code in order to extend equal remuneration protection to employees who are covered by a collective agreement and who work for an employer that
(a) provides services at an airport to another employer in the air transportation industry; or
(b) provides services to another employer in another industry and at other locations that may be prescribed by regulation.
Division 22 of Part 4 amends Part III of the Canada Labour Code to establish a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour and to provide that if the minimum wage of a province or territory is higher than the federal minimum wage, the employer is to pay a minimum wage that is not less than that higher minimum wage. It also provides that, except in certain circumstances, the federal minimum wage per hour is to be adjusted upwards annually on the basis of the Consumer Price Index for Canada.
Division 23 of Part 4 amends the provisions of the Canada Labour Code respecting leave related to the death or disappearance of a child in cases in which it is probable that the child died or disappeared as a result of a crime, in order to, among other things,
(a) increase the maximum length of leave for a parent of a child who has disappeared from 52 weeks to 104 weeks;
(b) extend eligibility to parents of children who are 18 years of age or older but under 25 years of age; and
(c) limit the exception that applies in the case of a parent of a child who has died as a result of a crime if it is probable that the child was a party to the crime so that the exception applies only with respect to a child who is 14 years of age or older.
Division 24 of Part 4 authorizes the Minister of Employment and Social Development to make a one-time payment to Quebec for the purpose of offsetting some of the costs of aligning the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan with temporary measures set out in Part VIII.‍5 of the Employment Insurance Act.
Division 25 of Part 4 amends the Judges Act to provide that, if the Canadian Judicial Council recommends that a judge be removed from judicial office, the time counted towards the judge’s pension entitlements will be frozen and their pension contributions will be suspended, as of the day on which the recommendation is made. If the recommendation is rejected, the judge’s pension contributions will resume, the time counted towards their pension entitlement will include the suspension period and the judge will be required to make all the contributions that would have been required had the contributions never been suspended.
Division 26 of Part 4 amends the Federal Courts Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act to increase the number of judges for the Federal Court of Appeal by one and the number of judges for the Tax Court of Canada by two. It also amends the Judges Act to authorize the salary for the new Associate Chief Justice for the Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador and the salaries for the following new judges: five judges for the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, two judges for the Supreme Court of British Columbia and two judges for the Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan.
Division 27 of Part 4 amends the National Research Council Act to provide the National Research Council of Canada with the authority to engage in the production of “drugs” or “devices”, as those terms are defined in the Food and Drugs Act, for the purpose of protecting or improving public health. It also amends that Act to provide authority for the incorporation of corporations and the acquisition of shares in corporations.
Division 28 of Part 4 amends the Department of Employment and Social Development Act in relation to the collection and use of Social Insurance Numbers by the Minister of Labour.
Division 29 of Part 4 amends the Canada Student Loans Act to provide that, during the period that begins on April 1, 2021 and ends on March 31, 2023, no interest is payable by a borrower on a guaranteed student loan.
It also amends the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act to provide that, during the period that begins on April 1, 2021 and ends on March 31, 2023, no interest is payable by a borrower on a student loan.
Finally, it amends the Apprentice Loans Act to provide that, during the period that begins on April 1, 2021 and ends on March 31, 2023, no interest is payable by a borrower on an apprentice loan.
Division 30 of Part 4 confirms the validity of certain regulations in relation to the cancellation or postponement of certain First Nations elections.
Division 31 of Part 4 amends the Old Age Security Act to increase the Old Age Security pension payable to individuals aged 75 and over by 10%. It also provides that any amount payable in relation to a program to provide a one-time payment of $500 to pensioners who are 75 years of age or older may be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Division 32 of Part 4 amends the Public Service Employment Act to, among other things,
(a) require that the establishment and review of qualification standards and the use of assessment methods in respect of appointments include an evaluation of whether there are biases or barriers that disadvantage persons belonging to any equity-seeking group;
(b) provide that audits and investigations may include the determination of whether there are biases or barriers that disadvantage persons belonging to any equity-seeking group; and
(c) give permanent residents the same preference as Canadian citizens in external advertised appointment processes.
Division 33 of Part 4 authorizes the making of payments to the provinces for early learning and child care for the fiscal year beginning on April 1, 2021.
Division 34 of Part 4 amends the Canada Recovery Benefits Act to, among other things,
(a) provide that the maximum number of two-week periods in respect of which a Canada recovery benefit is payable is 25;
(b) reduce the amount of a Canada recovery benefit for a week to $300 in certain circumstances;
(c) provide that certain persons who were paid benefits under the Employment Insurance Act are eligible to be paid a Canada recovery benefit in certain circumstances;
(d) provide that the maximum number of weeks in respect of which a Canada recovery caregiving benefit is payable is 42; and
(e) provide that the Governor in Council may, by regulation, on the recommendation of the Minister of Employment and Social Development and the Minister of Finance, amend certain provisions of that Act to replace the date of September 25, 2021 by a date not later than November 20, 2021.
It also amends the Canada Labour Code to provide that the maximum number of weeks of leave for COVID-19 related caregiving responsibilities is 42.
Finally, it repeals provisions of the Canada Recovery Benefits Regulations and the Canada Labour Standards Regulations.
Division 35 of Part 4 amends the Employment Insurance Act to, among other things,
(a) facilitate access to unemployment benefits for a period of one year by
(i) reducing the number of hours of insurable employment required to qualify for unemployment benefits to a national threshold of 420 hours,
(ii) reducing the amount of earnings from self-employment that a self-employed person is required to have to be eligible to access special unemployment benefits,
(iii) providing that only a claimant’s most recent separation from employment will be considered in determining whether they qualify for unemployment benefits,
(iv) ensuring that earnings paid to a person because of the complete severance of their relationship with their former employer do not extend the person’s benefit period, and
(v) providing for an increase in the maximum number of weeks for which regular unemployment benefits may be paid to a seasonal worker if certain conditions are met; and
(b) extend the maximum number of weeks for which benefits may be paid because of a prescribed illness, injury or quarantine from 15 to 26.
It also amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things, extend to 27 the maximum number of weeks to which an employee is entitled for a medical leave of absence from employment.
It also amends the Employment Insurance Regulations to, among other things, ensure that, for a period of one year, earnings paid to a person because of the complete severance of their relationship with their former employer do not extend the person’s benefit period or delay payment of benefits to the person.
Finally, it amends the Employment Insurance (Fishing) Regulations to, among other things, reduce, for a period of one year, the amount of earnings that a fisher is required to have to qualify for unemployment benefits.
Division 36 of Part 4 amends the Canada Elections Act to provide that the offences related to the prohibition on making or publishing certain false statements with the intention of affecting the results of an election require that the person or the entity making or publishing the statement knows that the statement in question is false.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 23, 2021 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures
June 21, 2021 Passed Concurrence at report stage of Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures
June 21, 2021 Failed Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures (report stage amendment)
June 14, 2021 Passed Tme allocation for Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures
May 27, 2021 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

University—Rosedale Ontario

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

moved that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere pleasure to join this debate on Bill C-30, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have done everything necessary to protect Canadians’ health and safety, to help businesses weather the storm and to position our country for a strong recovery. After 14 months of uncertainty and hardship, Canadians continue to fight COVID-19 with determination and courage.

Right now we are being hit hard by the third wave, but we can see the light at the end of the tunnel. More and more Canadians are getting vaccinated. The recovery is around the corner. The bill before us today would implement our plan to finish the fight against COVID-19, create jobs, grow the economy and ensure a robust recovery from which all Canadians would benefit.

The budget I presented to the House on April 19 contains further details about the plan. The budget focuses on middle-class Canadians and seeks to help more Canadians join the middle class. It is also in line with the global shift to a green, clean economy.

This plan will help Canadians and Canadian businesses heal the wounds left by COVID-19 and come back stronger than ever.

This budget meets three fundamental challenges. First, we must conquer COVID. That means buying vaccines and supporting provincial and territorial health care systems. It means enforcing quarantine rules at the border and within the country. It means providing Canadians and Canadian businesses with the support they need to get through these final lockdowns.

Second, we must punch our way out of the COVID recession. That means ensuring that lost jobs are recovered as swiftly as possible and hard-hit businesses rebound quickly. It means providing support where COVID has hit hardest: to women, to young people, to racialized Canadians and low-wage workers, and to small and medium-sized businesses, especially in tourism and hospitality. When fully enacted, this budget will create, in total, nearly 500,000 new training and work opportunities for Canadians.

Third, the major challenge is to build a more resilient Canada: better, more fair, more prosperous and more innovative. That means investing in Canada's green transition and the green jobs that go with it, in Canada's digital transformation and in Canadian innovation, and it means building infrastructure for a dynamic, growing country. This budget invests in social infrastructure and in physical infrastructure. It invests in human capital and in physical capital. It invests in Canadians and it invests in Canada.

Vaccine campaigns are accelerating, and that is such a good thing, but we need to vaccinate even more Canadians even more quickly. Thanks to plentiful and growing vaccine supply, that is something team Canada can get done working together. This legislation proposes a one-time payment of $1 billion to provinces and territories to reinforce and roll out vaccination programs.

Canadians should take advantage of our increasing vaccine supply and, when it is their turn, go and get the first Health Canada-approved vaccine available to them. I was vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine nine days ago at a Toronto pharmacy, and I am so grateful I was able to be vaccinated when it was my turn.

COVID-19 has placed extreme pressure on health care systems across the country. The pandemic is still with us and Canadians do need help urgently. That is why we propose to provide $4 billion through the Canada health transfer to help provinces and territories address immediate health care system pressures.

These funds are in addition to our unprecedented investments in the health care systems during the pandemic, including the $13.8 billion invested in health care under the safe restart agreement.

A full recovery from this pandemic requires new, long-term investments in social infrastructure, from early learning and child care to student grants to income top-ups, so that the middle class can flourish and so that more Canadians can join it.

COVID-19 has brutally exposed what women have long known: Without child care, parents, usually mothers, cannot work outside the home. A cornerstone of our jobs and growth plan is a historic investment of $30 billion over five years, reaching $9.2 billion annually in permanent investments when combined with previous commitments, to build a high-quality, affordable and accessible early learning and child care system across Canada.

Within five years, families everywhere in Canada should have access to high-quality child care for an average of $10 a day. This will help increase parents', and especially women's, participation in the workforce. It will create jobs for child care workers, more than 95% of whom are women. It will give every child in Canada the best possible start in life. Early learning and child care has long been a feminist issue. COVID has shown us that it is an urgent economic issue as well.

As we make this historic commitment, I would like to thank the visionary leaders in Quebec, and in particular Quebec feminists, who led the way for the rest of Canada. I am very grateful to these women.

Of course, the plan also includes additional resources for Quebec that could be used to provide further support for its early learning and child care system, a system that is already the envy of the rest of Canada and, indeed, much of the world.

We also recognize the continuing need to bridge Canadians and Canadian businesses through this tough third wave of the virus and into a full recovery. To date, the Canada emergency wage subsidy has helped more than 5.3 million Canadians keep their jobs. The Canada emergency rent subsidy and lockdown support have helped more than 175,000 organizations with rent, mortgage and other expenses.

The wage subsidy, rent subsidy and lockdown support were set to expire in June 2021. Bill C-30 extends these measures through to September 25, 2021, for a total of $12.1 billion in additional support. Extending the support will mean that millions of jobs will be protected, as they have been throughout this crisis.

To help people who still cannot work, we also propose maintaining flexible access to employment insurance benefits for another year, until fall 2022.

We also plan to extend the number of weeks for certain major income support measures, including the Canada recovery benefit and the Canada recovery caregiver benefit.

We are providing an extra 12 weeks of benefits to recipients of the Canada recovery benefit, which was created to help Canadians who are not eligible for employment insurance.

Bill C-30 also proposes extending the Canada recovery caregiver benefit by 4 weeks, up to a maximum of 42 weeks at $500 a week. This will help when the economy begins its safe reopening.

For caregivers who cannot find a solution, especially those who take care of children, the employment insurance sickness benefit will be extended from 15 to 26 weeks.

Canada's prosperity depends on every Canadian having a fair chance to join the middle class. Low-wage workers in Canada work harder than anyone else in the country and for less pay. In the past year, they have faced both significant infection risks and job losses. Many live below the poverty line, even though they work full time. We are Canadian, and this should not be acceptable to any of us.

Through Bill C-30, we propose to expand the Canada workers benefit to invest $8.9 billion over six years in additional support for low-wage workers. This will extend income top-ups to about a million more workers and will lift 100,000 Canadians out of poverty. This legislation will also introduce a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage.

Young people have made extraordinary sacrifices over this past year to keep us, their elders, safe. We must not and we will not allow them to become a lost generation. Bill C-30 would make college and university more accessible and affordable. This legislation will extend the waiver of interest on federal student and apprentice loans to March 2023. Waiving the interest on student loans will provide savings for the approximately 1.5 million Canadians repaying student loans.

In the past 14 months, no one has felt the devastating health effects of COVID-19 more than seniors. They deserve a safe, secure and dignified retirement. We therefore propose a one-time payment of $500 in August 2021 to old age security recipients who are or will be 75 or over in June 2022.

Bill C-30 also includes a permanent 10% increase in the old age security benefit for people aged 75 and over as of July 2022.

Small businesses are the cornerstone of our economy. Lockdowns, though necessary, have hit them hardest. To heal the wounds left by COVID, we have to put a small business rescue plan into action as well as a long-term plan to help them grow.

In addition to extending the Canada emergency wage subsidy, the Canada emergency rent subsidy and lockdown support, we also have to make sure that [Technical difficulty—Editor].

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. minister seems to be having technical issues. We stopped hearing her feed.

I would like to inform the House that technicians are currently checking the minister’s connection. We will return in a few minutes.

In light of the fact that the technical problems seem to be a little more problematic than we expected, we are resuming debate with the hon. member for Abbotsford. We will return to the minister's speech once the technical issues are resolved.

The hon. member for Abbotsford.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Wellington—Halton Hills.

It has been over two years—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

We have to obtain unanimous consent for the sharing of time.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands is rising on a point of order.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I was rising on a point of order that I believe unanimous consent was required.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. House Leader of the Official Opposition is rising on a point of order.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, we do accept that, but we want to raise the point that it is very important, especially for this specific debate where we are talking about billions of dollars, to be sure that everything is said. I want to remind everyone that the best place to talk is here in the House of Commons.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, I am seeking unanimous consent to split my time with the member for Wellington—Halton Hills.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Does the hon. member for Abbotsford have the unanimous consent of the House to split his time?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Abbotsford.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, it has been well over two years since the last budget was tabled in the House. After all this time, one would have expected that our Liberal friends would have gotten it right. Instead, budget 2021 is a massive letdown. Instead of building back better, as the Prime Minister had so vacuously promised, and focusing on job creation and long-term growth, this budget has left us with bigger debt, bigger deficits, an avalanche of unfocused spending and a much bigger and more intrusive government.

Our Conservatives have repeatedly supported emergency programs for struggling Canadians to make it through the pandemic. What we cannot support is the Liberal government's failure to address the most urgent health and economic issues facing our country.

The virus has inflicted untold damage and put intense pressure on our health care system. Health care workers and hospitals are under siege. Even today, only 3% of Canadians have received their second dose of vaccine, while in the U.S., 32% of Americans have been fully vaccinated. How can that be?

The Prime Minister has failed to put forward strategic investments to ramp up vaccinations and provide the help the provinces and territories have asked for, as they struggle to contain the virus and treat the thousands of sick and dying patients. In fact, he has refused to sit down with those provinces to discuss health care support. Instead, the Prime Minister has said that he will get around to discussing this once the COVID pandemic is over. The premiers had asked for one thing, and that was a reliable federal partner to help them in the fight against COVID-19. They did not get one.

The budget also fails to live up to the Liberal government's own financial commitments. For example, the finance minister had originally signalled that $100 billion of additional spending would be used to stimulate the economy, but only if absolutely necessary.

Today, the parliamentary budget officer noted that in fact a good portion of the spending was not used to stimulate the economy at all. In classic Liberal fashion, much of the so-called stimulus was instead spent on measures intended to further the political interests of the Liberal government. The PBO even noted that the Liberals could have reduced Canada's massive deficits by more than $100 billion over the next six years. Instead, they chose to spend that money on an avalanche of election goodies to buy the votes of Canadians.

The minister's own mandate letter from the Prime Minister instructed her to present a new fiscal anchor, in other words, rules and safeguards, to guide her management of the massive debt and deficits that the Liberals had created. Yet, the best she could do was to recycle the old debt-to-GDP ratio, but this time without any firm targets. What is very clear is that the government has no intention of ever returning to balance, even in the longer term.

The PBO's newly released report for parliamentarians highlights a number of other things. First, the finance minister's stimulus has been miscalibrated. That is his term. In other words, it missed the mark. Second, the finance minister failed to distinguish between stimulus spending and COVID spending. I would suggest that she may have conflated the two to hide the fact that much of the spending was, indeed, election related. The PBO also said that the Liberals had overstated the economic impact of the stimulus. In other words, they misrepresented and oversold the value of the stimulus.

We also found out that the Liberal government had left itself no fiscal room. In other words, the Prime Minister has maxed out our country's credit card and ability to make future investments.

Finally, the PBO confirms that the government is not on course to return our debt and deficits to pre-pandemic levels, another big fail.

However, to be sure, there are some measures in the budget that Conservatives support, for example, the extension of the emergency support measures like the wage subsidy, the rent subsidy and other recovery benefits as well as the hiring and training program for employers to maintain a level playing field and allow them to transition from the wage subsidy program. There is an improved tax treatment for capital investment over a two-year time frame and there is some support for hospitality, tourism and culture, although not the support required to reflect that these sectors were the hardest hit, the first to be shut down and will likely be the last to reopen.

Quite frankly, what I heard from tourism stakeholders is that they do not want handouts. What they want is for the government to come up with a plan to safely reopen the economy and let them do what they do best, which is to sustain and create good-paying jobs. Sadly, they did not get that plan.

In the lead up to the budget, we had sent the Prime Minister and his finance minister letters outlining the measures we believed were critical to fuelling our post-pandemic recovery. Unsurprisingly, almost all our advice was ignored, including on child care. Instead of building on existing family support measures that would deliver immediate relief to parents wanting to enter the labour force, the Liberals recycled an old promise to create an Ottawa-knows-best one-size-fits-all regulated day care program, one that will leave millions of Canadian parents behind.

The minister herself acknowledged just now that it would take at least five years to get this program in place to negotiate child care agreements with the provinces. Meanwhile, parents wishing to enter the labour force right now will be left hanging. Liberal leaders have made the very same child care promise in almost every election since 1993 and have never, ever delivered. Canadians have a right to skeptical.

Remember, this was supposed to be a growth budget. That is what the Prime Minister promised. Therefore, will this budget actually grow the economy and position us for long-term prosperity? Not at all. In fact, high profile Liberals like the Prime Minister's former economic adviser, Robert Asselin, have acknowledged this budget is not about long-term growth.

Today's PBO report confirms that significant elements of this budget were misrepresented by the Liberal government and overstate the stimulus and growth effects on our economy. As other countries provide their citizens with faster access to vaccines, they are also beating us to the punch by giving their economies a shot in the arm.

The U.K. has launched an infrastructure revolution. Italy has introduced what its Prime Minister has called “the mother of all reforms” to slash red tape. France and Germany are cutting taxes. Japan is helping its firms reduce their reliance on China with a shift toward more reliable and ethical trading partners. What did the Liberal budget do? It sprayed billions of dollars around without a clear strategy to position Canada for long-term prosperity.

The budget has no investments to address the structural problems that have plagued productivity and our ability to compete on the global stage. There is no plan to address the unprecedented level of investment that is fleeing Canada. There is no plan for regulatory and tax reform to help us win on the global stage. There is no comprehensive innovation strategy to ensure Canadian tech start-ups keep their job-creating investments here at home.

The budget is largely silent on our world-leading natural resource sector, one of the most significant contributors to our national prosperity. The Liberal government has again turned its back on our oil and gas producing provinces by expressly excluding the sector from the new carbon capture tax credit.

The Liberal government also missed a golden opportunity to substantively address the skyrocketing cost of housing in Canada. The budget introduces a 1% tax on foreign owners of vacant housing, which, quite frankly, will be considered an inconvenience to wealthy foreigners who will simply treat this as a cost of doing business, especially when we see the appreciation property values year over year.

Meanwhile, millions of Canadians are seeing their dream of home ownership slip through their fingers. That is a major failure.

I believe Canadians are looking for hope that things will soon get better and that we still have a bright future to look forward to. They want their jobs and small businesses back. They want their lives and communities back. Simply put, they want a return to normal and to live the Canadian dream.

This budget fails to deliver. There is no growth plan, only spending on an unprecedented scale, and spending is not an economic plan.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Liberal

Sean Fraser LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance

Madam Speaker, while I quite like and respect the member personally, I am disappointed with the number of falsehoods that characterize his remarks today.

In particular, he criticized our plan for growth. I would point him to Scotiabank Economics that has said our measures were well-targeted to raise potential output by focusing on economic inclusion, the green transition and measures to encourage business investment. He criticized our fiscal sustainability, when the major credit rating agencies, post-budget, have reaffirmed our AAA rating.

My question relates to one very specific point. He has said that he supports the continuation of emergency measures, despite the fact that his leader opposes CERB and has opposed our investments on long-term care. If the member supports the continuation of the Canada emergency wage subsidy into the summer, why did he and his colleagues vote against that very specific measure on Friday of last week?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, the member should know that many economists across Canada have lambasted the government for this failure to deliver a growth budget.

I already mentioned one of the Prime Minister's former top advisers, saying that this was not a growth budget. I would note that Mark Carney, a really close friend of the Liberals, basically damned the budget with faint praise.

It is very clear the budget does not position our country and our economy for long-term growth. Canadians were looking for a plan that would reopen the economy, get Canadians back to work, get small businesses back on their feet and then provide our business sector with the confidence of knowing that—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, my colleague is a student of history. He knows that during the Second World War, the last big crisis this country lived through, we put in place an excess profits tax, which led to the unparalleled growth that came after we had vanquished Nazism and fascism.

Today, we see a government that is absolutely refusing to put in place a pandemic profits tax or wealth tax, despite the fact that Canada's billionaires have increased their wealth by over $78 billion during this pandemic. These measures were supported by over 80% of Canadians, including two-thirds of Conservative voters.

Do the Conservatives believe that the Liberals have acted inappropriately by giving a free ride to the ultra-rich?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, it seems every time I give a speech in the House, the member asks me the same question. I will give him the same answer that I have given in the past.

Coming out of the pandemic, coming out of an economic crisis is the worst time to raise taxes. Now I know that given the fact that the Liberal government has run up huge debts and huge deficits and has no plan to go to balance in the future, it is very clear that it will have to raise taxes in the future. It maybe an inheritance tax, maybe a home equity tax, maybe an increase in the GST or the carbon tax, we do not know.

However, I am pretty certain, under the Prime Minister, eventually there will be significant increases in the tax burden on Canadians, which is the worst thing a government can do. The best thing it can do is put in place the strategies, programs and investments that will position the country for long-term prosperity—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Yves Perron Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about health transfers.

The government is announcing a one-time transfer rather than the annual steady increase the entire country is asking for. This is what all the provinces, not just Quebec, are calling for. I get the feeling that the government is implementing mini-measures to try to keep people dependent.

Consider, for example, the renewal of the tax deferral for agricultural co-operatives. The deferral has been renewed several times for five years. Why not make this credit permanent, since it works so well?

My answer is that the government wants to keep people dependent so that it can make election promises. By renewing these measures in five years, it is making sure that the people who politely come begging remain dependent on Ottawa.

What does my colleague think?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, my impression is that we have a Prime Minister who is unwilling to work with the provinces. He has made it very clear that he has no intention of talking to the provinces until the COVID pandemic is over.

Quite frankly, right now, in the middle of this pandemic, with the pressure on our health care systems, on our hospitals, on our health care workers, the Prime Minister should be sitting down with our provincial leaders, with our premiers, and working something out. He has shown an unwillingness to do that.

We are willing to sit down—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Before we resume debate, the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands is rising on a point of order.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON

Madam Speaker, this is the longest budget in Canadian history. As Andrew Coyne pointed out in The Globe and Mail, this budget comes in at 739 pages and 232,903 words. Paul Martin's landmark budget of 1995 was fewer than 200 pages. Michael Wilson's budgets of the late1980s, which put Canada back on fiscal track and had operational surpluses, averaged less than 120 pages.

The longest budget in Canadian history is the biggest disappointment. Never has a budget proposed so little with so many words. There is no plan to tackle the immediate problem Canadians are facing, which is the lack of vaccines. There can be no economic recovery without vaccines.

In Halton region, for example, where part of my riding is, only half the people who could have been vaccinated have been. This is because the federal government has failed to secure vaccines. Last month, in places such as Burlington, Oakville, Milton, Georgetown and Acton, Halton region was only able to vaccinate 90,000 residents. It could have vaccinated 216,000 residents, or 7,200 residents a day, more than double the number of people it actually vaccinated. The reason only half the number of people were vaccinated was because of a lack of vaccines.

I will quote Halton region directly, which stated, “While we have the capacity to book approximately 7,200 appointments per day through our clinics, the availability of consistent vaccine supply continues to constrain the Vaccination Program rollout.”

The budget does nothing to fix this lack of vaccines. As a result, we are experiencing a third wave, unlike countries who were able to secure an adequate supply of vaccines like the United States and the United Kingdom.

This budget has no plan to build back better. It has no plan to create jobs and growth. Instead, it leaves us with a bigger debt, bigger deficits and an avalanche of unfocused spending.

The budget has no plan for regulatory and tax reform to help us in a fiercely competitive global economy. It has no plan to address Canada's chronically low levels of productivity, the only long-term determinant of prosperity. It has no plan for Canada's natural resources sector, which is so important to the race for critical minerals as the energy transition heats up.

There is no plan to address the overheated housing market, which has put the dream of affordable home ownership out of the reach of millions of Canadian families and saddled them with sky-high levels of indebtedness. There is no plan to achieve budget balance and rein in the skyrocketing debt and deficits that are threatening our children's future.

Members do not need to take it from me. They can take it from the experts. This is what David Dodge, the deputy minister of finance during the Chrétien government of the 1990s and former governor of the Bank of Canada, had to say about the budget in The Globe and Mail. He stated, “My policy criticism of the budget is that it really does not focus on growth”.

Referring to growth and the finance minister, he continues, “over the longer haul, we face a very real challenge. And I don’t think she tried to seriously address that in the budget”.

He went on to say that the vast majority of the extra $100 billion in spending is consumption not investment. He also said the budget does not have a prudent fiscal plan. He stated, “To me, it wouldn’t accord with something that is a reasonably prudent fiscal plan, let me put it that way”.

According to the International Monetary Fund, Canada has incurred the largest deficit among major economies in the last year at 20% of our GDP, yet the IMF estimates that, compared to our economic peers, Canada's economy has contracted more and will recover more slowly. Despite this, the budget does nothing to create jobs and growth.

There is no plan in the budget to balance public finances. The budget itself indicates that in the next five years alone, interest charges on the national debt will double, increasing from about 20 billion dollars a year to about 40 billion dollars a year.

Other experts have also been critical of the budget, as my colleague just said in his most recent remarks in the House. Here is what the finance minister's former policy and budget director, Robert Asselin, had to say about the budget in The Hub.

He said, “The federal budget has no answers on the question of growth”. He went on to say, “it was clear for some time that the government’s decision to spend more than $100 billion in so-called short-term stimulus was a political solution in search of an economic problem.” He concluded by saying, “After doubling our federal debt in only six years, and spending close to a trillion dollars, not moving the needle on long-term growth would be the worst possible legacy of this budget.”

This budget has no plan for growth, no plan to make Canada more competitive on the global stage and no plan to deal with Canada's aging labour force and chronically low levels of business investment. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has noted that a significant amount of the spending in the budget would neither stimulate jobs nor create economic growth. Like many others, he has concluded that a good portion of the spending is not stimulus at all.

Much of the spending in the budget is designed to help get Liberals re-elected. It is clearly a pre-election budget with a shotgun approach to spending. For example, the budget promises a national child care program. They do not mind the fact that it is provincial jurisdiction and some provinces have already set up universal child care programs. They do not mind the fact that the social union framework agreement, which was negotiated in 1999 by a previous Liberal government, requires the government to get the support of the majority of provincial governments to proceed. They do not mind the fact that provinces are rightfully skeptical about a federal government setting up new shared-cost programs in provincial areas of jurisdiction, only to have the federal government reduce funding at a later date, leaving the provinces on the hook to make up the deficit.

This promise of a national child care program is one Canadians have every right to be skeptical about. The Liberals first made this promise in the infamous red book of 1993, some 28 years ago. Over the last 28 years, they have continued to trot it out, and they keep failing to deliver. The government had two years to prepare for this budget. The fact that after two years all they could come out with is a budget soaring in rhetoric, but lacking in substance, is not surprising.

This is a government with an unprecedented gap between its rhetoric and reality. It is a government that said it was about gender equality, yet forced out of its cabinet and caucus the first indigenous female minister of justice and forced out of its caucus Jane Philpott, someone whose medical expertise we could have desperately used as minister of health during the last year of this pandemic. It is a government that said it was feminist, yet ignored the specific allegation of sexual harassment against the head of the armed forces

It is a government that said it would introduce electoral reform. It is a government headed by a Prime Minister who arrogantly proclaimed to the world in 2015 that Canada was back, and who made it a centrepiece of his foreign policy to secure a seat for Canada on the UN Security Council. However, Canada lost the vote for the Security Council seat with six fewer votes than it received a decade earlier. It is a government that came to office promising to do more for the world's poor, but that has spent 10% less on official development assistance than the previous government. It is a government that came to office promising to do better on climate change, but emissions have risen each and every year it has been in office.

In 2016, the first full year the current government was in office, emissions were 708 megatonnes. Just last month, the government announced emissions for the latest year, 2019, at 730 megatonnes. This is a 22-megatonne increase from its first full year in office, when it stood at 708 megatonnes, and so, too, it is with this budget.

This is a government that says it is focused on the middle class. It says it is focused on jobs and growth and focused on fiscal prudence, yet it presents a budget that is focused on anything but. For all those reasons, I cannot support this budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, for starters, this member and I are both of Dutch heritage, being half Dutch, and I want to wish him a happy Dutch Heritage Day. I know that we both spoke passionately in favour of Motion No. 207 just a couple of years ago, which established Dutch Heritage Day. Perhaps our only regret is that, being Dutch, we are too modest to insist on a whole month.

I would like to go back to the member's comments about the vaccines. He referenced the Halton region. I think it is fair to be critical and to assess the job of vaccine delivery. Yes, there were a couple of weeks in February when there were some disruptions to the delivery, but by the end of the first quarter we had had more vaccines delivered to Canada than had been scheduled.

More important, the provinces knew what the schedule was well in advance, and the provinces were also getting forecasts with respect to where the pandemic was going and what to expect. Would the member not at least agree that, yes, there may have been some disruptions, but vaccines did get delivered as per the schedule just as the provinces were expecting?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON

Madam Speaker, I wish a happy Dutch Heritage Day to my colleague across the aisle as well. I appreciate the sentiment.

Let me respond to my colleague's question by saying that Canada has done nothing well in response to this pandemic. It is clear that both the United States and the United Kingdom botched the early response to the pandemic a year ago. That is clear. Their cases skyrocketed. They had many more cases than we did. However, they eventually pulled up their bootstraps and they have led the world, not just the free world, in vaccinating significant numbers of their own citizens to the point now where over 50% of Britons now have been vaccinated and almost 50% of Americans have been vaccinated.

We have not done anything well during this pandemic. The fact that we are now going through a third wave with a third set of restrictions is reflective of that. The government needs to do a much better job in managing the pandemic and in coordinating the response. At the end of the day, peace, order and good government—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Windsor West.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Madam Speaker, with respect to Dutch Heritage Day, the NDP is partial to orange, and we would not mind it being extended to a month. I know we could certainly live with that.

One of the things that took place at the start of the pandemic was that pressured credit card companies went on a campaign to lower interest rates for borrowing. The member mentioned families. I am curious about where he and his party are with the credit card agencies right now, when most of them are moving back to interest rates of 20% or more.

Does the member and his party think there should be some regulatory reform, either in the short term or the long term, as Canada's borrowing rate is so low right now and these predatory prices are accumulating a lot of debt for Canadians. I am curious about where his party is on that, because we believe that there should be some regulatory oversight, especially right now, given the circumstances Canadians find themselves in.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON

Madam Speaker, the member represents a portion of Windsor, the place of my birth and a part of southwestern Ontario that, I know, he and I are quite proud of.

In answer to the member's question, we believe that the government should have introduced, in this budget, measures to help cool the housing market, which is the single biggest factor driving household indebtedness and household challenges in this country. Household mortgage debt in this country stands at over $1.5 trillion. It is by far and away the largest portion, about three-quarters, of all household debt. The fact that the government did not introduce measures to help cool the housing market is only going to further add to that overall debt burden that Canadian families are facing.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Resuming debate, we have the hon. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance for the five and a half minutes she has remaining for her speech.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

University—Rosedale Ontario

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Madam Speaker, I thank colleagues for their patience with my Internet difficulties today. I apologize and I do really appreciate their forbearance.

Small businesses are the cornerstone of our economy and of every main street in Canada. Lockdowns, though necessary, have hit them hardest. To heal the wounds left by COVID, we have to put a small business rescue plan into action as well as a long-term plan to help them grow.

In addition to extending the Canada emergency wage subsidy, the Canada emergency rent subsidy and lockdown support, we also have to make sure that the hardest-hit businesses pivot back to growth and stay on track.

Bill C-30 proposes the new Canada recovery hiring program, which will run from June to November and make it easier for businesses to hire back laid-off employees or to hire new workers. We also intend to invest up to $4 billion to help up to 160,000 small and medium-sized businesses buy and adopt the new technologies they need to grow. We will encourage businesses to invest in themselves by allowing for the immediate expensing of up to $1.5 million of eligible investments by Canadian-controlled private corporations in each of the next three years.

Small businesses need access to financing in order to invest in people and innovation and to have the space to operate and grow. That is why Bill C-30 enhances the Canada small business financing program through amendments to the Canada Small Business Financing Act. This will mean broader eligibility and increased loan limits.

In 2021, job growth is green growth. This budget sets out an ambitious and realistic plan to help Canada get to net-zero emissions, and it puts in place the funding to achieve our 25% land and marine conservation targets by 2025. At the same time, we will make targeted investments in transformational technologies, helping our business growth and making us more productive and competitive around the world.

The hard and essential work of reconciliation continues. This budget commits to investing $18 billion over the next five years to narrow gaps between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples, to support safe, healthy communities and to advance reconciliation. We are committing to investing $6 billion to improve infrastructure in indigenous communities.

Bill C-30 earmarks $2.2 billion to flow through the federal gas tax fund, renamed more appropriately the Canada community-building fund, to communities across Canada. Cities and towns have faced steep revenue declines because of COVID. This funding will help them maintain and build the local infrastructure on which Canadians depend.

Collaboration with all levels of government across Canada has been and will continue to be the cornerstone of our team Canada response to this pandemic. Together, we will finish the fight against COVID and together we will come roaring back.

Bill C-30 is essential if we are to activate our government's recovery plan as presented in budget 2021. Our people and our businesses cannot do without the support measures in this bill. This bill takes unprecedented steps to stimulate future growth.

This plan is about people. It will make a measurable, positive, tangible difference in the lives of millions of Canadians. It is about making concrete, targeted commitments to heal the wounds of COVID, to get us all back to work and to put us on a long-term path toward growth, prosperity and a clean, green future.

I urge all members to join me in supporting the speedy passage of this essential legislation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, why is the government placing restrictions on people's ability to be compensated through the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation? Is she expecting federal financial institutions to fail?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Madam Speaker, I have a very high degree of confidence in our country's financial institutions. Indeed, the stability of Canada's financial institutions is one of our core economic strengths.

The CDIC is one of our key institutions, and the well-regulated, prudent way in which it operates is really central to Canada's stability. It is one of the reasons that Canada continues to enjoy a AAA credit rating.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, I have a big problem with division 5 of part 4 on the centralization of securities.

This plan to set up the pan-Canadian securities regulation organization in Toronto is bound to result in regulatory activities transitioning out of Quebec. The minister is allocating nearly $120 million to this ill-conceived plan. This is not just a conflict between provincial and federal responsibility. It is a battle between Bay Street and Quebec.

Nobody in Quebec—none of the political parties, not the business community, not the financial sector and not workers' funds—nobody is in favour of this plan.

After she invests $120 million, what will the minister tell them? Will she tell them that Ottawa cares more about Bay Street than about all those people?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. We do not always agree, but we always have useful discussions.

With respect to securities, I certainly understand Quebec's position. I have had constructive conversations about this with Minister Eric Girard.

While I certainly understand Quebec's position, I think that, with the agreement of all the provinces and territories, it is a good thing for the whole country to do things that help us establish a shared economy. One example of that is trade among the provinces and territories.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, unlike BIAs in any other crisis we have had in Canadian history, this budget implementation act basically gives a free ride to the ultrarich. Canada's billionaires have increased their wealth by over $78 billion, yet there is no wealth tax, there is no pandemic profits tax and the luxury tax is purely symbolic, bringing in less than one cent on the dollar of what the PBO has said a wealth tax would provide for.

At the same time, the Liberal government is slashing benefits. Starting in July, the emergency response benefit will be slashed almost in half. Students are still forced to pay for their loans during the pandemic, and people with disabilities get a three-year consultation. Try putting food on the table with a consultation.

My question is very simple: Why is the government slashing benefits at the same time as it is giving a free ride to the ultrarich?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for New Westminster—Burnaby for his very great concern for the people he represents. I appreciate that.

I take a very different view about what this budget is putting forward. This budget would extend the emergency support measures for individuals and businesses through to the end of September. It would extend the enhanced EI benefits for a full year and would create a new hiring credit that would run from June to November. These are important support measures, and we are glad to put them in place.

When it comes to students and young people, I agree with the hon. member that we need to support them. That is why there is nearly $6 billion in this budget to support young Canadians.

Finally, when it comes to taxes, let me highlight a very important element of this budget: unprecedented efforts to fight tax evasion, to close loopholes, including action on—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

We have to have allow the opportunity for more questions.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Liberal

Sean Fraser LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for her work in putting together this transformational document that is going to support Canadians.

The pandemic has not impacted everyone equally. A lot of people are doing just fine from an economic perspective, notwithstanding the public health crisis we are facing. However, women, young people, Black Canadians, indigenous Canadians and other groups from marginalized communities have suffered disproportionate consequences. When we talk about job numbers and GDP growth, sometimes people think that politicians are concerned with the economy but not as concerned as they should be about the people who live and work in it.

I am hoping the minister can offer comments on why supporting the groups that have been hit hardest by the pandemic is not just the right thing to do from a moral perspective. It is in our economic self-interest to support them as we rebound from the economic crisis of COVID-19 pandemic.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to start my answer by paying tribute to my parliamentary secretary and highlighting the very personal role he played in putting together this budget. He has a constituent who had advocated, with huge energy and personal passion, for extending the EI sickness benefit from 15 to 26 weeks. The parliamentary secretary spoke to me about the personal story of this constituent. In his view, based on his constituency work as a MP, this was a measure we needed to put in place, as sick Canadians needed longer support. We acted on what he proposed, and I am very, very glad we were able to do that.

I would say to all members of the House that there are times when speaking up for an individual member of our constituencies can transform the lives of millions of Canadians. I think that is what the parliamentary secretary has done.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the minister for reaching out to me last week after the budget had been tabled. We had a good conversation. However, had she reached out a little earlier, we could have helped her craft a budget that was truly a growth budget.

I noticed that her speech was almost exclusively about how much she had spent. There are certainly elements within the budget that we support, but as she is the finance minister, I would have expected her to talk about debts, talk about deficits and talk about the impact inflation and interest rates could have on the sustainability of our economy and our national finances. She mentioned none of that.

The minister's mandate letter from the Prime Minister directed her to come up with a “new fiscal anchor”. However, the fiscal anchor she came up with was the old one based on the debt-to-GDP ratio, except it did not have any targets attached to it this time.

Why has the minister not directed her mind to the financial sustainability of the country? Why did she not—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. Minister of Finance.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Madam Speaker, earlier on, the parliamentary secretary spoke about his personal high regard for the member for Abbotsford and, I believe, his fondness for him. I must confess to the same weakness. I was glad to speak with him last week, and indeed to speak with him while we were putting the budget together. Notwithstanding that high regard, I disagree with some of the hon. member's contentions.

When it comes to the fiscal sustainability of our budget, let me point to something that is important for Canadians to know. I am holding it up now. A week after we delivered the budget, S&P Global, the ratings agency whose job it is to determine which sovereign borrower has a good plan and which does not, reaffirmed Canada's AAA rating. S&P said that it expects the Canadian economy will post a strong recovery in—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Madam Speaker, seniors are angry, and with good reason.

They view the latest budget as an insult. Seniors saw an increase in old age security for people aged 75 and over, but no increase for people aged 65 to 74.

Will the Minister of Finance stop denying our seniors their dignity and provide the OAS increase to people aged 65 to 74 and those 75 and over?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON

Madam Speaker, I must say that I do not agree with the hon. member.

Earlier this week, I had a discussion with the Prime Minister and a group of Quebec seniors. We had an excellent conversation and these seniors really appreciated the OAS increase included in this budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, that is not what we are hearing on the ground. We are hearing a lot of grumbling about the creation of two classes of seniors and the exclusion of seniors aged 65 to 74. From our point of view, this is not being well received on the ground.

I would like to start by informing the House that the Bloc Québécois will support the principle of the bill. We will make amendments in committee and review our position in subsequent votes.

This implementation bill is mammoth in scope. It has 346 pages, four parts, 37 divisions and four schedules. The summary alone is 10 pages long. It goes without saying that it contains tons of measures, like the woolly mammoth, which could weigh up to six tons. We obviously support most of the measures, such as the ones aimed at extending support programs like the wage and rent subsidies.

Given the mammoth scope of the bill and the time I am allotted, I will limit myself to a brief overview, stopping to discuss some of its elements.

Part 1 contains a series of highly technical amendments to the Income Tax Act. It limits the stock option deduction for large companies. It increases the basic personal deduction to $15,000. It prohibits bonuses for senior executives in companies receiving the wage subsidy, and introduces anti-avoidance measures. These are some of the measures we support. Part 2 imposes GST on Internet and Airbnb purchases, which is obviously a good thing.

The bill extends the wage subsidy until September 27, gradually reducing the rates from 75% to 20%, and also allows the minister to extend the program by regulation for two more months, until November 30. During these two months, the minister could also make a regulation concerning eligibility criteria for the wage subsidy as well as its calculation.

This provision sounds like an insurance policy in case the House is dissolved for elections, preventing it from enacting a law that would extend the wage subsidy beyond September 27 if necessary. If you read between the lines, the choice of November 30 gives you an idea of when the current government anticipates the House to be back.

The bill creates a new hiring subsidy program for businesses restarting their activities. The hiring subsidy will be in effect from June 6 to November 20. It will be offered to businesses restarting their activities and hiring or rehiring employees. It could cover up to half of new salaries. Businesses will therefore be able to choose between the hiring subsidy and the wage subsidy, depending on which one benefits them most. These are measures that we support.

As I said in my question to the minister, division 5 of part 4 is a serious problem for us. This section involves the centralization of the securities commission, which infringes on Quebec's jurisdiction. With this division, the federal government is trying to strip Quebec of its financial sector.

Bill C-30 renews and significantly increases the budget of the Canadian Securities Regulation Regime Transition Office to expedite its work. The bill authorizes the government to make payments to the transition office of up to $119,500,000 or any greater amount that may be specified in an appropriation act. The transition office was established in July 2009 to create a single pan-Canadian securities regulator in Toronto.

There have been a number of setbacks before the Supreme Court, which deemed that securities were not under federal jurisdiction. However, Ottawa finally got the green light in 2018—remember it well—to interfere in this jurisdiction provided that it co-operate with the provinces and not act unilaterally. That is what is on paper, so that is the theory. However, as Yogi Berra said, “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.”

If the federal government carried out its plan to establish a pan-Canadian securities regulator in Toronto, we would inevitably see a creep of regulation activities outside Quebec. This plan is just bad and must never see the light of day. This is more than just a dispute over jurisdictions or mere squabbling between Quebec and Ottawa or the federal government and the provinces. This is a battle between Bay Street and Quebec.

I would like to remind the House that everyone is against this in Quebec, including all political parties in the Quebec National Assembly, business communities, the financial sector and labour-sponsored funds. Seldom have we seen Quebec's business community come together as one to oppose a government initiative.

In addition to the Government of Quebec and the National Assembly, economic circles unanimously and vehemently oppose it, including the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec, the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal, Finance Montréal, the International Financial Centre corporation, the Desjardins Group, Fonds de solidarité FTQ, as well as most Quebec businesses, like Air Transat, Transcontinental, Canam, Québecor, Metro, La Capitale, Cogeco, Molson, and the list goes on.

A strong Quebec Autorité des marchés financiers means a strong talent pool in support of the financial legal framework, a prerequisite to the sector's development.

When the Toronto Stock Exchange bought the Bourse de Montréal, the Commission des valeurs mobilières, the predecessor to the Autorité des marchés financiers, demanded before authorizing the sale that Montreal retain a stock exchange. We know that it specialized in derivatives, including the carbon exchange.

In Quebec, the financial sector represents 150,000 jobs with a contribution of more than $20 billion, or the equivalent of 6.3% of the GDP. Montreal is the 13th largest global financial centre with nearly 100,000 jobs.

The provisions in division 5 are an attack on our ability to keep our head offices and preserve our businesses. We are talking about the Quebec model. The Task Force on the Protection of Québec Businesses estimates that the 578 head offices in Quebec represent 50,000 jobs with a salary that is twice as high as the Quebec average in addition to 20,000 other jobs at specialized service providers such as accounting, legal, financial or computer services.

Quebec companies tend to favour Quebec suppliers, while foreign companies in Quebec rely more on globalized supply chains and all the impact that can have on our network of SMEs, in the regions in particular. We saw with the pandemic that globalized supply chains are fragile and make us entirely dependent on foreign supply.

Ultimately, businesses tend to concentrate their strategic activities, in particular research and development, where their headquarters are located. There is also a branch plant economy and a less innovative economy. These are threats to Quebec.

A strong financial hub is vital to the functioning of our headquarters and the preservation of our businesses. Keeping the sector's regulator in Quebec ensures that decision-makers are nearby, which in turn enables access to capital markets for businesses, an essential condition to support business investment and growth across Quebec.

The Bloc Québécois wants to eliminate division 5 of Bill C-30, by deleting the clause in question. This would be tantamount to cutting off funding for the centralization of Toronto's financial sector. We are sorry, but we will be standing in Bay Street's way.

I will move on to division 8 of part 4.

Division 8 enacts a new act, the retail payment activities act, which would govern all electronic transactions. It applies not only to online payment activities of federally regulated institutions but also to those of all businesses. Even provincial governments are subject to this law.

At this point, we have serious concerns about division 8. In our view, the activities described are essentially private in nature and fall under civil law. Why is Ottawa sticking its nose in? There is also the possibility that the federal legislation may not apply to a non-federally-regulated business in a province that has passed comparable legislation.

The Bloc Québécois and I find this all rather vague. Is this yet another encroachment by Ottawa into the area of financial consumer protection? We have questions. We are going to look into the matter and shed some light on it. Our constituents can count on us.

We all remember a mammoth bill introduced by former minister Morneau that removed the Bay Street financial sector from the Civil Code of Quebec. We managed to get the government to back down and we are ready to do it again, if needed.

I will now move on to division 22.

Here, Bill C-30 amends the Canada Labour Code in an effort to address the issue of contract flipping.

Unfortunately, this contract flipping is still happening in airports. It involves replacing one company with another less expensive one through competitive bidding. What does the new company do? It rehires the same workers to do the same job but with inferior working conditions and wages. That is unacceptable. It is straight out of another century. It is time for that to change.

We welcome that division of the bill. However, it seems that it refers only to pay and not to all of the social benefits and other benefits set out in the collective agreement. In fact, the collective agreement does not seem to be transferred. We will therefore continue to examine that division of the bill and possibly make some improvements.

Next, I want to talk about division 23, which increases minimum wage to $15 an hour. Obviously, we applaud that initiative. The Bloc Québécois is always in favour of improving the quality of life and working conditions of Quebeckers and Canadians. However, members need to be aware that only a minority of workers, or approximately 26,000 Canadians, will be able to get that wage increase, because the Canada Labour Code applies only to federally regulated sectors, so this measure is nothing too spectacular.

Division 25 provides for a payment to Quebec to offset the cost of aligning the Quebec parental insurance plan. For once, Quebec may not have to fight for its share of the funding allocated to a program it opted out of. We hope Ottawa will remember this way of doing things and do it more often. That would be nice sometimes instead of always wasting time haggling over money for social housing, roads and lots of other things, money that takes years to get transferred. We applaud what is being done here.

I will move on to division 32, which is about old age security, but before I talk about old age security, what do we have here in division 32? A $500 cheque for people 75 and over this summer, right before the election. People probably remember how Duplessis gave folks refrigerators so they would not forget which side to vote for. Well done, Liberals. Duplessis used to say that heaven was blue and hell was red. Unfortunately, the Liberals cannot appropriate that particular Duplessis slogan.

As I said earlier, division 32 will increase old age security by 10% for those aged 75 and over, not this summer, but in the summer of 2022. That is $63 more per month. I would remind the House that the Bloc Québécois is asking for an increase of $110 per month for all seniors aged 65 and over, starting immediately. This would bring Canada back in line with the OECD average. Canada would still lag far behind Europe.

On that topic, I would like to quote the economic analyst Gérald Fillion. In a very interesting article he wrote recently in response to the budget, he said, and I quote:

Two questions come to mind. First, why not increase old age security by 10% as of this year? Second, why do these measures apply only to seniors aged 75 and over? Why not those aged 65 and over?

Those are very legitimate questions that we too want to ask the government. The FADOQ network and seniors' groups in Quebec also spoke out against this approach. Gérald Fillion made a number of points. He noted that, in Canada, people's income drops precipitously when they retire. The technical term is net pension replacement rate, which was 50.7% of pre-retirement income in Canada in 2018. That translates into roughly half as much after retirement.

Across the OECD, that rate is seven percentage points higher. In the European Union, it is 63%. The figures are therefore 50%, 57% and 63%. These data are from a study of 49 countries, among which Canada ranks 32nd, well behind countries such as Italy, India, France and Denmark, and just slightly above the United States, where inequality is surging. That is not impressive. These statistics are alarming, so we must take action. Seniors were the first victims of the pandemic, and there was already inequality before the pandemic.

Gérald Fillion concluded his article by saying:

Considering Canada's poor showing in the OECD ranking, it would have made sense for the 10% increase to begin this year and apply as of age 65 and for this issue to be free from electioneering.

Improving old age security starting not this summer, but next summer, is what we are talking about. To reiterate our position, we are proposing $110 a month starting at age 65 to bring us in line with the OECD average. It is hardly a revolutionary proposal.

I will now move on to division 34, which deals with child care services. The government is giving itself the right to compensate a province that wishes to opt out of the federal early learning and child care program. That is obviously what Quebec would like to do.

However, the Bloc Québécois wants guarantees. This spending authority seems to be valid only for the current fiscal year and for a maximum transfer of $3 billion per province.

In the budget, but not the bill, there are different program objectives, and the budget also raises the possibility of an asymmetrical bilateral agreement with Quebec.

As everyone knows, the bill covers only this year. Is that until asymmetrical agreements are signed? Can the government finally guarantee that Quebec will receive full compensation every year, without conditions, for what it has been doing since 1997? That is what we want, and that is what we are asking for.

I would like to remind members that the new pan-Canadian child care program is another federal intrusion. Family policies and all associated programs are the exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. It is clearly a good policy, a worthwhile, feminist policy, but it is still an intrusion.

I will now move on to divisions 35 and 36, which grant 12 additional weeks of the Canada recovery benefit, bringing us to September 25 of this year. The total number of weeks is now increased to 50, which is a good thing. For the first four additional weeks, recipients will receive $500 a week. For the other eight weeks, the maximum will be reduced to $300, starting July 18. This division also extends the Canada recovery caregiving benefit by four weeks to a maximum of 42 weeks, providing $500 a week in the event that caregiving options are not sufficiently available. The maximum number of weeks for which the benefit can be paid to people living at the same address is 42.

The bill contains several measures, including extending EI benefits, which may be prescribed by regulation and extended until November 20, if necessary; maintaining EI eligibility at 420 hours; and extending the maximum length of EI sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 26 weeks starting in the summer. I do not mean this summer, but the one following the election. This measure continues to penalize people who are fighting cancer, for example, and need more weeks of benefits. It does not take into account the order that the House gave the government to extend the benefit period to 50 weeks. Twenty-six weeks is better than 15, but that was not what the House voted for.

I remind members that the Bloc Québécois voted against the budget. Although we believe the budget contains some worthwhile measures, it overlooked the key issues, namely proper funding for health care and proper support for seniors.

The Bloc Québécois also denounces the government's decision to use the budget to set up infrastructure that would enable it to interfere in provincial jurisdictions. The budget provides for frameworks for mental health care, women's health and reproductive health. These are all the exclusive jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces.

The budget also provides for a framework for extracting the minerals needed for the green transition. Furthermore, as I pointed out earlier, the government is once again talking about a Canadian securities regulator. The budget also talks about a federal office for recognizing foreign credentials, which is not a federal jurisdiction. There is also mention of a Canadian water agency and a federal framework for skills training. Whenever Quebec or the provinces do something good, Ottawa tries to latch on, even though it is not able to take care of its own jurisdictions.

This is all very troubling. All of these measures, frameworks and policies do not represent significant amounts in the budget, but they reflect the government's intention to set up the infrastructure to keep moving in this direction. We will be keeping an eye on the government, that is for sure. The government's vision is to control specific areas that, according to the Constitution, fall under provincial jurisdiction. The federal government has the power to spend, and that enables it to stick its nose into everybody's business, but as a result, we are becoming less and less of a federation with provincial autonomy and more and more of a centralized country where everything happens in Ottawa. The federal government could not care less about the provincial autonomy that Quebec holds so dear. The provinces are being starved. With health care costs rising and Ottawa refusing to co-operate, Quebec and the provinces have no more room to manoeuvre. If they want some breathing room, they need to turn to Ottawa, which will tell them how to do things. That is very troubling.

Madam Speaker, I see you indicating that my time is up. I will—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

You have 10 seconds left.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, since I have little time left, I will be brief.

Several elements of the mammoth bill are appealing, but others are not.

We will vote in favour of the bill at this stage, and we will try to make it better.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Liberal

Sean Fraser LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance

Madam Speaker, I would have to save an entire day to discuss some of the questions around jurisdiction. My question is about the government's fiscal policy in terms of the macroeconomic approach, which I know my colleague has serious expertise in.

At committee, we have heard the Governor of the Bank of Canada describe the monetary policy to be the effective lower bound of the interest rate the bank can offer. The chief economist of the International Monetary Fund has suggested that, for countries that have a central bank that has reached the effective lower bound of interest rates, public stimulus is not just economically sound but is the fiscally responsible thing to do.

Without getting into the specifics of 100 different measures he may agree or disagree with, from a macroeconomic policy point of view, I am curious whether he agrees it is essential to support the economy, and more importantly the people and businesses inside that economy, by ensuring we extend enough supports to ensure they can be on a life raft through this pandemic so they can contribute to the recovery on the back end.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, I salute and thank the parliamentary secretary. We both sit on the finance committee, where we both work very hard.

This is a very interesting question. Economists welcomed the income support measures during the pandemic, and they are currently debating the need for a recovery plan.

The Bloc Québécois and I are in favour of a recovery plan, as long as it is used properly. It should not be used to put more money in the pockets of the government's friends. It should be used to boost the strong sectors of tomorrow's economy, for example, the green economy and strategic sectors such as aerospace.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Madam Speaker, I listened intently to the member's speech, particularly the issues around the stock exchange. It was extremely interesting and something I am not as familiar with. The jurisdictional questions are always something he and I agree on, and I am happy he brought them up.

What are his opinions on the massive amounts of debt we are taking on? Are we getting anything for that in return?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, I salute my colleague and thank him for his comments and questions.

Obviously, we have reached a record debt level, which is troubling. Every dollar borrowed must serve the economy well.

As I said before, there was some consensus on maintaining income for those who lost their jobs during the pandemic. The money used for the recovery must generate more savings than it costs.

I remind you that there were apparently a million cases of fraud in the Canada Revenue Agency's CERB program. That is troubling, and we need to investigate. If that is the case, the government failed miserably. A million cases of fraud is unacceptable.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague that the finance committee certainly is going to have its work cut out for it. Tying into the last question on the size of the debt, I am very concerned that, as we have seen in the past, it is going to be small businesses and our vulnerable workers who have to shoulder this burden while very wealthy corporations and very wealthy individuals have been making out like bandits for this entire pandemic.

I know the member has spoken at great length in previous speeches about tax evasion, tax avoidance and the need for a wealth tax. Can he tell the House about maybe his disappointment that the budget did not really address those key areas? Going forward, the government needs to make sure those at the very top are in fact paying their fair share and that the burden is not unfairly falling on everyone else, as we have seen in the past.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, and I sincerely salute all the work he does in the House for the well-being of ordinary Canadians.

Can Canada still afford to allow the wealthiest, multinationals and Bay Street banks to shelter their money to avoid paying income tax? Given the colossal amount the pandemic cost, can we still allow them that privilege? In my opinion, we cannot.

Everyone should contribute according to their means. I am thinking about the big Bay Street banks that earned more than $40 billion in 2020, that took advantage of the pandemic and that are protected by regulation. They should no longer be able to use tax havens to avoid paying income tax. The budget presented by the minister does some things, but does not go far enough. We will continue to put pressure on the government.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his knowledgeable speech. I can see that he knows what he is talking about when it comes to finance, and I am very happy to be part of his team and to not have to make that kind of speech.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I would ask the member to make sure his microphone is connected, because there seems to be a problem.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Is it working, Madam Speaker?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

It is not any better.

We will move on to the member for New Westminster—Burnaby and come back to the member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert afterward.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, my colleague, whom I much admire and whom I work with on the Standing Committee on Finance, mentioned the whole issue of tax havens, the lack of a tax on wealth that other countries have put in place and the fact that there is no tax on pandemic-related profits, even though billionaires saw their wealth grow by $78 billion during the pandemic.

Meanwhile, we are seeing contradictions. The government made cuts to emergency programs. Students are being forced to pay back their loans during the pandemic, and of course there is nothing in the budget for people with disabilities, who will have to wait three years for bogus consultations.

I would like to ask my colleague whether he sees a contradiction in this situation, where the ultra-rich are not paying anything and ordinary Canadians are being forced to bear the entire burden of this pandemic.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, the admiration is mutual. I appreciate how productively we work together at the Standing Committee on Finance.

He raised some super-important issues. As I was saying to a colleague who spoke earlier, this inequity has been around for decades. It is actually getting worse. The gap between rich and poor is widening.

My question is, given the economic and social costs of the pandemic, can society still afford to hand out gifts to the very rich?

I think the answer is clear. The answer is no, and this has to change now.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Madam Speaker, I know my colleague is well acquainted with the housing crisis happening in Quebec right now. I think the housing crisis comes up pretty much every day.

There was an announcement today about $100 million for renovations in Montreal, but the Fédération des locataires d'habitations à loyer modique du Québec, which advocates for affordable housing, said that what the system needs is more like $400 million.

The rapid housing initiative, or RHI, which my colleague is familiar with, was launched in the fall. The government just injected $1.5 billion, but the Federation of Canadian Municipalities asked it to put $7 billion into the program. Ottawa clearly does not understand the gravity of the housing situation. All we ever see is a piecemeal approach.

Does my colleague agree that we need game-changing investments to deal with Quebec's current housing crisis?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague and send him my regards.

I congratulate him on the work he is doing for social housing and affordable housing. He is out there on the ground with people and doing an excellent job. I am proud to be part of his team, no doubt about it.

If social housing is in such bad shape, it is because Ottawa withdrew from the file in the 1990s, essentially abandoning it. Quebec did take it over but had limited means, which resulted in a senseless step backward in social housing. There is a huge amount of catching up to do.

In the last year we have had a minority government, which has helped. The government came up with some money, but neither the approach nor the amount were really enough to address the root of the problem that, I remind the House, Ottawa itself created.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Resuming debate, the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby will be able to start his debate. However, I will have to interrupt him. He will be able to continue the next time this matter is before the House.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, I would like to mention that I am speaking today from the traditional unceded territory of the Qayqayt First Nation and of the Coast Salish peoples.

I would like to underscore today, sadly. As members know, every day in Parliament I wear the Moose Hide square to commemorate the stolen sisters, missing and murdered indigenous women and girls, and two-spirit people. Today is Red Dress Day, when we commemorate their lives and we recommit to fight for accountability, dignity and justice and to say that there will be, one day, no more stolen sisters.

I have only a few minutes to start the debate today, but I would like to set the table talking about a tale of two countries during this pandemic.

During this pandemic, we have seen one country, a country of very ultrawealthy Canadians, billionaires who have seen their wealth increase by $78 billion during this pandemic, an astounding amount. At the same time, we have seen unprecedented supports showered on the banking sector to maintain bank profits, $750 billion in liquidity supports, which has led to, so far in the pandemic and we will have the latest figures in the next few weeks, over $40 billion in profits.

This flies in the face of every other crisis we have come through, where there has been a sense that we are all in this together and that the ultrarich have to pay their fair share. Notably, in the Second World War, an excess profits tax ensured that we had the wherewithal to fight Nazism and fascism and to rebuild, most vigorously, our economy, putting in place record investments in health care, education, housing and transportation in the postwar period. Sadly, that is not the case through this pandemic with the current government, which has allowed the ultrarich to benefit, to profit and to profiteer in an unprecedented way and refuses even to ask them to pay their fair share of taxes.

There is another country in this tale of two countries, and that is regular Canadians who have been struggling through this pandemic. We have seen Canadians losing their jobs. We have seen Canadians who have invested in their family-owned community businesses for years having to take that sad step of closing the door and turning the key for the very last time. We have seen students struggling to pay for their student loan during the course of this pandemic, as if paying back a Canada student loan should be their priority, rather than putting food on the table or keeping a roof over their heads. We have seen people with disabilities who have struggled and, through this entire pandemic, in about a third of cases with people with disabilities, they have received a $600 one-time stipend.

I contrast that with the land of the billionaires and the banks, with $750 billion in liquidity supports, $78 billion in increased wealth and $42 billion in profits. Throughout this pandemic, we have seen our inequalities exacerbated. We have seen more and more that difference between the ultrawealthy and all the privilege they get from the government, and the struggles that regular Canadian families are having to go through.

I must shout out to our frontline workers, the health care workers and the emergency responders, all of whom have been struggling with all of the financial challenges of this pandemic, often with no supports at all, and at the same time are showing, with great courage, their ability to continue to fight and contribute, fight for people's lives and support Canadians in the health care system, as first responders or as frontline workers. This is the contrast—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 5th, 2021 / 5:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member will have 15 minutes and 10 seconds left to raise this matter before the House the next time the bill is brought forward.

It being 5:55 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

The House resumed from May 5 consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:15 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

When the House last took up debate on this motion, the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby had 15 minutes remaining in his time for his remarks, and then of course the usual 10 minutes for questions and comments. We will go to him now.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:15 a.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, I say again in appreciation this morning that I am speaking from the traditional territory of the QayQayt First Nation and the Coast Salish Peoples.

Yesterday, I mentioned that this pandemic had been a tale of two countries: one is a country where billionaires have seen their wealth increase by $78 billion and where banks received $750 billion in liquidity supports, and the other is a country where people are struggling.

That is the fundamental issue we have to think about as we implement the budget through the passage of Bill C‑30.

I spoke yesterday about the impacts of this pandemic. I spoke of businesses closing their doors forever. These are small community businesses, family-run businesses and community businesses that struggled to maintain themselves during the pandemic. I spoke about the front-line workers, health care workers and first responders, all of whom have shown incredible tenacity and courage while going about their jobs of making sure as many lives are preserved as possible through this pandemic. We mourn the 24,000 Canadians who have died so far in this pandemic.

I also spoke yesterday, and want to engage today, on what has happened to the vast majority of Canadians through this pandemic. The government, through Bill C-30, is basically doing a victory lap. It is saying, even as this third wave crashes upon our shores, that we need to scale back on supports that are given to Canadians.

This contrasts vividly with the remarkable speed with which the government stepped in, within four days of the pandemic hitting, and provided the banking sector with $750 billion in liquidity supports. The government's first priority, coming through the pandemic, was to make sure that bank profits were maintained. That is a source of shame that should last for the entire government mandate.

However, to the credit of Canadian democracy, in a minority Parliament the NDP caucus was able to shift the government's priority from banks and billionaires to putting in place programs that would make a difference for people. These included the emergency response benefit, support for students, support for seniors and support for people with disabilities, which I will come back to because it is full of holes and simply inadequate to meet their needs, as are many of the programs that we forced the government to put into place. We also forced the government to ensure sick leave and put in place a wage subsidy to maintain jobs and maintain businesses. We also fought and pushed for rent relief for small businesses.

All of those things came as a result of NDP pressure. In a minority Parliament, thankfully because of the strength of Canadian democracy, we were able to bring that about. The reality is that there are two countries: one of banks and billionaires, and another of everyone else, where we know that the majority of Canadians are within $200 of insolvency in any given month and we continue to see Canadians struggling to make ends meet, to put food on the table and keep roofs over their heads. The growing number of homeless people across our country is a testament to the impact of the pandemic and the inadequacy of the government response.

What does Bill C-30 do? As I mentioned earlier, it basically does a victory lap on all of those supports that the NDP forced the government to put in place. Regarding the response benefit, we see a dramatic cut in July. That is within a few weeks. As this third wave crashes on our shores, we see the government moving to dramatically slash emergency supports. We see that the wage subsidy and rent relief are all going to be phased out over the course of the summer, starting within a few weeks' time, at the very worst time in the pandemic.

We spoke last night about the crisis in Alberta, which is now the worst-hit jurisdiction in all of North America. At this critical time, the government says its job is done, its mission is accomplished and it is going to start withdrawing those supports.

We add to this the impact of government policies, for example CRA going after Canadians who were victims of fraud. We have seen over the past few years numerous cases, including with Desjardins, in which private information was leaked out, and fraudsters used it to apply for CERB in people's names. CRA is demanding repayment from people who never received payments in the first place.

Members will recall that last June the government wanted to go even further. It wanted to put people in jail if somebody else used their private information and defrauded the public. Fraud is a serious issue. The government should have put in place systems to prevent that, but the government overreach of asking people who were victims to pay back moneys they never received is unbelievable. That is how the government is reacting to ordinary people.

What has it done at this unprecedented time? This is the first crisis in Canadian history where the ultra-rich have not been asked to pay their fair share. Through World War II, Canada put in place an excess profits tax and wealth taxes to ensure that, because we were all in this together, everybody had to pay their fair share. Coming out of World War II, after vanquishing Nazism and fascism, we had the wherewithal to make unprecedented investments that led to the most prosperous period in Canadian history. These were investments in housing, education, health care and transportation.

What has happened this time? What has the current government done through this pandemic? It has basically given a free ride to the ultra-rich. Canadian billionaires, who have received over $78 billion in increased wealth, are not being asked to chip in or pay their taxes. There is no wealth tax, even though the PBO estimates that would bring in $10 billion a year. There is no pandemic profits tax, even though the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates it would create $8 billion. That would be enough to eliminate homelessness in our country and ensure the right to housing, a roof over every single Canadian's head, yet the government refuses to do any of that.

The government did put a symbolic luxury tax in place, which is less than 1¢ for every dollar the PBO believes would be raised for the public good if a wealth tax were put into place. Curiously, that is one little symbolic gesture that the Liberals love to wave. They put a tax on yachts, so that means they are taking care of massive inequality, but it is not even in Bill C-30. What we actually see is a shell game. It is smoke and mirrors, with a tiny symbolic luxury tax of less than 1¢ for every dollar that a wealth tax would bring in, and that is not even on the government's radar screen.

It made the commitment and the promise, but as we have seen with so many other promises by the Liberal government, it is simply not worth the paper it is printed on. To reference previous broken promises, we just need to point to public universal pharmacare. Canadians have been waiting on its repeated promises for over 25 years. Regarding child care, we are told this time that the Liberals really mean it, but there are nearly 30 years of broken promises. Regarding boil-water advisories, there is over a decade of broken promises. The government says it really wants to tackle inequality. That is very rich, given that it has not done that either in the budget or in the budget implementation act.

The proposed act includes some curious and somewhat bizarre measures. For example, the budget implementation act acknowledges the increasing poverty of seniors, but says that seniors are only in this crucial poverty over the age of 75. Seniors from 65 to 74 would not get an OAS top-up, but seniors over 75 would. Poverty impacts all seniors, and for the government to discriminate is unacceptable. Also, the government acknowledges that students are having a tough time throughout this pandemic and would waive loan interest payments, but it is still forcing students to pay the principle. Students have to pay their loans back despite having to struggle through the pandemic.

I mentioned earlier the issues for people with disabilities who have struggled unbelievably throughout this pandemic. The NDP fought, not once or twice, but half a dozen times to finally get a one-time payment of $600 for a third of people with disabilities. Of all the fights that I mentioned at the beginning of my speech, it is the one for people with disabilities that the government resisted the most. Contrast this with the $750 billion given to the Bay Street banks in the blink of an eye. In four days, the government weighed in to maintain bank profits. However, of people with disabilities, who are struggling through this pandemic, who are half of the people who line up at food banks every week and who are many of the homeless in this country, one-third were given a one-time $600 payment. What does Bill C-30 reserve for them? The government has decided that it will do a three-year consultation to figure out whether people with disabilities really have any needs to be met. These people are being asked to wait three years, but it took four days for the government to weigh in with a $750 billion liquidity support bailout package. It is unbelievable, unacceptable and irresponsible.

Members might ask if there are any elements in the budget implementation act that I support. This government, which is so tired and so prone to spinning and acting rather than actually doing what comes with being the government, was struggling for inspiration. I gather somebody in the Prime Minister's Office discovered that they could be inspired by the 2015 NDP election platform. Tom Mulcair went to the public with a commitment for universal child care and a commitment to raise the federal minimum wage. Members will recall that the Prime Minister and Liberals at the time mocked the NDP for bringing these things forward. Well, that is the only thing that has inspired this government now. After six years of failure, the Liberals discovered that maybe the NDP election platform for 2015 was good and copied some of its elements. Now, in good faith, we say to the government let us get going on a minimum wage and let us get going on child care. We are here to make sure these things happen. We do not want this to be yet another empty Liberal platitude and another empty Liberal broken promise. We want to work with this government to make those things realities and not just other commitments or promises that it breaks for a quarter of a century, which has been the history of Liberal governments.

My final point is this. We do not see any real response to the crisis in housing affordability. It was Liberals who ended the national housing program, and they have yet to respond in any meaningful way. We also see the tragic, broken commitment to indigenous peoples and dozens of indigenous communities who do not have safe drinking water, and this government is now putting off any commitment to end the dangerous situation of boil-water advisories for another half decade. What message does that send to indigenous people, and what message does that send to indigenous children?

Bill C-30 has elements showing that the Liberals were able to copy the NDP platform from 2015. They should be inspired more from what the NDP is putting forward today, resolve these issues on behalf of Canadians and end the appalling levels of inequality that we are seeing in this country.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy listening to the hon. member. Often, budgets do not have a lot for NGOs and charitable organizations. As I have done a lot of work in that area, I am very pleased that there are a number of items for them in this budget, which I hope the member supports. They include the community services recovery fund of $400 million; the Canada community revitalization fund of $400 million; the $220-million social finance fund, which is a very creative way of funding socially progressive businesses; and a second tranche for the investment readiness program because the first $50 million ran out. We are also looking at the inventive idea of government social impact bonds and making NGOs and charities eligible for the SBF.

I was very pleased that those were in the budget, and I hope the member was as well.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, I like my colleague very much and I know that he is well meaning. However, we have been speaking about the tens of billions of dollars that the government refuses to collect. Every year, $25 billion goes to overseas tax havens. That means that over the course of the last five years, the government has refused to collect $125 billion from overseas tax havens. A pandemic profits tax would mean $8 billion. Issuing a wealth tax would mean $10 billion a year, each and every year.

The member talks about a few million here or a few million there for the charitable sector, but we should contrast that with what Canadians are living through: People with disabilities are struggling to make ends meet; there is growing a number of homeless people in this country; and 55% of Canadians are $200 away from insolvency. Despite this, we have no public universal pharmacare, no right to housing and a vague commitment on child care that the government has not followed through with yet. All of these things are needed, and there are billions of dollars that the government is refusing to collect from the ultrarich in this country.

Am I happy that a few million dollars have been given to the charitable sector? I am not unhappy about that, but it does not meet the needs of Canadians. It does not mean that an indigenous child has—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to speak to the member's comments regarding day care. Day care is largely under provincial jurisdiction, and the Liberals have promised it in every federal election up until 2006. Unfortunately, the federal government is running most of its expenses now with structural deficits that are mostly on the credit card.

Given these facts, would the member not agree that it would be easier to go to his provincial government, which is NDP in British Columbia, to work toward a day care system that is modelled after the system in Quebec or in any other province? They could use that as a basis for getting started, rather than using a one-size-fits-all “Ottawa knows best” day care solution that will see little to no flexibility for shift workers or students, and will not have the ability to reach people to a large extent in rural communities.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, first off, the member is citing an area where the Conservatives are very contradictory. The Conservatives say they support our public health care system, which is also in provincial jurisdiction, and universal health care, resulting from the work of Tommy Douglas and the NDP, is something that all Canadians accept. There is massive support across the country; it is our proudest institution. Putting into place universal access to child care and early childhood education has the same fundamental benefits. Yes, it has to be negotiated with the provinces. There needs to be standards and the funding needs to come from the federal government.

That brings me to his second point about structural deficits. The Conservatives, over their decade, left $250 billion in overseas tax havens. The Liberals have done, in their half-decade or more, about half of that. We therefore see in both parties a refusal to make the ultrarich and profitable corporations pay their fair share. If we have deficits in this country, it is because we have had poor financial managers, whether they were Conservative or Liberal.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:40 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his speech.

I was pleased to hear him talk about our two counties because that is what the Bloc Québécois has been saying for a long time now, since our party was created.

That being said, I was surprised to hear him describe the post-World War I and post-World War II experience in a positive light. Ottawa took that opportunity to create taxes and resume taxation, which was supposed to be left to the provinces. That seems similar to what we are experiencing right now and it shows Ottawa's tendency to take over more and more powers every time there is a crisis. The federal government is launching a gluttonous operation to centralize power, just as we saw following the Patriotes' rebellion and the 1980 and 1995 referendums.

In the budget, the federal government infringes on the provinces' jurisdictions and is making funding cuts so that it does not have to increase health transfers. That means that the provincial governments' jurisdictions are getting smaller and smaller, and there provinces are now being reduced to mere administrators. That problem could have been remedied had the House adopted the Bloc Québécois's amendment to the amendment, which sought to increase health transfers.

The member voted in favour of our amendment to the amendment, and I thank him for that. Why did most of his colleagues, including his leader, vote against our amendment to the amendment?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:40 a.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, the question is whether the Liberals are willing to go after tax havens and bring in a wealth tax. As everyone knows, the federal government has enormous power. We should be taking money from the ultra rich and the big corporations that are making huge profits, and putting it towards improving people's lives across the country. This needs to be done through negotiations with Quebec and the provinces.

Take the health care system for example. It is thanks to the NDP that we have universal health care in this country. However, it must be funded with—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:40 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I apologize for interrupting the member but we need to move on to another question.

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:40 a.m.
See context

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting that in this budget the Liberals made clear they would not tax the super-rich. We know that a few years ago when allegations were raised about KPMG shell companies and offshore tax fraud and tax havens, the Liberals not only shut down the investigation, but brought in one of the top KPMG people to handle Liberal finances. I guess those who run offshore shell companies for the uber-rich are probably great at handing Liberal finances. There are hundreds of millions of dollars hiding in offshore tax havens while working Canadians follow the rules and pay their fair share every day.

I would ask my hon. colleague about the efforts that are needed to force the Liberal government to reopen the KPMG investigation. We need to start naming the names of people who set up these shell companies and of the uber rich who are hiding their money and our taxes in these offshore havens.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:40 a.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Timmins—James Bay always stands on the side of regular families, whether they are in Timmins—James Bay or across the country.

He pointed out two things. The first is the massive amount of money that the government is ready to ensure can be kept by the ultrarich and profitable corporations. They can take it overseas with impunity. In fact, the Liberals have signed multiple tax treaties with overseas tax havens, which give companies and individuals the ability to take the money offshore. For the second thing, I have good news for the member. The NDP forced a vote at the finance committee, and a study on KPMG and tax havens will be starting this afternoon.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:40 a.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby, if he can, to clarify the NDP position on the study into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls, which recommended the shutting down of man camps. In last night's late debate, we noted that the spread of COVID through Alberta is a crisis. The hot spot is the oil sands region, and there is a continuation of construction at places like Site C and TMX, which I know the hon. member opposes, although I am not sure about his leader.

Can the hon. member clarify what the hon. member for Burnaby South meant when he ducked a question on this last night and did not directly answer the member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith? He was asked whether he would shut down the man camps.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot there for a 30-second question.

No, I did not get a question last night, so the member is unfortunately mistaken. She is also mistaken about TMX. I visited the TMX site. The member for Burnaby South and the NDP caucus have pushed hard on this, as the member knows. That is why we got the initial PBO study, and the revision of the initial study, on TMX and the escalating costs.

The reality is that TMX is not in the national interest. The Liberal government wants to pour more than $18.5 billion into Trans Mountain. We need to invest that money in clean energy and in the just transition. We need to do that as country if we are to really combat climate change.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to virtually participate in today’s debate on the budget implementation act, as this is an important piece of legislation, which I believe we need to pass swiftly in order to deliver much-needed support to my constituents in Scarborough Centre.

Budget 2021 is an important and transformative plan, and Bill C-30 begins the process of putting this vision into action. It is a vision that recognizes where we are today, which is not yet through a pandemic that is still causing real challenges for many. It also recognizes the need to be ready for a post-pandemic Canada and begin laying the foundation for an economic recovery that would ensure no one in our country is left behind.

In Scarborough Centre, we are in the grip of the third wave. Most of our community is a designated COVID hot spot. Residents are eager to be vaccinated, and with more and more vaccines flowing into Canada every week, thanks to the diligent work of the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, vaccination rates are steadily rising. Vaccinations are a team Canada effort, and I am proud of how the federal and provincial governments are working together. I am especially proud of the hard work being done by local health authorities and our frontline health workers.

It is clear to me that there is still the need to support small businesses and individual Canadians through this pandemic. My community is one of small businesses. If one drives along Lawrence Avenue East from Victoria Park to Bellamy, they will not see any national chains. They will see countless family-owned and family-run restaurants, convenience stores and small groceries. These businesses are struggling and they still need our help.

Budget 2021 answers that call. We will extend the Canada emergency wage subsidy and the Canada emergency rent subsidy and lockdown support until September 25, allowing businesses to keep staff on payroll and pay the rent as the pandemic curtails revenues. We will also improve the Canada small business financing program designed for small and medium-sized businesses by expanding loan eligibility, increasing loan maximums and expanding program eligibility.

The budget also continues important support for individuals and families by providing up to 12 additional weeks of Canada recovery benefit support and expanding availability until September 25. We are committing to maintaining flexible access to employment insurance benefits for another year and extending the EI sickness benefit from 15 to 26 weeks.

Since the beginning of this pandemic more than a year ago, our government has been firm in its commitment to all Canadians. We will be there support them for as long as it takes. At the same time, budget 2021 looks ahead to a post-pandemic Canada and to laying the foundation for Canada to build back stronger, with a recovery that all Canadians can be a part of.

This pandemic has not impacted everyone equally. While I have been privileged to be able to work from home, many of my constituents cannot. Those with essential jobs, or jobs that cannot be done remotely, have to keep going into work. They stock our grocery shelves and cook our take-out meals. They sort and deliver our online orders. They expose themselves to greater risk, both in their workplaces and during their commutes. They are lower income and often from racialized communities. COVID has hit these communities harder.

The pandemic has also had a greater impact on women. Last summer, at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, we studied the impact of the pandemic on women. We heard how the pandemic has led to women taking on more caregiving responsibilities within the household, especially in intergenerational households, both for children now doing virtual learning, as well as older parents needing care.

One of the key messages we heard was the importance of access to quality and affordable early learning and child care as part of any post-COVID recovery. As the first wave of the pandemic receded last summer and people began to return to work, we saw that women who had lost their jobs were not returning to work at nearly the same rate men were. One of the reasons is access to child care, and not all families can even afford child care when it is available.

This is not just a social issue; it is also an economic issue. If our economy is going to return to previous levels and grow, we need both men and women to be able to choose to participate in the workforce. A lack of access to child care is a major barrier to labour market access for some Black, indigenous, racialized and newcomer women.

The words of Armine Yalnizyan, an economist and the Atkinson fellow on the future of workers, really resonated with me. She said:

...there will be no recovery without a she-covery and no she-covery without child care. Let me be really clear. If we don't do this, we are actually voting to move towards economic depression—and not a recession but a prolonged contraction of GDP—by policy design.

Our budget’s plan for early learning and child care is not just innovative social policy. It is a necessity for our post-pandemic economic recovery. When women can choose to participate fully in the workforce, it is easier for businesses to access the labour and talent they need to grow their business.

When I was a mother of young children, as my husband and I were just beginning our lives here in Canada, we could not afford quality child care. I had no choice but to stay home and put off entering the workforce and beginning my career in Canada. I cherish the time I got to spend with my boys in their early years, but I want women today to be able to have the choice to make the decision that is best for them. It is their choice, and I support them whatever it is, but I want them to have a choice. This is a policy whose time has come.

We must also recognize the impact this pandemic has had on seniors. My riding is home to many long-term care homes, which I always enjoyed visiting before the pandemic. It has been painful to see how they have suffered over the past year. Budget 2021 proposes to invest $3 billion, working with the provinces to develop national standards for long-term care, and improve the safety and quality of life for seniors in care.

I was recently able to announce over one million dollars in joint federal-provincial funding to help two long-term care homes in my riding to improve their air quality and ventilation systems. This is vitally important funding that will keep seniors safer and healthier, as well as the hard-working staff. I am so glad to see the federal and provincial governments working on this. This is what we owe our seniors, and I hope this co-operation can continue to work to develop national standards.

Since we took office in 2015, 25% fewer seniors are living in poverty. With budget 2021, we are building on that progress by increasing OAS by 10% for seniors age 75 and over, which will help lift even more seniors out of poverty.

We are also providing needed assistance for our youth, who have seen major disruptions to learning during this pandemic. With budget 2021, we are extending the waiver of interest accrual on Canada student loans and Canada apprentice loans until March 31, 2023. We will also double Canada student grants and create new training and work opportunities for young Canadians, so they gain valuable skills and experience in the workforce. Our youth are our future. We must support them and set them up with the tools and support they need to succeed.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to see these important initiatives passed, so our constituents have the support they need to make it through this pandemic and build back stronger than before.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB

Mr. Speaker, I wonder what the hon. member's view is with respect to comments made by former deputy minister of finance David Dodge, of the Chrétien era, who is also the former governor of the Bank of Canada. He has been saying the budget does not focus on growth, is not a reasonably prudent fiscal plan and does not invest in growing Canada's economic policy. Does she agree with the former governor and deputy minister's comments? If she does not, why not?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, budget 2021 aims to finish the fight against COVID-19 and provide much-needed support to businesses and families finding it difficult to make ends meet. We are investing in them, but at the same time we are also laying the foundation for the post-pandemic recovery. We are investing in our seniors, child care and our youth, so we can lay the foundation for the economic recovery post-pandemic.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Mr. Speaker, before the pandemic, Quebec's debt to GDP ratio was 31.2%. Now it is 51.2% and will drop slightly to 49.2%. That is pretty worrisome, especially since that projection leaves little flexibility for the future.

What does my colleague think about the lack of flexibility this budget gives us in case of future crises?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government, which is working with provincial governments to make sure we end this fight against the pandemic. Over the last year, we have continued to work with provinces and territories. We have made sure we provide the support they need to fight this pandemic. That support has ranged from PPE and vaccinations to investing in the safe restart agreement, where billions of dollars have been provided to the provinces to end this fight against the pandemic and lay the foundation for the economic recovery we all need beyond this pandemic. We will continue working with the provinces to make sure we lay the foundation for an economic—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

We will continue with questions and comments.

The hon. member for St. John's East.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Mr. Speaker, during the budget speech, the Liberals announced a symbolic luxury tax with a small tax on the purchase of a yacht costing over $250,000 or a private plane costing more than $100,000, which might gain 1¢ on the dollar of the revenue that would come from a tax of 1% on the wealth of Canadians with over $20 million. They did not even include it in the budget implementation bill we are now debating.

I wonder if the member for Scarborough Centre can tell us what credibility the Liberal government could possibly have on any notion of tax fairness when we have seen billionaires increase their wealth by $78 billion during this pandemic alone.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, we have seen that this pandemic has not affected all Canadians in the same way. Minority communities, racialized communities and indigenous communities have been hit hard. I have seen, in my own riding of Scarborough Centre, that communities with workers in low-paying jobs have been affected, and we have continued to invest in those Canadians.

Since we came into power in 2015, we raised taxes on the top 1% to lower taxes for the middle class. The NDP voted against that. We invested in the Canada child benefit, which has lifted over a million kids out of poverty. We will continue investing into our middle class to make sure we set a pathway for economic recovery.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Halifax Nova Scotia

Liberal

Andy Fillmore LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-30, which would implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021.

At the outset, it bears recognizing that budget 2021 is unlike most budgets tabled in the House throughout Canada’s short but storied history. Much has been written about the length of the budget, and, yes, it is the longest budget in our history. It is also the first federal budget in Canadian history to be tabled by a woman finance minister, a glass ceiling long overdue for shattering, and it does come with over two years past since the previous budget, budget 2019.

Budget 2021 is truly one of a kind, one might say unprecedented, much like these last two years have been, as Canadians persevere through the worst global pandemic health crisis in recent memory. This unique budget responds to these unique times, the serious challenges created and exacerbated by COVID-19. It lays the foundation for a more prosperous future, a more inclusive future, a greener future and a future that we can be proud to pass on to our kids and grandkids, knowing that we seized the moment and emerged from this dark period in our history with a bold vision for a better Canada and the courage to act on it.

While it is prudent for the government to begin charting our path out of this pandemic, that is not to say that it is yet behind us, far from it. In fact, today, here in Nova Scotia, we are under lockdown. Our schools and shops have moved online, and strict gathering restrictions are in effect; this, as the third wave and its more dangerous, more contagious variants are hammering Nova Scotia with its highest daily case rates of COVID-19 since the start of this pandemic. It is a reminder to all of us how quickly things can change, even with leadership that listens to and respects the expert advice of public health officials.

Not long ago, Nova Scotia was the envy of Canada, with low cases and no community transmission. All it took was one thoughtless group of interprovincial travellers and, just like that, COVID-19 began to spread across our province like wildfire.

We are in a race. It is variants versus vaccines.

That is why on the morning of my birthday, as soon as I became eligible, I signed up for the first vaccine I could, the AstraZeneca. Yesterday, I got my first jab at Boyd’s Pharmasave, a new pharmacy in north end Halifax, opened by Greg Richard and celebrated for its inclusive approach to pharmacy, particularly for the LGBTQ2+ people. I thank Greg.

Getting vaccinated and defeating COVID-19 are the first steps to the economic recovery outlined in this budget. The sooner everyone is vaccinated; the sooner life returns to something more like normal, the sooner we are safe, the sooner we can hug our loved ones, the sooner our businesses can open up again and the sooner we can all go back to work.

As our vaccine rollout continues on schedule, putting Canada consistently in the top three of the G20 for vaccines administered by population, budget 2021 would extend our substantial and effective COVID-19 financial aid programs to Canadians and to the businesses at which they work and upon which they rely.

A year ago, when COVID-19 ground Canada to a sudden halt, the impact on our daily lives and our local economies was immediate. Our government sprang into action. From day one, we promised we would be there for Canadians, and that is exactly what we have done.

Here are the numbers to prove it: nine million Canadians received the Canada emergency response benefit, putting food on the table for out-of-work families; $2 billion for businesses and non-profits through the emergency rent subsidy; 4.4 million Canadian jobs protected through the emergency wage subsidy; and $8 out of every $10 in financial aid to Canadians through this pandemic has come via our federal government.

We promised we would be there for Canadians for as long as it takes, and this budget keeps that promise.

First, the budget will extend flexible access to EI benefits for one more year until the fall of 2022. These changes have made it easier for Canadians to qualify for higher benefits sooner. Next, we will be extending the Canada recovery benefit until September 25 to cover Canadians who do not qualify EI, like self-employed and gig workers. The budget also includes new measures for low-income workers, a significant $8.9-billion investment to expand the Canada workers benefit for one million Canadians, lifting one hundred thousand people out of poverty. Other parties have talked about it, but we are the ones doing it. This budget will introduce a $15-an-hour federal minimal wage.

For businesses being asked to lockdown to help stop the spread, like those in my riding today, the budget will extend the Canada emergency rent subsidy to the end of September. For businesses that have seen a drop in revenue because of COVID-19, the budget will also extend the Canada emergency wage subsidy to the end of September. We are going further, introducing a brand new program we are calling the Canada hiring benefit. For businesses experiencing a decline in revenues, this subsidy will make it easier for businesses to hire back laid-off workers or to bring on new ones.

All told, these investments are our plan to support Canadians in regaining the one million jobs lost to the pandemic. We have done it before, and we will do it again.

The pandemic has exposed an urgent need for national action on child care. From the day our finance minister assumed that office, she has made it clear that fighting the so-called “she-cession” is a priority of our feminist government. We cannot allow the legacy of this pandemic to be the scaling back of all the hard-fought advances that women have made in workforce.

That is why budget 2021 makes a generational investment to build a Canada-wide early learning and child care system. Our plan aims to slash fees for parents with children in regulated child care by half on average by 2022, with the goal of reaching $10 per day child care on average by 2026. This is a necessary investment, one that is a long time coming. While other parties have talked about doing it, we are the ones actually doing it, putting $30 billion on the table to finally get this done for Canadian families.

I come to the House from a long career in city planning in the public, private and academic sectors, including in my hometown of Halifax, the riding I am now honoured to represent as a member of Parliament. That career showed me first-hand and up close how vitally important housing was to a community. Without access to housing that is safe, secure, dignified and at a price people can afford, every other goal a person has in life becomes secondary.

I made the jump into politics in 2015, and became the first city planner elected to this place, because I believed the federal government needed to do more to support the communities Canadians called home, to help undo the decade of neglect by the previous government when it came to community investment, including in affordable housing.

We spared no time getting to work, and today Canadians have a federal government that is finally making the necessary investments in housing. The national housing strategy, released in 2017, has already delivered $25 billion in housing projects, and remains on track to reach $70 billion by 2027-28.

At home in Halifax, as our population rapidly grows, so does the need for more affordable housing. I recently announced the new Canada-Nova Scotia targeted housing benefit, which provides $200 a month to qualifying, low-income, vulnerable individuals to help pay for housing.

To help increase housing supply, our federal government has made major investments in Halifax so far this year, including $8.6 million under the rapid housing initiative to create 52 units in Halifax via three projects in partnership with the Mi’kmaw Native Friendship Centre, the North End Community Health Centre and Adsum for Women and Children.

Because of the success of the rapid housing initiative which, as its title suggests, invests in projects that can create affordable housing quickly, budget 2021 proposes a $1.5 billion top-up to this program. This funding will create up to 4,500 permanent, affordable homes on top of the 4,700 we already have built under this initiative, all within 12 months.

This budget recognizes that building an equitable Canada requires targeted investments that support marginalized communities. To continue down the path of reconciliation, this budget invests $18 billion in indigenous communities, including another $6 billion for infrastructure and $2.2 billion to end the tragedy of missing and murdered indigenous women and girls once and for all.

To fight systemic racism and empower under-represented communities, the budget makes a number of substantial investments, including $200 million toward the Black-led philanthropic endowment fund to support Black-led charities and organizations serving youth; new funding to combat hate and racism during COVID-19, particularly against Asian Canadians; and enhancing the communities at risk security infrastructure program to protect communities at risk of hate-motivated crimes.

For our seniors, we are building on our progress made; 25% fewer seniors live in poverty than when we took office in 2015. Budget 2021 goes even further by increasing old age security by 10% for seniors aged 75 and older. Today, our investments in senior benefits are over double our expenditure in the Canada child benefit. By 2026, our investments in seniors will surpass the total expenditure of the Canada health transfer and equalization payments combined.

This is a historic budget. Certainly, its size makes it difficult to speak to all the important investments it proposes. In short, this is the budget that will lead Canada out of the pandemic, chart our economic recovery and build a brighter tomorrow. I hope all members in the House will join me in voting in favour.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:10 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, one thing the parliamentary secretary missed was the investments in growth.

Both Robert Asselin, the former adviser to Mr. Morneau, the previous finance minister, and David Dodge said that the budget had no answers for investment and growth.

I am worried about the brain drain in Oshawa. We have Ontario Tech, and to get out of this pandemic, we need to make investments in the technological jobs of the future. A study by Brock University basically said that in 2018, 65% of engineers, technological engineers, software engineers, left the country as soon as they graduated.

Could the parliamentary secretary point out where the investments in growth are in this budget to keep our youngest and brightest in our country?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:10 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, of course, our youth are so terribly important, and we are focused on them through this pandemic. Education is the smartest investment that anyone can make, and our government is absolutely committed to make life more affordable for students. We have made a number of investments in students, including the way student loans are orchestrated. The budget implementation act would also extend the waiver of interest on student loans.

Beyond that, and more to the member's question, this budget has investments in community infrastructure and the infrastructure of science and innovation. It has investments of $250 million in the aerospace technology and $750 million for a job fund.

The budget is absolutely focused on growth and emergence from this pandemic in a way that is equitable and green for all Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:10 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for his speech. He concluded his speech by talking about investments for seniors. I really felt as though he was reaching out to me, ready for my question.

Does his government think that only seniors who are 75 and over experience financial insecurity?

Has the government done the math to see how much it would cost to extend that to everyone aged 65 and over, which should be the case?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:10 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, seniors are front of mind for this government. In fact, as my hon. colleague knows, this government created a ministry for seniors to specifically look after the health and fortune of them.

A number of the investments we have made in seniors over the past several years have dramatically increased the amount of the federal budget that goes to seniors. In fact, by 2026-27, as much as $81 billion of the federal budget will be directed toward seniors. As I said in my speech, that is more than the combined health transfer and equalization payments. Today, in fact, our investment in seniors is greater than that of the Canada child benefit.

We will continue to invest in seniors in a way that rewards them and thanks them appropriately for creating the world we live in today.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:10 a.m.
See context

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Mr. Speaker, we know this budget will do nothing to end fossil fuel subsidies. We see the federal government giving billions of dollars every year to companies like Royal Dutch Shell and Imperial Oil.

We know that Canada's richest Canadians increased their wealth by $78 billion this year, yet there is no meaningful action on a wealth tax.

I think my hon. colleague and the Liberals will vote against the NDP motion to provide dental care to six and a half million Canadians who do not have any coverage today, which would cost $1.5 billion per year as estimated by the parliamentary budget officer. Why does the member not support allocating $1.5 billion so Canadians can have access to this basic health need, when there are tens of billions of dollars of available funds that his government refuses to tax?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his dedication to Canadians.

Clearly, especially in the context of the pandemic, there is a long list of things that we would all love to do right away. We have had to make some tough decisions on what gets funded and still maintain what has just be reaffirmed as Canada's AAA bond rating. Our ability to make those investments does come through some changes, as the member mentioned, in tax fairness.

I want to take this opportunity to touch on the fact that fighting tax evaders in Canada and abroad is a priority for this government. Since 2015, we have invested over $1 billion in the CRA's ability to crack down on complex tax schemes, in increased collaboration with international partners and in ultimately bringing offenders to justice. Changes like that will increase the coffers and allow us to check off more of those things on that long list of very meritorious programs that we need to initiate for Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to sit in this virtual Parliament and address the 2021 budget, a budget which unfortunately saw this pandemic as an opportunity to reimagine the economy, rather than something from which Canadians desperately need to recover. This is obviously, as the Liberals say, an election budget. It is an inflation plan. It is an inflation tax. It is not a recovery plan and it is a huge credit card bill.

If we can contrast, historically in Canada governments used to promote jobs and jobs of the future. Instead, the Liberals have taken this opportunity to promote credit and credit cards. The Prime Minister was even so bold to say he was going to go into debt so Canadians do not have to. Imagine that, we have a Prime Minister who in his private life before politics never did have a job that supported his lifestyle. When the vacations came, it was dad's credit card, along with the ski vacations and the cars. There was always somebody else paying the bill.

This might explain why the Liberals are now practising a certain type of economics. They call it modern monetary theory. In other words, the Liberals have no plan ever to balance the budget. What they are leaving for Canadians and future governments is debt forever. Some people think this is the highest intergenerational theft in the history of Canada. He is leaving $1.4 trillion to future generations, a burden on our kids and grandkids.

The amount is huge. The Prime Minister is printing $3 billion a week to service his agenda. Instead of leaving a better economy to our kids, the Prime Minister, with his action, is destroying their opportunities for a better future.

Here in Oshawa, we have a huge investment in the jobs of the future. We are a university town. Ontario Tech has made huge investments in educating the kids of the future for the jobs of the future, which will help us get out of this pandemic.

Sadly, in 2018, Brock University did a study with the University of Toronto and the Munk School of Global Affairs. It was entitled “Reversing the Brain Drain: Where is Canadian STEM Talent Going?” This was in 2018, before the pandemic. It found that 65% of Canadian software engineers are leaving Canada right after they get their education here, plus 30% of other STEM students are leaving Canada. In other words, Canada is making investments to educate kids for the jobs of the future, but because of the government's lack of opportunities for kids to stay in this country, they unfortunately are leaving and they are leaving in accelerated numbers.

The next phase of global growth and recovery is going to be centred on technology. As the Liberals praise themselves that they are building back better, I would say that they are building back broken. This budget, as I just asked the parliamentary secretary, has no incentive for young people to stay.

As other countries promote growth, Canada stalls with this budget. My colleagues have spoken about Robert Asselin and David Dodge saying that this budget has no answer for investment in growth. We see the United States, and also China, India, Italy, the United Kingdom and Japan, that are all going to be winning the future technological race with our own Canadian students. Our youth is our most important investment and most important resource. We need to do things to keep them in this country.

I have been working with youth locally and one of the things that they told me is mental health issues are huge and very important in this global pandemic. The provinces asked the Prime Minister for a very simple investment. It was $4 billion and during this horrible pandemic, what did he say to the provinces? He said to wait for it, they will do it later.

In my member's statement last week, I actually addressed the need for all Canadians, now more than ever, to have improved access to mental health.

There are organizations in Oshawa. If members can see behind me, the Simcoe Street United Church houses The Back Door Mission. There is also an organization called The Refuge that really focuses on street youth and youth with mental health issues. However, they cannot do it alone. They need the support of the federal government.

My colleague from Cariboo—Prince George has been pushing a 988 suicide crisis line in order to help Canadian—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member. I cannot recall if at the front end of his remarks he indicated his intention to share his time. I wonder if the hon. member could indicate so to the Chair.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska.

To finish off my thought on the mental health issue, it matters. The pandemic has had a horrible effect with these lockdowns. Fortunately, the Conservative leader has identified the importance of improving access to mental health in our recovery plan.

Some of my colleagues have quite rightly said that this budget fails to provide security for all seniors. I got a call from Maurice, a senior in my community, who does not fit in the Liberal agenda of supporting a two-tiered senior demographic. My mom, who is 93, is very pleased, but, unfortunately, this budget leaves many seniors behind. What we are seeing in this budget is the politics of division practised by the Liberal government that is putting one group of seniors against another. This goes against everything that Canadians have stood for in the past as far as fairness to all Canadians when we put budgets forward.

When we talk about youth in Canada and how to get them to want to stay in our country, raise their families and have a career here, we have to look at their housing opportunities. It has been the Canadian dream to own a home, to invest and stay in this country, but this budget has absolutely nothing to help young people own a home who want to. It addresses social housing, but if we listen to students and young people, they do not want social housing. They want the opportunity to live the Canadian dream. Again, unfortunately, in this budget, we are not seeing that.

I can say there is one thing about housing in the budget that is a good idea, which is creating the beneficial ownership registry. I am supportive of that. I think it is a good idea, but the 1% on foreign owners is just going to be the cost of doing business. The government has to look at this again because we have to make sure there is a path for home ownership for young people.

This budget completely omits any emergency support for new businesses. I have talked about some of the small businesses, such as Julie and Victor at the Bulldog Pub & Grill in south Oshawa by the 401. They bought their business just before the pandemic occurred. Conservatives have been asking the government to be more flexible in its programs and we support these programs for businesses and individuals, but there is nothing in the budget for these businesses.

Then there are veterans organizations. I am wearing my 420 Wing tie today. We had the president attend a Veterans Affairs committee and report on what we could do to help veterans associations. Brian Wilkins and Mike Gimblett from Oshawa gave their input, but nothing is reflected in this budget.

We know how important it has been to support the government in its efforts to help Canadians through the most significant health and economic crisis in our lifetime. Conservatives have continuously supported these efforts and will be supportive for the number of investments and programs the budget includes for us to make it through this pandemic, but, unfortunately, there is very little to get excited about in the long term. It is just endless debt and deficits. What we desperately needed was a real recovery plan that would secure the future of all Canadians, get folks back to work and help small businesses recover. Conservatives have that plan. We have done it before and we can do it again.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Liberal

Sean Fraser LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, the member spent a significant portion of his time decrying what he suggests is a lack of support for young Canadians. I find that hard to believe, given that there is more than $5.7 billion in dedicated support specifically for young people in this budget, which constitutes the largest dedicated youth support package globally of any developed economy and is likely the largest dedicated youth support package in the history of any budget in Canada. The measures include reinvigorating the Canada student loan program, making it more affordable to pay those debts back; delaying the time by which students have to pay them back until they get their feet under them; reducing the cost of education through the Canada students grants program; and literally several hundred thousand job placements for young people so they can help kick-start the economic rebound on the back end of this pandemic.

My question to the hon. member is: did he simply write that speech without reading the budget at all?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary. He is very good at the Liberal rhetoric and talking points, but he was not listening to my speech and, of course, I looked at the budget.

What I did say is that there is no investment for growth in this budget. It is not just me saying that, it is Robert Asselin, who actually was the adviser to Bill Morneau who had to leave this government because it was out of control. David Dodge said exactly the same thing.

If the member would like, I will send him a copy of “Reversing the Brain Drain: Where is Canadian STEM Talent Going?” We are actually good at educating kids in this country, but what I said to the parliamentary secretary and my colleagues is that they are leaving, and they are leaving at an accelerated rate. In my community, we need these students to stay. Sixty-five percent of software engineers are leaving. We need to have a plan to keep them here and keep our youth in Canada. That is what I was talking about, and we need it in the budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on the question that was asked by my colleague.

The member spoke about supports for young people in his intervention. He spoke about the brain drain, about losing young people as they are leaving our country, and how desperate that situation is.

I have to say that, in Alberta, cuts to our post-secondary institutions have been devastating, and there are more young people leaving the cities of Calgary and Edmonton than anywhere else in the country. I completely agree with the member that this is a dire situation.

The NDP is proposing a plan where we would actually relieve some of that student debt, which makes it very hard for students to stay in this country, and it makes it very hard for them to start their life and contribute to our economy. We are looking at up to $20,000 of student debt forgiveness.

I am just wondering if the member would support the idea of reducing federal student or if he would rather that the federal government continue to make profits on the backs of students.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that relieving the debt of students does not stop them from leaving.

My comment and my point in my speech is that, since this government has come to office, it has shut down numerous industries. The member is from the west and knows that the oil and gas sector is heavily technologically advanced.

However, the government is almost incentivizing Canadians to get educated here, but then they are leaving. My concern is that they are our brightest and our youngest, and we need them to come out of this pandemic but also for our country in the future. This budget does nothing to address that in order to incentivize them to stay in our country, and it is a crisis where this Liberal government, again, has dropped the ball.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, our colleague from Halifax indicated that he thought this was an unprecedented budget that was going to spring into action. However, my analogy is that maybe the government started with a broken spring.

I would ask my colleague to analyze the budget, as he started to in his speech. We have supported many of the programs that have gotten Canadians this far, with the wage subsidy and rental extensions, but this is a huge spending budget, as my colleague has pointed out. About half of it may be there to help us get out of COVID, but the other half is a lot of promises that have been broken before and have had to be repeated in this budget. I wonder if my colleague could expand on that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is correct when he mentions the word “unprecedented”. There is unprecedented spending and incompetence with respect to where the money is going.

We are supportive of the programs that are supporting Canadians and businesses to get back to work. However, as I was trying emphasize, unfortunately what the Liberals do for any problem is throw more money at it. We need legislative changes. We need ideas coming from the government.

We in the Conservative Party have ideas for a recovery plan. It would have been great if the Liberal government had used the pandemic budget as an opportunity to give hope to Canadians and let them know that we are working together for them. However, they have ignored the desires of Canadians in this budget, and it is unprecedented and unfortunate.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, today, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak to the Liberal budget implementation bill.

As members know, this budget has been criticized by many analysts. It raised many expectations about the management of the pandemic and vaccine procurement. I will not get into that because I think everything has been said about the government's dismal failure, which has caused this third wave since the Liberal government mismanaged the contracts it signed with the companies that are providing us with vaccines.

There were two other major issues: reopening the economy and proper management of public finances, debt and deficits. I will focus my speech on those two aspects. I have 10 minutes, but we could talk for hours about all the very troubling things in this budget.

Others before me covered this so I will not talk about the fact that the government managed to do what no one ever thought possible: create a new class of seniors. Deciding to inject money to help seniors was wishful thinking, in other words the government had good intentions, but it decided to give money only to seniors 75 and up instead of giving it to those 65 and up. Everyone fell off their chair when they heard that. It was a clumsy measure and I hope the government will rectify the situation as soon as possible. Every day, we are getting calls at our constituency offices about that announcement.

The second important element, and I will only talk about this very briefly, is the Liberal obsession with interfering in provincial jurisdictions and desire to grab powers they do not have. We need only think of their interference in health and day care, in particular the fact that they are leading people to believe they are going to establish a day care program to reopen the economy. I can tell you that in Quebec it took more than five years to create and build day cares and to train staff. They are telling us that they want to do this. First, they are interfering in a provincial matter; second, they are leading people to believe that this will help reopen the economy. It will take at least five years for this measure to begin to come to fruition. I can tell you that, in Quebec, not every family has access to a day care space.

I will come back to the main points of my message: deficits, debt and the reopening of our economy.

In 2003, those were the issues that motivated me to get into provincial politics. I am older now, I have a lot of grey hair, but, back then as a young father I was concerned about debt and the consequences it can have. The Liberals never talk about tax increases that make life increasingly expensive. Without even asking them, the government takes more money out of taxpayers' pockets to pay for all the goodies they are handing out. It is crazy.

One of the figures that is striking is when you add up the deficits and debt created by the Liberal government under this Prime Minister since it came to power, since 2015. In the last six years alone, the Liberals have put us $162 billion in debt, and this is not just because of the pandemic. Keep in mind that in 2015, when Stephen Harper's Conservatives left, the deficit had been eliminated. The budget had also been balanced following the global stock market crisis. The Liberal government managed to run deficits during good economic years. These deficits have taken away our ability to deal with this pandemic without creating another gap for future generations and for today's workers who will pay more taxes. That is what will happen when interest rates go up. That will be the reality, whether the Prime Minister likes it or not. Any newly minted economist would be able to explain these basic facts to him.

What is striking is that, in six years, the Prime Minister has borrowed and added to the debt more than any prime minister in Canada since 1867. Since 1867, every Conservative and Liberal government combined borrowed a total of $630 billion to stimulate the economy and support Canadians. In six years, the government has managed to put us further into debt.

This all has consequences not only for our economy, but also for our ability to deal with a potential new crisis. The further we go into debt, the less freedom we have to tackle any new challenges and support Canadians. This government's investments and expenditures are not justified. People will say that I am being partisan because I am a Conservative, but that is not it.

Allow me to talk about the Parliamentary Budget Officer, an impartial officer of Parliament. Just yesterday he presented a report explaining that the government had announced $101.4 billion in new expenditures over the next three years as part of its economic recovery plan. He said that $69 billion of that $101.4 billion is the figure actually considered stimulus spending.

He then raised a red flag about the government's data. Much like the Prime Minister, the government acts as though money grows on trees, that money can be printed or that it is no big deal and the budget will balance itself. Those are the words of the Prime Minister himself. The government is telling people that we could see a 2% increase in economic growth and that this would create 334,000 new jobs in Canada. The Parliamentary Budget Officer refuted that and said that a more realistic economic growth would be 1% next year. That would create 74,000 new jobs, not 334,000.

This government talks a lot and leads people on. The Prime Minister tries to be positive, figuring that people will believe him because he is handsome, nice and well-spoken. He thinks that that should be enough. However, the numbers speak for themselves and cannot be ignored, because taxpayers will be directly affected by the inevitable tax hikes. That is the reality.

How do the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance explain this?

They say we can afford to borrow for Canadians because interest rates are low. However, if that is the case, why not just tell Canadians to go buy a house that is twice as expensive because interest rates are low? No problem, since interest rates are low. Why not get a new car? Why should Canadians settle for a small family sedan when they could buy a Ferrari? No problem, because interest rates are low; these things will pay for themselves.

If this is good for the government, why would it not be good for the taxpayers?

It is for the simple reason that fathers and mothers, workers and youth who believe in a better future know that this is hard-earned money. They know this because when they take the time to look at their pay slips, they see the line showing just how much money they are sending to the government. They also remember the government expense scandal. I do not want to harp on the WE Charity scandal, with the billion dollars sent to friends who had helped the Prime Minister's family, but those are the facts.

The government has to lead by example, and it starts at the top. This government, with its free-spending Prime Minister, is sending the wrong message. It is saying that work is not important, that people should not bother saving, that money grows on trees and that, unfortunately, when calls for help come in, we might not be able to answer them because the country is up to its eyeballs in debt. The government will just say it is time to print more money, and that will drive up inflation.

In conclusion, I think this is a bad budget. It does not set the stage for good economic recovery, and it will mortgage our children's and grandchildren's future. I cannot accept that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, all day the Conservatives have been critical of the amount of spending in this budget, the budget implementation act, and what we are providing for Canadians. However, I have yet to hear a Conservative talk about what they would remove from this budget in order to bring spending down. That is the basic way governments budget. If they think they are budgeting too much, which the Conservatives believe, they start to look for areas where they can decrease. Instead, as we heard from the previous speaker, all we are hearing about is where funding is missing.

Can the member tell us where he would start cutting in the budget and who he would take the money from? Would he take it from seniors? Would he take it from younger people? Would he take it from the supports for businesses? I would like him to explain where he would remove money.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, nobody ever heard a Liberal spare a thought for future generations. Nobody ever heard a Liberal, be it the finance minister, the Prime Minister or even my colleague who just asked the question, express any concern about how this growing deficit might affect future generations. Over the past six years, the deficit has been higher than it was under any Canadian prime minister since 1867. The Liberals have never shown that they care about our children and grandchildren even the tiniest bit. It is unbelievable.

If they had the guts, they would table a plan to balance the budget. They would tell people that money does not grow on trees. We would help them figure out the best ways to support Canadians. Every political party has been willing to help the government whenever necessary, especially by identifying problems with their hastily passed measures, which allowed fraudsters to take advantage of the system. The fact is, Canadians are the ones who will end up paying.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Richmond—Arthabaska for his speech. I completely agree with his criticism of federal centralization.

However, I want to ask him a very specific question. In 2009, the Conservatives were in power and they set up the Canadian securities transition office, a Toronto-based single securities commission that served as a pan-Canadian securities regulator.

The current government is taking up that project. At the time, the Conservatives pushed hard for that. What is their position on it now?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, that is a very relevant question. I thank my colleague for it, but I do not have an answer for him. I am not an expert in that area and so I do not want to get into it.

What I would like to say is that there is an obvious difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives. The Liberals are a centralizing government. A Conservative government respects provincial jurisdictions, works in partnership with the provinces and does not criticize provincial premiers from other parties, as the current Prime Minister does, which is causing conflict.

There is no doubt that our leader and a future Conservative government will focus on working with the provinces to find solutions to the country's problems. If those problems fall under provincial jurisdiction, then our government will work with the provinces so that they can take the necessary measures with the resources they need. As we announced, the provinces need to be given more money for health care, with no strings attached, so that they can do their job. They have the expertise to do so.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I noted with interest the part of my colleague's speech when he talked about the concern many workers have when they look at their pay stubs and the very real struggles many are going through.

Part of the budget implementation act sets a federal minimum wage at $15 an hour. This is something I ran on all the way back in 2015, and I can remember the Liberals openly criticizing it then, so it is very interesting to see it in this act six years later.

Does the member support the $15 minimum wage for federal workers? Does he think it is adequate in the year 2021? Does he have any concerns that it would take another six months for it to actually be implemented?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, to be clear, this is for federal employees. It is up to provincial governments to determine the minimum wage in each province.

The idea is to make sure that workers earn a decent wage. To do that, we need to support our small and medium-sized businesses, we need to support the economic recovery, we need to make sure the right conditions are in place so that all workers can earn as much as possible. This will give them a chance to raise a family, right here in Canada, and fulfill their dreams. That is what everyone wants. However, going into debt, as so many people are doing right now, is not the way to go about it.

We Conservatives believe in empowering individuals. That is our ultimate goal. We want to help businesses create good jobs and encourage investment in this country to increase our collective wealth. This will automatically result in the best possible wages for all workers, whether they are unionized or not. I think we should all be focusing on ensuring the best possible wages for all employees.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Kingston and the Islands.

I have been listening with great interest to my colleagues' speeches on Bill C-30, and I am pleased to have a turn to speak to this important legislation.

Much like budget 2021, this bill focuses on finishing the fight against COVID-19, healing the financial, social, emotional and physical wounds caused by the pandemic, and creating more jobs and prosperity for Canadians across the country. The purpose of Bill C‑30 is to help Canada build back better and become a fairer and more equitable country.

We need to rebuild, but not haphazardly. We need to make sure that we address the gaps that the pandemic has exposed and even exacerbated. As we rebuild, we must protect the most vulnerable.

When I mention vulnerable people, I am thinking, for example, of the elderly. The COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating effects on our seniors. Since day one, I have received calls from seniors in my riding of Alfred-Pellan. They were worried about the situation and all the measures that were being implemented to ensure our communities’ safety. They were anxious about not seeing their families and their friends. They were preoccupied about the impacts that the situation would have on their finances.

That is why, building back better also means ensuring that we protect the health and well-being of seniors in our communities. After a life of hard work, they deserve a safe and dignified retirement without financial worries. This question must be asked: What can be done to help them? More and more of them are living longer than before, and many of them rely on their monthly old age security benefits.

It is in that spirit that our government has reduced the age of eligibility for old age security from 67 to 65. We made sure that seniors, including those who are more vulnerable, can live their retirement in dignity. With Bill C-30, we are implementing another of our government’s commitments, which is to increase the amount of benefits for seniors aged 75 and over.

Seniors become more vulnerable with age, especially when it comes to their financial situation. Indeed, Canadians are living longer and longer, and many of them rely on old age security.

That is why Bill C‑30 proposes to amend the Old Age Security Act to increase these monthly payments by 10% for seniors aged 75 or over. By giving an increase to those 75 or older, we are providing targeted support. In practical terms, this would give seniors in this group greater financial security at a time in their lives when they face increased care expenses and a greater risk of running out of savings. The increase will be implemented in July of next year.

In the meantime, to address immediate needs, the 2021 budget also proposes to provide a one‑time payment of $500 in August of this year to old age security pensioners who will be 75 or older in June 2022. The targeted increase to old age security will really improve the lives of people who deserve more support, especially single seniors who are struggling to make ends meet, like Solange, Antoinette and Leonardo, who live in my riding.

This would increase benefits for about 3.3 million seniors across the country. For those receiving the full benefit, it would mean an additional $766 in annual benefits in the first year, which would be indexed to inflation thereafter. I am thinking of Jeannine, who lives in my riding. She lives alone, and this money would help her buy all the food she needs instead of going without meals to pay her rent.

I believe that our society has a duty to do more to support seniors. That was true before the pandemic and will still be true afterward. COVID‑19 has laid bare society's vulnerabilities and inequalities in Canada and around the world.

Seniors have felt this on a financial level. Many have run into economic hardship as they took on extra costs to stay safe. They have also faced social challenges. Many seniors in the Alfred-Pellan community and across the country spent the past year isolated from their family and friends. For far too many of them, COVID‑19 has been tragic. I am thinking particularly of those living in long-term care facilities. They have been the overwhelming casualties of the pandemic in Canada.

In fact, another thing the pandemic exposed is the systemic problems that affect long-term care facilities across the country. The situation in these institutions was such that the Canadian Armed Forces were deployed to lend a hand to the teams on site. My riding was not spared, and I had the opportunity to meet the soldiers deployed to the long-term care centres in Laval. I am grateful for their work.

The pandemic has laid bare a rather dire situation, which is why I am so pleased to see that budget 2021 proposes to provide $3 billion over five years to support the provinces and territories in ensuring standards for long-term care are applied and permanent changes are made when necessary.

I know that many people are worried about this measure, but I want to assure those who are wary that our government will work with the provinces and territories and respect their jurisdiction over health care. We must protect seniors and improve their quality of life, no matter where in the country they live. This is true for long-term care facilities, which is why this investment is so important.

It is also true for seniors who still live at home. That is why budget 2021 proposes to launch the age well at home initiative to help Canadians age in dignity. With this investment, community organizations could provide practical support to low-income and otherwise vulnerable seniors. For example, the program would support initiatives to pair seniors with volunteers who would help them prepare meals, do housekeeping, run errands, do odd jobs around the house or even help them get outside their home.

This kind of support is what Miguel and Jane from my riding need to allow them to stay in their home. Their kids help, but additional support is much needed. This help is particularly useful to elderly people with no children to look after them, like Anne and John.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all Canadians and the economic impacts of the situation are undeniable. However, the consequences have not been the same for everyone. Our government’s recovery plan puts people first, but focuses on the groups that have been most affected by the situation.

Canadians have been combatting COVID‑19 for over a year now. We are all tired, but we cannot give up. Now is the time to finish the fight against COVID‑19, get back on our feet and secure the recovery by protecting the most vulnerable. This is certainly true for seniors, who deserve to live out their retirement in dignity.

I therefore support Bill C‑30 and urge all members to do the same.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:55 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Mr. Speaker, there is one thing that has been very puzzling to me in terms of the government's fiscal approach. As we know, the Minister of Finance, and of course we are very proud to have the first female minister table a budget, is new to this portfolio. We were well into one year of the pandemic when she assumed the role. At that time she had a mandate letter from the Prime Minister. This mandate letter said for her to create no new programs and to create fiscal guardrails, so what we have is a budget that completely defies the mandate letter from the Prime Minister.

Could my colleague explain to me if the Liberal mandate letters to the ministers from the Prime Minister actually mean nothing?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:55 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for her question.

The mandate letter clearly sets out what the minister must do as part of her job. The federal government has always been there for seniors. This instruction was always part of her mandate letter.

Since taking power, we have made improvements for seniors. We reduced the age of eligibility for old age security from 67 to 65. We increased the guaranteed income supplement, and we also exempted those making less than $5,000 from any clawback of the guaranteed income supplement.

Jeannine, a woman in my riding—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 11:55 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Order. The hon. member for Beauport—Limoilou.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / noon
See context

Bloc

Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Mr. Speaker, the member for Alfred-Pellan said that the pandemic has exposed the inequalities that exist. He gave the example of one of his elderly constituents, who is pleased that she can buy all the food she needs.

I have received dozens of calls from seniors in my riding who are forced to rely on food banks. They are outraged that the Liberal government is claiming to help seniors by giving money to food banks. In so doing, the government is admitting that people are unable to feed themselves with the money they have. At the same time, it is creating two classes of seniors by refusing to help those aged 65 to 74.

How can the member be proud of a budget that creates inequality?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / noon
See context

Liberal

Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague across the aisle for her question.

I do not agree at all with her conclusion.

Earlier, I gave the example of Jeannine, a 79-year-old woman in my riding. She was doing well until her husband died and she began receiving only one pension. The increase we are proposing will make a difference in her life, so she can buy all the food she needs instead of skipping meals to pay the rent.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / noon
See context

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Madam Speaker, the people of Eabametoong have now gone over 20 years without access to clean water. We remember when the Prime Minister made the promise that within five years every first nation would have clean water. However, that never happened. The government ignored all the reports saying it had to invest properly, and it would not put in the proper money. We are now told that communities can wait another five years for the Liberal government to start addressing this crisis.

Why is the government continuing to deny first nation families the basic human right in this country to clean water?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / noon
See context

Liberal

Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague across the aisle for his question.

During the pandemic, we were all deeply shocked by the tragedies that occurred in institutions across Canada. The government acted accordingly.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / noon
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to talk about the budget implementation act and what this budget has to offer.

For starters, I will note that, as usual, I am perplexed by the approach the Conservative Party has taken on the budget. When listening this morning to the comments from Conservative members, I heard the member for Brandon—Souris say that the budget is too high, there is too much money in it and we are spending too much. However, in the same speech, he went on to say that we need to spend more money on housing, more money on provincial transfers, more money on funding health in the provinces, more money for small businesses and more money for veterans, without giving a suggestion as to where money needs to be taken.

I asked a question of the member for Richmond—Arthabaska, who spoke just before my colleague. I asked him where he would start to cut funding and where he would remove money in this budget. I also asked him to explain his budgetary process to me. In the response I got from him, he went on about the debt again without actually answering me, and at one point I heard him say that all political parties wanted to help when it was necessary. That perhaps provides the most insight into the Conservative position on this.

In the beginning of the pandemic, when we had unanimous-consent motions to adopt supports for Canadians, the Conservatives knew they had no choice but to support them because public opinion would have turned incredibly negative toward them. They therefore supported help back then, although perhaps they would have preferred that every person fend for themselves at the time, instead of taking the approach that we should work together, collectively as a society, to get through this.

Nonetheless, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska stated, in his response to a question, that all political parties wanted to help when it was necessary. My take from what he said is that, basically, it is not necessary for us, as a collective society through the channel of the government, to support Canadians anymore. At least it is a step in the right direction in understanding where the Conservatives are coming from. They appear to be coming from a position that it was important to help Canadians before but not so much anymore. I understand it now, and it starts to provide some clarity.

I hand it to the NDP—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / noon
See context

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Please don't.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / noon
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

No, Mr. Speaker, I want to hand it to the NDP. I like to pay credit where credit is due, despite the fact that the member for Timmins—James Bay does not want to hear a compliment.

The New Democrats fight for what they believe in. They come here and say to put more money into things and that we have to do dental care and support Canadians in this regard. At least they are consistent in their approach. Their approach has been consistent from the beginning. They supported the supports for Canadians. They pushed them hard, and they are continuing to push even harder for more supports now.

Compare them with the Conservatives, who supported initiatives back then to help Canadians but now do not. It makes me think they are driven completely by their perception of public opinion on matters, as opposed to thinking long term about how to support Canadians in getting through something like this.

Of course, the members from the Bloc Québécois have also been consistent on this. with regard to health transfers, we know that every time there is a debate in the House, somehow it is linked back to health transfers from the federal government to the provincial government. They are consistent in that regard. I respect that, and I hope that the Bloc and the NDP will support the budget implementation act, despite having identified some concerns.

It is the Conservative approach that continues to have me baffled. The Conservatives come in here and criticize the amount of spending, and yes, we know that it has been a lot of money. However, nobody, when elected in 2019, could have ever imagined we would be in this position talking about this kind of debt.

We are here because of a global pandemic that has impacted the entire planet, and to address what our response to it should be. In the response, there has been a simple choice: Do we let everybody fend for themselves, or do we take the approach that society should work together through the government? We let society as a whole take on the debt and shoulder the burden of the pandemic, socially and economically, to the best of its ability. This is as opposed to watching individuals take on the burden entirely themselves, which obviously, as we know, would have skewed more toward those who are less fortunate, those who are working on the front lines and those who are working more precarious jobs. They are the people who would have been impacted the most had we not chosen to collectively support each other and go through this collectively.

There is a lot of debt attached to this; there is no doubt about it. However, we made a choice and that choice was clear: We will do this together.

When I listened to the comments from the member for Brandon—Souris, I noted that even as he was saying we are spending too much but not doing many things, he was still incorrect in his assertion of what we were not doing. I would love to go through all of the elements he discussed: housing; provincial transfers; health funding; health care, and in particular mental health; new supports for small businesses; and support for veterans. I would love to talk about all of this, but I will talk for a few moments specifically about supports for businesses.

The government has been there for Canadians and businesses from day one, and what is being proposed in this budget implementation act is the extension of benefits, in particular the extension of the wage subsidy for Canadian small and medium-sized businesses. It will make sure that people can stay on the payroll and can get through the pandemic so that when we come out on the other side of it, jobs will still be in place, which will help our economy bounce back and rebound quicker.

There are, in addition to that, more supports for small businesses. What we see in the budget is the new Canada recovery hiring program. The federal government recognizes that if we are going to get back to the low unemployment rate that we had before we went into the pandemic, we need to make sure that we are putting measures in place to help businesses bring new people on board to get the economic engine moving again. There is also the Canada recovery benefit. It is more specifically for individual Canadians. The government has said that it will include an additional 12 weeks in the Canada recovery benefit, to a maximum of 50 weeks.

The government has made it clear that it is going to be here, whether it is through the wage subsidy, the Canada recovery benefit or the various programs, to make sure that Canadians have the supports they need. The Conservatives know that, and I think it scares them a little, to be honest. In question period, there has never been a question on this, or it has been very rare. I feel for the member for Abbotsford, who is in his new portfolio as the finance critic. He never gets to ask a question in question period.

The last thing the Conservatives want to do right now is start asking questions about the budget. They do not want to highlight anything in it, because they realize how good it is for Canadians and Canadian businesses. That is why the member for Abbotsford is not getting to ask any questions.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

I am getting laughs and heckles from members on the other side, but they should stand up and explain to me in a question why the member for Abbotsford does not get to ask any questions. He is the critic for finance.

Why is he not asking any questions in question period? It is because the Conservatives realize that talking about the budget is not in their best interests right now. They would rather go for personal attacks against the Prime Minister and against the Minister of National Defence, and all of these other things they love to drum up scandal about, instead of talking about government policy. If you can hold on and wait, an hour and 50 minutes from now you will get to see it live for yourselves.

In conclusion, the government is there to support small and medium-sized businesses, which are the backbone of the country and its economy. We will be there. We have been there from day one, and we will be there to the end. I strongly believe that Canadians know that, and I am hearing it from businesses in my riding. I look forward to supporting this budget implementation act.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member wavered during his speech and talked directly to members as opposed to through the Speaker. I want to remind him that he is to address all questions, comments and debate through the Speaker.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Madam Speaker, the member said something like, “Society will work together through government to come through this together”. How does he address, for future generations, the legacy the government is leaving with no plan on coming to balance? How does he justify the actions of the government to our children and grandchildren?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, for the record, the reason I feel the need to say that society will support itself through the government is because if I say the government is going to support Canadians, these members are going to say that it is not the government's money, as though we do not know that. I am trying to set the record straight so they understand that I know whose money it is.

To answer his question, I will throw it right back at him. Why is his own political party, on its election platform, saying it is going to take 10 years to balance the budget? It is because governments, political parties and politicians know that although saying the opposite is a great talking point, as long as the economy is growing faster than debt is being taken on, as long as the GDP exceeds the debt being taken on, we are in a good position to continue to grow and to see the economy prosper.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Madam Speaker, one thing that has come to everyone's attention during the pandemic is the significant inequality that remains in Canada. We have seen a greater impact from the disease itself and from its economic impact on seniors, young people and working people on front lines and in factories. However, we are not seeing the Liberals respond to calls for greater fairness going forward, such as with a dental care plan to help seven million Canadians get access to oral health care they cannot afford, for a fraction of 1% of current health care costs. As well, they refuse to tax the super wealthy, even while billionaires in Canada have increased their wealth by $78 billion during this pandemic. The token luxury tax we have seen on airplanes and yachts is not even in the budget implementation act.

Why are the Liberals doing nothing to ensure that those who have done so well by Canada's economy are paying their fair share?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I am borderline offended by the fact the member does not recall that I spoke in favour of the private member's bill he brought forward about dental care. I did not indicate whether I was going to support it or not. I actually thought it was good that he was bringing forward the bill to have a discussion about a national dental care strategy. I strongly believe dental care, like pharmacare, needs to be part of our health care package in Canada.

The member should not sell out the fact that he does not have the support of all Liberals on his private member's bill. I am sure there are a handful out there who genuinely appreciate what the member brought forward. I certainly appreciate it. Whether the devil is in the details and I can support it at the end of the day, I look forward to continuing my speech when the second hour of his debate comes up.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:15 p.m.
See context

Green

Jenica Atwin Green Fredericton, NB

Madam Speaker, this is just a reminder that the Green Party exists as well, as far as opposition goes. I will await my colleague's comments on that.

I would like to point to some substance, and I am not sure how much there was in his speech today, but I really want to get a clear answer on why there was a two-tiered system set up for seniors in this country. Can I have an explanation on the $500 one-time payment and the OAS increase only being extended to those 75 and over? I really need help understanding this.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I certainly have great respect for the members of the Green Party and I apologize if my colleague felt left out when I did not include them when I was talking about the opposition. Maybe it is because I have nothing bad to say.

To answer her question, what we know from the data is that the older someone gets the more they burn through their savings, the more they burn through their retirement and the more expenses they incur as a result of health care and so on.

Would the member rather take the available money for those top-ups and give it just to people over 75, or would she rather go all the way back to 65 but give people less money? These are the questions I am sure are being debated in the budgetary process, and I am sure she can respect them. I would love to hear what her position is on that. Do we give more to people over 75 or less to everybody?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Madam Speaker, growing up I was a huge fan of a television show called Bonanza. Maybe people have heard of it. It was a fantastic show. Let me tell members what I am not a fan of. I am not a fan of the spending bonanza that has gone on here in Ottawa over the last two years.

When we look at the accumulation of debt, and I am going to talk about this, $509 billion in new debt over two years has been put forward by the government. The Liberals have doubled the national debt in basically two years. Despite doing that, there are glaring gaps in the needs of Canadians, and I want to talk about some that have been basically ignored by the government despite the spending bonanza.

I also want to say I am sharing my time with the member for Prince Albert.

The first thing I want to talk about is broadband. This is a massive issue in my riding of Dufferin—Caledon. Not a week goes by that I do not receive a phone call or email from people in my riding decrying their lack of access to affordable high-speed Internet.

On April 30 I received an email from Andrew. Members from the Liberal government should hear this email because it is heartbreaking. He said, “Dear Kyle, I am writing today for the urgency of us receiving affordable Internet in the very near future. I have been out of work since February of 2020. My daughter has been forced to home school. I am unable to find a job that does not require me to work from home. I use my cellphone data plan and my wife's just to try and look for work. Having no Internet in this day and age with corona is literally crippling myself and my ability to provide for my family.”

When we talk about the bonanza of spending by the government, why have there not been rapid massive investments in broadband? This is critical in ridings such as mine that have a large rural component. They do not have 5G networks that they can use their cellphone plans on. They do not have unlimited data plans that they can use to work from home or school their children at home, which is what we are doing during the pandemic.

The failure to rapidly invest in this is a massive failure for the government. It is talking about having everyone hooked up to high-speed broadband by 2030. I became a lawyer because I am not good at math, but my math tells me that is about nine years from now. That is not going to be good enough for Andrew, and it is not going to be good enough for the huge bunch of Canadians who do not have affordable high-speed Internet. It is a shame on the government that it has not fixed it, especially given the pandemic.

There is another thing I am stunned the government has not moved on, in either the budget or the budget implementation act. On December 11, my colleague put forward a motion for a 988 suicide number.

The motion for the 988 number was passed unanimously in the House five months ago, and the only thing that has been brought forward by the government is that it may have the CRTC look into it. All we are hearing these days is about the mental health crisis going on in this country as a result of the pandemic. This is hard on people. Having access to a three-digit number for everyone has never been more important than it is now.

I have spoken about my own personal experience with depression. I can tell members that having access to a number anonymously, and speaking to someone anonymously, would save lives. Sometimes people do not have the strength to call a family member or a friend. A simple number to remember, and that is anonymous, will save lives. Quite frankly, I find the lack of action on this stunning.

I also want to talk about new business. In December I talked about Paul, a gentleman in my riding who had opened a new business in April 2020. He had to delay the start in March. Paul has been trying to make things work. He has been doing things like running up his line of credit and looking at ways to refinance his home. Why do new business owners like Paul have to do that? It is because there are no support programs out there for them.

The government can claim it is not aware of this, except I have raised this in question period and I have raised it during Adjournment Proceedings. The government is well aware that there are no programs for new businesses. Why not fix that in this budget? When we are spending $509 billion, can we not find some money for new business owners who have put their livelihoods on the line to start new businesses? The government is aware of this. All I can say to Paul is that the government does not care if his business succeeds or fails. It is the only message left that we can send to Paul, especially looking at the budget and looking at this BIA.

Another glaring omission from the government is action on housing prices. A 1% luxury tax for foreign buyers is going to do nothing. We have heard it over and over again. It is just going to be looked on as the cost of doing business, especially when real estate prices are going up 25%, 30% or 40% in a year. The 1% tax is a joke. The government should have gotten serious, because we know foreign buyers are an issue. There are ways to cool the housing market and we know it is a problem. Young people are saying they are never going to be able to afford to buy a house looking at the prices as they are. The government response has been nothing that has worked.

Recently, I was looking at purchasing a home. When I looked at the price, I was stunned and said, “This seems like an awful lot of money for a house.” Guess what? That house had gone up 50%. It was purchased in August 2020, and by the spring of 2021, it was on sale for 50% more. This is a housing crisis, and the government is doing basically nothing. It has done nothing to address the housing crisis going on in this country.

One of the big ticket items we heard about was the new national child care plan. With a big fanfare, it was announced that we are going to solve child care in this country. What I learned as a lawyer is that the devil is often in the details, and the details in this case are a little different from what is being announced. I would call it a child care idea, because the government is not actually going to spend any money unless the provinces jump on board. It is a cost-shared program. If provincial governments do not agree to take this on, then the money does not get spent. When we look at the fiscal circumstances of the provinces after 15 months of this pandemic, it becomes increasingly concerning that they will not be able to afford this new program, which has to be cost-shared.

Of course, no details of how the cost-sharing will be done have been worked out. The Liberals are going to work it out at some point with the provinces while telling them they need to pay this amount of money if they want the federal money invested. Again, it is not a national child care plan. It is a national child care concept. It is an idea that might happen some day if the government can get the provinces onside. To me, that is not a plan, as I keep saying. It is a concept.

Finally, we have $509 billion worth of debt. Our national debt has doubled. If interest rates go up to fight the inflation that we have going on right now, the government is going to become unable to pay the interest on the debt.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to go back to the first two minutes of my hon. colleague's speech where he talked about the importance of broadband. I know this issue is extremely important for all rural Canadians, certainly an issue that is important to my riding. However, I do want to correct him. He said that the goal of the government was to connect every Canadian by 2030. That is actually false; it is by 2026, so five years from now, and we have invested $1 billion further than the previous investments in 2019.

His colleagues are saying “cut, cut, cut”, but obviously he is advocating for more funding for broadband. Therefore, what should we cut in the budget or should increase broadband funding?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Madam Speaker, I would suggest two things in response to that. First, what I have seen is that they want to get a certain percentage by 2026 and 100% of people by 2030. I am saying that we should front-end that money for broadband now and not wait until 2026.

Second, I talked about Andrew, who sent a heartbreaking email to me. I get many like that all the time. People need these investments now. They need the rollout now. Waiting till 2026 or 2030 will not help people who are home schooling their children or working from home because of COVID. They need to get those investments upfront quickly.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Madam Speaker, the hon. member spoke of the hundreds of billions of dollars we spent in the last two years during these extraordinary times. He also spoke quite passionately about the need to support Canadians with mental health.

It is well-known that the one in three Canadians who have no dental care suffer not only physical pain and serious medical issues, but also serious mental health issues due to shame, social exclusion and, frankly, lack of employment opportunities.

The member spoke of a lack of spending in this budget on small business, sending a message to Canadians that the government did not care. Is his and the Conservative Party's vote against the NDP dental care plan a sign that Conservatives do not care about the 13 million Canadians who do not have access to fundamental basic oral dental health?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Madam Speaker, I disagree with much of what the member said.

As I said in response about child care, when we look at specific pieces of legislation, the devil is often in the details. It could be said that it is about X, but it includes many other things. No one should go without dental care. However, the way that motion was put forward, the devil was in the details, therefore I was not able to support it. However, I believe everyone has a right to dental care.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Lianne Rood Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON

Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned that some business owners had fallen through the cracks and that this budget did not address that. I have heard from many of my constituents who started a new business just prior to the pandemic and they have not been able to access anything.

I wonder if you can comment a bit further on what you would have liked to have seen in this budget to help people like your constituents and my constituents who are falling through the cracks.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I want to remind the member that she is to address the questions and comments through the Chair and not to the individual member.

The hon. member for Dufferin—Caledon.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Madam Speaker, the problem for new businesses is the requirement to show declines in revenue. That has been generally how businesses access the wage subsidy or the rent subsidy. A new business just cannot do that. What should have been developed was a specific program that would allow businesses to access some funds, whether it was for rent or to help pay wages.

We have been in the pandemic now for 15 months. Clearly, there is a way to design that program so new businesses have some of the supports that other businesses have.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, the member touched on many things that I thought were very important, things that the government should take to heart as it goes through the implementation of this budget.

I have looked at this budget and have talked to my constituents. When they hear about a $354 billion deficit, they say “wow”. I can see it on their faces. They cannot understand how that kind of money can be spent. However, they are there for Canadians. They want to ensure that Canadians are taken care of. They understand that during a crisis such as COVID we need to support each other, so they do not necessarily object to—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I know we have been down this road before, but apparently the interpreters are having a hard time. They are unable to interpret because of the connection. I wonder if the hon. member can unplug and re-plug his mick or ensure his mick is selected.

That seems to be better.

The hon. member.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, I will go back to what my constituents were telling me with regard to this budget. When they look at the dollar values, the $354 billion or $509 billion that have been spent over the last two years, they think that is a lot of money. However, in the same breath, they look at it and say that if we have to support each other and this is what it takes to get them through the crisis, they are willing to do it.

Then they start talking about priorities and whether it has been done right. Did the funds got to the people who needed it? Were the people who needed it the most taken care of? Were the funds delivered in an efficient way? When they start hearing about scandals like the WE scandal and friends and family of Liberal members getting money, they get mad because they feel cheated. They feel they have been taken advantage of and COVID has been used as a reason to do that. That is unacceptable and they are very upset about it. When they hear those things, they distrust government on everything, and that is unfortunate.

I remember back in 2008-09 when we went through the financial crisis under the Harper government. Billions of dollars were put into the economy through municipalities and provincial governments with zero scandals. Therefore, it can be done. We can empower the public service to get the money out, we can prioritize with the provinces and municipalities to get the appropriate projects established and we can spend the money in a responsible manner so taxpayers get value. I think a lot of people will look back on this situation maybe four or five years from now and will really criticize the Liberal government in how it conducted itself, how it aligned itself with areas and made decisions with regard to the crisis that ended up costing the lives of Canadians and our economy.

As we approached an actual budget, in January, I talked to all the municipalities in my riding through Zoom. I told them the rumour was there would be $100 billion for infrastructure for municipalities, so we should get our ducks in a line and have ideas of what types of things we would want to prioritize as far as spending. I came across the village of St. Louis. It wants a new fire hall. It is taking on more fire services in the rural areas and wants to put its fire trucks in one location instead of the three locations it has right now. It identified that as one of the priorities it would like to get some assistance on, if it was there.

I spoke to the mayor of Nipawin, who talked about how the landfill was getting to the end of its life, that the municipality was looking to get a new landfill and having a new partnership with other municipalities. He was trying to figure out a way forward on that.

Just north of Prince Albert, the Town of Shellbrook, the arm of Buckland and the regional municipality of Prince Albert, it is saying that it really requires water. It is getting together with others to put in a rural water network, costing some $50 million. It is something that would take care of the farmers, the Town of Shellbrook, the acreage owners outside of the city of Prince Albert. It would probably be about 70 or 80 kilometres long. It is a good project that would get shovels in the ground and be of value at the end of the day.

Those are the types of things at which municipalities are looking.

One of the other priorities that came out of my meetings with the municipalities was high-speed Internet. They feel so neglected. When they start hearing these big announcements about billions of dollars, in this case, $1 billion over nine years, about $140 million a year, they thought they should be able to do it. Then when they see the actual rollout and the amount per year, they roll their eyes and say that is never heading their way, that they will never get it. Therefore, they are looking for support to do it on their own. They have been looking at new technologies, and I encourage the government to start looking at some of the new technologies as well.

I have been one of the lucky people in Canada to be involved in the beta testing for Starlink, and it has been fabulous. There have been a few little hiccups, as there are with all systems. Why would the government not embrace Telesat Canada or groups like that, even Starlink, and look at how it can speed this up to get the service to rural Canadians at speeds of some 150 to 200 megabytes a minute down and 40 or 50 megabytes up? Why would we not look at that and ask how we can empower the private sector to provide the service? The technology is there; we just need the will of the government to push it along.

Another thing a lot of people said was that some sectors had done really well during COVID. Those who sell cross-country skis, Ski-Doos, quads or camping equipment were busy. Canadians love the outdoors and since they were unable to travel, they were spending money on things they could do in their own backyards. The riding of Prince Albert is beautiful and there are a lot of things for people to do in their backyards and still respect social distancing. Companies selling lumber right now are doing great.

If we look at those types of businesses, they have done very well, yet some sectors have been left out. People who are in the tourism sector, people who run a fishing lodge in northern Saskatchewan are looking at their second season under COVID, wondering whether they can open or not. They have clients lined up who wanted to go last year, they have held their deposits and now those people want to come this year. They are vaccinated, most of them are Americans, but they cannot get a signal from the government on what the matrix would be for our border to reopen.

In Saskatchewan, the province has at least given us an idea, based on the number of vaccinations and a combination of things, on when we will start to see the province start to open up. The federal government has done nothing like that. It has not given any signals to Canadians or businesses on what a safe reopening would look like and what steps would be required to have that safe reopening. Because of that, we cannot make decisions.

If people are running a fishing lodge, to open up that lodge, they need to fly in with their supplies for the year, and that is an expensive trip. Therefore, they do not want to go up there unless they are have clients coming. That takes time. They will have to get a hold of their clients and ensure they have processes in place to come to their lodge. They have to ensure their staff is rehired and trained. People cannot just wake up on a Monday morning and say, “the border is open; let's go.” There needs to be some proper signals. While those things do not cost money, we have to be in control of the situation, use the science to our best ability and give our best predictions based on that science, not be secretive or silent. That is not an answer and it is not acceptable.

We have had a really serious problem right across Canada in our restaurant sector. Some have adapted, some have not. There is no question that they are struggling. If there is a sector that needs help, tourism, restaurants and these types of businesses definitely need help. Where is that in the budget. If they have a new restaurant, like my friend from Dufferin—Caledon mentioned, they do not qualify. What about a ma and pa restaurant that has around for years? The owners are two or three years away from retirement, but all of a sudden they have to dip into savings. They wonder if they should put another $40,000 or $50,000 into it. That money it is coming right out of their savings account. It is coming right out of their RRSPs, and they have to pay tax on that if they put it into their business. There has been no compensation for things like that. There has been no flexibility. People have to make very serious decisions and they do not have good information from the government on which to base those decisions.

When we look at that, it leads into my next topic, which is mental health.

I have been very concerned about my staff in my office, and I am sure my colleagues have been as well. One minute, the people are on the phone crying and the next minute they are yelling. The next call is from somebody who is overwhelmed. Our staff are dealing with that call after call. Mental health is a serious issue right now. To think that we cannot find money for the mental health hotline that the member for Cariboo—Prince George asked for seems irresponsible. Where is the government's heart? Where is it priority?

In the agriculture sector, farmers are grappling. I will highlight the fact that they are spring seeding now. The census is hitting while they are doing that, by the way, which they are not happy about. I want them to have a safe seeding system. There are some things in the budget that they liked, but the one area that concerns them is the $60 million over two years for a nature-smart climate solution, where the government will buy farmland. Why does the government want to buy farmland? Farmers are the best stewards of the land. If we want to set aside land for planting trees, why would we not just pay them for it? We could say that this is marginal land, we will pay them for it and they can take care of it and manage it, just like they do in Europe.

Again, the government prescribes things instead of consulting and talking to people moving forward.

In summary, a lot of money is being spent. Some of it is good and some of it is bad. I know the member from Kingston will ask what I would cut from the budget. It is not a matter of cutting; it is a matter of having the appropriate priorities, understanding the needs of Canadians and getting the funds to people who actually need them.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his speech and agree with a number of things. I would like to thank him for supporting science, as well as Telesat and Starlink. I think we have licensed Starlink and we have provided millions to Telesat for exactly what he has asked for.

Also, I am delighted that he raised mental health; it has been a huge priority for our government. As members know, we made the first-ever agreement with the provinces and territories and there is money in this budget for it. I appreciate his support for that.

I am glad he raised the census. I hope every Canadian out there fills it out. I did mine. It took about 10 minutes.

I want to ask him about infrastructure. I am glad he supported that. We have provided more money to that than any government in history. Last summer, one could not go to a community in my riding where the roads were not dug up to deal with sewer, water or paving. It is a great way to inspire the economy.

He listed some great projects. I wonder if he has checked with his province on the approval of those, because the provinces decide which projects get approved—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

We have to go to questions and comments, the hon. member for Prince Albert.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, the census is very important, but to put it on the ground during spring seeding in Saskatchewan is very insensitive. To ask these people to come down off their tractors when they are going 18 hours or 20 hours a day is not the right thing to do. The government should have some compassion and at least give them a little extension on time, perhaps until June, or something like that.

Regarding infrastructure, the Liberals have been talking a lot about all this money being spent on infrastructure yet we do not see it. Where is it? I cannot touch it. I cannot feel it. I cannot look at it. Maybe it is all in the Liberal ridings. That would make sense as it would go along the theme of Liberal governments taking care of Liberal Party members. Maybe that is what is happening.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech. I am grateful for his concern for the restaurant, hotel and tourism sectors.

My riding has a large number of tourism and ecotourism sites that are extremely concerned about the nature of the assistance their sector will be getting, particularly with respect to the programs and their criteria.

The criteria for some of the programs announced in the past were too restrictive, preventing people from accessing the help they needed. What does my colleague think about this?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, I have heard much the same concerns. The government could consult to Canadians. It could sit down with the sector and ask what it needs to do to revitalize the sector. One of the things I said right off the bat was that by using science, and basing it off science, it could give this sector an idea of when the borders will reopen so Americans or people from other parts of the world can come freely to Canada and take advantage of our nature and beauty. That would allow them to at least plan and see some sort of future in front of them.

The other thing is this. What are we going to do to attract more people to our tourism sector? What type of game plan is there? How are we going to work with Global Affairs and people outside Canada to do just that?

The government should talk to the people who are impacted, understand what the barriers are, remove the barriers so they can proceed, and then it will have a successful program, but it does not talk to anybody but the Liberals.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:45 p.m.
See context

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Madam Speaker, I was happy to hear my colleague talk about the tourism sector as well, because in Edmonton Strathcona we are the heart of the tourism sector in Edmonton and have tons of restaurants. I have spent a lot of time meeting with restaurant owners, servers, bartenders and other people in the sector. They want additional help for sick time and minimum wage supports. How would the member make sure that the workers in these restaurants are also being protected during this dangerous time?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. Safety has to be front and centre. There is no question about that.

I understand Alberta is going through some tough times right now that we are not necessarily experiencing in Saskatchewan, but if people do not have a job, that is a problem. We have to make sure these businesses are operating so that people have a place to go to work. We need to have that in place in a safe and operable fashion. Vaccines are part of the key to getting to that, and the fact that we do not yet have vaccines in the arms of Canadians is very problematic.

I feel their frustration and concern for them and their family and I want to make sure we are there to support them. Most Canadians would agree with that. However, when we see money going to WE charities or out the door to Liberal friends, that is when they get mad and get mad really quick.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:45 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the House for allowing me to speak about the 2021 budget and explain why I support its implementation.

First of all, I need to thank our very first female finance minister for putting forward a budget that should make all women and all parliamentarians proud.

As the first woman in this most important role, she acts as such a positive and inspiring role model for young women everywhere in Canada. The amazing work that she accomplished, with the help of the Prime Minister and other ministers as well as parliamentarians who were consulted as she was preparing to introduce this budget, is work that she, her team and, frankly, all Canadians can be proud of.

I truly believe that there is something in this budget for everyone, whether we are tackling the need to support our seniors, women, youth, workers, businesses, indigenous people and racialized communities, or whether it is putting in place what is needed to finally combat COVID-19 with vaccine procurement or Canadian biomanufacturing of vaccines. This budget takes care of Canadians.

The budget contains several provisions that I am happy about. Honestly, I am thrilled to see that we will continue to support our small and medium-size businesses and the Canadians who were hit hard by the pandemic.

Today I am going to focus on new measures that I find particularly worthwhile and important. As a former teacher who spent almost all her time working with children, and as a feminist who believes in equality between men and women, I think that one of the most important things in the budget is the Canada-wide early learning and child care plan.

This measure will provide jobs for workers, the majority of whom are women. It will enable parents, particularly mothers, to reach their full economic potential. Moreover, it will create a generation of engaged and well-prepared young learners.

One of the studies we completed during my time on the committee on the status of women in the previous Parliament was entitled “Women's Economic Security: Securing the Future of Canada's Economy”. Throughout the study, we heard from hundreds of women of all backgrounds, and many of them spoke of the need for child care.

The committee was told that families in Canada have long contended with an inadequate supply of high-quality, universal, accessible, flexible, affordable and inclusive child care, particularly for infants and toddlers. We learned that the lack of child care significantly contributes to the gender wage gap, which should not be a surprise to anyone as traditionally women are most often the ones to stay home to take care of their children. I certainly grew up in a very traditional household where my mom did not work until my brother and I were both in school.

This unpaid work that women are usually responsible for, which includes hours spent on the care of their children and housework, limits their participation in the workforce and hurts their economic advancement. Furthermore, this disproportionate responsibility for unpaid work negatively affects their access to education, access to job training, the quality of their health and personal relationships, and their current and future financial resources—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I have a point of order.

The hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Madam Speaker, I believe the member meant to share her time with the member for Nepean.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I thank the member. I was sidetracked there, and I am not sure if I heard her say that, but I will verify with her.

The hon. member for Saint-Laurent.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, if I did not say it, I definitely meant to say that I will be sharing my time with the member for Nepean.

However, it goes without saying that women who have this sort of arrangement and who stay at home may experience poverty as seniors, and many of them, as they are not financially independent and are financially dependent on their husbands, may not flee abusive relationships and situations, because they are unable to do so without any money. I am mentioning these points, because I am trying to prove the point that establishing a Canada-wide early learning and child care system actually tackles several societal issues that we face today.

Another thing in the budget that is very important to me is the enhanced Canada workers benefit. Our government introduced this benefit in the last budget, and budget 2021 will enhance this tax credit and make it more accessible to low-income workers and families earning income from employment or business.

Approximately one million more low-income Canadians will have access to this assistance.

The pandemic showed us just how essential low-income workers are for keeping our society running. They are working in our grocery stores, corner stores and pharmacies. They are working behind the scenes to provide small businesses with all the goods we purchased during this period, and they went to work every day so that those who stayed at home could have the essentials we needed to get through this pandemic.

The budget would allow the government to raise the income level at which the benefit starts being reduced to $22,944 for single individuals and $26,177 for families. For full-time workers, this could mean that a single, full-time, minimum wage worker could receive about $1,000 more in benefits than they would receive under the current system, and could continue to receive the benefit up to $32,000 of net income in 2021.

The enhancement to the workers benefit would benefit single workers without children the most, because they have limited access to other government supports that are made available to families, such as the Canada child benefit.

Currently, a full-time minimum wage employee is not eligible for the Canada workers benefit, however, under the new proposed system in budget 2021, they would be entitled to $1,100 with this number being subject to differ, depending on where they live and what the minimum wage is in their province.

I know many hard workers who will greatly benefit from this extra support, and I am happy we would move forward with this enhancement to the benefit when we implement this budget.

As a member of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, I was thrilled to see the section of the budget concerning investments in COVID-19-related biomanufacturing. The budget proposes investing in Canada's biomanufacturing and life sciences sector in order to improve our capacity to develop and biomanufacture vaccines in Canada.

We now know that COVID-19 will be with us for some time to come. There are variants, and we do not know how long we will remain immune after we receive both doses of the vaccine. During the committee's study of domestic manufacturing capacity for a COVID-19 vaccine, witnesses told us that vaccine procurement is a short-term solution and that Canada must get ready to produce its own vaccines for Canadians in the long term. That is why I mentioned the need for this type of investment during the budget consultations held by the ministers responsible.

Budget 2021 will strengthen Canada's biomanufacturing and life sciences sector by providing a total of $2.2 billion over seven years towards growing a vibrant domestic life sciences sector. This support would provide foundational investments to help build Canada's talent pipeline and research systems, and support the growth of Canadian life science firms, including $59.2 million over three years starting 2021-22 for the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization to support the development of its vaccine candidates and expand the facility in Saskatoon.

The budget will invest in skills, training and trades and will help workers transition to new jobs. It proposes an investment of $250 million over three years to scale up proven third-party-delivered approaches to upskill and redeploy workers to meet the needs of growing industries.

The budget also contains measures to grow our net-zero economy and accelerate Canada's net-zero transformation through innovation. It allocates $5 billion for that.

I am proud of this budget. We are certainly heading in the right direction.

I hope that everybody can support it, so that we could get back to helping Canadians and so that we can improve our support to Canadians.

Thank you very much.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB

Madam Speaker, the member talked about how the budget protects workers and jobs.

In my riding, I have, for example, the Winnipeg Richardson International Airport and aviation manufacturing firms, like Boeing, Magellan and StandardAero. I have talked to many of the workers from the airport and these companies. They are struggling to just pay their mortgages. It is a very sad and devastating situation for the industry as a whole.

I am wondering if the member could comment on why there is no support for the aviation industry at all, including airports, in this budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, in my speech I was not able to touch on every subject, but the aerospace sector is definitely being helped in this budget. Specifically in my province of Quebec, a lot of the sector would be helped through this budget. That is another reason I am quite proud of what Minister Freeland has put forward in this budget.

I thank the member for giving me the opportunity to mention that. I had missed it due to time constraints.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member mentioned the minister by name. I would caution her not to do so, as she knows the rules of the House.

We will continue with questions and comments.

The hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Madam Speaker, it is great to see the Liberals supporting child care in this budget. It is something I ran on quite proudly back in 2015, and I agree with her that it would make a huge difference.

My question is regarding the Liberal standard for engaging with the provinces on these sorts of initiatives. This budget implementation act is setting up the legislative framework for the minister to engage with the provinces to get child care up and running.

However, when it came to Bill C-213, which was NDP legislation to set up a legislative framework for establishing a national pharmacare system, the Liberals voted against it. It seems as though the goal posts are shifting. Could the member clarify for the House what the Liberal standard is for engaging with provinces when trying to build up these national programs?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC

Madam Speaker, this pandemic has really highlighted the need to support the most vulnerable, and many would argue, the most vulnerable in this pandemic have been young people and women. It was definitely time. People have been fighting for child care for many years, and I thank the member for his advocacy on this issue.

When things like this are highlighted during a pandemic or a time of crisis, I believe the federal government needs to work with the provinces in order to establish goals and come up with the right sorts of plans. Right now, the political will is there, and there is definitely a need, as we have all said, to support women and to make sure they are able to have equal access to the workforce.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to speak on the investments made in this budget for artificial intelligence, quantum technology, photonics and genomics. More importantly, I would also like to speak on investments made in the critical minerals required for batteries, which are needed for use in everything from electrical vehicles to energy storage.

The global economy is moving toward a knowledge-based economy. One of the three objectives for me when entering politics a few years back was to work to ensure that Canadian society and the economy remained robust and competitive in the global knowledge-based economy, thus securing prosperity for our children and grandchildren.

Canada is prosperous today, and Canadians enjoy a very high standard of living due to the rich natural resources. We have oil. We have gas. We have minerals, and we have forestry products. All of which have provided for our prosperity so far. The natural advantage we have today may not be enough for us in a new global knowledge-based economy. To ensure that this prosperity is also available to our children and our grandchildren, we, as a country, need to be at the forefront of the new knowledge-based economy. Hence, investments in artificial intelligence, quantum technology, photonics, genomics, and the critical minerals required for batteries become very important.

Artificial intelligence is one of the greatest technological transformations of our age. It has already started making its impact. Many times we do not even know it is making an impact, but it is already there. Canada has communities of research, homegrown talent and a diverse ecosystem of start-ups and scale-ups.

I am glad that the budget would provide about $440 million in support of a pan-Canadian artificial intelligence strategy. More importantly, it would provide $185 million to support commercialization of artificial intelligence innovation and research in Canada. Investing in research, development and innovation is important, but for me, commercialization is also important. Both have to go hand in hand. We cannot continue to perpetually invest in research without all or part of that research being commercialized. Therefore, I am glad we are making investments in commercialization of artificial intelligence innovations.

Quantum technology is at the very leading edge of science and innovation today, and it has enormous potential for commercialization. This emerging field will transform how we develop and design everything from life-saving drugs to next-generation batteries. It also will provide a great deal of cybersecurity, which we hope to achieve and see soon. I am happy to state that this budget would provide about $360 million to launch a national quantum strategy. I am sure we will hear more details of this in the coming months.

Canada is a world leader in photonics, the technology of generating and harnessing the power of light. This is the science behind fibre optics, advanced semiconductors and other cutting-edge technologies, areas in which Ottawa has also got a great number of companies involved. There is a strong history of Canadian companies bringing this expertise to the world. I am pleased that the budget would provide $90 million to the National Research Council to retool and modernize the Canadian photonics fabrication centre.

Then, there is genomics. Genomics research is developing cutting-edge therapeutics and is helping Canada to track and fight COVID-19. Canada was an early mover in advancing genomic science and is now a global leader in this field.

I will give a cost comparison on how fast and how effective this particular technology is developing. The cost to sequence a genome has fallen by millions of dollars. I think in 2001, it cost us about $100 million to sequence a genome. From that, it came down to $1 million in 2008. It fell down to about $10,000 in 2012, and today it just costs a few hundred dollars. We can see how quickly it is changing and how effective it has become. Soon we will have tailor-made medicines available for genetic diseases.

The budget provides $400 million to support pan-Canadian genomic strategies. This includes support for mission-driven programming delivered by Genome Canada to kick-start the new strategy. In the new global knowledge-based economy, the world is flat. Canadians face equal competition from different parts of the world, and we do not have the advantages our natural resources used to give us.

The competition is coming from everywhere, especially for new technology professionals and new generations of Canadians in school today. The competition is from Sydney, Australia; Seoul, South Korea; Shanghai, China; Mumbai, India; and Frankfurt, Germany. All the world is flat, and we are facing a lot of competition from all over the world.

Immediately more important is the development of batteries. Many people may not recognize today, but this is also a national security issue. If we do not develop technologies, and if we do not develop batteries, one day we will be dependent on other countries for our energy security and transportation security. Things are changing very fast.

The trillion-dollar transportation market is quickly moving toward electrification. Major auto companies have already announced phasing out internal combustion engines and transitioning to battery-operated electric vehicles. Canada has rich reserves of the critical minerals needed for electric vehicle batteries and solar panels, along with the other low-carbon technology needed to reach net-zero.

Canada and the U.S. recently agreed to strengthen the Canada-U.S. joint action plan on critical minerals collaboration to target a net-zero industrial transformation, batteries for zero emissions vehicles and renewable energy storage. Investing in these critical resources is essential for our energy security and will ensure Canada is a vital producer in the supply chain of the future.

The budget provides funding to create a critical battery minerals centre of excellence at Natural Resources Canada. The centre would coordinate federal policy and programs on critical minerals and work with other partners too. The budget provides $37 million to Natural Resources Canada for federal research and development to advance critical battery mineral processing and refining expertise.

It is not just enough for us to be part of this operation. We need to have end-to-end capability to be in the battery business. To give an example of how far the cost of batteries has fallen in the last 10 to 12 years, the cost of lithium-ion batteries has fallen from $1,100 per kilowatt hour to just about $100. Soon it will reach much less, which will make the cost of electrical vehicles comparable with that of gasoline vehicles today.

Things are changing fast. Things are approaching fast where we will all move to electrical vehicles in the very near future. The companies have already announced changes and we need to be there.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his intervention, but I do want to question one part of his speech where he mentioned that Canada has lost its competitive edge in our natural resource sector. I would have to agree with him, but I am agreeing with him because we have lost our advantage because of poor Liberal policies, which are focused on phasing out the oil sands.

As my colleague is talking about the centre of excellence to build electric batteries, what other components does he think will be necessary to build those batteries if we do not have a petrochemical industry? Where does he feel we are going to make up the shortfall of a lost $678 billion a decade in revenue for every level of government from the oil and gas industry?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

Madam Speaker, just to clarify, what I meant to say is that the global economy is moving toward a knowledge-based economy and the transportation sector is moving toward electric vehicles. That is where Canada comes in. We have certain rare minerals that are required for the production of these batteries, and the investment we are making in Natural Resources Canada is to identify what minerals are required, how to develop them, how to refine them and how we can have a good, solid position in the supply chain that is required for the new generation of electric batteries.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Madam Speaker, I agree wholeheartedly with my colleague. The world centre right now for critical minerals is in my region: copper, cobalt, palladium and nickel. In terms of innovation, we had the deepest minds in the world at Laurentian University, in the mining engineering program. When Sudbury used to be a moonscape, we created and invested in environmental reclamation. The physics program had a Nobel Prize winner, yet this has been cut by the provincial government, completely hacked apart.

My hon. colleague is talking about innovation and investment. Will the government commit to working with us at Laurentian to maintain these programs of innovation and to build on this knowledge economy so that we can get these critical minerals into the new 21st century economy?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

Madam Speaker, I fully agree with the need for the research and development of critical minerals all across Canada. We need to have a pan-Canadian approach. As the government has already stated, in certain advanced technologies, it is formulating pan-Canadian strategies to develop various important things that are needed for the knowledge-based economy.

As the centre of excellence for batteries is being set up, I am sure it will also develop a comprehensive strategy, to develop not just the mines and minerals, but also the technologies, and lead to the actual manufacturing of batteries in Canada. Even the U.S. has lagged behind. Today, there are about five major battery manufacturing projects in the U.S., each with over $2 billion in investments. This is changing fast and we need to move very fast. We are going in that direction.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Green

Jenica Atwin Green Fredericton, NB

Madam Speaker, the member mentioned a lot about electrification, about solar panels and the way we want a low-carbon economy. What is his opinion on nuclear energy? Does that actually pose as a distraction for the direction we should be heading, which is in that renewable sector, in that electrification he is talking about?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

Madam Speaker, I am not very knowledgeable on nuclear power generation, but what I am focusing on is the renewable power generation to help solar panels bring energy with the new energy storage system that is possible with the batteries today. All these renewable energy projects will become much more viable and contribute to the total power generation at a much greater scale than what it is today.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington.

Canadians have waited more than two years for the Liberals to finally table a budget, and I would have to argue that it certainly was not worth the wait. It may have been worth the wait if we were looking to build back bigger: bigger government, bigger spending, bigger programs, bigger deficit and bigger, unsustainable debt. When Canadians were looking for a budget that would outline a path to recovery, what we got was a budget focused on re-election, which is truly unfortunate for Canadians, because we are the ones who are going to be paying for the Liberals' re-election budget.

This was not a recovery budget that Canadians were waiting for. This is a budget that would put unsustainable and suffocating debt on Canadians for generations to come. I want to put it into perspective. By next year, the current Prime Minister will have racked up more debt than all prime ministers in Canadian history combined. Members can let that sink in. That is including the current Prime Minister's father, who had racked up a debt that took decades to try to get under control. This is a budget focused on announcements, photo ops and, more than likely, broken promises, because the Liberals are very good at marketing, but they are very bad at the reality of having to follow through on those promises and the reality of government.

I want to start off the issues I am going to try to address in my speech with the child care announcement. I do not think there is any question that Canadians are interested in a child care program, especially with the changes we have experienced as a result of COVID-19. However, once again, the Liberals make their ninth or 10th promise on a national child care program, and I am going to guess this is their ninth or 10th promise waiting to be broken. This is the ninth time, let us say, the Liberals have promised a national child care program, but they forget to mention the fine print. The fine print is that it is a fifty-fifty split with the provinces and territories, so it is $30 billion over five years, but it is contingent on the provinces and territories stepping up to split that cost.

I am not sure if the Liberals, who believe the budget will balance itself, have taken a look at the current financial situation of the provinces and territories, which have been absolutely devastated by this pandemic. Very few provinces are going to have the resources to kick in and pay their share of the made-in-Ottawa national child care program, not to mention that many provinces and territories will balk at having an Ottawa-knows-best child care program that does not work for their families. In fact, it does not work for most Canadian families who do shift work, work in rural and remote communities or would much prefer an aunt, a grandfather or a neighbour to look after their children.

Conservatives realized this way back in 2006, when we introduced the universal child care benefit, because we knew that hard-working Canadian families knew how to look after their family and their children much better than Ottawa bureaucrats. That is what Canadian families want to see. They do not want to see a government-regulated child care program that provinces and territories cannot afford and that does not meet their needs.

That is just one program the Liberals are going to be getting and hoping for all these great photo ops and headlines, but when it comes down to the fact of actually being able to deliver on this promise, it will be another promise broken.

It is clear that the Liberals are doing their regular wedge politics here, trying to pit provinces and territories against one another on which provinces and territories can afford this child care program, but I do have to admit I was surprised to see that the Liberals chose a very vulnerable part of our community and our society to also put in a wedge. The Liberals have chosen seniors to be the next wedge topic in this budget. This was a budget where they should have made hard choices, but what they did, especially when it came to seniors, was choose winners and losers, and seniors under 75 are the losers. This budget would create a two-tier system for seniors in Canada. There are those seniors who would get the 10% increase on their OAS and a $500 bonus in August, not surprisingly maybe a few weeks before the Prime Minister drops the writ and calls an election.

How can we pick one group of seniors that is worthy of help and one that is not? We have a two-tiered system for seniors, and we know that seniors have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. They are exhausted, they are tired and, in many cases, they are scared as a result of isolation and being away from their loved ones during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, instead of ensuring that all Canadians are vaccinated and that all provinces have the vaccines and personal protective equipment they need, the government decided to pick winners and losers when it came to Canadian seniors. I find that to be incredibly disrespectful to such an important part of our community.

The next area I want to touch on is, like seniors, very important in my riding of Foothills, and that is the agriculture industry. Once again, the Liberals have failed to show heartfelt support for an agriculture industry that has been hit hard, not just by COVID but certainly by issues outside of its control over the last couple of years. Let us look back: We had the harvest from hell, rail blockades, strikes and lost export markets in India and China, which had a serious impact on the industry.

Thankfully, in my riding of Foothills, we had a great harvest last year. There is a lot of optimism as we head into seeding this spring, and we are just wrapping calving. There was optimism, until April 1, April Fool's Day, when the Liberals announced yet another increase in their carbon tax.

Farmers operate on a very small margin. They need all of these variables to match up for them to make a profit and be able to keep operating the following season. Doubling the carbon tax, and now announcing that it is going to be up to $170 a tonne in the next couple of years, is devastating to agriculture, which cannot pass on that cost anywhere else, because it is the end-user. Hessel Kielstra, who owns Mountain View Poultry in my riding, showed me his carbon tax bills, and this was before the increase. To heat his chicken barns in February was $24,000 for the month. This is not chump change. Why, in this budget, did the Liberals not exempt farm fuels and agriculture from the carbon tax and give them a break?

There is no question that agriculture is going to play a critical role when we try to dig ourselves out of this massive fiscal abyss that the pandemic has brought upon us, which was certainly not assisted by the financial recklessness of the Liberal government even before the pandemic. There is no question that agriculture is a key backbone of our economy, and if agriculture is treated poorly, and it is wrong, then not much else can go right.

I talked to many of my farmers and ranch families about this budget, and one of the other things they found frustrating was the lack of a real plan to ensure that every rural community has access to broadband. Certainly, this was a key issue in just about every rural riding in this country before the pandemic, but there is no question that the need to access broadband in every rural community is critical. We must start treating this like a utility. It is not a want; it is a must-have. We must start treating it like electricity or water, because if we want our rural communities to be able to compete on a level playing field with the rest of the world, they must have access to this critical infrastructure. Our farmers are competing in a global market; our small businesses are now going online, and kids are having to work from home. We cannot have these economic development opportunities in these communities if we do not have access to rural broadband.

In my one minute left, I want to touch on one thing that is obviously very important to Alberta, which is the fact that the energy sector is not mentioned once in this budget. I do not understand why the Liberals do not understand the important impact that our oil and gas sector has on this economy.

We are in a very difficult fiscal situation. According to the Canadian Energy Centre, between 2000 and 2018 the energy sector generated $672 billion in revenue for every level of government. That is $35 billion a year for municipalities, provinces and the federal government that cannot be replaced. In Alberta, we have felt the disdain for the energy sector, with 200,000 lost jobs. Now we are seeing it with Line 5 being in jeopardy because of the Prime Minister's virtue signalling. Unfortunately, Quebec and Ontario are going to start to feel the pain that Alberta has felt for a long time.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, it is interesting to hear the Conservatives talk about seniors because it was the Conservatives who not that long ago tried to make seniors work two years longer than what they expected to be their retirement, when the age of eligibility was changed for old age security and GIS to 67.

Can the member explain why he is so critical of the amount of debt this Prime Minister took on, in his words, when all that debt was taken on through unanimous consent motions in his House that he and his party supported? They supported that debt every step of the way.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Madam Speaker, there was a lot in that question, but the member said we were forcing seniors to work another two years. What was important with that proposal and program was that we were giving seniors the option to work two years longer before they had to retire, and many seniors in my riding appreciated that opportunity. We are living longer and they wanted those opportunities.

What he does not want to mention here is that this budget makes a two-tiered seniors system. All of a sudden, seniors are now eligible for an increase in OAS and this amazing pre-election $500 vote-buying scheme, but if they are under 75, the government is not really all that worried about them.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Madam Speaker, this budget implementation act is winding down the wage subsidy program and reducing then eliminating the supports to individuals through the Canada recovery benefit, CRB, which is the successor to the CERB.

Does the member agree with the NDP that this move is premature and that there are plenty of small businesses across the country, including in the restaurant business and the tourism sector, that will need continued support to recover from the consequences and the economic consequences of this pandemic?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for mentioning the importance of small businesses. That is why Conservatives, from the very beginning of this pandemic, worked with the Liberals and other parties in this House to try to design some of these assistance programs as best we could. In fact, it was the Conservatives who came out and said the initial wage subsidies the Liberal Party had set at 10% were much too low.

For sure, there are businesses that still need assistance and we want to see those programs still there for those businesses that need it, but this cannot be the new normal. This cannot go on in perpetuity . We have to see a clear path to an end to these lockdowns and restrictions and get Canadian businesses back open, but that will only happen if the Liberal government starts procuring and distributing vaccines as soon as possible.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB

Madam Speaker, the Liberals always tell us and accuse us now that we want to cut and cut in the budget, we did not support spending and all of these things.

With the debt we have and are going to be incurring over the next number of years, if rates go up even just a little bit, and we are approaching $40 billion, can you explain to Canadians the impact that will have on some of the social structures we have in this country?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I want to remind the member he is to address questions and comments through the Chair.

The hon. member for Foothills has less than a minute to respond.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Madam Speaker, I want to put that into perspective. The new debt the Liberal budget has put on is going to cost more than $40 billion a year just to service that new debt at the current rates, so imagine if interest rates go up. That is two years of health transfer payments to the provinces. Health transfers to the provinces could be increased substantially, not to mention other very important social service programs, but unfortunately we will not be able to afford those things in the future. Imagine what $45 billion a year could do if we were not having to spend that money servicing new Liberal debt.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to put some thoughts on the record with respect to Bill C-30. I want to thank my colleague from Foothills for splitting his time with me.

In my riding of Chatham-Kent—Leamington, or CKL for short, agriculture, agri-food and agri-food processing is a bedrock element of our local economy, just like for the previous speaker.

I want to begin my comments here. Before proceeding, I would also note that as a father of four daughters, my desire is that they face no glass ceilings in their careers. I want to congratulate the finance minister on being the first female finance minister to deliver a budget. My youngest daughter Kiana just completed her masters in economics, and so maybe, one day, she, too, will deliver a budget, hopefully one based on solid economics rather than election politics.

Back to agriculture, the Canadian agriculture and agri-food system is a key driver of our economy and generates $143 billion, accounts for 7.4% of our GDP, and provides for one in eight jobs, at least in 2018, and more than that this year.

This budget does include some provisions for up $100 million for rebates from the carbon tax for on-farm natural gas and propane use. At the agriculture and agri-food committee, we are presently finishing a review of Bill C-206, sponsored by my colleague, the MP for Northumberland—Peterborough South, which proposes an exemption from the carbon tax for on-farm propane and natural gas.

No doubt the existence of this private member's bill influenced the government's decision to include this measure. We discussed, and continue to discuss, at committee the utility of a rebate versus an exemption system. Farmers in my riding and indeed farmers all across Canada can thank Conservatives for this initiative appearing in the budget. Nevertheless, it is good to see that this issue is acknowledged, and that is a positive.

I also want to acknowledge monies targeted to agriculture in the form of incentives as part of programming to address climate initiatives. Practically speaking, though, the costs alone of fossil fuels, of nitrogen fertilizers is enough to encourage their judicious use. Despite that, innovation and environmental responsibility have always been hallmarks of our ag sector.

As the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food has acknowledged, present viable, scalable technologies that reduce agriculture's greenhouse gas emissions are presently lacking. Given that, incentives to encourage development and innovation are far better tools than punitive taxes, as many witnesses at the committee have testified.

However, if there is one measure that has the potential to move the needle in the adoption of technology in the ag sector, it is the expansion of high-speed broadband to rural and remote areas. The further adoption of precision agriculture, a key technology to build on ag's strong track record of environmental responsibility, is so often hindered by the lack of high-speed Internet access, and the previous speaker echoed these comments.

While the $1 billion amount announced for the universal broadband fund pales in comparison to other funding promises, it is the increased use of this technology that does have the potential to lower ag greenhouse gas emissions.

Given all the attention that the deficit of connectivity in rural and remote areas has attracted over the years, all of the promises, all of the election pledges, even before COVID-19, should have led to the ag sector, and indeed all rural Canadians, using world-class broadband infrastructure by now.

To quote a recent Western Producer editorial, “They didn't and we don't.” The parallels between promises of increased high-speed access and national child care programs are eerily similar, often announced and seldom delivered.

Specifically, I want to point out the situation in my riding of Pelee Island. While the most southerly inhabited point in Canada, it can be considered as remote as, if not more remote than, many parts of our north. There is no reliable 911 service. As it currently stands, Pelee Island has no broadband Internet available to the public. Internet speed on the island is either dial-up or slow cellular hubs for existing businesses, residents and visitors with huge costs associated for small amounts of data. Stormy weather disrupts this service. Pelee Island is the very definition of remote, with only boat and air access in summer, in good weather, and only air access in winter, again, in good weather.

My riding lies in southwestern Ontario, a region serviced by the Southwestern Integrated Fibre Technology, or SWIFT for short. Ten per cent of Canada's underserved broadband area resides in southwestern Ontario.

Therefore, under the government's previous connect to innovate, CTI, program, SWIFT's share of funding should have amounted to $58.5 million, yet the amount received was zero, not a penny. Similar to the structure of the previous CTI program, the government has chosen to administer the present universal broadband fund with no pro rata share provisions for under-serviced areas. This budget contains spending measures of $509 billion, over half a trillion dollars, but Canadians were looking for a budget with a plan for growth, for investment in infrastructure and a budget with a debt management plan to recover from the huge impacts of COVID.

I recently surveyed my constituents on a host of issues. Specifically on the statement that small businesses are the key to economic rebound in Canada, and 87% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed. Only 13% agreed or strongly agreed that multinational corporations were the key to our economic recovery. My constituents and all Canadians were looking not for a government-led spending plan, but a budget investing in infrastructure and creating the climate for a business-led recovery. The small businesses that I relate to in Chatham and Leamington, Blenheim, Ridgetown and many other towns in Chatham-Kent—Leamington need the confidence that their government will manage the country's finances well, so that the climate into which they invest is stable and predictable.

While this budget talks about some small investments in infrastructure and necessary measures to support small businesses affected by government, what this budget does not contain is a plan to pay for all of the election promises. There are no tax reforms, no financial guardrails anchored to fixed thresholds, no targets and no path to balance. These are the kinds of measures that give small business the confidence to invest and lead our recovery, and that is this budget's greatest failure.

Is this the spending legacy that we want to leave to our children and grandchildren? Last June I had the pleasure of announcing in the House the birth of my first grandchild. I also stated at the time that it was estimated that her share of the federal interest-bearing debt would be over $39,300 at fiscal year end. I was wrong. According to the budget just tabled, her share of the debt as of March 31 is over $43,300 and the budget predicts that her share of the debt five years from now will grow to over $50,700.

Here is what really scares me. Today's budget has assumed an average interest rate-carrying cost on our present debt of 1.2%. Yes, today's interest rates are low, but these budget assumptions assume that the average carrying cost will only rise to 1.9% five years from now. This assumption is inconsistent with how the government is funding its annual deficits. The government is printing money to finance its spending and every time in the past when governments have done this, the economy experiences inflation. In fact, we already are.

Asset inflation is here, as anyone who is trying to buy a house or a two-by-four already knows, and the Consumer Price Index is sure to follow. What follows inflation? It is higher interest rates as the government tries to rein in inflation and prop up its currency, so I have very little faith that interest rates will average 1.9% on the government debt five years from now.

Who does this hurt? People who have assets with low debt like this scenario, but for those working for a paycheque, their wages seldom keep up to rising costs. Everyday Canadians do not want this inflationary future, so this budget, with so much unfocused inflationary spending, cannot be supported. We will hear the usual refrains from government members that we Conservatives want to have our cake and eat it, too. Conservatives have supported and will continue to support measures to support Canadians and small business, but not the reckless, uncontrolled spending without a plan for our grandchildren.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for acknowledging the first woman finance minister in history presenting this amazing budget.

Earlier in the debate, it was said that within four days we provided huge liquidity to help small businesses and provide mortgage relief for people who needed it and I would ask if he agrees with that. I am glad he supported infrastructure because record amounts are flowing across the country and economists say that is the best way to inspire the economy.

The member made a point about the debt. I wonder what items he would not spend money on to reduce the debt that he talked about.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Madam Speaker, with respect to debt, there are hard choices that have to be made. I am not averse to debt, but this budget does not contain a plan that inspires confidence to invest among our small and medium-sized business owners. What kinds of carrying costs are they going to be facing in the future on the basis of the unfocused spending? There are, by some counts, 270 measures of spending in this budget.

The member acknowledged my support for infrastructure spending. I agree with that. Let us take broadband, for instance, with $1 billion spread over several years. One billion dollars for something so necessary, in a $500 billion budget, is 0.2%. I am a numbers guy, and that helps me bring perspective to this. There are many, many spending measures and they are not prioritized properly.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for sharing some interesting information about his riding. One of the greatest things in this chamber is that we get to hear about the vast diversity in our country. I learned a lot about his riding, so I thank him for that.

The best expression of where we are fiscally in this country is that we are experiencing a K-shaped recovery. Obviously, many sectors have really been hit hard, but some sectors have made massive profits. In fact, some of the richest Canadians have made about $78 billion during this last year, so my question for my hon. colleague is on the revenue side.

Eventually someone is going to have to pay the freight. Does the member agree with the NDP that it is time we bring in some fair taxation measures so that we tax wealth, go after tax havens and close tax loopholes to get a fairer balance, or does he think that working Canadians are the ones who should have to pay for this spending?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Madam Speaker, in principle, going after tax loopholes and tax havens are efforts that I would support.

The member mentioned the diversity in income and the diversity in how this pandemic has affected different sectors of our economy. That is what I referred to in my speech. I have great fears about inflation coming. Those members of our society who have assets and who have low debt will profit. They will continue to do well in this scenario where costs and asset returns outstrip wages. It is the members of our society who are working for wages, trying to buy their first houses and trying to get into this economy that I have the greatest fears for when inflation inevitably follows uncontrolled spending.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Madam Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer published a report stating that Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio will be 49.2% at best, if I remember correctly.

What impact might this have on our finances in the event of a future crisis? Does my colleague think that we have the necessary flexibility if we have to confront another crisis?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Madam Speaker, I will not answer with my own words, but I can reference the report yesterday from Yves Giroux, in which he cites that very concern: With this spending, we are not positioned to take on another crisis. As the previous speaker pointed out, our debt servicing costs top $40 billion. That is almost 10% now of the highest budget in history, which was just announced. That is what is in our future unless we bring some balance and a plan for our financial outlook to this country.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:45 p.m.
See context

Vaughan—Woodbridge Ontario

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my good friend and colleague, the member of Parliament for Davenport.

It is a pleasure to speak on Bill C-30, an act to implement certain provisions of budget 2021. As I stated during the budget debate, we as a government will continue to have the backs of Canadian workers and businesses as we continue the fight against COVID-19, but we will also take the next steps to position our economy for ongoing recovery and economic growth.

Simply, our ongoing focus is to strengthen Canada's middle class and help those who are working hard to join it. That has been our goal since Canadians, in the fall of 2015, entrusted us with moving Canada forward. As we fast forward to today, that is what we are laser focused on doing as a government. Strengthening a growing middle class, for me, equals a more inclusive and fair society.

It is a pleasure to represent the entrepreneurial and hard-working residents of Vaughan—Woodbridge. I wish to take a moment to encourage all residents who are eligible to receive a vaccine, to please make an appointment as soon as possible. My riding is home to a number of hot spots, and we need to ensure that all of our families and friends are safe and that life can get back to normal quickly. That can only occur through vaccinations.

I describe the budget as ambitious in attempting to answer the challenges we face not only today, but also tomorrow. Bill C-30 begins to implement this ambitious blueprint to build a resilient and more inclusive Canada.

In 2015, we promised Canadians that we would reduce taxes for millions of middle-class Canadians and raise them for the top 1%, and that is exactly what we did. In 2019, we again promised Canadians we would reduce their taxes by raising the amount of income they could earn without paying federal taxes. Bill C-30 implements that promise.

Bill C-30 will raise the basic personal exemption amount from $12,298 to $13,220 for the 2020 taxation year and, once fully implemented, to $15,000 for the 2023 taxation period. This tax reduction means that hard-working Canadians, including those in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge, will see savings at the onset of $2.9 billion. Once fully implemented, it will result in $5.6 billion in lower taxes for 2023-2024 and thereafter.

It is estimated that hard-working individuals will save just under $300 per year, while middle-class Canadian families, on average, will save $600 per year. That is $600 for middle-class families to spend on groceries, kids' after-school sports or arts programs, or to put away as savings for their kids' education.

The increase is estimated to result in an additional 700,000 Canadians, including seniors and young people starting their careers, who will pay no federal tax at all. Just as important is that approximately 40,000 more Canadians will be lifted out of poverty by this measure. That is real progress and that is smart policy. That is how to build a stronger middle class and help those working hard to join the middle class.

Millions of hard-working Canadians will benefit from this tax reduction and hundreds of thousands will be lifted from the tax rolls. It is great to see that the implementation of the basic personal exemption increase will be done. It is an idea that I have long championed and one I put forth in the 2019 platform.

Bill C-30 will extend the current support programs through to September, and will continue to assist Canadian workers and businesses that remain impacted by COVID-19. The CEWS and the Canada emergency rent subsidy are programs that I know literally hundreds of businesses in my riding have used, and continue to use during this difficult third wave of the pandemic. Budget 2021 provides certainty and clarity to Canadian businesses on both of these key support programs. The city of Vaughan is home to over 12,000 small and medium-sized businesses and they know that our government continues to have their backs during COVID-19.

Our goal must not only be to recover the jobs lost because of the pandemic, but to once again create good, middle-class jobs for Canadians. Bill C-30 spurs job creation with a new Canada recovery hiring program that incentivizes the hiring of new workers as we emerge from the pandemic. To build a fairer and more inclusive economy that works for all Canadians, we need to ensure that our tax system is fair and inherently progressive, and that loopholes, unfair tax evasions and tax advantages are prudently closed.

In Bill C-30, our government will move forward to implement measures that will limit the benefit of employee stock option deductions for employees of large and well-established corporations. Stock options are valuable and important incentives for newly funded firms, such as tech firms or start-ups, to pay their employees as they grow the business while cash flow, or as it should be referred to free cash flow, is very low. I know how important entrepreneurs are, and how they create jobs and take on risk, and they should be rewarded. However, for well-established firms the tax advantages offered by stock options should be limited. I advocated for this differential treatment of stock options. It is a large measure for tax fairness, which I am very glad to see in Bill C-30.

In line with our allies such as France, Italy and the United Kingdom, we will move forward with the implementation of a digital tax. Bill C-30 proposes implementing a digital services tax, at a rate of 3%, on revenue from digital services that rely on data and content contributions from Canadian users. The measure would apply to large businesses with gross revenues of 750 million euros or more. It would come into effect by January 1, 2022, and is anticipated to raise approximately $3.4 billion.

We will continue to provide tools and resources to the CRA as it combats tax evasion to ensure everyone pays their fair share.

Our government continues to strengthen the disability tax credit and related programs used by Canadians with special abilities. Bill C-30 proposes to remove the time limit for a registered disability savings plan to remain registered after the cessation of a beneficiary's eligibility for the disability tax credit, and to modify rent and bond repayment obligations. This again fulfills a promise of our government to the disability community. As noted in budget 2021, an expansion of the disability tax credit would take place to provide further support and expansion to the number of disabled Canadians eligible for the DTC.

Bill C-30 implements our budget promise with a major expansion to the Canada workers benefit of nearly $9 billion over six years and $1.7 billion annually. Approximately one million additional hard-working Canadians will benefit, and 100,000 are estimated to be lifted out of poverty with a strengthened CWB. We have a moral obligation to ensure that work allows individuals to live in dignity. We know how important the dignity of work is, but we need to ensure that individuals who are working hard are not falling behind. I have long favoured the Canada workers benefit as an effective income support measure. Along with prior enhancements to the program, namely in budget 2018, approximately three million Canadians will now benefit from this program. The CWB's effectiveness was strengthened with automatic enrolment for the non-refundable credit via the Canada Revenue Agency, which ensures all Canadians who are entitled to the credit will receive it.

In conjunction with the CWB increase, it is great to see that the minimum wage for federally regulated workers will be set at $15 per hour and adjusted upward annually on the basis of the consumer price index in Canada.

Bill C-30 implements a number of measures for seniors and students, both of whom we know have been impacted by COVID‑19 in different ways. For students, Bill C-30 amends the Canada Student Loans Act and also the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act. These amendments will provide students with approximately $3 billion in relief. In addition, no students will have to begin repaying their loans until they earn $40,000 per year. Combined, these measures will support an additional 121,000 students.

I wish to end by discussing our seniors, including my parents Rocco and Vincenza. These people built our country. They sacrificed, worked hard and built the strong foundations we now rely on. We know that our seniors, including my parents, helped build our country and sacrificed so much. Their fiscal prudence, work ethic and ingenuity continue to inspire me today.

We will fulfill our promise to raise old age security by 10% for seniors 75 years of age and older effective June 2022. This measure will benefit 3.3 million seniors, and is a $12 billion investment in our seniors over the next five years.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to ask the parliamentary secretary a question that directly relates to his area of responsibility.

This pandemic is global in scope, yet the budget missed an opportunity to reform onerous direction and control regulations. Direction and control regulations are unnecessary red tape that reduce the resources our critical international development organizations can bring to the front lines to help the world's most vulnerable.

I asked the Minister of International Development about reforms to direction and control. She said it was not her primary responsibility. Because this would involve changes to Canada Revenue regulations, I would like to hear clearly from the parliamentary secretary why reforms to direction and control were not included in this budget. Does the government see the need for reform of direction and control regulations? What is the government's view on the Senate bill from independent Senator Omidvar, Bill S-222,which proposes one way of reforming those direction and control regulations?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Madam Speaker, obviously any changes to the Income Tax Act in relation to what the hon. member is asking this afternoon flow through the Department of Finance. I encourage the hon. member to raise his concerns directly with the Department of Finance, on the CRA side, which is the implementation side. I would love to learn about this further. I somewhat understand the issue the hon. member is raising, and we can take it off-line to discuss it further.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue has three minutes remaining for questions and comments.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, many progressive measures are within the budget. One that is really quite encouraging is the support for child care throughout Canada. This would add so much value, not only to our economy but to individual families.

Could my colleague comment on that issue?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Vaughan—Woodbridge Ontario

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue

Mr. Speaker, a national child care plan will quickly become a foundational pillar of our social safety net, of our social infrastructure. It will, of course, result in a higher participation rate for women, as many of them choose to re-enter the labour force on a quicker basis. It will result in families saving money. In the riding I represent. in the York Region and in the GTA, it will represent a saving of literally thousands of dollars for Canadian families. Obviously that is very beneficial. It will also result in children receiving excellent care from ECEs across the country.

I wish to thank the leadership of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance for bringing forth this initiative for Canadian families from coast to coast to coast.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, the government is constantly doing the right thing in listening to medical health officials. We would like it to do everything they recommend with respect to protocols around COVID-19. However, when it comes to the opioid crisis, the government fails to do the same thing.

Medical health officers across the country have said that the government needs to decriminalize the use of opioids to end the stigma against those who suffer with a health issue, not a criminal issue. We not only have one crisis, the opioid crisis, we have two. We have a political crisis that is killing people. It is standing in the way of doing the right thing and implementing health policy as recommended by medical health officers.

Will my colleague speak to why the government is not decriminalizing the use of opioids, end the stigma against those struggling with addiction and give them the help they need?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Mr. Speaker, the opioid crisis is a crisis in every sense. We have seen way too many lives taken from their families, especially young people in their 20s and 30s who have unfortunately passed due to this crisis. Our government has put in place literally tens of millions of dollars and has partnered with the provinces to try to stop this crisis. It is a very unfortunate crisis and we must do better, not only as a government but as a society.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to Bill C-30, the budget implementation act, on behalf of the residents in my riding of Davenport. The last time I spoke on the budget, I ran out of time and so I will do my very best to be far more succinct today.

The truth is that this is a historic budget with a huge number of measures that will make a big difference in the lives of Canadians. In fact, in 10 minutes, it is virtually impossible to touch on all the reasons we need to pass the budget implementation act and to relay all the things that matter to Davenport, never mind all the important measures it contains for people right across the country. Instead, I will focus on a few key measures that may have been talked about a little less in the House. I will talk about the federal $15 minimum wage, some of the additional measures and funding for immigration, and the huge increase in funding for a new national action plan to end gender-based violence.

However, before I get to those measures, there are two huge game-changing segments of budget 2021 about I am super excited. I truly believe that they are once-in-a generation investments in our future and that they will be key to our future economic prosperity and jobs.

The first is that we are building a national child care program, which aims to bring child care fees down to $10 a day, will be key to the future economic prosperity and jobs in Canada. We are modelling the program on what Quebec currently does. This is a huge announcement for Davenport residents and families in my riding. We are located in the downtown west Toronto where child care costs are among the highest in the country, so I know they are really happy with this announcement.

Christine Lagarde, managing director of the IMF, spoke to our Prime Minister in July 2016. She said that to boost growth, we needed to employ more women. She indicated at the time that the participation rate for women was 82% in 2015, which was well below the 92% level for men. She also indicated that more women received university degrees than men, but their labour participation rate was 7% lower than men. Thus, there is a lot of room to tap into the underutilized female labour force to anchor strong economic growth. I am delighted that national child care will absolutely enable that. It is good for women, it is good for our economy and it is absolutely critical for Canada's success in the future.

The second game-changing element in budget 2021 is a green restart to our economy. Of all the letters and telephone calls that come into my riding of Davenport, if we exclude anything related to COVID, a green recovery and a green restart is top of the list. I am delighted that budget 2021 confirms a green recovery will be a core part of our strategy to create one million jobs.

In addition to the $60 billion that we have already invested in climate action and clean growth since 2015, we have committed an additional $18 billion in budget 2021. These new dollars will be allocated for more investment in renewables, carbon capture and to protect 25% of our land and water. This is in addition to the plan we announced in December 2020, which is outlined in a report entitled, “A Healthy Environment and Healthy Economy”. For the first time in Canadian history, we included a very specific, transparent, costed plan on how we would reach our emissions reduction targets by 2030. I would note that we have become ambitious since that report came out in mid-December. On Earth Day last month, we announced that we would further reduce our emissions targets to 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030.

For years, Davenport environmentalists have been asking for a clear plan, and that has been delivered. I really want to thank the amazing leadership of the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change for ensuring that we are moving urgently and aggressively to net zero by 2050.

Beyond these measures, I would like to speak about a number of others things.

The first is that we are establishing a federal minimum wage of $15 per hours, rising with inflation. There are provisions to ensure that where provincial or territorial minimum wages are higher, those wages will prevail. This $15 federal minimum wage will directly benefit over 26,000 workers who currently make less than $15 an hour in federally regulated private sectors.

It is no secret that the wages of most workers have not been keeping up with the cost of living and that many Canadians are struggling. We know that the $15 hourly federal minimum wage would be very welcomed by many across this country, and there is a lot of support for it from groups across the country.

The budget would make much-needed improvements to our immigration system. I believe that immigration is essential to Canada's economic future and positive economic growth. With our declining birth rates and increasing retirement rates, good immigration policy and funding will be fundamental to Canada's success moving forward.

I am the daughter of immigrants. My parents worked really hard to build a new life here and to contribute to a country that gave them a home and a safe place to raise their children. Indeed, 43% of my riding of Davenport are the first generation of their families in Canada. They were born in other countries, they specifically chose Canada to be their home and they contribute here. My office is a very popular spot for many immigration matters.

What improvements would budget 2021 make? Budget 2021 proposes to invest almost $430 million to deliver a new digital platform that would replace the outdated legacy global case management system. It also proposes $74 million to enhance capacity and service standards within the client support centre of the IRCC to ensure timely support by phone and email for inquiries related to services offered by the department. It also offers $29 million to be shared between IRCC and the Canada Border Services Agency to maintain and enhance processing capacity for temporary resident applications. I pulled out these three examples, but there are a number of other items.

This investment is huge. It is a game-changer, and it is key to ensuring efficient processing of new Canadians and immigrants. Many of our offices are very much offshoots of IRCC. The better the systems are that we have in place to provide the most timely information to new Canadians and new immigrants trying to come to this country, the better it is for everyone, and the faster we will be able to get them here and contributing to our economy.

We are also proposing a number of other measures to support temporary workers who come to Canada. Among these are more dollars to support migrant-worker-centric programs and services, to increase inspections of the sites that employ temporary foreign workers, and to improve the service delivery of open work permits for vulnerable workers, helping migrant workers in situations of abuse to find new jobs. This is important to point out, because we are determined to treat our migrant workers right. They do so much for us, from our agricultural sector to our food processing and health care sectors.

The final thing I want to point out is that we are providing additional legal aid support, which I know is very important to West Toronto Community Legal Services in my riding. It is to make sure that we provide the support that is needed from a legal perspective to refugees and immigrants who might need it.

I am going to use the last minute and a half to talk about another thing I am really excited about, which is our commitment to gender equality. We truly believe in gender equality and have done so much over the last five years, from installing a gender-balanced cabinet, enacting proactive pay legislation and contributing over $100 million to feminist and women's organizations, to tackling gender-based violence. I was delighted that we put in a historic amount of money, over $600 million, to enact a national action plan to end gender-based violence. For us to truly achieve gender equality in Canada, it is absolutely critical that we tackle gender-based violence. I am delighted that we are making this commitment in this budget and putting real resources behind it to make sure that we put a plan in place to have a dedicated secretariat.

In closing, there are so many elements of this budget that are game-changing. It would not only lead to economic growth, more jobs, a green recovery and more equitable and fuller participation in our workforce, it would also support our low-income earners and offer a better immigration system and a real plan to end violence against women. These measures set Canada up to become a more prosperous, more compassionate and more just society. I encourage all my colleagues to support this bill.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to the member's speech. I am curious as to her thoughts about an increasing challenge to Canadian society, which is inflation. When inflation takes place, generally the only people who benefit are those who are wealthier and who own assets. Regular Canadians, especially those who are middle- and lower-income, are those who most often face the most significant consequences from inflation.

Does the member opposite share those concerns about the circumstances that would see growth in the inflation rate in our country?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Madam Speaker, I think the cost of everything is top of mind for everyone. It is definitely top of mind for those who live in my riding. I know the Governor of the Bank of Canada is very much keeping an eye on that. It is important to know that we have leaders keeping an eye out on that.

The other thing I would add is that all the measures we have put in place to support Canadians through this pandemic have helped those on the lower end and our most vulnerable Canadians. They have helped give them a sustained quality of life and helped to ensure that they can afford to put food on the table and pay rent. We have been successful in doing so through all the emergency supports that—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.
See context

Bloc

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her speech, which I enjoyed. I have a very specific question for her.

It is about something that comes up a lot in my riding. I heard her say something about a fairer and more equitable budget. In the economic update last December, young families heard that the Canada child benefit would be increased.

I assume it was mentioned in the budget as well, but the benefit was supposed to be increased in January, then again in April and July, yet these families have seen no change in their benefits. It is a question that comes up a lot.

When will families see this increase in their child benefit?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Madam Speaker, we are very proud of introducing the Canada child benefit. It has provided wonderful support to families right across the country. My understanding is that it was through Bill C-14, the passage of elements of the fall economic statement, that the Canada child benefit increased. If it has not happened already, my understanding is that it should be happening very shortly.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, members are well aware that over 16,000 Canadians have died as a result of the opioid crisis. In fact, in British Columbia more people have died from overdoses due to fentanyl-poisoned drugs than from COVID-19. We have heard from Moms Stop the Harm, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, Dr. Bonnie Henry in British Columbia and many medical health officers right across the country that the keys to tackling the opioid crisis are ending the stigma and decriminalizing them.

The Liberal government states that it listens to medical health professionals when it comes to the COVID-19 crisis. Why is it not listening to the medical health officers and all of these groups? We can save lives by decriminalizing opioids and ending the stigma for a health issue, instead of continuing to take the approach that it is a criminal issue. Why is the government not taking action? Why is it not listening to its own medical health officers?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for being so passionate about this issue. I completely share his passion on this. I know that Canada suffered a 74% increase in opioid-related deaths in the first six months of the pandemic. Budget 2021 proposes an additional $160 million over two years to address the issue. We are working very closely with provinces and territories to not only look at safe supply, but to truly address this issue. On a personal note, I very much believe in treating opioid use as a health issue and not a criminal issue.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, I would first like to say that I will be sharing my time with my neighbour from the next riding over, the hon. member for Drummond.

This is the second time that I have been given the honour of speaking on behalf of the Bloc Québécois about the 2021 budget, the first in two years. This time, I am speaking to Bill C‑30, which will implement some of the budget's provisions. First of all, I will reiterate that my party will vote in favour of this bill to implement certain measures in the 2021 budget.

We voted against the 2021 budget itself because the federal government did not fulfill our two main requests, namely adequate, recurrent health funding, which was the only formal request made by the Quebec government and echoed by the Canadian provinces, and an increase in old age security for seniors aged 65 and over.

As the Bloc Québécois critic for seniors, I fully support these two requests because they are vital concerns for seniors. Their anger is not going away. I am not the only one saying this. Many seniors' groups, including the Réseau FADOQ, agree. Seniors aged 65 to 74, seniors aged 75 and over, and children and grandchildren under 65 are all feeling frustrated and bewildered. This is happening not only in Quebec, but in Canada as well, since I am also receiving emails in English and comments from anglophones outside Quebec who know that the Bloc Québécois is the party that stands up for all seniors.

I will therefore discuss three aspects of Bill C‑30 that relate to my three main roles, namely critic for seniors, critic for women, and the one I am proudest of, member for Shefford. I will also address the extension of certain economic measures, with which we agree.

By refusing to increase health transfers from 22% to 35% in Bill C-30, the federal government is once again ignoring the request made by Quebec, the provinces, the Quebec National Assembly and the House of Commons, which adopted a Bloc Québécois motion on this subject in December, to significantly and permanently increase federal health transfers.

Bill C‑30 offers only a one-time increase in health transfers, announced last March. This is certainly not enough to make up for the shortfall that existed well before the pandemic and was exacerbated by the crisis and by population aging. As we have said countless times, we are in a health crisis right now, so now is when we should be taking action, instead of waiting for the crisis to be over.

It is worth noting that the deficit announced in the 2021 budget is lower than anticipated. It is $354 billion instead of the $382 billion announced in the 2020 fall economic statement. By purest chance, the resulting margin happens to be exactly $28 billion, the same amount that Quebec and the provinces are asking for.

By refusing to provide that money even as it gears up for a colossal spending spree, the government is not making a budgetary choice, but a political choice at the expense of everyone's health. After seniors waited so long, Bill C‑30 finally includes the increase to old age security that the Liberals' promised during the 2019 election campaign. However, the increase will only start in 2022, will only apply to seniors aged 75 and over, and will only amount to $766 per year, or $63.80 a month. This increase is insufficient for seniors and for the Bloc Québécois. It totally ignores seniors aged 65 to 74, who account for practically half of all seniors currently receiving old age security.

The Bloc Québécois will continue to demand a substantial increase, namely $110 more a month, for all seniors aged 65 and over. We do not accept the Liberals' argument that financial insecurity begins at age 75. However, we will not oppose the decision to give some seniors the assistance included in Bill C‑30, which they need and deserve.

Seniors aged 75 and over will receive a one-time payment of $500 in August 2021, which is consistent with what was announced in the budget. It is merely an election ploy, and seniors know it.

The bill also implements the 10% increase promised to seniors 75 and over. As of the quarter starting July 1, 2022, the full monthly old age security benefit will increase by 10% during the period when a senior turns 75. It is strange that the increase does not start until 2022. Is this another election promise?

The government is not doing as we asked, which is what seniors themselves asked it to do. It is creating two classes of seniors. Why increase old age security only once people turn 75? That is age discrimination, it is ageism. It is not true that only seniors 75 and older are vulnerable.

Once again, we are asking for an additional $110 per month for all seniors 65 and up. Financial insecurity, poverty and rising prices do not wait until people turn 75 to kick in. Old age security is a universal program designed to compensate for loss of income after retirement. The Liberals seem to think that vulnerable people over the age of 65 do not deserve their attention. They seem to think that financial insecurity does not affect people until they turn 75. To top it off, all it would have cost is about $4 billion. As my colleague from Joliette said yesterday, and as economics reporter Gérald Fillion wrote in an article, Canada's record on supporting retirees, compared to other OECD countries, is dismal. We are in 32nd place.

Second, as the Bloc Québécois critic for the status of women and gender equality, I note that the bill provides for a one-time payment of just over $130 million to the Government of Quebec to harmonize the Quebec parental insurance plan, since the eligibility criteria and benefit period for EI have been temporarily modified and increased. Quebec has the right to opt out with financial compensation with respect to the maternity and parental benefits program.

Thus, if the government invests in improving its program, it must pay for the Quebec government to make a matching investment, the same way the government is giving itself the right to compensate any province that wishes to opt out of the federal early learning and child care program. This is a file we have talked about a lot at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. However, the spending authority for this child care program seems to be valid only for the next fiscal year, from April 2021 to March 2022, for a maximum transfer of $3 billion to each province and to Quebec.

The budget document, as opposed to Bill C‑30, mentions different program objectives and the possibility of an asymmetrical bilateral agreement with Quebec. There are two things we must watch out or. First, does the fact that Bill C‑30 only deals with the 2021–22 fiscal year mean the government is covering the costs of establishing and improving the child care program until asymmetrical agreements are signed?

I should point out that “asymmetrical” does not necessarily mean “unconditional”. It is not the same thing, and it is important to be careful. The budget rightly mentions and praises the Quebec child care system several times, which it claims to be inspired by. The announcement that there will be an asymmetrical agreement with Quebec is a positive sign, but only if this agreement comes with, I repeat, full and unconditional compensation for the total costs and for the program's measures. This is also what the Quebec National Assembly is calling for. The expertise is in Quebec.

Overall, beyond the measures themselves, a new Canada‑wide child care program provides another opportunity for federal interference. Family policies and all the associated programs come under the exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. This is another example of a government that is getting into the habit of sticking its nose where it does not belong, as it is doing with many other measures, such as the national framework for women's health, the national framework for reproductive health, and so on.

Why create these unnecessary conflicts with Quebec and the provinces? Why does the federal government not mind its own business? For a government that claims to be feminist, it is time to stop playing “father knows best”.

As a final point, I really want to commend the resilience of our businesses and the strong entrepreneurial spirit that defines Shefford. They have been hit hard during the crisis, which is why we are asking that the income stabilization programs be maintained as long as necessary. It is clear that many sectors, including tourism and cultural and artistic events, will not resume normal operations until well after November 2021. These sectors are so important to the economic life of my riding, and they need to know that they can count on assistance as long as they need it. They have talked about the importance of predictability and flexibility. The Canada emergency wage subsidy, which has been used by many companies, including some in Granby's industrial park in my riding, will be extended to September 25, 2021, and that is great.

In closing, I would like to reiterate that our vote in favour of Bill C‑30, which implements certain provisions of the budget, does not mean that we are giving the government a blank cheque. We will be watching closely to see how certain programs are implemented, especially for the hardest-hit sectors, including culture and media, which I am sure my dashing colleague from Drummond will talk about more fully in his speech.

As the member for Beloeil—Chambly often says, the devil is in the details, and there are certainly plenty of details in this budget. However, out of respect for everyone's health, and out of respect for our elders, who have the right to age with dignity by enjoying life, not merely surviving, we must act now.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to talk about my colleague from the Bloc's comments on day care and how the federal government continues to intrude into areas of provincial jurisdiction. This Ottawa-knows-best approach that the federal government seems to have is something that I think should be concerning. I think we can all acknowledge the fact that there is an issue with the availability of spaces and the cost of day care. However, the idea that provinces cannot have their own models and compete against other provinces in terms of improving their services, improving their costs and improving whatever is next, I think, shows conformity rather than competition within the provinces.

Can the member comment on that and other issues she has with the Ottawa-knows-best approach being proposed by the government?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his remarks.

In the budget, the federal government's attempts to interfere are clear. This is the mistake the government has made in reacting to a crisis. It really wants to intrude in our jurisdictions and interfere in everything.

My colleague gave the example of day care. I repeat that it was Quebec that developed this expertise. It does not need Ottawa trying to play the wise old grandfather or father and offering advice, because Quebec knows what to do. In my opinion, the important thing is to have the ability to opt out and do what we have to do based on our needs.

I will repeat that the provincial governments and the Quebec government are in the best position to set their own priorities, especially with respect to education and day care.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for mentioning the situation about continuing shortfalls and health funding transfers. That is something that the Bloc and the NDP agree on.

While Canadians are struggling with the health and economic impacts of the pandemic, big companies can continue to hide their profits in offshore tax havens. Could the member talk about how unfair that is, how those who profited from this pandemic just are not paying their fair share?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, I have to give a nod to my colleague from Joliette, because I know he would answer that there is still far too much tax evasion and tax avoidance going on and that we should be doing more about it.

Of course, that is where we could find some money, just as we could get money by taxing the web giants. We could also look for money elsewhere. Some major corporations are evading and avoiding taxes by illegal and sometimes even unethical means. We must recover this money and reinvest it, perhaps in health, where it is desperately needed.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, who is always passionate and eloquent.

My colleague is right. The fact that the government does not want to improve the old age pension is causing a lot of frustration. Everyone agrees on that. We owe seniors so much more than this.

We have seen a rather odd phenomenon playing out at our constituency offices over the past few weeks, ever since the budget was brought down. It is not necessarily the people concerned, in other words seniors, who are getting in touch to express their dissatisfaction. The surprising thing is that it is their children and grandchildren.

How does my colleague explain the fact that the Liberal government is refusing to give even a tiny amount of money to seniors? The bottom line is that we are talking about 1% of the deficit. Can my colleague elaborate on this?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for his hard work. I know that he works hard for the seniors in his riding, as do all of the other Bloc Québécois members.

I do not think there is any question that seniors have been in a precarious financial situation for a long time now. This was an issue before the crisis, and this crisis has only exacerbated the problem. Seniors are not the only ones feeling it. Their grandchildren can see it as well. One young man wrote to me about presenting a petition out of respect for his grandparents, because he thought the situation was unacceptable.

I even hear from seniors who are 76 years old and who say that they do not have more expenses than before and that their financial situation is not necessarily worse than that of their 73‑ or 74‑year‑old neighbour. They are insulted. They could not care less about the $500 cheque if their 73‑year‑old neighbour is not getting it as well. They think that is unfair. The youngest and the oldest citizens recognize that it is unfair to leave out seniors aged 65 to 74.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating my colleague from Shefford for her brilliant speech and for her work on behalf of seniors. Her work can be felt in my own riding, Drummond, which neighbours hers. The work she is doing for seniors is so brilliant and so serious that seniors in my riding recognize that the hon. member for Shefford is doing an outstanding job. I want to commend her.

I am very pleased to speak today to Bill C‑30, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget. As my colleague said a little earlier, the Bloc welcomes this bill. Needless to say, it contains urgent measures; we all agree on that.

I would like to commend the government for its initiative to remove certain technical barriers that have limited access to media assistance. These include deductions for subscription fees for individuals and the wage subsidy for media outlets. This will be well received by our print media, although there is no telling when the Liberals will realize how much our regional media, especially our weeklies, need legislation to solve the problems of the GAFAM. Even today, the GAFAM makes millions of dollars in profits on the backs of the content of our media and cultural creators.

Division 17 of part 4 of the bill amends the Telecommunications Act, in particular by facilitating the exchange of information between levels of government. This will better coordinate Quebec's efforts to provide access to telecommunications services in remote areas. We very much welcome the fact that the government is taking away the right to review CRTC decisions in funding matters for underserved regions. This adds a layer of protection against the government's often ill-advised decisions related to high-speed Internet in the regions. Everyone agrees that the government has clearly shown that this is not its great strength. We have come to expect the Liberals to promise nice things without delivering on them. That is their signature.

Take, for example, the measures announced in the budget for tourism and culture. When the budget was introduced a few weeks ago, the cultural industry's spontaneous reaction was very positive. I had the same type of reaction.

The government announced approximately $1.3 billion in assistance over three years, including $400 million for large and small festivals; $300 million over two years to create a recovery fund for arts, culture, heritage and sports sectors; $500 million for a tourism relief fund; $70 million over three years for the Canada music fund; $105 million over three years for Telefilm Canada; and $39.3 million over two years to support the book industry.

These provisions proved that the government recognized and understood the importance of helping the cultural industry. Many sectors of the industry were in a precarious situation before the pandemic for various reasons, one of which was the fact that the Department of Canadian Heritage's budget had not been increased since 2008. For 10 years, there were no investments in culture. The Liberals can lay some of the blame for that on the Conservatives because they undermined our industry by making $45 million in cuts in 2008.

I would like to quote the Prime Minister, the chief expert in empty rhetoric. Yesterday in the House of Commons, he said, “when it comes to culture, Canadians are certainly not going to believe the Conservatives. That is for sure. As a government, we have always been there for creators”.

As the philosopher Plato would say, that is an absurdity. The government has always been there in word. That is true. However, in practice, the Department of Canadian Heritage's budget did not increase from 2015 to early 2020. Why did the Liberals turn a deaf ear to the industry's repeated requests? The industry has been calling for an increase in funding for a long time.

I will not spend time talking about what the Liberals have not done because I only have 10 minutes. As an eternal optimist, I will focus on the future and tell myself that a little pressure and good collaboration might convince the Liberals to reconsider.

I was happy about all those measures I just listed, all those measures to help the tourism and cultural sectors, but I was deeply disappointed that the government opted not to include those measures in Bill C‑30.

Festival season is coming, but the crowds will not be as big as they were two years ago because now we have public health rules to follow. Organizers are already busy preparing for this summer. As I said, they are happy with the funding set aside to help them. They now know that money will show up at some point, but they do not know when.

Arts and entertainment, festivals and tourism need predictability to survive, so I do not understand why the Liberals chose not to act fast to help the creators and artists they claim to stand up for.

Unfortunately, there are other flaws. Let us talk about the so-called digital services tax, or DST, which is a strange name, in my opinion. The chapter of the budget on the digital services tax starts off by saying, “The government is committed to ensuring that corporations in all sectors, including digital corporations, pay their fair share of tax on the money they earn by doing business in Canada.” It is there in black and white. However, this tax will not apply to companies like Spotify, Amazon Prime, Disney Plus, Apple Music and Netflix, who draw their income from user subscription fees.

This tax, nicknamed the “Netflix tax”, will not apply to Netflix. This week in the House, I asked the Minister of Canadian Heritage questions about this digital services tax. To summarize, I asked why the government continued to give multinational web giants a free ride. The minister replied that I had it all wrong. He then declared that web giants would be taxed.

I know that the minister has a lot on his plate these days with all the questions about the environment. I will be happy to help him understand culture and communications a little better. The tax the Minister of Canadian Heritage was talking about was the GST, which is paid by consumers, not companies. Companies collect it and hand it over to the government.

Page 733 of the budget says that the digital services tax would not apply to companies that stream digital audiovisual content. The Bloc Québécois wants the digital services tax to apply to companies that stream this kind of content. The idea is that this money would be given to our cultural and media industries as compensation, as they have unfairly suffered from the arrival of the Web giants. The government, however, would rather put that money in the consolidated revenue fund than use it to help those that urgently need it.

Netflix streams audiovisual content, and Netflix and the others have a significant impact on our cultural sector, so Netflix is not subject to the Netflix tax. That speaks volumes about the government's understanding of the issues. The government does not need to thank me for my insights; if it has any more questions, it knows where to find me. Seriously, though, I am astounded that the Liberals do not appear to have a concept of fairness. The government seriously lacks courage in dealing with foreign companies.

I now want to talk about a topic that my colleague from Shefford raised earlier. This topic affects us all and considerably affects my constituents in Drummond. With Bill C‑30, the Liberal government is finally getting to its 2019 election promise to increase old age security, but only as of the age of 75 and only by $766 a year. As members know, this increase will not even happen until 2022. I think the House is well aware of the Bloc Québécois's position on this subject, but I want to give a voice to those who have been forgotten and who are affected by this.

This week, Mr. Bibeau called my office to share his disappointment with my team. He did not understand why the government made this choice to increase OAS at 75 only. He said, “I am retired. I receive the old age pension too and I think it is unfair that I am not getting that increase. My needs are no different from those 75 and older. I have to buy groceries and I have bills and rent to pay, just like them. I am not saying that I am jealous. I am happy that they are getting that money, but I do not understand this choice by the Liberals. I do not know if I am still going to be here when I am 75. I want to fully enjoy my retirement, spoil myself a bit and it seems that it would be a show of respect for the government to give this increase starting at 65 for all the years I worked and contributed, right?”

I understand and I share Mr. Bibeau's dissatisfaction, concerns and dismay. There are others like him: Mrs. Gaudreault, Mrs. Tellier, Mr. Paradis, Mrs. Guérin. Many people share Mr. Bibeau's point of view.

In Quebec, 19% of the population is over 65. In Canada, two million people are between the ages of 65 and 74, or two million people have been ignored by a government that made the choice to increase the pension at 75 as though the pandemic and the cost of living did not affect people 65 to 74. I think this deserves some serious thought.

I would now be happy to answer my colleague's questions.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, there has been a lot of talk, in particular from the Bloc, about the age of 65 versus the age of 75, and the increase that is being proposed in this budget. There is data out there to suggest and to support that the older people get, the more they burn through their retirement savings, the more health costs they incur and, generally speaking, the more expensive life becomes, compared to what they have as they get older.

Is it the Bloc's preference that, rather than giving more to those over 75, less is given to everybody over 65? That is another option. We could take that amount that we were going to give to those who really need it, those who are over 75, and spread it out between everybody over 65. Is that the preference of the Bloc?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I find it peculiar that the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands would suggest that the opposition should have to make the tough decisions. What a ridiculous thing to say.

People have paid into their pension plans for their entire careers and their whole lives, knowing that they would retire at 65. That is often the choice people make when starting their careers, or at least it was a few years ago. They are entitled to their pensions. They have the same expenses, the same needs and the same cost of living increases to deal with. Health care costs may be higher or more of a burden at age 75 and above, but that does not make it any more equitable to allocate these increases only to those aged 75 and older.

If the member would bother to listen to his own constituents, he might see that this is not just a suggestion from the Bloc Québécois, but a concern of all seniors across Canada.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Madam Speaker, I was going to ask about telecom, but I will carry on with this discussion. It is interesting that the parliamentary secretary's first response was to cut people back, whereas we know that people aged 65 and over are entering into or staying in the workforce longer because their pensions do not make—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe I was the one speaking, not a parliamentary secretary.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands has a point. He is not a parliamentary secretary.

The hon. member for Windsor West.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Madam Speaker, apparently things here are extremely sensitive, so I apologize and retract that part of my discussion.

The problem with people having to get jobs and work longer is that it squeezes out young people. I would ask my colleague how he feels about that. The response from the government is to cut back more people versus providing better supports, and that has a consequence for young people. Seniors or people wanting to retire cannot because they cannot afford it, so there are fewer jobs for youth.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and comments.

First, I believe that our colleague from Kingston and the Islands should have appreciated the impromptu promotion he was just offered.

I want to say that I find it quite odd to hear the government speak of making cuts so that the increases are fair, rather than just making the increases fair, especially when it has spent billions of dollars—quite recklessly, some might say—to help just about everyone and every business. The government likes to brag about that, and perhaps it just has a hard time treating all seniors 65 and up fairly.

It is not a matter of making cuts. They just need to treat our seniors fairly.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to continue with what my friend was talking about, which is how the budget is created and why the Liberals continue to structure endless amounts of deficit spending around the COVID pandemic.

The member spoke to programs that are now being created. Even though the government is continuing to fail on a number of files, including clean water for first nations, veterans and the list goes on, it is entering provincial jurisdictions with structural deficits that will continue well into the future, whereas it should be encouraging provinces to have competition within themselves, rather than conformity with an “Ottawa knows best” approach. I would like the member's thoughts on that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I believe that my colleague knows full well what we think of federal interference in provincial jurisdictions.

I also believe that money should not be doled out left, right and centre as an election promise. I believe that the money that was promised for programs to help businesses and sectors that urgently need it should not be promises that will be kicked down the road. I was speaking about tourism and culture. I could continue in that vein by talking about health transfers, which once more are non-existent.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4 p.m.
See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to be able to address the House of Commons, and this is a special time in that we are once again debating very important legislation. I am feeling very positive and encouraged because we presented, for the very first time in Canada by a female Minister of Finance, plan of action that would have a profoundly positive impact in every region of our country.

It is with pleasure that I encourage my colleagues across the way to recognize the true value in this legislation. As I suspect there is a chance a good number of opposition members will be supporting the legislation, we need to try to get it through the House of Commons in an appropriate and timely fashion, and not go through the same process we did with Bill C-14, given the very nature of the limited time frame we have to get government agenda items through the House of Commons. I encourage the House to deal with the legislation accordingly.

It is an exciting budget, therefore it is a solid and exciting budget implementation bill. Before I comment on that, I wanted to give a bit of a personal update on why I think Canadians should be feeling more positive and have a sense of hope. In the news in recent days and weeks, we have heard a lot about the coronavirus and how it is affecting our country, particularly some of those hard-hit areas, in this third wave. I am thinking of the province of Ontario and many of my Ontario colleagues, who are very strong advocates and who are expressing their concerns to make sure the Prime Minister and the House of Commons understand the severity of what is taking place in the province.

Last night we held an emergency debate regarding the the hardships and impacts of the third wave in Alberta. No matter the area or region of the country, the Government of Canada, headed by the Prime Minister, is doing everything it can to ensure we minimize the negative impacts of the coronavirus. As I have said on many occasions in the past, we have been there since day one on this issue.

The Winnipeg Free Press ran a wonderful story that reads something to the effect that bookings for the second dose of the vaccine could begin as early May 22. Vaccines are a major part of the recovery, and I am feeling very optimistic because of the numbers. Not only have we been able to, as a national government, secure the vaccine doses so critically important for our recovery, but we have also exceeded the numbers we told the provinces they would be receiving.

For example, for the first quarter, we said to Canadians before December that we were looking at getting six million doses. I think it was closer to nine million. Recently, we heard very good news about the total number of vaccines we will have before the end of June. We anticipate receiving somewhere in the range of 48 million to 50 million doses before the end of June. Keep in mind that we have a population base of 37.5 million.

We are on track and the numbers show that. Today's headlines regarding the number of doses in the province of Manitoba and the second dose reinforce that. For example, today we have had more than 14.5 million vaccine doses administered in Canada. We have actually received over 16.8 million doses, which have been circulated to provinces and territories. I believe we can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

Contrary to what many of my Conservative friends would try to leave with Canadians, misinformation is not what we want. What we want to do is send a very simple message to Canadians today on ways they could continue to help and make a difference in fighting this pandemic.

The first and most important thing is to get the vaccine. When the opportunity is there to get the vaccine, Canadians should take advantage of it and get the shot. People ask which vaccine is the best one. As the Prime Minister, the Minister of Health and a litany of other leaders throughout this country have said, the best shot is the first available shot. I believe the Prime Minister and the Minister of Health got the AstraZeneca shot, because that was the first shot available to them.

Another thing that everyone could do is encourage others to get vaccinated. We have to appreciate that there are people who have concerns. For those who have concerns, we need to talk to them and explain in the best way we can how their concerns could be dealt with and how important it is that people get vaccinated, including those individuals who have concerns.

We need to listen to what our health experts are saying and what science is telling us. The best way, the healthiest way for Canada to recover and build back better is to build confidence in our communities, get people vaccinated and ensure that we continue to do whatever else we can. For example, in the meantime, we still need to maintain physical distancing. We need to continue to wash our hands and wear masks. All of these things are important, and every one of us could practise that, along with the promotion of getting vaccinated.

I believe that if Canadians look at the budget document being debated today, they will see that it fits with what the Prime Minister indicated 12-plus months ago. The first priority is indeed the coronavirus, and being there for Canadians in that very real and tangible way. I will get into that shortly. That was the first priority, and we need to remain focused on that. The second is not to forget all the other responsibilities that we have as legislators, cabinet and others who are feeding into the decisions, and the importance of dealing with all other aspects of governance at the national level.

I am very proud of the fact that this budget reflects those types of priorities. It takes into consideration the extension of programs that have been absolutely essential to support Canadians through this very difficult time over the last number of months. It does that by ensuring that there are extensions. The legislation we are debating today is going to be there to support those types of extensions of critical programs: the Canada emergency wage program, the Canada emergency rent support program, and the recovery benefits program, which is a takeoff from the CERB program.

When we go back to the origins of the programs, we find that the direct payments to individual Canadians have been an overwhelming success. Yes, there may have been some problems here and there that crept in, but the overriding concern of getting money into the pockets of Canadians was achieved by these programs. We are talking about just under nine million people. Members should think about that. Out of 37.5 million people, nine million were affected directly through a program of that nature. We can think about the jobs and the wage subsidy program, and how this legislation would enable the extension of that program. Do members know how many people it kept in the workforce during this very difficult time for companies? Tens of thousands, going into millions, of jobs were allowed to continue in good part because of this program.

I remember when the Prime Minister held a virtual meeting with some of the ethnic diversity of the province of Manitoba. The Folk Arts Council of Winnipeg was one of them. The council talked about the importance of the wage subsidy program and how it has allowed it to keep its doors open. The impact of the Folk Arts Council for the city of Winnipeg is tremendous. We need the folk arts. That is Folklorama, where we can talk about the arts and celebrate diversity. That is what Folklorama is all about. Not only did the wage subsidy program help employees in manufacturing and many other jobs, but it also helped in the area of arts and culture and non-profit organizations. We have many non-profit organizations that stepped up to the plate to support Canadians throughout the many different regions and communities within Canada.

The pandemic is not over. We need to ensure that those programs, at least in some fashion, continue on, and we see a government that, through this legislation and the budget, maintains that commitment. How many businesses are receiving the rent support program? Some businesses would say that had it not been for the rent subsidy program, it is questionable whether or not they would be able to open their doors.

Here is the problem with the Conservative approach to the last 12 months. The first couple of months, the Conservatives wanted to be part of team Canada, but toward the end of June of last year they forgot that and put on the political partisanship hat. I do not care what any of them say; that is the reality. The Conservatives are more concerned about getting a political advantage than they are about contributing in a healthy way. I can demonstrate many examples of that.

I found it interesting listening to the Conservatives today. What are they talking about? They are talking about the debt, how much money we are spending, and how it is so much money. How many times did they support us unanimously in order for us to spend some of the money they are criticizing us for spending today? On the one hand, they talk about deficits, but I think they have some hard-right Conservatives in there. We have to look at the background of the Conservatives. There is a very strong reform element to the Conservative Party. It is not the same Progressive Conservative Party of the 1980s. There are a lot of hard-right personalities, going back to Stephen Harper himself. It is funny that they talk about caring for seniors. What did they do for the CPP? They did nothing. One of Stephen Harper's goals in life was to suggest the dismantling of the CPP.

The far-right Conservatives and their reform mentality are no friends to progressive policies that are helping Canadians today and will continue to help them into the future. Hobbes means a lot to them, the whole dog-eat-dog world type of thing. I do not believe for a moment that they would develop the same types of programs that we have put forward. There is a certain element within the Conservative rank and file that seems to be dominating the debates recently, which is on the far right with that reform mentality.

I believe, at the end of the day, that we needed to be able to borrow the monies to support Canadians. The Conservatives would have rather seen more bankruptcies, more personal debts. Where would the support have come from if people could not pay their mortgage or buy the groceries for their family? What would have happened because they could not work? That is why it was critical that we develop these programs. There is a progressive element within the Conservative Party that I believe recognizes that, but it seems to be a little more quiet nowadays and we rather tend to hear the others.

We see that in terms of the Conservatives' approach to the coronavirus. It is truly amazing. We can just look at some of the debate that took place last night about Alberta. All the Conservative speakers could do is think about how to blame Ottawa. This is all about blaming Ottawa.

Ottawa has been working with provinces, territories, indigenous leaders, stakeholders and so many others throughout this process, including many of those comments incorporated into the budget itself. When the Prime Minister said that we can learn from this experience and we can build back better, that is exactly what is taking place in this budget.

We can think of child care. Quebec has, over the years, developed a wonderful child care program. We are looking at ways in which we can expand that. Not only does the individual family benefit, but so does the economy. We know that. Economists tell us that if we can expand the economy by increasing the workforce, the contribution to the GDP will be enhanced. It is a progressive policy.

We could talk about other initiatives. We recognize that there were serious problems, for example, with long-term care facilities, so the Government of Canada listened to what Canadians in all regions of our country were saying about long-term care and the concerns they had, especially in the first six months or so of the pandemic, when there were some serious problems, to the degree that we had to bring in the Canadian Forces and the Red Cross to assist in our care home facilities. One thing that has come out of it is that we needed to ensure that there are some national standards dealing with long-term care.

My Bloc friends are really offended by that. I would tell them that even people in Quebec recognize the value of national standards for long-term care. That is something we need to see and, as a government, we are committed. Every Liberal member wants to see our seniors being taken care of properly and recognizes that Ottawa does have a role to play—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

On those words, we will go to questions and comments.

The hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Madam Speaker, one of my friends said that was probably the longest 20 minutes they have ever spent, but I thank the member for bringing that forward.

I want to ask a question for this member specifically, because I know he thoroughly knows what is going on in this debate. One thing that is really missing in this is anything that is for new business owners. I have a list of new businesses that started operating, a lot of them at the end of 2019, that are folding right now. The owners have not been able to find any supports at the provincial, federal or municipal governments because everything is not taking into consideration prior to the COVID pandemic.

What is the government going to do to help all of those flailing business owners who just do not have the eligibility requirements that the current government has put forward?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I know and I can appreciate that there is a genuine interest from all sides of the House in regard to small businesses. I have witnessed that in listening to a lot of the debate. We recognize from a government perspective that small businesses are a backbone to our economy.

In fact, about a week ago, the Minister of Finance met with some of my constituents who were business women of Filipino heritage. One of the businesses was Jeepney's, a beautiful little restaurant that started up back in January last year. We are listening to what business owners have to say. There are going to be some opportunities for us to look at ways in which we can improve and support business owners.

I cannot think of the name, but I know the Minister of Finance cited the specific program and I will try to get the name of the program that might be of assistance to the small business owners that the member might be referencing.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his speech; as the previous speaker mentioned, it did seem fairly long.

I would like to hear what he thinks about the speech that my colleague from Drummond gave about the non-existent Netflix tax and the income opportunities that the government is depriving itself of. I am thinking of regional media, such as Le Canada Français, which is distributed in my riding and which is about to celebrate its 160th anniversary. There are no real support measures for that newspaper in the budget.

What does my colleague think about the importance of supporting regional media that provide good local media coverage?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, the member and other Bloc members continue to talk about the issue of the government supporting seniors. The Government of Canada, during the pandemic, gave one-time payment increases to people on GIS and OAS. We also gave a substantial permanent increase to GIS shortly after getting elected back in 2015. There are many other initiatives that we have taken.

In regard to the 75-plus, that was an election promise. In the 2019 election, we made a promise. We said that we would give a 10% increase to seniors aged 75 and older, and that is exactly what we have done. We have given an—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

Madam Speaker, I note that the hon. member for Winnipeg North said the government members feel that they have done everything they could possibly do. I just want to let him know that the people in the tourism sector in my riding, particularly sport and recreational fisheries, just do not believe that is true.

The minister of fisheries has been sitting on a proposal for over a month that would have allowed limited openings for salmon fishing for April, and notice we are not in April anymore, and May, which would have helped the industry recover at least a bit of its business. Now that we are going to miss that limited opening, which would have had limited or no impact salmon stocks, this bill would allow the beginning of phasing out the CERB, cutting the CERB back, phasing out aid to small business owners, and phasing out the wage subsidy. How does this member respond to those people in tourism, and in particular sport and recreational fisheries, that this is everything the government could possibly do?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I only got to about point three on my speech and I probably had a dozen or so points to get to. One of the points that I wanted to highlight was that the NDP members want a home for everyone, universal child care, a more comprehensive health care system, a guaranteed annual income, no pipelines, billions more on infrastructure and they are going to get it by taxing the ultrarich. I think the NDP members at times do not live in the real world.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, unlike the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London, I thought that the speech went extremely fast. By far the worst part of it was when you cut him off at the end.

In any event, I thought I heard the member for Windsor West earlier say that seniors were taking away jobs from younger people. I do not think that is the case at all. If anything, seniors are being asked to stay on for a couple of years longer. Certainly when my mother was a teacher, she was asked if she wanted to stay on. A lot of seniors are looking for opportunities to go back in their retirement to do part-time jobs quite often.

Would the member agree with the member for Windsor West that seniors would be taking away jobs from younger Canadians?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments and the question is excellent. I love our seniors, as we all do. Pre-pandemic, I used to go to the local McDonald's every Saturday and a few seniors worked there. The owner said to me, “how much I appreciate them, I cannot enough young people and I love having seniors work for me”.

At the end of the day, I cannot ever see myself retiring per se. I think there are a lot of seniors who want to continue to work and I do not think we should be telling seniors that they have to retire. We have an economy that is healthy, that we will build back better and that there will be enough jobs for those who want—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Madam Speaker, I have to agree with my friend from London and disagree with my friend from Kingston. That was a pretty long speech and I am glad you did step in.

However, I want to talk about the conversation around anything that actually disagrees with the Liberal narrative and of course, the member opposite was making comments that if we disagree with the Liberals, they are all right and list went on.

However, let us talk about what the Liberals did. The first thing they did after the start of the pandemic, they shut this place down for a number of weeks. The next thing they did was brought in legislation to neuter the opposition of its powers into 2022, giving the government absolute power to tax and spend wherever and whenever they felt like it. The next thing they did was the WE Charity scandal. After that, they prorogued Parliament. The list went on. Now we are seeing allegations of what is going on in the military that we have to look into.

All this stuff is happening and meanwhile the Liberals tabled this budget that structurally includes a deficit well into the future. When the member talks about day care, those kids who may, probably not, see this national day care program, they will be paying for that bill well into the future, but the services will not be there unless there are cuts or massive tax increases to pay for it.

Is the member opposite not concerned that they are setting future generations up for failure on this spending plan?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, the short answer is no, I am not concerned because we are building a country. We are making a healthier nation because of the investments that we are making today.

The member talked about last summer's prorogation and things of this nature. Tell me when the government sat in the summer prior to last summer? It is well over 30 years ago.

Tell me when it is that the government made itself available for thousands of questions to be asked of it over a summer period in a format sitting inside the House of Commons. I would have loved to have had that opportunity in my 20 years in opposition.

This is a government that believes in accountability and transparency. It is a government that believes in investing in Canada and Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my friend, the hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London.

It took the government two years to table a budget, this in the midst of a social, health and economic crisis that this country has not experienced in generations. In the face of that, one would have expected the government to put forward a comprehensive economic plan to get Canada out of this crisis and on the road to recovery.

This budget is a long budget. It is a 739-page budget. Despite its length, when it comes to the fundamentals of getting Canada's economy back on track, it is, to put it generously, wanting. This budget has no plan to get Canadians vaccinated, no plan to get Canada's economy safely reopened and no plan to encourage innovation. There is no plan to address Canada's lagging competitiveness or attract investment to Canada. Simply put, when it comes to growing Canada's economy, when it comes to getting Canadians back to work and when it comes to sending a message to the rest of the world that yes, indeed, Canada is once again open for business, this budget misses the mark.

What this budget does do is usher in a sea of red ink, the likes of which this country has never seen. This budget provides for, last year, a deficit of $354 billion. To put that in some context, the deficit for last year is three and a half times the size of the total debt that the government accumulated of $100 billion prior to COVID.

It is hardly as though the government had a record of being good fiscal stewards prior to COVID. Indeed, the government left the cupboard bare during the good times, leaving Canada in a fiscally vulnerable position to weather the COVID storm. That is why, within months of COVID after the first tranche of COVID-related spending, Canada's credit rating was downgraded by Fitch and S&P threatened to do the same unless the government reversed course and got back on track with a fiscally responsible approach.

This budget does not provide any confidence in that regard. This budget will result in the national debt rising to $1.4 trillion by the end of this year, which is double the national debt from a little more than a year ago. That is truly staggering.

This budget will put the Prime Minister in the history books, but for all the wrong reasons. The Prime Minister will go down in history as the Prime Minister who accumulated more debt in the span of seven years than all Canadian prime ministers combined going back to Canada's founding in 1867. Again, that is hardly a record to be proud of.

In the face of all of this red ink, it is no surprise that there was no plan to get Canada's fiscal house in order and no plan to eventually see a return to a balanced budget, which the government inherited from the previous Conservative government under Stephen Harper, and completely missing from the budget was any meaningful fiscal anchor.

The only plan this budget provided is for spending, spending and more spending, burdening future generations like never before, with no end to deficits. This budget lays the framework for forever deficits.

The government likes to say that as we are in a pandemic, we have no choice and these are unprecedented times. That is true, and the COVID pandemic has necessitated some significant spending to help Canadians and businesses get through it, because Canadians are out of work and businesses are unable to operate in the way they were prior to COVID. At every step of the way, we in the official opposition have tried to work constructively with the government to see that there is targeted support and that it is delivered in a timely way to Canadians and Canadian businesses that need help. However, the government's excuse that all of its spending, deficit and debt are attributable to COVID can only go so far.

Under this budget, total program spending for the fiscal year 2021-22 is projected to be $475.6 billion. Of that $475.6 billion, only about 12% is related to COVID. In other words, 88% or so of the government's total program spending is unrelated to COVID. When we consider the $475.6 billion in program spending, that is an increase of a staggering 40.5% from 2019-20 levels.

What this budget contains is massive spending, including billions and billions of dollars of new permanent program spending, despite the fact that the Prime Minister's mandate letter to the Minister of Finance called on the minister not to include any new permanent spending. It turns out that the Prime Minister's mandate letter to the minister was not worth the paper it was written on.

The government hangs its hat on and touts the $101.4 billion in so-called stimulus spending. However, the Parliamentary Budget Officer notes that only $36.8 billion of that so-called stimulus spending is related to COVID, leaving $69.2 billion in so-called stimulus spending. The catch, however, is that, of the $69.2 billion in so-called stimulus spending, some $52.1 billion does not go out the door until 2022 and all the way to 2024. In other words, it will have no immediate impact, which is the very purpose of stimulus spending. It is no wonder that the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said, with respect to the government's so-called stimulus spending, that the government has “miscalibrated”.

With all of the spending, massive deficits and debt, where are Canadians as a result of the government's approach? Canada has among the slowest economic growth rates in the G7; one of the highest unemployment rates in the G7, a full 25% above the G7 average; and the highest level of debt, save for Japan. On top of that—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

We have to go to questions and comments.

The hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague's speech, although I disagree with some of the facts that he has presented.

The Conservatives often make the remark in the House that Canada has the highest debt. However, what they do not tell Canadians is that they factor in provincial debt as well. In fact, Canada has a much lower debt-to-GDP ratio than the U.K., France, Italy, Japan and the U.S. It is just a fact.

I have a question about a theme that has been developing on our side. The Conservatives continue to say that Canada is spending too much. Will they, for once, identify just one area where they would cut?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Madam Speaker, as a starting point, the government should abolish the wasteful Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which is very helpful to the Chinese Communist regime but very unhelpful to Canadians.

As for all of this spending, this budget projects $40 billion in interest payments on the debt by 2026, which is significantly more than the government spends on EI and the Canada child benefit. There is a very real cost to all of this government spending.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. He clearly indicated how the Liberal budget overestimates the impact of stimulus spending on the economy. That is what the Parliamentary Budget Officer thinks. He said that there is only $69 billion in economic stimulus.

In my colleague's opinion, could the government have limited itself to that $69 billion or could it have invested the $100 billion that it invested but in a different way? That way, the government could have dedicated $28 billion to health, as per the request of the provinces and Quebec. Which of the two options would my colleague choose?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Madam Speaker, with respect to the member's latter point about health, it is disappointing that we have seen zero dollars in the way of new transfers to the provinces for health, despite the fact that all 10 provinces have been begging and pleading with the government. I note that under the Harper government, health transfers increased by 6% annually.

With respect to the Parliamentary Budget Officer's findings, the Parliamentary Budget Officer projects, as the hon. member noted, that growth from the government's so-called stimulus will be half of what the government projects in its budget. As for new jobs, the PBO estimates only 74,000 new jobs, compared with the 344,000 projected in the budget. Without more, the government's so-called stimulus is a total flop.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, we know that millions of people are worried about losing their jobs. At the same time, Canada's richest people have gotten richer. We have seen excess profits for large corporations that have benefited from the pandemic.

The NDP has gone to the PBO and costed out an excess-profits tax. It would get $8 billion from the companies that profited from the pandemic. We would get $9 billion from a 1% wealth tax on people with over $20 million. We could close tax havens, which would generate tens of billions of dollars in taxes.

Does my colleague believe that we should be charging the superwealthy and those who have made a profit on the pandemic, instead of leaving this on the backs of everyday Canadians? We know that paying down the enormous deficits that have been incurred will mean either a tax increase to the middle class or cuts in services. Does my colleague support ensuring that those who can afford to pay for it should pay their share?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives believe in lifting up all Canadians by reducing taxes, getting Canadians back to work, attracting investment and making Canada more competitive.

When it comes to everyday Canadians, life is becoming less and less affordable, in part because the government is printing money and—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague from St. Albert—Edmonton gave us so much information, and I think we have all learned from it. If I add what I heard from him to what I have to say, we will have a fulsome speech, because like him, I want to talk about individuals. I will get to that.

I am giving my speech from the riding of Elgin—Middlesex—London, and to begin, I want to talk about families, individuals and businesses. We know they are all going through a very difficult time, and I do not think there is a member of Parliament who has not heard the challenges. We have all heard extraordinarily heart-wrenching stories, and we want to make Canada a better place.

I am going to start with some of the positives. I have heard a lot of people say that we are being negative about this, but let us be honest: Last year, if it were not for the opposition parties, there would not have been a wage subsidy to keep businesses afloat. The initial wage subsidy program was 10%, and it was increased later on after pressure from a lot of people on my side, my Conservative colleagues who were small business owners and accountants, and from other colleagues who sit in the other opposition benches. The wage subsidy program is something I can support in this budget.

We know people are continuing to struggle to keep their businesses open. We are hearing a lot of information on this from the CFIB, the St. Thomas & District Chamber of Commerce, in my area, and a variety of other sources. They are indicating the difficulties that many businesses are having. In my local economy, 17% of businesses did better during COVID; however, we have to look at those that did worse. I therefore support the wage subsidy, as having this bridge so we can continue to work out of this crisis is absolutely what we need to do.

The same thing goes for the rent extension. It is another program that had to be tweaked and changed. Again, opposition parties, in particular the official opposition, worked to ensure this it was a good program. I want the government to know that when it comes forward with something, it is not the only one to have great ideas. I can say that all colleagues have brought forward some very good ideas that were adopted by the government in the early days of the pandemic.

There is also the Canada recovery caregiving benefit. Unfortunately, I see that some of my neighbours are still having—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

We are having issues with the member's connection and the interpretation is not working.

We can now hear the interpretation well, so the hon. member may resume.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Unfortunately Ontario continues to see lockdowns, and people are pointing fingers. I will be honest, if we knew there were vaccines, if we knew it was safe for Canadians to get back to work and for children to go back to school, if we knew things would recover at a quicker pace, then I think we would have a lot more faith. That is why the Canada recovery benefit is very important. I do appreciate the extension of it.

This is where I want to get into CEBA loans. This where I want to change where we are going. I had recently asked the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader about these types of things. The government improved the Canada emergency business account. It went from $40,000 to $60,000, allowing business owners to keep up to $20,000. There have been some changes to that, such as repayment of loans and a variety of things.

My concern today is for those entrepreneurs who have been working to start new businesses. In my riding of Elgin—Middlesex—London, a number of businesses have remained on the line of whether they will fail or make it through is incredible challenge. It is an extremely difficult for them. When they call my office, I refer them to the Elgin Business Resource Centre, or the Enterprise Centre, or their banks. I suggest a variety of different things. However, when they are not eligible for these programs, the answer remains no.

We know that a lot of these programs have a list of restrictions. I did get a message back from the office of the minister for small business minister to inform me they had an appeal process for CEBA. It was supposed to be rolled out for people who were denied that assistance, but there still is no appeals process. Shortly, the government will have something so if people want to know why their applications were denied, they might be able to find out.

Those are some of the issues that I continue to have. I have to wonder why the government would not have put something like that in there, knowing that small mistakes could be made. One of my constituents was denied the assistance because there was a reversal on his business account number. He had to reapply and he continued to be denied. To me, that is a very simple slip-up.

However, when people are feeling choked out because of we are going through COVID-19 and the fact that they have to revert to some of these restrictions, something as simple as a transit number on banking information could get transposed, something that we could all switch so quickly and the government does not have a mechanism to deal with that. It is very concerning.

I will talk about a few more businesses.

In the community of Dutton, Margaret Perry opened up a place called the Daily Grind Cafe and Gift Emporium. Unfortunately Margaret opened her business in December 2019, and did not qualify for any of the COVID relief programs.

We have Angela Player, and Angela will do sensationally one day, I have had what she has to offer. She has a business called From the Vines. She is unable to show an up to 20% decrease in her revenues. Angela has invested over $60,000 into her business, but her business has never had that normal period for comparison purposes. I know Angela's business, From the Vines, will make it, but the COVID-19 pandemic has been the biggest barrier for her and there are no programs to assist her. Nobody is there to help her. Her hands are tied. When I referred her to some of these smaller organizations that did get the federal funding, because of the eligibility requirements, they would not assist her.

I think of someone like Craig Voakes. Craig owns what is called the Squad Box in St. Thomas. It is a business built around providing pre and post-game nutrition, hydration and recovery products to hockey, soccer and baseball teams.

As a parent, I am one of those crazy moms. I am on the sidelines, cheering along. I think Craig sees people like me as a perfect person to make a business around. A lot of us will give to our children. We want to ensure they have great opportunities, but our children are not playing hockey, soccer or any of these indoor sports right now. For somebody like Craig, whose entire business is built around that, he does not have the opportunity. As well, Craig started his business in December 2020.

Then there is Purely Wicked. If people come into the city of St. Thomas, I tell them to go to Purely Wicked. It is a fun place and it has so many great little things.

Kim, who owns Purely Wicked, now employs two people. It started it in 2019. She had nothing to which she could compare her information. It is exactly same thing for Shawn Devrie at Given Shop. Some of the six or seven different businesses I am talking about are within half a kilometre, so we are looking at storefront after storefront that may have to close because there just have not been any opportunities.

Finally, I want to end with Karen Nixon. She has worked extremely hard. Before she had her children, she was working three jobs in the physical health field. When I saw that, I knew she would make it. Years ago, she and her husband made a business plan. They worked with F45 Training, which has a way of building its business case. However, what happened to Karen was similar to everyone else. Karen had started her business and would run it while she continued to work. She was laid off because she was in physical health field and there was no business for her.

Last summer, at seven o'clock, each and every, in the morning, people would work out in our backyard because she needed to run her business. That was a year ago. She still cannot open her business today. Therefore, I think of people like Karen and Gary, who I know have given their entire lives and all their savings to their businesses and they have been left without.

I have so much more to add to this, but my biggest concern with this budget is it seems to touch on so many things. It is unfocused and just throws money everywhere, but it does not give direct money for programs to help entrepreneurs and small business owners, the people who create jobs and are the engine of our economy.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London for bringing up all the programs that have helped Canadians and businesses get through these difficult times. I thank her for hinting that the government brought in largely NDP programs.

While the Conservatives support these programs that have helped the country survive over the last year, they are constantly asking who will pay for them. The NDP members think that it should be the super-wealthy who pay, the people who have made billions and billions of dollars over the last year through this pandemic.

Therefore, I would ask her again. Who do the Conservatives think should pay for this? I would ask the member not to say that she will rely on trickle-down economics.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Madam Speaker, people do look at who will pay for this? Honestly, it is called tax reform. We need to look at the whole taxation system. I know that some great people are looking at this. There are inequalities across the board. I will not disagree with the member on that. However, what we are seeing are bits and pieces. We know there are so many loopholes and we need to look at those. We need to look at the bigger picture.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Elgin—Middlesex—London. It was an honour to work with her at the Standing Committee on Status of Women last session. I know she will take a keen interest in women's issues and, of course, a she-covery.

She spoke at length about support programs. Many women-owned businesses are smaller. They are very small businesses that have a hard time meeting the eligibility criteria for the various programs. Many of these businesses are in sectors that might take longer to recover from the crisis. We see lots of women in the cultural sector, in tourism and even in the restaurant industry.

Does my colleague agree that supporting these women during the recovery is important and that the programs should be extended, at least for them, until the crisis is over?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Madam Speaker, I really have enjoyed working with my colleague from Shefford over the last number of years. There has been a huge economic impact to women especially through COVID, but it is just on the economics. As a mother, a daughter and a grandmother, I look at not just the economics but the mental side to this and the supports that are needed.

I have said many times that many people are being crushed right now. As a mom, as a daughter, I am trying to ensure my parents are taken care of as well as my children and that is very difficult. Right now, we need those social supports to ensure our mental health is taken care of. On the economics side, we need to ensure there is the flexibility. Flexibility is extremely important. We need to find a balance between work and children and parents. We need to reinvest in that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Green

Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Madam Speaker, the member's speech covered a lot of ground and a lot of programs that were needed to help people. I appreciate hearing her talk about the social programs we need to help people at this time. I know a lot of small businesses in my community are having a hard time. They are disappointed with the amount of money that came in for tourism dollars, because a lot of small businesses rely on tourism.

One of my concerns again is about the profiteering that has happened during this pandemic. We now know some 47 billionaires have a quarter of a trillion dollars of the Canadian wealth. They have gained $78 billion during this pandemic and they need to pay their fair share. Does the hon. member think they should pay their fair share as well?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON

Madam Speaker, at the end of the day, if people make more, they pay more. That is very common. We already see that in the grading system of the tax system, but it should still continue to be reviewed.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, it is great to see some of my colleagues having a good laugh, some good discourse and a level of levity, despite the challenging circumstances.

I am very pleased to have the chance to speak to Bill C-30, which is the budget implementation act. I had the chance a couple weeks ago to speak to the budget writ large, and I am going to use my time here today to highlight some investments that may not be the headlines, but which I think are extremely important to what the budget represents in terms of major proposed programs.

I will start with the continuation of the emergency measures. Nova Scotia was not under lockdown two weeks ago. We had not suffered from the third wave that other jurisdictions in the country had. Right now we have over 1,000 cases in the province, which seems relatively small, but per capita it is quite significant.

These measures really matter. The government, by continuing the emergency wage subsidy, the rent subsidy and the Canada response benefit, the suite of programs, until September, with the ability to extend it under the legislation, illustrates that this is extremely important. I think I would be remiss if I did not start from that basis. Our government is committed to getting Canadians, individuals and businesses through the pandemic, and that is extremely important.

I want to talk about biomanufacturing investments. The budget would allocate $2.2 billion toward these types of initiatives. We know that coming into the pandemic. I think all parliamentarians, and indeed all Canadians and countries around the world, on the other side of the pandemic, are going to be asking themselves what the key industries we will need to make sure we have domestic capacity. Whether it is for an event like COVID or some other type of event, the country needs to have that capacity.

For me, one industry would be agriculture, but of course, biomanufacturing is important. Our government has made investments throughout the pandemic. We are committing to making sure this does not happen again.

I look at companies in my own riding. For example, in Windsor, Nova Scotia, there is BioVectra, which has its base in Prince Edward Island, but which also has a presence in my riding of Kings—Hants. I think of BioMedica. These are the companies we can build, and we can continue to nurture that local expertise to make sure we have the capacity in our country in the days ahead.

Long-term health care was something I heard a lot about during the height of the pandemic, particularly when the reports from the Canadian Armed Forces were presented on the conditions in Quebec and Ontario. We need to be able to create national standards. We need to do better in this domain.

Yes, it is the domain and the jurisdiction of the provinces, but the federal government has shown leadership on health care initiatives, and it is really important that there is $3 billion in the budget to help support those standards. This is on top of the fall economic statement, which had a billion dollars allocated directly to the provinces. Of course, my colleagues and others have talked at great length about the programs that have been put in place, such as the safe restart program, to help support provinces. I wanted to highlight that for Canadians who might be watching here today and, indeed, my own constituents.

We know that the cost of the pandemic has been significant, and our government, from day one, has said we will be there with individuals and small businesses. The deficit is about $355 billion this year alone because of that support, which we determined as a government was a better path than the economic scarring that would come of not intervening in a positive way.

It is important that this budget helps create and drive economic growth to make the spending we have taken on during the pandemic sustainable over time, so I want to take an opportunity, and hopefully my colleagues will listen with intent, to talk about some of the important measures in the budget that I think need to be highlighted.

I wrote in September 2020 about regulatory modernization and regulatory reform. This is an important element for small business and businesses across the board. I tip my cap to my predecessor, Scott Brison, who was president of the Treasury Board during the last Parliament. He served with great honour and respect in Kings—Hants for 22 years, and I consider him a mentor and a friend.

He took a great leadership role in the last Parliament on regulatory reform, and we are committing to build on that success in this budget with $6.1 million dollars allocated to continue efforts on that front at the federal level. I think that is extremely important.

Regarding interprovincial barriers to trade, estimates suggest that we could be losing somewhere between $50 billion and $130 billion to our economy every year because of internal barriers to trade. We would be allocating $21 million over the next three years toward trying to reduce those barriers and have co-operation between provinces and territories on harmonization of standards. We have a lot to gain in efficiencies and economic outcomes by working within Canada, and of course this is building on the success our government has already had in the last Parliament.

I talk about this a lot, but it bears repeating. We have an emerging wine sector in Kings—Hants. We have world-class wines. We know that the excise exemption that was created under the late Jim Flaherty in 2007 when he was the finance minister has been important to the success of our 100% Canadian wine industry. I am very pleased to see our government has committed $101 million over the next two years to help support the industry.

Of course, that is on the heels of the existing excise exemption being deemed not trade compliant. I look forward to working with the Minister of Agriculture and my colleagues to help keep driving those initiatives to support the sector in the days ahead. The ability to create interprovincial trade would allow small businesses in my riding of Kings—Hants to take advantage of that.

It is very difficult for consumers in Ontario or Quebec to enjoy some of our wines. I would encourage my colleagues to look at some of the many vineyards we have in the area. I am happy to provide recommendations. We need to be able to break down those barriers. I am proud our federal government got rid of any type of barriers at the federal level. I hope my provincial or territorial colleagues who might be watching can also take some leadership in easing and facilitating trade across provincial and territorial boundaries.

I do not think the Canada Small Business Financing Act has warranted a lot of conversation in this House, but I want to highlight some of the elements that are there. We know, particularly in rural communities, the importance of small businesses and what they mean with respect to providing jobs and opportunities for people in our communities. We are committing to expanding the loan eligibility under the Small Business Financing Act and increasing the maximum loan amount to $500,000 for non-real property loans.

We are also opening up opportunities for non-profits and charities. I have spoken at great length about the important role our volunteer sector plays, particularly in rural Canada. I am very pleased to see it will have access to financing under this mechanism as well, and a new line of credit option.

We will help reduce credit card merchant fees. How many of us are paying cash right now? Not a whole lot of people. I am the type who still likes to have a bit of cash in my wallet, but more and more people are using credit or debit cards. Our government is committed to help reduce the merchant fees associated with online or credit card transactions. I see this as a very positive step. I know there are restaurants and many different retail businesses that will welcome this type of thinking.

I also want to talk about the $1.9 billion for what is the national trade corridors fund. I sit on the agriculture committee, and I consider myself an advocate in this House for agriculture-related issues. This national corridors trade fund is crucial to helping make sure we have important links to get our many wonderful Canadian agriculture products to export markets. I am very pleased to see this.

Also, there is additional money, over $500 million, for the borders to improve trade and travel. I think about the chicken producers who talk about spent fowl at the border. This money could go to support those types of mechanisms to protect our supply-managed industry, which I know is so important to so many members in this House and, indeed, to many Canadians.

I will finish with three quick points.

One is around significant investments in the aerospace industry. In Kings—Hants, Halifax Stanfield International Airport is just outside my riding boundary, but we have thousands of jobs in my riding that are tied to the aviation industry writ large. I am very pleased to see those types of investments in the budget.

I often talk about my riding in the context of agriculture, but in the same sense we are a coastal community. We are home to the highest tides in the world. The $300 million over the next two years for small craft harbours is extremely important.

Finally, there are historic investments for indigenous communities. I have three indigenous communities in my riding I am proud to represent. I am also proud that our government is continuing on its legacy and good work around reconciliation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB

Madam Speaker, I am curious to know what my colleague's take is on the amount of debt and deficit that would occur with this budget, not only in this current year, but in the couple years to follow.

If we are paying $40 billion or more a year just on interest to service our debt, that will have a negative impact on the sustainability of some of our social structures and programs moving forward and on maintaining them in the years to come. I would appreciate his opinion on that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, I think any conversation about fiscal prudence in government is an important conversation. However, what I would say to my hon. colleague is that when we look at the budget annex, the debt-to-GDP ratio over the next five to six years is expected to decline. When we look at the cost to service the debt right now, despite the fact that we have taken on a lot of debt, of course, important debt to support Canadians, it is actually lower than what it was pre-pandemic.

I look at this plan and, yes, there is a significant amount of spending, but it is focused on jobs and on the creation of opportunities for Canadians. Ultimately, it is a fiscally prudent plan, and one that I look forward to supporting and talking to my constituents about in the days ahead.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Madam Speaker, I just want to remind our colleague that, even though the budget was positive, we voted against it. However, we will be supporting this Bill C‑30.

We voted against the budget for two reasons. First, the health funding it contains is not enough. We want recurrent funding, and we want it to go up from 22% to 35%. Second, as my colleagues mentioned earlier in their speeches, we want the government to increase old age pensions.

I have a question for my colleague. We are all familiar with page 733 of this brick of a budget, which says that Netflix is not subject to the Netflix act. Would the member please share his thoughts on that?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, I would say to my hon. colleague that I am quite disappointed that the Bloc will not be supporting the budget. There are a lot of very important investments that matter to Quebec and, of course, to his constituents as well. Although it does not come as a surprise, it does come as a disappointment.

The member referenced the brick, which I call an important document that has many great ideas for Canadians. Of course, if we are going to put out a vision that matters for the days ahead and for the future, it has to be comprehensive, and that is why it is quite substantive.

The member had a question that referenced page 833, but I was lost in the interpretation. I am happy to follow up with the member about Netflix and digital giants. I know that our government is focused on closing the gap in that regard, but perhaps I can follow up with my colleague offline to get to his question.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Kings—Hants for his speech, and I would like to let him know that two of my best friends have just decided to retire to his riding. However, it may not be altogether good news for him, because they are not only personal friends, they are political friends and terrific organizers.

My question has to do with tourism. I heard the member talk about all the great things in the budget, but in the bill, we see we would start phasing-out support for small businesses, and phasing-out and cutting back on the CERB.

In my riding, we are about to lose our second season for international tourism, and it seems way too early to cut those supports, which people need to survive in the tourism industry. I wonder if the member finds the same thing in his riding, and that the phasing-out of the tourism support is coming just a bit too early.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, I will have to connect with the member offline to see who those political friends are. I will watch with interest, and maybe I will try to swing them into my camp, no matter how hard that could be.

The member raises an important question around tourism. I talked about the highest tides in the world in the area that is Kings—Hants. Many people from around the world want to come here.

There are a couple things that I would point the hon. colleague to. First, there is $500 million specifically for regional development agencies to support tourism operators. Also, the member's question was around the emergency supports, and yes, there is a declining amount starting in July, but the intention is to carry them on until September. At the end of the day, our government's approach, since day one, has been to adopt them as the health information comes out.

We do not know where we are going to be in September. Certainly, the vaccinations are on a good track. My hope is that by September we can be opening up and starting to relax some of the regulations that we have in place. All this to say that we have the flexibility in the legislation to be able to meet the needs of businesses, and we will do just that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak on Bill C-30.

Before I start, I want to acknowledge and thank the voters for putting together a minority Parliament. I came here during the majority government in 2002. I have experienced majority governments for the Liberals and the Conservatives, as well as minority governments. I have found that this Parliament, at least, has been much more flexible and cooperative in many respects than the previous government, which had a large majority. At that time we heard that a lot of the things being proposed in this budget were unattainable for Canadians, such as child care and increases to employment insurance.

I am proud of the member for New Westminster—Burnaby and others at the finance committee. With all of the presentations that have taken place, they have consistently come forward, arguing for better programs, investments and choices than we currently have. I became a New Democrat a little bit before Jack Layton, but when we got with Jack, we were more into proposition than opposition.

We are proud to have influenced this economic situation and challenges for Canadians, in bringing the Liberals to some action on items that we had been told could never be done. We were told there were not the finances for them or that they were bad for the economy and all sorts of different things.

During the majority government we had before, very little got done. A lot of things were put off. I think now we see much more activism in the base of Parliament. At times there is high drama, but definitely, as a minority Parliament, we have gotten more accomplished than we did in the previous government where getting any of these things done was often mocked. I point to the increased supports for small businesses, the wage subsidy and the CERB, all of which were basically left out of the initial response to the pandemic, including student debt. I could not say how many times I have stood in this chamber and argued that interest should not be applied to student debt because it is an investment. Interest would bring on further debt. Debt also delays family experiences because people have to put off life decisions. As opposed to paying down the interest on loans from the banks, that money could be going to investments for people's futures and also to our communities.

The problem that we have with some of the issues in this budget is that they do not get rid of the problems for the future, but just kick them down the road a little bit. The increased benefits for seniors are a good example: They are divided between people who are 65 and people who are 75, and division is not what we need now with COVID-19.

I look at what this arbitrary age division would mean for my constituency in Windsor, Tecumseh, Essex, and all the regions around us, as we have a significant senior population. We have a lot of people with health issues. The ecosystem that we are a part of includes the pollutants drifting from the United States as well as from our own industrial base, and means that the risks to people's health are much higher than elsewhere. We have scientific evidence of this. One of the reasons I got involved in politics at the federal level was the Gilbertson and Brophy report, in which the Chrétien government at that time tried to hide a government study showing higher rates of cancer, thyroid issues, respiratory issues and all kinds of issues for infants. All of those different things came to light.

What I am suggesting is that the age factor for seniors really makes no difference. The risk factors are almost the same. The government is dividing those people. I do not know why, when what we are having to invest is pennies in the overall scheme of things. That money, for the most part, goes to paying for rent and food. It goes into the local economy. It allows people to live with dignity. It often goes for medications. We still do not see a pharmacare element to this bill, which is unfortunate. When we look at the investments we also do not see dental care, which is really crucial.

That is why New Democrats are continuing to present the government with options they can look at. The U.S. administration under President Biden brought in a wealth tax. Many other countries have done that as well. There are, quite frankly, winners and losers under COVID-19 for a lot of different reasons. Part of that is public policy.

For good reasons different businesses have had to close or amend their business practices. It has been very challenging for them, through no fault of their own or anybody else, but to prevent the spread of COVID they have lost their regular income. That is why these employment subsidies are important. Other businesses have emerged from this and have really done quite well. We do not hear about insurance companies having problems because business is very lucrative right now.

We can see from the work done at the industry committee that the telco giants have done exceptionally well during this time. I will give some credit to them: There have been improved incentives for consumers, but the volume of products that have gone out has risen exponentially, as have their profits and their responsibility to help offset some things right now.

There is no petroleum monitoring agency in this budget. Gas pricing, the hosing of consumers and the lack of accountability are still significant problems in Canada because we do not publish the rack pricing the United States gets. There is less accountability for that in Canada. A petroleum monitoring agency was supposed to be brought in by the Paul Martin regime, but it was never fulfilled. A motion passed in the House of Commons that it was supposed to be established. It was created, then it was defunded, and then when the Conservatives took power it was off the books. It languished and was in the works for a long time. It took us years to even try to get it. That was an oversight of a basic thing. As a result, people pay more out of pocket.

There are still significant public subsidies for the oil and gas industry. In one of my first speeches on this issue, about a decade ago, I listed 17 different ways an oil and gas company could get a subsidy from the federal government at the time. Some of that has been reduced a little, but it is still not anywhere near where it should be. It is interesting that the U.S. taxes worldwide profits and Canada does not. The current administration in the U.S. is going to be introducing higher corporate taxes. If we do more subsidization, the profit margins will be higher here, so we will be sending dollars to Washington, so to speak.

We have to look at these things. There is no doubt about tax havens, as we have seen in the news again today. How ridiculous is this? How many times do people have to suffer through the inappropriate taxation policies we have now? People who can afford accountants and lawyers, and who squirrel money away, are seen as clever and capable. They get away with it, whereas in Windsor and Essex region the working class cannot afford those types of services to hide money and to pay less than other people. That is where there should be a significant improvement in this budget.

New Democrats have called for not only an investment in people, but also in green transportation infrastructure. In my area, the auto sector is significant and we fail to see much improvement in this budget. There are some vague references, but no measures to get results. There is still no Canadian national auto strategy. Last week, Ford Motor Company announced more funding for battery and electric vehicle production in Detroit and the surrounding area, which has eclipsed my area and the entire country. Detroit and the surrounding region have almost tripled or quadrupled all of Canada's investments in green auto infrastructure and strategies for battery and electric vehicle manufacturing and production. This is important, because a transition is taking place. If we look at jobs in the production of parts and all of the different components, we are losing more of that market share. What is unfortunate about that is we are also losing out on the growth of the industry beyond the auto sector by having that innovation take place.

Canadians are also worried about the passing on of debt, and how to finance it. That is why New Democrats have provided some solutions, such as a significant luxury tax, not just for boats and cars but for other things as well. Right now, real estate speculators for foreign investors are sitting on empty land and are getting away with using our tax haven system. That is a problem. As we look at this budget implementation act part one, keeping in mind that part two has to be done in the fall, Canadians can count on New Democrats to try to make things work here in this chamber.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:25 p.m.
See context

Bloc

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, which I greatly appreciated. It reminded me of a headline I read yesterday in Le Devoir that said Ottawa sees the offshore oil industry as a net-zero partner.

Reading that, I felt my eyebrows go up, because I often say in the House that I see the environment and the economy as being complementary. This headline would have us believe that net-zero emissions and the oil industry could be complementary, which is an opinion I do not share. When I think of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the oil industry is not the first thing that comes to mind.

Does my colleague think that what the budget promises, especially in terms of funding, is enough to meet our greenhouse gas emission reduction targets?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I do not think it is enough, and I do not think that we are pushing our budget parts and pieces to the levels they need to be. I mentioned the auto sector, for example. Without a national auto policy, we do not target the growth of the industry enough, versus the decline of it. I look at old plant areas like Sainte-Thérèse in Quebec, where there was amazing production and an amazing skilled work force. There still is some work going on in that area, but it is not what it used to be and it is a lost opportunity. They have to have some measurable items in there.

For the oil and gas industry, let us have accountability for pricing. Let consumers have that accountability.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 6th, 2021 / 5:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

There will be three minutes remaining for questions and comments for my hon. friend for Windsor West when the House next gets back to debate on the question.

The House resumed from May 6 consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pride to rise and speak to budget 2021, the maiden budget from the first woman to hold the title of finance minister. In fact, as many parliamentarians know, we usually get a hard copy of the budget handed to us as the finance minister would rise in the House to speak, but due to COVID, we had to make do with getting the online version. I hear there are hard copies available, and I am hoping to get my hands on one, because I definitely want the finance minister to autograph it because it is so historic.

Given how hard the pandemic has impacted Canadian women, I do feel it is appropriate that someone familiar with the challenges women face, both at home and on the job, is leading the course forward, but let me be perfectly clear: This is a budget that is good for all Canadians. It is forward-thinking, and the changes announced in the budget are what Canada needs as we navigate a new path through COVID and after we wrestle this pandemic to the ground.

I believe it is important for a government to always strive to do better, to make changes for the better. This means exploring and implementing new ideas, evaluating how things have been done and whether they can be improved, and adapting decades-old social support systems to meet the needs of today's families. This budget positions Canada for the future on all fronts and includes new ideas, but it also contains some that are not particularly new at all.

As we all know, we are currently facing the gravest global crisis since the Second World War. Over 75 years ago, many women, including many mothers, had to go to work in essential war industries to provide for their families and fill the labour shortage left by those, mostly men, who were in the services. From 1942 to 1946, the Dominion-Provincial Wartime Agreement allowed for subsidized day nursery care for mothers working in essential war industries. Costs were shared fifty-fifty between the federal government and participating provinces, and each province had its own standards and regulations.

Of course, at war's end, the centres closed as most women returned to working in the home, seemingly not needed to keep our economy humming. Also, many women were forced to leave their jobs when they got pregnant, which is exactly what happened to my mother when she became pregnant with my brother back in 1952.

Despite the changes in society, the debate for returning to subsidized day care did not disappear. In fact, it grew louder in the following decades as more and more women joined the workforce, so much so that it was included in the report of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women in 1970. I was a teenager at the time and was encouraged to expect my life to be different from my mother's. I was determined to have a career and a family, but it was not going to be easy. The Status of Women report dealt explicitly with making child care affordable and accessible, including making sure that fees would be affixed to a sliding scale based on the means of the parents.

Having been a working mother, I know very well that having one parent stay home to look after children or relying on family is not always an option. Our government has increased the Canada child benefit, which parents could choose to put toward day care, but in a city like London, where I am from, monthly child care fees average out to around $1,200 a child. Maybe that is doable for some families, if they have only one child, but as soon as they decide to have another, it becomes almost impossible to cover the costs.

Let us face it, although times have started to change, caring for children still primarily falls to female partners or mothers. We hear about how this pandemic will go down in history as the “she-cession”. Someone recently commented that maybe it would be better to call it the “mom-cession”, and I think they are right.

The economic impact of this pandemic has been felt most keenly by women, including marginalized women, not only because some have had to stay home from work to care for children, but also because industries dominated by female and marginalized workers have been among the hardest hit by measures introduced to keep our communities safe. This is in direct contrast to the recession of 2008, when it was male-dominated industries that were the hardest hit.

As we look to rebuild from this crisis and build back better, we must make sure we do so in a way that helps those who need it most. We need to make sure that women and marginalized communities can be fully engaged in the economy. TD Economics and the Ontario Chamber of Commerce are just two of the institutions that have separately stated that a national child care program will help facilitate this.

In fact, they say it is critical to do so. They say a child care program will add between $100 billion to $155 billion to Canada's GDP, because it will allow more engagement in the economy for women and marginalized communities. This is a sound investment based on recommendations made by reliable economic experts. Child care is no longer a social “nice to have”; it is now an economic “must have”.

Our government is also moving forward with strong investments in the charitable and not-for-profit sectors to continue supporting them during this difficult time.

The importance of this sector to Canada and the lives of everyday Canadians is incalculable. While our government made sure to expand emergency supports to the organizations in this sector, they still need help. Employing millions of Canadians, many of them women, these organizations provide critical services, from child care to fitness to education and community supports, to communities of all sizes.

We have all heard stories from our ridings about not-for-profits and charitable organizations that are hanging on by a thread through this pandemic. We have seen local branches of the YMCA close their doors. We have seen legions struggling. It is imperative that we step in to provide more support and strengthen this critical pillar of Canadian society.

Over the past year, I have worked with my colleagues in the government caucus and parliamentarians from the other place to draw attention to the critical plight charities and non-profits are facing. Budget 2021 delivered on our calls for support with $400 million to help these organizations adapt and modernize through the economic recovery.

It also proposes $755 million to establish a social finance fund, which could attract $1.5 billion in private sector capital to support the development of the social finance market, and that would be creating thousands of new jobs in the sector.

We are also proposing to launch public consultations with charities on potentially increasing the disbursement quota and updating the tools at the CRA's disposal regarding charities, which could increase support for the sector by $1 billion to $2 billion annually.

I am particularly focused on that last point as it responds to some of the recommendations made in a report released by the other place in 2019, called “Catalyst for Change: A Roadmap to a Stronger Charitable Sector”. The Senate report made 42 recommendations to modernize and strengthen this sector in Canada, and I am very pleased to see the government begin taking these recommendations under consideration.

Budget 2021 proposes to provide additional support to students and young Canadians who are facing an uncertain future due to the pandemic, and the increasing devastation due to climate change. We must do better for our younger generations. Too many are struggling with crippling student debt and face daunting challenges right now in finding work.

Western University and Fanshawe College are both located in London, and many of my constituents are students and graduates of both post-secondary institutions. This has given me an opportunity to see first-hand the direct impacts COVID-19 has had on this generation. Along with the mental health impacts, young Canadians have been particularly hard hit by layoffs and workplace closures.

While we introduced measures to help the students over the past year who needed support through programs like the Canada emergency student benefit, doubling the Canada summer grant and waiving the interest on the federal portion of Canada student loans for the next year, more needs to be done. We listened to young Canadians from coast to coast to coast on what steps we could take to help them.

Budget 2021 takes those steps. We propose to extend the waiver on interest and maintain the doubling of Canada student grants until 2023. Waiving the interest allows graduates already in repayment to save money. Students and young Canadians will also benefit from the new Canada recovery hiring program, which will allow small businesses to hire new workers faster and at less cost to the businesses as they reopen.

Let us not forget the Canada summer jobs program that is helping over 100 young people just in my riding secure summer jobs this year.

Younger generations are the future of our country, and this budget is investing in them. We must move forward from this crisis, not backward. We must make our world better, not maintain the status quo. This budget moves us forward, and I am proud to support it.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, the PBO has said that the provinces are not in any position to take on new permanent spending. Since they do not have the required 50% of the funds, it looks like this will be yet another failed Liberal program. How exactly does the member think the provinces will come up with the money?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, the thing I am worried about is what would happen if we do not make these investments. It is very clear to see that if we decided not to invest in Canada, in Canadians, we would be far worse off.

It is important we all remember that we each need to do our part, and that everyone needs to be a part of the solution to build Canada back better.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

It was interesting to hear her talk about women's participation in the war effort. Many women are on the front lines in the fight against COVID-19, given they work in health care. What is lacking in the health sector is resources, not standards.

Would the member agree that, rather than standards, what is needed is an increase in health transfers, which would benefit not only patients, but also workers, since it would improve their working conditions?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for talking about health care. It is the most important thing right now because of COVID.

We are offering provinces more money all the time. They are getting essentially what they need, but it is how they are spending it. In the past, we had been very concerned that the provinces had not been spending the money on mental health issues in the way we had hoped they would, and now on long-term care. We need to focus on these areas as a federal government.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC

Mr. Speaker, the member said that child care was an economic must have, and l agree with that. I have talked to many folks in my riding, especially women, who have sacrificed their career because they simply cannot afford to pay their mortgage or their rent plus the high cost of child care.

However, another issue the government keeps neglecting is pharmacare. I have talked to so many people who say they cannot go to work because they cannot afford their medication and they or their loved ones are getting sick.

Recently, a woman who was just diagnosed with diabetes called me and said that she could not afford her rent or medication. She did not know what to do or how to make that decision.

When will the government commit to actually implementing something that will take a while to do? We need to start now. Why will the government not commit to that?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, pharmacare is very important, and we are making steps toward pharmacare. We have started. We have the advisory council on the implementation of national pharmacare, which is starting to take us down this road. However, it does not happen overnight, and we need to do it along with the provinces.

There is no question that we are on the right track as far as pharmacare is concerned, and we will get there, because it is important for all Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Terry Dowdall Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON

Mr. Speaker, I was just sitting here listening to the member's speech and all of a sudden I jumped out of my chair when she said that there was something in the budget for everyone. I have been bombarded by calls from seniors who are 65 to 74 years old who are not getting anything. We call them “junior seniors”. In addition, it has been over a year since the pandemic, and I have new businesses that have absolutely zero support. Their stress level is at a peak. Why were they not part of the budget?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, we are all very concerned about seniors. We are helping the seniors who need it most, those over 75, who maybe have come to the point where their savings are running out and they need extra money. People who are 65 and over will eventually get to that point and will probably need more assistance. We are doing what we can to ensure seniors are supported.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful to have the opportunity to speak to the budget implementation act and the impact, or lack thereof, that it will have on my constituents in Souris—Moose Mountain.

After two long years without a federal budget, the longest period without a budget in Canadian history, the Liberals have put forward this massive 700-page document that does very little to benefit those living in rural Saskatchewan. To say that I was appalled at the amount of unnecessary spending contained in the budget would be a gross understatement.

Under the government, Canada's deficit in 2020-21 has reached an astounding $354 billion, and just this week, the parliamentary budget officer announced that his analysis actually showed a deficit of $370.8 billion. Furthermore, the budget proposes over $101 billion in new spending over the next three years, over and above the usual amount needed to run the country. This is being done under the guise of helping Canada recover from the pandemic, yet the fact that there is no plan to pay this money back and return to balance shows just how short-sighted this budget truly is.

Another huge area of concern is the fact that both the Prime Minister in his most recent mandate letter to the Minister of Finance as well a report from the parliamentary budget officer indicated last fall that they expected the minister to come up with a new fiscal anchor. This was not done, and there is nothing in the budget indicating that such an anchor has been established. This sets Canada up for further long-term debt.

When it comes to our national debt, the situation is just as bleak. In two years, the Prime Minister will have added half a trillion dollars to our national debt. In six years, he will have almost doubled the $612 billion debt that was in place when he came into power. In fact, by next year, the Prime Minister will have added more to Canada's debt than all previous prime ministers combined. I wish I were exaggerating, but unfortunately the numbers do not lie.

The question that I and many other Canadians have is, who will be paying this back? In her budget speech, the Minister of Finance often spoke about families and their need for support in the short term, but what about the long term? At this rate, my great grandchildren will be paying the price for the government's financial mismanagement, and yet the Liberals continue to spend, spend, spend with no regard for future generations. Not my generation, not my problem seems to be the government's mantra when it comes to fiscal planning.

Speaking of rates, what happens when the interest rates go up? Let us think about that. What the government has presented is an election budget, yet other countries around the world have focused their pandemic budgets on job creation. The United Kingdom has tailored its budget toward funding for infrastructure as well as a super-investor tax credit which creates good jobs and actually gets some boots on the ground. France and Germany are both cutting taxes. These are G7 nations that have lower unemployment rates than we do, yet they create real jobs while we spend money on empty promises.

When I look at this budget through a local lens, it becomes obvious that this election budget was not intended to benefit southeast Saskatchewan. I do recognize that with the pandemic, we need to help those who have been affected by these new challenges, and there are some ways the budget does that. Measures like the suite of emergency financial support programs are essential since the downturn of the oil and gas market over the past seven years coupled with the pandemic has resulted in thousands of lost jobs in the energy industry and to small businesses. However, the non-existent support from the government for our natural resources industry further compounds our challenges.

One area that I was expecting greater support for was the agriculture industry and our Canadian farmers and ranchers. These hard-working people work tirelessly to provide Canada and the world with some of the highest quality produce available. Farmers are essential to our food security, yet the Liberal government has continued to make their lives more difficult and more expensive, especially through the measures like the carbon tax. As of April 1, it was increased to $40 per tonne and will go up to $170 per tonne by 2030.

In the budget, support for our farmers is as usual too little too late. One promise is that the government will provide $50 million for the purchase of more efficient grain dryers. Many will know that a large part of the issue with the Liberal carbon tax is that farmers are being charged huge sums just to dry their grain to get it ready for market. This is a necessary part for farming, and wet weather conditions are not something within a farmer's control. This is not a new issue. As soon as the carbon tax came into effect, and certainly following the harvest from hell, farmers were vocal about their need for greater government support. It has taken two years for anything to be done on this.

At any point during this time, the Liberals could have rectified this issue behind closed doors, but they let farmers suffer while waiting for a long overdue budget to make a flashy announcement in advance of an election. In fact, the Prime Minister 's cabinet appointed Prairies representative, the member for Winnipeg South Centre, recently stated that the added energy costs for farmers, notably for grain drying, had been a serious irritant in the farming community for a number of years. If he knew this, why has it taken so long and not fixed?

It is obvious that the Liberals are simply trying to placate Canadian farmers in advance of an election, but as I said, it is too little, too late.

When I ask Canadians where their food comes from, they unfortunately say the grocery store. I would like people to understand and appreciate the great land stewardship of the farmers who are actually producing that food. Prairie grain farmers adopted zero-till farming techniques decades ago and do not get any recognition for the great work they do in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. According to data released by the Western Canadian Wheat Growers, grain farmers in Canada are already a net-zero industry.

I have heard from many of my farmers who are seeding right now, and we look forward to seeing the crop in the ground, and also during past harvests about the big challenges they have using their energy efficient, carbon-reducing technology and equipment because they do not have proper access to broadband Internet.

Following the presentation of the budget, Ms. Jolly-Nagel, the Saskatchewan director and past president of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers stated: “I have trouble downloading software for my equipment now and cannot wait for Earth observation satellites to be designed and sent into space. The federal government has stated it wants a 30% reduction in GHG by limiting nitrogen fertilizer use but has never consulted industry or farmers if this is even achievable.” If the government wants farmers to do more to reduce GHGs, they need to listen to them and understand what rural Canada and rural Saskatchewan really means.

Another area that is important to my riding and to me personally is the use of carbon capture, utilization and storage, or CCUS, to reduce emissions in Canada. Since I became an MP, I have spent much time championing the incredible work that has been done in my riding at the Boundary Dam Power Station, the world’s first large-scale CCUS project. While I am pleased that there is some recognition of CCUS in the budget, the devil is always in the details, or in this case, a lack of detail.

The budget announces $319 million to support research, development and demonstrations that would improve the commercial viability of CCUS technology, but this is already being done. The Shand CCS feasibility study by the International CCS Knowledge Centre indicated that retrofitting their facility with CCUS could be done at 60% of the cost of Boundary Dam Unit 3 CCS and would make the Shand energy source carbon neutral, and some people say carbon negative with the fly ash that they ship to cement companies. Once again, the Liberals prefer to waste time and money on studies that have already been done rather than getting boots on the ground.

There is no indication as to when this money will be available, how it will be available and who will be eligible to receive it. We have seen this with Liberal programs before, such as the clean coal transition initiative, where communities are still struggling today to secure funds under ever-changing rules years after its inception.

The other measure regarding CCUS is an investment tax credit. This is another case of the devil being in the details, as further reading shows that this tax credit will not apply to enhanced oil recovery. By excluding EOR from this tax credit, the Liberal government is creating hurdles for new projects that might have otherwise qualified. The American version of this tax credit, the 45Q, includes enhanced oil recovery, and because of this, Canada will now be at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to incentivizing private corporate investment in the energy sector.

In closing, I think that most Canadians can see that this budget is an election budget that is big on idealistic spending without any promise of follow through. It spends taxpayer dollars at an alarming rate while using the pandemic as an excuse to do so. This indiscriminate spending needs to end so that we can work to create a secure Canada for future generations.

The finance minister listed in a number of her “sunny ways” things that were coming. Here is what is not coming: a balanced budget is not coming; lower interest rates are not coming; a reasonable debt and deficit are not coming. What is coming is a future where our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren are paying off the debt.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for focusing on the state of public finances and the need to monitor spending.

I would like to hear my colleague comment on another matter, specifically Ottawa's disturbing habit of interfering in Quebec's jurisdictions. One example of the link between finances and interference is the creation of the Canadian securities transition office. This constitutes a major intrusion into Quebec's jurisdictions. We really see this as an affront as well as proof that Ottawa wants to strip Quebec of its financial sector.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, the member for Shefford speaks from a party that is looking to separate this country, whereas I speak from a party that wants to keep this country together. The more we can work on those steps to keeping this country together the better, but in order for that to happen, we need to have a government that stands up for all of Canada. We need a government that recognizes the great participation factor from Quebec as well as from the western provinces and the great work the western provinces have done year after year in providing energy and natural resources to all of this country.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Scott Duvall NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON

Mr. Speaker, the StatsCan 2019 income survey reported that 349,000 people over the age of 65 live in poverty. In the budget, the Liberals have proposed to increase the OAS by 10% for seniors over 75 and that this would lift nearly 61,000 seniors out of poverty. This leaves a total of 288,000. Does he not agree that all seniors should be included in the 10%, so the other 288,000 seniors can get out of poverty?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to a time when we can get together again to talk about these issues, like our days when we were working together on veterans affairs.

The member's comment is very true. The reality is that in its budget the government has chosen who it thinks should be getting benefits. The member is right. We have seniors who are not getting access to these benefits. This is alarming. Ultimately, when we look at things, we also have to look at aspects such as the OAS and the impact the huge increase is going to have. Recent reports have indicated it will actually skyrocket. Those are things that need to be addressed. Those things were addressed in the previous Harper government, but the Liberal government took that out and is paying no attention to it.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK

Mr. Speaker, I would like to go in a bit of a different direction. I really appreciate everything my colleague has mentioned regarding the shortfalls.

The Prime Minister's mandate letter to the Minister of Finance instructed her to not create any additional structural debt, and yet the flagship of this budget is a national day care program that would do just that. From the minister's speech, it seemed to me she was indicating this was going to be a major catalyst to restoring our economy coming out of COVID. That cannot happen, as the PBO officer said, with the provinces not having the funds they would need.

Does he see this as just another election announcement timed when Canada's moms, who really need to get back to work, will actually not have the support they need?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I thank my northern neighbour for the great work she does for all Saskatchewanians and especially for the people of Yorkton—Melville.

She brought up a very good point. Yes, the government has put forward things in this budget that are strictly election issues in order to try to attract people and buy their votes. That is unfortunate. I think back to 40-some years ago to a gentleman by the name of Gord McNabb, who was a great friend of the family. I remember him talking way back then about child care and child care benefits. He probably would roll over in his grave today with what is going on.

Even back then, in the days of previous Liberal governments, Liberals were making these promises for things to happen but they never transpired. That is going to continue with the current government, as it says things but does not live up to what it talks about.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

Saint Boniface—Saint Vital Manitoba

Liberal

Dan Vandal LiberalMinister of Northern Affairs

Mr. Speaker, kwe, kwe. Tansi.

Today I am participating in the debate from my office in the riding of Saint Boniface—Saint Vital in Winnipeg, the homeland of the Métis nation and Treaty 1 territory.

I am proud to support Bill C-30. There are many important reasons to proceed with passing this essential budget implementation bill. Although all those reasons are important to our collective future, the most important, in my view, has to do with how this bill will benefit indigenous peoples and those living in Canada's north.

Our recovery plan for jobs, growth and resilience will improve the lives of people in the north in a significant and measurable way through investments in the fight against climate change, education, health, well-being and young people.

Bill C-30 creates economic opportunities for northerners while responding to the many socioeconomic challenges that have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

This bill addresses the need to fight climate change, and nobody is more aware of the need for urgent action on the climate crisis than those living in the north and in the Arctic. Canada's north is warming at three times the global rate, which has massive repercussions on the lives and livelihoods of northerners. The territories are experiencing increased wildfires, loss of sea ice, shoreline erosion, melting permafrost and adverse impacts on roads and infrastructure due to a change in climate. Indigenous peoples are experiencing its impact on their way of life, which is closely tied to land and water.

The good news is that those experiencing this would benefit from our plans to build back better. This is already apparent in places like Yukon, where the government is funding 100 climate change and clean-energy projects totalling over $50 million. This funding has supported northern and indigenous climate leadership to prepare for climate impacts and introduce innovative renewable energy projects that are locally led.

I recently had the opportunity to meet virtually with three first nations in Yukon and northern British Columbia who were able to install microgrid systems to reduce reliance on diesel with funding from our northern reach program. It was so very impressive to see how this is helping to improve food security by installing solar panels on a teaching and working farm and providing power to fish and culture camps so people connecting with the land through traditional activities now have access to sustainable power. To continue supporting locally led solutions, budget 2021 commits a further $25 million this year to the Government of Yukon to support its climate change priorities.

To help more northern communities transition to clean energy, budget 2021 proposes to invest $40.4 million over three years, effective this fiscal year, to support the feasibility and planning of hydroelectricity and grid interconnection projects in the north, providing clean power to northern communities and helping reduce emissions from mining projects. This could advance projects such as the Atlin hydro expansion project in Yukon and the Kivalliq hydro-fibre link project in Nunavut. Just this week, I joined Kivalliq Inuit Association in announcing an additional $3 million to support progress on this very important project.

Budget 2021 also proposes to invest $36 million over three years through the strategic partnership initiative. These funds would be used to build capacity for local economically sustainable clean-energy projects in indigenous communities.

The pandemic has hurt many, many small and medium-sized businesses, indigenous partners and particularly the tourism and hospitality sector in the north and we are responding with historic investments to help. Five hundred million dollars would be earmarked for a tourism relief fund which would be administered by the regional development agencies, supporting local tourism businesses in adapting their products and services to public health measures.

Budget 2021 also proposes to provide $2.4 million to the Indigenous Tourism Association of Canada to help the indigenous tourism industry rebuild and recover from the impacts of COVID. To help indigenous entrepreneurs start and grow businesses, and to create jobs to generate prosperity in their communities, the budget pledges to invest $42 million over three years, starting this year, to expand the aboriginal entrepreneurship program. This would directly support indigenous-led businesses and help indigenous communities generate wealth by improving access to capital and business opportunities.

Our government is determined to ensure that northerners, and particularly young people, will be able to fully capitalize on increasing business opportunities and contribute their skills and talents to their communities. A reflection of this commitment is budget 2021's proposal to provide $8 million over two years, starting this year, to the Government of Northwest Territories to facilitate the transformation of Aurora College to a polytechnic university. This would help create new opportunities in the Northwest Territories and prepare northerners for good jobs.

To further boost employment, budget 2021 would expand access to the travel component of the northern residents deduction. Northerners without employer-provided travel benefits would be able to claim up to $1,200 in eligible travel expenses. This measure would take effect as of the 2020-21 tax year. We have also proposed $117 million to renew the indigenous business community fund. This proposed funding would bring the total of indigenous community business fund support to $234 million to ensure indigenous communities can continue to provide services and support jobs for their members through collectively owned businesses and micro-businesses affected by this pandemic.

Another way budget 2021 is designed to meet the needs of northerners is by increasing access to housing, which is integral to people's health and welfare. If approved by Parliament, this budget would provide immediate support of $25 million this year to the governments of NWT and Nunavut as a down payment on the construction of 30 new housing units across the territories.

Indigenous peoples across the north would also have access to a wide range of enhanced programs and supports strengthened by budget 2021's proposed $18-billion investment to close the gaps between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. This would include $4.3 billion over four years, starting in 2021-22, for the indigenous community infrastructure fund, a distinctions-based fund, to support immediate demands prioritized by indigenous partners, such as housing or other infrastructure.

The price of food in northern Canada is considerably higher than in the rest of the country. That is why budget 2021 proposes to provide $163 million over three years to expand the nutrition north Canada program and enable me, as the Minister of Northern Affairs, to work directly with indigenous partners, including those in Inuit Nunangat, to combat food insecurity.

Last year, our government launched the harvesters support grant, which provides funding to help reduce the high costs associated with hunting and provide better access to traditional food. That is an essential component of food sovereignty.

Northerners will benefit from ongoing investments in the development of infrastructure and fast-track initiatives to end the national tragedy of missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and 2SLGBTQQIA+ people.

The goals and objectives of Canada's Arctic and northern policy framework were developed jointly with Arctic and northern partners.

This budget reflects what I have heard from northerners since I became minister. It recognizes the important roles that northerners play in our country. It is a critical step forward to reconciliation with indigenous peoples. I encourage everyone to support this legislation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to question the minister from Saint Boniface—Saint Vital on the budget. He talked a lot about support for indigenous communities and so on. I recently met with a number of the first nations bands in my riding of North Okanagan—Shuswap. They pointed out the difficulty in receiving funding for infrastructure projects. Some of the freshwater programs have been completed. They are looking at expanding their economy and the local economy through collaborative working relationships with local governments, and there are so many complications in trying to put that together.

The shortfall we see in this budget is that there is very little focus on long-term objectives for infrastructure development and so on. Would the member support abandoning the Canada Infrastructure Bank, which has been put in place and has failed dramatically at delivering infrastructure projects in Canada, and repurposing that funding toward collaborative infrastructure projects between first nations and local governments?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB

Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with the premise of the question. We are investing $18 billion into indigenous communities over the next five years in partnership with Inuit nations, first nations and the Métis nation.

All indigenous nations will have access to the indigenous-based infrastructure funding, which is $4.3 billion over four years. That is certainly over $1 billion a year. It is a substantial infrastructure announcement. It is distinctions-based and its priorities will be determined by the indigenous nations themselves, which can include housing.

Our commitment to infrastructure is second to none and I am very proud of the progress we are making.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am glad my hon. colleague, the Minister of Northern Affairs, talked about the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls inquiry. The government has not taken action when it comes to the calls for justice. It does not have a plan. It does not have a framework.

We have lost three people from the Tla-o-qui-aht First Nation in my riding who are currently under independent investigations by police that are not indigenous-led: Chantel Moore in New Brunswick; and Julian Jones, who died at the hands of the RCMP in Tla-o-qui-aht just a couple of months ago.

When is the government going to come back with a plan and reforms for the RCMP? These people cannot get a meeting with the Minister of Public Safety. I hope this minister will meet with them and listen to their concerns.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB

Mr. Speaker, I agree that we all have much more work to do to meet the needs of indigenous women and girls. However, our government has invested over $30 billion since 2015 in new funding over and above the base funding of the departments for health care, education, justice and infrastructure. In northern Manitoba alone, we have invested over $1.5 billion for all of those preventative issues. We have introduced co-developed bills on child and family services and language.

We have made progress. However, there is so much more work to do. We need to keep working in collaboration.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

As my party's critic for status of women, I want to point out that we have been waiting a very long time for the government to implement the recommendations in the final report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. I hope this will not turn into an election promise, which is what many of the measures in the budget seem to be. I hope we will see concrete action as soon as possible in honour of missing and murdered indigenous women.

My colleague had a lot to say about the environment and investment. It is good for the environment, and the government recently committed to some demanding targets. The problem with Bill C-12 is that its targets are not associated with actual objectives or an independent entity to monitor whether those targets are being met. The government is also pumping more and more money into pipelines and offshore drilling. We had a debate about Enbridge's Line 5 just yesterday, in fact. I would like my colleague to comment on the concrete environmental actions that the government must take as quickly as possible.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for this important question. Her intervention included a number of questions.

Our government has invested over $30 billion since 2015 through partnerships with indigenous nations in the areas of education, public health, justice, and child and family services. I believe that we have made excellent investments, but we still have a lot of work to do.

The highlights of this budget are children's services and education, in which we will invest $31 billion over five years. In addition, we will invest $20 billion over five years in the environment. In these times of environmental crisis, such investments are essential. In partnership with indigenous nations, we will also invest $18 billion to address their needs.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, “Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.” That is a quote from the great Charles Dickens in his novel David Copperfield. It was published way back in 1850, but is just as prescient as ever 171 years later. It is this basic principle of the need to live within one's means that has stood the test of time, keeping people and countries out of the poorhouse century after century. However, with the pandemic, we have seen common sense flung out the window, baby, bathwater and all.

Under the guise of the unprecedented nature of COVID-19, we have seen the government wield the heavy hand of opportunistic change in this budget, adding 16 billion dollars' worth of new permanent spending while Canadians are too busy trying to keep food on their tables and clothes on their backs to fight back. In a finance committee dissenting report, the Conservative members stated:

Now is no time for risky experiments or fantastical utopias. Instead, we must do what has always worked: free enterprise. Only voluntary exchange of work for wages, investment for interest and product for payment allows free people “to do well by doing good”....

Unfortunately, the Minister of Finance has ignored the true value and dignity that work affords a person, and has thrown the dice on a plan to print as much money as she wants to spend, hoping that her assumptions of low interest rates and low inflation last forever. What about the assumption that interest rates will remain low for the long term? Has the finance minister run some what-if scenarios with her team to see how much could change if any one of her hunches fail? The Parliamentary Budget Officer has intimated that there is no wiggle room in the current budget for inflation or interest rates to rise without serious consequences. It looks like we got a budget full of unicorn dreams that is long on hope and short on reality.

What is the reality we are currently living in? I can say with full confidence that inflation has reared its ugly head at every hardware and grocery store across the country, hitting those who can least afford it the hardest. Not only has damage to the global supply chain kicked low inflation in the teeth, but Canadians find themselves short on cash for necessities every month. In the latest consumer debt index survey from MNP LTD, just over half of Canadians surveyed said they are, at most, $200 per month away from being unable to pay all of their monthly bills and debt obligations. That is an incredibly scary statistic when we know that the cost of meat and dairy is rising, along with that of gas and rent, at a very steady pace.

With the continued implementation of quantitative easing, the Bank of Canada, in concert with the government, has decided to print money as fast as the government spends it. It has been proven by our own finance department that we do not need the huge sums of dollars the Bank of Canada is pumping off its printing presses. Our economy has been functioning well, with mortgage business increasing by 20% over the previous year. No one has been hoarding their dollars, which can be seen by the 20% increase in cash available on the market. The suggestion that these measures were necessary because of the risk of deflation has also been proven to be completely false.

As the government continues to spend, supported by the complicit printing presses at the Bank of Canada, our dollar is being seriously devalued, and the hardest hit are those who can least afford it. For those who rent, the rent is going up. For those going to the grocery store, the grocery bill is going up. For those getting gas at the gas pump, the gas bill is going up.

At the finance committee, the Governor of the Bank of Canada was adamant that he is completely independent from the government and the finance minister's policy decisions. However, let us take a deeper dive into what that independence actually looks like.

Last year our deficit was $352 billion, and last year the Bank of Canada bought $302 billion of that debt. This year our deficit will be $154 billion, and lo and behold, the Bank of Canada will buy $156 billion of that debt. Is it a mere coincidence that these numbers look so eerily similar, or can we all just admit that the governor has no choice but to respond to the policy decisions of the finance minister?

At committee, the Conservatives put forward the following recommendation: “Restore the independence of the Bank of Canada to ensure it focuses solely on its mandate of targeting inflation to 2 per cent a year.” It is very deep within the report, but it is there, because we believe this is imperative for a strong economy.

As we see, inflation has risen above the 2% target, and the lockstep of government deficits and Bank of Canada debt purchases continues. It is clear that independence is not functioning as it should.

The business of creating dollars out of thin air that has been happening in our country simply debases the money that already exists. That is the money people have in their savings accounts. It is the money they got in last month's paycheques. It is the money they have been saving for down payments on their first homes. It now buys less than it did a year ago. The monetary policy this government is utilizing to cover its unhinged spending is costing Canadians big time. It is nothing but a tax by another name, and the poor middle class end up bearing the brunt of it.

The Liberal budget has been widely criticized by many economists for being more concerned with redistribution than with economic growth. The focus is not so much on earning the money, but on borrowing it, so much so that we will borrow more in the next six years than in the last 152 combined.

No new taxes were another recommendation that the Conservatives included in our dissenting report. The Financial Post recently reported that our finance minister has indicated her support for joining President Biden's plan for a global minimum corporate tax, urging all countries to do the same. As a matter of fact, she called the idea “a breakthrough moment”. She made it clear that global interests are a priority over the best economic and financial interests of Canada, our workers and our young people, who will inherit our debt and our social programs.

What about $10-a-day day care? It is the centrepiece of this budget. The path to getting every Canadian back to work, we hear, is making sure every woman can put her children in a government-run institution for a mere 10 bucks a day. The finance minister would have us believe that all the mothers out there have been dying for this one-size-fits-all solution.

As a matter of fact, what I hear from constituents is that they want choice. Some prefer to leave their preschool children with close family, perhaps with grandparents where they are able to share their cultural and moral values. Others might want to share child care responsibilities with their neighbours, giving them flexibility around their very complex schedules. A one-size-fits-all program just does not fit the needs of Canadian parents for flexibility and alternatives. Does this government really think that it knows better than a mother what sort of care would be in her child's interests?

Add to that the challenge of getting the provinces on board. The finance minister has made this promise with some big strings attached. Since she will only foot 50% of the bill, the provinces will have to cough up the rest. Right now they cannot afford it, according to our Parliamentary Budget Officer. From where I stand, it looks like a very empty promise meant only as part of an upcoming election platform. The Liberals have been pledging this for years, and reneging on it just as often.

When Liberals stand up in the House and talk about their record, I would urge Canadians to stop and think about how much their grocery bills have risen since the Liberals came to power, about how much it costs to fill their gas tanks at the pumps or how far away their dreams of owning their own homes have become. Under the Liberals' watch, everything has gone up in price.

As Conservatives, we know that there is nothing better for our country than having its young people aspire to new heights, develop new ideas, and work with their hands and their hearts to create new wealth and prosperity free from government overreach. It is our commitment to all Canadians to create opportunities for them to be the solution and the economic drivers of our recovery. It is Canadians' hard work and ingenuity that makes this country great, not the Liberal government. I am thankful for all that Canadians do for their communities.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Liberal

Sean Fraser LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her remarks, although I was particularly put out by the aspersions she cast upon the independent Governor of the Bank of Canada. She has made wild allegations, which I can only describe as a conspiracy theory, that somehow the Governor of the Bank of Canada has lost his independence from the Government of Canada. I attended the same finance committee meetings as the hon. member did, where the Governor of the Bank of Canada affirmed his independence. It demonstrates to me that the Conservatives are not serious about trying to form government when they ignore the independence of this important institution, which potentially has never been more important.

I will give the hon. member an opportunity to correct the words she put out on the floor of the House of Commons in her speech. Does she seriously believe that the government and the Governor of the Bank of Canada are working with one another in a way that runs contrary to the essential independence of the governor, or is she peddling a conspiracy theory for purely partisan, political reasons?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that the hon. member look at the numbers again that I mentioned in my speech. Our deficit last year was $352 billion, and $302 billion of debt was bought. This year, our deficit will be $154 billion and lo and behold, as I mentioned, the Bank of Canada will buy $156 billion of debt. It cannot be mere coincidence. These numbers look eerily similar and this is a massive problem. We need to get back to having the focus of the Bank of Canada be on the 2% inflation rate target that it had set for itself.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

At the beginning, she seemed to be expressing disapproval of the government's extravagant spending.

Where would she like to make cuts? What does she think of my suggestion that we start by cutting subsidies to the oil industry?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, I did not quite hear the end of the question, but what we have mentioned as Conservatives over and over is the fact that obviously programs were absolutely necessary during the pandemic, but they needed to be targeted programs that actually helped those in need. We still do not have well-targeted programs, and many people are falling between the cracks. Look at the HASCAP: Very few people have taken that up and they are the most impacted in this pandemic. Again, it is about doing programs that actually work and are targeted.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, the member on one hand is saying that the government should not spend so much on programs, that we need to be mindful of the debt and that we cannot spend in these difficult times. On the other, she is saying that we should assist Canadians who need help during the pandemic.

We really cannot suck and blow at the same time. The truth of the matter is that Canadians need help during this difficult time. Would the member support the call for the government to ensure that seniors and people with disabilities also get the support they need? That is not in the budget at the level at which it is needed.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate my answer from the previous question. It is very important that the programs instituted actually work, and that we are not spending more than we should be spending. We have seen many, many programs not work well, but I agree that we need to ensure that those with disabilities and seniors are well supported. Absolutely. As the member mentioned, they are not well targeted either.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate and support early childhood education and day care programs for those who want them, especially those who are most vulnerable as single or low-income parents who need or want to work and deserve to have quality day care spaces designed and available for them. However, choice in child care is a high priority for mothers and fathers in my riding, including the options of using family or friends, or participating in a co-operative. There is an amazing co-operative in my riding of Yorkton—Melville.

Under the government's national child care plan, will all working parents be required to use a national, government-run child care system as their only option to receive financial support while participating in the workforce?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, I could not agree more that choice is what parents are looking for in their day care. If we want to keep mothers working, it would be important to ensure they have choice and have day cares that are flexible, rather than very set, stringent nationally run government day care systems. We need to look at how we can ensure that women will be given choices that fit their complex schedules.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 7th, 2021 / 1:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

It being 1:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

The House resumed from May 7 consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:20 a.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join in the debate today. It is our second day of looking at the budget implementation act, Bill C-30. Given that the budget was over 700 pages long and the budget implementation act is over 300 pages, I will start at a higher level of extraction by examining the nature of this legislation and refamiliarizing some of us with the controversial issue of omnibus bills.

This is clearly an omnibus bill, but I want to set out why it is not offensive. At over 300 pages long, the budget implementation act contains well over 20 acts. It affects the Canada Labour Code, the Federal Courts Act, the Trust and Loan Companies Act, two different varieties of student loans and student financial assistance. I will not read them all, but a large number of pieces of legislation are affected.

The issue of illegitimate omnibus budget bills takes us back to the era of the Harper administration in a minority. They were the best way to push through offensive legislation when parties that formed the majority of the members of Parliament, but were not the administration, would have objected. With the use of offensive omnibus budget bills, the Conservative government quite shrewdly discerned that it could put through things that would not otherwise get public support or MP support, given that they are confidence votes. It put through things such as the Budget Implementation Act 2008 and Budget Implementation Act 2009, which weakened environmental assessment leading up to the majority actions of that government. It continued to put lots of things in budget implementation acts that were omnibus bills.

An omnibus bill merely means that many pieces of legislation are being passed all at once. This is not offensive is if it is all to one purpose. Everything in Bill C-30 is mentioned in the budget. As far as I can see, there are no sneaky surprises, as we discovered in a recent budget in which there were deferred prosecution agreements for corporations. As I go through this bill, it is not like the omnibus budget bill of spring 2012 that destroyed our environmental assessment process, which has still not been repaired. It gutted the Fisheries Act and eliminated the national round table, among other things. This is an omnibus bill, but it is appropriate in that everything I can find in Bill C-30 is consistent with the budget itself and has to do with legislative changes to make it possible to enact the budget, which this Parliament has now passed.

There are items of concern. When the bill gets to committee, maybe improvements could be made on some of these, but certainly it is of concern to see withdrawal of supports for important things within our economy during COVID. We are clearly not looking at a post-pandemic budget. After not having had a budget for two years, this budget continues to face times of deep uncertainty. I have had my first vaccine shot. I will wait four months and then get a second shot. With vaccines, we see there is light at the end of the tunnel, but with variants, spikes and economies in various provinces opening up a bit and then closing rapidly, there are a lot of reasons why businesses and individual Canadians will continue to need support.

The notion that we would lower the Canada recovery benefit from the current $500 a week to $300 a week by July should be looked at. That is soon, and we may not be ready for that. The wage subsidy is ending by September. A lot of businesses in my riding know for sure that they will need that wage subsidy well beyond September. There are deep concerns particularly in the tourism sector, so I will focus on tourism for a minute.

The tourism sector has received $500 million in the budget, and that is not nearly enough. We underestimate it, as Canadians and even as parliamentarians. All of us have tourism in our ridings, and collectively across the country tourism's contribution to GDP is roughly the same as the oil sands. It employs far more people, thousands and thousands of them, across Canada in every region, and $500 million is not adequate to meet the needs of the tourism sector.

Big businesses in my riding, attractions such as Butchart Gardens, would normally have upwards of 700 to 800 employees seasonally. Butchart Gardens did not have anything like that number last summer because it was not open, but the wage subsidy allowed it to keep specialists employed: the hundreds of people who were recruited from around the world as horticulturalists. It simply will not be able to keep that workforce if we do not have a wage subsidy. If it loses that workforce and these specialists, horticulturalists and experts are not able to be employed here, they will go to other countries. Their skills are in demand.

We have a very big concern about the $500 million provided for tourism and the $1 billion for promotion. Some of the businesses in my riding feel rather hollowed out by the notion that we will have a billion dollars going to advertising attractions in Canada that cannot stay open.

It is also peculiar that we have a decision by the Department of Transportation that cruise ships on our coasts will not open until February 28, 2022. I have yet to see any justification for that arbitrary date. This is a big concern, because if we are letting people get on airplanes, are saying there are vaccination passports and that people are okay to travel, certainly we should be informed of why there is this arbitrary date. It would continue to damage tourism.

This budget is also very short on support for ground transport. The bus lines of this country, whether Wilson Bus Lines or Maritime Bus, need more connectivity between cities and towns. The support for Via Rail is welcome, at $491 million, but it is all in the Windsor-Quebec corridor. What about Vancouver to Toronto and Montreal to Halifax? In the absence of Greyhound, the Irving Bus Line and others that run between communities, those routes need daily trains and an expanded economy service.

What is missing again is what we are going to do to improve our financial prospects going forward. If we are not going to be looking at cuts, we need more revenue. There are some new taxes in this budget and some ways to save money. I particularly applaud the idea that the Government of Canada is going to stop spending as much on travel by civil servants: That is a $1-billion savings over five years. Most of that travel, as we know, was by air. We have learned during COVID that we can find other ways to meet that avoid greenhouse gases and avoid so much travel.

Long-term we need to look at more revenue. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has pointed out that our debt-to-GDP ratio is going to level out at about 51%. It was about 30.6% before the pandemic, and it will be 2055 before we get to pre-pandemic debt-to-GDP ratios. In 1995-96, we were at 66%, but we do not want to go through that deep austerity program ever again. We have to protect our health system. We have to expand it with pharmacare, which should have been in this budget and was not.

We need to look at where we can get more revenue and be consistent. For heaven's sake, it is time to stop subsidizing fossil fuels. It is time to cancel the Trans Mountain pipeline, which is going to cost another $10 billion to $12 billion. We are looking at excess profits from our banks. We should be going after those. We should be looking at a wealth tax. We certainly do not do enough in this budget. It suggests consultations on what to do about credit card interest rates and horrific payday loans. Those things need more attention.

We need to look at improving the revenue line so that we can afford universal pharmacare, which we must, and so that we can make sure the day care program takes place across the country for all Canadians. As well, we need to bring in support initially for low-income dental and get rid of the interest on Canadian student loans. All those need revenue in their appropriate place. With that, I am thankful for the time to speak to Bill C-30.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT

Madam Speaker, I always appreciate the words of the member. She is very helpful, especially related to our Porcupine Caribou herd, which I will mention later. I thank her for clarifying the omnibus bill. All budget implementation acts are omnibus bills because they have to deal with so many bills and departments.

To clarify, there are $1 billion for tourism. It is $500 million directly to tourism, $100 million to marketing and $400 million to tourism events such as festivals and museums. On top of the existing support programs that are being extended, there is $700 million for business financing and expansion of the small business financing program.

I wanted to thank the member for her great support over the years for the protection of the Porcupine Caribou herd that has so much effect on the Gwich'in people. Hopefully, she supports the $24 million for pan-Arctic scientific research through the polar continental shelf program, which many MPs might not know of, but is very important—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Madam Speaker, that is very generous praise for my work from the member for Yukon. My work to protect the Porcupine Caribou herd, and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge just across the border from Yukon, is nothing compared with what the hon. member for Yukon has done. He was their champion well before I went into politics. We have worked together for decades.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. It was interesting to hear what she had to say about tourism in particular.

I would like to turn to another topic. In the budget, the government says it will send seniors 75 and up a $500 cheque. The budget also says old age security will probably go up next year, but that is a whole year from now. It is creating two classes of seniors: those 75 and up and those under 75.

In Quebec papers this weekend, the seniors' federation spoke up, saying that seniors were not yet satisfied and were really angry. There is no reason to believe that a senior under 75 is poorer than one over 75.

What does my colleague think of the fact that this budget creates two classes of seniors?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

It is clear that nothing justifies creating two classes of seniors.

I myself am 66 years old. Seniors have been given no explanation for this decision. I completely agree with my colleague.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Madam Speaker, during the member for Yukon's intervention, he thanked the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for her clarity around omnibus bills. I thought she was quite clear. I have more a comment, not a question.

A large budget implementation act tabled by a Conservative government is bad, but a large budget implementation act that touches on different acts across the operation of government is good.

It was clear and I did understand very carefully what she was saying.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Madam Speaker, I am afraid to say that the hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge misunderstood entirely what I was saying. I did point out that the Liberals had included a change to the Criminal Code that was not required on the notion of deferred prosecution. That was a specific measure as a result of lobbying by SNC-Lavalin. That should never have been in a budget implementation bill, but that was one measure.

The spring 2012 omnibus budget bill and the fall 2012 omnibus budget bill brought in measures never mentioned in the budget, such as getting rid of scrutiny over some of our spy agencies in the fall omnibus budget bill, killing the environmental assessment process in the spring omnibus budget bill, and getting rid of the Kyoto implementation act. Again, these were not mentioned in the budget.

The previous administration created monstrous omnibus budget bills without connection to the budget itself. It was quite different.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Madam Speaker, all of us in this place know that so many Canadians have suffered great loss over the course of this pandemic. Some of us have also been affected by some of that loss. Whether it has been loss of life, health or paycheques, we know this past year has been extremely difficult. Certainly, we know no Canadian has been immune. All Canadians have experienced a loss of control and a loss of normalcy. It has been two years in the making, with Canadians across the country desperate and anxious to turn the corner on the pandemic.

There was a lot of expectation for the recently tabled budget. Unfortunately, for far too many, this budget fell flat, but by no means for a lack of spending. We know the Prime Minister has added $155 billion in new debt this year alone, and Canada's federal debt will pass $1.2 trillion this year for the first time ever. The government has tried to paint all its spending as stimulus spending, but that is not accurate. Yes, some spending will help stimulate the economy, but significant amounts are being spent on the Liberal government's own partisan interests.

Simply put, this is a spending budget, not a growth budget. The limited amount of funds being spent on stimulus have been confirmed by our Parliamentary Budget Officer, who also cautioned that continued debts and deficits will limit the government's future ability to introduce new permanent programs without cuts or tax increases. That fact is simply unavoidable. Massive deficit spending is unsustainable. It jeopardizes the long-term sustainability of the many social programs that many Canadians depends on. It limits the government's ability to react to future challenges and ultimately leads to higher taxes.

It is a hard truth that the Liberal government wanted to ignore the pandemic, but Canadians footing the bill will not have the luxury of ignoring it. Missing from the budget are focused spending on long-term growth and a clear plan to reopen Canada's economy safely. Unfortunately, that means more uncertainty for my constituents. This budget abandons the natural resource sector, one of the greatest contributors to our national prosperity, as a fiscal anchor. While the Liberal government's disregard for the energy sector is not a shock to any of my constituents, who depend on jobs in the industry to put food on the table and keep the lights on, it is nonetheless devastating for those workers who have lost their jobs, had their wages cut or are seeing opportunities and businesses in their industry dwindle. There is no support for them in this budget.

Emergency wage supports are not a meaningful replacement for a stable and predictable paycheque. That is exactly what Canadians want, stable and predictable paycheques. Our oil and gas workers have taken hit after hit at the hands of the Liberal government and now continue to be overlooked as the Prime Minister fails to see the financial and environmental opportunities in the oil and gas sector. That failure has a massive impact on my constituents, but the missed opportunity will ultimately be felt by all Canadians, who also benefit from the success of this sector.

Similarly, consistently overlooked and undervalued by the government are our farmers and farm families. While the budget introduces some measures to alleviate some of the ballooning costs facing our agricultural producers, it cannot be lost that it is the Liberal government's policies that are burying those agricultural producers in costs. The Liberal government has repeatedly failed to recognize the significant financial, food security and environmental contributions of our world-class agricultural sector.

The Liberal government's unfocused spending and failure to deliver a growth plan lets Canadians down. It lets down western Canadians, who do not see themselves or their livelihoods in the Liberal government's reimagined economy. It lets down those Canadians who have lost their jobs during the pandemic and do not know what the future holds. It lets down those Canadians who cannot afford more taxes and are already struggling to make ends meet, which includes low-income seniors, who were left out of this budget.

We know that seniors have been disproportionately impacted by this pandemic, from health to social isolation to financial costs. Not one senior has been immune to the fallout of this pandemic. Despite this, seniors have never really been a priority for the Prime Minister. The supports that are included in this budget and its legislation are either short on details or leave too many seniors behind.

Prior to the budget, Conservatives called on the Prime Minister to deliver increased financial supports for low-income seniors. The proposed one-time payment and the increase to old age security do nothing to support low-income seniors under the age of 75. For those seniors aged 74 and under who are facing an increased cost of living and unexpected costs due to the pandemic, and who are struggling with overstretched budgets, there is no support.

As shadow minister for seniors, I have been hearing from seniors from across the country who are upset and who feel forgotten. I share in their disappointment. Instead of focusing on spending on seniors who need it the most, the Liberal government has divided seniors. Our seniors, who have worked hard and helped build this country, should not be struggling to make ends meet. They deserve to live securely and with dignity, and this includes seniors living in long-term care.

The pandemic has sadly revealed how far we have missed the mark in ensuring the health and well-being of our seniors living in long-term care. Every level of government has a responsibility to Canada's seniors. We know that federal support is necessary to address the acute challenges in long-term care. While this budget proposes significant spending, there are unanswered questions on how it will be delivered.

The Liberal government has made many announcements, but seniors living in long-term care, their families and those who care for them need us to move beyond announcements. We need a federal government working in collaboration with provinces, territories, seniors advocates and caregiving organizations to ensure that meaningful and appropriate solutions are delivered in the immediate and the short-term. Collaboration is crucial to moving the needle.

As we look to improve the continuum of housing and care needs, aging in place is an important part of that conversation. It is good to see supports in this area, though the budget is short on details. However, noticeably absent from this budget is recognition or support for caregivers. There is also no clear plan for seniors concerned about managing their retirement savings through this crisis and beyond. Seniors deserve to live in dignity and security, but this Liberal budget leaves too many behind.

The potential permanent impact of unfocused and uncontrolled spending is also greatly concerning. Massive deficit spending without a clear plan for growth jeopardizes the long-term viability of our health care system and important social programs. It is critical that social programs, such as old age security and the guaranteed income supplement, continue to be viable in the long term for those seniors who depend on them. That is why Conservatives have put forward a recovery plan that is focused on long-term growth.

Canadians do not need the Liberal government to spend the most money to achieve less than our global counterparts. They do not need massive spending that fails to grow the economy, and instead saddles them and their children with higher taxes. Canadians need measures that create jobs and boost economic growth. They need a plan to safely reopen our economy. They need a plan that includes them regardless of where they live or what sector of the economy they work in.

Canadians want to return to normal and get back to work. Unfortunately, this legislation fails to do that. It leaves millions of Canadians behind. It is time for a real path forward.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE

Madam Speaker, I very much enjoy serving with the hon. member on the standing committee for human resources. She talked about support for seniors and discrimination against seniors of different ages. In the very budget the Conservatives presented upon gaining a majority, they increased the age of eligibility for old age security for seniors from age 65 to 67. I presented a private member's motion to have this reversed, which the Conservatives defeated.

The rationale at the time was that people were living and working longer, and therefore, there was no need for support between age 65 and 67. Is that still the policy of the Conservative Party of Canada?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Madam Speaker, I also enjoy serving with the hon. member on our committee. I will say that we heard the 10% increase for OAS for seniors age 75 and up was a campaign promise in 2019. It still has not been implemented, and I am not going to take any lessons from the Liberal government.

Liberals did not think that seniors were a priority when they had a majority last term, and they did not appoint a minister of seniors until very well into their term.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks of the fact that the government is behaving a bit like it has too much money. It is interfering in areas of provincial jurisdiction, when it is not even fulfilling its basic responsibilities, including transferring money for health from the federal taxes it collects from Quebec and the provinces. We know that all the provinces and Quebec are calling for increased health transfers.

Health care systems across the board are at a breaking point at the cost of human lives during a pandemic. Why not increase health transfers instead of interfering in Quebec's jurisdictions?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Madam Speaker, I very much am a big advocate for respecting provincial jurisdiction. I definitely think federal government needs to act where a federal government can and provinces need to act where they need to as well.

I think this speaks to the failure of the Liberals and their plan to prepare for this pandemic and also their planning that has failed altogether going through this pandemic. What this budget fails to do is have a plan to reopen the economy. If government keeps spending the way it is, we are going to lose supports for programs such as OAS and GIS, which many Canadians rely on.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. If we want to be able to have good public services for the long term, whether in health or to help the most vulnerable, like our seniors, we need to have the necessary revenues.

In that sense, there is nothing in the Liberal budget for collecting money from those who have it, in other words, companies such as Amazon, with its billions of dollars in profits, or web giants that are still not paying their taxes in Canada. We are also still not seeing a wealth tax.

Are those not things that the Conservatives would like to see in order to increase government revenues and avoid cuts in public services?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Madam Speaker, what I would like to see is the Liberal government reduce its burdensome regulations on the oil and gas sector, which provides a lot of supports for many provinces, whether that is OAS, GIS, health care, schools and transfer payments. I would like to see the burden of the red tape and the regulations go away, so we can see increased revenue from our oil and gas sector.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:50 a.m.
See context

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Mr. Speaker, people are starting to be cautiously hopeful. As vaccines roll out and we approach herd immunity, Canadians can dream, once again, of something approaching normality. What the new normal might be is, of course, anyone's guess. However, some people are starting to turn to thinking about how we are going to pay for the debts and deficits that have been necessarily incurred over the course of the last 14 months. Some 74% of Canadians are worried about the budget deficit, and it is a legitimate worry.

The government rightly injected billions of dollars into the economy. Looking at the charts in this 700-page budget, much of the money is sitting in Canadian savings accounts. I perceive that to be a good thing. Canadians have been notorious under-savers, more spenders than savers, but now, not quite so much.

Chart 22 in the budget shows that 8% of nominal GDP, year over year, has been put into savings accounts. That is a huge amount of money. It is such a huge amount of money that it will be looking for spending opportunities as we emerge from the pandemic. As it says in the budget documents, it may well become a bit of a tailwind to the economy.

However, what happens when significant excess money is released into the economy, money looking for places to be spent, generally speaking prices go up. Labour becomes more expensive, the cost of goods and services climbs and people's savings do not get them as much as before. Then we have another problem, and that is called inflation.

An article in The Globe and Mail caught my eye the other day. It was about the perceived mismatch between the consumer price index, CPI, and people's lived experience. The price of shelter rose 2.4% last year, which was consistent with the CPI of 2.2%, well within the Bank of Canada's inflationary band. Meanwhile, the average resale price of a home went up 32%. This is a mismatch between people's lived experience and the official numbers. As one commentator put it:

That leads to a cost-of-living indicator that doesn't quite reflect what consumers see and feel, and an inflation indicator that doesn't quite reflect the long-term cost of owned housing relative to other things we buy....To that point, there is a consistent mismatch between CPI inflation as Statscan measures it and how Canadians typically perceive inflation.

The article goes on in great detail as to the various means to measure inflation, a quite academic debate which I will spare the House.

However, in an online survey conducted by the Bank of Canada last year, 55% of the respondents said that 2% inflation was not a realistic representation of their experience of inflation, while 66% of respondents believed that the inflation in Canada was generally higher than 2%. All of the budgetary calculations are based upon a range of 2% to 3% inflation and a clear determination by the Bank of Canada to keep interest rates very low. The Governor of the Bank of Canada has repeated himself several times on that point.

The reason that Canadians are concerned about the size of the deficit is the fear that it will become overwhelmingly expensive to the detriment of other initiatives if inflation takes off and therefore interest rates take off. On the present consensus of numbers generated by the absolute best economists in Canada, Canada can afford a very large deficit and debt-to-GDP ratio.

Historically, we have been here before. Post-World War II, we had a debt-to-GDP ratio in the neighbourhood of 116% and, in 1995, we were named an honorary member of the Third World. At the time, we had a 67% debt to GDP. By virtue of economic expansion and some prudent measures, we were able to deal with those situations, and they were worse than what we are presently experiencing, which is a debt-to-GDP ratio around 50%, give or take, projected forward for the next five years.

However, there is a lingering doubt that the CPI does not quite get the picture right, not on housing, not on shelter, not on food, not on lumber, not on steel, not on cement. In this morning's Globe and Mail, the article entitled, “Copper hits record high”, is a commentary on the rise of the price of copper, which is used for everything, from plumbing to electricity to alternative energy as well as Chinese supply-side jitters and accommodating monetary policy, which is motivating companies to ramp up spending.

Virginia-based trader, Dennis Gartman, said, “The monetary authorities, whether it’s the Fed, the Bank of Canada, the Bank of Japan, the Bank of England, have all been extraordinarily expansionary. Copper, lead, zinc, aluminum, tin, iron ore, steel, are telling you something’s going on in the global economy.” He added, “This is inflationary, and this is more than transitory circumstances. This is secular in nature.” This is where it might end badly.

I started by talking about Canadians having massive amounts of money in their savings accounts, some of which will go to feed a pent-up demand. What will happen if Canadians go to spend their money and inflation has eroded their pandemic savings account? It will create a lot of very unhappy and upset Canadians. As the great philosopher, Wayne Gretzky, once said. one should go to “where the puck is going, not where it has been.” There are indications out there where the puck is going to inflation and if it goes to inflation, we will have yet another problem.

I commend the government on its handling of the pandemic finances thus far, but we, as Canadians, need to recognize that the inflationary pressures are there. How we handle them will largely determine how we get through this period of “normalcy”.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 10:55 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Madam Speaker, this is the type of debate we need, where we discuss important issues before the House, and inflation and his concern about it should be duly noted.

I am very pleased to hear the member raise inflation. At finance committee, for example, the testimony from officials and members of the government, members of his caucus, has largely not shared the urgency around getting a handle on ensuring that inflation does not harm Canadians in the months and years to come. The lived experience tells Canadians that prices on the critical things they need have gone up, like heating homes, rent and the price of a home, which has gone up 30% across Canada during the pandemic. I would ask the member continue with his concern on inflation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Madam Speaker, I am glad to hear that the finance committee is actually debating this issue.

I do not profess to be a world-leading economist, but I have lived through the stagflation of the 1970s, the erosion of people's savings and the mismatch between what inflation was doing to their assets and to their income.

The issue is whether the CPI is actually measuring the right things. The argument is that the CPI measures the Canadian economy well and its inflation well during non-pandemic times, but during a pandemic, it may not be measuring quite the right things. This an interesting debate and I hope the finance committee carries on with that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Scarborough—Guildwood for his speech.

He spoke about inflation and purchasing power. Purchasing power is indeed shrinking, especially under the current circumstances. I wonder what my colleague and his party think about increasing old age security for seniors aged 75 and over.

He mentioned numerous complaints, including some from seniors, about the loss of purchasing power. Seniors aged 65 to 75 are complaining about the unfair decision to increase the pension only for seniors aged 75 and older.

What does my colleague think about this very sensitive issue?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Madam Speaker, it is an issue, but the first point I would make is that if inflation does take off, it erodes everybody's purchasing power, seniors and non-seniors alike.

The second point I would like to make is that the government had to pick one age, whether it is 70, 75, even 80 or whatever, because the government's finances are not unlimited. Therefore, the choice was to support those who were the most vulnerable, and it was deemed that those people over 75 had the least flexibility in their financing and therefore needed the most support, most immediately.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

NDP

Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB

Madam Speaker, as we know, there is a fair deal to look at in the budget, but one of the areas we have yet to see action on is when it comes to reinforcing the powers of the Canadian ombudsperson for responsible business enterprise. The government has failed to create an independent office with real powers to investigate abuses and redress the harms caused by Canadian companies, particularly mining companies operating abroad. This is not acceptable. We know that Canadian mining companies the world over are wreaking havoc.

How important is it for the government to step up and have the power to stop the rampant exploitation in which we see companies engage in the name of our country?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Madam Speaker, I have three points. The first is that the ombudsperson is a serious person and very capable. The second is that the government did give her a decent budget. The third is that she is right; we should have the appropriate suite of powers for the ombudsperson.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB

Madam Speaker, what a pleasure to have the opportunity to speak to this bill for the budget implementation act. I listened carefully to the previous speaker from the Liberal Party and wanted to say a couple of things in regard to working with him. I note, with appreciation, that back in 2017, he was the only Liberal member of Parliament who broke the whip on the Canadian autism partnership and voted in support of it in 2017, along with members from all of the opposition parties. I very much appreciate him for that.

I also appreciated the member quoting Wayne Gretzky. In my previous life before I was a member of Parliament, I worked for the Edmonton Oilers for a decade, and so I very much appreciated that speech. I loved the quote that he used. One of the things that was key to Wayne Gretzky's success was practice. His father had a reputation for building a rink in their backyard and Wayne would go out for hours on end just practising. One of the keys to practising, of course, is repeating something learned from the past, which is where I will turn my comments to now.

The member said that in regards to where we are going right now that it “might end badly.” This is of great concern to members on the Conservative side and to my constituents here in Edmonton—Wetaskiwin that this might end badly.

In regard to learning from the past, I was very interested when the Liberal member for Scarborough—Guildwood said that “in 1995, we were named as an honorary member of the third world.” I listened with interest because that was where I was planning to go with my own speech. Of course, in 1995, Canada's credit rating went down under the Chrétien and Martin Liberal government of the day. We slashed spending on things like health care, social services and education. We slashed international development spending; all of those things. Our spending was the lowest that it has been in my lifetime. I am concerned that that is where we are heading right now. I am going to talk a little bit about what got us there in 1995 and the late nineties where, as the member said, we were named as an honorary member of the third world. To find out what got us to that point, we will have to go back to the Trudeau government of 1968 and the seventies.

When Pierre Trudeau and his Liberal government came to power, there was almost no debt in Canada. There was very little debt, relative to where we are right now, and that Trudeau government decided to conduct an experiment. It decided that running perpetual deficits was a good idea. It ran deficits in 14 out of the 15 years that it was in power. Of course, when the Liberals were no longer in power, interest rates were at an all-time high. There have been some comments about interest rates in some of the speeches so far. However, interest rates were not at an all-time high the entire time the Liberals were in power. When they were making decisions to run their massive deficit experiment, interest rates were much lower.

To give context, in August of 1981, interest rates were at 20.78%, which was a disaster for Canada. That was just before the equally disastrous national energy program experiment that the Trudeau government at that time ran. In August of 1971, 10 years earlier, as the government was just in its third year of power, interest rates were at 5%. By August of 1976, interest rates had risen from 5% to 9.25%, and by August of 1981 they had gone up to 20.78%. Folks who think that interest rates are just going to remain low forever maybe need a little bit of a history lesson, maybe to go back in time and take a look at what happened in the 1970s.

There was a transition of power in 1984 to the Mulroney government and the Liberals, pre-pandemic, prior to the massive deficit spending, like to point out that in previous decades the highest levels of debt were incurred under the Mulroney government. What they do not say is that the debt incurred, the deficits run up, under the Mulroney government were almost entirely interest on Pierre Trudeau's debt. The interest levels were so high that our biggest deficits in history were simply interest payments on the debt that Pierre Trudeau ran up. Of course, that bill came due and it came due more than a generation later than when the deficit started to be racked up by the Trudeau government. That debt came due in the late 1990s when, as the Liberal member for Scarborough—Guildwood pointed out, we were named as an honorary member of the third world.

I hope that we learn something today as we go down the road we are going down. We have to acknowledge that we are in a global pandemic and any government in power, any of the main parties, would be running large deficits at this point in time to deal with the challenge we are facing. The Conservative government back in 2008, 2009 and 2010 had to run fairly large deficits to deal with the global meltdown. The difference between now and then is that the Conservative government had a plan right from the start to get our budget back to balance.

We knew that we could not incur these deficits forever and that eventually, in the long-term interest of Canadians, we had to ensure we got our budget back to balance, so in 2008 we laid out a seven-year plan to get back to balance. In 2015 we got back to balance. We followed the plan to a T. I had the pleasure of serving on the cabinet committee from 2012 to 2105 that reviewed the plans of the government, ministers and departments to play their role in getting back to balance. We got back to balance by 2015 and that was the fiscal situation that the government of the day inherited.

If we look at this budget, where the government is and program spending, in 2014-15 program spending in the Conservatives' last year of government was $254 billion. Now let us look at 2019-20, pre-pandemic, before anybody knew what was going to happen. We should remember that the entire way through, Conservatives were asking the government if it was prepared for a future eventuality where the global economy was not as strong as it was. During this entire time of global strength in the economy relative to what it had been previously, rather than continue with a balanced budget and increased spending because of increased revenues that the government could then have the flexibility to spend on priorities of Canadians, it decided to rack up massive new spending. In 2014-15, program spending was $254 billion and by 2019-20, it was $349 billion, up $95 billion, 37.5%, in just five years. That is insane in terms of fiscal management. That was leading into the pandemic.

If we look at this budget, we are dealing with what we are dealing with now, but Canadians would expect to see a government that would have a plan for a post-pandemic world, for getting our finances in order and moving beyond the pandemic. In this budget, if we fast-forward to 2022-23, plans for spending after the pandemic is over, the government's projected program spending is $412 billion. We should remember that in the last year of the Harper government, it was $254 billion. Eight years later, the government plans program spending of $412 billion, an increase of over $150 billion, over 62%, in just eight years.

If we go back to the Trudeau government of the 1970s and look at the disaster its fiscal plan was for a future generation, my concern is that we are heading down that exact same path now with the current government. We need a change in direction. We need a plan from the government, even if it is a long-term plan, to get back to balance eventually so that we can again continue on the path that we were on in 2015, an upward trajectory where governments had the flexibility to spend on the priorities of Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:10 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, can the member explain why, if the Conservatives are so against debt and deficit, it is in their platform commitment for the next election that it will take them 10 years to balance that deficit?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:10 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB

Madam Speaker, when we were in government we laid out a seven-year plan to get back to balance and we got back to balance slowly during that time. It should be noted that during that time we could not spend enough to satisfy the Liberal members, and we see that in this very question. We laid out a plan to get to balance over 10 years. The current Liberal government has no plan to get back to balance, but an endless plan to continue to spend money. It is interesting that it criticizes our plan to get back to balance because it does not go fast enough when we have asked the Liberal government time and again what its plan is and there is no response from it.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Madam Speaker, my colleague seems obsessed with deficits. It is rather rich to hear him say that.

The government has still not invested in several of the main sectors that were affected by the crisis. For example, the budget does not address health transfers. The Conservatives voted against the Bloc Québécois's amendment on health transfers. The budget has nothing for seniors, other than a few crumbs in August and perhaps next year, if the Liberals are still in power.

Furthermore, Quebec is grappling with a housing crisis. The vacancy rate is low. The budget provides for a small investment, but the Federation of Canadian Municipalities was calling for a $7-billion investment to address the housing crisis.

There is no money allocated to these sectors that are vital during the pandemic. The government is not facing our current problems head-on, yet my colleague is obsessed with deficits.

How would he go about dealing with all of the serious problems that the pandemic has thrown at us?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. I, like the member, absolutely care about those things. I care about them today and in the future. I care about them for us and seniors today, as well as for people who are not seniors now but will be in the future. I care about vulnerable Canadians. As the member might know, I have a 25-year-old son with autism. I care about what programs look like for him today, but I also care about what they are going to look like when I am not here anymore, down the road, for him. Right now, the path the current government is on is such that the spending we are doing today is going to necessarily result in a reduction under whatever government is in power down the road. We said we will have a 10-year plan, a nice long-term plan, to get back to balance, but the point of strong fiscal management is exactly the member's point, so that governments can make sure we have the money to spend on programs that are important to Canadians now and in the future.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Madam Speaker, I would agree with the member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin that there are very real concerns and that often, as we go toward a path of fiscal correctness, it is working families who bear the brunt of this.

When we look at investments in things like pharmacare, which can have notable improvements on health care spending in the long run; child care, which allows more family members to enter the workforce to improve the economic lot of their families; as well as making sure the wealthy pay their fair share so the brunt is not falling on working families, I wonder about those three specific measures. So far, the Conservatives have shown a bit of an aversion toward them when we know those types of investments will have notable and beneficial impacts in the long run.

I wonder if the member can respond to that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB

Madam Speaker, all of the things the member mentioned are good measures. We want Canadians to be able to have access to them, but I would point out for all members that we have to also look at the revenue side of the equation. As a member from Edmonton, from Alberta, I have to point out that we have absolutely robbed our economy of our opportunity to fund some of those things because of our disastrous pipeline policy in this country, which gives preferential treatment to oil coming in from Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Algeria, Azerbaijan and countries like that. For example, it gives preferential treatment to that $25 billion worth of oil coming in from 2016 to today, relative to the oil coming from the Saskatchewan—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Humber River—Black Creek

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to be able to speak to budget 2021. As we heard the other day and today, our government—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Could I interrupt the hon. member and ask her to adjust her mike? I believe it is too close to her mouth.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, today we are talking about all of the different issues in our budget. We are talking about the future and how we will manage to get where we are going and make sure we have a strong plan to finish the battle against this terrible COVID-19. Clearly, as we have been hearing, our plan is to execute a plan to deliver one million jobs, as promised. These jobs are critical for us to have a strong recovery from this pandemic. These jobs would help make the lives of the community members I represent, and all Canadians, that much better.

The budget implementation act would deliver a plan to support the residents of my riding and all Canadians. It includes extensions and expansions of critical COVID-19 support programs for businesses and individuals. Examples of that are the wage subsidy, which has helped an enormous number of Canadians; the rent subsidy, without which so many businesses would have had to close; and, of course, the other recovery benefits we have provided.

The BIA would also implement the major policy planks of budget 2021, such as funding early learning and child care and supporting students to help them through these difficult times to find the employment they need to start their careers. It also includes a minimum wage of $15 at the federal level. It sets out a clear foundation for a greener, more inclusive and more prosperous economy, and it would make life more affordable for students by extending the moratorium on student loan payments. These are all critically important for our young people.

Ensuring large multinational companies pay their fair share is a topic of much discussion during these difficult times. We know benefits have gone to many of the companies, so as one end of the spectrum suffered tremendously, another area benefited enormously, and I believe they should contribute much more to getting us through these difficult times. This is what we promised in budget 2021, and this is exactly why we need this BIA to pass, so that the legislation delivers.

I can tell members it is a great budget for the residents I know and love in Humber River—Black Creek, and for all Canadians.

Our government values the contribution that seniors have made, and continue to make, to our communities. I miss visiting my local seniors groups. I call the presidents of these organizations as often as I can. They all want to get back to playing bingo and cards at their local community centres, some of which are now being used now to deliver the important vaccines our government has secured to protect our most vulnerable from COVID-19.

I know these seniors will see their lives get back to normal soon because of the hard work the government is doing to end this horrible pandemic. Our policies are showing positive results. For example, 25% fewer seniors live in poverty than when the Liberals took office in 2015. That is a direct result of the good work our government has undertaken, including restoring the age of eligibility for old age security and GIS to 65 years as opposed to the suggested 67 years, and increasing the GIS for the most vulnerable single seniors.

The budget implementation act proposes to increase old age security by 10% for seniors—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

I have to interrupt the hon. member.

The hon. member for Drummond is rising on a point of order.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I think my colleague's microphone might be positioned incorrectly. Perhaps she could adjust it slightly.

We can hear a lot of noise, and although the interpreters are not complaining about it, it is probably making their job more difficult.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

We noticed the same thing.

Could the hon. member try adjusting her mike again?

It is better now.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, it would increase by 10% for seniors aged 75 and over, which will help lift more seniors out of poverty.

Taken together, our government's ambitious and progressive measures are making a real difference in seniors' financial security. However, we know there is much more work to do. Canadian seniors can always count on the Liberals to listen, understand their needs and work hard to try to deliver for them.

Education is the smartest investment anyone can make, and our government is committed, as I mentioned earlier, to making life more affordable for students. To ease new graduates into working life and to make sure they are not prematurely burdened by loan repayments, budget 2019 made the six-month grace period after they finished their education interest-free.

During the pandemic, our government imposed a six-month moratorium on all student loan repayments, and committed to a one-year suspension of interest accrual on student loans in 2021-22. The BIA would extend the waiver of interest accrual on Canada student loans and Canada apprentice loans until March 31, 2023.

Let me assure Canadians that every little thing we do, or big thing we do, helps a lot of people and relieves their stress levels, as we know what they are going through at this particular time.

We are also increasing a threshold for repayment assistance to $40,000 for borrowers living alone, so nobody earning $40,000 per year or less will need to make any payments on their students loans. This will support an estimated 121,000 additional Canadians with student loan debt each year. These measures will ensure that Canada's youth are set up to succeed as we recover from the pandemic.

Now, let us talk about a favourite issue of mine, which is child care. I have always enjoyed visiting the local barbecues and events organized in the communities I represent. Getting to see the new families with their children brings a lot of joy to my life.

I know I will soon be back at the third annual Tastes and Sounds of Jane and Finch at San Romanoway. I want to see my friends Spider Jones and Mr. Jane and Finch himself, Mr. Winston LaRose. I know they are keeping safe, and I will see them soon.

Back to child care, the BIA would authorize $2.9 billion in funding for a transformative investment to build a Canada-wide early learning and child care system. This would drive economic growth, and is a plan to increase women's participation in the workforce—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There is a lot of noise and static. I would like you to ask the interpreters if it is a problem for them. It is problematic for me, and I am worried about the interpreters.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

We have not yet received a complaint, but we do know the interference is affecting us all.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, on a point of order.

I would just like to step out of my area of expertise for a moment and give my hon. colleague some technical advice. The microphone boom is flexible. If my colleague tries to unfold it slightly, it will automatically move the microphone the correct distance away from her mouth, which should help solve the problem.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the help.

This would increase women's participation in the workforce and is a plan to offer each child in Canada the best start in life. It will aim to reduce fees for parents with children in regulated child care by 50% on average by 2022, with a goal of reaching $10 per day, on average, by 2026, everywhere outside of Quebec. Budget 2021 will invest almost $30 billion over the next five years and provide permanent, ongoing funding.

There has been a lot of discussion over whether this budget is fiscally responsible. Canada entered the pandemic in a strong fiscal position. This allowed our government to take quick and decisive action supporting people and businesses, and to make today's historic investments in the recovery.

Systemic racism is a painful reality for too many people. In particular, Black Canadian communities have suffered immensely during COVID-19, and the events of the past year have highlighted the inequities and racism targeted at racialized communities. Our government is taking action to tackle racism, support racialized communities and respond to the uneven impact of COVID-19. As we build back better and recover from the pandemic, we will continue to address systemic racism and empower communities by bridging the gaps that hold Canada back from reaching its potential.

Budget 2021 outlines the government's plan to build a healthier, more inclusive and more equitable Canada for everyone. The budget proposes $200 million toward a Black-led philanthropic endowment fund to support Black-led charities and organizations serving youth and social initiatives, as well as $100 million for supporting Black Canadian community initiatives. Both will be administered through Employment and Social Development Canada for 2021-22. There will also be a new anti-racism grant program to combat rising hate and racism during COVID-19 and a national coalition to support Asian-Canadian groups.

We will be enhancing the communities at risk with empowering and enforcing security infrastructure programs to protect communities at risk of hate-motivated crimes. We will expand access to community-led mental health programs for indigenous peoples, and racialized and Black Canadians. This is a historical first of its kind, groundbreaking, and an investment that we are speaking about. These ventures will have a direct positive impact on the communities I represent for years to come.

My apologies to my colleagues and the translators for the difficulties with my microphone. I thank them for their help.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB

Madam Speaker, I know the member did touch very briefly on the issue of fiscal responsibility, but it is that area I want to discuss with her.

A couple weeks ago when the finance minister made her speech, she basically said, and I am paraphrasing, that it would be irresponsible not to incur more prospective debt because interest rates are so low. I know this morning the headline on CNBC is that the 10-year Treasury yield in the U.S. has risen amid inflation fears.

Last week, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen said she was concerned that interest rates might have to go up because of inflationary concerns. The Minister of Finance in New Zealand, who is a Labour minister, also recently said they will move to reduce debt and return to surplus as a responsible government should.

Given all of this, why is the Liberal government not following suit and taking heed, with respect to the possibility of inflation and interest rates rising, by bringing in fiscal anchors and a plan to get back to balance?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, the issue of fiscal responsibility is important to each and every one of us. I would say all members of the House care about the fiscal responsibility avenues of our country. Clearly, we have met the challenges and continue to do so. This pandemic is still not over. We are still trying to help as many people in our country as possible.

We will deal with this, and we will have a plan to get ourselves back to the point where we want to be, but for the moment I believe we have to continue to help people overcome challenges and get our economy to bounce back as quickly as possible. By making these kinds of investments and helping put money in people's pockets, I expect that will happen much faster.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:30 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her speech despite the poor sound quality.

She stated that she was proud of what her party did for seniors in the recent budget, which increases old age security for those 75 and up.

If my colleague was in my riding office, she might feel a little less proud. Every day we receive telephone calls from people who are angry that they are not entitled to the increase because they are not at least 75 years old. These people are just as affected as the others because the cost of medications and groceries has increased. However, their purchasing power has not, and they currently feel cheated, alone and ignored.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague what she thinks these people are feeling. What would she have to say to people aged 65 to 74 who are not getting an increase? How can she explain this to them?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, my colleague was not the only one getting those phone calls. I think many of us did.

We talked about fiscal responsibility with my previous colleague, trying to be fiscally responsible while at the same time trying to help as many people as possible. People are living much longer today than they used to and the costs as people get older are much higher for those 75 and older than they for people between the ages 65 and 75. We would have loved to have done this kind of an increase for people aged 65 and older, but while we are trying to help people, we are trying to be fiscally responsible as well.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.
See context

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Madam Speaker, I was speaking with a young Canadian who went to work in the United States, and within a month, she had the vaccine. She was called three days in a row by three different health agencies in her city to get the vaccine. I compare that to the Ottawa workers I know who are relying on Twitter, word of mouth, rumour. Two young workers who I spoke to in Toronto took an Uber 35 minutes across the city on the wild off chance they might get the vaccine.

We have to admit that between the feds and the provinces, Canada has absolutely failed in the delivery of the vaccines. We have had politicians patting themselves on the back, but there is such uncertainty for so many of our young millennial workers, our Gen Z workers, the front line workers. The fact that they have no other choice but to rely on Twitter to find out where they can get a vaccine is a real condemnation of the government's response to the pandemic.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, this pandemic has been a tremendous challenge for everybody, the provinces, the federal government. It was not something that we had a plan on how to do the rollout. I think everybody has done the best they could. A lot of issues—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Thérèse-De Blainville.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:35 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, I hope to avoid having any more microphone problems. If I do have any, I know I can count on my hon. colleague from Drummond to speak up; I rely on his sound advice.

I am pleased to take part in the debate on Bill C-30, budget implementation act, 2021, no. 1. My initial observations are that this budget sprinkles billions of dollars on just about everyone. The budget implementation bill contains a number of half measures, and we have noticed several things that are missing. For a stimulus budget, what it lacks above all is meaningful measures.

I would like to begin my speech by talking about the labour-related announcements included in the budget and pointing out how positive they are. The Minister of Labour is implementing one of the commitments included in her mandate letter, specifically to amend the Canada Labour Code to increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Although this measure affects only about 26,000 federal employees, it nevertheless sends a message to everyone who has come out of the shadows as a result of the crisis.

Madam Speaker, I am hearing a conversation going on, and a member's voice—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

I cannot see which member it is, but I would ask that—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

It is the member who spoke just before me.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

I would ask the member for Humber River—Black Creek to put her mike on mute, please.

The hon. member for Thérèse-De Blainville.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:40 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Clearly, the microphones are a real problem.

I will continue my speech.

I was saying that raising the minimum wage to $15 was sending the right kind of message. We found out that all our guardian angels, all the essential workers, who were brought out of the shadows by the pandemic, earned low wages. By ensuring them a minimum wage of $15 an hour, we are sending them the right kind of message.

Still on the subject of labour laws, I would say this is a half measure. It is a good start, but it is only one step.

With regard to the practice of contract flipping, we can see the intention to add the word “airport” to the Canada Labour Code. The airport sector is hardest hit by this practice, which undercuts its workers. This is a demand that has long been supported by the workers of this industry.

I will now remind members of the situation and what constitutes contract flipping.

In the airport sector, the workers and unions have no leverage to protect the working conditions they have fought for over time. Consequently, with contract flipping, where the work is given to a different subcontractor, workers lose everything. They lose their jobs and working conditions. The subcontractor has no obligation to them, and so the workers' salaries can even be cut. This destroys lives and careers.

Workers could be hired by a new employer, but they have to start at the bottom, despite having 25 years' experience, for example. However, the work is the same, they must work with the same tools and equipment and work the same schedule. By adding the term “airport” in the budget implementation bill, there is some protection for these workers when contract flipping occurs.

I will now speak about half measures, since the Liberals seem to want to only protect salaries.

That is what happened during the recent dispute between Swissport employees and the Montreal-Trudeau and Mirabel airports. The Swissport employees' contract was changed.

Workers who used to earn $23 per hour are now earning $16 per hour for the same work. That obviously makes no sense. This bill would rectify situations like that. It has to go further, though. Why stop halfway?

This is a half-measure. Pay should not be the only thing the law protects. Working conditions, pension plans, insurance plans and union recognition should also be protected. That is what people want, and it is the right thing to do. That is what we are calling for, and that is what unions are calling for. We hope this part of the bill will be improved so we can go all the way.

When it comes to a given situation or practice, what we are asking for is simple. We do not want workers to suffer when the supplier changes. If the government tackles a particular issue, it might as well make sure that issue will not come up again later because it only went halfway. I am expecting to see amendments in this area.

There is something missing in our labour laws, something that workers have long called for. The government says it wants to protect workers and the middle class. That is easy to say but they are unwilling to lean left to better protect people in situations where they are really struggling. Something is missing, and that is anti-scab legislation to stop employers from using scabs in a labour dispute.

In Quebec, the issue has already been settled. The Quebec Labour Code prohibits the practice. Quebec's anti-scab legislation was adopted in 1977, but there is nothing like it in the Canada Labour Code.

Using scabs during a strike is a completely outdated practice, and yet employers have no qualms about exploiting this weakness in the legislation.

For example, in February 2020, employees of the City of Fredericton had their jobs stolen by scabs in the middle of a lockout. There was a similar situation in June 2020 for the energy workers at the Co-op Refinery in Regina, as well as in March 2020, in New Brunswick, involving the workers of the Red Pine landfill.

Also, what about the situation at the Port of Montreal? In August 2020, the representative of the employer indicated that he intended to work with replacement workers or managers, ignoring the rights of unionized workers. We even saw that in the dispute between the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, or IAMAW, and Swissport, which I was talking about earlier with regard to contract flipping, and the workers went on strike. The employer took advantage of the opportunity to hire scabs to drag out the negotiations. The employer had no interest in quickly settling the dispute.

All that to say that the government could have taken action and corrected an injustice by passing anti-scab legislation, but it failed to do so with Bill C-30.

Now I would like to quickly talk about the employment insurance system. It is unbelievable to think that, after all these years, with all of the studies and consultations that have been done, the government is not doing anything about this social safety net that is so important for workers receiving EI benefits, workers—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

It is time for questions and comments, where the hon. member can continue her comments.

The hon. member for Yukon.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the member two questions and she can pick which one she would like to comment on.

The first is that we have a huge digital economy in Yukon. There is a large investment in this budget to help businesses transform to the modern digital economy. People have not talked much about that. Does the member think this is important?

The second is that Quebec has had great experience with hydro. Our mining people asked for more hydro support for electric planning and transmission in the budget, which they received. Does she think the money for hydro in the Arctic, in the north and in Yukon is helpful and beneficial?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for the question.

Does the budget fully respond to that? One thing that is essential is the unquestionable need for a fair, greener environmental transition.

Some sectors of our economy such as natural resources and hydroelectricity will be key in that transition. To be consistent with what I said, in order to achieve fairer, cleaner, greener transitions, we have to make workers part of the solution. We have to imagine the green transition with our workforce and jobs in mind. That is essential to us.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:50 a.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for her speech.

This is the first federal government budget in two years. We were all collectively hit by the pandemic. We have seen how much we rely on a robust and effective public health care system that treats its workers and professionals well.

The Liberal government says that it transferred a lot of money to the provinces for health, but we can all agree that it was a one-off, not a recurring amount. Why does my colleague think that the Liberals are unwilling to commit to permanently giving the provinces enough money so they can have a good, effective public health care system?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:50 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, which gives me an opportunity to finish part of my speech.

When I talked about the lack of meaningful measures, I was referring to the issue with the health transfers from the federal government. The government is saying that it will increase the transfers after the pandemic. It also says that it has sent billions of dollars. That money was a one-time thing, though. It is not meaningful or permanent.

This week is National Nursing Week, and tomorrow is International Nurses Day. The government is failing to give these workers the essential support they need by refusing to fix an injustice and give Quebec and the provinces the money they need to adequately fund their health care systems and pay the workers who provide these quality services.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:50 a.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville. I especially want to thank her for her comments on the subsidies for fossil fuels.

Does she agree that if we are serious about climate action, then we need to cancel the Trans Mountain pipeline and stop giving fossil fuels billions of dollars in subsidies?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:50 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, a paradigm shift is crucial, and it should have happened a long time ago. We really need to recognize that we need to go in another direction.

Investing in fossil fuels is not the way to change course. These matters should have been resolved a long time ago. If we want to be serious, we really need to shift to clean energy, including energy from our natural resources. We have made plenty of proposals, including wood—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:50 a.m.
See context

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Order. We have to resume debate.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 11:50 a.m.
See context

Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook Nova Scotia

Liberal

Darrell Samson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence

Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure for me to rise in the House, virtually of course, to speak to Bill C-30.

This budget is an extremely important one. The BIAs are key elements that we will be moving forward very quickly.

We are in the third wave, and I want to thank Canadians right across the country for their efforts, and Nova Scotians as well. There are so many great stories when visiting various communities and organizations.

In my riding of Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, the Sackville Public Library was able to make changes during this pandemic so that people could go online, work virtually and have e-books to continue their learning and research, which is so important. The Sackville Legion, the Waverley Legion, all six legions in my riding were shut down for a while but worked closely with the government and the health agency to reopen when they were able to and continue to do their great work to support veterans and their families.

The First Lake Early Learning Centre had to lower the number of students and have smaller groups, but it continued to do the work that needed to be done. I cannot say enough about teachers, students and parents, who have done so well in continuing the education of students. The Waverley Heritage Museum had virtual learning experiences and had students working in this area last summer to support their community. The Boys & Girls Club in the Preston area, which is the African Nova Scotian community, was able to support the community by delivering food and assisting seniors in the area. In Porters Lake, Lake & Shore Community Recreation had a summer camp last summer and will do it again this summer.

Those are really interesting stories that many Canadians could talk about right across this great country.

There are two big areas of investment in the budget that I want to touch on before I get into the BIA.

One is the investment for veterans, an added $5 million over the next three years, on top of the $3 million that already exists for the well-being fund, which is extremely important for veterans and their families and organizations across the country. Also, there is an investment of $45 million toward veterans homelessness. We are trying to eliminate homelessness right across the country, and we are focusing on veterans homelessness and mental health as well.

I want to touch on the Black community as well, because my riding has the oldest intergenerational Black community in Canada. There is a major investment in the philanthropic endowment fund of $200 million to support Black communities. This fund will be led by Black Canadians, which is important to fight anti-Black racism. There are also investments to support Black Canadian communities, $100 million for programs to support capacity building, which is so needed in Black communities so they can continue working closely and supporting their communities.

In the BIA, there is an investment for child care, which is an important one because it would give students and children a better start and allow more women to enter the workforce because we will have a child care program. We will support Canadians by lowering the cost by 50% by 2022, and then down to $10 a day in 2026. This is a big investment. The BIA has $2.9 billion for Canada-wide early learning, which means that it is concrete, it is moving and it is real.

Education is one of the most important investments we can make. To support young Canadians, we would waive the interest on their federal loans until 2023, which is two more years. This would support 121,000 more Canadians than in prior years, and the threshold for repayment, which was $25,000, will be pushed to $40,000.

As I said, businesses have been doing well and being challenged at the same time. We have worked closely with them and will be extending many of the programs until September, such as the wage subsidy and rent subsidy, and there is room for us to extend them until November. If the economy is in need of more investment, we will be ready to move very quickly. Businesses can apply for up to $500,000 in loans, and there are investments in rehiring and digitalization programs. Credit card merchant fees, which are so expensive for small businesses, will now be the same as for big businesses. That would be a big help for the business community, which has been asking for this for many years.

For health care, which is very important in Nova Scotia and Atlantic Canada and right across Canada, there will be an additional $5-billion investment in the health transfer payments. This is over and above the health transfer payments that already exist, 10 years running. It is a big investment.

We will increase the EI sickness benefit for people who are challenged with illness from 15 weeks to 26 weeks. My colleague Mr. Eyking, the former MP for Sydney—Victoria, was a big proponent of this program.

We are investing in key areas where Canadians have spoken clearly to us, such as a national framework for autism, a national strategy for diabetes and, of course, all of the investments that we have put forward for vaccines and the success of moving those vaccines right across the country. We will have all Canadians vaccinated with a first dose by the end of June.

Seniors are very important to our economy. They have contributed, and continue to contribute, to the success of our great country. Since 2015, we have been able to reduce senior poverty by 25%. We made some major investments. In 2016, we increased the GIS by 10% for those who were most vulnerable. We also added $300 to the OAS and $200 to the GIS tax-free during COVID, which was very important. We are investing in national standards for seniors residences and in the new horizons program, which will help many organizations support seniors. Let us not forget that the Conservatives wanted to move the eligibility age for OAS to 67, not 65 as we did.

With respect to green energy, people can apply for grants of up to $5,000 for home improvements. For major refits there is an up to $40,000 interest-free loan. The net-zero accelerator is supporting projects that will help reduce domestic greenhouse emissions. We will also reduce by 50% the general corporate and small business income tax rates for businesses that manufacture zero-emissions technology.

I see I have one minute left, so I will conclude. We will continue to support Canadians for as long as it takes. Before COVID we were in a very good fiscal situation with the lowest unemployment rate, and over 1.2 million jobs were created. Just by remortgaging our debt we have been able to save $3 billion in interest payments. Not just Canada, but all countries are investing in their people. I am so proud of our government for continuing that work.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the speech by my colleague from across the floor very intently and I have a specific question to ask.

In the budget there is what seems like a last-minute addition of carbon capture, utilization and sequestration. My constituents are largely employed in the oil and gas industry, which has a tremendous capacity for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration. What is very concerning to them is that the budget specifically excludes any reference to the energy industry being able to access these future government funds.

Would the member be willing to commit today to ensure that the energy industry is added to that important development to ensure that we can have a green future?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, we have been supporting the Alberta economy since the beginning with investments into pipelines. I am glad he is talking about carbon, because I understand that now the Conservatives are looking at carbon pricing as well. I am glad they see that, because polluting is not free and we need to invest in that area.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question.

In his speech, he said that EI sickness benefits would be increased to 26 weeks in response to calls for such an increase. I question that because, for 10 years now, many people have been asking that EI sickness benefits be increased to 50 weeks. Many studies and statistics show that this is needed.

By only providing 26 weeks of benefits, the government will be leaving behind more than 50% of workers. Why not take immediate action and increase the duration of EI sickness benefits to 50 weeks right away?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her important question.

As we well know, we must continue to help Canadians, especially those in difficulty. We certainly know that, and we must do better. We increased EI sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 26 weeks, and I am sure that this will help a lot.

We will work with companies to find other ways to support those who are ill, because they should not get into financial difficulty. I understand my colleague's question very well.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the member mentioning child care in his speech. Child care has always been very important to me and to the constituents of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford. It is something I strongly campaigned on back in 2015.

My question is about the Liberal standard with respect to negotiating with the provinces. In Bill C-30, under division 34, we see that a legislative framework has been set up to get the early learning and child care system put into place, yet when the NDP came forward with a similar legislative framework in a version of Bill C-213 to set up pharmacare, the Liberals voted against it. Why was that?

Second, when can constituents in my riding and across Canada expect to see action on pharmacare, so that working families are no longer suffering under the huge burden of costs associated with unexpected pharmaceutical medications?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Mr. Speaker, those were two important questions. I think the pharmacare one is very important. We are continuing the work that we started on pharmacare in bulk purchasing. In many areas we are investing more in pharmacare than we ever did. We will continue that.

Child care is essential. I agree with the member 100% that this should have been done years ago. We are now moving directly forward on it with a $2.9 billion investment, but also let me state that we are going to work. We have already told the provinces and territories that we are ready. It is time to talk about how we are going to implement that.

The provincial and territorial governments will have pressure from people, now that young families will be looking forward to having those costs lowered by 50%, and to $10 in 2026. This is a partnership and a team Canada approach, and we will get there.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to budget 2021.

As I always remind my constituents, I am Beauce's representative in Ottawa, not Ottawa's representative in Beauce. That is why I would like to share with the House my many concerns about this budget and the changes that I would like to see made for my constituents and all Canadians.

The fact that the government took two years to announce its budget is unbelievable. One would think that, since the budget took two full years to develop, it would not have so many glaring problems, but it is important to remember that this government is constantly embroiled in scandal and other types of distractions.

Since coming to Ottawa during the last election, I have seen how complicated it is to work in federal politics. Everything moves at a snail's pace. It is extremely discouraging to have such good intentions but to feel as though this government never makes any progress.

As the associate shadow minister for rural economic development, I examined the budget carefully, and there are many things I would like to talk about today.

I would like to start by talking about the labour shortage that is affecting Quebec businesses. Business people across the country have found very creative ways to keep their businesses afloat during these uncertain times. Unfortunately, in rural areas, even before the pandemic, it has always been extremely difficult to fill all the available positions. The government should expand and enhance the existing temporary and seasonal worker programs to help fill the gap for these businesses.

The government also needs to cut the red tape associated with hiring. In some cases, businesses have to deal with three different departments to bring in the workers they themselves recruited in foreign countries. Current departmental wait times are destroying our businesses. The government cannot keep using the pandemic as an excuse. It is time for these ministers to stop gearing up for their next election campaign and start getting to work on these files.

Secondly, I want to talk about something that I have been passionate about for many years and that is public transportation in rural areas. The problem is that the money is simply not there. When the government promises to provide funding to the provinces, most of that funding ends up in major urban centres. With the population aging, keeping seniors in their rural municipalities could be easier with access to a public transportation system that would give them greater autonomy. In the absence of such transportation services, seniors choose to move closer to hospitals and health care centres for a better sense of security.

We see the same thing with newcomers. They also need transportation. In the context of a labour shortage, many businesses are recruiting foreign workers. It is the employer's responsibility to secure transportation to the workplace for employees with temporary work permits. However, these employee have no means of transportation to get to medical appointments, the pharmacy or the grocery store.

Public transportation in rural areas would help these workers and their families better integrate into their host communities. Without public transportation, students have no choice but to own a vehicle, carpool when possible, or live near post-secondary institutions, which are often located in major cities. For rural areas where about 20% of the Canadian population lives, a per capita contribution is not appropriate. Commuting distance should be a criterion for contribution. This approach would support the provision of transportation services in rural areas.

I would now like to quickly address a fairness issue that is not mentioned at all in this budget. It involves the current state of the Income Tax Act when it comes to the transfer of a family business. Currently, the reality for business owners is that it costs them more in taxes to sell their business to a family member than to sell it to a third party.

The current act unjustifiedly disadvantages operators who wish to pass on their family business to their daughter or son, leaving owners to decide whether to keep their life's work in the family or sell it to the highest bidder.

As everyone knows, Beauce is all about small business, and I would like to share an example from my riding. Eddy Berthiaume of Les Escaliers de Beauce in Saint-Elzéar was forced to make the difficult decision I just explained to the House. As the owner of half the business, Eddy is a hard worker who devoted years and years to building his business. When he was ready to retire, he decided to sell his shares in the family business to his children. Unfortunately, he was unfairly forced to pay thousands of dollars in transfer fees.

The worst part is that his business partner sold his half of the business to a third party and had to pay next to nothing in taxes. Why is that unfair? That is just one of many examples of how the government is leaving this country's small businesses out in the cold. We do not need a government that is willing to grant exemptions to some Canadians while penalizing hard-working families like the Berthiaumes.

I therefore hope all parties in the House will support the Conservative Party when it is time to vote on Bill C-208 tomorrow.

I now want to talk about high-speed Internet access and, in particular, the quality of cellular coverage in rural parts of Canada. This is the biggest problem that continues to put rural and remote communities at a disadvantage.

More and more Canadians are required to work and learn from home, so stable and reliable Internet and cellular connections are crucial. The Liberal government has completely bungled this issue, which has lagged for years, through five different programs and three departments.

Fortunately for Quebeckers, our provincial government presented a real plan with dates and objectives to get all homes connected by the end of 2022. The federal plan was so bad that the province implemented its own plan and simply asked the federal government to share the costs. Other parts of Canada are unfortunately quite far behind. We do not need more talk. We need action on this urgent issue.

Budget 2021 does not contain a single initiative to help improve cellular networks in rural areas. In some parts of my riding, people are finally getting access to a decent Internet connection. However, if they walk five minutes down the road, they lose any reliable connection to the cellular network, which makes no sense.

When can we finally hope to have a plan that works from this government to connect all Canadians in rural areas? We need the government to show leadership. It cannot continue to sit on the sidelines and wait for the big telecoms to take the initiative and solve this problem.

Another file that I am very passionate about is our agriculture and agri-food sector, a very important part of Canada's rural economy. This sector has been neglected by the Liberal government for years. To improve the economic development of Canada's rural areas, it is essential that the government help fund not just farmers on the ground, but the entire food chain.

When I was the associate shadow minister for agriculture and agri-food for the Conservative Party, I tried to get the minister to listen to me, but it seems that her hands are tied by a Prime Minister who does not believe in this sector. I still sit on the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, which released a complete report on business risk management programs. Unfortunately, nothing has changed.

It is essential to improve the business risk management programs for agricultural producers. The minister proposed a few changes to the program on condition that the provinces and territories share the cost. Unfortunately, some provinces cannot do that right now because of budget constraints. The minister is probably happy to wash her hands of it and say that she tried. However, agriculture and agri-food need to be considered as a real driver of Canada's economic recovery.

In closing, this budget is nothing more than a campaign tool for the Liberals, who are throwing money around without a real plan. I hope that, before the next election, Canadians will clearly see that the Liberals are just trying to buy votes with this budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, with whom I have the pleasure of serving on the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

I would invite him to consult page 22 of the budget, which sets out $1 billion more than what was already announced in budget 2019. He can tell his constituents that there is plenty of money allocated to Internet access.

I would like to know whether my colleague supports the measure for supply-managed processors, for whom the government announced nearly $300 million in the budget. Is he for or against that measure?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague.

The answer to the first question is yes. I did see the billion dollars, but I think that Quebec's announcement last March must have nudged Ottawa to get it to move faster on this issue.

I agree with my colleague that Internet access will be resolved for us in Quebec, but elsewhere in Canada there are still serious problems to overcome. In my view, it is mostly the cellphone coverage issue that still has to be worked out.

As for providing assistance to food processors, I support that measure, because when I speak of the whole agri-food sector chain, food processors are definitely part of that.

It is an important measure, but I think the message we send should be more—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Order. The hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Beauce.

I am very fond of my colleague, and one part of his speech interested me in particular, namely where he spoke of public transportation in rural areas. It is an issue that also affects my riding of Lac-Saint-Jean.

What is his vision and how will he put solutions on the table?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

This is an issue that has always been close to my heart in my former capacity as an elected municipal official.

I think that all of Canada needs better service in rural areas. This will require dedicated funding for the development of public transportation in rural areas across Canada. That will take a clear signal from the government.

Yes, it is important to have funding for public transit, but there are also significant needs in public transportation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

In the last budget, the Liberals presented child care services as a key measure for economic recovery. Obviously, as Quebeckers, we have seen the success of the network of child care centres and know that it is a good idea.

Given that the Liberals first made this promise in 1993, does my colleague believe it?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his question.

I do believe it, but within a five-year time frame. When we look at what has been implemented in Quebec, that took 20 years, and there are still some adjustments to be made, so there are some grounds for skepticism.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

James Cumming Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, within the budget did the member for Beauce see any specific strategies about growing the agri-food industry and gaining more market share throughout the world?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Edmonton Centre for his question.

From my reading of the budget, I did not see much to stimulate the growth of the agri-food sector in any way that would really help expand our export markets.

Canada is an agri-food exporter, and the budget should have included concrete measures to capitalize on the margins that we do have in Canadian agri-food to export, but unfortunately they just were not there.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have a brief question.

In his question, the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie forgot that the Conservatives, the NDP and the Bloc Québécois are responsible for the fact that the child care program was cancelled by the Harper government, following the promises and contracts with 10 provinces under the Paul Martin minority government.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.

I cannot look back, because I was not here at the time. I cannot comment on that issue, but I do think it is up to the provinces to bring in those programs. We have to consider all jurisdictional issues.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to speak to Bill C-30, budget implementation act, 2021, no. 1, introduced by my colleague the Minister of Finance. This is a first in Canadian history and I think it deserves to be acknowledged once again, as many members of the House already have. As the first woman to introduce a budget implementation bill in the House, the finance minister has broken down another barrier and inspired young girls in the process.

The budget essentially has three main themes. First, since March 2020, our objective has been to help Canadians get through the pandemic. Second, we want to help build a bridge to help SMEs get through the pandemic, since many small and medium-sized businesses have had to close their doors because of lockdown measures. Third, once the pandemic is over, we want a fair, equitable and green economic recovery. My speech today will address these three themes.

The objective of budget 2021 is obviously to help Canadians, for example through programs like the Canada emergency benefit or the Canada emergency wage subsidy.

Many members know that workers have unfortunately lost their jobs as a result of lockdown measures or because schools are closed and they need to stay home with their kids. A number of measures in budget 2021 will be extended until September to help Canadians through the crisis.

I just mentioned the Canada emergency wage subsidy. I have spoken with several business owners who were calling for this benefit to be extended beyond June 2021. It has been extended until September 25. This is good news for our small businesses, which have done an outstanding job of adapting and finding new ways to serve their customers.

I want to take a moment to commend the Prescott-Russell Community Development Corporation for the work it has done through the minister responsible for economic development. The corporation gave subsidies of up to $20,000 to help businesses adapt to the digital economy and develop an online presence, allowing residents to purchase products and services. Congratulations to everyone who made this happen.

As I mentioned earlier, the Canada emergency wage subsidy will be extended to September 25.

Regarding help for businesses that had to close down, we also extended the rent subsidy program. It has been so important for many of those businesses that are either paying rent or a mortgage but are forced to be closed. I think about hair salons that, in some parts of Ontario, have not opened in over a year. One can tell the region somebody comes from by the type of haircut they have. Some people have very long hair right now. Needless to say, these salons are an important part of our economy and I am glad we are helping them with the rent support program.

The CEBA loan was also extended. It has helped many businesses in my riding. Businesses can apply for up to $60,000, and if they reimburse it prior to a certain date, they can get access to a $20,000 grant.

Now, here are some of the measures we have outlined in budget 2021.

Fair, equitable and green economic recovery was one of the main themes of this budget. I am thinking primarily of child care. If we want a strong economy and economic recovery, we need to make sure that women participate equitably in our economy.

It is true that promises have been made before—some were even made when I was 7, apparently. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance are determined to ensure that this program is implemented once and for all. I hope we will have all-party support, as this is a very important measure.

When I was young, I could easily visit my grandmother, whose house was just behind ours. My mother had to go back to work after only three months of maternity leave. Not every parent has the option of having a family member look after their children. That is why access to child care and the cost of those services are so important.

We know that parents can spend from $40 to $100 a day per child for child care, sometimes more. They often wonder whether they should just stay at home to look after their children because it is simply not worth it for them to participate in the economy or to work while they have children at home. That is not a choice that people should have to make in our society, in a G7 country like Canada.

The Government of Quebec has had a proper child care program in place for decades. It is a great example. There is no reason why Ontario and the other provinces should not have a similar program. I am sure that the negotiations will be successful and that the Minister of Finance will get positive results for our families, who are so dependent on affordable child care. That is why we want to reduce the cost of such services by half by 2022 and cap it at $10 per day by 2025-26. That is a realistic and worthy objective that will help families across Canada.

The other important measure in the budget and in this act is help for our seniors. During the election campaign, we promised to increase support for seniors by 10% starting at age 75 for a very simple reason. Starting at age 65, seniors have access to old age security, as well as the guaranteed income supplement for our most vulnerable seniors. The guaranteed income supplement was increased by 10% in 2016, another promise that we kept.

Now we have committed to increasing old age security starting at age 75 for another very simple reason, which is that most seniors exhaust their savings before they reach 75 and suffer the consequences, with some falling below the poverty line. The proposed increase has a noble purpose, and it fulfills our campaign commitment.

Another important aspect of budget 2021 is none other than the issue of a green economic recovery.

I am so glad we are finally focusing on a green economic recovery. The measures in budget will reduce corporate tax rates by 50% for those manufacturers that produce zero-emissions technology. What a great incentive to position Canada as a go-to partner for the world to reuse our products. If we want to get to net zero by 2050, Canada has to do its part, but other countries have to do their part as well. There is no reason why Canada cannot be a provider of net-zero emissions technology. The incentive to reduce the tax rate by 50% is a great example.

Finally, I know we get accused of not being fiscally responsible. We are being compared to the 1990s, so I am will recall some facts. In the 1990s, the debt-to-GDP was 66% and the interest rates were at 12%. Thankfully, we are no where near that. I know that the debt-to-GDP ratio will rise to 51.2%, but then it will decline to 49.2%. By next year, the deficit will be reduced by half and by the following year, the deficit will be reduced even further by half again.

We are on a clear path to get to a budgetary balance, but we will also ensure we do not leave anyone behind. Budget 2021 is all about that. We want a fair, green economic recovery that leaves no one behind.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague mentioned seniors. He also mentioned how it was a promise made, promise kept. In actual fact, the Liberals have changed the eligibility. I have had many calls in regard to changing the age to 75. I understood from two of his colleagues that the reason the government did that was because it had limited finances and it wanted to be fiscally responsible.

Does the member understand how farcical those sorts of statements sound when so much money is being thrown around? The Liberals are trying to save money on the backs of seniors.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the member that it was not our government that proposed an increase to the age for eligibility of old age security from 65 to 67. That was her government. Our party and our Prime Minister said that we would bring that eligibility age back to 65. We said that would increase the guaranteed income supplement by 10% by age 65, which we did the first year in office. We are one of the only parties to list our party commitments on the Internet. I would invite the member to look at it. We said that we would increase the old age supplement by 10% at age 75, and we are doing that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Speaker, my colleague touched on the green recovery, but I would like to hear what he has to say about climate change. It is fascinating to see what the government does and does not do.

The day before the budget, Canada's greenhouse gas reduction target was 30%. On the day of the budget, it was 36%. Three days later, on Earth Day, it was 45%. I would like to point out that Canada has never managed to achieve a single greenhouse gas reduction target. It has never, ever happened. Clearly, since the measures are not there, the numbers mean absolutely nothing. The U.S. is at 50%. Since these are mere words, I wonder why the government did not say 58%. If the U.K. is at 78%, why are we not at 92%? Why did the government not say 154%, since they are just throwing words around?

Does my colleague agree that, to fight greenhouse gas emissions, the government should implement robust measures that are not currently in the budget?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question, but I do not agree with him about the budget. I think he should read it. I know it is 800 pages long, but there is an entire section devoted to the green recovery.

I come from an agricultural riding. I know that there are $200 million in the climate action fund for our farmers, whether to promote intercropping or the presence of wetlands on their land. We know that wetlands absorb twice as much CO2 as forests. There are other funds aimed at encouraging farmers to keep forested areas on their farms.

Several measures were presented in the 2021 budget. I invite my colleague to flip through it.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB

Mr. Speaker, the member spoke quite a bit about the promises made and promises kept. I recall that in the 2019 campaign, a promise was made on reducing cellular phone bills by 25%. I am somewhat concerned that in the 721-page budget document that was presented recently there was not a mention of that promise. Will this promise be kept or will it be another on the long list of promises that have been broken by his government?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, the member's question is very timely. I would invite him to look at a report that was published a few days ago. On average, cellphone bills have gone down by 25%. I forget the name of the report right now, but it is online. He just has to google it, and he can read it. There has been a reduction of at least 25% on average.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take a few seconds in the House to commemorate the work of anthropologist, radio host and distinguished author Serge Bouchard. For years, he filled our evenings with his reassuring voice and his profound vision of Quebec and our relations with the first nations. We have lost a great Quebecker. We will all miss him.

I would like to address several topics, because we are talking about the first federal budget in two years, so this is an important event.

The past two years have left their mark and turned life upside down in every one of our communities. Over these two years, we have all had to relearn how to live, work, communicate and get things done. Worse still, we saw businesses suffer and close up shop, workers lose their jobs, and entire sectors get turned upside down, especially the tourism sector, the cultural sector, including our artists, and the restaurant and bar sector.

Then there is the health care system, which had to perform miracles with very limited resources and in difficult working conditions, but I will get back to that later. Thousands of Quebeckers and Canadians fell ill and died in great numbers and are still dying or, even if they recover, can suffer long-term after-effects, known as long COVID.

Does the budget meet people's expectations when it comes to improving the situation and being better prepared for the future? There are some major flaws. There are tons of things missing. One of the first things is, how is it that the budget does not provide for stable and permanent health transfers so that Quebec and the other provinces can treat their employees well, treat their patients properly and face another crisis, another wave or another virus?

Over the years, the federal government has been investing less and less in our public health care system. That is very serious. In the NDP, we share the provincial governments' demand to raise funding to 35% of costs. In recent years, a Conservative government, under Mr. Harper, cut transfer payments to the provinces by reducing the annual increase from 6% to almost 3%. At the time, the Liberals made a big fuss about that, saying that it was a terrible thing that would threaten our public health care system but, when they came to power, they maintained and renewed exactly the same agreement. For that reason, our public health care system is now in dire straits. We need to make difficult choices. Times were hard even before the health crisis, with austerity budgets aimed at cutting corners everywhere. We are now seeing the results of those policies.

We need to give our public health system the means, the tools and the resources it needs. We need to work together to be able to care for our seniors in long-term care facilities. We saw the carnage in the first wave. Some of our seniors, the people who built Quebec by the sweat of their brow, were abandoned, left on the floor, left in their beds, dehydrated, without care and with rotten food, if they had any food at all.

As New Democrats and social democrats, we find this treatment disgraceful. It strips our seniors of their dignity, and we must do something to make sure it never happens again. We are not looking away and saying that it is not our problem. We are asking what we can do to help so that we never find ourselves in that situation again.

It feels like spring is coming, people will be getting vaccinated, and the recovery is on its way, so much the better. These are all good things. We are starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel. However, we cannot forget what happened last year. If we do, things will never change. The cycle will start all over again, and the same thing is going to happen.

One of the reasons we did not have the means to ensure a basic level of quality care for our seniors in long-term care facilities is the lack of resources. There were management problems, but the Quebec government is taking care of that, because it is not the federal government's jurisdiction, of course.

If we do not help the provinces provide decent care and look after their health care workers, what happens?

When orderlies earning $14 an hour are forced to work mandatory overtime and insane schedules, and this is compounded by a crisis, where a virus enters the workplace, it creates a vicious cycle. It is no longer worth their while to go to work because it is too dangerous, they are not paid enough and they do not want to take the risk. As a result, workers stay at home, and that exacerbates the problem.

Earlier, a member from Quebec said that this is world health worker week and that tomorrow is International Nurses Day. Let us consider. What are we offering them in exchange for caring for our sick patients and our seniors? What are we offering them to make the work attractive and make sure that they still want to go to work even when it is harder than usual, when there is a crisis and they are at greater risk?

For now, that is not what we are seeing, and the Liberal government's budget does not offer any answers. Sure, the government transferred some money, but only on a one-time basis, in the middle of a crisis. There is no plan for the future, yet we know that we need permanent, stable funding.

There is another important issue, and that is child care. We can see how accessible child care services help families and young parents in Quebec and how they allow women to rejoin the labour market. It is a good idea in itself, and I do not want to be a killjoy, but this was a flagship proposal in the NDP's 2015 and 2019 election platforms. It is a good idea, but only if it is executed properly. It could really help people, especially since we are in an economic crisis right now that is disproportionately affecting women. Women's participation in the labour market has dropped sharply, and we know that affordable public child care gives women greater access to the labour market, since they have unfortunately inherited traditional societal responsibities, such as caring for children.

It is a good measure that is very fitting under the circumstances. We could be happy, if only the Liberals had a shred of credibility in the matter. As I said earlier, they have been promising a child care program for the past 28 years. The first time was in Jean Chrétien's red book in 1993. That was quite a while ago. Should we believe them?

Let us see their action plan and what they are going to do, and let us watch how they work with the provinces. Perhaps the Liberals will want to act quickly to meet the need, because there is indeed a need. We see it in Quebec, where the minister of families is desperate. Quebec needs 50,000 more child care spaces, and federal money would be welcome. I met with Quebec's minister of families a few months ago. He asked us to try to put pressure on the government for a federal transfer so that he could open more spaces and pay more educators. That would be a good thing for the Liberals to do, but I have my doubts that it will happen.

Let us remember that, in the last budget, the Liberals' big promise for a major social program was public pharmacare. The NDP agrees that we should have a public pharmacare program, as do the Union des consommateurs, the FTQ, the CSN and the CSQ. There are holes in Quebec's system, which is a hybrid system and is not perfect. Such a program would also help many sick people in English Canada reduce the cost of their medication and access the drugs they need. How is it that pharmacare was a priority two years ago, and now it is suddenly off the table? How is it that we were told that other consultations would be held, but now there is no funding for this program and it is over and done with? One year it is pharmacare, and the next it is child care. The government is playing games by going from one to another. The government does not seem very serious about these things.

There is also a lack of funding for housing, even though there is a major housing crisis in Montreal and across Quebec. There is nothing in the budget about making the tax system fair and equitable. Web giants are still not paying taxes in Quebec and Canada. There is probably even a loophole so that Netflix does not have to pay taxes. The government is even playing favourites among the web giants. I think we need to get to a point where companies that make excessive profits, like Amazon, are taxed more and a tax is imposed on wealth over $20 million. These are solutions that the NDP is putting forward so that we can pay for a vibrant, green and prosperous economic recovery that benefits everyone.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that has not been mentioned too much in this debate, at least not at all today, is the benefits in the budget for NGOs and charities.

This does not often show up in a budget, at least not to this great of an extent. There is a community services recovery fund of $400 million; $220 million for the social finance fund, which is exciting and new; $50 million for investment readiness for social financing, which had expired and is now being refunded; the opening up the Canada small business financing to NGOs and charities; and studying an exciting new concept of social bonds.

Does the member support these types of supports for charities and NGOs? I always enjoy listening to the member, so I definitely wanted to comment.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his kind words.

Yes, any support for community groups in our constituencies is a good thing in and of itself, because they have difficult working conditions and extremely limited resources. These groups are often the ones keeping the social fabric intact and holding our communities together, so any additional assistance is good. We know that public services are also underfunded, so there would be disasters and tragedies if these community groups were not there.

They often tell us that they also want the funding they receive to be for their mission, not for their projects. Project-based funding forces these groups to spend a lot of time filling out paperwork and doing a lot of administrative tasks instead of helping our fellow Canadians. I encourage my colleague to look at this approach.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Mr. Speaker, I will not ask my colleague from Rosemont-La Petite-Patrie too difficult a question.

He mentioned taxing the digital giants. A “Netflix tax” that will not apply to Netflix is incredibly ironic. Actually, if it were not so sad, it would be laughable. I would love to hear my colleague's perspective on the consequences of the government's negligence and lack of courage when it comes to getting the web giants, who are making a fortune on the backs of our creators, to pay their fair share.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Drummond for his question.

We are talking about fairness and about the resources we need to give ourselves to support our cultural sector and our artists so they can contribute to the production of original Quebec and Canadian content.

How is it that the corner store near my office is forced to pay taxes while the Googles, Facebooks and Netflixes of the world get billions of dollars richer without having to pay a cent in taxes to Canada? These companies do not even want to tell us if they would be willing to pay.

It is absolutely scandalous and, unfortunately, the Liberals have done nothing about it since they took office six years ago. In what they are tentatively promising for next year, we can already see there will be loopholes that Netflix could take advantage of. It is unacceptable.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his speech, which, once again, had plenty of substance and raised some extremely important issues.

As he pointed out, the government is cutting emergency benefits. It refuses to recognize housing as a human right, while the state of social housing in this country is appalling. Meanwhile, Canada has no wealth tax and no excess profits tax on the web giants and the billionaires who hide their money in tax havens. This all adds up to billions of dollars in lost revenue each year.

What will it take for the Liberals to ensure tax fairness and understand that the government really needs to make the ultrarich pay in this country, instead of always making cuts on the backs of ordinary Canadians?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent question and his comments.

I only touched on the subject, but we could talk about it at length. We could also talk about the capital gains tax and the tax loopholes that allow the wealthiest Canadians and Bay Street bankers to profit from the sale of certain shares. That money could help fund social housing, public transit, our health care systems, better access to university for students, and more research.

My New Democrat colleague raised a good point about tax havens. We hear about taxing the web giants and the wealthy, but the Liberal government has never done anything about tax havens. According to the Department of Finance, we lose about $16 billion a year to tax havens. As for taxing excess profits, the Parliamentary Budget Officer recently estimated that we could recover $8 billion that way.

The Liberals should truly work for ordinary people, for middle-class workers, not for bankers, as they are doing now.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 12:55 p.m.
See context

Green

Jenica Atwin Green Fredericton, NB

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to speak to Bill C-30 and to share some of my reflections, not only on the government's budget and its implementation, but also on how the government views its relationship to Canadians.

I have been open in my critique of this budget. There is some good, and there are some things to be optimistic about, but ultimately this long-anticipated budget lacks the courage required to lead this country into a bold, new future. Canadians were not given a clear picture of what concrete steps will be taken to lift us up from our darkest hour. What we all need is leadership.

A leader speaks with clarity. Instead, we often spin our wheels with mixed messaging. The government has clearly indicated that we will be net-zero by 2050, while missing the point entirely that the decade we are currently in is actually the most important to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

A leader speaks with consistency. On the one hand, the government declared a climate emergency in 2019. Then, within the month, it had purchased the Trans Mountain pipeline to shepherd it through construction and more than double oil sands production.

A leader acts with integrity. The government says that no relationship is more important than its relationship with indigenous peoples, yet court injunctions are being enforced on unceded lands across this country in the name of law and order. Reconciliation has lost its meaning.

This budget is just another example of symbolism over substance, where we maintain the status quo under the guise of transformation. I am certain I am not the only one who feels as though the last 14 months have simultaneously trickled by at a snail's pace and disappeared in the blink of an eye.

Last March, the world had to stop. We had to stop travelling, stop going to the office and stop enjoying Sunday dinners with grandparents. We had to adapt. Week by week, month by month, we were tested. We saw COVID sweep through long-term care homes as residents had no access to PPE or rapid testing. We closed our borders as a nation and many provinces chose to do the same. In those early months, there was no certainty about vaccine production timelines. All the while, tremors were shaking the economy, hitting small and medium-sized businesses the hardest.

We now find ourselves 14 months into this pandemic, and the Deputy Prime Minister has tabled a budget said to focus on Canadians and the middle class, and those seeking to join it. This middle-class obsession is yet another way to avoid talking about the widening gap between those experiencing extreme poverty and the wealthy elite.

We are in the throws of a housing crisis from coast to coast to coast. Not only is it becoming more and more difficult for young people to purchase their first home, but people cannot afford apartments as rental market prices are skyrocketing. People across the nation still do not have access to a primary care provider, mental health care professionals or the ability to pay for their medications they require to live.

Research published last month exposed that over half of Canadians, 53% of them, are within $200 of not being able to cover their monthly bills. This includes the 30% who report they are already insolvent with no money left at month's end to cover their payments. This is unacceptable. How have we let income inequality reach this point? How is it that we are unwilling to face it down directly?

Instead, our government would rather reflect wistfully on the middle class, while banks increase their profits and children go hungry. People are having a hard time. The people we work for. They have done their best to manage so far, but I have felt the increased weight of it all in their correspondences to my office over the last month or two.

People's financial reserves are exhausted. Their emotional reserves are exhausted. They do not need insincerity from their government. They need to be seen. When over half of our population is living with the anxiety of maybe not being able to make ends meet, or already being unable to do so, perhaps this middle-class concept is a little more than a relic of a bygone era.

It is important to name things as they are so we can approach them with integrity. I want us to have real conversations about offering stability, health and well-being to Canadians, meeting them where they are at, understanding the urgency and acting. This budget is a missed opportunity to truly offer Canadians a shift to directly improve their quality of life.

I had been hoping that one lesson taught by the pandemic would have been that we were able to act quickly and put in place life-changing programs, such as the Canadian emergency response benefit. In many cases, it kept people quite literally alive. However, even with the CERB, the government demonstrated indifference to the most vulnerable. We determined an amount that would be livable, knowing full well that we were continuing to ask persons with disabilities, seniors and those on social assistance to live on much less.

We had a chance to offer Canadians the stability of a ground floor to ensure that basic needs are met. We could have offered a collective sigh of relief with a guaranteed basic income. Instead, many Canadians are still holding their breath. I will not hold mine while I wait for the promises of the government to come through.

Another lesson I was had hoped to see reflected in the budget was the need to address racism and systemic inequality. We are still waiting for action on missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people. Words will not protect them. Words will not have their cases investigated the way they should be, and words will not root out hate and white supremacy in our society.

The Federal Anti-Racism Secretariat should have a robust plan to reach into every corner of our institutions to confront the vectors of power that have been at play since colonization began. Racism kills. We must adopt Joyce's principle that aims to guarantee that indigenous people have equitable access to all health and social services and to the highest attainable standard without discrimination.

We also need concrete, long-lasting actions for change in the Criminal Code, police enforcement and the carceral system. We know that our society will not be able to thrive until we break down the barriers that prevent people from living their full lives. Until there are real reparations and real justice, we cannot talk about reconciliation.

This budget is supposed to be about building a more resilient Canada, one that is better, fairer, more prosperous and more innovative, but without implementing a guaranteed livable income, I do not see how it will help Canadians to be more prosperous. While refusing to hike the capital gains tax and a reticence to impose a significant wealth tax, this has nothing to do with being better or more fair.

Who will bear the brunt of the deficits anticipated for the next decades? It is one thing to announce long-overdue investments in health care and housing, but these were needed decades ago. Will the government have the courage to implement a tax to target the large corporations that are profiting off this pandemic? As things stand, these corporations are the ones building back better and they are doing it on the backs of Canadians.

The minister also said that this budget is in line with the global shift to a green, clean economy. Everyone here should know without any surprise that I strongly support that vision, but I wish I was able to believe that this statement had value beyond the rhetorical. I see the situation we are facing as a potential opportunity. As the entire world looks to shift away from fossil fuels, we are given an incentive to figure it out now, to invest in innovation that will meet the energy demand with renewable energy or that will reduce our total energy demand.

The economic opportunity of new industries combined with an effort to redirect workers to these sectors holds immense potential. I know that some Canadians, indeed some members of this House, see me as an idealist or perhaps even naive, but my commitment to the rotational workers in my home province and beyond is real. I believe with every fibre of my being that their best futures are not travelling to and from Alberta for dwindling work in a dying industry. Their knowledge and skills can be transferred to benefit the economy of the future, one that is sustainable and renewable, one they can proudly leave to their children and grandchildren. That takes courage to stand one's ground and to do what is right, even when some people do not like it.

I know that with all of my colleagues in this House, we share the common objective of improving the lives of Canadians, but I also know we see different ways of getting there. As a woman, a mother and an educator, I want to put the emphasis on the well-being of people above all. I know that with a healthy and happy society, we can all thrive. What we need is a government with the courage to lead, a government that will share a vision for Canada that inspires us and a resolve to charge forward in that direction with confidence. This is how we will transform our society. This is how we will build the Canada of tomorrow.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, the member for Fredericton ended her speech with something that is very interesting: perpetuating the myth that the oil and gas industry is dead. I do not believe that to be true. Canadian oil and gas is more ethical and environmentally friendly than any other gas and oil sector in the world. Therefore, why would we not, as Canadians, do our best to export our oil and gas to countries across the world so that they do not use dirty, environmentally less friendly oil and gas from countries such as Venezuela, Saudi Arabia or Russia?

Why would we not promote our energy sector so that we could lower emissions around the world instead of perpetuating the myth that Canadian oil and gas is dead?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:05 p.m.
See context

Green

Jenica Atwin Green Fredericton, NB

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague's passion and support for the oil and gas industry. To be clear, I said the oil and gas industry was dying, not that it was dead.

We clearly still have a need for Canadian oil and gas and I absolutely want to highlight the ethical standards that we have here in this country, but it is about the transition. It is about using that oil to lead us into the future. We know that petroleum products are still in use and are going to be in use for some time to come, but we can make a conscious effort to change some of the ways that we use them to lead us into the green economy future.

It is not about it being dead now, it is about preparing for that day to come and acknowledging that we need to shift. We cannot wait.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated the answer that the member just gave to that last question. Conservatives seem to have this narrative that when it comes to oil it is all or nothing, and people either support it or they do not. I appreciate the position that the member is taking on it, realizing that we have to use oil in the short term, but ultimately we would like to get to something that is less dependent on oil.

What does the member think that means for the future? She has young children. I have young children. We both care about what the future holds for them. How does she perceive this transition benefiting future generations?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:05 p.m.
See context

Green

Jenica Atwin Green Fredericton, NB

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly appreciative of that question as well, especially in light of being a mother. Any decision that we make as a government must be made with the foresight of future generations and how they are going to benefit. Certainly, oil and gas contributes to building wind turbines, solar panels and the renewable energy that we know is ready, available and affordable for Canadians now. That is very much how I see this transition and how this will happen in Canada.

I also really want to highlight the need to reduce our energy demands. There are so many ways that we can retrofit commercial buildings and residential buildings. Look at all the personal decisions that we make on a daily basis as far as energy consumption goes. There are ways that we can reduce it while meeting the demand that we currently have with renewables.

I just have a comment as well that I do not believe we need to emphasize a broader future of nuclear energy. I really think it is about reducing the demand for energy first and then utilizing the amazing renewable technology we have now.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:05 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Speaker, I really liked my colleague's speech, especially the part about her concerns for the most vulnerable. I certainly have the same concerns.

This morning, there was a newspaper article about the very sad situation of a single mother of three children who was the victim of domestic violence. She is having a hard time finding housing that she can afford. In Longueuil, rent for a two- or three-bedroom apartment is between $1,500 and $1,700. That is outrageous.

The government launched a housing strategy in 2017. However, Quebec received no money for years because negotiations failed. There could have been housing for this woman if the Government of Canada had signed an agreement and not insisted on putting up flags everywhere. In Montreal, encampments for the homeless have been dismantled. People are calling for social housing.

Does my colleague believe that the government is doing enough to help the most vulnerable, especially with respect to housing?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:05 p.m.
See context

Green

Jenica Atwin Green Fredericton, NB

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, we are in a housing crisis that is playing out in multiple ways: we see the impacts of victims of domestic violence who are not able to turn to a safe place and put a roof over their head with their children; and we see some of the tent cities that we are seeing in our big city centres. It is devastating. This is Canada. It is a beautiful, prosperous country where everyone should have the right to affordable housing. We are just not there yet.

I really would have appreciated seeing stronger steps taken to address this. Some more investments have been made in housing, but we know the rapid housing initiative was so oversubscribed. We have to do so much more.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am just wondering if I could get the member's thoughts. This budget implementation act provides for the legislative framework for setting up child care, yet in an earlier attempt by the NDP to set up a legislative framework for pharmacare, the Liberals voted against.

Can the member comment the different approaches the Liberals have on child care, which is arguably very good, and on pharmacare, which certainly needs more work?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

Green

Jenica Atwin Green Fredericton, NB

Mr. Speaker, absolutely, it was nice and encouraging to see the plan to implement a national child care strategy, but without the groundwork for conversations with provinces and territories to get on board. That was the largest criticism we have as far as the NDP motion that was tabled for a national pharmacare program. There is a little bit of a cognitive dissonance there. Really, we just need to put our heads together, get the job done, deliver for Canadians, and do the groundwork that is required to make sure that happens while respecting provincial jurisdictions.

I am ready to do that work and I know that my colleagues in the NDP are also willing to do that. Let us get the rest of this House on board to do it as well.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to join in the debate on the budget implementation act today. This is the first time I have responded to a federal budget as a member of the opposition. For eight years, I was a member of the government in Saskatchewan and replied to some budget speeches as a member of the government, so this is a new experience.

In listening to the responses from the opposition members, they never talk about anything positive, so for the member for Kingston and the Islands I will talk about some of the positive steps that have happened in Saskatchewan, but I will point out some areas of criticism as well.

As is my tradition, I have some thanks to give. First and foremost, none of us could do this job without our spouses and the support from back home. My wife Larissa is back home with our three kids Jameson, Claire and Nickson. It is Nickson's birthday on May 15, so I have to get home for that.

While I am on the topic of birthdays, this is a special day. I grew up on a farm in Rush Lake, Saskatchewan. My dad and uncle farmed together. We celebrate two birthdays on May 11, my cousin Jason Steinley's, whom I wish a happy birthday, and one of my childhood heroes, my big brother Quinton's. He turns substantially older than me today. It is an honour for me to wish him a happy birthday from the House of Commons. I am sorry we cannot see each other face to face, but hopefully we can have a celebration sometime in the near future.

Moving forward to the budget debate on the implementation act we are talking about today, there are some positives for the people of Saskatchewan. We have a fantastic facility called VIDO at the University of Saskatchewan and this budget has a $40-million to $45-million investment for VIDO, which we appreciate. Not only will it help us get out of this pandemic, it will prepare us for anything that is coming in the future. Investments in science and technology and the health care sector are very important. We appreciate that investment into the University of Saskatchewan. That is something we have talked about for a long time and we wish it had happened a bit sooner, but like we always say, it is better late than never coming from the current government.

We are also seeing a return to bigger government and bigger spending. That is something we have seen throughout this budget. I think it is on track to be 30% more permanent spending by 2026, which is $100 billion more added to the annual budget of the Government of Canada. When it comes down to it, the question we on the opposition side is this. How are we going to continue to pay for that?

We have heard that the Liberals expect this to be a stimulus budget. There is $101.4 billion earmarked for stimulus spending and the opposition is asking if that is true. Some comments have been made by some people that that may not be the facts exactly of the stimulus spending.

I am going to quote the PBO, who stated:

Parliament's spending watchdog says the federal Liberals' budget overestimates how much of an impact its stimulus measures will have on Canada's economy.

The budget last month outlined what the government said was $101.4 billion in new spending over three years aimed at helping the country climb out of the economic hole caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

But the budget officer's report on Wednesday estimated that only $69 billion of that spending could be considered stimulus, such as the extension of emergency supports that were outlined prior to the budget.

Yves Giroux said his estimates of stimulus spending would boost economic growth by one per cent next year and create 74,000 jobs, compared with the budget's estimates, respectively, of two per cent and 334,000 jobs.

He went on to say that the higher deficits and debt in the coming years could limit the ability of a government to introduce any new, permanent programs without spending cuts or tax increases.

The crux of the argument today in this House of Commons and in my presentation is that the overestimations by the government have continued to hurt our economy. I do not have any doubt, and I do not think anyone in my constituency of Regina—Lewvan has any doubt, that the Liberals know how to spend money. They have full faith that the Liberals have not met a dollar they do not want to spend on insiders, friends and family. What are they going to deliver for average Canadians? When are they going to deliver jobs for average Canadians?

We just saw a report that, once again, 200,000 Canadians lost their jobs last month. The question is, out of this spending, if the Liberals are saying 334,000 Canadians are going to go back to work, why is the PBO saying it is only going to be 74,000? That is an important question that needs to be answered. Are they saying that Canadians need to trust what they put on paper or what the non-partisan PBO has put on paper? I think I know who Canadians are going to trust more.

There are also comments, from other sectors and from the CFIB, that they would like to see a plan to reopen. When I have talked to small businesses in Saskatchewan, a lot of them do not want to be dependent on government programs or government cheques. They would rather see clients and customers coming in their doors. They would rather have their doors open and be able to earn that money than wait for a government cheque.

What we would also like to see is what is going on in Saskatchewan. I am quite proud of our provincial government and the plan it has rolled out as to how to safely reopen. There is a three-phase plan, where on May 30—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The hon. member's microphone is off. We will just see if we can get it back working again.

Let us go back to the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, the provincial government under Premier Moe has laid out a very concise plan to reopen its economy in three phases. The first phase starts with having over 70% of 40-year-olds vaccinated. They are actually there already, so phase one is going to reopen on May 30. Three weeks after that, if 70% of people 30 and over are vaccinated, they can go to phase two, where there will be more opportunities and businesses can open and have more clients and customers coming through their doors. If we get 70% of people 18 and over vaccinated, hopefully in mid-July, we can get back to a little of the normal life we all are hoping to get back to this summer, sooner rather than later.

Some of how to safely reopen our economy is missing from the budget, and that is what we look at from an economic development point of view. One thing that I have seen, and once again this is a positive thing for the member for Kingston and the Islands, is that in the Regina area we have had almost a billion dollars' worth of private investment over the last month. That is great news for agriculture and manufacturing. Viterra has said it is going to bring one of the largest canola-crushing plants on earth to Regina. That is fantastic. We just spoke with a person from Cargill. That company is investing in having a canola-crushing plant come to Regina. Federated Co-operatives Limited just bought True North Renewable Fuels, and it is going to be expanding and setting up a renewable diesel refinery in the Regina area.

There is good news on the horizon in Regina, but there has not been much from the federal government side. It has been private business. The Government of Saskatchewan has set up an economic atmosphere of success, and that is what I want to talk about toward the end of my comments. We need to create more opportunities in our major industries. One of the industries that continually gets left behind by the government is the oil and gas sector. Through the economic downturn in 2008, what brought us back faster than any other G7 country were our oil and gas sector, our manufacturing sector and our agriculture sector.

I want to talk about that, being a member of the agriculture standing committee. We just finished work on how to increase processing capacity across the nation, and the government had lost out on a major processing facility from Maple Leaf Foods. Actually, the chair of the agriculture committee, who is a Liberal member, asked a VP from Maple Leaf Foods why the company did not build in Canada instead of building its new processing plant in Indiana. The VP of Maple Leaf Foods said it was because of the uncertainty in regulations and the changing atmosphere of the regulatory system in Canada. He said that it seems like whenever someone is going to be investing big private capital in Canada, the goalposts keep moving.

It was there in black and white in the Hansard, and it is happening on way too many occasions with the current government. It continues to change the goalposts when it comes to regulatory guidelines and what it needs from people when they invest in Canada. It happened to Teck Frontier, and it happened again here with Maple Leaf Foods. What we need to see from the Liberal government is more certainty, and that is why I will be voting against the budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by extending a happy birthday to the member's brother, and on his behalf, I would perhaps raise a point of order. I doubt his brother is that much older than him despite the fact the member indicated that.

In all seriousness, going to his speech, we heard the member talk about how the government needs to be doing more to establish a plan to reopen. We know the Conservatives brought forward a motion demanding a plan to reopen about a month ago, but then the member went on to talk about how the premier of Manitoba had developed a plan himself.

This is what we have been saying from the beginning. It is not the federal government's job to determine how a province is going to reopen, just like it is not the federal government's responsibility to determine what lockdowns are happening from time to time. I am just glad to hear the member finally admit that it is the provincial government's responsibility to determine when the economies need to reopen in those provinces.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, I raise a point of order as well, as it was the premier of Saskatchewan and not Manitoba. That is my home province.

What escapes the member for Kingston and the Islands is that there also has to be federal leadership from his government to show the way when it comes to reopening. Obviously the provincial governments across the country have a lot to do with the reopening plans, but they have to know there is certainty in vaccination.

As the member said, and as we saw in his comments, we would not be standing in this place right now if the government had gotten the vaccine rollout right in January and February. I admire his honesty in saying that the federal Liberals made a mistake. They screwed up and did not get the vaccines here in January and February, and that is why we are in the position we are. There is leadership coming from the provinces. I just wish a little more would be coming from the federal government.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my colleague from Saskatchewan, which was one of the first provinces to bring in a public universal health care system.

In terms of vision and leadership, does my colleague agree that to support the economy and our health care sector the government should immediately honour its commitment to transfer the necessary funding through the Canada health transfer to cover 35% of expenses, as Quebec and the provinces have been calling for?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, there needs to be more collaboration between the provinces and the federal government. Coming from the provincial government, I know there are always conversations between federal and provincial health ministers. Those conversations need to be taken very seriously, and there needs to be more collaboration between health ministers. We saw in this pandemic that there needed to be co-operation as our vital food supply chains and vital systems could be shut down. There needs to be a collaborative approach with the federal government and all provincial and territorial governments across the country.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB

Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot from the Conservatives about the need to take the COVID crisis more seriously, and I agree. We have seen the deadly toll COVID has taken, especially in long-term care homes. So many elders and seniors have been lost during this COVID crisis. They should not have been.

We in the NDP have made it clear that we need to ensure the long-term care system is in public hands. However, the Conservative leader does not seem to have an issue with for-profit long-term care.

Why is it that the Conservative leader and the Conservative Party cannot seem to recognize the deadly impacts of for-profit, privatized long-term elder care in our country?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, long-term care is vital. Seniors are the pioneers who helped build this country, and there are many different aspects we can continue to invest in to create better atmospheres and outcomes in long-term care. We talked about having standard metrics to make sure people are being treated equally across the country, and that comes with those same conversations to have with health ministers. Many arrows need to be in the quiver for long-term care in order to treat seniors with the respect they deserve and to make sure the ends of their lives are as successful, prosperous and comfortable as possible.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I was surprised by my hon. friend for Regina—Lewvan's reference to Maple Leaf Foods as an example of where it was unfair that a company might go to the United States.

Maple Leaf has had several outbreaks across the country, with workers complaining at Maple Leaf Foods in the Brandon, Manitoba, plant as well as at the Ontario poultry plant. There is a history of listeriosis in one of the plants. The model of major industrial livestock and massive meat plants has had a rather harsh light shone on it during COVID.

Would we not have potentially safer production and more plants if they were not mega-industrial livestock slaughterhouses?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, there is just so much wrong with that member's question. I do not know when would be the last time she was on a farm.

My family and my cousins still ranch. Ranchers are some of the best stewards of their land when it comes to grasslands and when it comes to how they treat their cattle. That is their livelihood. I just got home from helping my cousins vaccinate heifers to make sure they were safe and they were going to grow.

It puts a terrible lens on industrial agriculture. In Canada, we have great producers. We have great agriculture and people across the country from east to west. To even cast doubt on how good they are and how much they care about their land, their cattle and their livestock really does an injustice to them. The member should be embarrassed by that question.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge that this is an important week, National Nursing Week. I want to take this opportunity to thank not only the amazing nurses of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford but those who work across Vancouver Island, the province of B.C. and our great country for the hard work they do every day.

For people who doubt how severe an illness COVID-19 really is, they need only speak to a nurse who works incredibly long hours in an ICU, who helps patients in respiratory distress and who is often the only one there when a patient meets his or her end. I want to acknowledge our amazing nurses and thank them for their service. They do an amazing job on behalf of our communities.

We are at a point now where we have been battered quite hard by COVID-19, and this third wave has certainly been the worst of them all. I know people are exhausted everywhere. Some members before me have referenced the physical, mental and emotional exhaustion that we all feel at this moment. We are all looking for some light at the end of this very long and dark tunnel.

However, we are at the stage now where there is a noticeable uptake in vaccinations. We are certainly at a point in British Columbia right now where people in my age group are starting to book their vaccination appointments. In fact, I just booked mine today. I am looking forward to getting that first shot and joining the growing list of my fellow citizens who have received theirs.

Today, we are here to discuss Bill C-30, the government's budget implementation act, which followed its April budget. It proposes several legislative changes to bring those measures into force. However, I do not think that all the measures that were announced in the budget are contained in the bill. I have heard reference that a second implementation act will follow in the fall of this year.

I have been listening to the speeches on Bill C-30 today and to some of the concerns about the spending that is going on in this budget and the eye-watering deficit in which we find ourselves. We would not be at this stage if it had not been for the pandemic. We have had to open up the federal taps to help struggling small businesses and individuals weather this storm, and to ensure those small businesses are still in operation when we finally are clear of the pandemic.

However, in all the concerns I have heard about the spending, I have not really heard much discussion from either the Liberals or Conservatives on how we address the revenue shortfall, how we ensure that when we get back on the road of recovery, when we try to get the books back to a balanced status, that we do not unfairly place the burden on working families. We need only look at the example in the 1990s when the Liberal government, with finance minister Paul Martin, had a very large axe, and they swung it everywhere. There were incredible slashes made to health care transfers and housing, and that left a lot of working families in extreme pain.

How do we move forward in a way that saves working families from continuing to bear the brunt of the costs from this pandemic? The answer is simple. It is a wealth tax, which is a simple 1% on fortunes of over $20 million. We have proposed that because we are in a state now where over the last year we have seen Canada's billionaires increase their wealth by an exponential amount.

I am still scratching my head when I hear my Conservative colleagues say that this is not time to impose a tax. Clearly, Canadians of all political persuasion have indicated strong favour for imposing a wealth tax, for ensuring that the wealthy and well-connected are paying their fair share. A 1% tax on fortunes of over $20 million is not targeting our normal constituents. In fact, I do not think I know anyone personally with a fortune of over $20 million. This is a smart economic policy to ensure that the burden does not fall on most of our constituents. It is about finding that way forward.

I would have liked to have seen Bill C-30 and, indeed, the budget speech from April 19 contain some specific references to targeting very wealthy individuals, maybe putting in a profiteering tax, similar to what the Canadian government did during World War II, as well as harsher measures to crack down on tax evasion. So much revenue is slipping through the fingers of the CRA right now. People who can afford to pay that money, who have the means to pay the tax, are not paying their fair share and are using existing loopholes to escape notice. It is shameful behaviour and it is morally wrong. It means that the rest of our constituents have to shoulder that unfair burden.

I am also very interested in the part of the budget implementation legislation that deals with child care. I am a very strong believer and supporter of child care. I ran very strongly on this platform in 2015. I remember the Liberals criticizing the NDP plan back then, so it is nice to see they have now adopted it, almost six years later, and that it is finally in the budget.

However, I compare the rationale behind child care versus what the Liberals have said on pharmacare. Under division 34 of of the bill, we see a legislative framework to set up child care, yet when the NDP proposed a legislative framework that was based on the Canada Health Act to bring in a pharmacare system, the Liberals voted against that.

Child care is great, and I really hope this time around it does succeed, but when it comes to pharmacare, we have been waiting since 1997, when the Liberals last promised it. Every month, families right across the country are having to make those difficult decisions when there are unexpected medical costs. It can really break the family budget. Those investments can have a tangible impact on the budgets of working families and help them make it from month to month.

The member for St. John's East, my great colleague, has introduced a motion in the House of Commons to expand our health care system to include dental care. That is also a key missing element. For the life of me, I cannot understand why health care coverage ends at one's tonsils and does not include strong oral care. We know that poor oral health is a very strong indicator of more serious medical conditions. It is ultimately a class issue. People who have the means and the wealth can afford good dental care. Often people are lucky enough to have good dental coverage through their work. However, a lot of people have lost those benefits in this pandemic. They have had their hours reduced or they have lost their jobs altogether. We need to make those very important and specific investments in health care.

It is great that the budget implementation bill addressed EI sickness benefits, unfortunately raising it only to 26 weeks. The House of Commons has repeatedly indicated support for the full 52 weeks or even 50 weeks, which I have heard in some iterations. This is important because Canada pension plan disability benefits do not often kick in unless someone has a demonstrated illness or injury that will make them incapable of work for over a year. Often people are falling in the gap between what the Liberals are now proposing, the 26 weeks, and a full year, which is 52 weeks. That could have been done quite easily.

The Liberals do enjoy their half-measures, so if 26 weeks is what we will get this time, I will accept, but I want it to be known that it is not good enough. Definite improvements need to be made to that.

I know I am within my last minute, so I will end on a positive note. The budget is certainly a mixed bag, but as the NDP critic for agriculture, it is nice to see some investments coming to that sector, really trying to concentrate on the area of environmental sustainability. Our farmers are on the front lines of climate change, but they also have the tools to be one of our greatest weapons in fighting climate change. In the future, I would love to see more investments come their way, investments that concentrate on the sector's ability to sequester carbon.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, at the end of his speech, the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford touched on something that is very important to me, and that is the issue of rural Canada, particularly the agricultural industry.

The reality is that the Liberal government totally has a misunderstanding of rural Canada. My riding of 42,000 square kilometres has rural people. The government has basically said that it will put money toward public transit. Let us see someone put a bus line in from Maryfield, which is a two and a half hour to Regina if people are lucky.

I would like to hear a little more about carbon sequestration. I am sure the member is well aware that farmers are great stewards of the land. They sequester carbon every time they crop. They recognize their crops. Organic farmers do not use nitrogen, etc., to enhance that, but they use cover crops to put nitrogen into the ground. I would love to hear some further comments on that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I, too, am a representative of a rural riding, certainly not the size of my colleague's. My riding is about 4,700 square kilometres. The Cowichan region has a long and storied history in agriculture. We have generational farms.

This is an exciting policy area. Through techniques such as no-till, cover cropping, appropriate use of fertilizer, farmers can use regenerative agricultural methods, stuff they already know, but can be encouraged to do more of it. This an exciting policy area. It might help us get out of the bunfight over the carbon tax and find incentives and rewards to give farmers the credit they so very much deserve in fighting climate change.

There are areas where we can work together in developing these policies.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, could my colleague elaborate a bit more on the problem with the health transfers and the fact that the new bill does not provide anything for changing the balance and helping Quebec and the provinces?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, I know the member is speaking from his province's perspective, but the province of British Columbia, my home province, and many premiers in our federation have called for increased health transfers because provincial budgets are breaking in trying to deal with the costs.

I support what the member wants to do. As I very clearly laid out in my speech, I also want to see very targeted investments in a pharmacare system and a dental care system. These can fit very well under the existing Canada Health Act, which lays out conditions that provinces must meet to qualify for those transfer dollars. I would really like to see us make bold steps in both of these areas.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my hon. colleague about the need to establish a national dental care plan. I talk to people all the time who are unable to get their teeth fixed and the huge impact that has on families, workers and people's health.

We know the Liberals have promised many things like pharmacare and failed to deliver, but on the issue of dental care, we have been told that it is doable, that is not overly costly. Could my hon. colleague explain how practical it is to establish a national dental care plan that would have such an impact for so many people?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely huge. I put a post on my Facebook page and it was filled with comments from constituents about the costs they personally had to bear for fixing their teeth.

I think the member will join me in recognizing our colleague from St. John's East, who has put forward this motion. Unfortunately, the Liberals have indicated they will not support it. Even though the motion is non-binding, the Liberals still cannot bring themselves to support at the least the intent or recognize the importance of dental care.

It is inconceivable that our health care coverage ends at our tonsils when poor oral health has been linked to so many serious medical conditions. I am proud to be a member of a party that will fight tooth and nail for both dental care and pharmacare.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Mr. Speaker, before I begin my speech on Bill C-30, budget implementation act, 2021, no. 1, I would like to take a moment to extend my sincere condolences to the friends and family of Serge Bouchard. He was Quebec's favourite anthropologist, and a wonderful communicator and speaker. He was an exceptional man. We learned of his death today. I wanted to express my deepest condolences to his family and tell them that we will miss him dearly.

I rise today to talk about the budget. Bill C-30 is a big omnibus bill with lots of measures. Some are better than others. The Bloc Québécois will support Bill C-30, and I would now like to look at the positive aspects and then look at what could have been improved. We agree that the Canada emergency wage subsidy and the Canada emergency rent subsidy should be extended to 2026.

There is also the tax deferral on patronage dividends from agricultural co-operatives. I met with Jean-Sébastien Leblanc and Sylvain Brault of the Coop fédérée, which is now called Sollio. They stressed the importance of this measure for co-operatives. We are very pleased that they can take advantage of this measure. It will be good for this great Quebec co-operative.

We will certainly follow rigorously and closely all the measures surrounding tourism, including small and large cultural and special events. They are also major victims of this pandemic and will probably be the last to fully resume their activities.

This brings me to two topics that are really important to me: seniors and sick workers. Starting with seniors, clearly Bill C-30 announced with great fanfare an OAS increase for people aged 75 and over, not right now, not as soon as the bill is passed, but in 2022. Quite frankly, I am not the only one who wonders why only those aged 75 and over, and why in 2022.

FADOQ, which has 550,000 members in Quebec, is the largest seniors' organization in Canada. It wasted no time condemning what is going on. Truthfully and to the point, FADOQ said that the budget's 10% OAS increase for people aged 75 and over creates two classes of seniors: those aged 65 to 74 and those 75 and up. Specifically, the Liberals's proposal is to give seniors 75 and up a raise of $63.80 per month.

For quite some time now, the Bloc Québécois has been calling for an increase of at least $110 per month for all seniors over 65. There is a reason for that. For years, seniors' spending power has been shrinking while costs have been rising. Some seniors were not lucky enough to have a job with a pension or were not able to save much money. Some seniors, more than one might think, have trouble making ends meet.

I worked with seniors my whole professional career. I dedicated my working years to them. I know that, as we speak, there are seniors who cannot afford to buy medication or food. They have a hard time buying services because they are losing their independence. Their independence and their ability to do things depends on an old age security increase.

The president of FADOQ, Gisèle Tassé-Goodman, did not mince her words. I met Ms. Tassé-Goodman at the debate on seniors during the last electoral campaign. She is a smart woman.

She said that by increasing old age security exclusively for people age 75 and over, the government was creating two classes of seniors. To avoid this divide, her organization recommended that the 10% increase in old age security be extended to everyone eligible for this benefit, starting at age 65.

The Bloc Québécois advocated for this and asked the government to include it in the budget. We are also calling for it in our platform. We know that Quebec seniors need to increase their spending capacity, because everything costs more.

When seniors realized that the Bloc Québécois understood their situation, as the issue is well documented, some ministers responded immediately through the newspapers. They said that it was not true that the government gave nothing to seniors, that on the contrary, it gave them a lot of money.

However, we know seniors do not have money in their pockets. The government has taken money from a host of programs—three-quarters of which fall under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces—and given it to seniors. The government is interfering in a whole slew of programs.

A parliamentary secretary even had the nerve to say that the government had given a lot of money to seniors through the new horizons for seniors program. This is definitely a worthwhile and important program for our communities and seniors' clubs that helps seniors, but it does not provide the money they need to pay the rent, utilities and grocery bills every month.

By creating two classes of seniors, the government has really rallied seniors around this cause. This is my third term and I have never received this much correspondence from seniors, who are criticizing this decision. There is an outcry on social media because people do not understand. They are also not satisfied with the answers they are getting.

Organizations such as the Centre d'action bénévole de Beauharnois, the Popote roulante de Salaberry-de-Valleyfield, the Club de l'âge d'or de Bellerive and the Club l'âge d'or de Saint-Timothée, which look after seniors and are dedicated to their well-being, all wrote to me asking me to continue speaking out about this situation. This is a major form of discrimination.

We hope that the voices of our seniors will be heard, and that the increase in old age security will be revised so that seniors 65 and over can receive it.

I cannot end my speech without mentioning how disappointed I am and how disappointed all the Émilie Sansfaçons of Quebec and Canada are. The government turned a deaf ear and did not really listen. It amended the Employment Insurance Act by extending the EI sickness benefit from 15 to 26 weeks. It has been documented that 26 weeks are not enough. On average, people need 41 weeks. Why commit this injustice? Why decide that seriously ill people who are fighting for their lives in the hope of returning to work do not deserve to get the support they need?

During a briefing, the government gave a truly awful answer. They said that essentially EI was there for people who are not sick for a long time and it was not in the spirit of the legislation to help those who are, since there is little chance that they will go back to work. If I had been at that briefing, I would have been very angry because none of that is true.

Tomorrow we will debate my bill at second reading and I hope that it will be passed and referred to committee. Then we could document and prove that 26 weeks are not enough and that we need 50. We hope that common sense will prevail and that in committee we will be able to convince government members that we need 50 weeks for workers who are sick.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her comments, especially what she said about seniors.

I am wondering if she could talk a little more about the impact of COVID-19 on seniors, who want to be able to see their friends and their grandchildren. Sometimes spouses can even be separated when one of them is in care.

We need a plan to roll out testing and to make vaccines available. The failure to do so is having a significant impact on seniors—and yet there is no plan in the budget to get us out of this pandemic.

Has the member heard from any seniors who are asking for a COVID-19 recovery plan?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

Vaccine distribution is Ottawa's responsibility. It was delayed, and that has delayed mass vaccination in Quebec. Now that Quebec has received the vaccines, it has become a leader, like Saskatchewan. All seniors living in long-term care homes in Quebec have received their first and second doses, and those living in seniors' residences have begun to receive their first dose. The lack of a plan therefore has no impact on us at this time. Quebec is doing very well at vaccination.

Instead, I am trying to understand why the government is creating two classes of seniors when everyone is against it. Only the party opposite does not understand that we need to support the purchasing power of seniors by increasing old age security from the time they turn 65 until the end of their lives, to help them with their financial obligations.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, to follow up on that last comment, in the last federal election there was a very clear commitment made to seniors aged 75 and over that we would be providing a 10% increase. Over three million seniors across Canada will benefit as a direct result of the promise and what we are seeing in the budget. Does the member not agree that fulfilling a campaign commitment is a good thing?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. People who are 75 and will receive the old age security increase are quite pleased, because they need it and it is a good thing.

I have heard from many seniors who are 65. It is important for people to understand that someone who has worked all their life as a server in a restaurant, for example, is exhausted by the time they reach the age of 65. Their body and their mind can no longer keep up.

What the government's arguments imply is that people aged 65 to 74 still have a little bit of energy to work, that they just need to find a side job to make ends meet and that when they turn 75 and are exhausted, they will get the old age security increase.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her interventions and for her ardent defence of the interests of seniors and the elderly.

The housing crisis is severe in Quebec, as it is pretty much everywhere. After years of neglect by the Liberals and the Conservatives, who cut investments in social housing, people are finding themselves in situations where they could end up out on the street, unable to afford their absolutely exorbitant rent. For example, near my home in Montreal, I recently saw a two-bedroom unit for rent for $1,700 a month, plus heating. I wonder who can afford that in our society.

I would like to hear my colleague's views on the Liberals' half measures to help people access a home or social housing.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I know that the housing issue is very important to him. It is to me too.

I have to say that the current situation is crazy. It took four years to come up with a national housing agreement between Quebec and Ottawa, and still Quebec's expectations are far from being met because the needs are so great. The problem is that the money for affordable housing and social housing is in Ottawa, whereas the need is in the provinces.

Quebec has excellent programs, such as AccèsLogis Québec. To make new social housing units available faster, Ottawa must give Quebec the money it needs to start building affordable housing and social housing.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB

Mr. Speaker, I want to start my speech with a single line: Mr. Speaker, I told you so.

I mean no disrespect, but about a month ago, in mid-April, I said that I would not be surprised if Bill C-14 would not go through the other place by the time we got our hands on this 2021-22 budget. Obviously, I was right. To make it even better, Bill C-14 has not been returned to us and it has been a month since I made that prediction. However, I am not here to speak to Bill C-14.

I am here to speak to another bill. It would spend a lot of money. It would massively increase our national debt and it would not do a whole lot to help Canadians. I am going to be speaking to Bill C-30 because, like I said, this budget would spend a lot of money: $154.7 billion. Even if Bill Gates were to liquidate his entire net worth, that still would not be enough to cover the bill for this. I want to talk about all of this money.

If my colleagues here would think back to last year, when this finance minister started her current portfolio, she was very eager to bring Canada's fiscal firepower to bear if September's throne speech is to be believed. However, there is a bit of a problem with that. This is not Hollywood. We can run out of ammo. Our barrels can overheat. We need some way to not burn through all this firepower too fast or, in other terms, we need some sort of fiscal anchor.

Why do we need a fiscal anchor? Fiscal anchors serve as notional ceilings or caps to the levels of public spending, deficits and debt that governments are prepared to reach in their fiscal policy. They serve many purposes: one, retaining the confidence of lenders and global markets, like credit access and favourable rates; two, establishing a positive investment climate for businesses; and, three, providing a measure of fiscal discipline inside government. If the finance minister does not have one, it becomes very difficult for her to put any sort of constraints on her colleagues in cabinet and caucus, and ensure that the government has the ability to respond to future economic shocks and unforeseen crises.

Before COVID-19, the current government's fiscal anchor was to decrease the debt-to-GDP ratio. That anchor has disappeared. Now the budget has one, a vague, pretty useless one. Great, they are committed to reducing the debt, but the fiscal anchor is supposed to be a prudent, specific debt target, not “we will lower it over the medium term”. Fiscal anchors need to be a target that people can use to hold the government to account with no vague statements.

It is clear that this budget does not have a fiscal anchor. It is clear that this is just written in there to hide the Liberals' lack of future planning. What kinds of fiscal anchors could the government have used? I am not talking about that vague, literally, one line that is in the budget.

The first one is the debt-to-GDP ratio. This is what the Liberals would clearly claim they have got right now, but, again, they need targets and accountability, not vague statements and no accountability. A good example would be keeping the debt-to-GDP ratio under 30%. Any of my colleagues here may remember that as Bill Morneau's favourite target. The so-called anchor in the budget says it wants to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio, but it does not provide a goal or a target. Therefore, when debt to GDP is at nearly 50%, a reduction is pretty easy to do, but whether the reduction is effective is another matter.

Another anchor the government could be using is something like the deficit-to-GDP ratio. Again, they have a one-off section about this one, simply saying that the government will reduce COVID spending. Great, but what about other spending? This budget introduces a lot of spending, permanent spending, including stuff like made-in-Ottawa child care programs and made-in-Ottawa pharmacare. This is a lot of new permanent program spending, and these are just small drops in the bucket.

The PBO found that the purported growth spending in the budget would only produce a fraction of the government growth that the government said it would. Therefore, the PBO found that with 1% growth on 74,000 jobs, $100 billion would result in over $1 million per job.

If keeping the deficit-to-GDP ratio down is one of this budget’s fiscal anchors, why would the government spend so much money frivolously? In all honesty, had I asked that in question period, I would have received the government's famous non-answer, which is disappointing.

Since we both know that it will not answer, I will tell the House what the real reason is that the federal government wants to spend this avalanche of cash. It is an election budget. That is why there is a lot of growth funding that would not cause growth. There are no productivity measures, and there is nothing to address Canada’s uncompetitive regulatory regime. It is just a lot of money for programs that look good in a nice, red-covered election platform with a big L on the front of it.

What really, deeply worries me is that the government does not seem to care about what all of this purposeless spending will cause. It is not just from this budget, but all of the previous ones too. The government has spent more than all previous prime ministers in the history of Canada combined. At this point, the government is spending so much that our grandkids, if not our great-grandkids, will still be paying it off. It is like taking out a credit card in their names, maxing it out, and leaving it for them to deal with.

As with actual credit cards, the interest rate is critical to this. I know that the minister would say, “Oh, it’s fine, the interest rate is low so we can borrow easily,” a quote from the minister, but again, our national debt is like a credit card. If there is even a one-percentage-point jump in the interest rate, that is another $10 billion per year in debt-servicing costs. Just like with credit cards, the interest can go up if we do not pay down our debts.

What if another massive crisis comes up, and we end up spending another few hundred billion dollars? Our creditors might start wanting us to pay the money back, and it will be tougher for that future government if it needs to borrow money during that crisis.

We also have to consider inflation. What if inflation goes up in the future? Right now, the Bank of Canada has the inflation rate at 2.2%. I know they like it around 2%, but what if the inflation rate keeps increasing? If we keep injecting all this money into the economy, it could cause inflation to spike.

Consider if inflation rose to 5%. Everything would cost more, which is a normal practice, and the value of our currency would drop by 5% year after year. That might not sound like much, but it would add up if it went on like that for a decade.

I am sure all of us who are old enough to remember the 80s and 90s will remember that it was not pretty stuff. Most of us are only a decade or so out from retirement and we will all get good pensions, but not all Canadians will.

My kids are in their early twenties, and I know a lot of our colleagues have kids who are younger than that. Do we really want to leave this fiscal mess in their laps, or in our grandchildren's laps? I know that I do not.

Our legacy should be having rebuilt Canada with a strong, competitive economy that will be there for decades to come, not spending our money for no purpose other than to help the government win an election. We need to spend within our means, not outside of our means, our kids' means and our grandkids' means.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the member is right. Over the last number of months, the Government of Canada has spent a great deal of money, supporting programs such as CERB for nine million people, the wage subsidy program and the rent subsidy program. It has supported seniors and people with disabilities through one-time payments, provided hundreds of millions toward non-profit organizations, and so forth.

My understanding is that the Conservative Party of Canada supported the spending of those billions of dollars. Is the Conservative Party now reversing its position on the many worthwhile expenditures we made to support Canadians through the pandemic, and is it now saying that we should not have spent that money?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has been around long enough to know that we are not changing our minds. The government is changing its promises. The Prime Minister promised to balance the budget before 2015. That is what the Liberals are changing. They are walking away from what they believe in. Remember the Paul Martin era? They are walking out of this. They do not believe in balancing the budget anymore or being fiscally responsible. They want to borrow money and buy out elections. That is what the current government is focusing on. It can hide behind the programs, the support and all of that, which is fine. We agreed to the support because we stand by Canadians all the way, but the government is changing what has been done historically, which is to be fiscally responsible and balance the budget. That is what the government is doing, which is concerning and scary.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his intervention. Of course he is my neighbour in Edmonton, so it is nice to see him virtually since we cannot see each other face to face.

He spoke a bit about the plan the Liberals have. I have concerns as well that the government does not have a good plan going forward. I wonder if he feels the federal government has a bit of a role to play to ensure we finish this race. This has been a very difficult year. It has been very hard on small businesses in Edmonton, as he knows. I think if we pull out those supports for individuals and businesses now, we risk losing the race because we stopped before the end.

How does he feel about the government stopping its giving $500 per week to Canadians who are on CERB? Would he support continuing to make sure Canadians can get through this pandemic?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for Edmonton Strathcona. Of course, it is good to see her.

My speech was focused on the fiscal anchors and what we can do to make sure we do not pile on debt with unnecessary spending. I was not talking about necessary spending. That is very clear. I was talking about unnecessary spending and the crazy promises that keep piling up. Where is the answer? Where is the government on telling Canadians what it is going to do with this debt? How long can we continue spending?

We have to deal with the pandemic and of course with all of the mistakes the government has made, such as not being able to provide vaccines on time or test kits so we could get out of this as soon as possible. What we are talking about is why the government is not being responsible with how much debt it is bringing to Canadians, what we are going to do with it and how we will pay for it generation after generation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Chris Lewis Conservative Essex, ON

Mr. Speaker, through you to my hon. colleague, something I have been talking about and worrying about is how someone in the next generation is going to be able to start a family, have a car and afford a house.

What could have been done differently in this budget to look to the future, for people to start families and look toward a new Canada?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB

Mr. Speaker, I focused a lot on the fiscal anchors. I focused on the government being responsible in order to be able to calculate and tell Canadians the true story. Where we are going? The budget that was introduced is a suicidal route toward a non-end. It is something somewhere that nobody understands, including Canadians, which is very scary. The fiscal anchors are the answer, and they do not exist in this budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON

Mr. Speaker, this past year has been challenging for all Canadians. Today it is my honour to represent Brampton South to speak in support of Bill C-30, the budget 2021 implementation act. In budget 2021, the priority is to support Canadians through the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and create more jobs and prosperity for all Canadians across the country.

This budget outlines the many challenges Canadians have faced throughout the past year and recognizes that Canadians need support in order to recover financially from the pandemic. As more people are eligible to get vaccinated, businesses are still in need of support to make it through this third wave of the pandemic. That is why this government is extending business and income support initiatives through to the fall.

I would like to focus on some key areas for my community. During the series of pre-budget consultations, I met with many businesses and many seniors from Brampton, including organizations such as CARP, the International Seniors Club, Young at Heart Seniors and others. With budget 2021, Brampton seniors will not be left behind. Many seniors find it difficult to adjust their financial situation after retirement, especially in the pandemic.

This is why the government is providing a one-time payment of $500 this summer to those aged 75 years and older as of June 2022. It is essential aid for seniors who have been impacted by COVID-19. Old age security benefits will also be increased by 10% for seniors over 75, and will be adjusted annually for inflation. All of these actions proposed in budget 2021 will help our seniors live more independent lives and have a dignified retirement.

One of my constituents, Myrna Adams, who is a member of our local CARP chapter, requested that more action be taken to prevent elder abuse in Canada. I am happy to report to my constituents, and to all Canadians watching, that budget 2021 will provide funding for the Public Health Agency of Canada to design and deliver interventions that prevent family violence, including elder abuse. Budget 2021 was designed with the feedback of many seniors from Brampton and across Canada. This pandemic has shown us just how important it is to protect our loved ones and community members.

Some of the people hardest hit by COVID-19 are women, especially low-income women. More than 16,000 women have left the workforce, while more than 91,000 men have re-entered. In order to recover from this pandemic, we need women in the workforce.

Access to affordable child care has been a top priority in my riding of Brampton South this past year. With school closures and many parents still needing to go to work, finding affordable child care for their children has been a struggle. In urban centres such as Brampton, many young families are struggling with increases in the cost of living, including child care. This is not only a social issue but also an economic problem. If parents are unable to work because they cannot afford care for their children, they lose out on their full potential for contributing to the economy.

Proposed in budget 2021 are supports for parents and more affordable options when it comes to child care. The proposed Canada-wide early learning and child care system will help to ensure that all families, no matter their socio-economic background, have access to child care across the country and will increase women’s participation in the workforce.

Not only do children need access to high quality education and affordable care systems, but so do our youth. When the pandemic hit last year, young Canadians were among the hardest hit demographics, experiencing more job loss than any other age group. The mental well-being of youth has been an issue that my riding has taken very seriously over the past year. Being isolated from their peers, attending online school and experiencing the stress of finding summer jobs have affected young people greatly.

In budget 2021, the federal government is investing $5.7 billion over the next five years to help youth by creating more job opportunities and providing them with the ability to finish and further their education. The government's overwhelming support for young Canadians has been apparent over the last year: $7.4 billion was spent on youth when COVID-19 hit Canada last year to help young Canadians through this difficult time as well as create more opportunities for them to get meaningful work experience while supporting small businesses.

Making education a little more affordable is a pillar of this budget. Waiving interest on student loans for another year is giving students an opportunity to save money and not worry about making additional payments. Summer employment opportunities have been increased, with 75,000 job placements in 2022-23 through the Canada summer jobs program.

In my riding, over 600 young Canadians will be employed through Canada summer jobs and my riding will benefit with over $2.7 million. This will ensure that students are securing job opportunities for the summer and learning important skills and gaining work experience. Students and young Canadians will benefit from the new Canada recovery hiring program. By offering small businesses the ability to hire more people faster, this in turn will help young Canadians looking for summer jobs.

Our government recognizes infrastructure investments create good jobs and build healthy communities. It is the right time to start investing in Canadian communities for the economy to recover from this pandemic.

I know that in the coming years, my community will benefit from some recent infrastructure investments the government has made. This includes over half a million dollars to create a youth hub at the South Fletcher's Sportsplex; upgrading The Rose theatre and making it more accessible, with a grant of over $2 million; $35 million in safe restart funding to support the city of Brampton; a grant of $38 million for flood mitigation that will allow us to protect and transform our downtown Brampton and build the city’s transformative Riverwalk project; more transit funding like we saw last summer, where the federal government invested millions of dollars to upgrade Brampton’s transit system; and the largest federal housing investment ever made in Peel Region of $276 million, which will create 2,200 much needed affordable housing units.

These are just some of the most recent investments from our federal government. I know there is more coming in the budget and Bramptonians look forward to seeing their fair share of investments.

Finally, I would like to thank the government for using the budget to recognize that 2021 is the 100th anniversary of the discovery of insulin in Canada, with a commitment to establish a national framework for diabetes. Members of the House know I have long advocated for this to help the 11 million Canadians living with diabetes and pre-diabetes. With a focused strategy, we can help them all and perhaps find our way to a cure.

Brampton is a community of essential workers. Many of my constituents work in health care, manufacturing, food processing, distribution, transportation and other essential industries. I extend my thanks to all of them for the hard work they have continued to do over the last year. Throughout the pandemic, they had to continue going to work to keep our supply chain running so the rest of us could stay safe.

I thank all essential workers in Brampton and across Canada who have had to work in essential roles. The Government of Canada has their backs. This bill is essential to restarting the economy and ensuring that no Canadian is left behind. Since the start of the pandemic, it has been this government’s priority to protect the health and safety of all Canadians, help businesses endure COVID-19 restrictions and ensure we have a plan in place for a strong economic recovery. This bill would do just that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her speech.

She began her speech by talking about seniors and said she was taking into account comments she had heard from those around her about seniors.

Let us look at what is being said in Quebec. People think it is unacceptable to create two classes of seniors, namely young seniors aged 65 to 75, and older seniors. Everyone finds that unacceptable.

Why does the member's government refuse to take into account what is being said elsewhere in the country?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her passion for seniors. Our government values the contributions that seniors have made and continue to make to our communities. We have taken action to combat poverty, including poverty among seniors.

We are helping the seniors who need it most, those over 75, who may have taken some time to adjust their spending in retirement and have discovered they need extra support.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, surely the member for Brampton South is not suggesting that the paltry $500 one-time payment is lifting those seniors out of poverty. It is to the contrary.

We know that for-profit long-term care facilities like Extendicare and Sienna received $157 million in support and paid out $74 million in dividends. The previous speaker talked about supporting frontline workers, yet thousands of seniors have died in inhumane conditions at LTC facilities.

Despite the evidence that more people have died in private long-term care facilities, the government continues to protect its profits. Could the member explain why the government is putting the profits of for-profit care providers ahead of the quality of care for the seniors in her riding of Brampton South?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON

Mr. Speaker, for long-term care, our government is there to help seniors. Our policies are also showing positive results as 25% fewer seniors live in poverty than when we took office in 2015. That is a direct result of the good work our government has undertaken, including restoring the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS to 65 years, and increasing the GIS for the most vulnerable single seniors.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, the speaker talked a bit about her home riding and a lot about the constituents in her riding, particularly children. What she did not expand upon was the huge impact that the budget will have on those children and their grandchildren. The rationale to do this is because the interest rates are low. However, the one thing we do know is that interest rates are going to go up. That is going to have a huge impact on her constituents, particularly those who are buying homes now, which are escalating through the roof.

How does this budget help those children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren? Who is going to pay that debt back?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague mentioned child care. The status of women committee has been studying issues to do with the effects of the pandemic on women and children.

When it comes to the fiscal sustainability of our budget, it is important for Canadians to know that the Government of Canada supported over 9 million Canadians through CERB, as an example, but there have been many other supports. A week after we delivered the budget, S&P Global reaffirmed Canada's AAA rating, saying that it expected the Canadian economy would post a strong recovery.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Before resuming debate, 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 Vancouver East, Public Safety; the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, Canadian Heritage; and the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Foreign Affairs.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, for those following the debate on this budget implementation act, I will provide the necessary context for how we ended up with the most expensive federal budget in our lifetime.

It is imperative that we as legislators look at the full picture and to the future when debating a bill like this. Right now in Canada there are countless families and businesses on the brink of losing everything they have. The recent job numbers are horrendous, as our economy shed another 207,000 positions and our unemployment rate is 8.1%. These are not just numbers and statistics; they are people's livelihoods and careers. Many of these jobs were in the service and retail industry. These workers now find themselves without a pay cheque and some fear their jobs will never come back.

Every single constituency has been hit hard. All we have to do is look at the empty storefronts and vacant buildings to understand the severity of the economic and health crisis our country is facing.

We are now in the third wave and my province of Manitoba is back in lockdown. We are not unique as every province is in a race to stop the spread of COVID variants. While other nations have done a tremendous job of procuring enough vaccines for the first quarter of 2021, which helped them to mitigate against the third wave, we, in Canada, have not been so fortunate. We find ourselves in this terrible position due to a series of failures.

For my Liberal colleagues who might not take my word, I only need to point to the recent Auditor General's report that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the government was woefully unprepared for the pandemic. My Liberal colleagues could also review the speech given by the member for Kingston and the Islands when he admitted, “if vaccines came sooner we probably would not be standing in this place right now,” which was in response to the emergency debate that took place just last week. For once in my parliamentary career I can say that I agree with my hon. Liberal colleague.

I do not plan on litigating everything that has happened to date. For the purposes of this debate, it must be said that if we were able to procure enough vaccines for the first quarter of 2021, we would be in a far better position than we find ourselves today. If the government had moved quickly to shutdown flights from countries, where the variants are out of control, it would certainly have helped limit the spread of these variants. Not only has those failures cost people's lives, but it has resulted in prolonging the pandemic.

There is a direct correlation between those failures and their direct impact on our economy and the nation's finances. Within this omnibus bill, the government has acknowledged that the pandemic will continue for quite some time.

It is clear that the government needs to extend the programs on which many businesses and companies are relying, as either their doors are now locked or they are operating with very limited capacity. Just because the doors are closed, though, does not mean the bills do not continue to pile up. To no fault of their own, businesses and their employees are paying the price of the federal government's failure of not procuring enough vaccines for the first quarter of 2021 and for failing to keep the variants out of our country, and certainly for the lack of distribution of the same.

The last thing people want to do is to continue to apply for more financial support, but they do not have a choice. They cannot afford to go through another lockdown and they need to pay their bills. Therefore, I support those very specific clauses in the legislation to extend these programs. In fact, there are other specific measures I support, but in a bill as lengthy as this one, there are bound to be a few things that every member can get behind.

The road ahead of us is paved with uncertainties and risks, so we are already seeing the unintended consequences of the government's policies. The first risk is the very real threat of inflation. The Bank of Canada recently sent out a warning to investors that rising inflation numbers could result in it hiking the interest rate. If we couple that with the recent report that close to half of Canadians are $200 or less away from not being able to cover their bills and debt payments at the end of each month, that should keep every member of Parliament up at night.

If we look at the skyrocketing housing prices, we are witnessing in real time the dream of home ownership slipping away. I shudder at the thought of what is going to happen to those who will have to remortgage their homes at a much higher interest rate.

The second threat is the growing size of our country's debt and the cost to service that debt, as was mentioned by many of my colleagues. I know that every government must grapple with making choices and setting priorities, but I fear there are some who cannot see the forest for the trees. In a perfect world, every government has the financial capacity to carry out its mandate, but we do not live in that utopia where everything can get funded all at once. The size of this deficit makes one wonder who got left out.

Last week, the Parliamentary Budget Officer issued his analysis of the budget. He projects that the ratio of federal debt to gross domestic product will hit 52.1% this year and remain well above the pre-pandemic level of 31.2% for quite some time. In the report, there was another startling number that deserves repeating. The long-term projections presented in the budget show the federal debt-to-GDP ratio remaining above its pre-pandemic level through to the year 2055. That is a staggering 34 years from now. I doubt that I will witness the momentous occasion when the Government of Canada returns to pre-pandemic debt numbers, but my grandchildren and their families will most certainly be stuck with the bill, and that bill right now is that the average Canadian family owes over $77,000 in federal debt.

Any time a government goes this far into debt, it is completely irresponsible to not have a road map or a plan to get its fiscal house back in order. The interest payments alone on our debt are expected to hit almost $40 billion a year in the next few years. For my Liberal colleagues who do not share the same hesitations about their spendthrift ways, I will quote Paul Martin, who was a long-serving Liberal finance minister. He said, “The debt and the deficit are not inventions of ideology. They are facts of arithmetic. The quicksand of compound interest is real.” He said those words over 20 years ago and they still ring true. It would seem that modern monetary theory has found a receptive audience within the government.

I want to reference Jonathan Hartley, an economics researcher, who recently wrote about the pitfalls of this new economic model being touted by the left-of-centre politicians. He said, “The defining feature of [modern monetary theory]—and what distinguishes it from [other] economic theories—is its insistence that, so long as a government's debt is denominated in its own currency, there is no upper limit on the state's monetary borrowing.” He went on to say that under this theory “public debt is irrelevant”. He did not say that, but he referred to it as part of that theory. He further stated, “a country's central bank can always avoid default by printing more money.”

We know that there are real risks to this approach, and there are countless examples of debt monetization leading to out-of-control inflation. The Bank of Canada must adjust to the reality that this cannot go on forever. The Bank of Canada has been buying a minimum of $4 billion in government bonds every week, accumulating more than $250 billion of the securities over the past year. As reported, its share of the holdings of the outstanding bond market continues to grow, and it currently owns more than 35% of the total marketed outstanding Government of Canada debt. We should all be watching the Bank of Canada's actions and future decisions.

I do not say these things to cause alarm, but rather as someone who witnessed the crushing interest rate hikes and inflation in previous decades. I fully understand the necessity to help get our economy back on track and those suffering. However, we must quickly turn our attention to getting our finances under control. As parliamentary committees gear up to study the various parts of this omnibus bill, Canadians are counting on all of us to get this right, so we must ensure that every dollar being spent will, in fact, grow our economy and improve the lives of those we represent.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Mr. Speaker, my colleague and I are both on the international committee representing the Arctic nations together. We have a great working relationship, and I always appreciate hearing from him. We work very well together.

He started out by explaining that many businesses and individuals are on the verge of bankruptcy, so I assume he supports the items in the budget. He mentioned that he supports the extension of the wage subsidy, the rent subsidy, the lockdown subsidy and the RRRF. I assume he also supports the extension of the flexible access to EI for another year and the Canada recovery benefit to September 25, adding another 12 weeks. Then there are brand new programs on top of these extensions: $1 billion for tourism, $700 million to support business financing, improving the Canada small business financing program and enhancing the low-income workers benefit to help all the people in these dire situations.

Is there any one of those items that the member does not support?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, the member is quite right. I did say in my speech that I support those items. In fact, as a Conservative Party, we helped the government make sure there was more inclusion in the programs he mentioned: the wage subsidy, the rent subsidy, the areas of CERB when it was active. We are supportive of the employment insurance program going on now.

We know there are other sectors of our society that will need to be kick-started and helped to get back into it. He mentioned tourism as being one of those sectors, which I know is very important in his region, and the infrastructure spending as well. The problem we have with the infrastructure spending is that there has not been a lot of it coming out the door. There have been lots of announcements, but we need to make sure we get into activity. There are many projects in many areas of Canada that need to go forward. We need to look carefully at the programs to see how we can do that.

A big part of it, which was mentioned by some of my colleagues, is that there are many things in this budget. As I said, hardly anybody was left out of it. It certainly looks like an election budget.

My only concern—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I must interrupt the hon. member to move on to other questions.

The hon. member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I think he would agree that it is hard to listen to the Liberals say that we would have ended up in a recession after the pandemic and that they needed to invest a hundred billion dollars.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer believes that $69 billion would have been enough to stimulate the economy. He is also of the opinion that the GDP will increase by 1% after the pandemic and that roughly 70,000 jobs will be created. The Liberals, however, think the GDP will increase by 2% and more than 300,000 jobs will be created.

What does my colleague think of the Liberals' statements, what is presented in the budget and the Parliamentary Budget Officer's projections?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, answering this question will probably finish off the answer to the previous one as well.

When I say there is no plan, I mean there is no fiscal plan for how to come back to balance. A situation where it takes 34 years to get back to where we were pre-pandemic, which was still out of control at that time, with many years of deficit financing and increased debt of about $80 billion even at that, is not good enough.

It is really irresponsible to look at the situation Canadians are in, the situation we are putting Canadians in, and to say that we would not have an accountability program for 34 years.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

NDP

Scott Duvall NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the countless families facing bankruptcy and financial collapse.

One of the things I have been hearing across the country is about the seniors omitted from the budget, those aged 65 to 74. They are angry, frustrated and disappointed, as they only have the GIS and OAS to live on. I am hearing this as the critic for seniors. I want to know what the member is hearing in his riding on the issue of seniors being omitted.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for that observation, and his question from that observation as well. Certainly, seniors are telling me that they are concerned about the levels that have been imposed upon us by the Liberal government in this activity as well in this budget.

Seniors have suffered a great deal through the pandemic. With the vaccine rollout, I was very much in favour of their being vaccinated up front, for many of them, along with our frontline workers, who have done a great job as best they can with the vaccines that they were limited in getting. That is certainly a good observation that my colleague has heard and one that I have heard as well.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Before we resume debate, I notice that many members are interested in participating in the question and comment time, which is quite normal for budget bills and their ilk, so we should be able to get at least three exchanges in that five-minute period of time, sometimes even more. I would ask hon. members to keep their observations and their questions concise, and the same goes for the member who is responding to those questions, and we will see if we can give more members the opportunity to participate in the debate this afternoon.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB

Mr. Speaker, after a record two years, Canadians were finally provided with the federal budget. Unfortunately, it was the longest wait in our nation's history in some of the most troubling times in a generation.

Before I begin addressing the budget and the impact it will have on the people I represent, I want to congratulate the Minister of Finance on making history. Last month, she became the first woman to deliver a federal budget in Canadian history, and for that I applaud her. This is a historic step forward in inspiring women across our country.

Unfortunately, the current Liberal government has a problem, a spending problem. It has said that increasing the national debt to an unimaginable $1.4 trillion is to stimulate the economy, but we all know the only thing the government is focused on is stimulating voters. It is obvious the Prime Minister is more focused on keeping his job than on doing his job. By next year, he will have accumulated more national debt than all previous prime ministers combined.

One of the world's most respected investors, Warren Buffett, famously said, “Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.” The current government does not understand the difference between the two. It is more focused on how large the price tag is instead of how much value it will bring to Canadians.

The foundation to any good economic policy is to measure the output or the results. The federal government has tried to justify that its record-breaking deficit is a strategic investment so our economy can come roaring back, but that is not the case. This budget fails to provide a real plan for job creation and long-term economic growth. As a matter of fact, the Prime Minister's former adviser questioned this budget. He admitted the Liberals are, “doubling down on programs that do not address our innovation shortcomings and have yielded few results to date.” Where is the plan for coherent growth? Where is the plan to be competitive on the world stage? Where is the plan to foster an economic environment that allows the agriculture, forestry and tourism industries to thrive? There is no plan because the government is fixated on price instead of value.

My constituents know what happens when governments spend money without a plan. They understand because they have experienced it before. It was the Prime Minister's father who famously took the same approach in the 1980s, with record deficits, reckless spending, no fiscal guardrails and no plan. As a result, Canadians suffered a debt crisis. My constituents can remember the all-time high interest rates, the extreme inflation, the record unemployment rates and the massive increase in poverty. My constituents are concerned about spending without a plan because they have lived through the damage before.

I think of Diane in Minitonas, who reached out to me and expressed her concerns regarding the budget. She is concerned this budget is unaffordable for Canadians. As a mother of four, she is worried about the future of her children, who will have to pay for the record spending. I share her concerns. My constituents are seeking a plan in this budget that would outline the future of our recovery from this pandemic, but they did not get one. I represent thousands of locally owned and operated businesses throughout rural Manitoba. Agriculture, forestry, tourism and hospitality are the foundations of the communities and families of our region. Whether it be the businesses surrounding and within Riding Mountain National Park that rely on tourism or the restaurants and coffee shops that rely on regular local visitors, the small businesses that I represent want certainty for a secure economic future. What they are not seeking is a reimagined economy.

The finance minister sees things differently from my constituents. She has stated that the COVID-19 pandemic “has created a window of political opportunity”. Thousands of Canadians have died, jobs have been lost and businesses have been shuttered, but the government sees the tragedy as a political opportunity.

I recently heard from an outfitter in my riding who relies on business from American clientele. She is frustrated that the government refuses to discuss what the future will look like with our American neighbours post-pandemic. Unfortunately, because the federal government has failed to provide our country with enough vaccines, it cannot have these important conversations.

While other developed nations reopen for travel and business, Canada is experiencing a third wave because of this Prime Minister's own incompetence. Premiers across Canada have called on the federal government to increase health care funding. However, this budget has no new money for health care transfers to provinces such as Manitoba. In a time when the federal government should be stepping up to support the provincial health care system, the Liberals turned a blind eye in their budget.

The seniors in this country were also disappointed to read this Liberal budget. Once again, the current government has failed our seniors by not providing them the support they need. Seniors across my constituency are telling me that they can no longer afford to live with dignity on a fixed income, due to the rising cost of living.

I will admit that there are some things that sound good in this budget. For example, I welcome the proposed investments for connectivity. Access to high-quality Internet and cellular service is essential for all Canadians, and investments into rural Canada are key to closing the connectivity divide. However, I am skeptical of this promise because, as of today, no money from the existing universal broadband fund has been announced for Manitoba. Proposals such as the Parkland multi-community broadband project have yet to receive any funding. I would strongly caution Canadians on the promises in this budget. The Liberals are notorious for over-promising and under-delivering, and my constituents know that.

The best way to predict the future is to look into the past. Let us examine the record on a few of the previous promises. The Liberals promised to plant two billion trees. They promised to end the boil water advisories. They promised not to raise the Liberal carbon tax. They promised to be accountable. They promised to balance the budget. Guess what? They failed to deliver all of these promises.

I should remind the House that it was only last year when the government mentioned the importance of the fiscal anchor and fiscal guardrails. Well, Canadians will be shocked to learn that the car has driven off the cliff. The government does not believe in fiscal sustainability. In nearly 750 pages, there is no clear mention of a fiscal anchor.

Canadians of today may not experience the full impact of government debt, but I can assure this House that Canadians of tomorrow will experience not only today's debt but the interest as well. Each Canadian is now responsible for $33,000 in federal debt, and that number is growing. By 2026, interest payments on the federal debt could reach $40 billion a year. By next year, this Prime Minister will be responsible for more debt himself than all of the previous prime ministers combined.

Unfortunately, this budget does not tell Canadians how the government is going to pay for this record amount of debt. I suspect that the explanation of how the Liberals will pay for the new debt will not be shared until after the next election. I am confident that if the current government is re-elected, taxes will go up and promises will be broken as soon as the campaign is over, because history is bound to repeat itself. Canadians will not be tricked. They understand that higher spending today means higher taxes tomorrow; and, when inflation decreases the value of hard-earned savings accounts and higher interest rates prevent home ownership, the last thing Canadians want are higher taxes.

I will conclude with the words of former American president Herbert Hoover, who said, “Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt”. I can assure Canadians that a Conservative government would unleash the economic potential of our nation, stand up for rural Canada, and secure the future for all Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is getting really tiring to hear the misrepresentation of a quote by the Minister of Finance. A number of Conservatives have done that throughout just about any debate that relates to the budget since the budget was introduced and they always are very good at cherry-picking half of the sentence that they want to say. This member did it too, when he said that the Minister of Finance said, “I really believe COVID-19 has created a window of political opportunity”.

Of course, the Conservatives stop the quote there because finishing it would just look horrible. If we actually finished the quote, which I would like to do, the Minister of Finance went on to say, “...political opportunity...on the importance of early learning and child care”.

Does this member not feel any kind of remorse for grossly misquoting the Minister of Finance?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB

Mr. Speaker, this budget really has no focus. What I cannot not get over is the conversation I had with Diane. Thinking back, this was a young female with a family of four worried about how much government debt is being acquired. Those are the things I am focused on. That conversation really set me back. I really do wonder why my colleague across the way would be wondering about how we are misrepresenting something when everybody in Canada except the Government of Canada is worried about how much debt is being acquired.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa for his speech.

Bill C-30 increases the envelope for the Canadian Securities Transition Office, which was one of the Harper government's pet projects.

The member spoke at length about SMEs in his speech. In Quebec, SMEs, the financial sector, labour-sponsored funds and political parties are against this bill.

Can the member explain why the parties in power in Ottawa listen to the Bay Street banks more than they do Quebec?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB

Mr. Speaker, I know the current government in particular does not want to listen to any of the provinces in Canada. This has been an ongoing battle as we respond to COVID-19.

I totally sympathize with the battle Quebec is going through in dealing with these SMEs.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, all I heard in that speech were partisan shots. New Democrats are here right now to help people who are struggling right now, because there are a lot of businesses, like the ones he talked about, that are struggling to get through this third wave of the pandemic, including start-ups that have not been able to get any help so far.

The government has an opportunity to look at new baseline revenues for the wage subsidy or for the commercial rent program. The government could actually help those businesses that have been left out and have not received any supports to date if it amended those programs. It could help businesses like the Wildflower bakery that opened in Port Alberni in my riding, which opened in July but has been waiting for several months to get its business up and running after years of planning.

Does my colleague support calling on the Liberals to take action and help preserve a generation of businesses that need help right now by amending those programs to give them the emergency support they deserve and need?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB

Mr. Speaker, I would support all those businesses. The problem with this budget is it misses so many of those businesses in my riding, those start-ups, and is creating a huge amount of uncertainty for the future. They do not know what kind of future bills are going to come from the government. Can one imagine starting up a business and having a special item line that says if inflation goes up another 1% or interest rates go up one has to allow for that in one's taxes. That is the kind of future the government is creating—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Red Deer—Lacombe.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to be in the chamber today to speak to Bill C-30, the Liberals' budget implementation act. It has been more than two years since the government has tabled a budget, and the expectations of Canadians were high. With all the platitudes, like “build back better”, the government had increased expectation and set the stage for something that we were led to believe would be momentous. Unfortunately, the Liberals once again fell back to their default setting of over-promising, overspending and underachieving. Plain and simple, this budget is a letdown for the hard-working Albertans in my riding of Red Deer—Lacombe.

It is reasonable that a number of essential COVID-19 support programs that many Canadians rely on are being extended. This is only fair considering they are necessary because of the failings and mismanagement of the pandemic by the Liberals in the first place. However, while Americans are able to attend stadium sport events and mass gatherings because of a successful vaccination and therapeutic drug strategy, Albertans have just been placed under the most stringent public health measures so far. The Liberals' failure to procure an adequate number of vaccines is devastating, not only to those who will undoubtedly get COVID, but to all Canadians who are being forced to sacrifice more for longer than our friends and families in other countries.

The budget completely fails to lay the road map for how the Liberals plan to get out of the pandemic and get back to life as we once knew it. That is job number one right now, and it was missed entirely in this budget. It is clear that the Liberals have no plan to get back to normal. Instead, they came up with creative solutions to try and mask their failure by trying to compare Canada's first-dose vaccination rate, with our four-month gap between doses, with those of our G20 partners, which are following the manufacturers' instructions on timelines for administering the second dose. Maybe that should not be surprising. After all, this is a government that is well practised at spin, starting with its ethically challenged Prime Minister.

The Liberals' failure to prevent variants of concern from entering Canada and their failure in acquiring vaccines are not just health related. The longer it takes for us to begin the post-COVID recovery, the further we will fall behind.

While the Liberals may be spending money like it grows on trees, which is easy to do when one is printing money to offset spending, the reality is that only the private sector can lead us out of the pandemic, and private sector investment is going to flow to the jurisdictions that welcome it. Unfortunately, with so much uncertainty about when we will be on the other side of the pandemic and with a budget that does nothing meaningful to cut red tape or improve the business climate in this country, Canada is not and will not be prepared for the necessary private sector investments.

The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance has made it clear that the government sees the current quagmire of misery that Canadians are living in as a window of political opportunity. This budget shows us exactly what kind of opportunity the Liberals are seeking: an opportunity to shore up their political fortunes for re-election. This budget is full of unnecessary, unproductive spending and electioneering that the government is trying to disguise as stimulus.

The Minister of Finance promised that they would spend up to $100 billion in stimulus, but only if it was necessary. With many economists speaking out and telling us that stimulus spending of that magnitude was not necessary, I was hopeful that the Liberals would pull in the reins on their spending spree. However, when it comes to the government, the devil is always in the details.

We know that the full $100 billion has been allocated even though the Parliamentary Budget Officer has made it clear that a significant portion of it is not actually stimulus at all. I guess no one told the Minister of Finance that if she does not need the whole $100 billion in stimulus, she should not spend it, because it is borrowed money. It certainly does not mean the government should spend the rest supporting political or ideological goals instead of economic ones.

The Prime Minister is set to rack up more debt than every prime minister preceding him. The real issue is that the Liberal government does not even seem to see this as a problem. Time after time we see the government brag about the size of the investment instead of the quality of the return on the investment. That is the problem when a government is all talk and no substance. The Liberals value the press releases more than the result reports, and they clearly plan to continue this trend with budget 2021.

The Liberals promised that they were going to build back better. Well, for central Albertans, this is a plan that will ensure that we build back poorer, as sectors of the economy that Albertans rely on have been largely ignored in this budget, if not outright attacked.

Small businesses that are a critical part of our economy and our communities have been let down. While some much-needed pandemic relief programs were extended and loans remain on offer to those able to shoulder even more government-forced debt, the lack of certainty is crippling. Last year, 60,000 small businesses failed and another nearly 200,000 are in danger of closing now. Small businesses in the tourism sector have been especially devastated.

A single mom in my riding who has been a self-employed travel agent for 30 years recently had to go out and start looking for a new career. This is in large part because the government did not ensure any safeguards for small, independent business people when they were dealing with the airlines. Their commissions are now being clawed back by airlines for services rendered months or even years ago.

In 2020, countless community events were cancelled because of COVID-19, events that our communities rely on to bring in tourists. Many of these community events are once again faced with a fast-approaching deadline to decide what 2021 is going to look like for their events and their businesses.

My riding is home to the Ponoka Stampede, Canada's largest seven-day rodeo. Losing an event like the Ponoka Stampede is not just a loss for the competitors or spectators. It is a loss to the community and surrounding areas, which would otherwise benefit from the event. The estimated economic impact for the local area is $150 million every year. That is a lot of money anywhere, but especially in a rural community like Ponoka with a population of just 7,200 people.

We are getting to a point where organizers need to make these tough decisions again, but the government has not given them the certainty they need to make them. We can see how that ripples across the community. Just last year in Red Deer, the Black Knight Inn closed its doors after running successfully for nearly 45 years.

Guides and outfitters are another part of the tourism sector that have been left behind by the government. With many businesses getting 90% or more of their clients from the United States or other foreign countries, times have been tough for the industry, causing spinoff problems related to food security for local communities and wildlife management. These businesses have lost nearly all of their clients and have no way or ability to pivot to clients from the domestic market.

The budget implementation act has no mention of the tourism relief fund committed to in the budget, which many of these businesses could certainly use. We would expect that a fund geared toward helping businesses adapt their services to public health measures and start to recover would be implemented right away. While funding for Destination Canada could have been helpful in promoting our world-class hunting and fishing opportunities to other Canadians, the government quietly stopped letting lodges access the fund for this purpose a number of years ago.

The agriculture sector was also essentially forgotten. Throughout the pandemic, it has become routine for the government to point to the original set of business risk management programs, which were in need of a overhaul long before the pandemic, as somehow now a solution to the problem. The proposal to refund a portion of the carbon tax on natural gas and propane for vital activities like grain drying is a pittance of what farmers pay to run them. Hopefully, we can get this corrected through the private member's bill of my colleague from Northumberland—Peterborough South, which would remove the carbon tax from a broader list of farm fuels. The Liberals, I might add, recently voted against it at second reading.

When it comes to the oil and gas sector, there was literally no support whatsoever. In fact, we can see the next step shaping up in the Prime Minister's plan to phase out the oil and gas sector entirely, through the proposed changes that ensure several types of fossil fuel powered energy equipment are no longer eligible for accelerated capital cost allowance deductions. In other words, the Liberals are driving away investment.

When it comes to Alberta's energy sector, the budget is also ensuring that the modest money that is being committed for carbon capture is not eligible to companies that perform enhanced oil recovery. During past challenging economic times, Canada's energy sector has been able to be an integral and central part of our recovery.

Instead of working to empower our world-class oil and gas sector, which abides by the strictest environmental standards in the world, the government prefers to increase the pace with which they are mothballing this industry. They work to end the Canadian industry and ironically welcome oil from places like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, which lack our commitment to environmental standards and human rights.

This budget is extremely frustrating to my constituents. A recent survey in Alberta by ThinkHQ Public Affairs suggested central Albertans are more likely to report a negative financial impact from the pandemic. It is about 57% in the place I call home compared with 46% for the provincial average. With these realities, we would think that if the government is going to spend money to stimulate our economy, it would ensure that industries important to local economies in places like central Alberta are included.

I do not know what would matter to the government. It simply does not seem to care about the needs of central Albertans. I look forward to the day when a Conservative government once again takes care of the needs of all Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Mr. Speaker, just so the member knows, Destination Canada is now supporting domestic marketing. I am glad he has called for supporting tourism. There is $500 million for a special tourism relief fund, another $700 million for small business financing and another $100 million for Destination Canada so we can get ready to market Canada. I am also glad the member mentioned the carbon tax and that the Conservatives are putting that forward.

The member said there is all sorts of unfortunate, unneeded funding in this budget. Could the member go over the funding that he thinks is not necessary and not needed for supporting businesses and individuals? That would be interesting to hear.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB

Mr. Speaker, I would simply suggest that Canadians should not believe that the Liberals' expensive ideas in budget 2021 are needed to fix the previous Liberals' bad ideas. What we need is a budget that gets our Canadian economy back on track, gets people back to work and gets us through the pandemic, rather than one that relies on support programs. The best solution for this is a free market economy, with people with real jobs driving our economy forward, not a Liberal government driving us further into debt.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Louise Charbonneau Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues have highlighted, this budget creates two classes of seniors and it denies provinces and territories the health transfers they need to fight the pandemic.

The member spoke of small businesses, and a detail in the budget caught my attention, which is that charitable enterprises will be excluded from the definition of a small business. Does the hon. member not think that this will further weaken small charitable enterprises?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois need to understand that for federal transfers to the provinces to work and pay for the things she is asking for, the Government of Canada needs to grow the Canadian economy. The Alberta economy has contributed disproportionately, in a positive way, to the overall budget and to the the federal government's balancing of the books, to the tune of several hundred billion dollars in the last few decades alone. If the member and her party would just stop attacking the oil and gas sector in western Canada and promote the use of pipelines, there would be enough resources for all of us to share in equitably.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Mr. Speaker, this morning I met with the Canadian Health Coalition, and they had just one question for me: Why do the Liberals and the Conservatives not want to add pharmacare to our national health care system, when over 90% of Canadians want it, it would keep us all healthy and it would save us over $5 billion a year? Why are the Conservatives against it?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB

Mr. Speaker, my colleague should know that over 98% of Canadians currently have access to a pharmaceutical plan, either through their employers or through provincial programs offered to seniors and those living with disabilities. If my colleague wants to work constructively on a plan that would help the other 2% of Canadians who do not have access, he would find me to be a willing partner.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Red Deer—Lacombe for citing two things: one, that we need to have a thriving economy here in Canada; and two, that it should be led by the private sector, because it knows where the opportunities are and how to multiply returns for the benefit of everyone.

Today Suncor and ATCO, in collaboration, announced a new project that would actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions in existing refineries via the production of clean hydrogen. However, the government in its budget has excluded natural gas-based hydrogen projects from the list of zero-emission technologies eligible for tax reductions.

Does the member believe that the government needs to start supporting the private sector in these kinds of things, rather than just applauding, but not really supporting, made-in-Canada technology and solutions?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB

Mr. Speaker, I think that is an excellent question. I would point out to my colleague from Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola that, in the budget, the Liberal government is supporting carbon capture and sequestration but not carbon capture, utilization and sequestration.

There is a major project in my constituency right now that produces net-zero oil, and it is creating jobs, wealth and economic opportunity here. However, because of this current Liberal government's ideological bent to stop everything that involves the use of oil and gas, the technologies, the innovations, and the expertise in Alberta, western Canada and in any oil-producing provinces will get short shrift from this government. Its ideological bent is to do anything and everything to stop the oil and gas sector.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, do you remember learning history in grade school? One of the students would raise her hand and ask why the king did not just create more money if there was not enough, because after all, he was the king and he could increase the amount of money available in order to spend more.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I am hearing there is no interpretation.

The interpretation is not working. We will check the French interpretation again.

Everything seems to be working now.

The hon. member for Carleton can continue his speech or he can start over from the beginning.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, do you remember grade school history class, when a student would raise her hand and ask why the king did not just create more money if there was not enough? He was the king, after all. Almost all children ask that question at school at some point when they are learning history. Then the teacher has to explain that, if the king creates more money, inflation goes up.

Young students are not the only ones asking that question and thinking about the concept of creating more money to cover government spending. Academics, U.S. members of Congress and even former U.S. presidential candidate Bernie Sanders have endorsed a concept called “modern monetary theory”, which states that a government can spend as much as it wants and the central bank can just print more money. If inflation goes up, as the grade school teacher tells the students, all the government has to do to reduce inflation is raise taxes. Ultimately, the people are the ones who have to pay, but in the beginning, everyone thinks it is all free.

This theory is becoming more popular. The current federal government says it is against the theory, but is that really the case? Let us look at the numbers. Last year, the government ran up a $350-billion deficit, of which the Bank of Canada bought $300 billion, or over 75%. The fact is, the Bank of Canada now owns almost one-third of the federal government's debt. The debt that is now in the hands of the Bank of Canada has increased by hundreds of percentage points.

This year, the government announced that it would borrow $3 billion per week. How much will the Bank of Canada provide to the government each week? Also $3 billion. For every dollar the government borrows each week, the Bank of Canada will provide the same amount. This has never happened in the history of the country. Even during wartime, when money was needed to finance armies, money was loaned by citizens. They bought interest-bearing bonds, allowing them to save money while financing the war against the enemy. Now, however, the government has decided to print money.

Is this really a modern concept? If my colleagues think that a concept used over 2,000 years ago is modern, then I guess we can call it modern. Let us recall the dictator Dionysius of Syracuse, who never had enough money because he was always fighting wars and living lavishly. Unable to pay his bills, he collected all the coins on his island, each of which was worth one drachma, the currency of the Greeks at that time. He then stamped each one-drachma coin with the number two. Now he had twice as much money to spend.

It was like magic, except now the public had to pay twice as much for all the goods and services on the island because the money was worth half as much as it was before. The ultrarich, the dictator's entourage, the bankers, the big businessmen and the military leaders were much richer, but the workers had to pay more just to put food on the table and survive.

That is not the only example. In Europe, throughout the great Napoleonic Wars, kings and leaders tried to mint more coins with less silver to fund their wars. During the wars, people noticed that there was less silver in the coins and that the cost of living was going up for ordinary citizens.

In Germany, during the First World War, the government inflated the value of its currency tenfold. After the war, the Germans had to cart around a huge amount of money just to buy a loaf of bread. At the restaurant, they would order 10 or 15 beers at once as soon as they arrived because the price could shoot up hour by hour over the course of the evening. They were better off ordering as soon as they got to the restaurant.

The economist Milton Friedman, who won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work on inflation and the creation of money, demonstrated that in the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Germany and Brazil, there was a perfect correlation between an increase in the production of money and an increase in prices.

That is the history of the creation of money. When there is too much money chasing too few goods and services, prices go up. Have prices gone up in Canada since the government began paying its bills with printed money?

A Financial Post article states that the central banks and government are out of touch with Main Street when it comes to the rising cost of living. According to the latest Canada's Food Price Report, every year, the cost of meat increases by 5% to 7%, the cost of bread increases by 4% to 6%, and the cost of vegetables increases by 5% to 7%, and gas prices have increased by 78% to $1.18. Yes, prices are going up.

Home prices have also gone up by one-third, or 30%. Young Canadians cannot even dream of owning a house because of the skyrocketing prices. That is good for the wealthy. The ultrawealthy are seeing their assets increase in value, but the working class, the people doing the work, are seeing their wages decrease in real terms. A lot of money is being transferred from workers to the ultrawealthy.

Elected officials never voted for this inflation tax. This tax is worse than all other taxes because it targets the poor, who do not have assets and cannot increase their net worth.

We must control the spending and stop the central banks from printing money so that we can protect the value of our dollar and the value of workers' time. This will give us an economy that compensates people based on merit, on their contributions, not based on the inflation of their assets and cost of living.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:30 p.m.
See context

Yukon Yukon

Liberal

Larry Bagnell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency)

Madam Speaker, a lot of people in this debate have been very constructive, coming up with good ideas and good criticism, so I would like to ask the member this.

In a 700-page document with hundreds of items that support businesses and individuals, of all the members in the House, the former finance critic should be able to analyze what he supports and, to be fair, what is good in it. Could the member enumerate some of the positive things in the budget?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Madam Speaker, I rise today to point out that this extremely costly 700-page half-trillion-dollar budget will raise the cost of living for working class people. When money is printed to pay bills, the cost of living is driven up, increasing inflation, which drives up interest rates. Those higher interest rates that will apply to record levels of household corporate and governmental debt will lead to an inevitable debt crisis.

The government is not giving anything. It actually is taking away and it is doing so through the most surreptitious and insidious method, which is an inflation tax brought on by heavy doses of printing money, which is going to hurt the working class while helping the super-rich and causing a debt crisis. We should not be going in that the direction.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, I really like the member for Carleton and I enjoy his presentations.

He spoke to us about modern monetary theory. We do not agree on it. In terms of approaches to political economics, I do not share the classical view.

However, I would like to draw a parallel. In the budget, I would like to see a new theory, modern oil and gas theory. This theory tells us that we can reduce our GHGs through the oil and gas industry. That is the strategy that the government is proposing with the green plan they have introduced, more specifically the $17 billion to be invested in grey hydrogen.

I do not know if my colleague sees the parallel I am trying to draw. Does he think that oil and gas can be used to reduce carbon in a green recovery plan? Is that not a little like the modern monetary theory he was telling us about earlier?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Madam Speaker, I think the theory he is referring to is the one about how, in Quebec, the most popular vehicle is the Ford F-150. What goes in a Ford F-150? Oil.

The Bloc Québécois is constantly asking for subsidies for Bombardier to cover the cost of airplane construction and huge executive bonuses. What goes in those planes? Oil.

Right now, the Bloc Québécois and Quebeckers are worried about Line 5 being shut down, depriving Quebeckers of half the oil destined for refineries in Montreal and Lévis. They are worried people will not be able to go to work. What goes in those pipelines? Oil.

Acknowledging that we have to reduce oil consumption and greenhouse gas emissions is all well and good, but we also have to acknowledge that oil is important, that it exists and that it should come from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland, not from other countries.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Madam Speaker, my colleague's intervention was very illuminating as to his perspective on things. He expressed a lot of concerns about the budget and, of course, I have concerns with it as well. I suspect that our concerns are very different. I am concerned that people will not thrive as we finish the third wave. I am concerned that we do not have paid sick leave. I am concerned that we do not have dental care and that there is not enough support for post-secondary students.

The member's colleague from Red Deer—Lacombe just talked about how 98% of Canadians, from his perspective, had access to pharmacare. Does the member believe that and if so, how?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Madam Speaker, the vast majority of Canadians do have access to drug coverage either through their employer or through their provincial social assistance. A small minority do not. We should look at how we can address that.

What shocks me with the NDP, once again, is how its members seem to have no problem with this money printing exercise even though it has been proven, and the Governor of the Bank of Canada has admitted, it balloons the assets of the super-rich while diluting the wages of the working class. It is an inflation tax that transfers money from the have nots to the have yachts. I would think the NDP, which claims to care so much about the gap between rich and poor, would have something to say about that inflation tax.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:40 p.m.
See context

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, I am glad to speak to the budget implementation act, and I want to congratulate my friend from Carleton for an excellent speech.

It is very clear that the Liberals' so-called stimulus fund in this budget is really all about spending on Liberal pet projects and partisan priorities, not creating jobs and growing our economy. We continue to see no plan to get back to a balanced budget. We know spending in certain areas is completely out of control. This budget has been panned by the parliamentary budget officer and a number of financial experts. Editorials in major newspapers have not given it a passing grade.

It has been said many times through this debate that the Prime Minister of Canada, the Liberal Prime Minister, has racked up more national debt in the past six years than all previous prime ministers and governments of all political stripes in the 150-year history of Canada.

My granddaughter's birthday is today, and Sarah turns one, and I wish her a happy birthday. When she was born last year, she was already on the hook for over $31,700 of her share of the national debt. Today, she is now on the hook for almost $40,000. That is how much it has gone up because of the Liberal government.

There is no doubt we are dealing with a pandemic and there is no doubt a lot of emergency spending had to happen. However, we also know that a lot of money has been wasted and has gone into Liberal priorities, not the priorities of Canadians. As has been said many times, we are getting very concerned about the cost of this borrowing and how all this new printed money that is being pumped into the economy is going to impact inflation.

Whether we are looking at new home prices or when trying to buy lumber at a local lumber store to rebuild a fence or put a new deck in the backward, all these prices are skyrocketing because of this injection of cheap money printed by the Government of Canada.

We went through this once before under Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau. I took out my first mortgage to buy some farm land back in 1984. Because inflation was out of control and the Bank of Canada was trying to control it, interest rates were pegged at over 21% for mortgage borrowing. If we have that type of escalation in the cost of borrowing, there is no way people will be able to afford the homes they bought. They will be more than mortgage poor; they will be into foreclosures. The Government of Canada's borrowing will grow exponentially and it will have to take money from other programs just to pay down the interest on this huge debt, totalling over $1.4 trillion.

In this budget, we have another $101 billion in new spending over the next three years. We have a deficit left over from last year of $354 billion. This is not sustainable and we need to ensure we do not bring forward programs that will be structural and cause structural deficits. We have to ensure the assistance is there, but that it is short-lived and is removed as soon as we start to recover. The PBO has already said that we need to continue to balance our spending so we can adjust as people come of the recession caused by COVID.

We have to remember that today's deficits are tomorrow's taxes, and 74% of Canadians, according to a Nanos poll, have already said that they are incredibly concerned about the deficits the government is racking up under the Liberals.

One of the things missing in this budget is that there is nothing to increase productivity and competitiveness. When we were in government under Stephen Harper, we provided dollars to businesses to accelerate their capital gains losses against any equipment they were buying to increase productivity. They could buy new machinery or tools for their shops.

By increasing productivity and increasing competitiveness so they would be able to compete on the world market, they were creating more jobs. By creating more jobs, Canadians are back at work. They are stimulating the economy, because they are spending more, and they are paying taxes.

The budget we have in front of us right now is not a growth budget, and it fails to have any way to get Canada into a position of prosperity down the road. As I said, the Parliamentary Budget Officer said that a significant amount of the spending in this budget by the Liberals will not stimulate the jobs or create any economic growth, and that is going to hurt the long-term outlook on this budget, which is that they are expecting to see growth exponentially to fund that debt down the road.

I am really concerned about how this is affecting local businesses, especially in my riding of Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman. So many businesses are slipping through the cracks, especially seasonal operations. Here we are, going into a second summer under COVID with lockdowns and no ability for so many different businesses to operate.

I am thinking about caterers. I had a conversation with Danny's Whole Hog recently. All the weddings that were booked for this summer have now been cancelled. The company went last summer with almost no events to do and no catering available, and its barbecue business right now is pretty much dead. Instead of running 20-plus teams around the province, doing barbecues every weekend, it is down to only several staff. The owner is glad that he has had access to the wage subsidy program, but there is no guarantee that it is going to be extended down the road, especially as these seasonal businesses do not have revenues once they get through the summer and fall, and by then it is going to be too late for many of these companies.

There are summer camps in my riding, along beautiful Lake Manitoba, Lake Winnipeg and over in the Whiteshell: Camp Arnes, Camp Massad, Gimli Bible Camp and Camp Cedarwood. They did not have any campers last summer and again camp has already been cancelled for this summer, so they are looking for help.

One of my constituents, Jennifer Mills, has just been so tenacious in dealing with the loss of revenues to her company. She is in the carnival business. I have a neat industry in my riding where we have three main carnivals that go and set up at the midways, local fairs, rodeos and festivals: Canuck Amusements, Select Shows and Wonder Shows. Again, they are going into the second summer, over 20 months now without any revenue, and there have been no programs to support them. Jennifer has emailed the Liberal government over 200 times over the last 20 months, and still nobody has bothered to respond to her, whether the Minister of Small Business, the Minister of Finance or anyone.

That does not even deal with hairdressers, restaurants, libraries, outfitters and museums. They are all suffering, yet there is no help coming from the government for most of those businesses.

Agriculture is key to this economy. It is key to my riding. It is in my blood, as I am a farmer myself. I look at my family and immediate family and I am worried about young farmers and how they are going to be bearing the cost of these programs. I am glad to see that after we asked the Minister of Agriculture for a year to exclude the carbon tax on propane and natural gas that is used for drying crops, the Liberals are finally doing that and refunding it. It is a start.

This budget is proposing funding for more efficient grain dryers and farm equipment not powered by diesel fuel. There are no alternatives out there, and young farmers depend upon having to use used equipment. They buy used equipment, which is going to be based on older technology, so diesel fuel is the lifeblood of agriculture. If we want to eat, diesel fuel is going to be part of that for a very long time to come. There is no reference here to how the government is going to reward farmers for bringing in better crop rotation, low-till practices, zero-till practices and carbon sequestration. It is a public good, but there is nothing there.

Farming depends upon trade, and there is no funding in this budget to help our farmers trade more, especially as places like Communist China become more unpredictable on whether we will be able to access it.

I have more to say, and I will deal with that in the questions and answers afterwards, but I am glad to be able to get on the record talking about the gaps and the failures of the Liberal budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I have heard Conservatives today talk about how this budget is not going to do anything for Canadians and will certainly cripple our economy, in their opinion. I respect that opinion. However, it is not an opinion that is shared by everybody. The former governor of the Bank of Canada, who I might add was a Stephen Harper appointee, had the following comments in relation to the government's plan. He said, “ingredients that one needs to have in a sustainable plan are present, and that was done without a meaningful increase in taxes of any kind.”

Would the member like to reflect on the comments that were made by the former governor of the Bank of Canada, who was appointed by Stephen Harper?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, the member for Kingston and the Islands can pat himself on the back all he wants. The Liberals may not increase taxes in this budget, but they will. It is just a matter of time, because these massive out-of-control deficits are not sustainable.

The one thing we need to remember is that the number one ask of the provinces was help with health care. We are dealing with COVID-19, and hospitals are overwhelmed. There are not enough nurses, doctors, health care aides and other support staff. We know the provinces wanted the federal government to step in and be a partner. What did it do? The Liberals turned their backs on the provinces and funding health care properly, and instead are now sticking out their hands to the provinces and asking them to be their partners on a national child care program. This is something that the Liberals have been promising for the last 20 years and have failed to deliver each and every time. The provinces cannot afford to be in a national child care plan while we are dealing with a national pandemic.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, we have heard many Conservatives today bemoaning what has happened with the working class. This is newfound language the Conservatives have found with the working class, yet we have not heard any critiques whatsoever of the Liberal government's $750 billion Bay Street bailout. We have not heard anything about companies like Imperial Oil, which took $120 million in subsidies and then paid out $300 million in dividends.

What does the member tell the farmers in his riding about all the big corporations that have been at the trough while small businesses and rural farmers in his constituency continue to suffer?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, the farmers in my riding want the government to get out of the way. They want to eliminate the red tape. They want to get away from all the enforcement of new regulations that do nothing to enhance productivity or to allow farmers to feed the world. We need to make sure processors are there to buy and process our products so we can export them around the world.

There is one thing in this budget I did not get the chance to talk about. I am the critic for national defence. There is new money in the budget, and I congratulate the government for finally realizing that we need to invest in our sovereignty and put more money into modernizing NORAD, we need to do our responsibility under NATO, and we need to deal with sexual misconduct and gender-based violence within the armed forces. The one thing I am worried about is that out of all of the funding it announced, over half of it is, as the budget says, “Funds Sourced From Existing Departmental Resources”.

Essentially, the government is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Those dollars have been transferred out of military infrastructure, which will hurt the overall competitiveness or capability of our armed forces in dealing with security threats in the future.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Madam Speaker, my colleague talked quite a bit about small businesses and the small business sector. Conservatives have supported more inclusive expanded programs during the entire pandemic, but one issue that I hear about quite a bit in Kelowna—Lake Country, and I wonder if the member hears this as well, is that businesses that opened in late 2019 or early 2020 are still ineligible for a lot of COVID relief programs. They are hit even harder because quite often they have personal and business debt intertwined.

How does this budget work to give hope to small businesses through an economic recovery plan that the member can see?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Kelowna—Lake Country for her comments, and this is the one thing we are very concerned about. A lot of our seasonal businesses, especially in my riding of Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, have a lot of people come up from the City of Winnipeg, from other places across the country and internationally, but they are not coming these days. People are taking staycations at home with all of these lockdowns and limitations.

However, there is little offered in this budget that provides long-term hope to those businesses, especially those that have not been able to access the programs that are out there. Maybe they are ma-and-pa-type operations that do not have the opportunity to use things like a wage subsidy program or an emergency business account, and we have to remember that the emergency business account is just another loan. There may be some relief for it down the road, but it just means inheriting more debt and that, of course, has to be paid back.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 11th, 2021 / 5:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

It being 5:56 p.m. the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

The House resumed from May 11 consideration of the motion that Bill C-30, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:20 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-30, which implements certain provisions of budget 2021.

As everyone knows, it is a mammoth and extremely dense bill that contains a wide range of measures. We unreservedly support some of these measures, which we would like to see implemented even if we vote against the budget.

This part of the bill seeks to extend COVID-19 assistance programs, which although not perfect are nevertheless essential, until September. These include the Canada emergency wage subsidy and the Canada emergency rent subsidy. Many businesses that have suffered badly over the past year rely on those programs. Considering how important predictability is in business, of course we are pleased that entrepreneurs will have a clear idea of the programs available to them over the coming months. However, the amounts allocated will decrease gradually throughout the extension period.

However, there is one little thing worth noting. The bill gives the Minister of Finance the power to extend the programs until November 30, 2021, through regulation, without having to go through the legislative process. I believe I am right in thinking and safe in saying that this measure is an insurance policy in case the House is dissolved for a fall election, which would prevent it from enacting a law that would extend the wage subsidy beyond September 27, 2021. I will let my colleagues read between the lines to determine when the government expects the House to resume.

We are particularly pleased that, instead of paying taxes in the year that they received a government assistance cheque and getting a credit in the year that they reimburse the amount, as is currently the case, under Bill C-30, taxpayers will not have to pay taxes on any government assistance that they reimbursed. Those who have just completed their 2020 income tax return could end up paying taxes on the amounts they received through the Canada emergency response benefit. However, even if the government asked them to pay back those amounts, under Bill C-30, any reimbursements made this year make the cheques received last year tax-free.

Another piece of good news is the creation of a hiring subsidy program, which will be in effect from June 6 to November 20, 2021. That program is offered to businesses restarting their activities and hiring or rehiring employees. I am also pleased that taxes will finally be imposed on Internet products and services and Airbnb rentals, which will put an end to the unfair competition that we have strongly criticized.

I would also note the new Canada-wide child care program, even though it is part of a general trend of interference and federal centralization. Fortunately, there is mention of a possible asymmetrical agreement with Quebec and the federal budget statement repeatedly touts the child care system. However, there needs to be assurances that this agreement will translate into full compensation with no strings attached for Quebec for its share of the total cost of the program. Since this federal government likes to interfere in matters that are not under its jurisdiction, I would like to note that family policy and related programs are exclusively under Quebec's jurisdiction.

Bill C-30 provides for a one-time payment of just over $130 million to the Government of Quebec to harmonize the Quebec parental insurance plan with the Employment Insurance Act. Since the eligibility criteria and benefit period for EI have been temporarily modified and increased, Quebec has the right to opt out with financial compensation with respect to the maternity and parental benefits program.

However, Bill C-30 also lays the foundation for a Canadian securities regulation regime, which the Bloc Québécois and Quebec strongly oppose. This bill provides for a significant increase to the budget of the Canadian Securities Regulation Regime Transition Office, so it is not a stretch to conclude that Ottawa wants to strip Quebec of its financial sector. I remind members that the office was created in 2009, and its purpose is to create a single pan-Canadian securities regulator in Toronto. Bill C-30 authorizes the government to make payments to the transition office in an aggregate amount not exceeding $119.5 million, or any greater amount that may be specified in an appropriation act.

Although the Supreme Court ruled on a number of occasions that securities were not under federal jurisdiction, Ottawa finally got the green light in 2018 to interfere in this jurisdiction provided that it co-operate with the provinces and not act unilaterally. History has taught us to be cautious in such situations.

This plan to create a national securities regulator in Toronto is bound to result in regulatory activities transitioning out of Quebec. I will note that the unanimity we have seen in opposition to this bill in Quebec is rather remarkable. All political parties in the Quebec National Assembly, business communities, the financial sector and labour-sponsored funds are against this bill. The list of those who have vehemently expressed their opposition to this initiative includes the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec, the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal, Finance Montréal, the International Financial Center, the Desjardins Group and Fonds de solidarité FTQ, as well as most Quebec businesses such as Air Transat, Transcontinental, Québecor, Metro, La Capitale and Molson.

This plan is just bad and must never see the light of day. Contrary to what members opposite are saying, this is more than just a dispute over jurisdictions or a new conflict between the federal government and the provinces. This is quite simply a battle between Bay Street and Quebec. It is an attack on our efforts to keep head offices in the province and preserve our businesses.

Keeping the sector's regulator in Quebec ensures that decision-makers are nearby, which in turn enables access to capital markets for businesses. A strong Quebec securities regulator is essential for the development and vitality of the financial sector. In Quebec, the financial sector accounts for 150,000 jobs and contributes $20 billion to the GDP. That is equivalent to 6.3%. Montreal is the 13th largest financial centre in the world.

A strong financial hub is vital to the functioning of our head offices and the preservation of our businesses. It is a well-known fact that businesses concentrate their strategic activities, in particular research and development, where their head offices are located. This new attack on Quebec's jurisdictions risks having us go the route of the branch plant economy, to the detriment of Ontario.

This potential exodus of head offices could have serious consequences on every level of our economy, since Quebec companies tend to favour Quebec suppliers, while foreign companies in Quebec rely more on globalized supply chains. Just imagine the impact that can have on our network of SMEs, particularly in the regions. As we have seen during the pandemic, globalized supply chains are fragile and make us very dependent on other countries. We will not stop fighting against this plan to centralize the financial sector in Toronto.

We will also keep calling out the government for ignoring the demands of the Quebec National Assembly and the provinces and refusing to increase health transfers from 22% to 35%. As we know, the government is ignoring the will of the House of Commons, since a Bloc Québécois motion calling on the government to substantially and permanently increase federal transfers to the provinces was adopted in December 2020.

The government could well have taken advantage of the fact that the deficit announced in budget 2021 was lower than expected, by $28 billion, which is exactly how much Quebec and the provinces are asking for. With massive spending on the horizon, it is clear that by refusing to increase transfers, the government is making a political choice, not a budgetary choice, to the detriment of everyone's health.

It was a long time coming, but Bill C-30 finally includes the increase to old age security that this government promised during the 2019 election campaign. However, the increase will amount to only $766 per year, or $63.80 per month, and will apply only to seniors aged 75 and over. The increase will not begin until 2022 and is insufficient for seniors and for the Bloc Québécois.

In closing, we will vote in favour of the bill, because we do not want to deprive seniors aged 75 and over of this cheque. We do not want to deprive businesses and workers of the assistance programs they are counting on, but we will continue to fight to ensure that all sectors of Quebec society receive their fair share in a fairer budget in the future.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Madam Speaker, the Consumer Price Index for last month was 3.4%, which is outside the historical targets of 0% to 2% and, in fact, outside the 3% transitory target.

In my hon. colleague's opinion, does the budget contribute to further inflation or will it decrease inflation, and are further higher inflation numbers, which I believe will happen, good for his constituents?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I must admit I did not detect a specific question. Generally, he asked me if the current spending will contribute to inflation or encourage consumption, in other words, if this is a stimulus budget. I gather that is the gist of his question.

Public spending is generally key to a sound economic recovery. Of course, we must not invest indiscriminately, but historically, in times of crisis and turmoil, we have relied on an ambitious public spending agenda. We do not like all the public expenditures laid out in the budget, but we are not opposed in principle to public spending.

We also know that most of these support programs will disappear in the near future as the crisis subsides, so we will not have to rack our brains about where to make cuts, because many of the programs will automatically come to an end.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, with the budget implementation bill, the government has recognized the true value of investing in Canadians throughout very difficult times. Ultimately, what we would like to see is a road to a stronger and healthier economy by having invested in Canadians from coast to coast to coast over the last number of months during the pandemic.

I wonder if my colleague could provide his thoughts on how important it was for the Government of Canada to work with other levels of government to ensure we could maximize the return of the economy in a better fashion.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Madam Speaker, I certainly cannot be against the idea of the federal government working with other levels of government, far from it.

The problem is that we are talking about a plethora of centralizing programs that are structural in nature. The government is laying the groundwork to majorly encroach on provincial jurisdictions, but its refusal to increase health transfers will soon make things quite frankly unworkable for Quebec and other provinces.

I do not call that working with other levels of government.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

I want to ask a more general question about Quebec's jurisdiction. Quebec is ahead of the rest of Canada. Thirteen years ago, we had the opportunity to pass a law to ban the use of carcinogenic pesticides across Canada.

The Bloc Québécois blocked this bill in a minority Parliament, saying that it intruded on provincial responsibilities. There are a number of issues like that where jurisdictions are shared.

I therefore want to ask my colleague this: Would it not be better to have bills that seek to improve people's health and protect the environment?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question, which she kind of answered herself.

I was not here 13 years ago, but as she pointed out, an intrusion is an intrusion, and any intrusion must be rejected unequivocally.

In many, many ways, Quebec's laws are extremely advanced, much more so than those in the rest of Canada. Quebec is a leader on environmental matters, although there is always room for improvement.

That is why all new programs and legislation must include the right to opt out. Since Quebec is already ahead on most of these issues, it must be able to get its fair share so it can use that money to make even more progress on other fronts instead of paying for something that is not as good as what it already has.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

Vaudreuil—Soulanges Québec

Liberal

Peter Schiefke LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have this opportunity to contribute to the debate on Bill C-30, budget implementation act, 2021, no. 1. The budget reflects the unprecedented times we are living in.

My constituents in Vaudreuil—Soulanges, all Canadians and billions of people around the world have had their lives turned upside down for more than a year by COVID-19. Many people have lost loved ones. Schools, day cares and businesses have had to close. Families have been affected by temporary and long-term layoffs.

The magnitude of this situation cannot be underestimated. This is the worst health and economic crisis that Canada and all of humanity have experienced in generations. Our Liberal government had to present a budget that reflected this reality, and budget 2021 does just that.

This is an important budget focused on three key goals: finishing the fight against COVID-19 and continuing to support families and businesses during the pandemic; investing in the economic recovery and in economic growth in the short and long terms; and, lastly, looking ahead by investing in building a cleaner, safer, stronger and more prosperous Canada for our children and grandchildren.

With respect to our investments to finish the fight against COVID-19, I will start by speaking about investments in vaccines, more specifically our domestic vaccine production capacity in the future.

COVID-19 highlighted the importance of rebuilding Canada's vaccine production capacity, which was lost over the past 40 years. Budget 2021 provides a total of $2.2 billion over seven years to re-establish a vibrant domestic life sciences sector. This amount includes a previously announced investment of $170 million for the expansion of a vaccine production facility in Montreal. These and upcoming investments will equip Canada to produce COVID-19 vaccines and other vaccines that Canadians may need to combat future biological threats.

As we continue to navigate through the highs and lows of this pandemic, many sectors of our economy are still closed or operating at reduced capacity due to provincial health measures. As a result, many of my constituents in Vaudreuil—Soulanges are either out of work or are facing a reduction in income.

To ensure that they continue to put food on the table and support themselves and their families, budget 2021 extends the COVID-19 economic response support measures for individuals by another 12 weeks to September 2021. This includes the Canada recovery benefit, which will reduce gradually over time; the Canada recovery caregiving benefit; the Canada recovery sickness benefit; and it allows for more flexible access to EI benefits for another year, into the fall of 2022. This ensures that those in my riding of Vaudreuil—Soulanges, who are still heavily impacted by this pandemic, including our artists, restaurant owners, tourism operators, those working in the aviation sector and many more, will have the support they need to see it through.

We have also extended benefits for small business owners. Budget 2021 ensures that the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which has helped more than 5.3 million Canadians, will be extended until September 25, 2021.

The Canada emergency rent subsidy, which has already helped more than 154,000 organizations, will be extended from June to September 25, 2021.

Canada emergency business account loans, which have helped more than 850,000 Canadian small businesses, are still repayable by December 31, 2022, but the application deadline has been extended to June 30, 2021.

To help businesses reopen, budget 2021 includes several new programs, such as the Canada recovery hiring program, which offsets a portion of the extra costs employers take on as they reopen.

The objective is to help employers that continue to experience declines in revenues relative to before the pandemic. The program will be available for employees from June 6 to November 20, 2021.

Budget 2021 also includes an expansion of a worker support program that I know will have positive impacts on the lives of hundreds of thousands of Canadians in the years ahead who may find themselves diagnosed with an illness that will require them to take time off work, and that is the extension of employment insurance sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 26 weeks. During my personal battle with cancer, I know how important it is during and after chemotherapy to focus on one's well-being, on one's mental health and on healing.

Budget 2021 proposes funding of $3 billion over five years to deliver on our promise in 2019 to extend these benefits by almost three months. This extension would provide approximately 169,000 Canadians every year with additional time and flexibility to recover and return to work.

The extension of the support programs for families, workers and business owners to September 2021 is vital to the health and safety of many families and businesses in Vaudreuil—Soulanges.

We promised all Canadians that we would be there for them during the pandemic, and that is what we are doing with budget 2021.

We also promised seniors that we would be there to help them. Since 2016, our government has worked hard to do just that. We have already increased support for 900,000 of the most vulnerable seniors across Canada, made historic investments in affordable housing, and invested billions of dollars in mental health care.

In budget 2021, we are continuing on that track by offering a one-time payment of $500 for seniors aged 75 and over in August 2021, as well as a 10% increase in old age security payments starting in July 2022 for seniors aged 75 and over.

We also invested over $3 billion to improve long-term care and $3.8 billion to build an additional 35,000 affordable housing units for Canadian seniors.

For young Canadians who are anxious about their future job prospects in the coming months and years, budget 2021 provides the support they need to build skills, get on-the-job training and start their careers. This includes $721 million to connect Canadian youth with employers that will provide them with over 100,000 new quality job opportunities and a historic $4 billion in a digital adoption program to help 160,000 businesses make the shift to e-commerce, which will create 28,000 new jobs for young Canadians.

It provides $708 million over five years to ensure that we have 85,000 work-integrated learning placements and $470 million to establish a new apprentice service that would help over 55,000 first-year apprentices in construction and manufacturing Red Seal trades.

Finally, it provides an additional $371 million in new funding for the Canada summer jobs program in 2022 and 2023 to support approximately 75,000 new placements in the summer of 2022 alone.

Further, to respond to the mental health impacts of this pandemic, as part of an overall investment of $1 billion in the mental health of Canadians, budget 2021 proposes to provide $100 million over three years to support innovative mental health programs for populations disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, including health care workers, front-line workers, youth, seniors, indigenous Canadians and racialized Black Canadians.

Finally, budget 2021 includes unprecedented investments in the protection and preservation of nature and action against climate change. To enable Canada to reach the ambitious goal of protecting 25% of our nature by 2025, budget 2021 invests $4 billion for small and large-scale conservation projects and $3.16 billion to plant two billion trees across Canada by 2030. To help Canada not only meet but exceed our Paris agreement targets, budget 2021 invests $8 billion in the net-zero accelerator supporting green technology and renewable energy and creating well-paying jobs in the process.

It also invests $1.5 billion to purchase 5,000 electric public transit and school buses, helping to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, provide cleaner air and reduce noise pollution in our communities. In addition, to help communities like mine in Vaudreuil—Soulanges that have already begun to experience the impacts of climate change with two record floods in just the last four years, budget 2021 will strengthen climate resiliency by allocating $640 million to the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund for small-scale projects between $1 million and $20 million in eligible infrastructure costs. For communities like mine, with smaller municipalities, this change is going to make all the difference.

With that, I strongly encourage every member of the House to support the measures proposed in budget 2021 and in Bill C-30. These measures will allow us to—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member's time has expired.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cloverdale—Langley City.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Madam Speaker, this past week, Restaurants Canada came to the Standing Committee on Finance and stated that half of restaurants face risk of closure if subsidies are scaled back too soon.

The vast majority of food services businesses have been operating at a loss or barely breaking even throughout the entire pandemic, with nearly half consistently losing money for more than a year. They have been counting on the rent and wage subsidies to be the bridge they need to stay alive until dining restrictions are lifted and they can truly start to recover without the help of emergency support. Why has this Liberal budget still not designed a targeted program for the vital restaurant sector?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Peter Schiefke Liberal Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC

Madam Speaker, in fact, all of the restaurant owners I have spoken to have been incredibly grateful for the wage subsidy and the rent subsidy that were put forward. They told me that without those support measures, they would no longer be around.

I am very glad to see in budget 2021 these programs are going to continue throughout the summer. This provides the opportunity for the Minister of Finance to re-evaluate in September whether they need to be extended for a longer period of time, until November. It delivers for restaurant owners and other small businesses in my community of Vaudreuil—Soulanges and all across the country.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for his speech.

I had to chuckle when he spoke about the two billion trees that his government promised to plant by 2030. Two years have gone by and, as far as I know, the government has yet to plant a single one of those trees.

First, I would like to ask my colleague if there are any studies on the species of trees his government intends to plant, because if it is going to plant two billion of them, it needs to plan ahead a little.

Second, I would like to know if my colleague agrees with promoting the forestry industry, which was the subject of an extremely detailed and interesting report tabled by the members for Jonquière and Lac-Saint-Jean. It might be more cost-effective and even better for the environment to read that report, rather than planting two billion trees over the next eight years.

Essentially, I would like my colleague to comment on his government's nebulous plan.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Peter Schiefke Liberal Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.

I completely agree that we need a multi-faceted plan to fight climate change. That is what we are implementing.

Our historic $3.16-billion plan includes planting two billion trees, which will help us meet and also exceed our Paris Agreement targets, while ensuring that we leave a healthier Canada for our children and a positive legacy for future generations.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:50 a.m.
See context

NDP

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Madam Speaker, budget 2021 does nothing for dental care. It does nothing in terms of going after offshore tax havens. The member talks about the climate emergency, but the budget does nothing to end fossil fuel subsidies. This is concerning, because who is going to pay for it? It is certainly not big oil or big corporations. It is people.

Why is the burden of this debt going to be placed on people rather than big corporations and big oil?

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:50 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Peter Schiefke Liberal Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC

Madam Speaker, there are a couple of points I would like to clarify. Firstly, we are still dedicated to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies by 2025 and we have already been able to remove eight fossil fuel subsidies. This budget delivers in so many ways with regard to climate change. In fact, it is the largest investment ever made by any government in history in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The plan that was released by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in December shows very clearly how, through these investments and by working with provinces and territories, we are not only going to meet but exceed our Paris agreement targets. It is something that makes me very proud for my children, my children's children and all future generations of Canadians.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 10:50 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Madam Speaker, over the course of the debate on Bill C-30, there have been many points of view shared. Many of my colleagues on this side of the House have justifiably raised concerns about the deficits and levels of debt the current government is accumulating, and the impact this debt will have on Canadians for generations to come. They have skilfully illustrated that, despite the Minister of Finance's description of her budget as a plan for jobs, growth and resilience, it falls dreadfully short of a real plan for economic growth that will create jobs for Canadians.

One of my colleagues has sounded the alarm about the impact of the government's inflation-inducing borrowing and spending plan and the real impacts this has on the daily lives of Canadians, whether they are trying to buy a home or pay for groceries. Of course, we cannot ignore the vast body of evidence confirming that the current government has proven itself very skilled at convincing Canadians of their grand promises of action on priorities like rural Internet, infrastructure spending and housing. The lack of meaningful results is, at worst, a betrayal of the Canadians who trusted this Prime Minister; or, at best, the vacuous panderings of an individual whose life experiences prepared him only for being famous.

While all of these issues are important and have yet to be addressed by the government, I intend to focus my comments particularly on what would appear to be the centrepiece of this budget for the Minister of Finance: a national child care program. There can be no doubt that access to affordable child care and early childhood education is a wise investment in our economy and can help ensure all Canadians are able to realize their full potential in the workforce. Personally, I believe a system designed to respect the choices of parents in the best child care options for them makes more sense than a massive government program, which, by the way, would cost $30 billion over the next five years, then roughly $9 billion annually thereafter. This proposal highlights yet another example of the federal government making a commitment in an area of provincial jurisdiction without the corresponding commitment of dollars needed to fund a program that most provinces simply cannot afford.

Here is a brief history, that I am sure all of us know. One of the primary reasons for Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick federating to form the Dominion of Canada in 1867 was the desire to fund the transcontinental rail link and to build a common market that would spur economic opportunities for the provinces and lessen the impact of any adverse economic policies of the United States. The new federal government was also designed to stabilize public credit. That was one of the first items of business in 1867 when the new Dominion of Canada assumed $72.1 million of the $88.6 million of existing provincial debt.

The British North America Act assigned the big expenses of settling, building and defending this new country to the federal government, and the provincial governments were responsible for, at the time, the less expensive services like education, hospitals and municipal institutions. Despite this original design, immediately after Confederation, the provinces had spending commitments higher than their revenue. This led to the creation of the dominion subsidy from the federal government, which was calculated at 80¢ per capita and, including other transfers in support of specific legislation, cost the federal treasury about $2.8 million or over 16% of total federal spending. This country was born into debt and the national government was established, in part, to manage that debt.

Now, fast-forward through those early nation-building years of World War I, the Great Depression, World War II, all eras where the federal government borrowed heavily to grow the economy, win a war, save the economy and win another war. Following the end of World War II, the economy expanded exponentially as did the level of government intervention in the daily lives of Canadians. New programs were introduced by the federal government, including unemployment insurance in 1940, the family allowance in 1945, old age security in 1952, the Canada pension plan in 1965 and the guaranteed income supplement in 1967. During this period, the dominion subsidy program evolved into the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act in 1957, which was due in part to the federal government's desire to promise nationwide health and social programs, all made possible because of a 50% cost-sharing commitment from the federal government.

By the 1970s, the federal government had established an outrageously complex cost-sharing system with the provinces to partner in the costs for expanded health services, education and income security programs. All of this and a program of equalization payments to poorer provinces was funded by debt, which was funded by an exponentially growing economy. Then, 1973 hit and an already-slowing economy and increasing inflation were compounded by a quadrupling of oil prices. Government debt grew faster than ever, without the corresponding economic growth to pay for it.

Interest rates skyrocketed, unemployment soared and Canada was in trouble. While tax reform in the eighties, the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement and significant deregulation of key sectors of the economy certainly helped spur economic growth, by the 1990s Canada was in a fiscal crisis with growing debt-servicing costs and an economy not growing fast enough to pay for it. Between 1995 and 1997, the Chrétien government was forced to cut spending to save Canada's finances. In that time period, the government cut direct program spending by almost 10%, but it cut provincial transfers by 22%.

While the fiscal imbalance in our Confederation existed from the very beginning, federal expansion and intervention in provincial jurisdictions exacerbated that imbalance. While the federal government failed to ever really fully meet those original commitments made to provinces, the debt crisis culminated in the 1990s with the federal government solving its debt problems by abandoning the provinces and also the municipalities. By 2007, with federal finances back under control, a new formula for provincial transfers was established that increased transfers, but not nearly enough to meet the demands on provincial services that the federal government helped create and agreed to pay half the cost of.

In the Parliamentary Budget Officer's most recent fiscal sustainability report, he noted, “subnational governments will face ever-increasing health care costs”. He also continued to say, “For the subnational government sector as a whole, current fiscal policy is not sustainable over the long term. We estimate that permanent tax increases or spending reductions amounting to 0.8 per cent of GDP...would be required to stabilize the consolidated subnational...net debt-to-GDP ratio at its current level of 25.7 per cent of GDP”.

In his report on budget 2021, the Parliamentary Budget Officer cautioned that the government's $100-billion stimulus spending could be miscalibrated, meaning that based on the current recovery it is not likely necessary, while he cautioned that the government's plan to continue borrowing could exhaust its fiscal flexibility in the medium to long term.

We have provincial governments, many of which are drowning in debt and a federal government borrowing and spending wastefully, all while advocating its responsibility to fully fund its share of provincial programs like health care, and now the federal government offers to add a new child care program to the provincial balance sheets with a promise to cover half the costs.

How could the premiers ever trust the government to live up to this latest promise, when the broken promises of the past are threatening the financial future of almost every province in the country? Clearly, German philosopher Georg Hegel was correct when he wrote, “What experience and history teaches us is that people and governments have never learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it.”

This budget is a buffet of spending, paid for with massive debts and designed to perpetuate the government's promises of being all things to all people. The government is not only ignoring the financial struggles of the provinces, struggles created in part by federal interference; budget 2021 seeks to push the provinces even further into debt.

We need a real plan that manages public debt and invests strategically to stimulate real economic growth that will create jobs. We need a plan that will restore fiscal balance to our Confederation. Restoring that balance will better prepare the federal treasury to manage the impending fiscal problems, grow our economy and build a stronger and more prosperous Canada.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I find it fascinating that the Conservatives are willing to hedge their bets on inflation, when, although it is indeed something we have to be concerned about and pay attention to, it is also something that economists seem to be split on. Indeed, the most recent Harper appointee to the Bank of Canada has indicated that the moves that have been made by this government are important and should be able to be done in a responsible way. If only Conservatives gave that kind of attention to and believed 97% of scientists when they talk about climate change, but I digress.

I wonder if the member could comment as to how he is so certain that inflation is going to be a massive issue, given that the economists right now seem to be split on the issue, and that there is some evidence to suggest that we might have a temporary blip, but it will not necessarily last that long.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Madam Speaker, it seems as though the member for Kingston and the Islands is constantly digressing.

I would note that inflation is already rising. It is a threat that we have been warned about, and the government needs to think about it cautiously. Instead, we have people like the member for Kingston and the Islands standing and saying, “Just don't worry. Everybody be happy.” I do not think that is really a wise or strategic plan at all.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, on a point of order. The member said that I said, “Don't worry. Be happy.” I never said that.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1Government Orders

May 25th, 2021 / 11 a.m.
See context

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

That is a point of debate at this point. The hon. member can raise it under questions and comments, if he wishes.

Questions and comments.

The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.