Bill C-69

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024

Part 1 implements certain measures in respect of the Income Tax Act and the Income Tax Regulations by
(a) denying income tax deductions for expenses incurred with respect to non-compliant short-term rentals;
(b) exempting from taxation the international shipping income of certain Canadian resident companies;
(c) exempting from taxation any income of the trusts established under the First Nations Child and Family Services, Jordan’s Principle, and Trout Class Settlement Agreement;
(d) doubling the volunteer firefighters and search and rescue volunteers tax credits;
(e) extending the eligibility for the Canada child benefit in respect of a child for six months after the child’s death;
(f) increasing the cap on labour expenditures per eligible newsroom employee from $55,000 to $85,000 and increasing, for four years, the Canadian journalism labour tax credit rate from 25% to 35%;
(g) extending eligibility for the mineral exploration tax credit by one year;
(h) providing a refundable tax credit to small and medium-sized businesses in designated provinces by returning a portion of fuel charge proceeds from the province;
(i) providing a refundable investment tax credit to qualifying businesses for investments in certain clean hydrogen projects;
(j) providing a refundable investment tax credit to qualifying businesses for certain investments in clean technology manufacturing property;
(k) amending the definition “government assistance” to exclude bona fide concessional loans with reasonable repayment terms from public authorities;
(l) implementing a number of amendments to the alternative minimum tax;
(m) increasing the home buyers’ plan withdrawal limit from $35,000 to $60,000 and deferring the repayment period by three additional years;
(n) excluding the failure to report under the mandatory disclosure rules from the application of the section 238 penalty;
(o) introducing a $10-million capital gains exemption on the sale of a business to an employee ownership trust; and
(p) implementing a number of technical amendments to correct inconsistencies and to better align the law with its intended policy objectives.
Part 2 enacts the Global Minimum Tax Act , a regime based on the rules of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The global minimum tax regime will ensure that large multinational corporations are subject to a minimum effective tax rate of 15% on their profits wherever they do business. It sets out rules for the purposes of establishing liability for the tax and also sets out applicable reporting and filing requirements. To promote compliance with its provisions, that Act includes modern administration and enforcement provisions generally aligned with those found in other taxation statutes. Finally, this Part also makes related and consequential amendments to other texts to ensure proper implementation of the tax and cohesive and efficient administration by the Canada Revenue Agency.
Part 3 amends the Excise Tax Act , the Excise Act , the Excise Act, 2001 , the Underused Housing Tax Act , the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act and other related texts in order to implement certain measures.
Division 1 of Part 3 amends the Excise Tax Act by repealing the temporary relief for supplies of certain face masks or respirators and certain face shields from the Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax.
Division 2 of Part 3 amends the Excise Act , the Excise Act, 2001 and other related texts in order to implement changes to
(a) the federal excise duty framework for tobacco products by
(i) increasing the excise duty rates for tobacco products, including imposing a tax on inventories of cigarettes held by retailers and wholesalers,
(ii) changing the process by which brands of tobacco products for export are exempted from special excise duty and marking requirements,
(iii) allowing certain information to be shared for the administration or enforcement of the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act , and
(iv) requiring the filing of information returns in respect of tobacco excise stamps;
(b) the federal excise duty framework for vaping products by increasing the excise duty rates for vaping products; and
(c) the federal excise duty framework for alcohol by
(i) extending by two years the two per cent cap on the inflation adjustment on beer, spirits and wine excise duties, and
(ii) cutting by half for two years the excise duty rate on the first 15,000 hectolitres of beer brewed in Canada.
Division 3 of Part 3 amends the Underused Housing Tax Act and the Underused Housing Tax Regulations by, among other things,
(a) eliminating filing requirements for certain owners;
(b) reducing minimum penalties for failing to file a return; and
(c) introducing a new exemption for residential properties held as a place of residence or lodging for employees.
Division 4 of Part 3 amends the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act by providing authority, in certain circumstances, for the sharing of certain information amongst federal officials and for the public disclosure of certain information by the Minister of National Revenue.
Part 4 enacts and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 4 amends the Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1 to delay the repeal of the Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non-Canadians Act for two years.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the National Housing Act to increase the in-force limits for guarantees issued by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) in respect of mortgage-backed securities and Canada Mortgage Bonds and for mortgage default insurance provided by CMHC from the temporary $750 billion to the permanent $800 billion. It also amends the Borrowing Authority Act to avoid the double counting of liabilities related to Canada Mortgage Bonds that are guaranteed by the CMHC and have been purchased by the Minister of Finance, on behalf of the Government of Canada, in the calculation of the maximum amount of certain borrowings under that Act.
Division 3 of Part 4 authorizes the making of payments to the provinces for the fiscal year beginning on April 1, 2024 respecting a national program for providing food in schools.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Canada Student Loans Act and the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act to expand eligibility for student loan forgiveness to early childhood educators, dentists, dental hygienists, pharmacists, midwives, teachers, social workers, psychologists, personal support workers and physiotherapists.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Canada Education Savings Act to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Minister responsible for that Act to open a registered education savings plan in respect of a child born after 2023 who is eligible for the payment of the Canada Learning Bond and is not the beneficiary under such a plan, so that the Minister may pay a Canada Learning Bond in respect of the child; and
(b) increase, from 20 to 30 years, the maximum age of a beneficiary under a registered education savings plan in respect of whom a Canada Learning Bond may be paid on application.
It also makes consequential amendments to the Income Tax Act .
Division 6 of Part 4 amends the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act to increase the maximum financial assistance that may be provided in respect of foreign states.
Division 7 of Part 4 amends the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act to increase the amount of the payment that the Minister of Finance may provide to the International Monetary Fund in respect of Canada’s subscriptions. It also amends the International Development (Financial Institutions) Assistance Act and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Agreement Act to provide for new financial instruments that the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Minister of Finance, as the case may be, may use to provide financial assistance to the institutions referred to in those Acts.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the International Financial Assistance Act to, among other things, provide that foreign exchange losses in relation to programs referred to in that Act must be charged to the Consolidated Revenue Fund and provide for the making of payments to Development Finance Institute Canada (DFIC) Inc. in relation to programs referred to in that Act out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Export Development Act to lower the limit for total liabilities and obligations referred to in subsection 24(1) of that Act from $115 billion to $100 billion.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Financial Administration Act to broaden the application of subsection 85(2) of that Act to other Crown corporations.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the Financial Administration Act to require certain banks and other financial institutions to disclose prescribed information for federal payments accepted for deposit.
Division 12 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to enhance the Canada Health Transfer for qualifying provinces and territories.
Division 13 of Part 4 amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to require that the Superintendent of Financial Institutions publish certain information relating to pension plan investments. It also amends the Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act to require that plan administrators provide specified information by written notice to certain persons when they become members of a pooled registered pension plan.
Division 14 of Part 4 amends the Canada Pension Plan to, among other things,
(a) provide for a death benefit of $5,000 in cases where no other Canada Pension Plan benefit, with the exception of the orphan’s benefit, has been paid in respect of the deceased contributor’s contributions;
(b) create a new child’s benefit for dependent children aged 18 to 24 who are in part-time attendance at school;
(c) maintain eligibility for the disabled contributor’s child’s benefit if the disabled contributor reaches the age of 65;
(d) allow for the deeming of an application for a disabled contributor’s child’s benefit on behalf of a child to have been made at an earlier date under the Canada Pension Plan ’s incapacity provisions;
(e) preclude entitlement to a survivor’s pension if an individual has received a division of unadjusted pensionable earnings in respect of their deceased separated spouse; and
(f) clarify the determination of the payee of the disabled contributor’s child’s benefit.
It also makes a consequential amendment to the Canada Pension Plan Regulations .
Division 15 of Part 4 amends the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act to provide for the payment of certain amounts into the Consolidated Revenue Fund by the Public Sector Pension Investment Board.
Division 16 of Part 4 enacts the Consumer-Driven Banking Act , which establishes a consumer-driven framework for individuals and small businesses to safely and securely share their data with the participating entities of their choice.
It also makes related amendments to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act to establish the position of Senior Deputy Commissioner for Consumer-Driven Banking who is responsible for consumer-driven banking matters and to provide for, among other things, the supervision of participating entities.
Division 17 of Part 4 amends the Bank Act to, among other things, clarify the definitions “deposit-type instrument” and “principal-protected note”.
Division 18 of Part 4 amends the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Act to increase to $100,000,000 the maximum amount that expenditures made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund to defray the expenses arising out of the operations of the Office may exceed the Office’s total assessments and revenues.
Division 19 of Part 4 amends the Bank of Canada Act to clarify that the Bank of Canada may enter into repurchase, reverse repurchase and buy-sellback agreements.
Division 20 of Part 4 amends the Canada Business Corporations Act to
(a) harmonize fines for a corporation guilty of an offence related to the collection or sending of information regarding individuals with significant control; and
(b) set separate fines and imprisonment terms on the basis of a summary conviction or a conviction on indictment for a director, officer or shareholder of a corporation guilty of an offence related to individuals with significant control.
Division 21 of Part 4 amends Parts I to III of the Canada Labour Code to, among other things,
(a) provide that a person who is paid remuneration by an employer is presumed to be their employee unless the contrary is proved by the employer;
(b) provide that if, in any proceeding other than a prosecution, an employer alleges that a person is not their employee, the burden of proof is on the employer; and
(c) prohibit an employer from treating an employee as if they were not their employee.
Finally, it also includes transitional provisions.
Division 22 of Part 4 amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things, set out certain employer obligations relating to policies respecting work-related communication and clarify certain employee rights and employer obligations relating to terminations of employment. It also includes transitional provisions.
Division 23 of Part 4 amends the Employment Insurance Act to extend, until October 24, 2026, the duration of the measure that increases the maximum number of weeks for which benefits may be paid in a benefit period to certain seasonal workers.
Division 24 of Part 4 amends section 61 of An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages in order to add a reference to subsections 18(1.1) and (1.2) of the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act in subsection 19(1) of that Act, which An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages enacts.
Division 25 of Part 4 authorizes a corporation that is to be incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Canada Development Investment Corporation to provide loan guarantees as part of an Indigenous loan guarantee program and authorizes the payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund by the Minister of Finance of amounts that are required in respect of those guarantees.
Division 26 of Part 4 authorizes the payment of up to $1.3 million to entities or individuals involved in the government’s engagement in a pilot project for the creation of a Red Dress Alert.
Division 27 of Part 4 provides that the subsidiary of VIA Rail Canada Inc. incorporated with the corporate name VIA HFR - VIA TGF Inc. is, as of the date of its incorporation, an agent of His Majesty in right of Canada and may enter into contracts, agreements and other arrangements with His Majesty as though it were not such an agent.
Division 28 of Part 4 amends the Impact Assessment Act , in response to the majority opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada on the constitutionality of that Act, to, among other things,
(a) align the preamble and purpose provision with the primary objective of that Act, which is to prevent or mitigate significant adverse effects within federal jurisdiction — and significant direct or incidental adverse effects — that may be caused by the carrying out of physical activities;
(b) replace the definition “effects within federal jurisdiction” with “adverse effects within federal jurisdiction” and, in doing so,
(i) restrict the definition to non-negligible adverse changes,
(ii) limit transboundary changes to those involving the pollution of transboundary waters and the marine environment, and
(iii) include, in respect of federal works or undertakings and activities carried out on federal lands, non-negligible adverse changes to the environment or to health, social and economic conditions;
(c) ensure that the impact assessment process applies only to those physical activities that may cause adverse effects within federal jurisdiction or direct or incidental adverse effects;
(d) ensure that, in deciding if an impact assessment of a designated project is required, one factor that the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada must take into account is whether another means exists that would permit a jurisdiction to address those effects;
(e) amend the final decision-making provisions to provide for an initial determination as to whether the adverse effects within federal jurisdiction and the direct or incidental adverse effects are likely to be, to some extent, significant, and then, if so, provide for a determination as to whether those effects are justified in the public interest; and
(f) improve cooperation tools to better harmonize the impact assessment process with the processes for assessing effects that are followed by provincial and Indigenous jurisdictions.
Finally, it also includes transitional provisions.
Division 29 of Part 4 amends the Judges Act to increase the number of salaries authorized for judges of superior courts other than appeal courts. It also reduces in a corresponding manner the number of salaries authorized for judges of provincial unified family courts.
Division 30 of Part 4 amends the Tax Court of Canada Act to provide that, if a party to a proceeding under the general procedure of the Tax Court of Canada is not an individual, that party must be represented by counsel, except under special circumstances.
Division 31 of Part 4 amends the Food and Drugs Act to, among other things, authorize the Minister of Health to
(a) establish rules for the purpose of preventing, managing or controlling the risk of injury to health from the use of therapeutic products, other than the intended use, or the risk of adverse effects on human beings, animals or the environment from the use of a drug intended for an animal;
(b) exempt any food, therapeutic product, person or activity from the application of certain provisions of that Act or its regulations; and
(c) deem, on the basis of decisions of, information or documents produced by, a foreign regulatory authority, that certain requirements of that Act or its regulations are met in respect of a therapeutic product or food.
Finally, it also includes a transitional provision.
Division 32 of Part 4 amends the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act to authorize the provision of customs information to the Minister responsible for that Act for the purpose of the administration and enforcement of that Act and to authorize that Minister to disclose information to other federal ministers for certain purposes.
Division 33 of Part 4 amends the Criminal Code to broaden the criminal interest rate offence to prohibit a person from offering to enter into an agreement or arrangement to receive interest at a criminal rate and from advertising an offer to enter into an agreement or arrangement that provides for the receipt of interest at a criminal rate. It also repeals the provision that requires the consent of the Attorney General prior to commencing proceedings related to the offence.
Division 34 of Part 4 contains measures that are related to money laundering, terrorist financing and sanctions evasion and other measures.
Subdivision A of Division 34 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to, among other things,
(a) permit information sharing between reporting entities for the purpose of detecting and deterring money laundering, terrorist financing and sanctions evasion;
(b) authorize, subject to certain conditions, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) to disclose certain information to provincial and territorial civil forfeiture offices and to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration;
(c) authorize FINTRAC to publicize additional information pertaining to violations of that Act; and
(d) extend the application of that Act to cheque cashing businesses.
It also makes consequential amendments to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Cross-border Currency and Monetary Instruments Reporting Regulations .
Subdivision B of Division 34 amends the Income Tax Act and the Excise Tax Act to allow provincial or superior court judges, a judge of a superior court of criminal jurisdiction or a judge as defined in section 552 of the Criminal Code to grant on application by a Canada Revenue Agency official the authorization to use device or investigative technique, or procedure or otherwise do any thing provided in a warrant, for purposes of tax investigations.
Subdivision C of Division 34 amends the Criminal Code to provide for an order to keep an account open or active and for a production order to require the production of documents or data that are in a person’s possession or control on dates specified in an order that fall within the 60-day period after the day on which it is made.
Division 35 of Part 4 amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) create new offences in respect of motor vehicle theft, including an offence concerning the possession or the distribution of an electronic device suitable for committing theft of a motor vehicle, and in respect of criminal organizations; and
(b) add, as an aggravating factor, evidence that an offender involved a person under the age of 18 years in the commission of an offence.
It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Division 36 of Part 4 amends the Radiocommunication Act to, among other things, prohibit the manufacture, import, distribution, lease, offer for sale, sale or possession of certain devices specified by the Minister of Industry. It also amends that Act to establish as an offence or a violation the contravention of that prohibition.
Division 37 of Part 4 amends the Telecommunications Act to, among other things, require telecommunications service providers to provide their subscribers with a self-service mechanism that allows them to cancel their contract for telecommunications services or modify their telecommunications service plan and to inform those subscribers before the expiry of their fixed-term contract, as well as in other specified circumstances, of other service plans that those providers offer. It also amends that Act to prohibit the charging of certain fees.
Division 38 of Part 4 amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to, among other things,
(a) provide that the Correctional Service of Canada is responsible for implementing any arrangement — approved by the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness — entered into by the Commissioner of Corrections and the Canada Border Services Agency with respect to the support that the Service may provide to the Agency to assist in the exercise of certain powers or the performance of certain duties and functions;
(b) control the access of the inmates of a penitentiary to a designated immigrant station adjacent to the penitentiary and the access of the immigration detainees of a designated immigrant station to a penitentiary adjacent to the station; and
(c) provide that, in exigent circumstances, staff members of the Service may provide additional support to detention enforcement officers of the Agency to assist them in the exercise of certain powers or the performance of certain duties and functions.
It also amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to define the term “immigrant station”, to provide that an area of a penitentiary may be an immigrant station only if it is designated under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and to set out the circumstances under which a person detained under that Act may be detained in a designated immigrant station.
Finally, it provides for the repeal of those amendments on a specified date and includes a transitional provision.
Division 39 of Part 4 contains measures related to public debt and the borrowing of money.
Subdivision A of Division 39 amends the Financial Administration Act to clarify that certain regulations and directions do not apply to contracts related to the borrowing of money entered into by the Minister of Finance.
Subdivision B of Division 39 amends the Borrowing Authority Act to increase the maximum amount of certain borrowings.
Division 40 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act , the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act to require certain financial institutions to make available information respecting diversity among directors and members of senior management.
Division 41 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.
Division 42 of Part 4 amends the Federal Courts Act to provide that the Federal Court has jurisdiction to hear applications for judicial review of decisions of the Social Security Tribunal on the extension of time to make a request for review or reconsideration under the Canada Disability Benefit Act . It also amends the Tax Court of Canada Act and the Department of Employment and Social Development Act to, among other things, provide the Tribunal with jurisdiction to hear appeals of decisions made under the Canada Disability Benefit Act and require that matters related to income raised in those appeals be referred to the Tax Court of Canada.
Division 43 of Part 4 amends the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to repeal provisions related to the ministerial power to exempt supervised consumption sites from the application of that Act. It also amends that Act to allow for the making of regulations respecting authorizations for supervised consumption and drug checking services and includes transitional provisions.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, let me give a specific example. Provinces come up with great ideas at times, and often the national government will take a look at them to see how we might expand on them. A good example is our health care system. Saskatchewan came up with a good idea, and ultimately it was spread across Canada. Quebec had an excellent idea in regard to $10-a-day child care. We took that idea and expanded it across the nation. It increases a sense of fairness and equity for all Canadians.

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

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the question to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment is as follows: the hon. member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, Carbon Pricing.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, the school of wackonomics is open, and the Liberal-NDP Prime Minister is the dean. What will people learn in this school? They will learn that budgets balance themselves, that the economy is people and absolutely not numbers and that somehow raising taxes will put out forest fires.

The newest graduate, who just graduated with a Ph.D. in wackonomics, is none other than the out-of-touch Liberal finance minister. She learned that once Canadians are put into a cost of living crisis, they can be told to solve it by cancelling Disney+. If they cannot afford gas, groceries and home heating because the government has raised the carbon tax scam, they can buy a bike for themselves, especially those who live in rural Canada.

We have had nine years of an out-of-touch government that has been nothing short of wacko. Its wacko policies are the reason why today we are seeing two million Canadians going to a food bank in a single month, with a million more projected for this year. Now we have found out that one in four Canadians is living in poverty. Wacko, extreme, woke policies have put Canadians in this position today.

Speaking of schools, schools have students. Today, after nine years of the Liberal government, students are going through a housing hell. In fact, all Canadians are living through a housing hell. It is because the government spent $90 billion on housing, only to double housing costs. Not only did it do that, but housing starts have declined in this country according to its own housing department, the CMHC. However, the government still shovels millions of dollars in bonuses to the department that has caused this issue under one of the most incompetent housing ministers, previously the most incompetent immigration minister, in Canadian history. High interest rates are a massive barrier to home builders. This is what we are hearing from every home builder and developer and even those who want to get into homebuilding.

How did we get here? How did interest rates get so high? It is because when the Liberal-NDP government spent more than every single government before it combined, it created a cost of living and inflation crisis. In fact, 40-year highs in inflation have happened. It had a lot of wasteful spending too, and what did that do? That made the Bank of Canada raise interest rates at the most rapid rate in Canadian history.

That is why Canada, according to the IMF, is now most at risk of a mortgage default crisis. It is this high rate of interest that is stopping homebuilding. It is putting Canadians in a bind and taking more and more from their paycheques every single month. Now OSFI, which testified at the finance committee, is warning about a price shock, as mortgage renewals could see a 50% increase in price.

I can imagine when the finance minister and Prime Minister told people to borrow as much as they wanted because interest rates would stay low for a very long time. What they did not know was that the incompetent Liberal-NDP government would pour billions of dollars of fuel on the inflationary fire that it started, making interest rates go up. Now, when people renew their mortgages, they are sometimes renewing at double or triple the rate. That is not what they were promised. They were supposed a “responsible government”. What they ended up getting was a housing hell, and a high-debt, high-tax, high-spend government, which put them in this position.

Now we are seeing people with good-paying jobs, like nurses and teachers, living in their cars, and students who have to live under bridges. In some cases, 16 students are living in one small space. It is because the Liberal government doubled their rents and doubled their mortgages, and now they are in a housing hell.

We also found out that delinquencies are on the rise. It is because Canadians have to shoulder the burden of nine years of bad policy-making. It put them in that position.

I recently talked to a single mom in my community who has three kids. She said that she left an abusive relationship and moved out on her own. Of course, she is one of the people whose rent has doubled. It went up. It has doubled over the last nine years, but recently, she had a $300 increase in her rent. For a single mom with three kids, it was already hard enough to pay for gas, groceries and home heating, so what did she do? She had to move in with her abusive ex-husband because she could not afford day care and could not afford to buy food. In fact, she was already starting to skip meals. She is one of the one in four experiencing food insecurity.

When I spoke to her, she had the exact same story: It was not like this before. She came here as an immigrant and did everything right. She went to school here. She got a job. She had kids. She was married at one time. However, all she got was a government that worked against her, that raised her taxes and that made her cost of living more and more expensive.

This is not the only story. There are millions of Canadians in this kind of situation, to the point where people are asking why they moved to this country. Most of them are now thinking about leaving. Last year, more than 400,000 people left Canada. The top two reasons were the high cost of living and their credentials were not recognized, especially those who moved here as immigrants.

What did the government decide to do? It thought it was a brilliant idea to jack up the carbon tax scam. We found out last month that again rents are at the highest rate they have ever been. On top of that, for these same people, these Canadians who are trying to get to work in their car, trying to buy nutritious meals for their kids and themselves or trying to stay warm in the winter, all of those costs went up by 23% because the government jacked up the carbon tax scam by 23%.

This should be a wake-up call for the out-of-touch government. It should be an absolute wake-up call given the poverty report that came out today. We now know that we cannot believe anything that comes out of the government's mouth. It did not tell the truth about how many people were in poverty. That was proven today. We have found out that one in four Canadians could possibly be living in poverty. That is unheard of in this country. It was never like this before. It just goes to show that everything the government has done has made life worse for everyday Canadians.

We hear the government say over and over again that life has never been better for everyone here, that they should enjoy what they have and enjoy what it gives them. However, the number of Canadians in poverty, which we heard about today, could rise. It is 30% for Canadians aged 18 to 30 and 44.5% for single-parent households, while 42% of renters cannot afford two or more household essentials. Some 21.7% of Canadians cannot cover an unexpected expense of more than $500, while 8.8% of Canadians cannot pay their bills on time. On top of this, 7.2% of Canadians cannot afford to heat or cool their homes. The truth is that working Canadians will have to foot the bill for the government's spending once again.

The government talks about tax fairness. Never have Canadians had a bigger tax burden than after nine years of the Liberal-NDP government.

Let us start with the carbon tax, a scam that it hid from Canadians recently. Did members know that it had a gag order on the PBO, which was asking to release a report, a damning report that proved the carbon tax scam committed $30 billion of economic vandalism? That means $30 billion was taken away from the economy, taken away from the paycheques of workers and taken away from investments into things like equipment and other capital investments.

It is no wonder Canada's productivity is worse than it was in 2014. In fact, there are seven straight quarters of productivity decline. What does that mean? To the average person, that means Canadians are poorer, and it is easy to tie that in with the poverty report that we see today. Despite the sunshine that the Liberal-NDP government tries to portray with its economic vandalism over the last nine years, the reality is that Canadians are poorer than they have ever been before, and it is only getting worse. The Liberals introduced tax hikes, such as the carbon tax scam, but they hid the damning report from their department. It took the PBO's courage, after Conservatives put on pressure, to release the report that proves there was $30 billion of hidden costs in the scam on Canadians.

In fact, because the Conservatives put the pressure on and forced the papers to be released, to no surprise, the day that the vote was supposed to happen, the Liberals released the report. The report proved what Canadians already know, which is that the Prime Minister and the carbon tax scam are not worth the cost. The carbon tax has raised the cost of gas, groceries and home heating. Because of the tax, costs have gone up to our farmers, to our truckers and to everyone else. That is why we are seeing the record rise in poverty in this country.

The Liberals sold the scam as something that would automatically fix the environment. They tell us that, if we pay a bit more tax, they will pour it over top of the forest fires and put them out. The reality is that emissions have gone up and the forest fires have not gone. Every claim that the government had that the carbon tax scam was to fix the environment was false. The government's own department officials admitted that they do not tie in how much of the carbon tax scam is related to so-called fixing climate change, which is what the Liberals say. It does not work like that, and that is why they are not tracking it. Even they know it is not worth the cost.

Just yesterday, the PBO admitted to our common-sense Conservatives that the cost of climate change would have no effect on the cost of the carbon tax scam to Canadians. The PBO proved it. People just have to pull up the blues from the committee yesterday, and it is clear to see that the Liberals keep jacking up the carbon tax, but it has done nothing to fix the environment. How embarrassing that is for a government whose members claim to be stalwarts of the economy and the environment, but their ranking on the climate change index fell. It fell four spots, to 62 out of 67 on the world stage, but it is on par with the embarrassing Prime Minister, who jet-sets around the world just to embarrass Canada further. We need serious leadership once again in this country.

The PBO also said that Canadians pay more into the tax than what they get back. The claim that eight out of 10 Canadians get more back in rebates than what they pay into it is false, and the PBO proved that, over and over again. Carbon tax scam 1, which the PBO did costing and an analysis on, proves that a majority of Canadians, six out of 10 households, are worse off because of this scam compared to what they get back in rebates.

There is another part to this whole thing. It is called carbon tax scam 2, the clean fuel regulations. That has zero rebate, and it affects every single Canadian in every province. The PBO, yesterday, admitted to me that, if a majority of Canadian households are worse off with carbon tax scam 1, which has the phony rebates, then when we factor in carbon tax scam 2, which has no rebates, overall, a majority of households are still worse off. Therefore, the Liberals' claim that it leaves Canadians better off is false, and the claim keeps being proven wrong over and over again.

On top of all of that, the Liberals introduced a job-killing capital gains tax hike, which is a direct attack on hard-working farmers, fishermen, physicians, tradespeople, home builders and, of course, small business owners. Today, the finance committee heard from a plumber who talked about how his small business is his retirement savings. He did not put money into RRSPs, and he does not have a pension because he put all of his time, effort and money into his business. He admits that he is not rich. He is not one of the ultrarich that the government keeps talking about. He did everything right. He worked as hard as he could to leave something for his kids, his grandkids and their kids. However, on par with the Liberal-NDP government, hard work is punished in this country.

I know many people who live in Calgary Forest Lawn who left their home countries and took a big risk to come here. They took the risk because they wanted to go to a country where they were promised that, if they worked hard, they could make something of themselves and leave something for their kids. After nine years of the Liberal-NDP government's failed economic policies, the Canadian dream they were promised is broken. It is gone. That is why nine out of 10 young people say they have lost the dream of home ownership. That is why two million Canadians are going to food banks in a single month, and people with good jobs are living in their cars or tents.

They have a government that will not stop attacking their success. In fact, it vilifies success. The greedy government will do anything to fill its coffers. The only people it really cares about are rich Liberal insiders, like those with the $22 billion in consultant fees that it paid. Not all Canadians are well connected like that. They wish they were, but the government is doing everything it can to work against hard-working Canadians.

We heard from a farmer today who only wanted to work hard, make food for Canadians and leave his farm to his four daughters. However, once again, this job-killing capital gains tax hike would ensure that less will go to his kids and their kids and more will go to the greedy government.

As I mentioned before, Canada is in a productivity crisis. GDP per person has gone down. That is the definition of how successful people are in this country. It has gone down, and it continues to go down. The government drove away $460 billion of investment that went to the U.S. It made sure that U.S. workers get paid better than Canadians. That means Canadian workers get 58¢ of investment for every dollar of investment that goes to an American worker. The government's high-tax, high-spend ideology has driven away investment and workers from this country. What did that do? That made talent leave as well and, with that, made Canadians poorer.

I will tell Canadians that hope is on the horizon. It was not like this before the Liberal-NDP government, and it will not be like that after it is gone. After the next carbon tax election, when the member for Carleton would become the prime minister of this country, Canadians would get what they deserve and what they have been promised by this common-sense Conservative government. We would axe the tax. We would take the tax off for good for everybody and bring down the cost of gas, groceries and home heating. We would build the homes by incentivizing municipalities to build. We would fix the budget and bring in a dollar-for-dollar law. Indeed, we would make sure that income taxes are lower, simpler and fairer for all Canadians and not punish hard work as we have seen being done under the government.

We would also stop the crime. We have seen drugs, disorder and chaos increase all across the country. We would put an end to that. We would once again bring home the Canadian dream of working hard and being able to accomplish great things. We would bring it home.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Rural Economic Development and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Madam Speaker, my colleague talked a lot about two issues that I am concerned about, which are affordability, of course, and housing. Our government has been focused, in the last number of years, on key issues for families and supporting Canadians. If the member is saying that we have an affordability problem, a housing crisis, et cetera, then why are the Conservatives voting against all the good programs that we are bringing forward? On the dental program, they voted against it. On pharmacare, they voted against it. On early learning and child care, they voted against it. On the Canada child benefit, again, they voted against it.

When the member talks about axing the tax, what he is actually saying to Canadians is that, if the Conservatives take power, they would axe all those programs. It is easy to understand because they are voting against them, which means they are not in favour of them. I would like the member to tell me, and tell Canadians, if he would axe all those good programs or not?

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, let me start by saying that when we form government, Canadians would be able to realize the Canadian dream.

The member is asking why we voted against some of those measures. Well, it is clear to see that we do not want to be complicit in the economic vandalism of this Liberal-NDP government, which, after the last nine years, sent two million Canadians to a food bank and made one in four go into poverty.

We are not gullible like the NDP, which needs to protect our leaders' pension like they keep doing by propping up the government. We are going to do what is right for Canadians. We would axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget, stop the crime and bring back that Canadian dream.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Madam Speaker, the budget implementation measures in Bill C-69 are full of interference in the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. Whether it is a question of housing, health, education or the banking sector, the fiscal imbalance really is on full display.

I would like to know what my colleague thinks.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, my colleague makes it very clear that, after nine years of the Liberal-NDP government, everything is broken. Everything he is listing is just a list of the things that the government has done.

We see that Confederation is also more broken than it ever has been before because the divisive Prime Minister has pitted region against region, sector against sector and Canadians against Canadians. However, that is what he wants. He rules by dividing, and then he deflects and blames. We would bring home a country that is more united.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, I had the benefit of being in the same finance committee meeting as my hon. colleague this morning where I heard the same evidence about the capital gains inclusion rates. Of course, most of what my hon. colleague has just said in here was simply contradicted by the evidence, including that there is zero evidence that the capital gains inclusion would have any negative effect on job creation in this country.

The member seems to be opposed to raising the capital gains inclusion rate. I am wondering if he can explain why the Mulroney Conservative government raised the capital gains inclusion rate in 1988 from 50% to 66.67%, and then again, in 1990, to 75%. Were the Conservatives wrong about the capital gains inclusion rate then, or are they wrong now?

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, first of all, the member was in the committee when a small business owner was there, a plumber, who did everything right, worked as hard as he could to leave something for his kids and their kids, but the capital gains tax is going to punish all that hard work. This member sat there, yet he would rather listen to Liberal-NDP-paid economists than everyday, hard-working Canadians. That is a problem with the government. It keeps propping up the Prime Minister to protect its leader's pension, all at the expense of the suffering of Canadians.

Second, let me remind the member that when John Manley, who was the finance minister under the Liberals, reduced the capital gains tax to 50%, what ended up happening? Well, productivity went up. Government revenues went up. Do members know why? It is because it helped stimulate the economy once again.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Madam Speaker, I listened intently to the member's speech. As well, I listened intently to the last two NDP-Liberal MPs who asked questions The funny thing is that they complained that, when the Conservatives attain government, we would cut their great programs, such as the green slush fund from which, of that billion dollars, almost $400 million went to conflicted directors' own companies.

I am wondering if the member could expound on the other great Liberal programs that have resulted in this kind of corruption, which the Conservatives would end when we assume power.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, first of all, we are going to cut the number of Liberal seats in this House when we form government. That is the first thing we will cut, and, of course, we are going to axe the tax. We are going to cut the tax on gas, groceries and home heating, and, indeed, we will cut out the corruption. My friend, who is a great hockey player, highlighted just one piece of a plethora of corruption that we have seen under the government. There is the WE scandal and the green slush fund that is growing in scandal every single day, which he and other members are doing a great job of highlighting. We are also going to cut out the Infrastructure Bank, which has built exactly zero projects. It is a $30-billion program. It has built zero projects, yet it has shovelled millions of dollars to Liberal-connected insiders. This is the kind of corruption we are going to cut under a common-sense Conservative government once the member for Carleton becomes Prime Minister.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the finance critic for the Conservative-Reform party says that they are going to cut the Infrastructure Bank. He is just reaffirming a policy that we know. My question for him is this: Is the member aware of the many projects that are taking place in his home province? One of the examples would be the investments in irrigation, which is helping farmers diversify. Liberals have continuously been there to advocate for farmers, and the farmers would actually be fairly disappointed in the Conservatives' not recognizing the importance of irrigation in the province of Manitoba.

Why does the Conservative Party oppose that particular program?

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, that is a bit rich, coming from the most anti-Alberta government in Canadian history. We thought Trudeau 1 was bad, but under the current Prime Minister, we have never seen such brazen attacks on the hard-working people from my province, the greatest province in this country, Alberta, as those that have come from the Prime Minister. The attacks do not stop, whether they are on our province, on our energy sector, on our farmers, or on everyday hard-working Canadians.

I do not think there is any Canadian today who can trust that whatever the government is doing is in the best interest of Canadians. We recently saw that with the carbon tax scam, where the environment minister, who is probably one of the most anti-Alberta ministers I have ever seen, hid a report that proved to Canadians that there is a $30-billion carbon tax loss to the economy and to workers. The government did everything it could to hide that report, so I do not know anyone who can trust that the government is doing anything in the best interest of Canada or Canadians.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, in his speech, my colleague talked about the cost of living and touched on the issue of housing. At the moment, there is a trend on both the Liberal and Conservative sides. There is a coalition trying to interfere in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction when it comes to housing.

Both the Leader of the Opposition's bill and the latest budget from the party opposite attempt to get tough with cities so they will propose housing solutions. These magic wands will not work. Instead, the money earmarked for housing could be transferred unconditionally to Quebec, because housing comes under Quebec's jurisdiction. What does my colleague think?

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Madam Speaker, let me just correct the record first. The only coalition is the carbon tax coalition of the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc. There is no way we would be complicit in any way like the Bloc has been in making sure that housing costs have doubled. That is not something we were complicit in. I will say that our common-sense plan to fix the housing crisis in this country will do just that. We will bring up the supply by incentivizing municipalities to build and stop the gatekeeping—