House of Commons Hansard #228 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was finance.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to five petitions.
Official LanguagesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
November 2nd, 2017 / 10:05 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Paradis Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the sixth report of the Standing Committee on Official Languages entitled “Air Canada's Implementation of the Official Languages Act: Aiming for Excellence”.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
I would like to thank all the members of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, as follows: the member for Beauport—Limoilou, the member for Drummond, the member for Madawaska—Restigouche, the member for Charlottetown, who is the parliamentary secretary, the member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, the member for Calgary Midnapore, the member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, the member for Sudbury, the member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, and the member for Saint-Boniface—Saint-Vital.
The committee does remarkable teamwork. We are always working towards the same goals. This morning, we are submitting a unanimous report to the House. I am fortunate to chair an extraordinary committee.
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-383, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act (psychotherapeutic services).
Mr. Speaker, today I have the honour to introduce my private member's bill, which would amend the Excise Tax Act in order to exempt psychotherapeutic services delivered by a psychotherapist from the goods and services tax.
Once passed, this bill will ensure that psychotherapists are treated the same as their fellow practitioners in other health care fields who do the same kind of work and who are exempt from the excise tax.
I urge the government to get behind this very simple but very necessary bill to rectify this blatant tax inequality. The government says that Canadians' mental health is a priority, so this is an opportunity to do something good for Canadians' mental health and for tax fairness in Canada too.
I hope that the government will get behind this bill. I am prepared to give the Minister of Finance my bill if he wants to include it in his next budget implementation bill. I would be pleased to provide him with a copy of the bill.
I am grateful to the people who are working on this issue and who have been calling for tax fairness for psychotherapists for a very long time.
(Motion deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today that deals with the process for firearms reclassification. This is a firearms issue but is also a rule of law issue.
Firearms owners are concerned when reclassification decisions are made by the RCMP, sometimes without proper communication, in which reclassification takes place and property that they are able to possess one day, without any change in the law, they are suddenly no longer able to possess. This petition raises in particular the issue of the 10-round plus magazine reclassification changes.
The petitioners call on Parliament to remove the power of the RCMP to arbitrarily make classification decisions on firearms.
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to table e-petition 1164, which has been signed by over 9,000 Canadians. This was the last petition that was sponsored by our late friend and colleague Arnold Chan. It is my honour to table it on his behalf and on behalf of the authors of the petition. I wish that he was here to table it himself.
The petitioners call upon the government to fulfill Canada's responsibility, as established by the international education commission, to ensure that girls around the world have access to quality education, and specifically, to increase Canada's investment in global education by 2¢ per day, per Canadian, an increase of $632 million over three years by 2020.
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition from constituents in my riding of South Okanagan—West Kootenay. The petitioners recognize that Canadians share a deep concern for the environment and recognize its inherent value, and that Canadians understand that a healthy and ecologically balanced environment is inextricably linked to the health of individuals, families, and communities. They therefore call on the House of Commons to enact legislation to implement an environmental bill of rights in Canada.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present two petitions.
The first one is from people in my riding and calls on the government to do something to address the crisis facing homeless people.
We note that there is a national housing strategy being called for by these petitioners, and hope for action soon.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, the second petition deals with the ongoing global issue of the rights of small family farmers around the world to save their own seeds for the coming season to be able to protect, particularly, the rights of women in agriculture globally.
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present dozens of petitions from the people of Drummond in response to Health Canada's approval of the sale of genetically modified salmon and the fact that, at this time, no one knows when they are eating genetically modified salmon. It is rumoured that people in Quebec are eating genetically modified salmon, but no one knows for sure, because Canada does not have mandatory labelling.
The petitioners are therefore calling on the Government of Canada to pass legislation on mandatory labelling of genetically modified foods. These kinds of petitions have been landing on my desk for over a year now.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
Harjit S. Sajjan Liberal Vancouver South, BC
moved that Bill C-63, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 22, 2017 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Joël Lightbound LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today to speak to budget implementation act No. 2, Bill C-63. The second budget implementation bill includes key measures of our government's second budget, which outlines the second phase of our government's plan to make smart investments that will create jobs, grow our economy, and provide more opportunities for every Canadian to succeed.
Thanks to these smart investments and an overall commitment to equity, our government is ensuring that Canada's best days are still ahead.
Before I get into the budget implementation bill, I want to talk about the measures the government has taken so far to give all Canadians, including those in the middle class and those working hard to join it, the opportunities they need to succeed.
To begin with, we asked the wealthiest 1% to pay a bit more in taxes in order to be able to give the middle class a tax cut. That tax cut for the middle class benefited nine million Canadians, which is something we can be proud of.
Then we brought in the new Canada child benefit, which has lifted hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. As a result of our CCB, nine out of 10 Canadian families are getting more in benefits than they did under the previous system. Compared to the previous system of child benefits, the CCB is more generous and better targeted to those who need it the most.
In the fall economic statement released on October 24, the government announced that it would strengthen the Canada child benefit by indexing it to annual increases in the cost of living effective July 2018, which is two years earlier than planned.
What this means, in practical terms, is that for a single parent with two children and income of $35,000 the enhanced Canada child benefit will contribute an additional $560 in the 2019-20 benefit year towards the cost of raising his or her children. That means more money for books, winter coats, and skating lessons, for example. The added confidence that the Canada child benefit brings to families can have a positive impact on economic growth, as we have seen in the past.
Our government has also enhanced the Canada pension plan in order to provide Canadians with financial security when they retire from their hard work life. Enhancing the Canada pension plan ensures that Canadians will have more money in retirement so they are less worried about saving, can focus more on enjoying the good times with their families, and do not have to worry about financial issues.
Starting in 2019, we will be enhancing the working income tax benefit, or WITB, by an additional $500 million per year. This will put more money in the pockets of low-income workers, including families without children and the growing number of single Canadians. The enhancement will be in addition to the increase of about $250 million annually that will also come into effect in 2019 as part of the enhancement of the Canada pension plan.
These two actions alone will boost the total amount the government spends on the WITB by about 65% in 2019, increasing benefits to current recipients and expanding the number of Canadians receiving this support, which is essential for those who need it the most. This extra money could be used for things such as helping to cover the family grocery bill or buying warm clothes for winter. Above all, the improved benefit will help low-income working Canadians make ends meet.
The government is also showing that it is committed to helping small businesses invest, grow, and create jobs by lowering the small business tax rate to 10% effective January 1, 2018, and to 9% effective January 1, 2019. This will provide a small business with up to $7,500 per year in corporate tax savings to reinvest in and grow its business. These kinds of savings are crucial for businesses to grow and prosper.
Lastly, the government intends to make important changes to the tax system that will ensure Canada's low corporate tax rates serve to support businesses, not to provide unfair tax advantages to the wealthiest Canadians.
The steps taken to date are having a real positive impact on our economy and for Canadians. Optimism is on the rise, and with good reason. Job creation is strong, with over 450,000 new jobs created in the last two years—
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order with respect to relevance. This member and I have gone through this a few times. He brings out talking points, which it seems he is recycling from last week's fall economic update.
Bill C-63 has many measures, and the member has not touched upon a single one yet. I wonder if he has read the bill or if he is embarrassed to talk about what is not in the bill. He is talking about things that are completely not benign to the discussions today. As he is leading off the debate, I would ask the member to actually devote some time to Bill C-63.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton
I thank the hon. member for his intervention. I note that the hon. parliamentary secretary is only five minutes into a period of 20 minutes that he has to reflect on the motion that is before the House.
Members will also know that on issues of budgets, budget implementation, and these types of bills, as with their experience in committees, these measures certainly encompass a broad range of topics, and in the usual case members are given a degree of latitude with respect to how they make their arguments on these measures. However, I would say on budget and fiscal measures, the boundaries become even that much broader.
Therefore, I appreciate the hon. member's intervention. He is right about relevance. However, we will continue to hear what the parliamentary secretary has to say and we will be able to get a good assessment of that toward the end of his remarks.
The hon. parliamentary secretary.
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, job creation is strong, with over 450,000 new jobs created in the last two years, and the unemployment rate is at its lowest level since 2008. Youth unemployment is also at a historic low.
Canada is now the fastest growing economy in the G7 by a wide margin, growing at an average rate of 3.7% over the last year, the fastest pace of growth since early 2006. Growth is forecast to be 3.1% in 2017, significantly above expectations at the beginning of the year. The fiscal outlook has improved by more than $6.5 billion annually on average from what was projected in budget 2017 last March. This is why we are here today, to consider and discuss the important measures contained in Bill C-63.
I will describe just a few of the key elements briefly, and I encourage the member opposite to pay close attention.
I will start with our help for the middle class and those striving to join it.
This budget implementation bill supports the middle class and those working hard to join it by protecting the rights of federally regulated workers when they request flexible work arrangements from their employers. Flexible work arrangements include flexible start and finish times, the ability to work from home, and new unpaid leave to help employees manage their family responsibilities.
These work arrangements benefit many women who continue to do the majority of unpaid work in the home. Budget 2017 was the first budget in Canada's history to include a gender statement. It seeks to present a frank and honest analysis of the impact the budgetary measures will have on women.
The government believes that having a meaningful and transparent discussion around gender and other intersecting identities will help us better understand the challenges that are faced, and will help it make informed decisions to advance the goals of gender equality, fairness, and stronger workforce participation.
The government also recognizes that youth today face important challenges when it comes to finding and maintaining good, well-paying jobs. While internships can give young Canadians the hands-on work experience they need to make a successful transition into the workforce, some internships, in particular those that are unpaid, can be unfair and exploitative.
The budget implementation act proposes to eliminate unpaid internships in federally regulated sectors where the internships are not part of a formal educational program. These changes will also ensure that unpaid interns who are part of an educational program are entitled to labour standard protections, such as on maximum hours of work, weekly days of rest, and general holidays. It is the right thing to do for our young people trying to gain necessary work experience to enter the labour force.
With regard to tax measures, the budget implementation bill begins to implement changes arising from the government's in-depth review of federal tax expenditures in order to make the tax system simpler, fairer, and more efficient.
Bill-based accounting was examined as part of the tax expenditure review. Bill-based accounting allows taxpayers to defer taxes by permitting the costs associated with work in progress to be expensed without the matching inclusion of the associated revenue.
In the 1980s, bill-based accounting was eliminated for all professionals except those designated under the law. At the time, these professionals had limited access to the small business deduction. Since those restrictions no longer exist, this measure eliminates the ability of designated professionals to use bill-based accounting.
We are listening to Canadians. In response to feedback and to mitigate the effect this measure will have on taxpayers, the inclusion of work in progress into income for tax purposes will now be phased in over four years rather than just two.
The government is also proposing changes to the principal residence exemption. The current income tax system provides a significant income tax benefit to homeowners disposing of their principal residence, in the form of an exemption from capital gains taxation. The principle residence exemption is available only to Canadian residents, individuals, and trusts.
Families are able to designate only one property as the family's principle residence for any given year. The government is proposing amendments that will improve the integrity of the tax system and ensure improved tax fairness for homeowners. An individual who was not residing in Canada throughout the year and acquired a residence will not be able to claim the exemption for that year. The ability of trusts to designate a property as a principle residence will be limited to improve fairness and integrity by better aligning the rules applying to trusts with the rules that apply when the property is sold directly by an individual.
Finally, more reporting will be required in respect of the disposition of a property for which the principal residence exemption is claimed. The Canada Revenue Agency will be provided with the authority to assess taxpayers beyond the normal assessment limitation period in respect of unreported dispositions.
The government is continuing to propose measures to ensure fairness for all taxpayers.
By developing in a cleaner, more sustainable way, Canada's natural resource sector will be able to keep making significant contributions to the Canadian economy. The success rate of exploratory drilling has grown considerably since the 1990s. In most cases, discovery wells now lead to production. Under the provisions of the bill before us today, consistent with the usual treatment of enduring assets, expenses associated with oil and gas discovery wells will be treated as Canadian development expenses, unless the wells are deemed unsuccessful.
By improving the tax system's neutrality, this measure supports Canada's international commitment to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies and indirectly supports the federal sustainable development strategy's measures and goals, including reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Canadians and indigenous peoples deserve to know that their government is doing everything in its power to protect the natural environment while supporting our economy. Our government intends to meet its objective of having a low-carbon economy and this is a step in that direction. This bill includes tangible measures that will move Canada forward as a smart and compassionate country. The government plans to strengthen the middle class and ensure that Canadians have the support, resources, and confidence they need to succeed, create jobs, and keep our economy growing.
Growing the Canadian economy helps the government to improve its record. Canada's financial situation remains solid and the government will see to keeping the debt-to-GDP ratio on its downward trend in order to preserve Canada's financial health and allow us to continue investing in those who contribute to our country's success. Every Canadian deserves to benefit from this economic growth. The government has lowered taxes for middle class Canadians and has committed to ensuring that the tax system does not offer unintended benefits to the wealthiest Canadians, or those with a high income. I urge hon. members of the House to vote for this bill that will benefit all Canadians.
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for getting to Bill C-63. I certainly appreciate that contribution to this place. I think we can have a good debate.
The government has deemed it important to cut off access to work in progress for professionals such as lawyers. I have met with advocates and law society members who have said that this change will make it more difficult for people seeking legal representation, whether due to a car crash or a health issue. These lawyers operate on a contingency basis and will be forced to pay tax on work they have not received any income for. Other clients are going to have to subsidize those activities to pay these taxes when there is no firm way for them to pay them, unless they win their case. These are some of the most vulnerable people.
Does the member recognize that the government has made accessing proper legal representation in rural areas more difficult? Could he explain why he is making this change?
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Mr. Speaker, let me first thank my colleague for his question.
As a lawyer by training who practised law and advocated for access to justice, I am very sensitive to the concerns he raised, and I think they are important. I believe that tax fairness is our main concern going forward. We have listened, and we want to make that two-year transition a five-year transition because we want legal professionals to have that transition time and we want to maintain access to justice as well.
Among other things, we want to avoid negative repercussions for lawyers operating on a contingency basis. Originally, we were going to bring this measure in over two years, but now we are stretching that to five years to give legal professionals the time they need. We always pay attention to what they have to say. There are many lawyers in our caucus. I know there are many lawyers in this House and that, like me, they care about access to justice. Our government's objective is to make our tax system a little bit fairer.
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, it will come as no surprise to members of this House, I am sure, nor indeed to Canadians across the country, to hear that the Minister of Finance has been subject to a fair bit of scrutiny over the last number of weeks, particularly with regard to conflicts of interest around Bill C-27 and his personal holdings in Morneau Shepell.
When asked about that in question period, when the time for questions and responses is very short, the finance minister likes to start talking about his fiscal measures. Presumably, the introduction of this bill would be very important to the Minister of Finance.
Therefore, I find it passing strange that the opening speech was given by the parliamentary secretary. Is that because the Minister of Finance did not want to be subject to a 10-minute question period by members of this House?
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Minister of Finance is often here for oral question period.
It is an honour for me to be here to introduce this important bill. My colleague, whom I hold in high regard, ought to be pleased to see me do so, as we now have an opportunity to discuss a bill that is important to Canadians. As everyone knows, since taking office, we have presented two key budgets.
In budget 2016, we introduced the Canada child benefit, which is reducing child poverty by 40%, but the NDP voted against that, which still surprises me. It is an honour for me to come here and talk about our budget initiatives, from both 2016 and 2017, that have put Canada back on track for growth, job creation, and prosperity, but above all, for inclusive prosperity, which is particularly important to me. For decades now, we have seen an increase in inequality and income disparity. When we came to power, we made sure to put Canada back on track for growth that is good for the middle class and for all Canadians.
We know that the more we reduce inequality and the more we help those in need, the more we grow our economy. That is what we did in budget 2016, and that is what we are doing in budget 2017. My NDP colleague should like some of the measures in Bill C-62, including the proposed guidelines for unpaid federal internships, which will ensure that young Canadian workers have more rights.
Steven Blaney Conservative Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague opposite has the difficult task of defending the indefensible.
My question for the member is simple. Why is the government attacking seniors by depriving 230,000 seniors of the guaranteed income supplement? According to the actuary of Canada, the government is going to take $3 billion out of the pockets of our most vulnerable seniors.
Why attack the middle class, which accounts for 8 out of 10 families, according to the Fraser Institute? The government is taking away more benefits than it is handing out. Why, contrary to its claims, is it attacking the middle class?
Why is it attacking not only our businesses, but the most vulnerable people in our society, such as diabetics and those with autism, by eliminating their tax credits?
Can the member ask his minister to address this situation? I would also ask him to end his deficit spending, which is counter to the government's commitments.
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Mr. Speaker, first, I want to reassure my colleague and let him know that I am very proud to defend one of Canada's best economic records in decades.
As I mentioned in my speech, in terms of growth, 45,000 jobs have been created since we took office. According to all of the economic indicators, our government's performance is far superior to that of the previous government on virtually every front. That is what I am defending.
Speaking of defending the indefensible, I would imagine that the member knows something about that. He was a minister under Stephen Harper for 10 years. He should know what he is talking about. What I am defending here is a government that is focused on growth and reduces inequalities. I am very proud of that.
I am happy that the member mentioned the guaranteed income supplement because one of the things that we have done since taking office is to increase that supplement by 10%, which puts about $1,000 more into the pockets of our most vulnerable seniors. We have helped 900,000 seniors. We also helped hundreds of thousands of seniors from falling into poverty by reducing the age of retirement from 67 to 65. That is what we have done for seniors, and I think that we can be proud of those results.
At the very end of its mandate, the government that the member across the way defended increased the tax-free savings account limit from $5,500 to $11,000, a measure that it knew would help only the wealthiest 3%. The American that invented the concept said that it was madness and that it would impose a fiscal straitjacket on the government. Members will recall that Joe Oliver, who was finance minister at the time, said:
“Well, why don’t we leave that to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s granddaughter to solve?”
We certainly do not leave problems for anyone's grandchildren to solve on this side of the House. We deal with problems promptly to secure stronger growth.
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for highlighting some of the areas we are working on to introduce equity into our tax system.
I am particularly interested in the working income tax benefit we are announcing. Seventy per cent of Canadians living in poverty are working. This benefit would address people who are trying to get into the middle class, people who are working but still live in poverty. It is also to encourage people to get into the workforce.
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Mr. Speaker, my colleague raises a good point.
Yes, we know there are many vulnerable Canadians who have the lowest incomes and have trouble making ends meet. That is why we will be increasing this tax benefit by 65% over the course of our mandate. That represents an increase of half a billion dollars, as mentioned in our 2017 fall economic statement. I think this will be of some assistance to Canadians who need it most.
As I said earlier, we on this side of the aisle know that reducing inequality and helping those who need it most fuels economic growth. This is a concept the previous government never grasped during its 10 years in office. The correlation was observed in the years following World War II, for example, when middle-class incomes kept pace with rising growth.
With more inequality and less growth, we are trying to balance our system to make sure that Canadians in need have as much money in their pockets as possible to pay for public transportation, housing, and electricity.
In terms of the economy and fairness, this is the fundamental difference between our approach and that of the previous government, which preferred giving tax breaks to the wealthy with no benefit to the economy, and which had one of the worst track records on almost every economic front since World War II. It had a horrible track record in job creation and GDP growth. It also added some $150 billion to the debt.