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

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Saskatoon West talked about the so-called Conservative housing plan, but I have not seen anything in that housing plan that speaks to the kind of communities that I represent, which are rural communities with small populations.

The challenges in rural communities are categorically different from those in urban centres. The Conservative plan mentions forcing density around transit hubs. Small rural communities do not have transit hubs. They talk about requiring communities to build 15% more new homes every year. In many small communities, the housing demand does not allow for that kind of growth, yet small communities deserve housing just like any other community in this country.

I am wondering why the Conservative plan so wholly ignores the housing needs of rural communities.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, first of all, I just want to say that I was a home builder in a small community, so I understand that very well.

I have really good news for the member. There is an easy way to find this out. All of our detailed plans will come up during an election. That member and his party have the ability to force an election on this very budget. If they choose to not support the Liberal government and this Liberal budget, and instead vote against it, we could have an election. All of the detailed plans that he is looking for will be there for him to see.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I wanted to start off by saying that the NDP will be supporting the budget because of the many provisions that the NDP has forced into the budget. These things are not negligible. They would help to deal with the here and now. Canadians are struggling to make ends meet, put food on the table and keep a roof over their head. This is 50% because of the Liberal government's continuing the terrible practices of the former Harper regime; in addition, about 50% of the blame has to be shared by Conservative MPs, who have never admitted to the incredible way that they ran roughshod over the rights of Canadians, gutting services and giving massive handouts to the billionaires in this country. Therefore, 50% of the blame is shared on both sides of the House, by Conservatives and Liberals.

The NDP has gotten to work. The member for Burnaby South and the NDP caucus all make a real difference in the House of Commons. We have really extraordinary members of Parliament, such as the member for Edmonton Strathcona and the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley; they are two of the very best members of Parliament. However, the entire NDP caucus is very proud of the work we do, and Canadians are seeing the results of that.

Dental care has been an extraordinary success that Conservatives should be thanking the NDP for. In the first two weeks of the new dental care program, 60,000 seniors were able to get dental care, dental surgery and dental supports. For many of them, it was for the first time in their lives. There are 60,000 people. Members can do the numbers. That is hundreds of constituents in each and every Conservative riding, Liberal riding and NDP riding. However, Conservatives have not once stood up to say, “Gosh, we should have been more effective as official opposition, and we thank the NDP for providing these services to our constituents.” Two million seniors have signed up so far. Tens of thousands are signing up each additional week. We know that, by the end of this month, those seniors aged 65 to 70 will be able to sign up for the program and are signing up now. We know that, next month, people with disabilities and families with children under 18 years of age will be able to sign up. This is all a result of the work of the member for Burnaby South, the member for Edmonton Strathcona, the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley and the entire NDP caucus, which makes a difference each and every day.

However, we do not stop there, of course. There is pharmacare now for six million people with diabetes, some of whom are paying $1,000 or $1,500 a month for their diabetes medication and devices. An example is my constituent, Amber. She is paying $1,000 a month for diabetes medication. By the time the pharmacare program is rolled out in the course of the next few months, she will finally be able to breathe; she will not have to find $1,000 each and every month in order to pay for a diabetes medication that keeps her in stable health. Now, the reality is that, in every Conservative riding, 17,000 to 18,000 constituents would be helped by this. The constituents of each Conservative MP should be telling their MP to vote yes for the pharmacare provisions, and not only for that which affects diabetes but also for contraception. On average, 25,000 constituents of each Conservative MP would be benefiting from contraception; however, again, the member for Carleton has tried to block these types of supports, which would make a huge difference in the lives of the constituents of Conservative MPs. They are not doing the work. The NDP is doing the work for them, but the least they can do is stop blocking it so their constituents could actually benefit from what the NDP has done for all Canadians.

We also see in this budget a furthering of the work of the member for Burnaby South, the member for Edmonton Strathcona, the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley and the entire NDP caucus. What does that mean? Well, it means such things as ensuring that there is a growth guarantee around the Canada health transfer. I will come back to that in a moment, because this was a particularly egregious decision made by the Harper government to slash health care, destroying health care in this country. The fact that we now have, in this budget, a growth guarantee to ensure that health spending grows as expenses do is actually an important step forward.

With the national school food program, we are talking about nearly half a million kids who would benefit from getting food at school. Conservatives are saying, no, they want to block that provision. They do not want kids to eat healthily.

That makes no sense at all. Again, we are not even asking Conservative MPs to do any work. We are just asking them to please stop blocking the school lunch program, so kids in their ridings can actually benefit from school lunches.

In rural areas of this country, we have a shortage of pharmacists, dentists and dental hygienists, teachers and social workers. We have seen those shortages. Expanding the Canada student loan forgiveness program so that we can have more people in rural areas and northern areas of this country with those skills and professions is vitally important. Again, Conservatives are blocking that program.

I wanted to then turn my attention to the issue of tax provisions. This is going to be an important part of the second half of my speech. The reality of actually ensuring that Canada's big corporations start paying their fair share includes implementing a 15% global minimum tax to ensure that large multinational corporations pay their fair share wherever they do business. Tax provisions are important. Capital gains provisions are important, as we saw under the Harper government, during the terrible Harper regime, with its infamous tax haven treaties.

The PBO did an analysis just after the Harper government was thrown out. The most profitable corporations and our very wealthiest citizens bled $30 billion a year out of this country. As a result of those infamous Harper tax haven treaties, over $30 billion a year was shipped overseas where those corporations and citizens never had to pay a cent of tax. What was the result of that? Under the Harper regime, there was a slashing of services. Veterans Affairs was slashed. The veterans who laid their lives on the line for their country were treated with such disdain and disrespect by the Harper regime. Basically, their services were gutted.

We saw a whole range of unbelievable cuts to other services, such as for seniors. Seniors were being disrespected. The Harper regime forced seniors to work years longer before they could collect a pension. There were cuts in services from environmental services to food inspection. The Harper regime was a terrible calamity for this country. It was the worst government in Canadian history; of that there is no doubt. There were scandals and financial mismanagement, along with a terrible approach by the Harper regime.

What I reproach the Liberal government for, despite the fact that there has been some progress in the budget, which we will be supporting as a result, is its maintenance of many of the terrible practices of the Harper regime. Many of those practices are still intact. We are still losing $30 billion each and every year, as a result of the infamous Harper tax haven treaties. Colleagues can do the math. That is a third of a trillion dollars that we have lost over the course of a little more than a decade as a result of Conservative mismanagement, scandals and corruption.

However, colleagues should not stop there. Again, Liberal practices and Conservative practices are so similar that we say there has been a corporate coalition between the two parties over the course of the last 15 years, with a trillion dollars having been given in liquidity supports to Canada's big banks. Why was this? It was to maintain bank profits, executive bonuses and dividend payments for Canada's big banks. Between the Conservatives and the Liberals, over the last 15 years, a trillion dollars in 2024 dollars has been given to Canada's big banks. When we talk about oil and gas CEOs, a regular stipend with massive subsidies that was given under the Conservatives has continued under the Liberals.

The NDP has forced major improvements, with significant steps forward, but the reality is that the legacy of the Harper regime is terrible. It continues today because the Liberals have simply not stepped up to do what is right, to ensure that we have a fair tax system, that the terrible legacy of the infamous Harper tax haven treaties has finally ended, that banks stop receiving hundreds of billions of dollars in supports, and that oil and gas CEOs stop being subsidized off the public purse. Those are steps that an NDP government would take.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I know that the member was in the House earlier in the debate when a Conservative colleague stood up and tried to glowingly suggest that Stephen Harper had actually balanced a budget in 2015. I was not here at that time, but I certainly know how Stephen Harper did that. He did that by selling off shares of GM. He did that on the backs of veterans. He did that by increasing old age security to 67. He did a number of things. Therefore, when Conservatives talk about balancing a budget, what they are really talking about is cuts and cutting as much as they can, because they do not believe in these social programs. Could the member give some insight, since he was here at that time?

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, the Harper government was the worst government in Canadian history. Yes, the Conservatives cut and they slashed services, but they never balanced the budget. They slashed services to seniors, to veterans, to the most vulnerable. They would announce, “Oh, next year is going to be different. We're going to balance the budget.” However, they never did. They used sleight of hand; they tried to reconfigure the budget, but they had a deficit each and every year, sometimes an enormous one.

Now, for folks who want to check that, they can look at the fiscal period returns issued by the Ministry of Finance, which is surely not a hotbed of social democrats. The fiscal period returns have compared all governments, federal and provincial, over the course of the last 40 years. What those fiscal period returns tell us is that Conservatives and Liberals are woefully inadequate in managing money and paying down debt. However, the best administrations have been, uniformly over the last 40 years, NDP governments in the provinces, which have balanced budgets and paid down debt more than any other political party. Folks should not believe me; they should consult the fiscal period returns and see the proof.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague said something interesting. He said that, ever since the Harper government lost power nine years ago, the Liberals have not stood up to do what is right and fair.

In other words, he just admitted that the Liberals have not been getting the job done for the past nine years and that they are not doing things fairly. If there is one thing the NDP and the Bloc Québécois are fighting, one thing we agree on, it is injustice. We want to fight injustice.

We know for a fact that most of the money allocated to programs the NDP lobbied for will not flow until after the next election. With things going the way they are going, the Conservatives might well take power and never implement those programs, so I have to ask myself why the NDP is not positioning itself as the progressive party in the rest of Canada. It could position itself as the party that is not corrupt. It could campaign on that to make sure these programs will actually be set up.

Apparently the NDP does not have the courage to do that and is supporting the Trudeau government. Polls say they are going down with him.

My question, therefore, is this: Why not trigger an election right now?

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

I would remind the hon. member that sitting members are not to be referred to by name.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I really like my colleague, but he is mistaken.

First, dental care is already being offered to Quebeckers. The services covered by the pharmacare program will make a big difference. They already have the support of Quebec's major unions.

What the NDP is doing is already having a positive impact on people's daily lives. I could go on, but this impact will continue to grow.

The next election will be a referendum election. I know that my colleague loves referendums, but this one will be a referendum election for the millions of Quebeckers and the millions of Canadians who receive dental care, about whether they want to keep those services. Pharmacare will assist six million Canadians with insulin and nine million Canadians with contraception. Do people want to keep these services?

I am convinced that people will say yes, that they will want to keep these services and avoid the cuts and all the ravages of the Conservative Party. I am convinced that they want the stability that comes with the NDP, that makes it possible to provide all these services, and with better financial management as well.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity tonight to speak to the budget.

A big part of what politicians do is decide which problems in society need to be solved by governments and which problems are best left to individuals and to families and to the private sector.

The Liberal government, with its NDP coalition partners, spends a great deal of time, effort, energy and taxpayers' money trying to solve all sorts of problems, while unfortunately accomplishing very little and more often than not being counterproductive.

I remember when the finance minister presented her budget last month. She received one partial standing ovation from the official opposition when she said:

There are those who claim that the only good thing government can do when it comes to economic growth is to get out of the way.

The finance minister went on to cite the example of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project as an example of her government's success when it comes to government intervention in the economy. It was not too long ago that resource companies and international investors were excited about all of the potential pipeline projects in this country, such as northern gateway, Keystone XL and energy east, just to name a few.

Building pipelines such as these is something that private sector companies are able to do in most countries, but sadly not in Canada. All of the blueprints for all of these pipeline projects have been sitting on the shelf collecting dust for years because the Liberal government has made it practically impossible for the private sector to get projects like this built through its anti-development legislation, such as Bill C-69, the “no more pipelines” bill, and Bill C-48, the “west coast oil tanker ban”.

It is sad that the finance minister would cite, as a success story, the one lonely, solitary pipeline expansion project that the government decided to take over while all the others were being chased away. It is also worth noting that this was not a new pipeline being built. It was simply the twinning of an existing pipeline, with a new pipe being laid right alongside the old one. This raises the question: How long did it take to build the new pipeline and how long did it take to build the old one?

The proposal for the original Trans Mountain pipeline was submitted for approval in 1951. Construction was finished in 1952. Compare that to the decade that it has taken for the expansion to be completed. That makes this project hardly anything for the Liberal government to brag about. One also cannot help but be concerned about the cost overruns that have happened under the Liberal government's watch. The Trans Mountain expansion was originally estimated to cost $7 billion. The final price came in at $34 billion.

When a fivefold increase in total cost is touted as a success story, that should give all Canadians pause the next time the Liberal government sets out on one of its interventions into the economy. The finance minister went on to talk about her government's new school lunch program. It seems that the Liberals have just recently discovered what Conservatives and food banks have been saying for years, namely that food bank use has skyrocketed under the Liberal government.

According to a report by Food Banks Canada, nearly two million Canadians had to use food banks in March of last year. That is a 32% increase from the year before. Furthermore, one third of food bank users are children. I did not hear the finance minister mention under whose watch food bank use skyrocketed. I did not hear anything in her speech about the Liberals increasing their carbon tax again this year on the farmers who grow the food, the truckers who truck the food and the grocers who refrigerate the food, and about all of those costs being passed on to consumers at the grocery store.

I also did not hear anything from the finance minister about passing Bill C-234 in its original form to exempt grain drying and barn heating from the carbon tax so that those costs are not passed on to consumers in the form of higher grocery prices.

I did not hear anything about the Liberals' $40-billion deficit driving up interest rates or the $60 billion in debt servicing charges making it more difficult for Canadians to make ends meet and causing Canadians to have to choose between putting a roof over their heads or putting food onto the dinner tables.

Instead of focusing on the root cause of the cost of living crisis, the Liberals have decided to bring in yet another government program. This time, it is a nationwide school lunch program. While school lunch programs are certainly a reasonable and beneficial public policy, anyone who bothers to take a brief skim of section 91 and section 92 of our Constitution will tell us this is clearly the jurisdiction of provincial governments and best left to provincial ministries of education and social services.

What I find so frustrating about the Liberal government is not only that it is bad at capitalism, but also that it is just as bad at socialism. Take, for example, the new Canada disability benefit. This program resulted from the passage of Bill C-22, a bill the Liberals introduced almost two years ago. The stated objective of this bill was actually very reasonable; it was to provide a social safety net for Canadians living with disabilities so that no one has to live in poverty due to a disability.

Personally, I have always felt programs such as this are best left to provincial governments. In my home province of Saskatchewan, we have a program called the Saskatchewan assured income for disability, SAID, program. I also believe very strongly in an inclusive society for persons with disabilities, so if the federal government wanted to join in, I certainly was not going to stand in the way. It seems that everyone else in this chamber felt the same way since Bill C-22 passed unanimously last year.

When the details of the Canada disability benefit were announced in the budget, they were certainly a disappointment for disability advocates everywhere, with the maximum benefit being only $200 per month and not one thin dime being paid out until July of next year. Two hundred dollars per month is not enough for anyone in this country to live off, even before inflation and the cost of living skyrocketed under the government.

After nine years of the Liberal government, and with the introduction of this budget, the size of the federal government and the cost of the federal government have now doubled under the Liberals' watch. After nine years, the government has come to the point where literally all of the revenue from the GST goes toward merely paying the interest on the federal debt. The Liberals are adding another $40 billion to the federal debt this year, which now stands at well over $1 trillion and rising.

I come back to the finance minister's statement, when she said that the only good thing the government can do when it comes to economic growth is to get out of the way. A more accurate statement would be that the only good thing that the current government can do is to get out of the way.

It is time for a new Conservative government to replace the Liberals and their NDP coalition partners and to fix the budget as well as the many other problems they have created. Therefore, Conservatives will vote against this budget and we will vote non-confidence in the government.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, if I understand this correctly, Conservatives are saying it is this government's fault people have to use food banks, but when this government puts forward a solution to that, this member says it is not in the jurisdiction of the federal government, one should read our Constitution and the federal government should have nothing to do with this.

The member spoke as though he was very complimentary and understood and encouraged school food programs. He must know Canada is the only G7 country without a national school food program, but yet he not only will vote against this budget that puts money into it, but also voted against the national school food program policy that came before the House about three months ago. We are expected to believe this is all because the Constitution says we should not do anything about it.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Madam Speaker, good heavens. Where do I begin?

Yes, the Liberal government has caused a lot of problems in this country. Most notably is the increased use of food banks, especially among children, over the last nine years of the government.

I would also really encourage the member to read this country's Constitution. I do not know what it is like in his home province of Ontario, but in Saskatchewan every school can be designated as a community school if it is in a neighbourhood with a low enough income and a low enough poverty level, and those schools are given school food programs on the basis of the individual need. I do not understand why we need a national school food program when provincial governments are already doing exactly that.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Regina—Wascana mentioned the northern gateway pipeline.

What he did not mention was that the northern gateway pipeline and the plan by Enbridge to bring crude oil supertankers to the north coast of B.C. was wholly rejected by municipalities, first nations, anglers, commercial fishermen and the majority of the people of the District of Kitimat, who held a specific referendum on that issue. The culmination of that effort led to Bill C-48, the north coast Oil Tanker Moratorium Act.

I say this with no animus to my colleague personally, but his leader is going around the country saying that a Conservative government would tear up that oil tanker moratorium as one of its first acts in office.

Can my friend down the way confirm if that is true? Can he say it loud enough for the people all the way on the west coast of Canada, on Haida Gwaii, in Prince Rupert and Klemtu, and all of the—

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

We get the gist of it.

The hon. member for Regina—Wascana.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Madam Speaker, I have said literally hundreds of times on the campaign trail that yes, Conservatives are opposed to Bill C-48, the west coast oil tanker ban. That is because Canada's oil and gas do not do anyone any good when they just sit there in the ground doing nothing.

Other countries around the world buy their oil and gas from Saudi Arabia and Russia. That is so counterproductive to building a productive Canadian society and a better place for our allies all around the world. Yes, we will certainly get oil and gas flowing to our allies and around the world.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Regina—Wascana for his wonderful speech. He and I share a passion when it comes to supporting Canada's world-class energy industry.

Can he share some of what he hears from people in Regina on the impact the anti-energy government has had on the people and the jobs in Regina—Wascana?