This bill is from the 44th Parliament, 1st session, which ended in January 2025.
Jean-Yves Duclos Liberal
This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.
Part 1 enacts the Dental Benefit Act , which provides for the establishment of an application-based interim dental benefit. The benefit provides interim direct financial support for parents for dental care services received by their children under 12 years of age in the period starting in October 2022 and ending in June 2024.
Part 2 enacts the Rental Housing Benefit Act , which provides for the establishment of a one-time rental housing benefit for eligible persons who have paid rent in 2022 for their principal residence and who apply for the benefit.
Finally, Part 3 makes related amendments to the Income Tax Act , the Excise Tax Act and the Excise Act, 2001 .
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-31s:
This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Bill C-31 aims to alleviate the cost of living for eligible Canadians through two main measures: a tax-free dental benefit of up to $650 per year for children under 12 in low- to middle-income families without private dental insurance and a one-time $500 payment to low-income renters who spend a significant portion of their income on rent. The dental benefit is intended as an interim measure while a comprehensive national dental care program is developed, and the rental benefit aims to provide immediate relief to struggling renters. The bill proposes to use the Canada Revenue Agency to administer the benefits.
Liberal
Conservative
NDP
Bloc
Green
Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 2Government Orders
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Madam Speaker, my colleague delivered yet another of the very well-organized speeches we have come to expect from him, so it is clear to me that the Conservatives oppose Bill C‑31. I get it; the bill is very poorly written. However, given that they would rather the federal government essentially cease to exist, I assume they are also against giving money to Quebec so it can improve its own system.
That being the case, is the Conservative Party now against transfers, including upping provincial health transfers to 35%? Are they now against what Quebec and all the provinces want?
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Mirabel is quite right that the premiers have called on the federal government to increase health transfers to the provinces. The Prime Minister has refused to even sit down with the premiers and has come up with this bill instead of addressing the needs of the provinces.
We do have deficiencies in our health care system that need to be addressed. Those deficiencies were exposed during COVID. What is required is federal leadership working collaboratively with the provinces, and that starts with sitting down with the premiers, something the Prime Minister has failed to do.
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Madam Speaker, I want to be very clear on this point. The CPP and EI are not taxes. These are social programs. They are part of a social safety net that ultimately helps workers.
The opposition party is consistently saying that these are taxes, but these are deductions that help people. The Conservatives are saying that they want to save workers, on average, about $11 a month by cutting their pensions and EI. What they are not saying to people is that this would save corporations billions. They are trying to sell them on something that is not true.
Ultimately we are trying, through the government and our work with it, to create long-lasting equity-driven social programs, like dental care.
There is a difference, but the Conservatives are calling for tax cuts that would benefit a very small group of people. What we are seeing in the U.K. is that this clearly is not working. This is clearly—
Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 2Government Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes
I have to give the hon. member time to answer.
The hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton.
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Madam Speaker, the member for London—Fanshawe has said that these payroll tax hikes are not tax hikes, yet her leader, the member for Papineau, has said that they are. The Government of Canada website states that they are.
This is the reality for everyday Canadians. These payroll tax hikes will mean that the average person will take less of his or her paycheque home. In the new year, people will be taking even less home when, on top of the payroll tax hikes, the government, with the backing of the member for London—Fanshawe and the NDP, is going to triple the carbon tax.
The policy of the NDP is one of taking more money out of the pockets of Canadians and making life less affordable. Our position is to put more money back in the hands of Canadians by cutting taxes, which is a very different approach, indeed.
Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON
Madam Speaker, I know the member for St. Albert—Edmonton has been interested in finding common ground in the chamber. Just last week, he proposed and sponsored a bill from the Senate that was passed here unanimously.
In this spirit, when he speaks about the cost of housing, we both agree that much more needs to be done to address increased unaffordability. One issue I hope he could comment on is the rules of the market that currently favour corporate investors, such as real estate investment trusts.
I have two questions. Does the member agree that homes should be for people to live in and not commodities for investors to trade? Is he not similarly concerned that more needs to be done to tilt the market back toward regular Canadians, young people, for example, who are looking to afford rental housing in communities across the country?
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Madam Speaker, I appreciate working collaboratively with the member for Kitchener Centre on some issues of common ground.
The root of the problem of which the member speaks goes back to the half a trillion dollars that the government pumped out over the past two years, money that went into the mortgage and finance systems, which was borrowed out to investors who bought up properties and bid up prices. As a consequence, housing prices have gone up 52% because of that policy.
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
Madam Speaker, we just heard a comment from the NDP that suggested that taxpayers just like those big, bad corporations were the bad guys. I would like the member to reflect on this. In essence, every tax dollar comes out of the pockets of taxpayers.
Could he reflect on where the money comes from for these payroll taxes?
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Madam Speaker, it comes from the earnings of Canadians, who will be taking home less in January, again, thanks to the Liberal and NDP planned payroll tax hikes and the tripling of the carbon tax. They could not have come up with a worse policy at a time of this cost-of-living crisis in the face of 40-year high inflation. By the way, as the—
Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 2Government Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes
We have time for one last question.
The hon. parliamentary secretary to the leader of the government in the House.
Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 2Government Orders
October 3rd, 2022 / 12:30 p.m.
Kingston and the Islands Ontario
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)
Madam Speaker, I listened with interest when the member talked about the price on pollution, the carbon tax, as though it was brand new. The reality is that party has run on having a price on pollution in three elections. In fact, the member, under the Conservative banner, also ran in favour of a price on pollution in the last election in 2021.
Could he explain to the House why he is so critical of a plan that he ran on just one year ago?
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary is simply wrong. I have always opposed the carbon tax. The Conservative Party has always opposed a carbon tax, and we will scrap it if elected.
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Madam Speaker, I am sharing my time with my good colleague, the member for Edmonton Strathcona.
What are we talking about here this morning in the House of Commons? We are debating Bill C-31. It is a bill that wants to see Canadians get the support they need. What are those supports? We are talking about ensuring that low-income families and children get access to dental care. We are talking about providing a housing benefit for low-income individuals and families, although a one-time housing benefit. Nonetheless, it is some support that is desperately needed for people in our communities.
Where are we? We just heard from the Conservatives that they are opposed to providing low-income families and their children access to dental care. They say we cannot afford it, yet they are completely fine seeing the big oil and gas industry continue to get subsidies from the government. Last year alone, the oil and gas sector made over $147 billion in profits, and the Conservatives want to see that they continue to get subsidies from the government. Meanwhile, they are saying no to children under 12 from families that cannot afford to get dental care.
We have to give our heads a shake and ask what is wrong with this picture. The Conservatives just elected a new leader, and every day we hear in this House each one of the Conservatives get up and make a statement to talk about how they stand on the side of the people and how they have people's backs. Whose backs do they have? It would be those of the wealthy CEOs and big corporations that are making humongous windfall profits—
Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 2Government Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes
We have a point of order from the hon. member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies.