Debates of March 23rd, 2017

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, government orders will be extended by 29 minutes.

Resuming debate on the subamendment, the hon. member for Don Valley East.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

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

I would like to take the time today to talk about the government's budget 2017, and specifically, the historic investments in infrastructure.

In budget 2016, we invested the first tranche of funds for infrastructure to support the repair of our aging pipes and roads, the building and refurbishing of affordable housing, the upgrading of public transit, and the improvement of indigenous communities. With the fall economic statement, we built on these efforts by targeting public transit, green and social infrastructure, as well as projects in northern and rural communities, and ones that facilitate trade.

The total federal investment in infrastructure now tops $180 billion over 12 years. These infrastructure investments will help ensure a cleaner environment for our children and grandchildren, while serving as a driver of economic growth.

The 2016 infrastructure investments are already making a difference in communities across Canada. In my riding of Don Valley East, we have benefited in the areas of repairs to the housing stock, bike lanes, and walking trails. With budget 2017, we plan to do even more.

We plan to invest in faster, more efficient public transit systems that will help people get to work on time, and at the end of the long day, back home faster to their families. In my riding, and in many urban ridings, constituents tell us that this is very important to them. That is what constituents told us in our budget consultation processes. They want better infrastructure. They said that commuting times were taking away from their productivity.

In our consultations, we heard as well about cleaner sources of energy. Therefore, our budget proposes to help build communities that are cleaner and less reliant on sources of energy that pollute the air, harm the environment, and compromise our health. Constituents who suffer from asthma and other breathing issues are thankful that our government is so keen on cleaning the environment.

Hard-working Canadians also need decent, affordable places to live. I am glad our government listened to the people and is investing $11.2 billion in this area.

In the area of a clean growth economy, I would like to expound on some things. Canadians understand that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand. The government agrees. That is why our government is further investing $21.9 billion in green infrastructure. This is on top of the $5 billion it invested in the previous budget.

The investment of $21.9 billion in green infrastructure will support the implementation of the pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change. We will support projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, deliver clean water, safely manage waste water, help communities prepare for challenges that result from climate change, and help build a cleaner, better connected electricity system. This is welcome news to my young constituents who are focusing their sights on jobs of the future.

I would also like to talk about how social infrastructure can help transform communities and help overcome social economic barriers to a truly inclusive society. From early learning and child care for our children in their first years, to home care that supports us in our final years, social infrastructure helps Canadians at every stage of their lives. Building on an initial investment of $3.4 billion over five years announced one year ago, the government will invest $21.9 billion over 11 years to support social infrastructure in Canadian communities, including early learning and child care, affordable housing, cultural and recreation infrastructure, and home care.

In my riding of Don Valley East, there are many families who have to choose between one parent working or both parents working. If both parents are working, they have to look for affordable child care. Child care spaces are expensive or unavailable. It is a question of supply and demand. I am very proud that budget 2017 provides $7 billion over 10 years toward the creation of child care spaces. This will greatly help not only my constituents, but Canadians who are aiming to join the middle class. The investment of $7 billion is over and above the investment we made in 2016.

The government will work in co-operation with provinces, territories, and indigenous partners to provide help to families most in need. A portion of the investment will be dedicated to improve access to culturally appropriate early learning and child care programs for indigenous children both on and off reserve.

Finally, safe, affordable housing is a cornerstone of sustainable, inclusive communities and a prerequisite to middle-class prosperity, yet too many Canadian households struggle to find affordable housing. To address this challenge, budget 2016 invested $2.2 billion over two years, starting in 2016-17, in the affordable housing sector. We also provided funding for low-cost loans and new financing tools to encourage municipalities, housing developers, and not-for-profit housing providers to develop more affordable rental housing units, and we launched nationwide consultation on a new, inclusive national housing strategy to help guide the way forward.

Thanks to the overwhelming participation of provinces, territories, indigenous and other community stakeholders, and the public over the past several months, we will now commit more than $11.2 billion over 11 years to a variety of initiatives designed to build, renew, and repair Canada's stock of affordable housing. This investment is a blessing for the constituents in my riding. We have seen the affordable housing stocks shrink. We have seen it is in dire need of repair and renewal. Many Canadians in urban centres know how difficult it is to buy or rent properties.

Our strategy will provide a road map for governments and housing providers across the country. As housing needs vary greatly by community, the government is committed to working with the provinces and territories to ensure that the unique needs of communities all across Canada can be met.

The unprecedented investment in infrastructure that we are making in budget 2017 is about more than improving public transit and repairing aging roads and sewer systems. It is also about building better communities by providing Canadians with cleaner water to drink and cleaner air to breathe. By increasing access to child care, affordable housing, and other key social infrastructure, our budget will strengthen and grow the middle class.

Our 2016 investments have already created good, well-paying jobs to the tune of 250,000 jobs. This ensures that we have a burgeoning middle class.

The trajectory is positive. If we wish to be economic engines, we need to have an inclusive growth strategy. That is what budget 2017 is doing.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the infrastructure spending that has been announced, one of the things that really concerns me is that out of the more than $80 billion over 10 years, only $2 billion is for rural communities. I have a lot of rural communities within my riding of Sarnia—Lambton, and they are really struggling to keep up with all their infrastructure.

I wonder if the member would comment on what the government's reasoning was on disproportionately giving rural communities only $2 billion out of that $81 billion.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as far as I can see in the summary of the budget, there is $20 billion plus that is being invested in this budget, and that investment is because the Federation of Canadian Municipalities talked to the federal government and insisted that the provinces and the municipalities decide how these funds will be distributed. We are talking to them, consulting with them, and it is important that this money, with the help of all the MPs, go to the right place and benefit all the communities.

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

Mr. Speaker, an important thing that I did in my copy of the budget document, which I think all Liberals should do to sort of help speak truth to this budget, is I drew a line just before the next election, because any of the promises that fall in the fourth, fifth, sixth, or 11th year out from this budget are not worth the paper they are written on. The Liberals do this constantly. They put up some large figure and say they will invest x billions of dollars in something, and it is all back-loaded. Of the money that the Liberals just talked about in their budget, and which my friend referred to, 85% falls after the next election, as if somehow the Liberals could promise money five, six, or seven years out.

My friend talked about child care. This is an important thing. During the last campaign, the Liberals were very critical of the NDP plan because they said we rolled it out too slowly, even though our plan is ten times more generous than the first year the Liberals get to spend money on child care. I have the budget document here. If I look through the budget and look at spending on supporting families through early learning and child care, that is their money. In 2016-17, the Liberal budget says zero, and for 2017-18, the Liberal budget says zero.

If this is so important—and it is; we know affordable child care for families is critical not just for families, but also for the health of our economy—budgets are about choices. The Liberal Minister of Finance and the Liberal government made the choice to spend zero dollars allowing Canadians to access affordable, safe child care for their families.

Why pretend at this? Why back-load this? Why put the hope out there to all those Canadians, to all those single working moms, and I was raised by one, that somehow there is something coming when there is not? Maybe there will be in two years. We will see in next year's budget the number three years from now is actually real, but with the vast majority of child care money spent after the next election, one could only take away the conclusion that this is all about politics and not about families. Why spend zero dollars this year and zero dollars next year when it comes to helping families access child care? It is a simple, straightforward question.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as an accountant, I do not know how the member opposite is calculating the figures, but if one looks at the $3,600 per child that was given to families, the child care spaces are above and beyond the Canada child care benefit, which has lifted 317,000 kids out of poverty.

Coming back to child care spaces, I was part of the Paul Martin government, and I remember clearly that when the budget was presented and 250,000 child care spaces were given, members of the NDP got into bed with the Conservatives and rejected that budget. Now, 10 years later, they have zero to show for it.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, as we gather here to debate the merits of the 2017 budget, let us recognize that we are here on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people. It is a meeting place of first nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples. It is also the national capital of all Canadians.

This budget is about investing, not just in traditional budget items like bridges and roads, but in people, because they have become la raison d'être. They are the most important thing in this budget.

As I was rereading the throne speech from December 4, 2015, I read the words of Governor General David Johnston, which state:

First and foremost, the government believes that all Canadians should have a real and fair chance to succeed. Central to that success is a strong and growing middle class.

We can see that this budget goes a long way to deliver on that ideal. It makes a great difference in the lives of many people. For instance, we are significantly boosting federal support to provinces and territories by $2.7 billion over six years to help more unemployed and underemployed Canadians access the training and employment services and supports they need to find and keep good jobs.

We are also investing $225 million over four years to identify and fill skill gaps in the economy to help Canadians be best prepared for the new economy.

Also, there is the Canada caregiver credit, which is a new credit that will provide better support to those who need it the most, and will be given to caregivers whether they live with their family members or not. It will help families with caregiving responsibilities. This new Canada caregiver credit will provide tax relief on an amount of $6,883 in 2017 in respect of expenses for care of dependent relatives with infirmities, including persons with disabilities.

The forces of inertia, of immobilization, of standing still, of 10 years of darkness characterize what happened in the past decade of the ancien régime. It may give voice to an opposition, but as the Governor General has said on December 4, 2015:

Let us not forget...that Canadians have been clear and unambiguous in their desire for real change. Canadians want their government to do different things, and to do things differently.

Budget 2017 proposes to increase financial support for Canada's clean technology sector by making available more financing to clean technology firms. Nearly $1.4 billion in new financing, on a cash basis, will be made available to help Canada's clean technology firms grow and expand.

Budget 2017 also proposes to invest $400 million over five years, starting in 2017, to support projects that develop and demonstrate new clean technologies, that promote sustainable development, including those that address environmental issues, such as climate change, air quality, clean water, and clean soil.

Budget 2017 also proposes to adopt clean technology in Canada's natural resources sectors, with $200 million over four years, starting in 2017, going to Natural Resources Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

This is not all. In housing, budget 2017 proposes to invest more than $11.2 billion over 11 years in a variety of initiatives designed to build, renew, and repair Canada's stock of affordable housing, and help ensure that Canadians have affordable housing that meets their goals.

I think about the 1,500 homeless people who I find in my riding. They are asking for housing not just in the suburbs, but in their neighbourhood where they can receive supports so they can be successful as well, where they do not have to end up in a prison or the emergency wards taking up valuable resources, but where they can find the resources that society should provide them and they can be housed and healthy as well.

This is what our plan and our budget propose to do.

Our Governor General goes on to state:

Because it is both the right thing to do and a certain path to economic growth, the government will undertake to renew, nation-to-nation, the relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples, one based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation and partnership.

This is perhaps one of the greatest budgets we have ever seen for indigenous peoples, and perhaps for all Canadians, $828.2 million over five years to improve health outcomes for first nations, Inuit people, and communities, including mental health services. The opposition should be excited about this.

In education, we have invested $165 million over five years to support post-secondary education and skills training for indigenous peoples. We have also increased funding to the post-secondary student support program by $90 million over two years beginning in 2017. There will be $25 million over five years to Indspire. This will fund bursaries and scholarships for 12,000 Métis, Inuit, and first nations youth in our country, ensuring they can get the education so they can build communities, their families, and a life they deserve.

It is not even done. There will be $18.9 million over the next five years and $5.5 million every four years thereafter to support indigenous youth and sport programs. When we have crises in many of our communities among our youth, we need to ensure they are healthy. To be healthy, they need to do sports. We need to ensure they are active, that they have good mental health. We know from empirical studies that if we are active, our mental health is often better.

That is not all. There will be $225 million over the next 11 years to improve housing for first nations, Métis, and Inuit people who live off reserve; $4 billion over 10 years on social and green infrastructure funding to build and improve infrastructure in first nations and inuit communities; $21.4 million over four years to support the development of renewable energy projects in indigenous and northern communities that rely on diesel for electricity and heating, by continuing the northern responsible energy approach to community heat and electricity programs. That is good for the environment because diesel is not a clean fuel. We need to ensure people have access to clean technology.

There will be $83.8 million over five years to integrate traditional indigenous knowledge of our elders, to build better understanding of climate change, and inform adaptation actions and to enhance indigenous community resilience through infrastructure planning and emergency management. In communities where even the risk of flooding has not been truly evaluated, we will ensure we can evaluate it so if there is flooding or environmental change, we can do it in a good way.

There will be $26.4 million over five years, starting in 2017, to support indigenous collaboration on climate change and $18 million over five years to implement a climate change and health adaptation program for first nations and Inuit communities, including support for surveillance and monitoring activities, risk assessment, laboratory diagnostics, as well as health profession education and public awareness campaigns.

One of the things I love so much about the budget is the fact that we are starting to talk about culture. Culture is so important to me as a traditional indigenous person. There will be $89.9 million over the next three years to preserve, protect, and promote indigenous languages and cultures. That warms my heart. When I go to my sun dance, I can look my brothers and sisters in the eye and tell them that this Canada will represent them and will ensure they have a place in our country.

There will be $25 million over five years to launch a pilot indigenous guardians program, a program which I supported in the finance committee and ensured was in our pre-budget report.

There will be $250 million over five years to renew and expand Pacific and Atlantic integrated commercial fisheries initiatives and to augment indigenous collaborative management programming.

There will be $8.6 million over four years to develop the indigenous tourism industry. So many of our young people do not have the education they need, but they often have skills. It might not be a diploma, but perhaps they know to do a very good powwow dance. They can entertain people, but they never get paid for it.

There are so many things we can do.

I remember a story about a man I met just last weekend at a powwow, Gordon Kent. He has been homeless for many years, and it was very hard for him. It would have been easier if he had received these supports earlier on. He would have been able to get off of the streets and his drug addictions. I met him at the powwow where he was dancing, where he was trying to rehabilitate himself and become a better person. The thing he wants to do most of all is to ensure that our young people do not follow the path that he chose, that they can choose the good path right when they are young, so they can look to him sometimes to see what not to follow, but what they should do later on in life. This budget is truly for Gordon. Hopefully, we will be successful for many more of our young people.

Tapwe akwa khitwam hi hi

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Kootenay—Columbia, The Environment; the hon. member for Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, Ethics; the hon. member for Lévis—Lotbinière, Ethics.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I was interested in the member's perspective on the budget.

The one line item I did not see in the budget was $155 million that the court ordered be paid for indigenous children's welfare. Will the government be honouring that order?

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, when I speak to the minister, I know she is very concerned about the child welfare system. Right now the system is completely broken, but throwing more money at it will not make the system better. Often it is not a question of more money. For instance, we could put more money into the system, but there is the great chance we would take more children from their parents because we would provide incentives for doing that. There would be more incentives and more money to take those children.

Currently in Manitoba, 11,000 kids are in care of the state. I have been pushing for a total reform of this entire system. I have members of my staff working on this. I have cases on child and family services. We all care about this, but we will have to sit down as indigenous peoples and have a deep and profound conversation about how we raise our children, how we look after them, who is supposed to look after them.

Our children in many communities have become a natural resource, our greatest natural resource, but not in the good way we often use in the House. They have become a natural resource in the sense that they are a product passed from person to person who can generate money. I do not want to imply that foster families are not doing a good job, because there are many great foster families.

We really need to be thoughtful and considerate about the direction in which we move. I hope one day we will have the funding that goes along with it, but we have to really reform the system beforehand.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on this line of questioning with my friend. Just so we understand this, the Liberals yesterday were in court fighting the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on what it had ruled on twice was a racist policy in Canada perpetrated by the federal government in that a first nations child would get less money than a non-first nations child for support.

Thirty-five per cent to 40% of the people I represent in northern British Columbia are first nations. Many of those first nations and communities have been working on the reforms about which my friend has talked. One of the things they consistently tell me is that as they work to incorporate their children in culture, in the community, there is a lack of funds coming from Ottawa, and we know exactly how much that is. Cindy Blackstock has been an incredible champion on this.

I am confounded that the Liberal Party, the government right now, has said that it believes in the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. It has rejected the tribunal's orders multiple times and is today spending money on lawyers in court fighting to make child welfare equal for all Canadian children, regardless of race.

This court order is very specific. It says that the government's policy on first nations children's welfare is racist and wrong. It is $155 million. Meanwhile the Liberals are blowing $80 million on a stock option loophole for CEOs. I just do not understand how this can be a decision point. Of course we want the reform, but to say that the money is not important, that a racist policy must be undone is wrong. The Liberals had the opportunity to undo it and make it right, and they chose not to. Why?

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in January and February I had the opportunity to visit 41 first nation communities throughout Saskatchewan and Manitoba, where I not only skied but also walked over 900 kilometres. On that trip I had the opportunity to have discussions with chiefs, council members, elders, youth, and people who were running child and family services systems. I discovered that in fact there are things that are being built in communities, such as water treatment plants and new schools. There are things that are happening, such as more educational opportunities and economic development.

When I was talking with the CFS workers, agencies, and authorities, I discovered that money is flowing and they have seen a funding increase, but obviously we are at the start of a conversation about this. I wish we could snap our fingers and fix all the wrongs of the past, but unfortunately that is just not going to be the case.

The member suggested that we are blowing an opportunity. However, the way budgets are often looked at is that people will criticize us if we spend money on certain people. For example, I do not consider spending, or blowing, $89.9 million over the next three years to preserve, protect, and promote indigenous languages and cultures as giving money away or as something that is not good for the Canadian state.

This is actually part and parcel. We cannot isolate things by themselves. We have to take a holistic view, which is an indigenous view. It is the ideal of the one in a unified sense. When we consider the spending, it must be taken as a unified whole, and what we do here has an impact over there.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today on the subject of the budget, and the things I like about it and the things I do not like about it.

I will start with the things that I like. I always like to—

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

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I clearly heard you say that it would be the member for Mégantic—L'Érable. I love hearing from my hon. colleague for Sarnia—Lambton as well, but I am a bit confused.

Therefore, I move that the member for Mégantic—L'Érable now be heard.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I thank the hon. member for his intervention. I did note that the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable had not started his remarks prior to the point of order.

In this particular case, the hon. member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola had proposed that the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable should have the opportunity to speak. Indeed, the hon. member was recognized to speak, but a different hon. member rose and took the spot.

The issue around a member now being heard would not be applicable in a case like this. Had the hon. member indicated that another member be recognized to speak, other than the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable, perhaps the outcome would have been different. In this case, the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable was recognized; he chose not to rise in his place, and another member of the same party took that spot. In this case, the motion is not applicable.

I see that the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable would like to add something on this point of order.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Actually, Mr. Speaker, I rose to speak. Since my colleague also rose and began talking, there was some confusion. I had risen, but then sat down again to yield the floor to my colleague, who seems to have a thrilling speech prepared. However, I think it would be appropriate for me to sit back down, given that I have yielded the floor to my colleague.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I appreciate the comments of the hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable. In that case, the decision remains the same and we will resume debate.

The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, I want to have the opportunity to comment on the things I like and do not like about the budget. I will start with the things I like.

I was very pleased to see $11 billion for home and palliative care and mental health care. I was really pleased to hear the Minister of Health comment on that again today. With my private member's bill on palliative care coming forward, I am happy to see money in the budget that would be used in that direction.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

Let us start with some of the things in the budget that concern me.

First, the whole point of the budget and the Liberal campaign promises was to run a deficit to grow the economy, to get infrastructure money in place and create jobs, and so we saw a $23 billion deficit last year.

However, the infrastructure money, according to the parliamentary budget officer, was not flowing at a very good rate, so we really did not get the growth in GDP we expected. In fact, if we look at budget 2017, it is projecting a deficit next year of $28 billion, and still the growth rate for GDP that is projected is not above what it was before we talked about spending all this money. We are spending a huge amount of money and going into a huge deficit, and it is really not producing the results we intended.

That gives me great concern. Once we start with a structural deficit—and it appears to me that the deficit is intended to run on and on, because I think I heard the member for Saint Laurent say 2055, and it was not contradicted—we get into paying interest on it every year. It will start off with $10 billion of interest that could be used for other things, such as paying down the debt, and then it becomes $50 billion by the time the deficit is the $1.5 trillion that has been suggested.

This is a bad direction for Canada. We are not getting the results we want out of it. We really need to focus on things that are going to create jobs.

With regard to job creation, one of the key drivers of employment in Canada is the energy sector, the oil and gas sector. The budget does absolutely nothing in this area. In fact, by removing some of the incentives for oil well drilling and things like that, the Liberals are killing the oil and gas sector. The carbon taxes that are going to be applied under this budget will just crucify the oil and gas sector.

I know this absolutely from my own riding of Sarnia—Lambton. We produce about a third of the petrochemicals that are produced across Canada. We have three oil refineries, we have a number of chemical plants, and we are the hub where the Marcellus natural gas is coming through, as well as the Utica gas. These companies create various kinds of jobs and all kinds of employment in our community. Now we have to think about companies like NOVA Chemicals, which has a $2-billion plant in the offing. It can decide to build it here or build it on the gulf coast. The carbon footprint will not leave the planet, but 3,000 Canadian jobs will go to the U.S. because a carbon tax like this is not competitive.

There is another energy company that is looking to build three energy facilities in Canada at $1 billion each. It also has the option to go to the U.S.

Again, I think that we have created an environment in this budget that will kill jobs and move our jobs from Canada to the U.S. It will not accomplish what Canadians want.

We have created a bad environment for small businesses. If we think about small businesses creating 90% of the employment in Canada, then it is certainly of concern that the Liberals did not come through on their promise to reduce the small business tax rate. In fact, they have increased the costs that small businesses have to pay through the CPP and EI payments they will have to pay for each employee. The combination of all these factors is creating problems for small business. That also is not going to result in jobs.

One of the other comments in this budget is about skills and training and the importance of having the right skills and training so that we can put people into these well-paying jobs. I really do applaud skills training, and I think we need to match the skills and the training of people to the job opportunities that exist. However, if that is a priority, I have no idea why the government, in this budget, has delayed the funding for skills training until nearly the end of its mandate. That makes absolutely no sense to me.

Some of the other concerns I have are with the amount of money going into this infrastructure bank and the whole discussion about foreign ownership of what I would consider to be critical secure assets for Canada. If we think about our airports and our harbours and some of the folks who potentially could be buying a foreign interest in our airports and harbours, that causes me great concern. There does not seem to be oversight in the infrastructure bank of who determines who gets that deal. That is very concerning in every way.

Let me talk a little bit about the gender equality part, and again, I will say something nice and then I will talk about the things I think are missing. As a woman, I am pleased to see that the Liberals have actually dedicated pages in the budget to talk about women, that they have done a gender-based analysis, and that they have 60 measures that are intended to help women here in Canada. That said, we know that senior women are some of the most impacted, the ones who are struggling the most in terms of making ends meet and living from day to day. There is absolutely nothing in the budget for seniors, and certainly nothing for senior women, so that gives me pause.

I was lucky enough to be on the pay equity committee. We studied and we made recommendations, and a large number of recommendations were made. One of them was about legislation, but there were many other things that could be done. Although I see that pages 217 to 221 are devoted to pay equity, there is absolutely no action taken immediately to address some of the things that could be done within the government. That is disappointing for me.

I was pleased to see child care as something brought forward in the budget. Again, this is a huge issue that is keeping women from entering the workforce. If I look at the 40,000 spots that are planned, they are not planned until 2019. That does nothing to address the issue right now. If we work out the math, divided by the ridings it is only 120 spaces in each riding. We have ridings across the country where there are waiting lists of two years to get children decent child care. Again, that is a little disappointing.

On violence against women and girls, we have talked about how important this is. There have been lots of words said. We do not see much progress on the murdered and missing aboriginal women effort, other than consulting with 90 victims. However, if I look at the amount of money the Liberals have put for violence against women and girls, it is $100 million. Let us measure that and how that stands up against some of the other priorities in the budget. There is four times as much money to have Statistics Canada collect data as there is to address violence against women in Canada. That, to me, is totally the wrong priority. I am not saying that it is not good to collect data, but in relative terms, one in four women are experiencing violence. We have an incidence of date rape on campus where 29% of young women in their first eight weeks will experience sexual assault. That is a huge priority, and I think it is not reflected in the budget.

Finally, I want to talk a little bit about innovation, because this budget is supposed to be an innovation budget, and I am a fan of innovation. I think that is definitely where we need to go as Canadians to figure out where we can succeed. I am all for that.

To have innovation succeed in Canada, there are three elements we really need. We need good ideas, so again, I want to say good things about the budget in terms of the science budget. I work very well with the Minister of Science, and I am pleased to see that good ideas will be fertilized in this budget.

We then need good support to commercialize, and unfortunately, although I see some funding with the Business Development Bank, I do not see enough funding that is really in the right risk portfolio to get the kind of commercialization we will need to create jobs.

Finally, we need a good business climate for those ideas to flourish and become companies in Canada. I have already spoken about the high taxes, the carbon tax, all the CPP, and the regulatory regime in Canada. It is really unsuited to creating entrepreneurial business in Canada, and I would like to see the government address that.

With that, I will conclude. That is the good and bad on the budget.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Sarnia—Lambton for her passionate speech and for the hard work she does for the people of her riding.

She mentioned the enhanced Canada pension plan payroll deduction for people to have a better pension when they reach retirement age. Most people, as we well know, who are working in a small business or are in the middle-class rankings, cannot afford to take part in an RRSP. They do not have a company pension plan. They cannot afford to take part in a tax-free savings account plan. What is it that the member and her party opposite have against a small weekly deduction, only dollars a week, to give people a secure pension at the end of their working days so they can live better, be better prepared for what retirement will bring to them, and have a decent income when they reach that time?

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what I have against the plan for the CPP that was proposed is that I, and every other Canadian who is working, am going to be paying about $1,200 out of my pocket every year for the next 40 years, and nobody in the next 40 years is going to see any benefit from that, because the program does not start paying out benefits until after 40 years. We have people who are struggling today. We could easily have increased the GIS, and that would have provided immediate relief to seniors who are struggling and living on fixed incomes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I agree with her. Disappointment abounds.

The budget is a real letdown. The Liberal members made so many nice promises. They voted against the food strategy presented by my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé, claiming there would be a different food strategy. They made me that promise on two separate occasions when I decried the rising number of people dependent on food banks. More needs to be done to combat poverty, but in the end, there is nothing in the budget to combat poverty and improve food security.

I would like to know what my colleague thinks about that.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe there is quorum in the House. Can we check?

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Yes, I believe we have quorum. Thank you.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that is very troubling to me is that when we look at the plight of the poor in Canada, we really have done nothing in this budget to address those people who make less than $80,000 a year. They got nothing in terms of tax cuts. They got nothing in terms of advantage in the budget, and they are really struggling. The carbon tax is going to disproportionately impact them. I do not know by how much, because the report was blacked out when it was given. I agree that food certainty and poverty are going to be growing issues under this budget.