Debates of Feb. 2nd, 2017

Opposition Motion—Taxes on Health and Dental Care Plans

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have risen in the House many times to speak about the Liberals' hypocrisy. I have also used the term “middle-class tax fraud”, because that is what I believe they are perpetrating on Canadians.

The Liberals talk about this narrative all the time, “the middle class and those working hard to join it”. Nothing could be further from the truth. We just have to look at the numbers. Yes, we can give them a little bit of leeway on some of the issues, but in the overall scheme of things, they are actually going to be taking more money out of middle-class Canadians' pockets than they are going to give back.

The reality is that when we build a debt situation of $1.5 trillion, who do we think is going to pay for that? It is going to be the middle class. It is going to be me and every single family in Barrie—Innisfil, but the Liberals do not care. They just keep piling it on and spending money. If I ran my house and if people in Barrie—Innisfil ran their homes the way the Liberal Party is running government, we would be kicked out of our houses. We would lose our cars. We would lose everything. That is the truth.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague across the way asked members on this side to speak plainly and truthfully about the measures we are taking to support the middle class, and I am only too happy to do so.

By raising taxes on the richest 1%, we have been able to cut taxes for nine million Canadians. We have been able to introduce a Canada child benefit that, in New Brunswick alone, will help 112,000 children and help put $600 million back into the GDP of the region within its first two years. In addition to that, we are helping seniors with a top-up to the guaranteed income supplement, we have reduced the age of retirement back to 65, and we will be strengthening the Canada pension plan for years to come. This is in addition to an innovative strategy and agenda that will help create good job growth in the years to come and help spur our economy and communities for generations.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are doing it on their credit card. If I spent money on my credit card the way they are spending money, eventually I would be called up. However, they are the government. They will tax people and lower their services. That is how they will pay for it, and eventually, that is what is going to happen.

The projection is $1.5 trillion in debt. That is not the projection of the member for Barrie—Innisfil. It is the finance department's projection. Somebody will be paying for that, and it will be the middle class. As for all those programs and services the member talked about, eventually somebody is going to have to clean up that mess. Somebody is going to have to pay for it.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to the motion today calling on the government to abandon any current and future plans to tax health care and dental care benefits. We need to ensure that the Liberal government stands in this House and supports our motion, to give some comfort to Canadians that their health and dental plans will not be taxed. These benefits lower the tax bills of 13.5 million Canadians and cost the Liberal government nearly $3 billion in foregone revenue.

Until yesterday, the Liberals were planning to tax the health and dental benefits of Canadians. We want all members in this House, including the Liberal members, to support our motion and hold the Prime Minister to account on his word.

We have seen time and time again promises being broken. There is no trust. In the Prime Minister's election platform, he promised electoral reform, saying over 1,000 times that the 2015 election would be the last first past the post. All we wanted as Conservatives was to have a referendum so the people of Canada could decide how they wanted to elect their representatives. Yesterday, the entire election promise was scrapped, citing “no consensus”.

In the Prime Minister's election platform, he promised to reduce small business taxes from 11% to 9%. Instead, the Prime Minister chose to ignore that promise and say that small business is only a tax haven for the rich. Maybe that applies to the Prime Minister. However, small businesses are the backbone of this country. Over eight million Canadians are employed by small businesses, a number that makes up nearly 50% of Canada's entire workforce and over 70% of the private workforce.

As well, the Prime Minister has committed $7.3 billion outside of Canada, plus an upcoming commitment of $2.9 billion to an Asian infrastructure bank to build infrastructure in Asia.

The Prime Minister committed to all Canadians that he would run a very small, tiny deficit that would go towards infrastructure and to stimulating the economy. He also promised that the budget would be balanced by 2019, but we can see now that none of this is true.

This morning, the parliamentary budget officer released a report called “Following the Money”. This report focused specifically on the Liberals' new infrastructure plan. The parliamentary budget officer outlined several concerning issues, including that the Liberals had no framework to evaluate the program's performance and limited transparency on how the money is being spent. He also confirmed that there is a shortfall of $9 billion in infrastructure funding and that the government will not meet its economic growth and GDP targets outlined in budget 2016.

The Liberals' infrastructure program was supposed to be the key focus of their economic growth plan. This is how they were going to balance the budget. Clearly, this is no longer going to happen, and it is no surprise. The Prime Minister and his Liberal government have spent so much money that the books will not be balanced until 2055.

The financial federal debt will hit $1.5 trillion by 2050. That means that those who are 18 years old today will not see another balanced budget until they are 56 years old. Who will pay the tab? It will be the next generation, the generation this Prime Minister purports to be supporting, making sure they have jobs. That is who is going to pay the tab, our children.

Let us remember that the bill has to be paid. Let us look at how the Liberals might do that.

The Liberals have already increased the CPP premiums for employers and employees. They have scrapped the small business tax. Why on earth would we want to help anyone who is actually creating jobs? They have cut the contributions to the TFSA because seniors and young families do not really need to save for their future or retirement. They have increased the down payment requirements for first-time homebuyers to make it harder for young families to purchase a home and enter the market. They have squandered the $2 billion surplus and two balanced budgets handed over by the Conservatives. Instead of using a common sense method and regulating or fining heavy polluters, what have the Liberals done? They have decided to implement a national carbon tax that will be paid by the taxpayer in higher home heating costs, groceries, and gas, while giving exemptions to those who actually need to reduce their carbon footprint.

The Liberals cite that this carbon tax is revenue neutral, but it is clear that it will only be revenue neutral for the government, not for the taxpayer. What did the Prime Minister forget to factor into the last budget? Indexing the Canada child benefit at a cost of $22.3 billion. He forgot to include the fighter jets at a cost of between $5 billion and $6 billion. He forgot health care transfers at a cost of $11 billion. Forgot a contingency fund at a cost of $3 billion to $6 billion.

Currently, the finance ministry is undertaking the review of all benefits and tax credits under the guise of simplification. The Liberals have already done away with the child tax credit on art, fitness, and textbooks. Therefore, when look at the economic strategy of the government, it is met with much trepidation. The Liberal government is looking for any and all ways to tax the people of Canada to pay for its out of control spending. The Liberals need to cover the cost of a $1.2 million renovation of the minister's office for Status of Women, another $800,000 for the renovation of the Minister of Infrastructure's office, $220,000 for moving expenses of the chief's staff, and limousines for his ministers.

We must have concrete motions in the House of Commons to prevent and to try to control the Liberals' spending. We must curtail their urge to follow greed and their economic policies. We have all seen how that ended. Canadians deserve much better from the Liberal government and we as the official opposition will ensure that this occurs.

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

Mr. Speaker, again, I will have to differ with many of the comments I have heard from across the way. ln listening to the member, she says that the Liberals should be spending on this and should be spending on that. If we tally up the totals, it probably comes close to $20-plus billion. Then the member talks about the Liberals' deficits and expresses concerns. I do not think she is consistent with many of the arguments she has put forward.

Let me focus a question on the deficit. I am sure the member realizes that the former government had deficits virtually every year, with the exception of the first two years when the Conservatives first came to office. They had billions of dollars in surplus from the Paul Martin government. However, before the recession started, the Conservatives had already put us into a deficit and that deficit, contrary to what the Conservatives might try to tell us, never disappeared. It continued to grow, and Prime Minister Harper actually had an accumulated deficit in excess of $100 billion.

Why should this government listen to what was likely the most irresponsible, regressive government that ultimately put us into the position we were in not that long ago? Now we see a government that truly cares about Canada's middle class. Why should we listen to advice—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. The hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, when we look at the economy and where it was when the Conservatives were in power, I find that astonishing. We went through and came out of a recession. We used stimulus money, got the economy going, and moved forward. Was there a deficit in doing that? Absolutely. Did we balance the budget? Did we have a plan? Did we end up with a surplus? Did we have balanced budgets? Yes, yes, yes and yes. We will not wait until 2050 to see if there will be a balanced budget. Therein lies the difference.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague from South Surrey—White Rock knows, today is Groundhog Day. Similar to Groundhog Day fashion, in 1993 the Liberals campaigned to end the GST. Once they were in government, they kept it. In 2015, the Liberals campaigned on lowering the small business tax, and they have not done that. If we go back to 1994, the Liberals tried to implement a GST on health care costs. Fast forward to 2015, and they are doing the same thing.

How does my my colleague see these taxes affecting the small business industry, not only the doctors and dentists but also the patients and clients who use them?

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, when we look at who the job creators are in our country, it is small business. We need to create a low-tax environment for small businesses so they have the ability to grow and to hire people. We need to ensure we support those businesses. By adding red tape and taxes, by not completing the promises that were undertaken by the Liberal government, we are harming those businesses. They will move or shut down. We have seen it in every community across the country. Small business cannot afford the Liberal taxation plan, and they will shut down and not hire. The Liberal attack on small business is astonishing.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Scarborough—Guildwood.

It is my pleasure to rise in the House today to debate something that is so important to Canadians and the Canadian economy.

I would first like to reassure the many residents of Oakville North—Burlington who have contacted me, the Oakville and Burlington Chambers of Commerce, and business and labour leaders, by reiterating what the Prime Minister stated yesterday. There will be no tax on health and dental benefits in the 2017 budget. I have advocated for maintaining the tax-free status of these benefits since it first hit the news.

It is important in today's debate to focus on what our government is doing.

Our government has introduced significant tax cuts to support the middle class and those working hard to join it. With these tax cuts, we are restoring hope, optimism, and creating new opportunities for inclusive growth that will make Canada stronger today and for the long term.

In fact, one of the first actions we took as a government was to introduce our middle-class tax cut. Today, nearly nine million Canadians are benefiting from lower taxes on every paycheque. By reducing the second personal income tax rate to 20.5% from 22%, a 7% reduction, our middle-class tax cut represented a major first step in our commitment to strengthen the middle class, but it is no means the last.

Budget 2016 advanced our vision of a stronger middle class with the introduction of the Canada child benefit.

For families in Oakville North—Burlington, the tax-free Canada child benefit means more money to spend on things that matter, things like new winter clothes, or healthier groceries, or sports programs. The Canada child benefit is particularly significant in providing enhanced support for low-income families, including many single parents. In fact, about 65% of families receiving the maximum Canada child benefit are single parents, the majority of whom are single mothers. This makes the Canada child benefit an effective ladder out of poverty for hundreds of thousands of Canadian children.

With this new support, it will be easier for them to stay healthy as they grow, to succeed in school, and to succeed in life. Our kids will have more opportunities available to them to go on to raise their own families in a country that is more prosperous and fair. This is just one of the many things we are doing for Canadians.

These investments in Canada's middle class are already paying dividends, not just for Canadians but for our overall economy.

The International Monetary Fund, for example, projects that Canada will be among the fastest-growing economies in the year ahead. This remarkable performance is being driven, in part, by the middle-class tax cut and the introduction of the Canada child benefit, not to mention our historic investments in infrastructure. These investments are the foundation upon which we are building a better and fairer Canada in which all have the opportunity to not only succeed, but to share in our success.

If we are going to speak about young people and keeping them healthy and active, as the member of Parliament for Oakville North—Burlington, I am working with my community members to encourage investments and the use of active transportation, such as bike lanes. These investments are good for our economy, our health, and our environment.

Oakville's Crosstown Heritage Trail will receive a significant upgrade, thanks to funding from the Canada 150 community infrastructure program. The important investment in the trail and its pedestrian and cycling facilities is part of the federal government's activities to honour Canada's 150th anniversary in 2017.

The Canada 150 community infrastructure program will preserve and improve our community infrastructure so Canadians and their families can enjoy moments of culture, sport, recreation, and leisure for years to come. I am proud to see my community benefit from this program.

Thanks to the Canada 150 funding, residents in Oakville North—Burlington will soon be able to stop and read first nations information stations in Bronte Creek Provincial Park and along the Sixteen Mile Creek trails. The Oakville Community Foundation will be partnering with our indigenous community members to share aboriginal stories, verses, and culture revolving around the land, water and sky.

In honour of Canada's 150th birthday, I will be participating in many active and healthy events in my riding. ParticipACTION has created an ultimate play list to get Canadians moving, 150 activities that define our land and people, from sledge hockey to lacrosse, walking, cycling, skating, and more.

On my website, it is possible to sign up for my e-newsletter at MPDamoff.ca or visit my social media sites to find out what I will be doing and join me. I encourage all Canadians to go to participaction.com to check out the list, try as many activities as they can, and track their activities.

Canada's public health care system is an example of what Canadians can accomplish when given the opportunity. It is a source of great pride that not only sustains our health, well-being, and prosperity, but defines us as who we are. I am proud that our government is working with our provincial and territorial counterparts to finalize a new health accord.

In my community, the auto industry is critical, and the Government of Canada's innovation agenda will deliver on an ambitious automotive policy agenda to attract investment and position Canada as a leader in innovation in developing the car of the future. I am looking forward to working with my fellow MPs and colleagues from Oakville and Burlington on transit, and I know we will be sharing information about more investments very soon. We are also working together with our municipal partners on phase two of our infrastructure investments to improve our communities, create jobs, and grow the economy.

In my riding, I am fortunate to have many young people, who will become leaders in the community in the near future. When I speak with their parents, I hear the concern about their children finding good jobs. Each year, the Canada summer jobs program helps employers create valuable summer job opportunities for full-time students in Oakville North—Burlington while strengthening local economies and communities across Canada.

Employers in my community know how important it is for students to gain much-needed skills and experience and contribute to our community. Our government doubled funding for the Canada summer jobs program, and last year 97 students were employed across Oakville North—Burlington. Groups like Habitat for Humanity Halton Mississauga employed 12 students, who assisted with everything from family intake to producing videos for volunteer and donor recruitment; it was a win-win for both the employers and the students. I have been working with non-profit agencies and small business to grow this program in my community, and I am looking forward to another successful summer this year.

All Canadians deserve to find meaningful employment and earn a decent wage, including those with disabilities. This is an issue that I am very passionate about, and I have been working with my colleagues in Parliament to change the culture in our country so that people of all abilities are able to contribute to our economy and receive a fair wage for their work. Our government is committed to improving inclusivity in employment.

In budget 2016, the federal government committed to a full review of the Canadian tax system, looking specifically at tax expenditures, to ensure tax fairness for the middle class and to simplify the tax code. This is a critical exercise for our government.

The residents of Oakville North—Burlington and Canadians from coast to coast to coast recognize that the environment and the economy go hand in hand. They know that to succeed in the new economy, we must be well placed to take advantage of the growing renewable energy sector. This sector will be creating jobs for our young people and ensuring our prosperity for years to come.

I am proud to be part of a government that is looking to the future, not the past. Our government is creating jobs, growing the middle class, and protecting our environment. This is what Canadians expect from us, and this is what we are delivering.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we can tell that the member is very attuned to her constituency and being very active. I think that is an excellent thing for any member of Parliament to do in this place. However, I have some concerns.

She talked about the government's plan on infrastructure and growth. So far, we have not seen the growth that was expected. In fact, the finance committee heard from the Bank of Canada that it continues to downgrade, in many cases, projections for Canada's growth.

Part of the government's major pillar in the last election was to run on a growth strategy around infrastructure. We find out today that the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer has made considerable effort to link the announced budget measures to the underlying infrastructure projects, but there is still a gap between what has been announced and the value of the projects currently identified by departments:

PBO data show that of the $13.6 billion for the fiscal years 2016–18 announced in Budget 2016, departments have identified [only] $4.6 billion worth of projects.

I added the word “only”. Again, the concern is that about a third of the money has actually been identified for real projects.

Is the member not concerned that the government seems to be dragging its feet on something that is so core to its election promises?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as a former municipal councillor, I take infrastructure very seriously. I have been working with my communities of Oakville and Burlington to ensure they are receiving the infrastructure funding they are looking for, for the community.

While I was back in my riding, I attended the Oakville Chamber of Commerce RBC economic outlook breakfast. I just want to share some of the statistics that were shared at that breakfast. They are forecasting the unemployment rate to drop from 7% in 2016 to 6.6% across Canada in two years, and in Ontario, it has continued to fall since we were elected in 2015, from 6.8% to 6.5% this past year. By 2018, it will fall to 6%; so I think we are creating jobs, and we are doing exactly what we promised to do in terms of getting jobs created, especially for our young people.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate member's comments about supporting the middle class. The concern that I share with my colleagues is about those who aspire to be in the middle class.

The member's government put out a trial balloon saying it might think about taxing medical and dental benefits. There are a lot of Canadians who do not even have basic access to medical services or dental services, particularly a lot of our first nation communities. Her government promised that it would deliver on the promise so that there would be comparable services for indigenous families and children, and it broke that promise.

We cannot take the word of the Liberals on the promises of electoral reform. They already broke their promises about basic services to indigenous families. What else can we expect the government might be bringing forward? Will it or will it not be taxing the services? Will it or will it not be finally delivering on the opportunity for equal access to basic dental and medical services?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think we have broken our promises. We are not taxing health and dental benefits. That was clear from the Prime Minister's comments yesterday. Having said that, when we talk about our indigenous communities, there is always more we can be doing for them.

We are investing billions of dollars, but we can and we must do more to ensure that the children living in these communities do have access to health and dental services. I know that our Minister of Health and Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs are working hard to ensure that those children receive the same opportunities as children who are living in my riding, because they deserve it.

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member is engaged with her constituents. She is holding town hall meetings regularly. She is knocking on doors on a regular basis and is proud of that, and that keeps her connected to her constituents.

It is unfortunate that a member of the official opposition referred to the Prime Minister's town hall meetings as a travelling road show. On this side of the House, we call that engaging with Canadians, and I know that this member is very proud to engage with Canadians.

The member spoke about focusing on the middle class and being proud of those things: middle class tax cuts, child benefits, and summer jobs. Could she share with this House the impact and the effect that has had on members and constituents in her own community?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have been out talking to the residents in my riding, and I have held town hall meetings. They have told me that what we have done is critically important, in particular, when it comes to youth employment and the impact that the Canada summer jobs program had.

I think probably I have heard more from residents about the importance of jobs, particularly for young people, and that is something we are delivering on and will continue to deliver on.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to participate in a debate for the first time in 2017.

May I say, first, that normally I like to stick to the motion. The motion did read:

That, given the average middle class Canadian is already overburdened with taxes, the House call on the government to abandon any plans it may have to in any way tax health and dental care plans.

That was a good motion about this time yesterday. However, during question period, the Conservatives had an oops moment when the Prime Minister announced that this particular tax expenditure was not under review.

Just as a point of information, there are about 180 tax expenditures that are in the tax code. As budget 2016 announced—so it is hardly a secret—all of those tax expenditures are under review. Most tax expenditures are put in for perfectly good reasons. They are trying to achieve some sort of social good of one kind or another. However, sometimes they do not work the way they are supposed to work, and sometimes they create a whole other level of inequities.

Let me just use the one that we were supposed to be debating today, which we are now not debating today, namely the health and dental issue, as kind of an example of where there is an inequity that was probably unintended by the original drafters. If I am an employer with an employee and I have a health and dental plan, I can deduct the cost of that plan as an employer, and on the other hand, the employee does not have to declare that benefit as income, and therefore it is tax free. However, if I as the employer say to my employee, “Here is $1,000 to go and buy a health and dental plan”, it is deductible in my hands as an employer, but it is taxable in the hands of the employee.

Therefore we see that there is an inequity that is immediately set up; hence the government's desire to review all expenditures on a continuous basis because of unintended consequences. Those unintended consequences create real inequities for Canadians. For Canadians who are fortunate enough to work for an employer who has a health and dental plan, versus one who does not, there is an inequity that is created there.

However, we are talking gossip, and the motion yesterday was founded on mainly gossip. It does seem kind of regrettable that the Conservatives would even introduce a motion based on gossip. The Conservatives have now amended their gossipy motion to read “such as taxes on carbon, savings, payroll, small businesses and children's arts and sports programs”.

The taxing of carbon is largely done by provinces. About 80% to 90% of the population already, one way or another, pays a price for carbon pollution, so it is hard to know what the Conservatives are talking about there, other than anticipated gossip. I have no idea what they are talking about with savings, payroll, or small businesses. Let me just go on to talk about the children's arts and sports programs, which on the face of it is a good idea, encouraging children to participate in sports and arts programs. However, it may well be that individuals either do not have a child so it is not beneficial to them, or if they have children, they would like to put them in a tutoring program or a reading program or something else that might actually cost money. Those individuals would not actually qualify under a sports and arts program. Therefore there may be a better way to achieve a social benefit by the review of a tax expenditure such as that.

The second inequity is that people in the upper tax brackets can afford sports and other programs for their children, but people in the lower tax brackets frequently cannot. Again, an inequity is created among Canadians based upon their income.

Therefore, what exactly are we talking about today, other than the Conservative posturing that would have us believe that they are the only ones capable of managing the economy and the fiscal framework. The mantra usually has something to do with taxes and hard-working Canadians.

The presumption of the motion is that somehow or another the Harper Conservatives were absolutely brilliant with their tax brackets, but if we compare the tax brackets between 2015, the last year of the Harper regime, and 2016, the first year of this Liberal government, we can note that on the first bracket, which is 15%, both brackets remain the same and are quite comparable, however, the threshold has moved up $500 under the Liberals. In effect, people have to earn $500 before they leave that 15% bracket.

The second bracket, and this is where the dramatic change is, under the Conservatives was 22%, but under the Liberals it is 20.5%, a significant change in the bracket, which is inaccurately referred to as the middle-class bracket. In addition to the drop of 1.5 points between the percentages, people have to be earning a further $1,000 before they leave the bracket under the Liberals. It is a double benefit.

The 26% bracket, which is the third bracket, remains the same, as does the 29% bracket, but there is a new bracket that is created under the Liberals that taxes income over $200,000 at 33%. It is a major initiative, and it is an attempt to offset some of the costs of lowering the brackets in the lower brackets so that there is not a huge hit on the fiscal framework.

The second major initiative was under the Canada child tax benefit on which the tax was eliminated to the benefit of nine out of 10 Canadians, including my own grandchildren. The rhetoric does not match the rates.

Then we can look at the fiscal situation that was passed on to the Conservatives back in 2006. Prime Ministers Chrétien and Martin reduced the national debt by $90 billion. Under the Harper regime, that was not only reversed but increased by a further $60 billion. So, $90 billion down by Chrétien and Martin; $150 billion up by Harper.

The Conservatives would like us to believe that this was all due to economic circumstances, such as in 2008. Actually, it was a self-inflicted wound, because, foolishly, against every advice given by every economist in the country, the Conservatives cut the HST. That was $14 billion a year, right out of the fiscal framework. The reason they did that was political rhetoric and nonsense. Hence, the difficulties we are now faced with, having to increase the national debt by a mere $150 billion.

As I finish up here, we are basing our discussion on gossip. I cannot support a motion that is based on gossip. I cannot support a motion that is based on amended gossip. The motion does not seem to understand the difference between taxes, tax rates, and tax expenditures. The proponents of the motion have no credibility on tax rates, on deficits, or accumulated debt.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened quite carefully to my colleague's speech, and the revision of history is amazing. When I hear Liberals talk about what happened in 2008 with the world economic downturn, the member was part of the party, and was here in the House calling for more borrowing and more spending. We emerged from that in the best shape of any country in the G8. Also, if we look at job creation, there were over one million net new jobs. Under the current government, in just one year, there are 30,000 fewer full-time employed people.

We have heard the wishy-washy answer by the Prime Minister yesterday, and I was in the House. He sort of said he was not going to be taxing this type of benefit, but he really was not very clear about it, and then the follow-up question to the finance minister was very wishy-washy.

Knowing that we are getting $1.5 trillion into debt, I would ask the member what the Liberals are going to cut next. Is it the pension income splitting, the public transit tax credit for students, volunteer firefighter tax credits, or tax credits for charitable donations? They can only balance the budget one way. What are they going to cut, or are they just going to raise taxes?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I just finished my speech by saying that I could not support a motion based on gossip, and then up pops the member asking what we are going to do next based entirely on figments of his imagination.

However, the facts do not lie. When the Martin government gave way to the Harper government, there was a $14-billion surplus, and thereafter it was just downhill. The record deficit was in 2009-10, which on an adjusted basis was almost $62 billion, the next year $36 billion, the next year after that $27 billion, the year after that $18 billion, the year after that $5 billion.

The Conservatives were singing and dancing in the streets, because they might have handed off a slight surplus at the last election. However, it was $150 billion that this government had to dig out from underneath that fiscal mess.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, and I have to say it was much more focused on the subject than what we have heard from most of his colleagues, who were rehashing the Department of Finance talking points. He stuck to the motion that is before us today.

He talked a lot about tax expenditures, a subject we could discuss at great length. Fortunately, the government has undertaken a review of a lot of tax expenditures, about 180 of them, as my colleague said. One of the major problems that makes things sometimes unfair is that most tax credits are non-refundable. That certainly does not improve the fairness of the tax system, since people who do not pay income tax do not have access to those tax credits. In addition, as my colleague said, most people who have the lowest incomes do not have the resources to enrol their children in sports, or cultural, or arts activities, and so they do not benefit from those tax credits in any way.

When the Liberals set about reviewing tax expenditures, are they considering making more tax credits refundable?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's question, and it is a good question. I agree that it would be very useful to spend this day on a focused debate, possibly on those 180 tax expenditures, and see whether there is some review that is appropriate. A lot of these expenditures were initially created with the best of intentions to achieve a certain social goal, but they do leave a lot of people behind.

One of the inequities the member has mentioned is the difference between refundable and non-refundable. I, as a relatively wealthy individual, get the full benefit of the tax expenditure, where someone who is not as affluent does not. This is in itself an inequity.

I do not know the extent and nature of the commitment in the budget to a review, but I commend the government for at least having the chutzpah to put those 180 tax expenditures under the microscope.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to divide this speech into two components. The first component is that the Liberals have raised taxes significantly for Canadians, and have done that while increasing spending to unsustainable and crazy levels. The second component is that they have more to come. That should be of great concern to any of our constituents, because we know that Canadians are having a harder time making ends meet, and certainly the people in the province of Alberta, who are facing a severe job crisis. Enough is enough. That is what this motion today is about.

We know that the Liberals have raised taxes. Canadian families are probably paying about $2,200 more this year per household because the Liberals have increased the CPP premium. That means $2,200 right off of their paycheques because of that tax hike. Small businesses are saying that that tax hike will cause them to decide whether or not they hire another employee or let one go.

With respect to the carbon tax, not only is it a tax that affects every part of something like the food delivery chain, it affects everything. It will not materially reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Liberals have not been able to show any price elasticity data showing that the demand would decrease at the price they have set. All they have done is increase the cost of everything for Canadian families. We estimate that to be another $2,500 per household. Therefore, we are at about $5,000 per household so far.

The Liberals cancelled the arts and fitness tax credit, so for anyone wanting their kids to play hockey this year, that tax credit is gone.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

What is also interesting is that the Liberals have cancelled the education and textbook tax credits. There are people in my life who are going to school and asking me why this universal tax credit, which helped everyone, was cancelled by the Liberals. That is costing roughly about $440 per person for those who are in university or studying a trade.

The Liberals also cancelled the family tax cut, which is about $2,000 per family.

Therefore, we know that through the cancellation of all of these tax credits, and the imposition of the carbon tax, the Liberals have significantly raised taxes. Regardless of one's political stripe, when we do the math to figure out how much that impacts our family, the Liberals have a lot of explaining to do because they have increased their spending on the other end of that, and for what? We are looking at deficits that we have never seen before in this country. This is not short-term targeted infrastructure spending for one particular project to get people back to work in a region. There is no intent on the part of this government to get back to balance. There is no intent on the part of the government to have any sort of fiscal sustainability.

I will say this. Canadian families or small business listening to this today are saying, “I have to balance my budgets and spend within my means.” All the government seems to understand is how to take more money out of the pockets of Canadians and spend it on bureaucracy. Regardless of one's political stripe, Canadians are saying that is enough.

Why is it so important for the government to vote for this motion to say that it will give Canadians some assurance that it will not raise their taxes? It was noted in the Liberal campaign platform that the Liberals would review all tax expenditures. This came up during the campaign. What does that mean? What is this platform commitment? What are the Liberals doing? I would say this was a hidden agenda, except it is right there in their platform. They are looking at ways to eliminate tax credits, those things that Canadians depend upon to make ends meet. Not only was it in their platform, the Minister of Finance made an announcement that he would do this review. We know that he contracted a third-party agreement in secret, because the Liberals have not released the report that was done. There was a secret panel that looked at all of these tax expenditures, and now there is a list of all of these things to cut, which will raise taxes for Canadians. They want to do that so that they can take taxpayer money and put it into the hands of bureaucrats. That does not help Canadian families at all. That is math that I can do, and it is very bad math.

What are some of the things we think the government is looking at given its campaign platform and the finance minister's announcement? Is the government going to eliminate pension income splitting? We are fairly certain that was in the review. What about the tax credit for employee stock options, the public transit tax credit, the Canada employment tax credit, the foreign employment tax credit, the volunteer firefighter tax credit, and the non-taxation of capital gains on principal residence tax credit?

Then of course there is the dental and health benefit tax credit. There may be those who are watching who would say, “Come on. The Liberals could not seriously be cutting all of this stuff. They could not seriously be raising my taxes.” When this issue came up two months ago that this report looked at dental and health benefits, it came out in a National Post article. I received hundreds of emails almost instantly saying that the government cannot be serious about this.

It was only after intense political pressure across party lines from average Canadians saying that enough is enough, the government sheepishly said that maybe it would not. I think the Prime Minister even qualified his answer in question period yesterday. Why did it take them so long to deny that they were not going to do it? It is because they were considering it.

What else was in that report? Why are the Liberals hiding it? The Liberals know they have spent into oblivion, that they have spent our grandchildren's future away, so they are trying to think of how to pay for this. They are not looking at balance. They are just trying to make sure that they can potentially get re-elected down the road with some semblance of order. This is what the Liberals are doing. They are looking to take their mismanagement of Canada's finances and mismanagement of government and put it on the backs of average, hard-working Canadians.

The people in my riding who are out of work because of the Liberals' ideological opposition to the energy sector are saying, “Enough is enough. First of all, you are impeding our access to jobs. You are taking away investment and certainty in the energy sector and so many sectors across this country. You are mishandling trade files. You are not doing anything to retain skilled workers in the province and now you are going to raise my taxes for nothing? Come on. Enough is enough.”

Why did we put this motion forward today? It gives the government an opportunity to stand and say, “Canadians are right. Forget one party or another; Canadians are right that we do not need more tax hikes right now.” Here is my guess. The government is going to say it knows what is in that report and what is going to be in the budget at some point this month, and it is going to be a large amount of tax increases for Canadians. I bet we will see many tax credits cancelled. That would have a huge impact on Canadians at a time when Liberals have no plan for creating jobs in this country. We have seen nearly 200,000 jobs in the energy sector disappear under their watch.

If the government wants to see government revenue increase, I suggest it look at the opposite side of the equation and grow our economy. If Liberals want to see more revenue come in through things like job-creating companies that are paying their share of taxes, then allow a fiscal environment where companies can grow and invest. Do not put more pressure on them through things like a carbon tax that will not work, or CPP premium increases. Allow people to have the fiscal space to take risks and to invest and be confident in this country. Right now, consumer confidence, the confidence of average Canadians that things are going to get better for them is at an all-time low. Why? It is because the government keeps increasing taxes and making it more uncertain for businesses to work here in Canada. That is just wrong. That is the opposite of what the government should be doing, but because the Liberals are so self-interested in their own projects and expanding government, I think they have forgotten what really matters.

The Liberals are so entrenched in the Langevin Block that they have forgotten what matters and that is the people of this country.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the way invited members on this side of the floor to speak to Canadians across the country who are watching. I am only too happy to accept her invitation to do so to remind her and Canadians watching that the very first thing this government did when assuming office was to cut taxes for almost nine million Canadians.

Our government then introduced a Canada child benefit that was more generous for nine out of 10 families. In the province I have the honour of living and the riding I represent there are families, some 112,000 children, who are now benefiting more through that child benefit program that will deliver upwards of $600 million back into the regional economy in its first two years of existence.

These are the sorts of measures this government has taken to reduce taxes for the middle class in addition to not moving ahead with the taxation of health and dental plans.

I thank my colleague for the invitation to address Canadians.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, anybody watching at home will notice that my colleague opposite forgot the other side of the equation. It is like reverse Robin Hood. A carbon tax on everything will cost taxpayers at least $2,500 per household, if not more. There is the Canada pension plan payroll tax hike. The Liberals cancelled the arts and fitness tax credit, the textbook tax credit, income splitting, and the list goes on and on.

Who do the Liberals think Canadians are? Canadians know what the bottom line on their chequebook is and reverse Robin Hood over there clearly does not.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech, in which she mentioned that the government is generating unprecedented deficits, and that she has never seen this in the history of Canada.

Deficits built up steadily under Prime Minister Mulroney, who was leading a Conservative government, not to mention the $150 billion added under Mr. Harper’s government.

My colleague is trying to portray the tax credits for physical or cultural activities, for example, as tax breaks. In fact, she is talking about the tax credit for sports activities, for example, and saying that if it were eliminated, that would amount to a tax increase.

Could the member clarify her party’s view, or her own? To me, eliminating a tax credit does not amount to a tax increase. It is simply taking a way of paying less taxes away from taxpayers. I think she is confusing the two.