Bill C-47

Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023

Part 1 implements certain measures in respect of the Income Tax Act and the Income Tax Regulations by
(a) enabling the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to use electronic certification of tax and information returns and requiring taxpayers to file electronically in certain circumstances;
(b) doubling the maximum deduction for tradespeople’s tools from $500 to $1,000;
(c) providing that any gain on the disposition of a right to acquire Canadian housing property within a one-year period of its acquisition is treated as business income;
(d) excluding from a taxpayer’s income certain benefits for Canadian Forces members, veterans and their spouses or common-law partners;
(e) exempting from taxation any income earned by the Band Class Settlement Trust in accordance with section 24.05 of the Settlement Agreement entered into on January 18, 2023 relating to the attendance of day scholars at residential schools;
(f) providing an additional payment of the Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax (GST/HST) credit equal to double the amount of the regular January 2023 payment;
(g) providing for automatic, quarterly advance payments of the Canada Workers Benefit;
(h) allowing divorced and separated spouses to open joint Registered Educational Savings Plans and increasing educational assistance amounts under those plans;
(i) extending, by ‚three years, the ability of a qualifying family member to be the plan holder of an individual’s Registered Disability Savings Plan and expanding the definition of “qualifying family member” to include a sister or a brother of the individual;
(j) allowing defined contribution registered pension plans to correct contribution errors and requiring that the contributions or refunds are reported to the CRA for the purpose of correcting the RRSP deduction limit;
(k) modifying reporting requirements in respect of reportable transactions, introducing reporting requirements for notifiable transactions and providing reporting requirements with respect to uncertain tax treatments, as well as extending the reassessment periods applicable to those transactions and creating or modifying penalties for non-compliance with those requirements;
(l) allowing the CRA to share taxpayer information for the purposes of the Canadian Dental Care Plan;
(m) expanding the definition of “dividend rental arrangement” to include “specified hedging transactions” carried out in whole or in part by registered securities dealers;
(n) implementing the Model Reporting Rules for Digital Platforms developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development;
(o) requiring annual reporting by financial institutions of the fair market value of registered retirement savings plans and registered retirement income funds;
(p) expanding the permissible borrowing by defined benefit pension plans; and
(q) implementing a number of technical amendments to correct mistakes or inconsistencies and to better align the law with its intended policy objectives.
It also makes related and consequential amendments to the Excise Tax Act , the Tax Rebate Discounting Act , the Air Travellers Security Charge Act , the Excise Act, 2001 , Part 1 of the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act and the Electronic Filing and Provision of Information (GST/HST) Regulations .
Part 2 implements certain measures in respect of the Excise Tax Act and a related text by
(a) clarifying that the international transportation of money benefits from Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax (GST/HST) relief and other special rules in the same manner as a service of internationally transporting other kinds of freight;
(b) permitting a pension entity, in specific circumstances, to claim the pension entity rebate or an input tax credit, or to make the pension entity rebate election, after the end of the two-year limitation period;
(c) specifying that cryptoasset mining is generally not considered a supply for GST/HST purposes; and
(d) ensuring that payment card clearing services are excluded from the definition “financial service” under the GST/HST legislation.
Part 3 amends the Excise Act , the Excise Act, 2001 and the Air Travellers Security Charge Act in order to implement two measures.
Division 1 of Part 3 amends the Excise Act and the Excise Act, 2001 in order to temporarily cap the inflation adjustment for excise duties on beer, spirits and wine at two per cent, for one year only, as of April 1, 2023.
Division 2 of Part 3 amends the Air Travellers Security Charge Act to increase the air travellers security charge that is applicable to air travel that includes a chargeable emplanement after April 2024 and for which any payment is made after April 2024.
Part 4 enacts and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 4 amends the Bank Act to strengthen the regime for dealing with complaints against banks and authorized foreign banks by, among other things, providing for the designation of a not-for-profit body corporate to be the sole external complaints body. It also makes consequential amendments to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act and related amendments to the Financial Consumer Protection Framework Regulations .
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to, among other things, provide for variable life benefits under a defined contribution provision of a pension plan and amends the Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act to, among other things, provide for variable life payments under pooled registered pension plans. It also makes a consequential amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act .
Division 3 of Part 4 contains measures that are related to money laundering and to digital assets and other measures.
Subdivision A of Division 3 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to, among other things,
(a) require persons or entities referred to in section 5 of that Act to report to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada information that is related to a disclosure made under the Special Economic Measures Act or the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) ;
(b) strengthen the registration framework for persons or entities referred in paragraphs 5(h) and (h.1) of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act , which are often referred to as money services businesses;
(c) create two new offences relating to persons or entities who engage in activities for which they are not registered under that Act and the structuring of financial transactions undertaken to avoid reporting obligations under that Act, as well as a new offence relating to reprisals by employers against employees who fulfill obligations under that Act;
(d) facilitate the sharing, between the Minister of Finance, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions and the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada, of information that relates to their respective mandates; and
(e) authorize the Minister of Finance to issue directives to persons and entities referred in section 5 of that Act in respect of risks relating to the financing of threats to the security of Canada.
Subdivision A also amends the Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1 in relation to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act .
Subdivision B of Division 3 amends the Criminal Code to provide for a new warrant authorizing a peace officer or other person named in the warrant to search for and seize digital assets, including virtual currency, as well as to expand the list of offences on the basis of which an examination of information obtained by the Minister of National Revenue under various tax statutes may be authorized. The subdivision also makes related amendments to other Acts.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Customs Tariff to extend the expiry date of the General Preferential Tariff and Least Developed Country Tariff to December 31, 2034 and to create a new General Preferential Tariff Plus tariff treatment that will expire on the same date. The Division also aligns direct shipment requirements for tariff treatments under that Act with those that apply to free trade agreements.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Customs Tariff to remove Belarus and Russia from the List of Countries entitled to Most-Favoured-Nation tariff treatment.
Division 6 of Part 4 allows the Bank of Canada to apply, despite sections 27 and 27.1 of the Bank of Canada Act , any of its ascertained surplus to its retained earnings until its retained earnings are equal to zero or the ascertained surplus applied to its retained earnings is equal to the losses it incurred from the purchase of securities as part of the Government of Canada Bond Purchase Program.
Division 7 of Part 4 enacts the Canada Innovation Corporation Act . That Act continues the Canada Innovation Corporation, which was established under another Act, as a parent Crown corporation, sets out the Corporation’s purpose to maximize business investment in research and development across all sectors of the economy and in all regions of Canada to promote innovation-driven economic growth and includes transitional provisions. The Division also makes consequential and related amendments to other Acts.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to authorize additional payments to the provinces and territories.
Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to renew the authority to make Equalization and Territorial Formula Financing payments for another five-year period beginning on April 1, 2024 and makes a technical change to improve the accuracy of the programs. It also makes a technical change to the calculation of fiscal stabilization payments. Finally, it provides for the publication of the details of all amounts authorized to be paid under that Act.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Special Economic Measures Act , the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act and the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) to strengthen Canada’s ability to take economic measures against certain persons.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the Privileges and Immunities (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) Act to, among other things, enable the Paris Protocol to be implemented in Canada.
Division 12 of Part 4 amends the Service Fees Act to, among other things, clarify the definition “fee”, exempt certain fees from the application of that Act, make certain exceptions in that Act applicable only with the approval of the President of the Treasury Board, make certain changes to the annual adjustment provisions and provide authority for the President of the Treasury Board to amend the regulations made under section 22 of that Act by taking into account the factors established by regulations.
It also amends section 25.1 of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act to provide for the application of sections 16 to 18 of the Service Fees Act to low-materiality fees, within the meaning of the Service Fees Act , that are fixed under section 24 or 25 of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act .
Division 13 of Part 4 amends the Canada Pension Plan to allow the Minister of National Revenue to make available information to the Minister of Employment and Social Development that is necessary for the purpose of policy analysis, research or evaluation related to the administration of that Act.
Division 14 of Part 4 amends the Department of Employment and Social Development Act to grant the Minister of Employment and Social Development the authority to collect and use Social Insurance Numbers for the purposes of administering or enforcing any Act, program or activity in respect of which the administration or enforcement is the responsibility of the Minister.
Division 15 of Part 4 amends the Canada Labour Code in respect of leave related to the death or disappearance of a child to, among other things, increase the maximum length of that leave from 104 weeks to 156 weeks and to repeal paragraph 206.5(4)(b) of that Act.
Division 16 of Part 4 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to provide that a claim for refugee protection made by a person inside Canada must be made in person and, with regard to a claim made by the person other than at a port of entry, that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration may specify the documents and information to be provided and the form and manner in which they are to be provided.
Division 17 of Part 4 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to clarify that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration may give instructions in respect of an application to sponsor a person who applies for a visa as a Convention refugee, within the meaning of that Act, or as a person in similar circumstances.
Division 18 of Part 4 amends the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants Act to, among other things,
(a) provide that the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants may seek an order authorizing it to administer the property of any licensee of the College who is not able to perform their activities as an immigration and citizenship consultant;
(b) extend immunity against proceedings for damages to directors, employees and agents and mandataries of the College, among others;
(c) authorize the College to enter into information-sharing agreements or arrangements with any entity, including federal or provincial government institutions; and
(d) expand the areas in respect of which the Governor in Council may authorize the College to make by-laws.
The Division also makes related amendments to the Citizenship Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to clarify that any person who is the subject of a notice of violation issued under either of those Acts has the right to request a review of the notice or the administrative monetary penalty set out in the notice.
Division 19 of Part 4 amends the Citizenship Act to, among other things,
(a) grant the Minister responsible for the administration and enforcement of that Act the power to collect biometric information from persons who make an application under that Act — and to use, verify, retain and disclose that information — in accordance with the regulations;
(b) authorize that Minister to administer and enforce that Act using electronic means, including by using an automated system; and
(c) grant that Minister the power to make regulations requiring persons who make an application or who provide documents, information or evidence under that Act to do so using electronic means.
Division 20 of Part 4 amends the Yukon Act to authorize the Minister of Northern Affairs to take any measures on certain public real property that the Minister considers necessary to prevent, counteract, mitigate or remedy any adverse effect on persons, property or the environment.
Subdivision A of Division 21 of Part 4 amends the Marine Liability Act to, among other things,
(a) increase the maximum liability for certain claims involving a ship of less than 300 gross tonnage;
(b) establish the maximum liability for claims involving air cushion vehicles;
(c) remove all references to the Hamburg Rules;
(d) extend the application of the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001 to non-seagoing vessels;
(e) provide for public notice requirements relating to the constitution of limitation funds under that Act;
(f) clarify that the owner of a ship is liable for economic loss related to fishing, hunting, trapping or harvesting suffered by an Indigenous group, community or people or suffered by a member of such a group, community or people; and
(g) expand the compensation regime of the Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund to include certain future losses.
Subdivision B of Division 21 amends the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 to, among other things,
(a) expand the application of Part 1 of that Act in relation to certain pleasure craft;
(b) expand the exemption powers of the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans;
(c) allow the owner of a Canadian vessel to enter into an arrangement with a qualified person under which that person is the authorized representative of the vessel;
(d) give the Marine Technical Review Board jurisdiction to make decisions on applications for exemptions from interim orders;
(e) authorize the Governor in Council to incorporate by reference in certain regulations material that the Minister of Transport produces;
(f) broaden the Governor in Council’s power respecting fees, charges, costs or expenses to be paid in relation to the administration and enforcement of matters under that Act for which the Minister of Transport is responsible;
(g) increase the maximum amount of fines for certain offences;
(h) provide authority, in certain circumstances, for the Chief Registrar to refuse to issue a certificate of registry and for the Minister of Transport to refuse to issue a pleasure craft licence;
(i) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting emergency services;
(j) authorize the Minister of Transport to, among other things,
(i) direct a master or crew member to cease operations,
(ii) authorize the Deputy Minister of Transport to make interim orders in response to risks to marine safety or to the marine environment, and
(iii) direct a port authority or a person in charge of a port authority or place to authorize vessels to proceed to a place selected by the Minister; and
(k) permit designating as violations the contravention of certain provisions of Parts 5 and 10 of that Act and the regulations made under those Parts.
The Subdivision also makes a related amendment to the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act .
Subdivision C of Division 21 amends the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act to, among other things, establish the Vessel Remediation Fund in the accounts of Canada and provide the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans with certain powers in relation to the detention of vessels.
Division 22 of Part 4 amends the Canada Transportation Act to, among other things,
(a) allow the Governor in Council to require air carriers to publish information respecting their performance on their Internet site;
(b) permit the sharing of information to ensure the proper functioning of the national transportation system or to increase its efficiency, while ensuring the confidentiality of that information;
(c) allow the Minister of Transport to require certain persons to provide certain information to the Minister if the Minister is of the opinion that there exists an unusual and significant disruption to the effective continued operation of the national transportation system;
(d) establish a new zone in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, in which any interswitching that occurs is subject to the rate determined by the Canadian Transportation Agency, for a period of 18 months; and
(e) broaden the scope of the administrative monetary penalties scheme.
Division 23 of Part 4 amends the Canada Transportation Act to, among other things,
(a) broaden the authority of the Canadian Transportation Agency to set fees and charges to recover its costs;
(b) replace the current process for resolving air travel complaints with a more streamlined process designed to result in more timely decisions;
(c) impose a greater burden of proof on air carriers where it is presumed that compensation is payable to a complainant unless the air carrier proves the contrary;
(d) require air carriers to establish an internal process for dealing with air travel claims;
(e) modify the Agency’s regulation-making powers with respect to air carriers’ obligations towards passengers; and
(f) enhance the Agency’s enforcement powers with respect to the air transportation sector.
Division 24 of Part 4 amends the Customs Act to, among other things,
(a) allow a person arriving in Canada to present themselves to the Canada Border Services Agency by a means of telecommunication, if that manner of presenting is made available at the customs office at which they are presenting themselves; and
(b) subject to the regulations, require that the operator of a commercial aircraft arriving in Canada ensure that baggage on board the aircraft is transported without delay to the nearest international baggage area.
The Division also makes a related amendment to the Quarantine Act .
Division 25 of Part 4 amends the National Research Council Act to, among other things, provide that the National Research Council of Canada may procure goods and services, including goods and services relating to construction and to research-related digital and information technology. It also establishes a new Procurement Oversight Board.
Division 26 of Part 4 amends the Patent Act to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Commissioner of Patents to grant an additional term for a patent if certain conditions are met;
(b) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting the number of days that is to be subtracted in determining the duration of an additional term; and
(c) authorize the Commissioner of Patents and the Federal Court to shorten the duration of an additional term if the duration as previously determined is longer than is authorized.
Division 27 of Part 4 amends the Food and Drugs Act to extend measures regarding therapeutic products to natural health products in order to, among other things,
(a) strengthen the safety oversight of natural health products throughout their life cycle; and
(b) promote greater confidence in the oversight of natural health products by increasing transparency.
Division 28 of Part 4 amends the Food and Drugs Act to, among other things, prohibit
(a) the sale of a cosmetic unless its safety can be established without relying on data derived from a test conducted on an animal that could cause pain, suffering or injury, whether physical or mental, to the animal, subject to certain exceptions;
(b) the conduct of a test on an animal that could cause pain, suffering or injury, whether physical or mental, to the animal if the purpose of the test is to meet a legislative requirement that relates to cosmetics; and
(c) deceptive or misleading claims, on the label of or in an advertisement for a cosmetic, with respect to testing on animals.
Division 29 of Part 4 enacts the Dental Care Measures Act .
Division 30 of Part 4 amends subsection 41(1) of the Canada Post Corporation Act , in response to the decision in R. v. Gorman , to limit the Canada Post Corporation’s authority to open mail other than letters.
Division 31 of Part 4 expresses the assent of the Parliament of Canada to the issuing by His Majesty of a Royal Proclamation under the Great Seal of Canada establishing for Canada the applicable Royal Style and Titles.
Division 32 of Part 4 amends the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act to provide that the Public Sector Pension Investment Board may incorporate a subsidiary for the purpose of providing investment management services to the Canada Growth Fund Inc. It also amends the Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2022 to increase the amount that may be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund on the requisition of the Minister of Finance for the acquisition of shares of the Canada Growth Fund Inc. and to provide that the Canada Growth Fund Inc. is not an agent of His Majesty in right of Canada.
Division 33 of Part 4 amends the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Act , the Trust and Loan Companies Act , the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act to, among other things,
(a) expand the mandate of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions to include the supervision of federal financial institutions in order to determine whether they have adequate policies and procedures to protect themselves against threats to their integrity or security; and
(b) expand the Superintendent of Financial Institutions’ powers to issue directions to, and to take control of, a federal financial institution in certain circumstances.
It also makes a consequential amendment to the Winding-up and Restructuring Act .
Division 34 of Part 4 amends the Criminal Code to, among other things, lower the criminal rate of interest calculated in respect of an agreement or arrangement and to express that rate as an annual percentage rate. It also authorizes the Governor in Council, by regulation, to fix a limit on the total cost of borrowing under a payday loan agreement. Finally, it provides for transitional provisions.
Division 35 of Part 4 amends the Employment Insurance Act to extend, until October 26, 2024, the increase in the maximum number of weeks for which benefits may be paid in a benefit period to certain seasonal workers.
Division 36 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 to, among other things,
(a) establish an account in the accounts of Canada to be called the Environmental Economic Instruments Fund, for the purpose of administering amounts received as contributions to certain funding programs under the responsibility of the Minister of the Environment; and
(b) replace references to “tradeable units” with references to “compliance units”.
It also makes consequential amendments to the Canada Emission Reduction Incentives Agency Act .
Division 37 of Part 4 amends the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act to clarify that the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation may administer any contract related to deposit insurance entered into by the Minister of Finance and to allow the Minister to increase the deposit insurance coverage limit until April 30, 2024.
Division 38 of Part 4 amends the Department of Employment and Social Development Act to, among other things,
(a) establish the Employment Insurance Board of Appeal to hear appeals of decisions made under the Employment Insurance Act instead of the Employment Insurance Section of the General Division of the Social Security Tribunal; and
(b) eliminate the requirement for leave to appeal decisions relating to the Employment Insurance Act to the Appeal Division of the Tribunal.
It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Division 39 of Part 4 amends the Canada Elections Act to provide for a national, uniform, exclusive and complete regime applicable to registered parties and eligible parties respecting their collection, use, disclosure, retention and disposal of personal information.

Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to join my friend from Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan virtually.

We are debating the budget tonight. I do not want to be too finicky about it. It is really weird, of course, that we have already voted on the budget. Like him, I voted against the budget. I could not support this budget after reading the 429 pages of Bill C-47.

I do not blame him as everyone is doing this. They are treating this debate as if it is about the budget, but the budget implementation act does not do anything about carbon pricing. It does not do anything about fossil fuel subsidies. Those were in the budget.

One thing I found in Bill C-47 that I really want to vote for is taking Russia and Belarus off the most favoured nation tariff treatment. I would have thought we would have done that a year ago, but I wonder how my hon. colleague feels about this. If he votes against Bill C-47, he will be voting against taking Russia off the most favoured nation list for our trade relations. It is peculiar, but I just wonder what his thoughts are on that.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that my colleague is not voting in favour of this budget either. Obviously, as I stated, this is a challenge that we sometimes have to face. We have to face difficult decisions.

One of the things that I have always thought about leadership is that there are tough decisions to be made. Normally the first thing is to take ownership, but I have not seen that with the government. Second is to make tough decisions, not bad decisions. Third is to remember that this is about serving others, not oneself. Four is to leave a legacy and not leave a mess behind.

This is a difficult decision but I will not be supporting this budget.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and make my own contribution to the debate on Bill C-47 tonight.

Elsewhere, I have spoken more at length about some of the things I think are commendable in the budget, including another doubling of the GST rebate, which is an important way to help Canadians who are struggling the most with the cost of inflation without returning more money to the pockets of Canadians for whom extra spending might be inflationary. A lot of private sector economists have recognized the virtue of this approach the NDP pioneered and has managed to extend in the budget here.

I have talked about the importance of dental care and the good it will do for millions of Canadians to be able to finally access dental care when they have not had that privilege before. It is something that should not be a privilege, but should be a right for every Canadian wherever they are in the country.

I have talked also about an important step, not a step that meets the need in any way for indigenous people, who are struggling, like other Canadians, with the housing crisis, but in an even more acute way with more challenges for how to deliver housing properly. Over $4 billion was invested in the last 12 months to an indigenous-led strategy where indigenous people themselves will be making decisions about how better to house their people in urban, rural and northern areas.

There are some important labour conditions on federal funding for the new energy economy, ensuring that public dollars that are invested in that new energy economy do not just go to large corporations and get siphoned out of the country, but actually go to Canadian workers, by requiring those companies to pay prevailing wages, not just the hourly wage but the wage package, which includes benefits and pension amounts, to their workers in order to qualify for that federal funding. There will be two seats for labour on the board of the growth fund that the Liberal government is establishing to ensure that workers and their interests are represented in the investment decisions of that fund.

Those are just some of the things the NDP has pushed for in the budget, which we think are going to make a positive difference in the lives of Canadians.

I have also talked about many of the things that are not in the budget that ought to have been, including urgent reform to the employment insurance system, which the Liberal government has promised now for close to eight years and has not done. In the meantime, it has actually revolutionized the EI system and completely changed it, and then it came back full circle to the EI system that the Harper government left in 2015. We have made no progress, despite years of promises and a demonstration that the government can do it.

The Liberals did do it. They had a minimum benefit. They had one universal qualifying threshold with low hours. They had a higher income replacement rate for many people on the program. They had a lot of the things EI needs in order to be a successful program that is there for Canadians when they most need it, which incidentally is in a period of recession, which the budget says is coming.

When will the employment insurance reform come? The Liberals know where the account is, because they took $25 billion of CERB debt that does not belong there and plunked it right in there, ensuring the premiums for workers and employers will go up consistently for the next seven years, trying to pay down a $25-billion debt that does not belong there in the first place, so it is certainly not because they do not know about EI or they do not know where to find the account.

Up to now, over $60 billion has been taken out of the EI operating account by successive Liberal and Conservative governments. As far as I am concerned, adding $25 billion of debt is another expenditure that does not belong on the EI account, and we are now in the territory of about $85 billion the Liberal and Conservative governments have taken from EI ratepayers they never had any right to in the first place. The EI account would be in very good shape and perfectly capable of sustaining the kinds of reforms we need to have for the sake of Canadian workers if that money had not been taken out of there in the first place.

That is a perfect example of what is not in this budget that ought to be, and Canadians can count on New Democrats to continue to press the government to get the job done, just as it should get the job done on housing. I talked a bit about a modest plan, when it comes to indigenous housing, in terms of allocating some funding in the budget. It is nowhere enough, and that is just for the needs in indigenous communities, never mind the amount of non-market housing we need to build in order to meet the needs of people right across the country from coast to coast to coast.

It is not just about spending money. It is also about taking regulatory action in order to constrain the investment activity that is happening from private actors with deep pockets all over the country that is driving up the cost of housing, whether it is driving up the cost of rental housing for Canadians who need affordable rental housing or whether it is driving up the cost of a home that Canadians would aspire to own. In either case, it is a problem. We need to see a government that is willing to take action. I have talked elsewhere about the kinds of things New Democrats believe can be done by the government that would not cost a dime to taxpayers, in order to relieve some of that investment pressure that is driving up houses in the real estate market.

There has been a fair bit of debate tonight about the budget, rightly so. We have heard a lot about the carbon tax and inflation. These are important debates and I respect how people are being affected by inflation, certainly. I see it in my own community.

We are not in any way immune to the rise in the use of food banks and people having to make tough choices, but I do want to talk a little bit about the nature of inflation, because when we listen to Liberals and Conservatives debate inflation, there is something that never comes up.

Again, this is what they share in common with housing. They do not want to talk about the role that deep-pocketed investors are playing in driving up the cost of housing for Canadians. When we talk about inflation more generally, they do not want to talk about the role that corporate Canada has been playing in jacking up prices for Canadians.

There have been reports out, more than one, that say that up to 25% of the inflation that Canadians have experienced is related precisely to excessive profits by corporations.

What do we mean by excessive profits? We mean profits over the prepandemic baseline, an increase in the rate of profit for these companies. The oil and gas sector is a good example. It has seen outsized increases in its profits over the last couple of years. It has seen a 1000% increase in its profits. That is a lot of money.

What do we mean when we say excess profits? We mean expanding one's profits by a 1000% over two years, because who pays for that?

Conservatives are quick to talk about how every penny that is raised in taxes comes out of Canadian pockets. Well, guess what? Every penny that is raised at the pump comes out of Canadians' pockets too. I am not just talking about the pennies that go to the government and the carbon tax or the gas tax or whatever else. I am talking about the pennies that go to provide that 1000% increase over two years in corporate profits for oil and gas.

That is why New Democrats have been advocating for an excess profits tax. We forced the Liberals to do this when it comes to banks and insurance companies. We have also said that this should also apply to oil and gas companies.

What do we hear from the Conservatives when we talk about that? They say, oh, well, they will charge it to the consumer. They will just pass that on to the consumer. There is probably some truth in that. That is why the member for Windsor West has done an excellent job talking about how we should have a formal body that regulates price increases so that Canadians can be sure that they are getting a fair shake at the pumps. We have done this for decades in Manitoba with the public utilities board, in respect of auto insurance rates and Manitoba hydro rates and gas prices for heating one's home.

This is not something out in left field. This is something that provinces do with respect to important price controls, something that the member for Windsor West has done a lot of great work on.

The other thing that they neglect to mention is what happens if one removes the carbon tax. For some reason, they think that if there is additional tax, they will just pass that on to the consumer, but if by lowering a tax, we create more disposable income, they somehow think that oil and gas companies are not going to raise their prices to gobble that up too. We have a problem. Yes, the oil and gas companies win, it seems, no matter what one does.

That is why the member for Windsor West is bang on in talking about a real way to control oil and gas prices, but they best believe that by reducing those kinds of taxes in a period where the oil and gas companies have been jacking up their prices and making a 1000% increases in their profits over two years, they are going to gobble that up too.

That is why targeted tax relief, like doubling the GST rebate, has been praised by private sector economists as a good way to provide relief to Canadians who need it the most without contributing to inflation and that broad-based tax relief, of the kind that the Conservatives advocate for, is seen as something that would contribute to inflation. B.C., Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador and the Northwest Territories all have their own carbon pricing system imposed provincially. Getting rid of the carbon tax is not going to make a whit of difference for people who live in those provinces.

We have a broad-based tax measure proposed that economists say will be inflationary and only provides relief to people in about half the country. That is not a plan. That is just a talking point.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I certainly appreciate the member's contribution tonight, although I have to disagree with some of the flaky theories he has.

For example, provincial jurisdiction allows for price controls or for information systems to basically force gas companies to post ahead of time what their prices and inputs are. That is something the provinces can do right now. However, in my home province of British Columbia, the NDP government has chosen not to. In fact, it has backed away from all the big talk about excess profits and people being gouged.

The member continues to say that if we just had another tax, we would make all this money go to the people. It used to be government asking the big oil and gas companies to hire lots of people, expand their projects and invest back into it. However, at the end of the day, they cannot because of NDP and Liberal policies that have made it impossible for them to do so. What does the member have to say about that?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, I would say that if times were so tough for oil and gas companies, they would not have seen a 1,000% increase in their profit over two years. I think the member should look at the numbers and give his head a shake.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Madam Speaker, there is nothing flaky about standing up for people who need affordable housing support. I really respect the member's interventions every time he gets up and speaks in the House.

I would ask the member about the comments he made on real estate investment trusts and the issue we are dealing with as it relates to the commodification of housing and the impact it is having on people in terms of rising rents, renovictions and other things. I really respected the fact that he got up and talked about it a number of times. Could he expand on it in terms of what that means for renters and what the government needs to do to provide assistance regarding the same?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, one of the things the government could be doing is working to establish a non-profit acquisition fund. A lot of non-profits have great experience running housing complexes and know how to get the job done, but they find out too late that a building with affordable units might have been available or on the market. Corporate landlords, who are better connected and have deeper pockets, find out sooner; by the time there is more public knowledge of that building coming up on the market, it has already been scooped up. Therefore, providing a notice period for that kind of sale and making funds available for competent non-profits to be able to swoop in and compete with some of these big corporate landlords is a really important piece of the puzzle.

Also, we can look at the idea, as they have done in New Zealand, of having escalating down payments. As a person owns more properties, they would be required to put up more instead of just leveraging equity out of their existing properties for the same amount of down payment. This is another way to try to have a bit of control over really excessive investment activity in the residential housing space.

These are just some of the ideas out there about what government could do. The non-profit acquisition fund, obviously, does involve some government investment, but different rules around escalating down payments do not. Therefore, that is an example of something the government could be doing right now that does not cost money and could help have a cooling effect on the residential housing market.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to listen to the member for Elmwood—Transcona.

I want to ask the member about that grocery rebate. Why does he think the government decided to call it that instead of a doubling of the GST?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is kind of a curiosity, is it not? I think that “doubling of the GST rebate” is very clear and very honest in terms of what it is. The “grocery rebate” branding has caused some confusion.

We had finance department officials at committee just recently, and I had the opportunity to ask them about that. They confirmed that, from a technical perspective, there is no difference at all. Therefore, it is just another doubling of the GST rebate, as we have been happy to talk about on this side of the House.

I asked if the tax officials in the department moonlighted as branding specialists and maybe recommended to the minister's office that it be called a grocery rebate. They did not say that was true. In fact, they said that they could not say, because those are privileged conversations. However, I felt that astute political observers could probably put two and two together and figure out that the Liberals are sad that the NDP has been getting credit for a good thing, and so they came up with a term to try to get more credit, as is the wont of many folks around this place.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour and a privilege to be able to rise in the House of Commons on behalf of the great people from southwest Saskatchewan. I would be remiss if I did not start off by congratulating all the ranchers who have just made it through another calving season, or are at the very end of the season.

I also mention our farmers, who are about to begin their spring plant, with the spring thaw that is going on. We have a bit more moisture this year than we have had in years past. I know a lot of folks are really excited about that and are also more than happy to wait a couple of days to start. I know everyone is anxious to get in the fields back home, so I want to wish everybody a safe and happy spring planting season.

Here we are talking about budget 2023. The budget is a great opportunity for the government to take a step back, have a little self-reflection and really hone in on the needs of Canadians. That is something that has been lacking for the last number of years. Instead, we are seeing a continued coalition with the NDP, who are keeping the Liberals in power and helping them repeat scandal after scandal.

We have seen the NDP bring up some of these scandals from time to time, but at the end of the day, it is still voting for them. We know the NDP will vote for this budget because it has to. We have heard some great comments from NDP members criticizing the government. At the end of the day, it is kind of useless and meaningless because they are just going to prop the Liberals up and vote for it anyway.

The Liberals are running a government that is quick to announce massive amounts of spending without figuring out where the money is going to come from to pay for it. Most recently, we saw the government massively subsidize Volkswagen in Canada. We still do not know the upper reaches of the total compensation of the package, but we do know that it is going to be in excess of $13 billion. We still do not have a lot of information, but that is a ton of money, and it is appropriate for us to be asking a lot of questions about it.

It gets even worse. Volkswagen is the only automaking company in Canada to be charged under CEPA for violations against the environment. There were 60 counts against it. What was its reward for that? It was $13 billion of taxpayers' money. This is from a government that says it prioritizes the environment. However, the only company to actually violate the Canadian Environmental Protection Act gets massive subsidization as a reward for its behaviour.

The Liberals will go out of their way to defend all this spending. They will say they have to spend a lot of money so that we can get a bit out of it. Let us be real. There is no plan to get a complete battery industry here in Canada. We have heard many times in this place, in committee or in meetings with stakeholders, that Canada has all the resources and minerals required to have a very robust battery supply chain. However, we simply do not have the extraction and refining capacity to do what is required. To make matters worse, there is way too much red tape and over-regulation of the sector, preventing private sector investment into our country. Again, we have the raw materials to work with, but they are literally stuck in the ground.

We would think that with all the abundance of natural resources that we have, private companies would be lining up at the door to invest their money in Canada. As it stands right now, if someone does not have massive government subsidies, there is nothing being built or done in this country.

The investments of these companies would bring jobs, service companies and spinoff industries, such as restaurants and service-and-repair shops, not to mention the royalty revenue that builds our communities and invests in our rural communities. It still makes rural Canada a viable place to live.

If it were not for rural Canada, urban Canada would not have all the luxuries it enjoys. If we think of the food that is eaten, it is all grown, harvested and produced in rural Canada. There is all the lumber and building materials required to build the housing that we talk about so much in this country. Where does it come from? It comes from rural Canada. We have to prioritize the rural areas. We are not seeing that from the government.

We should also mention the opportunities that exist for the first nations people of Canada to be able to partner with these private companies, make investments and sign these partnerships. This will bring about opportunities for jobs and education for their people as well. That is missing because of government inaction.

Natural Law Energy is a company from my riding. It tried to partner with TC Energy to invest in Keystone XL, and the government chased that off. That was an opportunity for six or seven partnering first nations to have jobs and opportunities, and the government said no. That is the terrible direction that we have been heading in.

However, it is always possible to change course and direction. Budget 2023 presented the government with such an opportunity, but the government has a shocking level of disrespect for how it is handling Canadians' money.

Here is a straightforward example: On page 223 of the budget book, the Liberals have a graph showing that we will not be on track to balance the budget until 2060. How can they possibly pretend that it is a responsible plan for the national finances to be left like this if it is going to be a few decades before they even have a plan to get it back into fiscal balance? It is a complete mockery of all the people who work hard and pay taxes in this country.

How are they choosing to spend this money, the millions or billions of dollars at a time? The Liberals continue to give massive subsidies, as I mentioned earlier, to such things as a battery plant for giant companies that, quite frankly, could afford to pay for and do this on their own. However, as I said, the Liberals will also decide to spend millions and billions of dollars without worrying where that money is coming from, which is from the taxpayers and ratepayers of this country.

The Liberals' policies are preventing us from developing our natural resources across the board, but they save their worst treatment for demonizing the oil and gas sector here in Canada. In the budget, it says that the government is forecasting the price of oil to be around $82 a barrel. That is actually not too bad. At that price, if the government could choose to support the idea, Canada could balance its budget within a couple of years and not a couple of decades. The Liberals would still be able to invest in all the social programs that Canadians have grown to like, enjoy and appreciate and be able to afford to do so by supporting natural resources development in this country.

We have even had a few countries come to Canada looking for LNG, but the Prime Minister said no, that there is no business case for it. However, other countries around the world continue to beg for our resources. Instead, we are driving them off to other countries, such as Qatar. Therefore, we miss out on those opportunities to grow as a country while making the world a better place because of the high standards that we have here in Canada for human rights and for environmental protection.

I proudly represent a rural riding where we have our own way of life, and the government does not understand it. Rural Canada is far from having the majority of our population, but as I was saying earlier, we produce all the things that people in urban Canada need to have the luxuries that people enjoy there. In return, too often, the Liberal government leaves us behind and forgets about us. Sometimes, the Liberals impose things on rural areas. They will make it harder, if not impossible, to continue to live there.

Has anyone heard of the carbon tax? That is one of the biggest issues that people talk about that is driving up the cost of living in urban Canada, but predominantly in rural Canada, the place hardest hit by the carbon tax.

For right now, the Liberals have been busy talking about a so-called just transition for oil and gas and for coal, even though they are still failing to make a just transition happen, whether they are located in the Prairies or the Maritimes. That is something that we also learned from a recent audit done by the Environment Commissioner. Since then, not much has been moving. We do not even see a budget item yet for the just transition for these communities. We are only seven years away from the end date for some of these coal mines and some of these coal power plants that the government is going to force off coal, and yet the government does not even have a plan or an allocation for how to deal with that. It is shameful.

For the Liberals, it is not on their radar. I asked the minister what he planned to do with the people from coal-producing communities like Coronach and Rockglen in my riding, as well as in the Souris—Moose Mountain riding. As much as the minister tried to sound as if he would support rural areas, his answer and his examples actually suggest that rather than staying in the communities and working where they are, people are going to end up moving to other places, such as Regina, northern Saskatchewan, Calgary, Edmonton or the east coast.

The Liberal minister might think that Regina is part of the rural area, even though it is the capital city of Saskatchewan. Regina is a great place. It is a fantastic place, but that is not where the people from Rockglen, Coronach, Willow Bunch or Assiniboia want to be. They want to stay in the places where they currently are, in their communities. The government is doing absolutely nothing to make sure that happens after it has mandated away the number one industry in their communities.

I will just quickly mention that there is one thing I definitely appreciate in this budget, and that is the tax credit for tradespeople when they purchase their tools. Again, we are talking about a housing crisis in this country. How are we going to get there? We have to build houses. We need more workers. We need to incentivize people to be able to go to trade school and to want to work in these industries. That tax credit is going to help a lot of people as they enter into the trades.

The Liberals also could have supported a Conservative private member's bill, Bill C-241. It has passed this place, but the government could have been proactive and provided that in the budget. However, it did not do that. The Liberals missed an opportunity there.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Madam Speaker, I heard the word “shameful”. I want to focus on that issue in terms of what is shameful. What I find shameful is that when we make historic investments, whether in housing, the environment, manufacturing or jobs, Conservative members who voted against these initiatives show up to cut ribbons and show up with a shovel for the ceremonies that are taking place in communities across Canada. What I find interesting is that we have heard consistently today that the party opposite is obviously opposed to the historic investment we have made in the Volkswagen facility in St. Thomas. Does the member know whether the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London has shared her opposition to that investment with her constituents?

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Madam Speaker, after eight years, what we continue to see is the Liberals spending record amounts of money to accomplish so little. They value and rate their success by how much they spend, not by how much they have been able to accomplish. They can spend all the money they want on housing, but they have not been able to properly develop housing in this country because they cannot get out of the way to allow developers to get to doing what they do best, which is to build housing for people.

Volkswagen has a lot of money. It could invest in building this battery project without the government dumping $13 billion into it, which my great-grandkids, quite frankly, will be paying for. The Liberals are not spending their money. They are spending the money of my great-grandkids. That is whose money is at stake here. They need to remember that because without taxpayers they do not have any money to spend.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to build on the previous question, if I could. I am going to give a secret away to the Canadian people. Those folks on the other side do not have any money, not a penny. That is taxpayer money. In order to give something, something has to be taken away from someone. The Liberals are taking credit for taking other people's money. That is not cool. Does the member agree?

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Madam Speaker, I absolutely agree. The Liberals are spending the money of future generations. I was talking in my speech about how on page 223 of the budget the Liberals are not even on track to balance the budget until 2060. I will be a grandpa. That is when they will balance this budget, when I am a grandpa. That is absolutely crazy.

We want to make sure we have a plan to develop the economy. That is why we talk so much about natural resources. Our critic from Lakeland does a fantastic job of speaking on behalf of the industry, and my colleagues from across the country do that as well. They know that when companies invest in Canada we are better positioned to be able to invest in our people and our environment, and then we are able to share our riches with the rest of the world. We do that by attracting investment and because the private sector has invested in Canada, not because the government took money away from its citizens to invest in things that are not producing great results for people.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I hear Conservatives expressing concern about inflation. With what is going on at the grocery stores, where is the outrage against Loblaws, Empire and Metro? With what is happening at the gas pumps, where is the outrage against Imperial Oil and Shell, which have seen profits go up by 1,000% since 2019? When people are paying more on interest rates for their mortgages, where is the outrage against CIBC, Toronto Dominion and RBC?

For Conservatives to stand in this place and manufacture this outrage but completely ignore the insane levels of corporate profit, they are just doing a disservice to their constituents.