This bill was last introduced in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session, which ended in August 2021.
Chrystia Freeland Liberal
This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.
This is from the published bill.
This enactment amends the Income Tax Act to revise the eligibility criteria, as well as the level of subsidization, under the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) as part of the response to the coronavirus disease 2019. It also extends the CEWS to June 30, 2021. The enactment further amends the Income Tax Act to introduce the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy (CERS) in order to support those hardest hit by the coronavirus disease 2019. This subsidy provides relief in respect of rent and interest on debt obligations incurred to acquire real property used by businesses, charities and not-for-profit organizations in the course of their businesses or other activities. The rent subsidy is effective as of September 27, 2020.
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.
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Chair, we have a program, as I said last week, moving into longer-term debt instruments. This is to lock in current rates. That is exactly what we are doing right now.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Chair, it is exactly the opposite of what the minister is doing. I am surprised that she did not visit the Bank of Canada website where she could have found out that less than 10% of the new debt her government has issued since March is long term. The rest is short term. In fact, it is of shorter duration than our pre-existing debt. Why did the minister mislead an audience last week when she claimed she was locking in debt for the long run while Bank of Canada data shows precisely the opposite?
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Chair, our government and the Bank of Canada's debt-management program is second to none in the world. We are making a careful and thoughtful effort to lock in longer-term maturities and move to longer-term instruments. That is what we are doing. Instruments are maturing all the time and are being moved into longer-maturity, lower-interest-rate debt.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Chair, it is second to none in that it is the most expensive. Let us find out how expensive it is.
How much would it cost the government if there were a one-percentage-point increase in the effective rate of interest on our debt?
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Chair, I need to challenge the first comment the member opposite made. Canada's debt is not the most expensive.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Chair, the question was how much would a one-percentage-point increase cost the government in extra interest costs on the national debt? How much? I just want a number.
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Chair, the member's assertion was that Canada's debt is the most expensive and that—
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Chair, Canada is one of two G7 countries with a AAA credit rating. We borrow—
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Chair, how much would it cost the government if interest rates rose by 1% across our national debt? How much?
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Chair, the member opposite is building an assumption into his questions that I strongly disagree with.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Chair, the minister cannot disagree with numbers. I am asking how much a 1% interest-rate increase would cost the government.
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Mr. Chair, actually one can absolutely disagree with implicit assertions.
