Debates of March 8th, 2017

Status of Women

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, on International Women's Day, let us hear some good news from the government that will actually honour its commitment to the United Nations and implement a national action plan to end violence against women.

I still have not heard anything from the member that explains why the Liberals are not honouring their commitment. A federal strategy is very narrow. It does not get at the actions that the government committed to when it said it would do a national plan.

For months, we have been hearing heartbreaking testimony at the status of women committee about how this country is failing women.

There is disparity of access to service across the country. Some 500 women and children are turned away from shelters every night. There is no excuse for the government not living up to its United Nations commitment.

Why not a national plan?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to remind the hon. member that in budget 2016 there were a number of measures which underscored the federal government's commitment to reducing and preventing gender-based violence.

This included $90 million over two years for shelters, beginning in 2016-17, for the construction and renovation of shelters, and transition houses for victims of family violence. This investment is expected to support the construction or renovation of over 3,000 shelters spaces over the next two years.

We have also allocated $10.4 million over the next three years to support the construction of new shelters in first nations communities. Budget 2016 also provided $33.6 million over five years, and $8.3 million ongoing funding to better support shelters that will serve victims of family violence living in first nations communities.

Poverty

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, on November 15, I asked the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development if the Liberal majority would support Bill C-245, which I introduced in the House to develop a poverty reduction strategy. The bill responded in every respect to the mandate letter that the minister received from the Prime Minister.

The minister told me that the government was in the process of creating a poverty reduction strategy in Canada. What we did not realize is that the Liberals were going to vote against Bill C-245, shutting down what could have been a real policy to fight poverty, one that would help us avoid delays and improve quality of life for the less fortunate in our society more swiftly.

In that question, I also talked about the report from Canada's food banks. They had just tabled their report stating that one million people in Canada needed to use food banks. The Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities is currently studying poverty. The study began in September and will wrap up in June. Representatives from Canada's food banks came to committee and told us that they would like to see a poverty reduction strategy by October 2017.

With the protracted consultations, I am not sure we will meet that deadline. However, adopting Bill C-245 would have made it easier. When we say one million people in Canada, we are talking about one in eight families. That is a lot of people who often have to choose between eating or paying rent.

As part of this study on poverty, we went to Medicine Hat, in Alberta. Two directors of a food bank told us that they were working every day to ensure that one day their food bank would not be needed. We all want a society where we no longer need food banks to feed families.

We will also remember that Statistics Canada just told us that the two richest men are as wealthy as 30% of all Canadians combined. As the gap between rich and poor grows, it is high time to establish a real poverty reduction strategy.

When I go back to my riding of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, I meet with organizations that do excellent work such as La Chaudronnée sponsored by the Centre de bénévolat d'Acton Vale, the Accueil fraternel of the Centre de bénévolat de Saint-Hyacinthe, and the Comptoir-partage La Mie or the Moisson maskoutaine, which are our food banks. I see people who are working very hard, but they alone will not be able to alleviate poverty.

In a country as rich as ours, we cannot tolerate the fact that people suffer every day because of the government's ongoing lack of action on this file. A few months ago, this chamber had the opportunity to get down to work on attacking the problem of poverty, but the Liberals seem to have decided that this issue is not a priority. The Liberals have been in power for 17 months, but nothing has been done outside of consultations.

The days that I am in my riding, I can talk to the people of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, and it is at these times that I can really see that the fight against poverty must be a priority and that it is high time that the government wait no longer and that it take action.

My question is simple. Will the fight against poverty become a government priority and, most importantly, when?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate my colleague for the work she has done on Bill C-245. I know how important reducing poverty in Canada is to her. It is also important to us.

This government is committed to reducing poverty and improving the economic well-being of all Canadian families so they can have a real chance to succeed. Our government is working on its first-ever Canadian poverty reduction strategy. The strategy will provide alignment with, and add to, the initiatives this government has already launched in the last budget and the strategies that already exist at both the provincial and municipal levels, as well as within our first nations communities and governments.

As part of the Canadian poverty reduction strategy, we launched two important initiatives that will support this development. These include a national consultation process and the implementation of an advisory committee on poverty. Through the consultation process, Canadians have the chance to share their opinions and their suggestions for more effectively tackling poverty. They can do this through an online consultation, which also includes discussion forums.

We are also holding in-person round tables with businesses, community organizations, academic experts, and, most important, Canadians with a lived experience who have come through or championed themselves as they succeed despite the poverty they may have endured.

We will also collaborate with indigenous organizations to ensure that the voices of first nations, Inuit, and Métis people are heard through this process.

For the advisory committee on poverty, I invite all Canadians with experience in poverty and with poverty reduction strategies to share their views and apply online at Canada.ca to take part in the selection process. This committee will help identify the best ideas resulting from the public consultations and will also provide expertise and independent advice to the minister.

There is more. Our government has also launched the tackling poverty together project that was done earlier this year in Saint John, New Brunswick. This is an important research project that is currently under way. It is dedicated to understanding poverty and identifying what can be done to lift Canadians out of poverty from coast to coast to coast. The results from the project, which will also involve case studies in six distinct communities across Canada, will help us better understand the impact that poverty is having and opportunities for poverty reduction programs in different communities that have identified poverty as an important issue.

Furthermore, our colleague knows that we have already announced important measures, for example, in budget 2016, that will reduce poverty among children, seniors, indigenous peoples, and all Canadians in need.

These measures are not limited to, but include the following: increasing the guaranteed income supplement with a top-up of almost $947 annual for the lowest-income single seniors, most of whom are women; cancelling the Conservative increase in the age of eligibility for OAS, changing it from 67 back to 65, again helping hundreds of thousands of Canadians; introducing the tax-free Canada child benefit, which is better targeted to those who need it most, low- and middle-income families and, most important, poor families across this country, to prevent them from falling into poverty. We have also doubled the investment in affordable housing funding, bringing the total federal investment to over $1 billion over the next two years, with the promise of a national housing strategy on the horizon.

Once again, I would like to congratulate my colleague for raising this important issue in this House and across this country and for the tremendous work she does and the focus she brings to the goals that she and I and our government share. She has raised awareness that reducing poverty can be done in Canada. She has put this on the table for us to debate. We will deliver on these issues because they matter to all of us as Canadians, all of us as parliamentarians.

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, even so, I am not completely satisfied with the parliamentary secretary's answer. The measures taken by the Liberal government are woefully inadequate. We need a large-scale plan to fight poverty. By voting against the NDP's bill, Bill C-245, the Liberals deprived all those who are living in poverty of a much-needed plan.

When I asked my question, the minister answered that the government was committed to reducing poverty, but proposing consultations and studies rather than addressing the root causes of poverty is not a viable option. The means and opportunities are there. The only things that are missing now are the Liberals' will and political courage.

Will we finally have the opportunity to get to work and eliminate poverty once and for all, or will we have to once again settle for the half measures proposed by the Liberals, which, in my opinion, are just smoke and mirrors?

When will the government propose real solutions to finally get to the root of the problem?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

Madam Speaker, this government shares the values and the principles expressed by the member opposite. However, when the choice comes between action and words, this government will always choose action. The investment in the child benefit, the investment in seniors, the investment in the housing sector, and the promise to negotiate and create the national housing strategy, a framework for early childhood education, as well as make sure we deliver on a whole series of issues as they relate to aboriginal, Métis, and first nations peoples, including the historic investments in those communities, combine with historic investments in making sure that we sustain a pressure against those forces that create poverty in this country. That is action.

While that constitutes a budget response to the issues raised by the member opposite, we are also in the position of putting together a national strategy right across the country, relying on evidence, lived experience, and expertise. It is studying specific communities, and is going to deliver a strategy that will put an end to poverty as best we can in the term of this government, and I hope we can do it forever for this country.

Canada Revenue Agency

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

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House this evening. I want to begin by congratulating my colleague on her appointment as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue. I hope to have frank, honest, and unscripted discussions with her in the House, and that we will be able to exchange ideas and come up with solutions to the problems Canada has been trying to fix for some time, although they have gotten even worse lately and have been in the news, specifically, tax evasion, the use of tax havens, and aggressive tax avoidance.

Not so long ago, I asked the Minister of National Revenue a question about an extremely important file regarding the Swiss bank UBS. That bank made headlines a lot in the mid and late 2000s, and I also raised the issue with one of my colleagues.

What happened was that a whistleblower tipped off the U.S. government and other governments about a fraudulent scheme orchestrated by Swiss bank UBS and wealthy individuals including Canadians and Americans. Rich people around the world were hiding vast sums of money there to avoid paying taxes and grow their money. They were turning a profit with that money, which was invested all over the world but primarily in Switzerland. They did not declare those profits to Canadian or U.S. tax agencies.

It was similar to the KPMG scheme, which was discovered later. The U.S. meted out harsh penalties, but Canada was more lenient with the fraudsters. That is why the cases are similar if not exactly the same. The United States recovered millions of dollars in taxes from those rich American clients in addition to imposing very severe penalties on UBS totalling some $800 million U.S.

However, when the whistleblower gave the Canada Revenue Agency a list of names of Canadians who were involved in the scandal, nothing was done. The CRA turned a blind eye to those documents and later, in 2013, it finally received 3,000 voluntary disclosures from Canadians who decided themselves to report the amounts that they had hidden in previous years. That is how the government recovered approximately $270 million. However, the whistleblower said that Canada could have recovered up to a billion dollars since nearly $6 billion in assets were being held by UBS.

Why then is preferential treatment being given again, this time to UBS clients, when the Americans took the lead and cracked down on tax frauds and those who helped them, like banks and tax experts? Why is the government being so nice to fraudsters?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Madam Speaker, I also look forward to working with my hon. colleague, and I would like to thank him for giving me this opportunity to address this very important subject.

Most Canadians pay their fair share of taxes, but there are some wealthy individuals who buy their way out of paying their share by using aggressive tax avoidance schemes. This is why, as members may already know, our government's action on offshore tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance has been quite decisive since we announced an unprecedented investment of $444 million for the Canada Revenue Agency in budget 2016.

Our government and the CRA have taken actions on several fronts to reflect a more proactive approach on tax cheats. Using intelligence gathered through a variety of tools, the CRA has developed a robust system to tackle tax fraud and aggressive tax avoidance. We are seeing the results. By increasing the number of auditors for promoters and large multinational corporations, we now have more people, tools, and technology at our disposal than ever before. This year's audit activities are on pace to raise assessments of over $13 billion this fiscal year alone.

Even if offshore tax evasion has become more and more complex, the agency is working very hard and is getting results by implementing new tools and refining those already at our disposal. Furthermore, we continue to build on our ability to collect and share information with our international partners to crack down on tax cheats that place an unfair burden on the tax system.

As my hon. colleague is fully aware, the CRA has been tracking international electronic fund transfers of over $10,000. So far, because of these efforts, a total of 41,000 transactions have been analyzed, equalling over $12 billion in funds being transferred to offshore jurisdictions. The CRA plans to expand its efforts this year by reviewing over 100,000 transactions between Canada and four additional jurisdictions of concern.

With respect to offshore-related files, the CRA is currently conducting audits on over 820 taxpayers and criminally investigating over 20 cases of tax evasion. Over the last five years, the work of the CRA's criminal investigations directorate resulted in the conviction of 42 Canadian taxpayers for tax evasion, of over $34 million in evaded taxes and court fines of $12 million, as well as 734 months of jail time for fraud. Over the same period, total domestic and offshore related criminal convictions have resulted in 508 convictions involving approximately $120 million in evaded federal taxes, leading up to $40 million in court fines, and a number of months of jail time.

Our government is increasing its efforts and seeing signs of success. Thanks to concrete actions on several fronts, the CRA is on track to identifying an additional $2.6 billion in revenue over the next five years. I do not see that as preferential treatment for fraudsters, but rather protecting Canadian taxpayers who work very hard to pay their fair share of taxes.

This is a commitment that we made to Canadians. This is what Canadians expect us to do, and this is exactly what we will do.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her reply, but I did not once hear the name of the Swiss bank UBS, which I referred to in my question.

I said that, as part of its scheme in Switzerland, UBS helped rich multimillionaires hide their money from the tax man. In Canada, no one even got a slap on the wrist, whereas in the United States, UBS and the rich Americans who hid their money from the tax man were given harsh penalties.

My question was very simple. I know that my time is almost up, but I will ask the question again. In the specific case of UBS, why did we ignore the information provided by a whistleblower? The result is that only 3,000 Canadians made voluntary disclosures, and none of them were even prosecuted for their illegal activity.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I have previously stated, the Canada Revenue Agency is getting concrete results by cracking down on tax cheats on many fronts, but we also understand that there is still much more to be done and additional improvements are also under way.

As the independent Offshore Compliance Advisory Committee recommended in its report earlier this winter, the CRA is currently reviewing the voluntary disclosure program. The CRA is committed to ensuring that the program continues to promote the right taxpayer behaviour. The agency is building on its successes and has developed new approaches and expanded its capacity to detect fraudulent activities.

In addition, our government continues to sign tax treaties with other jurisdictions. This will help provide information to Canada and its partners to crack down on tax cheats worldwide, fulfilling our government's commitment to crack down on tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance in Canada and abroad.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 8:28 p.m.)