Debates of Feb. 25th, 2014

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and honoured to rise and discuss economic action plan or budget 2014. At the outset, I will say I am going to be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Calgary Centre.

It may come as no surprise to members who know me that I am going to be discussing veterans' issues as related to this budget specifically, and veterans' issues more broadly.

The new veterans charter was passed in 2005 by the previous Liberal government, and good on it for doing that. It passed with 100% support from the House, from every member of every party. In 2006, our government implemented it, again supported by all veterans' organizations. In 2011, it was updated by our government, not with entire support from across the floor, but that is okay; we got it done. With economic action plan 2014 or budget 2014, the new veterans charter would be updated again.

As many know, we are also doing a comprehensive review of the new veterans charter in the veterans affairs committee, and it will be updated again after that. It is a work in progress, as it should be. Is it a perfect document, a perfect plan? No, that plan has not been invented yet, and that is why it has to be continually updated, as it is being in economic action plan 2014; to the point that even the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore, on many occasions, has pointed out that the new veterans charter is in fact superior to the old pension plan, given that we all agree it needs to be continuously updated.

In this economic action plan, there are additional measures to honour the sacrifices made by veterans and their families and to facilitate the transition to civilian life and provide better access to services.

We are expanding the eligibility to funeral and burial programs to ensure that modern-day veterans of modest means have access to a dignified funeral and burial. In economic action plan 2013, we added $65 million over two years and raised the amount available to such a veteran to $7,376 from $3,600 plus the cost of the plot. In economic action plan 2014, we are adding a further $108.2 million over three years, starting in 2013-2014, to expand eligibility for those veterans of modest means. That includes eliminating some of the items that had inflated the amount of their assets, which would have eliminated their ability to participate in the program. That is changing.

In this budget, we are also committing to commemorating the Afghan mission. I can tell members that the highlight of my time in Parliament will be the time I spent in Afghanistan with the troops on numerous occasions. It has been the longest military engagement in Canada's history, and it certainly deserves to be commemorated properly, mainly for the 158 Canadian soldiers plus 5 civilians who lost their lives, and the families who suffered, not just those who suffered the loss of a member but those who suffered through the injury to family members or just the stress of having family members in a theatre of war. As I said, the highlight of my career in Parliament will be the time spent in Afghanistan, waking up on Christmas morning in an outpost somewhere in the boondocks of the Panjwai with those incredibly remarkable Canadians who went back there time after time, some of them, to help people whom they will never meet again and had never met before. There was nothing in it for them other than doing what was right.

I mentioned this before in a previous speech, but I will talk about the kind of people they are and the determination they have to do good. In the last Edmonton rotation a couple of years ago, in the combat mission, there were nine soldiers going back to Afghanistan for the fourth time. The commander of Land Force Western Area, who was a friend of mine, talked to me about having a personal interview with each of them just to ensure their heads were on straight, so to speak. He said he was talking to this one young master corporal and he asked him, “What is your biggest concern about going back to Afghanistan for the fourth time?” He said the soldier looked him in the eye and said, “That you will not let me go, sir”. Whereupon, the commander said, “You are okay; get out of here”. In fact, I wound up talking to that soldier with a bunch of others at the airport a couple of days later when they were leaving and, not knowing it was him, I recounted my conversation with the general. He stepped forward and said, “That was me, sir”. I shook his hand and thanked him very much and wished him good luck.

As we have said before, we are introducing priority hiring for veterans. We are going to change the Public Service Employment Act and the public service employment regulations to cater to the fact that there are 7,600 men and women who leave the Canadian Armed Forces every year. In round numbers, 1,000 of those leave for medical reasons beyond their control.

We are creating a statutory hiring priority in the Public Service Employment Act for Canadian Armed Forces members medically released for service-related reasons and extending the duration of their entitlements from two years to five years, giving them more time to adjust and more time to prepare themselves for employment in the public service, if that is what they wish to do.

We are also amending the Public Service Employment Act to give preference to eligible veterans in external public service job competitions and allowing Canadian Armed Forces personnel with more than three years' service to participate in internal public service job competitions.

We want to give our men and women in uniform every opportunity to transition to the public service, if that is what they want, or to other areas in the private sector.

We will be providing better access to online services to the tune of about $2.1 million in 2014-15 to improve the My VAC Account, to enhance the ability to do routine business with Veterans Affairs Canada. This is intended to mimic in-person services.

Online services do not cater to everybody. A lot of the older veterans may not be as tech savvy as some of the younger folks, and there are other ways in which we are trying to cater to them. However, this targets the largest and fastest growing segment of the veteran population. It is just another example of our trying to keep ahead of change, instead of being dragged along by change.

On veterans issues more broadly, they are all budget related because they have related to past budgets and hopefully, in my view, future budgets. One thing we need to understand is that the aim of the veterans affairs programs is not lifelong financial dependence. It is based on giving veterans the opportunity to retrain, rehabilitate, and get on with their own lives under their own terms.

A lot of these men and women are very young. Some are in their 20s and they have a long time ahead of time. The last thing that almost anybody would want to do is to sit there and be financially dependent. We want to honour their spirit to get out and do that. We want to help them in every way we can.

There is an awful lot of misinformation out there. Most of it is based on emotion. The notion that we “give them a lump sum and kick them to the curb” is absolutely false, and frankly it is shameful when people keep bringing that up.

All MPs on all sides of this House care deeply about our veterans and the men and women in uniform, notwithstanding what we might hear in the media or from the opposition or the unions. I do not blame them. The media relies on conflict to make stories, and I get that. The opposition's job is to oppose, and I get that. The union's job is to advocate for union jobs, and I get that.

However, people should understand that and maybe not take everything from anybody, government or anybody else. People should not take everything at face value. They should understand that the media, opposition, union, and government are all operating in their own interest. They should look at all the facts.

I have done a number of veterans events, and all I ask is that we look at all the facts. We can disagree about facts. That is okay, as long as we are doing it respectfully, rationally, and with all the facts on the table, not cherry-picking facts and building a case around that.

The broad range of veterans' benefits is very comprehensive and, yes, it is very complex. It should be simpler. We have had different things added, one on top of the other, for many years. I understand that there is confusion about what is available and how to access it. We do need to make that simpler, and I will talk about that more in a minute.

There is a broad range of benefits available, and I do not have time to go over all of them. There is a broad range of facilities now available.

What I will say is there are challenges, and I firmly acknowledge that. We have challenges of access, which we are working on; challenges of burden of proof; challenges transferring information from one department to another, DND to VAC. The forms are too complex, but we are working on making them simpler. It needs to be faster, with more one-stop service and more online options that cater to the changing demographics. We need improved wait times and stronger partnerships with DND and others.

The bottom line and the question we have to answer is this: are the Veterans Affairs programs a success? Yes, they are. Are they a failure? In some respects, yes, and we are working on those. Are they a work in progress? Absolutely, they are a work in progress, and that is what we have to keep doing. With the co-operation of people on all sides of the House and people outside the House, we will make that happen.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleague had plenty of nice things to say about the budget.

According to my analysis, things look a little less rosy for my region, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. Forestry is big in the region, but we also have aluminum plants. Those two sectors of the Canadian economy are really struggling right now.

Many people want to work in my region, but they cannot find work in their fields. Tourism is also important to the region, but we know that these days, not many Americans or Europeans are interested in coming. Basically, things are really tough in my part of the country.

Can my Conservative colleague pull a rabbit out of his hat and give some good news to the people of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, maybe some kind of economic stimulus to help create good jobs?

I think that the reason people were disappointed in the budget is that it did not contain many measures to stimulate employment in my region.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have in fact spent a lot of time in the member's riding at CFB Bagotville. I was never posted there, but I flew out of there a lot with 425 Squadron, holding alert with CF-18s. I have spent a fair bit of time downtown. There are some wonderful places downtown in Chicoutimi and other local communities.

The member is right that there are areas of the country that are more advantaged than others with respect to employment and so on, for whatever reason. It is a big country, so the playing field is never going to be level.

There are programs in place. There are EI reforms, which could be taken either way, I guess. There are programs such as the building Canada fund. I am not sure how much infrastructure is available to be built or necessary to be built in his riding. Obviously it is not like Toronto or Montreal or someplace like that.

The main point is to work with the relevant agencies to promote his riding, which we all do, as I am sure he does as well. If there are projects in the riding that would benefit the local economy and benefit work, he should by all means promote those to the Minister of Transport or whoever happens to be involved in that particular area.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member started out with a couple of comments with respect to what has been in the Last Post Fund in this and in the last budget, and then later in his remarks he said that we should not take anything that anyone says at face value.

One of the things he said was that in the last budget there was $65 million in extra money allocated to the Last Post Fund. That is one thing that should not be taken at face value, and here is why.

Yes, there was mention of $65 million in the budget, but the Last Post Fund spends about $10 million a year. It is true that in the last budget the government doubled the amount for which veterans would be eligible for a funeral. Assuming the same number of eligible veterans, that would double the amount of expenditure under the Last Post Fund from $10 million to $20 million. The amount the Conservatives put in the budget was $65 million. They put $65 million in the budget for one reason: they had no intention of spending it. It is going to be impossible for veterans to be able to avail themselves of that. The $65 million is going to lapse and become part of the budget balancing exercise. It is what is called balancing the budget by stealth. That is what it is.

Does the member agree that this balancing of the budget by stealth is tantamount to balancing the budget on the backs of veterans, and that the $65 million in last year's budget is nothing but a ruse?

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it will come as no surprise to my hon. colleague that I completely reject the premise of his question. All Veterans Affairs programs are in fact demand-driven. They are needs-based. If the demand is there, it will be delivered.

We have made more changes in the budget that respond to the need to lower the threshold of proof, to lower the need to declare income and so on, in order to put someone in the position where they could take advantage of the Last Post Fund. We put everything out there and we see if it works. Then we try to improve it the next time. That is what we did in the last budget, that is what we are doing in this budget, and that is what we will do in the next budget.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am really delighted to speak to this budget. It is a great budget, and it is no coincidence that we in Canada have one of the strongest economies in the world. That is thanks to sound judgment and knowledgeable leadership, and it is budgets like this that show that. Our finance minister and Prime Minister have been doing an amazing job over the last eight years in keeping Canada on track. In fact, that is the reason that I ran for office: to support the stellar leadership of our Conservative government in the economy so that we can continue to enjoy a high standard of living and a good quality of life in Canada.

Economic action plan 2014 is another example of good economics and excellent government policy. Despite what the airy-fairy Liberal leader has been telling his flock, budgets do not balance themselves. Everyone knows that. It takes strong, knowledgeable leadership in order to do this. Just as we promised in the last election, we will return to balanced budgets in 2015. This is not just talking points; this is what matters to Calgarians and what matters to Canadians.

We only have to look at the floundering economies in Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal to see what economic decisions that are not based on these kinds of fundamentals lead to in the face of a very difficult global economy. Thankfully, Canada is not there, because we have had responsible, sound government, with responsible, sound programs for our budgets.

What does fostering strong economic growth do for Canadians? First, it means lower taxes for everyone, which keeps more money in the pockets of Canadians. Second, Canadians and their kids will not end up paying for today's overspending. It is simply irresponsible to be building up debt today by overspending when we know we are leaving the debt for our kids. That is mortgaging our future, and we as Conservatives will not do that.

Balancing the books also cuts our interest payments, and that frees up money so that we can reduce taxes at the same time that we are protecting and growing our important social programs, programs such as education and health care. This seems like common sense to most Canadians, but unfortunately this kind of common sense does not seem to be very common on the other side of the House. The opposition parties want to recklessly tax and spend, and they think that the budget will balance itself. That statement itself tells us what kind of economic leadership we would get from the Liberals: vacuous.

Canadians deserve strong financial leadership, and we have provided it in this budget. Economic action plan 2014 keeps us on a positive upward trajectory. It has new measures that would create even more jobs and opportunities and keep our taxes low. We are not balancing the budget by increasing the GST or by cutting health care, as the Liberals did; instead, we have increased health care spending and have actually cut the GST, not once but twice.

Canadians at all income levels are benefiting from this, with low- and middle-income Canadians receiving the biggest tax breaks. The average Canadian family now pays $3,400 less in taxes than they did when this government was elected. That is amazing. That is $3,400 they have in their pockets to spend on anything they want. They can spend it on education and child care, family vacations and mortgage payments, things that will make their lives better.

We are also supporting pipelines and resource development while protecting the environment. It is the energy industry that is paying Canada's bills, and we have a balanced approach to balancing the books by balancing energy and the environment. This is the only party in the House that takes that approach.

This budget is jam-packed with all kinds if benefits for Canadians. I could go on and on, but in the interests of time, I will share just a few more.

As we know, my city of Calgary was hit with a devastating flood, the flood of the century, last summer. The flood not only cost $5 billion in damages but also destroyed people's homes and lives, and they are still rebuilding. It is important to me and the people of Calgary that not only does this budget include $2.8 billion to pay for the damages from that flood, but there is also, for the first time, another $200 million for a disaster mitigation fund that was announced in the throne speech and funded in the budget to help to prevent future floods. That provides a tremendous amount of the psychological security that people need after such a disaster.

However, the budget does not stop there. We are also consulting with the insurance industry, along with the provinces and territories, to find a better way of approaching residential flood insurance.

Not only are we providing the support needed to help Canadians recover from disasters, but we are also keeping the economy on track.

In 2008, the world had the worst recession since the dirty thirties. It has been almost six years, and people around the globe are still dealing with those shock waves. However, I am proud that here in Canada, we can say that we have emerged from that crisis with one of the strongest economies in the world. I think we sometimes take for granted, but we should not, because budgets do not balance themselves and economies do not flourish on their own. They need tending. It is no coincidence.

This budget continues our forward-thinking, fiscally responsible approach. It addresses two fundamental issues for the economic health of Canadians.

The first is employment. Jobs matter to all of us. This budget would continue the gold track record of this government in creating jobs. There is not a real lack of potential employment in Canada, but rather a need for access to skills training so that people can get those jobs. As the old proverb goes,“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime”.

I recently chatted with a dad who sat next to me on the plane on the way back to Ottawa. He asked me how his daughter would be able to get a job once she graduates from school. That is something we are addressing in this budget. For the 26,000 apprentices who are looking for jobs in skilled trades, we have introduced the Canada apprentice loan. The program would provide apprentices in Red Seal trades, which include a lot of women, with over $100 million in interest-free loans every year. We are encouraging young women to look at the skilled trades. We are also investing $55 million to create paid internships for recent graduates in small and medium-sized companies in high-demand fields. These measures would help a lot of Canadians and a lot of our kids get a leg up in getting a job.

In my riding, during the pre-budget consultations, the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, seniors groups, corporations, and even the volunteer sector said that it is clear that skills training is the number one issue that needs to be addressed to keep our high quality of life. They want the government to help them with that. I am proud to say that this budget does that for Canadians, while keeping us on track to balance the budget and protecting our important programs.

Canada is also one of only a handful of countries in the world with a AAA credit rating. That is amazing. It shows that the Canadian economy is thriving. Canadian families in all income tax brackets have seen real increases of more than 10% to their income since our Conservative government was elected, and the economic action plan would build on this record.

Since our government implemented the action plan, Canada has the best job creation record of any G7 country. Again, these are things not to be taken for granted.

Canadians elected the Conservative government because they knew we understand that sound government policy and fiscally responsible budgets matter. Budgets do not balance themselves.

I learned this when I was growing up in Lloydminster, a city on the Alberta-Saskatchewan border. The border goes right down through the middle of Lloydminster. The Saskatchewan side of the border, which was under an NDP government, had small houses, often dilapidated, with old cars sitting out in front, and 50 metres across the road there would be new ranch houses with new trucks in front and oil pump jacks going up and down just as they were meant to. I asked myself what the difference was between Alberta and Saskatchewan. The difference was sound economic policy.

Saskatchewan has now started to flourish since it elected the Brad Wall Conservative-thinking government. It is inviting its sons and daughters, who had all left for other provinces as what we call economic refugees, to come home again. Saskatchewan now has the highest growth rate in the country and the kind of opportunity that we want for all Canadians.

It should not be just a few provinces in this country that enjoy that kind of prosperity. All Canadians should reap those kinds of rewards. That is what our Conservative government continues to achieve for all Canadians. This budget is an example of that. Budget 2014 tells the people of my riding and the rest of this country that they made the right choice in 2011, and they will do so again in 2015.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I really like participating in the debate and commenting on my Conservative colleagues' remarks. They keep saying that their government's budget is really great. I get that they are proud of their party, but we have a different perspective on the budget. I am very protective of my riding and, unfortunately, the main thing in this budget that will affect my riding is the cuts to National Defence.

I have repeatedly asked the government to confirm that the Bagotville military base's operating budget will be cut by 19.2%. I realize that my Conservative colleague is not the spokesperson for this issue and that she will not give me the answer I want.

Every budget has some good and some bad. Some parts of this budget should be amended to spare ridings that will be severely affected. I would like the Conservatives to consider that.

When the NDP proposes amendments, will the Conservative government rise above partisanship, stop thinking that its budget is perfect, take different situations into account and work with us to improve the budget?

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is what budgets are about. Budgets are always about choices. We can never say yes to everything. When we want to balance a budget, it is particularly important that we make choices to ensure that we can come within the realm that we want.

I am sure that the member opposite and his party will have an ample opportunity to discuss the budget at committee, but I can say that this budget's priority is making sure that we continue economic growth. Every one of the choices made in this budget has been pored over to do what is best for most Canadians.

I look forward to the continuing debate.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member for Calgary Centre talk about how the budgets have been good for all Canadians, and it made me wonder when she last went to Prince Edward Island.

The economic policies of the Conservative government have devastated our seasonal economy. That devastation was made worse by an announcement on February 20 to treat some islanders differently from others with respect to employment insurance. The cuts made to the civil service were about 5% across the country, but double that in Prince Edward Island. We have also been particularly hard hit by the decision of the Conservative government to put a $3-billion gap in infrastructure funding.

My question for the member comes back to her theme that the budgets have benefited all Canadians. Are all Canadians only those who have had the good fortune of finding oil buried underground from hundreds of years ago?

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for the question even though I completely reject its premise.

I would just remind him that every Canadian benefited from the $3,400 tax reduction achieved since the Conservatives came to office. That is regardless of whether they live in Prince Edward Island, Iqaluit, or Nanaimo, B.C. It is equal and it is there for all.

The focus of this budget is on helping to create jobs. I am sure those jobs would be created in Prince Edward Island as well as they would in every other province. We want to see our resource industry developed at the same time we do other important things, such as protecting Sable Island. These are all priorities of our government.

The apprenticeship trades program is another very important program. We want to make sure that all Canadians have an opportunity to participate, but not by giving them a government job, because these are not long-term, permanent jobs that grow the economy. We want to give them jobs in the private sector, where they can earn money and we can keep their taxes low. They would have money in their pockets to take home to their families.

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Lambton—Kent—Middlesex.

It is my pleasure to rise today to speak about economic action plan 2014. This budget is focused on what matters to Canadians, keeping taxes low and growing the economy, a concept the opposition simply does not understand or refuses to acknowledge.

Economic action plan 2014 fulfills our commitment to balance the budget by 2015. While the leader of the Liberal Party thinks that budgets just balance themselves, on this side of the House we know that achieving this requires prudent fiscal management.

It is no coincidence that Canada's economy has witnessed the best economic performance among all G7 countries, both in job creation and income growth. Since the end of the recession, over one million high-paying, net new jobs have been created in Canada. Not only that, but we are also the only G7 country to have more than fully recovered businesses lost during the recession.

The IMF and the OECD both predict that our economic growth will remain the strongest in the G7 in the years ahead. For the sixth year in a row, the World Economic Forum has ranked Canada’s banking system the soundest in the world.

Nevertheless, we know that Canada is not immune to worldwide economic difficulties that arise beyond its borders, which is why we continued to support job creation and economic growth.

To the dismay of the Liberal economic advisers, this budget does not say amen to taxes; rather, the opposite. Our government believes in letting families, not big government, decide how to spend their hard-earned dollars. The facts speak for themselves. Since 2006, we have cut taxes nearly 160 times and reduced the overall tax burden to its lowest level in 50 years.

The economic action plan 2014 continues to deliver on our promise not to increase the tax burden. We are introducing a tax credit for volunteers taking part in search and rescue activities to emphasize the valuable contribution they make nationally. We are eliminating the sales tax on more healthcare products and services, and increasing the tax credit for medical expenses.

Our strong performance with respect to tax relief has led to savings of almost $3,400 for a typical family of four, and more than 1 million low-income Canadians have been taken off the tax rolls.

Economic action plan 2014 is about creating jobs for Canadians. Through the Canada job grant, Canadians will be able to access the skills training they need to get jobs that are in demand. The Canada apprentice loan program would provide apprentices in Red Seal trades access to over $100 million in interest-free loans each year. Too many jobs go unfilled because of a lack of people with the right skills. We are taking action to address this problem by providing Canadians the training they need to pursue well-paying jobs that are in high demand.

Canadians deserve to be the first in line for jobs, which is why we have launched an enhanced job-matching service to connect job seekers and employers. We are focused on connecting young people with jobs by investing $55 million to create paid internships for recent graduates in small and medium-size businesses in high-demand fields. Our budget also invests $75 million to support senior workers who want to participate in the job market but require skills training.

To continue reducing taxes and improving the quality of life for Canadians, we have to take advantage of the enormous potential offered by our natural resources. That sector accounts for almost a fifth of our economy, over half our exports and some 1.8 million jobs, which means one Canadian worker in 10. The future is promising. Hundreds of major resource projects are anticipated over the next 10 years, for a total investment of $650 billion.

For Canadians to continue to benefit from the abundance of natural resources, we must transport our resources to tidewater. However, we will not jeopardize the safety of Canadians or the environment as we look towards this important priority. That is why the economic action plan provides the National Energy Board the tools to continue conducting thorough science-based independent regulatory reviews for proposed pipeline projects. This investment builds on our government's responsible resource development plan to reduce unnecessary duplication and provide timely, predictable reviews for resource projects.

Mining workers in communities can count on our government's support of the mining sector, a vital engine of economic growth that provides over 400,000 jobs for Canadians. That is why we are extending the 15% mineral exploration tax credit to encourage investment and continue to promote Canadian mining companies abroad.

Our government is also focused on creating jobs and economic growth for forestry communities across Canada.

That is why we continue to offer support to these large communities of workers. Our investments in forest industry transformation program plays an essential role in providing industry with the tools it needs to effect the transition from traditional uses of forest products to the adoption of innovation-based technologies.

My constituents in Eglinton—Lawrence understand that our Conservative government will stand up for Ontarians. Our province will benefit from significant support, with major federal transfers in the 2014-15 period totalling $19.2 billion, an increase of 76% compared to the previous Liberal government. While the Liberals drastically slashed transfer payments to provinces, Ontarians can count on our government to ensure that there is funding for health care, education, and other social services that families rely on.

Budget 2014 recognizes the importance of Ontario as an economic driver for the Canadian economy. That is why we are investing to advance the construction of the Windsor Detroit international crossing, an important infrastructure project, to improve the commercial relationship with our largest trading partner and neighbour.

Through the building Canada fund, we have supported over 12,000 infrastructure projects from coast to coast to coast. This is the largest investment in Canada's job-creating infrastructure in our nation's history.

This year we are expanding our government support for important infrastructure by investing to enhance broadband service to up to 280,000 Canadians. We doubled the gas tax fund and indexed it to provide predictable investments directly to Canadian municipalities. This fund has directly benefited Toronto, with significant investments in our transit system.

Before the worldwide recession struck, our Conservative government had reduced Canada’s debt to its lowest level in 25 years. This example of our sense of responsibility in financial matters put Canada in the best possible position to weather the recession.

We know what the NDP and Liberals support: reckless spending and higher taxes. That may be what they want, but we know what Canadians want: good jobs, low taxes, and a balanced budget. That is exactly what this budget delivers.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the current government once put in place the eco-energy retrofit program. The program was popular with homeowners and small businesses because the highest rising cost in Canada is a person's energy bill. The government cut that program before it even expended all the dollars that were set aside.

In the last two budgets, there has been nothing for eco-energy retrofit.

An equal driver to investment is regulation. It is fine that the government talks about not spending money, but in its paying down of the deficit, which it created, by the way, it is not regulating.

What Canadians are waiting for, and certainly what the energy efficiency sector in Canada is waiting for, is for the government to put a price on carbon, particularly in the fossil fuel industry. President Obama is waiting for the government to put a price on carbon in the fossil fuel industry, and the Europeans are waiting for the government to take action.

The government once promised clean electricity. It claimed it is addressing climate change. My question for the minister is, what is it going to do in addition to this budget, which does nothing, to reduce the use of fossil fuels? What is it going to do to actually drive a cleaner economy?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I must say that I am quite amused, a little astounded perhaps, that the member opposite would raise the issue of the eco-energy program for homes, which the NDP has voted against consistently. It keeps voting against it, and then when it completed its mission, the NDP criticized it for not being extended. In fact, almost $1 billion was invested in this program and many millions of Canadian families have benefited from it. It has been a success.

It was always intended to be a limited program. Unfortunately, the NDP voted against it, and I guess it is sorry that it did.

We have no intention of introducing a $22 billion carbon tax. The United States government does not intend to do it either, contrary to what the member opposite has said.

Our government is interested in keeping taxes low and generating employment for Canadians. We are not in the business of increasing the deficit.

The deficit resulted from an international financial crisis, and the NDP was right there, asking us to spend much more. Had we done that, the deficit would have been considerably higher right now, and we would have had to take draconian steps to cut social services.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. minister were to bring in a separate bill to reinstate the eco-energy retrofit program for homes, I am sure he would find support for it from all sides of the House.

In fact, it is quite specious of him, and I am disappointed in him as a relatively new member of this place, to take the attitude that so many of his colleagues on that side have taken, saying, “Yes, we had a 400-page budget bill with all sorts of things in it, but because you didn't vote for it with all those nasty things in it, we're going to claim you voted against eco-energy”.

That is irresponsible. It is not reasonable. I do not know why he would take that approach.

He talks about reckless spending. People in my riding tell me that they are concerned about the cost of home heating. They see it rising all the time. They are very concerned about the cost of gasoline. There are so many costs they face in their daily lives that they are not getting help with from the government. However, the government is responsible for reckless spending. It increased spending at a rate of three times the rate of inflation in its first three years and put this country in deficit before the recession began. I can show him the records on that.

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, again, I am rather surprised that someone who voted against it wants to see the program reinstated. I did not hear from the member opposite or his party that they were in favour of this program.

As far as the deficit is concerned, again, the Liberals very much wanted this government to spend a great deal more than it did. If we had, our deficit would have been considerably higher. We would not be in the situation of being able to declare a surplus next year. We would not have a triple-A credit rating, and interest payments would be higher. There would be less money available for social programs, and we would have to cut those programs right now.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Thunder Bay—Superior-Nord, Taxation; the hon. member for Drummond, The Environment; the hon. member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, Aboriginal Affairs.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed an honour and a pleasure for me to stand in this great place and talk about the budget in economic action plan 2014.

When I joined and became a part of this House, times were good. In those times, we took the good times and the surpluses and we paid down the debt.

I come from a rural municipality called Lambton—Kent—Middlesex. My largest urban area is made up of 14,000 people. The next one, at the other end of the riding, has somewhere around 12,500. This means that Lambton—Kent—Middlesex is made up of small towns and small businesses, dominated by agriculture.

One of the things I know about the businesses in the riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex is that small businesses go into debt from time to time. I also know from experience, coming from a small business myself, that when we have debt, we work and build a business plan around it so that we can pay the deficit down to get that debt under control. That way, there is money left to spend on our families, to grow our businesses, and to be part of the community.

Today, it is again my pleasure to rise to speak on budget 2014, which takes the same principles that were here when I had the honour of being elected to this place in 2006. Now, we are here in 2014, getting ourselves back to the position that we were in. We will get there in another year.

Having a surplus and our deficit paid down would come with great joy to me, the businesspeople, the communities, and the families in my riding. When the time of a surplus comes, we will take some of that money and pay down our debt once again. Budget 2014 would have many benefits for the people of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex this year.

When we look at how business stands, we look at how a country stands. This year, Canada went from sixth place to second place in the ranking that now says that this is the second-best place in the world to do business. That does not just happen because somebody says that we have a good budget or because we have come out of the recession stronger than anyone else. It comes about because of determination and because we have a government that has the foresight, the focus, and the goal ahead of it to create an environment for businesses in which they continue to grow and sustain themselves.

It is not only important that we attract businesses into our communities and into our country. It is just as important, if not more important, that we keep our businesses, and that the businesses within our communities have the ability and the financial goal and vision ahead of them, along with the business plans and markets so that they will stay and grow. I say that because when they stay and grow in communities like mine, that means that they are the employer, and employers hire people. When we have strong and vibrant businesses within our community, that means jobs.

When we look at budget 2014 and the economic action plans of 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and beyond, they were about creating a strong, viable community and a country with strong opportunities for our businesses and for our families.

This would be the third consecutive year where we as a government would spend less of Canadians' money than we did the year before. As a result, this year's deficit would be less than last year's. The direct program spending has fallen for three consecutive years. For the first time in decades, and in 2012–13, it was over $5 billion lower than it was in 2009–10.

Specifically, action plan 2014 announced that the deficit is expected to decline to $2.9 billion in 2014–15. Then, in 2015–16, we would have a budget surplus of $6 billion, as we have continually talked about through our Minister of Finance, who is, by the way, recognized around the world as one of those solid finance ministers. That would take in, as any budget does, certain dollars for risk. As Canada is large and diverse with areas that have disasters, as we noticed last year, we need to have an adjustment for risk, and we have put in $3 billion for that.

The key issue is how we have been able to do that, and that sort of runs contrary to the opinion on the other side. We have been able to do this while keeping taxes low. Over the last eight years, not only have we kept taxes low, but we have also reduced them 160 times, which relates to a figure that puts Canada in the lowest tax regime in 50 years. I know the minister is looking at me in astonishment, but that was at the time of Prime Minister Diefenbaker. So we are back to that tradition of having those low taxes.

In fact, as I mentioned, my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex is made up of small businesses, agriculture, and middle-income families. The majority of our families are hard-working people. They get up every day, go to work, pay their taxes, and when they come home they become part of their community, which they get involved in. We have been able to leave $3,400 in their pockets, which we have not collected. We did not collect it and say that we would send them back a cheque. No; we just did not collect it.

I remember when we were talking about removing or lowering the GST. We did not say that we would remove it; the opposition party said they were going to but never did. However, we lowered the GST from 7% to 6% to 5%, and I remember one of the debates where the opposition said that all that meant was that we would save a dollar or something on a pair of jeans or a few cents here and there. I will tell members what it meant to my constituents in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex.

One percent put $18 million back in the pockets of the people in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex. Now, I am not a great mathematician, but 2% left $36 million. That was accomplished by taking the GST from 7% to 6% to 5%.

Also, we have a particular interest within this budget for local municipalities, such as my riding. I have a bit of a unique riding because I have one single tier. I have two county ridings and 14 lower tier municipalities. I was privileged and honoured for a number of years to have been the mayor of Middlesex Centre and of Lobo Township before that. However, the $21.8 billion in gas tax refunds has now been indexed, which means it is $1.8 billion in payments for municipalities. That is secure funding for municipalities for their capital projects.

I had a lot of things I wanted to say, but I will wrap it up.

One of the things I want to talk about is the General Dynamics Land Systems announcement we made a week ago in London, which is just outside of my riding but the impact affects us. This was a multi-billion dollar announcement. It is the largest new program in Canada's history. It is not in my riding, but I can say that the small businesses in my riding now are so excited. Small businesses know that they have the opportunity to compete and be there.

Our commitments to Canada's economy and prosperity for the residents of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex is no different than across the country, and we will continue to work to balance this budget and to work hard for Canadians in Canada.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to put a question to my Conservative colleague, particularly as he was the mayor of a municipality before becoming a federal MP.

My riding is fairly rural, apart from one urban centre. There are eight mayors of villages and small municipalities with populations of 2,000 to 5,000. For the mayors of small municipalities, infrastructure represents a major challenge. The new building Canada plan has been announced, but unfortunately there is no new money. That is the problem raised by the mayors in my riding.

For example, they do not have the money to update their waste water treatment systems, so they continue to discharge waste water into the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park, which is managed jointly by the federal and provincial governments. That is not very pleasant.

Since my Conservative colleague was once a mayor, will he be putting pressure on his colleagues to ensure that municipalities across Canada can get new money? That is what would do the most good for our smaller municipalities, and ensure that they can grow, hold on to their young people and diversify their economy.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I really believe that those of us who have had the opportunity to have been involved in municipal governments prior to coming to this great place gives us a foundation and, I would like to think, a bit of an understanding of what is really happening on the ground with our municipalities.

I agree. From the time that I was a councillor, a deputy and then mayor, there was never enough money, but what I always appreciated is that we had the option in money. We now have a Bell Canada program with $1.25 billion over five years in P3. That is the public-private partnerships fund. When we talk about water and sewer plants, this is now becoming a great opportunity for municipalities to partner with the private sector in building major infrastructure. As well, there are $6 billion in federal support that goes not only to provinces and territories but also to municipalities.

I get calls from mayors in my riding and I thank them very much for that. One of the great things is the gas tax rebate. Not only did we double it, but we also made it permanent, and now we have indexed it. When municipalities are given the opportunity to make their decisions, with limited guidelines other than for capital cost, that is the way it should be, and I am pleased that we have been able to do that.

I appreciate the member's comments on municipalities.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to continue the discussion on the infrastructure deficit. We need to recognize that throughout Canada there is a huge deficit in terms of our infrastructure. The billions of dollars required in order to meet the demands of our infrastructure are just not possible to raise at the local level. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the federal government has to play a significant role in building infrastructure and is in a great position to demonstrate leadership, ensuring that there is a national infrastructure program.

The question I have for the member is fairly specific, given his expertise and background working in the municipal levels of government as a politician. I am sure he would have had on his plate five-year capital plans, possibly even ten-year capital plans.

Does he not recognize that there needs to be ongoing annual commitments, not a pile of money right now or three years from now? Why are we not seeing as much money in 2014 as compared to 2015? Coincidentally, of course, the election will be in 2015. A skeptical person might point that out.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to be clear that I do not ever consider myself an expert. I am a public figure who works hard to serve my constituents in many areas.

When I became a member, there was an infrastructure deficit that continued to grow. I could take the shot that you guys did not do a very good job of giving money for it, but the reality is that all of the—

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Order, please. Again, I remind the member to address comments to the chair not to individual members. Your time is up, in any event.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Etobicoke North.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Winnipeg North.

I rise today to speak to budget 2014, which fails to acknowledge the genuine needs of middle class Canadians, like the good and hard-working people of my riding of Etobicoke North, and provides nothing to make the economy grow.

A new internal Conservative report shows that Canada's middle class is in fact mortgaging its future to stay afloat and making the Canadian dream “a myth more than a reality”. This straightforward report reveals the plight of middle income Canadian families and stands in marked contrast to the brighter economic picture presented in this month's budget.

Why did the government prepare and review research over three years and then present a different picture to Canadians? Canadians expect openness and transparency from their government. That is why the Liberal leader rightly opened up the books of Liberal members of Parliament to public scrutiny. Transparency is not a slogan or a tactic for our leader. Rather, it is a way of doing day-to-day business.

This new Conservative government report shows that “Middle-income families are increasingly vulnerable to financial shocks”. It also shows that the market does not reward middle income families well, and as a result they get an increasingly smaller share of the earnings pie.

The Conservative government report further shows that, “many in the middle spend more than they earn, mortgaging their future to sustain their current consumption”.

As our leader and now the Conservative government report has said, “middle-income Canadians are unlikely to move to higher income brackets, i.e., the 'Canadian dream' is a myth more than a reality”.

Our Liberal leader is focused on the middle class and on making a real difference to middle class Canadians. Research from the Library of Parliament shows that since January 1, 2013, our leader explicitly acknowledged the middle class 52 times in the House of Commons. The NDP leader and the Prime Minister did so only nine times and twice respectively.

What Canada urgently requires is an action plan for growth to build a solid economic foundation. Instead, the Conservative government failed to fix its so-called jobs grant, which still does not even exist. There is still no consensus among the partners who will be expected to pay for it. The government is still planning to claw back funding that provinces currently devote to the disabled. There is still not a single penny of new federal investment, and it remains a total arbitrary mess.

From my daily work in our constituency office this summer and during constituency weeks, I know that the people of Etobicoke North need jobs. I have worked hard to get them jobs. I obtained funding for a completing the circle program, a $500,000 jobs program in our community in remembrance of Loyan Gilao, a young Somali Canadian man, a York University student with a bright future who was shot and killed in 2005.

There was not a day in these past constituency break weeks that my office did not have a student, a graduate, a parent, or even a grandparent come asking for help to find a job. They came and continue to come because we do help them find jobs. I personally review and edit resumes late into the night, sometimes doing two and three drafts. We get our people into jobs programs. We follow up with them to make sure their job searches are going in the right direction. While they search, we help them with food, clothing, and whatever other supports they might need.

At critical times I have personally bought medicine. We had a lady looking for help who was in agony due to an ear infection that had raged for three weeks. She had pus and blood running down her face. The sad reality is she could not afford antibiotics because she could not find a job. How many more stories are there like hers?

I repeatedly have bright, ambitious, and qualified university graduates come to get help after being out of school and out of work for two years. What are their pathways into the middle class? What has the government done to help them get there? I have numerous disappointed graduate students, international doctors, and teachers who struggle to find work. I have grandparents who come on behalf of their grandchildren—the first in the family to graduate from university and college—who had fled their country of origin to come to Canada, the land of promise, so that their children could have education. Now the children have education and they still do not have a job and cannot contribute to Canada's economy.

Besides working constructively with provincial partners to get a jobs grant that works and a larger infrastructure plan to drive growth, the Conservative government could also have taken some meaningful action on affordable housing. It could have enhanced a refundable accelerated capital cost allowance to encourage business investments in productivity and competitiveness. It could have torn down some of the barriers blocking access to all forms of post-secondary learning and skills. However, the government did not do any of that.

The economic reality under the Conservative government is the following: Economic growth in Canada has been sliding downward in each of the last three years. It is the worst growth record of any prime minister since R.B. Bennett, and there is stubbornly high unemployment, with 262,000 fewer jobs for young Canadians than before the recession. The government should have used last week's budget to implement a real plan for jobs, growth, and prosperity. However, for reasons that escape us, it chose not to.

The Conservative government squandered the opportunity, just as it squandered all the financial strength it inherited from its Liberal predecessors back in 2006. It was handed a decade of balanced budgets and the best fiscal position in the western world, but it blew it in less than three years. The Conservative government turned a record surplus into a record deficit in record time.

What about economic growth? Unfortunately, the government is running a chronic trade deficit, which became $1 billion worse at the end of last year. Where is the business investment in Canada? Businesses are piling up retained earnings, not having the confidence to invest in new ventures, staff, training, or technology.

Perhaps this is why a new Ipsos Reid poll shows that most Canadians simply shrugged off the federal budget. In fact, a majority of Canadians, or 76%, think the budget does not impact them at all and 20% of Canadians say the budget is “bad and they'd symbolically give it 'two thumbs down'...”.

The people of my riding of Etobicoke North told me that, in addition to a jobs program that actually exists, they would have liked to have seen more support for better access to all forms of post-secondary education and better and new infrastructure. The reality is that some 70% of all future jobs will require post-secondary qualifications and only 50% of Canadian workers have those qualifications today. We must boost our achievement level.

Finally, in closing, the people of Etobicoke North want to know the government's position on income splitting. In the 2011 election, the Prime Minister announced in no uncertain terms that once he could claim a balanced budget, he would implement income splitting for couples with children under age 18. Now he is being contradicted by none other than his own finance minister on the wisdom of that commitment to income splitting.

The budget amounts to little to do about nothing, and my community of Etobicoke North and Canadians across this country deserve much better.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague has been very passionate about the importance of nutritional programs in our schools. Maybe she could provide some comments in regard to how important it is that our young people go to school with full stomachs, and learn on full stomachs. I know this is an area about which she cares deeply, and maybe she could provide some comment in terms of her thoughts related to the budget.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is unconscionable in a country as rich as Canada that any child goes to school hungry. Forty per cent of elementary school students and 62% of secondary school students in Toronto go to school hungry. Hungry children cannot learn. If they are hungry as children, it can affect their lifelong development. We need a national breakfast program in the country; 169 other countries feed their children every day. We are the only industrialized country without a national breakfast program.

We need to do better for our children. As Buzz Aldrin says, “If we can conquer space, we can conquer childhood hunger”.