Debates of April 14th, 2016

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talked about leadership, but what we saw over the 10 years was leadership that put the country $150 billion more in debt.

Last year at this time, we were still waiting for a budget. We saw oil prices start to drop, yet the previous government was like a deer in the headlights. The Conservatives promised us that we would be an energy superpower, and put all our eggs in one basket. Where did that leave the people of Alberta, or Saskatchewan, or the Maritimes?

Would the hon. member care to speculate what life would be like had the Conservatives won the election and had to stare down the issues we face today and still balance their budget?

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at leadership and the types of things done under the previous government. The Liberals talk so much about deficits and the situation that occurred as though they were not around in 2008 and 2009, understanding the global economic disaster and realizing how well Canada was able to make it through that time.

The Liberals talked about all the extra dollars that were spent. The NDP and the Liberals said that we should have spent even more by adding dollars to various programs. Fortunately, we did not pay attention to them. That would not have allowed us to get to the stage where we could have removed the deficit.

There were deficits in the past few years associated with that. The reason was that we were respecting contracts we had with individuals. There could have been other ways of dealing with deficits, as was done in the 1990s, as I heard in some conversations this morning.

Having been a hospital board chairman at the time and understanding what the Liberals had done in cutting dollars to health care transfers and transfers to the provinces, it was important to have someone who understood the economics that was associated with it. We had a prime minister who understood economics and knew what all those binders from each of the departments meant versus simply recognizing the different colours, which is the Prime Minister we have now.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the top priority of my constituents in Edmonton Strathcona is health care. They are waiting for dollars for palliative care and pharmacare, and nothing came in the budget.

The member raised another important issue, which is the short-changing of public safety. One of the areas of public safety is rail safety. We heard testimony in committee this week from the Department of Transport's inspectors, saying that there were cuts to rail safety, including rail safety inspection. I now discover that two of the top most dangerous rail crossings in Canada are in my city. I am sure the member's constituents are concerned about rail safety. Does the member think that perhaps the government should be paying a little more attention to transport safety?

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member raised two issues. The first was on health care transfers. During the campaign there was a lot of discussion with regard to cuts to health care. We are well aware of the massive increases that went out to all the provinces for health care over the 10 years we were in power. It was more than a 70% increase. Page 240 of the budget shows the proposed increases. Members will note that there are years when those increases do not even meet the 3% escalator, which was the floor we had for our budgets. That is critical.

As far as transportation safety, it is critical. It is so important that we deal with the structural aspect of safety. Rail transportation is so important to Canada. As we expand and get new trade deals throughout the world, that really becomes one of the most important aspects. We have to ensure we keep the government on task for that.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We have run out of time for our five minutes of questions and comments. I see there is a fair bit of interest in participating in these rounds today. For subsequent periods for questions and comments, I might ask hon. members to try to keep their interventions as concise as possible, so more hon. members will have the opportunity to participate in that brief fives minutes, which we all know goes by so quickly.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for North Okanagan—Shuswap.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the hon. member for Red Deer—Mountain View, for sharing his speaking time with me this morning.

It is an honour to stand today as the elected representative of the North Okanagan—Shuswap. In recent weeks, I have heard members on the government side speaking of being proud of the budget that was tabled by the Minister of Finance on March 22. At every mention of this apparent pride, I find myself asking how they can be so proud of this budget. How can the Liberals be proud of promising one thing and delivering something totally different, delivering a deficit much larger than what they said they would limit themselves to in the election campaign, promises made and promises broken? It is hardly something to of which to be proud.

The bogus pride does not end there. During the election campaign, the Liberals also told the people of Canada that the Liberal government would “return Canada to a balanced budget in 2019”. Yet in budget 2016, it is completely silent on this promise and is vacant of any vision of returning our nation to a balanced budget. Surely, if the Liberals had a plan to deliver on their promise of a balanced budget in 2019, they would have put at least one line in their 269-page budget to say so.

Sadly, the government appears to be dodging another promise it made to Canadians and has no plan on how to pay back this out-of-control borrowing and spending. The people of Canada want results from their government. The hard-working women and men of this nation, who go off to their jobs day in and day out, and their children are the ones who are now on the hook to repay this Liberal deficit. If all taxpayers must share in the weight of this debt, then it should stand to reason that all taxpayers should receive equitable benefits from this spending.

Canadians deserve to know how the government plans to spend and ensure that this deficit spending is disbursed in an equitable fashion from coast to coast to coast, in rural and urban communities alike. Yet we wait for any details on how this budget will help those taxpayers and who will carry the cost. When can Canadians expect to see the infrastructure projects move ahead in their communities? When can Canadians expect to see some benefit from the burden of debt the Liberals have placed and surprised taxpayers with on March 22?

It is clear the Liberals have a plan to spend to a much higher deficit than they committed themselves to, but it is not clear when Canadians can expect to see improvements to their highways and bridges, water and sewer treatment projects, low-income housing, and the list goes on and on.

I believe that balanced budgets are both appropriate and possible. My home province of British Columbia is proof that it is possible. Now, with consecutive balanced budgets, my home province has created an atmosphere of certainty, predictability, and responsibility that continues to encourage private investment, spurring on job creation and economic growth. I am happy and proud to live in a province where business investment continues to be strong, but I wonder how long that might continue if the federal government cannot manage our country's finances and uphold the confidence of business. After all, it is business, not government deficit, that is the true driver of economic growth.

In budget 2016, the Trudeau government had an opportunity to provide some stability for the economy and reassurance for investors and business owners. Instead, the Trudeau budget has delivered a cloud of uncertainty that—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I would remind the hon. member that we do not use the proper names of other hon. members in the House. The right hon. member for Papineau could be used as a substitute.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

I stand corrected, Mr. Speaker, thank you.

In budget 2016, the Liberal government had an opportunity to provide some stability to our economy and reassurance to investors and business owners. Instead, the Liberals delivered a cloud of uncertainty that hangs over our economy.

The government promised to reduce the small business tax rate to 9% from 10.5% to allow small businesses to invest in their operations and their employees, but the government has now decided to subject small business to the higher tax rate of 10.5% and not deliver on the promised reduction. It seems the government has broken another promise on that one. The government has also terminated the small business job credit and has failed to follow through on the Liberal election promise to create a credit for hiring young employees.

Broken promises, no plan to return to a balanced budget, and tax increases for employers: hardly a recipe for growth and certainly nothing to be proud of. There is no plan for the government for balancing the budget, no plan for job creation, just a murky commitment and increasing public debt. The sad reality is that the budget falls short of the need for leadership that this nation requires.

Whether they are managing the finances of their households or businesses, Canadians understand and desire the values and notion of living within their means, handling their debt with prudence, and being disciplined and decisive in their spending. Unfortunately, the government is out of touch with Canadians in those regards.

The reality is that no Canadian homebuyer or business operator would expect to secure a loan from a bank for one amount and then return to the bank shortly thereafter and demand up to triple that amount. What is more, the government has undertaken this scheme of bait and switch without presenting a plan for repaying the debt. This is irresponsible and reflects an apparent detachment from reality.

As homeowners who have to develop a repayment plan before securing a home mortgage, Canadians are saying this budget does not meet the same standards of accountability.

As a small business owner and employer, I understand the values of fiscal discipline, prudent planning, and living within one's means, and the costs of borrowing.

The people of Canada deserve better than what the government has presented in budget 2016. Canadians deserve to know how the government is plotting our economic future.

Last week, our own parliamentary budget officer was banned from sharing the government's five-year cost estimates. When the government finally succumbed to demands for information from parliamentarians and Canadians alike, it was clear what the Liberals were hiding: cost estimates for their policies that significantly shrink over time. Perhaps this is no surprise, considering the Prime Minister's previous assertion that budgets balance themselves.

If the Liberal budget were based on reality, subject to prudence and tethered to reason, perhaps the Liberals would not be so motivated to hide the details, the small print and the large effect it has on our collective future.

One thing that was hidden in this budget is an increase in government tax revenues projected for the next five-year outlook. If one looks closely, there are predictions of government tax revenue increases from $237.6 billion in 2015-16 to $284.9 billion in 2020-21. This is an increase in government tax income of roughly 20% in five years.

Where is this increase coming from? Well, one increase is in projected GST revenue of almost 21%, from $33.1 billion to $40 billion by 2021.

We know where this increased revenue will come from, because there is only one taxpayer. Are these tax increases what Canadians can expect to continue to see and expect to have to pass on to future generations?

I fear that it may be what we can expect, unless the government can do something that it can truly be proud of and reverse this out-of-control spending and debt.

Canadians deserve the type of leadership and fiscal policy that places reason over popularity, prudence over impulse, and honesty over broken promises. Unfortunately, this budget does nothing of the sort.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it has been a difficult week. This week we had an emergency debate on the suicide crisis in Attawapiskat and the dire situation across Canada for first nations and all indigenous people.

Budget 2016 finds $8.4 billion of new money to combat the hopelessness in first nations communities and indigenous communities across Canada, including $2.6 billion for primary and secondary schools on those reserves.

I wonder if the hon. member, in light of his statements, feels that we should be removing this money. Could the member comment on that? Should we actually be removing this money, or does the member in fact support the increased funding for indigenous populations across Canada?

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Mr. Speaker, during the previous government's time, we showed that we could balance budgets increasingly, and in fact provided a surplus budget in the last year.

I certainly recognize the need, especially after the emergency debate which I took part in the other night, to support these northern communities. We need to support our aboriginal people. We do that through a strong economy, through having income coming in through business creation and job creation. We cannot do this if businesses do not feel confident in investing in Canada's future, which is indeed our aboriginals' future as well.

I certainly agree that we need to spend and recognize the needs of these communities, but at the same time, we also need to recognize the need to increase business investment in Canada.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

Since tabling the budget and since the election, the Liberals and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food have promised that they will take action on milk proteins crossing the border with the United States.

On Tuesday, members of Quebec's dairy industry joined forces to demand that Ottawa do its job and, at the very least, enforce Canadian cheese compositional standards domestically. That would prevent diafiltered milk and milk proteins from crossing the border unnoticed and ending up in Canadian cheese. This problem is costing our producers lots of money and will end up costing dairy industry jobs. This has a real impact on dairy producers in my riding, who are worried about their jobs. They are worried because agri-food production in Canada in general is under threat from the TPP, the trans-Pacific partnership, and international trade agreements.

Does my colleague think that the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food should keep his promise and enforce his own Canadian cheese compositional standards?

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this is certainly a concern in my riding, as well. We have many dairy producers in the riding. I have met with them. I understand their concerns.

This is something that has developed over time. When the previous trade agreements were put in place, no one envisioned that milk could be broken down into, I believe it is 26 different protein products. Those individual protein products were not covered in those trade agreements. Now they are being imported into Canada. It is certainly a big concern. I will be pressuring the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to move forward on the restrictions on those diafiltered milk products coming into Canada, because it is definitely an economic impact for our dairy producers.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Saint Boniface—Saint Vital.

It was truly a pleasure for me to sit in this House as the representative of the people of St. John's East when the Minister of Finance presented the government's priorities.

During the three weeks since budget 2016 was laid before the House, I have had the opportunity to visit with many groups in St. John's East. We discussed their pleasure with the new direction our federal government is taking and the opportunity it signals to the local business community.

Economic indicators show that nationally, companies may already be investing with newfound confidence now that they have a government that is prepared to invest as well.

However, in my riding, people are anxiously awaiting the provincial budget to be delivered later today by the Newfoundland and Labrador Minister of Finance, Cathy Bennett. She has the difficult task of squaring the fiscal realities of a devastating collapse in oil prices with an aging population and a shrinking workforce. A $2-billion deficit such as was experienced in Newfoundland and Labrador last year would be akin to Canada running on a $140-billion deficit and is not sustainable.

However, the people of St. John's East are glad to know that the Government of Canada supports them and is here to help in tough times.

Infrastructure spending is important, but there are three other ways of particular importance to my community the budget will help Newfoundland and Labrador, and I hope these may convince the other progressives in this chamber to support the budget: support for seniors; the Canada child benefit; and support for our scientists.

Budget 2016 shows compassion for those seeking to retire and age with dignity. We understand that many seniors are suffering, and budget 2016 seeks to help them.

Budget 2016 will lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. My constituents are heartened to see that we are delivering on this promise immediately, notwithstanding a worse than expected economic forecast.

Finally, budget 2016 supports innovation, research, and entrepreneurship. The Liberal government has listened and understands the role that Canadians expect us to play in helping support economic growth in 21st century jobs.

First of all, the previous government raised the age of eligibility for old age security to 67. I believe that was a mistake. Our party campaigned against that change. Budget 2016 fulfills our promise to restore the age of eligibility for old age security to 65.

Second, the budget proposes to increase the guaranteed income supplement for single seniors by up to $947 annually. Single seniors are the most vulnerable. This increase will be in place starting in July 2016.

By supporting those seniors who rely almost exclusively upon old age security and the guaranteed income supplement and may therefore be at risk of experiencing financial difficulties, the government is delivering upon our commitment to improve the quality of life for seniors most at risk.

Third, in order to ensure that the true higher levels of inflation that are experienced by seniors are taken into account, the government has committed to indexing the OAS and the guaranteed income supplement to a more generous seniors price index.

To help address child poverty, the CCB, or Canada child benefit, which replaces the Canada child tax benefit and the universal child care benefit, will be paid monthly to eligible families beginning in July 2016.

The CCB will be simpler. Families will receive just one payment every month. Since the CCB is non-taxable, families will not have to pay back a portion of the payments they receive when they pay their taxes.

The CCB is better targeted to those who need it most. Lower- and middle-income families will receive more money, while those who have higher incomes will receive less money than under the current system.

Since the CCB is more generous, families who receive it will see an average increase in benefits of nearly $2,300 over the next year.

Nine out of 10 families will receive more money through this child benefit than under the current system. This will lift about 300,000 children out of poverty right away.

This is a more simple, tax-free, better targeted, and more generous benefit, one of which Canadians can and should be proud.

With respect to innovation and investment, Memorial University of Newfoundland is a key participant in past and future economic growth in my province and our country. Its main campus as well as its marine institute campus are both located in my riding of St. John's East.

The post-secondary institutions strategic investment fund will provide $2 billion over the next three years toward improving research and innovation infrastructure. This initiative has tremendous potential to harness the creativity of the dedicated researchers at Canada's world-class post-secondary institutions.

Canada's post-secondary institutions and affiliated research and commercialization organizations are at the front line for fostering science and research excellence. They train the workforce of tomorrow and create knowledge and insight necessary for a thriving clean economy. This strategic investment fund will enhance and modernize research commercialization facilities on Canadian campuses and will improve the environmental sustainability of these facilities.

The new fund will open new pathways for the future success of our institutions. For example, a university could repurpose and modernize underutilized space for use in a specialized field of strength or to meet energy efficiency standards. A college could create sector-specific training facilities in the Red Seal trades. On-campus business and technology incubators could be expanded to better support entrepreneurs and start-ups. Where these institutions support prototype development or proof-of-principle assessment, the program will be indirectly supporting the industry partners of those institutions.

As part of budget 2016, the Government of Canada has also proposed more funding, an additional $95 million a year, for granting councils to support discovery research, including $30 million for the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, $30 million for the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, $16 million for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, and $19 million for the research support fund, to support the indirect costs associated with federally sponsored research undertaken at outside institutions. This more than triples the funding provided to the granting councils in 2015. It increases it to $140 million this year alone.

Support for science and innovation does not stop there, with other measures to support internships, fellowships, genetics research, theoretical physics, stem cell research, and funding for the commercialization of health research. Our government understands and supports the independent work of scientists and their role in developing a modern economy.

Memorial University hopes to benefit in key research areas where it is a leader, such as in cold oceans research, naval architecture, oil and gas engineering, medicine, and many others.

These measures are pivotal. They are necessary to grow the middle class and revitalize the Canadian economy, and they also chart a new course to growing the middle class. Real change is being delivered.

Last October, Canadians sent a clear message that they wanted real change, both in how government does things and what it is doing. They asked for a government that would deliver on its commitments and would be focused on what matters most to them, like caring for our seniors, lifting children out of poverty, growing the economy, creating jobs, strengthening the middle class and those working hard to join it.

We are listening to what Canadians need, and our policies and this budget reflect what we have heard.

For my province, this also includes certain targeted measures which demonstrate an understanding of our local situation. Federal transfers are increasing by $31 million this year, in addition to the almost $32 million in stabilization funding in the last fiscal year; $5 million to help grow much needed public transit; $134 million in accelerated infrastructure spending; and $22 million for an improved ferry mooring system for Marine Atlantic. As well, many of the changes to EI provide essential support to Newfoundland and Labrador during this commodity prices crisis.

With evidence-based policy and a sense of fairness, budget 2016 ensures that Newfoundland and Labrador will not be left behind and Canada's best days lie ahead.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the hon. member on his election in October.

We, too, feel the pain of the energy sector, like he does in Newfoundland and Labrador, along with Saskatchewan and Alberta. However, as we all know, as he stands in the House today expecting a deficit budget provincially in Newfoundland, we, too, expected a deficit budget here on March 22. Unfortunately, we expected a $10-billion deficit, but what we were dealt with was a $30-billion deficit, three times as much. We are really concerned about this.

The hon. member talked about seniors and OAS. Well, they are only getting pennies more. The Liberals took away the TFSA from seniors. It is still there, but we had increased it.

The other thing the Liberals have taken away, and which I have heard time and time again in my riding in Saskatoon, is that seniors now are going to pay more because the Liberals took away income splitting.

I ask the member from Newfoundland, what does he think that seniors have gained in this budget that the Liberals proposed on March 22?

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, certainly I understand that in this commodity prices crisis, many people are suffering. I and our party feel that we are doing what is necessary to provide them the necessary support in this troubling time, and we are putting a plan in place to see future growth and new clean energy jobs.

With respect to seniors, we have in fact put real money in the hands of families and the most vulnerable seniors. Single women seniors will receive up to $947 more per year, which is meaningful money to seniors who are living on such low incomes. It is a 10% increase in that envelope of money that they receive.

There are changes to some of the other tax benefits that the previous government provided which really only benefited the most wealthy seniors. These changes are for people who need the help of the Government of Canada to make ends meet and to put good quality food on their tables. Seniors who have over $5,000 in disposable income at the end of the year to reinvest in TFSAs do not need the help of the Government of Canada to do that. It is the people who are living on fixed incomes, buying food at the dollar store and other places, and are not able to access clean, high-quality, highly nutritious food who need our help, and these are the people the Government of Canada is helping.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the very well-articulated words from my colleague.

In this budget we see a number of measures from which Canadians in every region of the country will benefit. I would highlight a couple of them. One is the Canada child benefit program, which will lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. We could talk about the middle-class tax cut. Some nine million Canadians will get more money in their pockets. By doing that, at the end of the day we will have fewer people living in poverty situations and we will have a healthier middle class.

By the actions that are taken in this budget, including on infrastructure—I do not want to let slip by the amount of money we are investing in infrastructure—would the member not agree that what we are really doing is investing in Canada's middle class, and that by doing that we will have a healthier middle class and thereby a healthier economy also?

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I would even go farther to say that the new direction and new approach are transformational, putting this extra money where it is needed at the levels of the economy into the hands of the people who spend essentially every cent they receive every month. They are not able to save for their retirement. They are not able to save for their children's education. They are not able to take vacations or buy fancy clothes. This puts money into the hands and the pockets of people who are going to spend it very quickly.

It accelerates the money through our economy. It should lead, and we hope that it would lead, to stronger economic growth. When millions of Canadians have more money to spend in their local communities, it will create local jobs. We know that is true. While we are asking the more wealthy to pay a bit more to help support these initiatives, we know that when people are struggling in Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Alberta, it is the right thing to do at the right time.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Mr. Speaker, as always, it is a genuine honour to rise on behalf of the people whom I represent in Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, who, on October 19, voted for a change in leadership, a change in direction, and a change in priorities for our country. I am very happy to say that budget 2016 delivers on those promises.

As a former city councillor for many years, and a former chair of public works, I am proud to say that this budget delivers on our commitment to rebuild Canada's communities and rebuild Canada's cities.

Cities all over the country, from Ottawa to Moncton, from Moncton to Vancouver, are in desperate need of the most basic infrastructure: regional roads, residential streets, back lanes, sidewalks, bridges, community centres, libraries, and that is just the infrastructure above ground. The infrastructure below ground is equally important, and some would say even more important: the water systems, the waste-water treatment systems.

Cities and municipalities, especially rural municipalities, simply cannot afford to do it themselves. The time is right for investment by the federal government, especially with the interest rates being as low as they are.

Let me give hon. members a real-time example from Winnipeg, the city I represent. Winnipeg currently spends $1 billion a year on strictly above-ground infrastructure, all the items I mentioned previously. A report about six years ago by the heavy construction industry said that Winnipeg should be spending another $380 million, in addition to the $1 billion, just on above-ground infrastructure. If we did spend an extra $380 million, this would not actually improve the infrastructure, but it would maintain the infrastructure at its current state. That is the level of crisis in our cities across Canada. Let me repeat, because it bears repeating: an extra $380 million over the $1 billion for our city of Winnipeg would not improve the infrastructure; it would maintain it at its current state.

Cities cannot do it themselves. It is time for the federal government to invest.

I am especially proud that our first slice of infrastructure spending will be on what is arguably the most important infrastructure of all, the underground infrastructure, our water systems, our waste-water treatment systems.

We have to understand that for years and years, provincial governments and federal governments have been extremely reluctant to invest in our underground systems for a very simple reason and a very cynical reason: we do not often get to cut a ribbon when pipe is placed underground. It is not a play structure. It is not a sexy bridge. We do not often get to cut a ribbon when the underground infrastructure is placed, but nonetheless, it is probably the most important of all, because nothing is more important than clean water and a clean environment.

That is why I am proud that budget 2016 makes green infrastructure its first priority. It is filling a void that previous federal and provincial governments have created, because again, make no mistake about this, cities and municipalities, especially rural municipalities, cannot do it by themselves, and budget 2016 recognizes this.

We will also be giving families more money to help with the high cost of raising their children. We will be introducing a more generous, simplified and tax-free Canada child benefit to give families more money for their children. Our Canada child benefit will be geared to income to help those who need it the most: single and low-income families. Our plan will raise over 300,000 children out of poverty. This is an incredibly important measure that will help provide children a better opportunity and a brighter future.

Families in Manitoba, the province I represent, alone will receive $490 million more in child benefits the next year from the previous year.

Another part of the plan in this budget which I am very proud of is the raise in the guaranteed income supplement for low-income seniors by 10%. This will give one million of our most vulnerable seniors, often single women, almost $1,000 more per year.

As I previously noted, this has been a difficult week. Earlier in the week we had a thoughtful, emotional, and important discussion on the suicide crisis in Attawapiskat and the incredibly horrible conditions of indigenous folks on reserves as well as in cities across Canada. I was heartened that on the day of that debate, the Minister of Justice rose and said that we are being held back by the shackles of the Indian Act and that the solution lies in removing those shackles and continuing an honest nation-to-nation relationship with indigenous folks, Métis people, and Inuit people all over the country. I agree with that.

I am extremely proud of our indigenous platform and what is in budget 2016. There is targeted funding to improve the physical conditions that indigenous communities live with. There is an increase of $8.4 billion of new money over the next five years. We will invest $2.6 billion of new money in primary and secondary education over the next five years. We will invest $970 million of new money in school infrastructure over five years. We will invest $935 million of new money over five years for prevention to keep kids out of CFS, child and family services. We will invest $554 million of new money over two years for housing on reserves.

Nobody is naively saying that better infrastructure is the only solution. Far from it, but it is an excellent start. Ultimately, in addition to better schools and clean water, it will be a relationship between Canada and our indigenous communities based on respect, on honour, on honouring the treaties, on honouring decisions of the Supreme Court on land claims that will help our families and our communities all over the country.

On Friday, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance came to Saint-Boniface—Saint-Vital to talk to members of the community about budget 2016.

During the first roundtable discussion at the Université de Saint-Boniface, we met with stakeholders from the francophone economic sector. They commended us on our inclusive budget, a budget that invests in the future. They are excited about our investments in green technologies and innovation and the choices this affords them. These investments in a green economy offer new market and job opportunities, beyond the traditional markets.

The members of my community also talked about how important cultural organizations are to the vitality of official language minority communities. The budget includes a $675-million investment in CBC/Radio-Canada, a national institution that is crucial to official language minority communities.

In St. Boniface, ICI Radio-Canada Manitoba is an important member of the Franco-Manitoban and Franco-Métis communities that supports and promotes our culture. The federal budget recognizes the contribution of cultural industries to the Canadian economy by committing $1.9 billion to arts and culture over five years.

These investments will support major national institutions, protect both official languages, and support industries that showcase Canadian culture, including the Canada Council for the Arts, Telefilm Canada, and the National Film Board of Canada.

There is not enough time to discuss everything. I am proud of this budget, and I have not even talked about the middle-income tax cut, which will benefit nine million Canadians. I have not talked about our infrastructure investment in rapid transit.

Budget 2016 will lift 300,000 children out of poverty. It will offer nine million Canadians a middle-income tax cut. It will improve living conditions for one million seniors through a 10% increase in the GIS.

There is $8.4 billion of new funding for indigenous infrastructure and education and $2 billion for arts and culture over five years. As well, Canada's largest-ever infrastructure program is being introduced in this budget.

I am incredibly proud of this budget, and it should be unanimously approved in this chamber.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the budget is likely to be unanimously approved. In fact, I know that it will not be, or I think it is very unlikely that it will be unanimously supported in this House, in part because it breaks a number of commitments that were made by the Liberal Party during the last election campaign. The promise of a $10 billion deficit was a serious promise that most Canadians took at its word when it was made, and this budget blows right through that promise.

In the door-to-door campaign in my riding, these were real questions and issues that came up. Voters want to know how much debt is going to be taken on, if any, by the new government, and how we are going to repay this debt over time. The budget fails to address that question. It fails to fulfill the election promise of a so-called mere $10 billion deficit, and there is no plan to return to surplus at any point.

Would the member care to comment on how we are going to repay money that is being borrowed under this budget?

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is true that when we took office the economy was in worse shape than we had thought. The reality is that we are going into debt to rebuild our communities, to rebuild our cities, to rebuild our rural municipalities, and I think that is something Canadians want. I know they certainly wanted it on October 19 when they voted in the new government.

It is actually quite funny to hear representatives from the previous government accuse us of being in debt. The previous government ran eight consecutive years of operating deficits, it ran a trade deficit every single year that it was in power, and it had the lowest rate of GDP since the dirty thirties.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech, which was very apropos.

We know that living conditions in indigenous communities are deplorable and are comparable to third-world living conditions and even worse in some cases. For example, we have been discussing Attawapiskat for a few days.

When I look at the budget, housing is one of the issues that concerns me the most when it comes to the living conditions in indigenous communities.

The budget leaves an impression on everyone because of the big numbers. I think that many people were surprised at the money to be allocated to indigenous peoples over the next five years, starting in the third year in some cases.

I would just like to give this example: $554 million is set aside for on-reserve housing, including $416 million over two years that will flow through Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

If we divide up this money among the 630 indigenous communities across the country, they will each receive about $330,000. It costs about $200,000 to build just one house in my riding in Nunavik because of the cost of materials and transportation in the far north.

What can the communities in Nunavik do with one and a half houses a year for, say, the next 10 years?

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for that good question. I have a great deal of respect for him.

Over five years, $8.4 billion will be allocated for residential housing, with $554 million over two years. Education is also important. I know this is not ideal. It took generations to create the situation in which we find ourselves today, and it is going to take generations to fix it.

As a new MP who came into office five or six months ago with new advisors, I consider this a good start. I am committed to continuing the good work that will be done on these serious issues, and I hope that the hon. member will help us.

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

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I want to let the House know that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou.

We have all been waiting for this budget for some time now, and I am honoured to stand in the House today to speak to it. Listening to ministers speak about this budget, Canadians have to sit through endless and effusive hyperbole that is liberally filled with both bombast and pomposity. Liberals are indeed masters of self-congratulation.

Unfortunately, the composition of the budgetary document breaks the covenant made during the election campaign with the Canadian people, as the Liberals do time and again when they say one thing and do the other. Like the progressive paint jobs the Liberals have applied to themselves in order to mask what the party really stands for, this budget's cover features a picture that cannot do anything but evoke an emotive response from those who gaze upon it: a mother and daughter holding hands as they walk on a yellow brick road toward the shining sun and a construction crane. It is beautifully crafted symbolism of good days ahead and the building of a new society. We can see that the Liberals are really hoping Canadians will judge this book by its cover.

Progressives have been walking through the desert for 10 years, waiting for a drop of change. It is little wonder, then, that the first glass of water offered to them seems to be so good. New Democrats are here to tear this cheerful mask off the Liberal budget and show Canadians what we are really dealing with.

There are families that I speak to all the time who are struggling with extremely expensive child care costs that often keep women at home and out of the workforce. This is one of the most important social policies of our time, and it is not being addressed. The Liberals need to know that child care cannot be provided with a small financial transfer to individual families.

Actually, Liberals do know. In a 2006 interview with the National Post, the Liberal Minister of Foreign Affairs, then the member for Saint Laurent—Cartierville, said:

We need child-care facilities to provide Canadian parents with real choice. It's a matter of social justice, but also of sound economics: child-care facilities are a good way to encourage flexibility and mobility of our workforce, at a time when, often, two parents are working outside the home.

As New Democrats, we could not agree more. We need a well-funded public policy on child care similar to what so many countries have done. The NDP will continue to propose its plan for $15-a-day child care, with spaces for those who need it.

We have spoken in the House a number of times about the social determinants of health, and one of these very strong social determinants is the right to food security. Food security is, by its very nature, linked to agriculture, which plays a key role in my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, as it does in many communities across Canada, yet this budget devotes a scant two pages to merely discussing the topic. There are no measures for organic or small-scale farmers. There is nothing to support value-added production, something that is critical for the industry. This is not the way to build the agricultural base that small communities need.

Canada needs a healthy society, and I want to take a moment to point out how the budget lacks the infrastructure needed for actually creating one.

A healthy society takes care of its seniors. People should never have to buy poor-quality food or skimp on prescription drugs just to be able to pay their rent. It is alarming that this so-called "progressive" Liberal government has totally abandoned its commitment to build long-term care facilities for seniors and increase the GST credit for new rental home construction.

The Conservatives unilaterally cut health transfers, and the Liberals have not given any indication that they will reverse these cuts. We must build a health care accord now, but there is no money set aside in this budget to do so.

I think we were all encouraged when we heard the Liberal promise of $3 billion over four years for home care. Home care is desperately needed, given Canada's aging population. We must act now on this issue, and it was good to see that both parties were on side, so it is a large disappointment to see that this promise is nowhere to be found in the budget now in front of Parliament.

The budget is also missing funding for mental health, long-term care for seniors, and palliative care. The lack of palliative care is clearly disappointing, especially given that, during the 41st Parliament, we passed a motion saying that we would work on high quality home-based and hospice palliative care. The motion was not reflected in the budget document, and it is a glaring omission in light of the physician-assisted dying legislation we will soon be debating.

When we speak about a sustainable society, we need to address climate change, the great challenge of our time, together. New Democrats welcome the low-carbon economy fund, but we would obviously like to see it get started sooner than 2017 and actually include details on what it means or how it works. We are still subsidizing the fossil fuel industry for the foreseeable future. The Liberals promised to repeal this Conservative subsidy in their election platform, but we still do not see it. New Democrats will continue to push the government on its promises and to propose new solutions to our pressing problems.

When we talk of green infrastructure to help us transition to a sustainable economy, we remain concerned that the level of funding is inadequate for small and remote communities to receive access to these funds. I know I speak for many communities, when there is so much to be updated and restored.

In my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, the effects of climate change are being felt, both last year and in the foreseeable years. The Cowichan River is reaching dangerously low levels, and we really need to update the weir to hold back more supply. That is one thing on which I will be pressing the government. We need to have this kind of funding for our infrastructure, to make it more resilient, because climate change is happening.

Why are the Liberal members of Parliament from British Columbia not standing up for B.C. ferries? I see $51 million in the budget for the Atlantic ferries, but nothing for the B.C. ferries. Why are they not standing up for our coast? BC Ferries is arguably the largest ferry transportation system in the world, and there is zero mention from the Liberals. I hope Liberal MPs from B.C. have a great time talking to their constituents about that glaring omission.

On indigenous rights, the government has not kept its promises to first nations in the budget. Education funding in the budget is $800 million short of the government's election promises. Even then, the funding is so back loaded; it does not come into effect right now to address the underfunding crisis.

Cindy Blackstock, who spoke to our convention this weekend, has stated that the government is $130 million short on meeting its legal commitment, set out by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling that the child welfare program discriminates against indigenous children.

These promises have come up short, but even then, we must do more right away as a turning point for our indigenous communities as they are living from crisis to crisis. It is totally unacceptable in our country. This point was emphasized time and again by all parties during our emergency debate on Tuesday evening, and I hope we follow through. I hope the debate was not just a one-off and that some meaningful action comes through in this noble House.

In this period of sunny ways and sunny days, the Liberal light can be quite blinding after years of Conservative darkness. It will take time for Canadians' eyes to adjust to the fact that the budget would not deliver on Liberal electoral promises.

Canadians want progressive change, and we will be in the House fighting to make that change a reality. We will stand up against the tempting promises of the Liberals that were never intended to be fulfilled. As New Democrats, we remain united in a vision for a better Canada that is built on common goals of solidarity, equality, fairness, and prosperity for all.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his words, particularly the comments around infrastructure. As a city planner in suburban, rural, and urban areas for some 25 years, I understand well the importance of credible investment in infrastructure.

The truth is that our government has inherited a shocking situation of deferred maintenance and investment in infrastructure over 10 years that has left a ticking time bomb of deferred financial and human health and safety liability for the government to now deal with.

One of the things I am most proud of in the government's budget is the historic infrastructure investment. Far from putting our children and grandchildren into debt to pay for this investment, we are investing in their future and, in the long term, making life much better for them. I wonder if the hon. member would agree that this is in fact the time to be making enormous investments in Canadian infrastructure after a very long drought.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member will find no argument from this particular section of the House on the need for infrastructure funding. As I alluded to in my remarks, we have been wandering through the desert for quite some time. I will agree that the Liberal budget does include some much-needed funding for infrastructure, but it is the other parts that I really wanted to hammer home.

During the election campaign, the Liberals made some specific promises. It adds to the disappointment in politics when someone says one thing and ends up doing another. Canadians were really looking for some progressive change. When we start reading the fine print, we can see that the amount is a little less and it is back loaded. The actual amount promised is not going to happen until the 2019-20 fiscal year. That is going to be after the 2019 election.

Infrastructure is welcome to see. I will certainly be writing letters to respective ministers to see that my riding gets its fair share, as all MPs in the House will be doing.