Debates of Nov. 2nd, 2017

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is almost like a softball question: what have the Liberals done to raise taxes? I would like to thank my colleague.

The Fraser Institute has shown that the Liberal middle-class tax cut has actually resulted in 81% of the so-called middle class actually paying higher taxes than before.

Under the previous government, we had promised to lower the small business tax to 9%. The Liberals at the time, during the election, said they would do the same and copycat the NDP. What happened when they got in? In the first budget, oops, no small business tax cut. In the next budget, oops, there was no small business tax cut. It took small business people from around the country rising up against the incredible, insulting tax attack on small businesses for the government to finally come through on its promise from two years ago.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his very well documented speech. He provided a very nice overview of the current economic situation.

I was also pleasantly surprised to hear him talk about the savings we might make that could help us provide, for example, a more affordable education to our young people. I commend him on that.

I am sure I know the answer, but does my colleague think that combatting tax evasion is one of the things the Liberals have yet to address? We see incredible cases of tax evasion in Canada, but it is also being done right before our eyes in the House of Commons.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from the NDP is right. What is going to happen in 2021 if the spending stays the same is that we will have interest payments of $36 billion. That is money taken away from students. That is money taken away from the poor. That is services we could be providing across the country. Instead, we are going to pay it to foreign banks in the form of interest.

With respect to tax evasion, we have seen what the government's policy and focus is on. It is focusing on sufferers of type 1 diabetes. It is focusing on people suffering from mental illnesses. These are not the tax evaders in the country. These people need help, not taxes, from the current Liberal government.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member from the Liberal Party is talking about how the Liberals are lowering taxes. Nothing could be further from the truth. We know, at least in my riding of Simcoe—Grey, that small businesses are suffering. They know what tsunami is about to hit them with increased taxes, whether it be 54% to 73% or even personal income taxes. We know what happened with the disability tax credit. It was eliminated altogether for those with diabetes.

I would like to ask my colleague what he thinks the cumulative effect will be on these affected individuals and businesses in his local area. Is he hearing from his constituents how damaging this is to families?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is very clear what is happening in my constituency. We are having issues with unemployment. People are coming to our office every day saying that they cannot take any more. It is one more straw that breaks the camel's back. Instead of a straw, the current government is dumping a bale of hay on the camel's back, with higher taxes on small businesses and taking away tax credits, and it goes on. Canadians cannot take any more. The government needs to take a hard look at what it is doing and the damage it is doing to average, everyday Canadians. It needs to take a step back, stop the tax increases, and stop the wasteful spending.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to stand today to talk about the terrorizing of the middle class, which is what I think is going on here.

The Liberals have gone on and on about how they are the champions of the middle class. We are not sure what they define as the middle class. I can tell members a little about the people where I come from. I come from northern Alberta. We are a hard-working bunch. We are typically in the farming and forestry industries and the oil patch and those kinds of things.

What was most interesting to me about this budget implementation bill was when the Liberals came out with the ways and means motion. I was reading through it, and what I came across was very interesting. I must say that it is dry reading, but when I was near the end, I ran across the meaning of beer. I never thought that as MPs, we would be discussing the meaning of beer, but the meaning of beer is in the current budget.

Beer is definitely something folks in Canada consume. I think about $22 billion a year is consumed, and this translates into revenue for the government of about $6 billion. Where I come from, beer is a big part of everyday life. It is a part of what I would consider middle-class Canadians consume. It is in contrast with maybe champagne or wine. I think the vast majority of Canadians consume more beer than wine. If I would make a comparison, I would say that there is somewhat of a class distinction, perhaps, between beer and wine. I would say that the middle class would more likely drink beer than wine.

When the government decides that it is going to define beer, it defines it as “any product (other than wine...)” which to me is very interesting. Why would the government want to define beer as other than wine? I looked at this through the lens of the middle class particularly. This is what the government wants to talk about all the time. This is the budget for the middle class. It is the government that champions the middle class. Why would it want to define beer as anything other than wine? Well, it made sense to me. We need to ensure that the middle class is getting its fair share, and I have laid out the fact that the middle class consumes beer.

[An hon. member]

What do you have against beer?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

I do not have anything against beer. I am saying that the middle class consumes beer. I asked why the middle class would be taxed on beer. What are the Liberals doing with the tax on beer? They are raising the tax on beer. This is the government that continually says it needs to stand up for the middle class. I made the argument that the middle class drinks beer. Why is the government raising the taxes on beer?

It goes on from there. The middle class drinks beer and understands that taxes are being raised, but then the Liberals come up with a formula for how they are going to tax beer. Believe me, it is quite a doozy. The formula is A x B x C = the tax that has to be paid on beer.

Why would there need to be a difference in the tax rate between beer and wine? It seems to me that there would be a fairly simple way of taxing beer and wine, if we need to tax beer and wine. It would seem that the product of concern we are trying to tax is the alcohol. Every bottle of beer I have ever bought says right on it 0.5%, 5%, or 7% alcohol. It seems to me that it would be fairly easy to figure out the volume of alcohol, and we would have a standard rate. For a volume of alcohol, this is how much tax there would be.

However, no, the minister must get involved to determine what kind of beer we are dealing with or what the percentage is. Therefore, in the equation I mentioned earlier, A x B x C, A is for the quantity and litres of beer concentrate, and B is the particular method by which the beer is diluted, as approved by the minister. This is very interesting to me.

Why does the minister need to approve the production of beer on a particular case? Why would that manipulate the changes in the rate of tax that a particular beer company pays? Perhaps it is because one of those numbered companies that we continue to ask about may actually be a beer brewing company. That would be why the minister has to get involved in beer production. He needs to ensure that his beer company does not have to pay as much tax.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

We used the same formula as Harper.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Either way, Mr. Speaker, they were standing up for the middle class. I assume they were trying to lower the taxes on beer, which would make sense if they were trying to stand up for the middle class. However, no, the minister has to get involved with the dilution of beer.

We can see that already, just in my short time speaking about the meaning of beer, that the Liberals definitely do not have the best interests of Canadians at heart.

The Liberals said that they would bring in a carbon tax. It takes energy to produce beer. That means those breweries have to be heated. We live in Canada, a cold place, and believe it or not, it takes a lot of water to make a bottle of beer. All that water has to be kept warm somehow. Now, there is a fermentation process that happens when beer is produced and that creates a bunch of heat in and of itself. However, we still need to keep the rest of the building warm, so therefore we need to use some form of energy, typically natural gas or coal. This kind of energy is now going to be taxed with the carbon tax. This is adding an additional cost to our breweries, which is also increasing the price of beer.

In my last few remaining minutes, I want to talk a bit about the document that was given to each of us when the government tabled its new budget. Interestingly, I thought for sure that if this was a budget for the middle class, it would be straightforward, easy to understand, with no bafflegab in it.

Page 154 of the ways and means motion talks about the provision of information by a master pension entity. I am sure many middle-class Canadians, many Canadians in my riding, have no idea what a master pension entity is. I started to read through it, and I will read some of this so people back home understand what we have to deal with every day when it comes to the Liberal government.

Paragraph (d), on page 156, states:

...an amount of tax deemed to have been collected under any of subsections (5) to (7.1) by another participating employer of the pension plan in respect of a specified supply of the other participating employer to the pension plan during a fiscal year of the other participating employer that ends in the preceding fiscal year, provided that the other participating employer is related at any time in the preceding fiscal year to the particular participating employer, less the amount, if any, determined for B under paragraph (c) of whichever of those subsections is applicable in determining that amount of tax...

This is the budget for the middle class. It is completely understandable and straightforward, lowering the costs for everybody and ensuring that at the end of the year, people will only have to pay $800 more than they paid last year. That is what is going on in the budget and that is what we are going up against today.

I know my colleagues and I in the Conservative Party will adamantly vote against this budget because it does nothing for the middle class.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned that the budget and the bills were hard to understand at times. Legal texts are hard to understand. I have to give him credit, as his speech, in and of itself, was hard to follow. Trying to connect the dots has been a great exercise for me, with all the various avenues he has taken.

At the beginning of his speech, he questioned the definition of “middle class”. I understand he defines it in terms of what people drink. Is it beer or is it wine? I come not from the middle class but from a background where I was one of those working hard to join the middle class, and we enjoyed red wine a lot. That does not define us in any way, shape or form. Nor do the kinds of products we consume.

However, on this side, our definition of “middle class” is more with respect to the capacity people have to pay their bills at the end of the month. That is what is defining our ambition as a government, to ensure families that need it the most get the most money at the end of the month so they can pay their bills, raise their children, and have the opportunities all Canadians deserve for success. That is why we made the Canada child benefit more generous, more progressive, and tax free, while the Conservatives were sending it to millionaires. If that is their definition of “middle class”, then when they increased the TFSA limit, who were they targeting? Was it the middle class? Therefore, I would like to know his definition based of what people earn and their capacity to make ends meet more so than what they drink.

I have a comment for clarification. As we are talking about Bill C-63 and beer, we have done this. A beer concentrate has been developed. We do not want to tax it as a spirit; we want to tax it as the volume of beer it creates. We received this from the industry. We followed through on it, and stakeholders are happy about it.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, every family looks at whether they can pay their bills at the end of the month. The government is raising taxes on everyday Canadians. The average family is paying $800 more a year in taxes. Besides that, it is adding, on average, $500 per person to the national debt of our country every year. That means when we are born, we are born with a $23,000 debt just for being alive and for being Canadian. “Welcome to Canada. You now have a $23,000 debt.”

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I hate to correct my friend, but we have to get the terminology right. It is the middle class and “those working hard to join it.” I found out that when Liberal colleagues use that exact phrasing, including the Prime Minister, they get a cookie every time. Therefore, if Conservative colleagues are looking for the same opportunity, here is a question about the middle class, which is the obsession of the 1% finance minister, or the 1% of the 1% finance minister, because I want to get the numbers right.

The Liberals promised to curb a loophole in the Income Tax Act whereby people would be paid in stock dividends rather than by salary and would receive a much more beneficial tax treatment. They promised to shrink and close that loophole. It costs the treasury about $800 million a year. Compare that to some of the attacks the Liberals have made on small businesses, where just one portion of what they were going after. They called those “loopholes” and inferred at times that small businesses were tax cheats. That was meant to bring in about $220 million to the treasury. By actually fulfilling the campaign promise, on which the Liberals ran, to close down these CEO stock option loopholes, they would have brought in almost four times as much money.

How many middle-class Canadians does the member know in his riding who are not paid by salary or by hourly wage but by stock options from the companies for which they work?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I did not research it, so I do not know how many people in my riding are paid by stock options. However, what I did research was the price of beer and how many Canadians consumed it. It turns out that 44% of Canadians consume beer. It is interesting that when it comes to beer, nearly a majority of Canadians enjoy their beer. The government is raising the taxes on that significantly, in perpetuity. Therefore, I appreciate the comments we received from the member, but when it comes to closing tax loopholes, obviously the government is closing the tax loophole on beer, ensuring we have to pay a tax on beer.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Thunder Bay—Rainy River.

Those in Waterloo region are very fortunate. The national unemployment rate is 6.2%, a nine-year low. Kitchener's unemployment rate is just 4.5% and it is experiencing an almost 5% job growth.

Our plan seems to be working. Canada's economy is the fastest-growing economy in the G7. Canada's economy is growing faster than it has in a decade. Job growth is among the highest in a decade. In just two years, over 450,000 jobs have been created. Canada has the lowest unemployment since 2008.

Youth unemployment is the lowest on record. In 2015, the national unemployment rate was around 7% and youth unemployment was double the national average. In my riding of Kitchener South—Hespeler, our doubling of the Canada summer job program has meant that for the past two summers, we have made a half a million dollars available to help social service agencies and private enterprises create summer jobs for young people, which will help them build their work experience, their resumés and equip them with the necessary skills they will need after graduating to secure good, well-paying jobs.

As a result of the excellent growth of our economy, government revenues have grown by more than an estimated $6.5 billion annually, on average, improving our budget to the extent that we are able to index the Canada child benefit two years ahead of our original plan.

In the last month for which I have figures, the Canada child benefit has meant that in my riding of Kitchener South—Hespeler, a total of 10,770 payments were made, benefiting just over 19,000 children. That is more than $6 million a month that moms and dads in Kitchener South—Hespeler have to buy clothes for their kids, shoes, school supplies, nutritious food, and learning and recreational activities. That money can now be spent locally in my riding.

Not only do nine out of 10 families in Canada now have more money to spend, not only have 300,000 children been lifted out of poverty, but economic experts, including the governor of the Bank of Canada, tell us that the Canada child benefit has been highly stimulative, which means that it has been very good at growing our economy. That should not surprise anyone.

The North American economy, Canada's economy included, is consumer-driven. When parents' responsibilities require them to spend on necessities for their children, the economy improves and grows, sales increase, profits rise, and employment increases. Therefore, the Canada child benefit helps parents raising the next generation and, at the same time, helps grow our economy.

As promised in our election campaign platform, we are lowering the small business tax rate from 11% to 9% to help small businesses invest, create jobs, and grow. Dan Kelly, with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, said, “This decision will pump hundreds of millions of dollars back into the small business community, helping them create more jobs and grow the economy.” Therefore, not only have we improved the situation of families with children and caused the economy to grow, thereby improving business, but we have also reduced the tax burden on household businesses.

We have also been investing in transit, such as the Waterloo region LRT. We are investing in Canada and Canadians. Over the past year, I participated in a number of announcements and investments in my riding of Kitchener South—Hespeler, and I would like to outline some of those now.

There was a $15.8-million investment in Conestoga College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning. As a result of this investment and investments like it, students, professors, and researchers will work at state-of-the-art facilities to advance the country's best researchers. They will collaborate in specially designed spaces that support lifelong learning skills and training. They will work in close proximity with partners to turn discoveries into products and services. In the process, they will train for and invent the high-value jobs of the future. Their discoveries will plant the seeds for the next generation of innovators.

We will be investing $2.7 million in 3E Nano Inc. of Kitchener. 3E Nano produces a window coating that will make it easy to defrost car windows and make windows more energy efficient by increasing energy retention or rejection without reducing clarity.

We will make a repayable contribution of up to $3 million to Grand River Foods Ltd. in Hespeler to increase production and explore new export opportunities.

Our government will provide $96 million to widen Highway 401 from six to ten lanes for a distance of approximately five kilometres, between Hespeler Road and Townline Road. The work includes new high occupancy vehicle lanes and the replacement of two bridges at Hespeler Road and Franklin Boulevard over Highway 401. Once completed, the project will help improve safety and traffic flow by easing congestion and providing faster and more reliable travel and commute times on one of Canada's most important trade corridors. The addition of high-occupancy vehicle lanes will promote environmentally friendly transportation, such as carpooling and the use of public transit. By widening and improving the highways, we can get products to market faster, adding to the growth rate and continued success of our current economy.

We are also building an innovative economy that will create more good jobs for the middle class today and in the future. As part of our innovation and skills plan, we are investing nearly $1 billion over five years to create jobs and accelerate innovation through superclusters.

Superclusters are innovation hotbeds. They are areas of high growth, like Silicon Valley, that bring together the most talented people, the newest technologies, and the fastest growing companies. This is what we want to create in regions across Canada.

This legislation will take the next steps in our innovation and skills plan, an agenda that focuses on people and addresses the changing nature of the economy to ensure that it works for all Canadians. It will enact several key parts of our plan, including $600 million in new financing for clean technology firms and $400 million to put into place the venture capital catalyst initiative.

I want to conclude by mentioning some of the initiatives that our government has put forward. We have put forward an economic plan that has created 450,000 jobs in two years. The unemployment rate was at 7% when we took office and it is now down to 6.2%. The economy is growing faster, at an average pace of 3.7%. Canada has the fastest growing economy in the G7. Nine out of ten families have benefited from the child benefit, and we have lifted over 300,000 children out of poverty.

I want to share that record with the members of the House to show that our record is successful, it is working, and it is working for most Canadians.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is really important as parents that we talk to our kids about financial literacy. Our government put that concept forward and I think the Liberal government has put some resources toward it.

When we teach our kids about financial literacy, it is important that we tell them not to borrow money on credit cards to a point where the debt cannot be paid down.

We just had the government's fall economic update. The Liberal government promised a small $10 billion deficit. This time around it is $20 billion. In the last two years, the deficit has been closer to $30 billion. The Liberals brag about all of the money they are handing out to Canadians, but the reality is that this year alone a family of four will be further in debt by $2,222 approximately. During bad times the Liberals like to spend money. Now they say we are in good times so they are spending more. The deficit is twice the amount they promised. That is Liberal ideology.

Does the member believe in financial literacy for children? If so, does he believe in financial literacy for the government, because it is putting us further in debt even in good times?

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that gives me an opportunity to talk about this further and to address the member's question on financial literacy. One thing I want to say is that the way we grow our economy is by making investments in our middle class and in business. We have lowered the tax rate on small business from 11% down to 10.5%, and will be lowering it even further to 9%. We are lowering taxes on businesses, increasing investment, and increasing infrastructure. The latter include the highest numbers we have seen, with billions of dollars being put into infrastructure. I have seen in my riding how that will help our region. Investments are the way to grow the economy.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to draw to the hon. member's attention to one concern that I have, which I hope we can correct at some point very soon. That is the fact that the proposed 10 days of unpaid leave of absence for victims of domestic violence might not help very many people. I will point out what I have shared with the member's colleague.

For the many women in particular who are in abusive relationships, 90% of them are also economically controlled by their partner. We can imagine a scenario in which an individual has taken unpaid leave from their job to deal with an issue, to maybe see a lawyer or to take care of some issues in order to be safe, and then come home at the end of the month and their pay is less than what it should be. That will create an unsafe scenario in some families.

I really want to call my colleague's attention to how important it is that this leave be paid if it is to be an effective policy piece by the government. I would like the member's comments on that.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to express support for this bill and address the question of the hon. member. As a result of the bill, the Canada Labour Code would allow for greater flexibility in terms of vacation days, holidays, and bereavement days. This is something that we wanted to do to ensure that the labour code is particular to the times we live in. We want to continue to work with all of our colleagues to look at ways we can help all Canadians with work-life balance. I want to work closely with my colleague and all members of the House going forward.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague hit the nail on the head when he said that we are investing in Canadians and that it is paying off. When he goes door knocking in his riding of Kitchener South—Hespeler, what is he hearing about those investments, particularly the Canada child benefit and the other investments we are making in Canadians?

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have friends on BBM, where we have a group chat. In our case, the topic was to alert all parents out there that the Canada child benefit would be increasing again in 2019. They were very happy to hear that because they know that the cost of raising their children is increasing and that this will go directly to their families to help them with that and to ensure that they spend more. That spending will go directly to our economy and will continue to boost it.

[Don Rusnak, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-63. We know that when it passes, this very important legislation will continue the government's plan to ensure progress for the Canadian middle class.

We are keeping our promise and delivering on what Canadians want us to do, to build an economy that works for Canadians and their families. A strengthened middle class means that hard-working Canadians and their children will reap the benefits of their work and will be prepared for the economy of tomorrow.

A vital component of that is supporting our small businesses, which are the lifeblood of the Canadian economy. Just last month, the government announced that it intends to lower the small business tax rate to 10%, effective January 1, 2018, and to 9%, effective January 1, 2019. We will make sure that the small business rate is effective in encouraging businesses to grow, buy new equipment, and hire more workers.

I would now like to focus on the state of our economy and the recent measures in the government's fall economic statement, which is a continuation of the government's plan in its past two budgets and last year's fall statement. The government's plan to invest in people and in our country's future is based on the belief that when we have an economy that works for the middle class, we have a country that works for everyone.

The Canadian economy is the fastest growing in the G7, with an average growth of 3.7% over the last four quarters. This is due in large part to increased consumer confidence, a direct result of programs like the Canada child benefit that put more money in the pockets of moms and dads, so they can pay off debt, buy hockey equipment, or buy healthier food. Everywhere we look, there are signs of progress for the middle class. The economy has created over 450,000 jobs in the last two years, and the unemployment rate has dropped to its lowest level since 2008.

Canadian economic growth has accelerated sharply since the second half of 2016. Over the last four quarters, the Canadian economy has had its fastest rate of growth in more than a decade, and growth is forecast to be 3.1% in 2017, significantly above expectations at the beginning of the year.

These gains, coupled with a better than expected fiscal outcome in 2016-17, have resulted in a really positive improvement in our budget outlook. In fact, Canada's fiscal outlook has improved by over $6.5 billion annually, on average, compared to what we were expecting in March, and the federal debt to GDP ratio has been placed firmly on a downward track, with Canada's net debt to GDP ratio projected to remain the lowest in the G7.

How did we get here? In the short term, we did what Canadians asked us to do, by making smart investments to grow the economy, and strengthening and growing the middle class. We asked the wealthiest 1% to pay a little more so we could cut taxes for the middle class. We increased the guaranteed income supplement for low-income seniors. We introduced a new tax-free Canada child benefit, CCB, to replace the previous child benefit system.

The CCB provides greater support to those who need it most: low and middle-income families. Sixty-five per cent of families receiving the maximum CCB amounts are single parents, of whom 90% are single mothers. Nine out of 10 families are receiving more support under the CCB than under the previous system. The CCB has helped lift 300,000 children out of poverty, and by the end of this year, child poverty will have been reduced by 40% from what it was in 2013.

In the fall economic statement, the government proposed strengthening the CCB by making annual cost of living increases starting in July 2018, a full two years ahead of schedule. The government had previously committed to indexing the CCB to inflation starting in 2020, but a growing economy and improved fiscal track means that the government can deliver on this commitment a full two years ahead of schedule.

We are also strengthening the Canada pension plan, reaching an historic agreement with the provinces that will increase the maximum benefit by 50% over time.

However, there is more work to do, and as our plan helps grow the economy, we are investing that growth back in the middle class and those working hard to join it. For those working hard to join the middle class, such as young single workers just getting a foothold in the workforce, the government proposes to offer even more help by further enhancing the working income tax benefit, or WITB. The WITB is a refundable tax credit that supplements the earnings of low-income workers. It provides important income support and helps ensure that work is rewarded. In the fall economic statement, the government proposed to further enhance the WITB by $500 million annually, starting in 2019. This enhancement would be in addition to the increase of about $250 million annually that would come into effect in that year as part of the enhancement to the Canada pension plan.

The enhancement proposed in the fall economic statement will give a needed boost to over 1.5 million low-income workers as they work long hours, sometimes in more than one job, to advance their careers, support themselves, and their families. Whether this extra money is used to help cover the family grocery bill or for work-related expenses, the improved benefit will help low-income working Canadians make ends meet.

The investments we have made in people, in our communities, and in our economy will put more money in the pockets of those who need it most, create more well-paying jobs, and give Canadians greater confidence in their future.

Our budget is a call to action. It calls on each and every one of us to take this moment in history and to make it ours. That is why I would strongly encourage all members of the House to support this legislation.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the last member quoted Dan Kelly from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. It is amazing that he would quote him, given what the CFIB has said about the government's plan and continuing intentions to attack small business. Indeed, Mr. has Kelly stated:

These proposals, while intended to target the wealthy, will hurt middle-class business owners from every sector of the economy. These are shop owners, farmers, doctors, financial planners, homebuilders and trades in all sectors...

As well, Perrin Beatty, the CEO of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce has said:

In 10 years at the Canadian Chamber, I’ve never seen an issue that has generated greater concern among our members.

That is quite incredible. I wonder if the member could comment on that.

Mr. Speaker, before I do, I wonder if you would see whether we have a quorum in the House at the moment.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

On that point of order, we do not have a quorum. Please ring the bells.

And the bells having rung:

We now have a quorum.

The hon. member for Thunder Bay—Rainy River.

[Don Rusnak, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is quoting articles from when the government first put out its proposals. I have often said that no government in history has put out proposals and asked for consultation as we have with the minister's tax fairness plan.

We have listened to and heard Canadians. We have made changes to the tax plan. The minister has said from the beginning that he did not want any unintended consequences in terms of tax fairness, and I think that is what has been delivered.