House of Commons Hansard #173 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was 2017.
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Madam Speaker, I would disagree.
We introduced the Canada child benefit to benefit those individuals who were most in need of receiving additional support. It is lifting children out of poverty. It is putting that money into people's pockets so that they can do more for their families.
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Madam Speaker, I noticed in the member's speech that she made the case at length that this bill deals with a number of important issues.
In her speech I did not hear about a couple of those issues that have to do with the establishment of the infrastructure bank. Another, just off the top of my head, would be the changes to the parliamentary budget office.
I wonder, given the complexity of the bill, if the member would agree that the infrastructure bank, for example, which is a significant change in its own right, represents a meaningful change in the way the government is going to deliver on infrastructure projects. If so, should we not be able to study that separately?
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Madam Speaker, I would say that we certainly agree that infrastructure investment is important. We are having the debate right now, and the debate will be held at committee, about all of the things that are included in the bill.
If we can make more investments in infrastructure, I know that in my community that is really important. We see things like the flooding that is taking place, which happened in Burlington a few years ago, and if we are able to put in place some investments to prevent these kinds of things from happening, that is where we need our infrastructure dollars going. The more we can do, the better.
Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity today to speak to Bill C-44, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 22, 2017 and other measures.
I will begin by talking about the part “and other measures”.
Bill C-44 before us is an omnibus bill, as were the budget implementation bills that we became used to seeing for many years. If it passes, this bill will amend more than 30 existing laws even though a third of these amendments were not even included in the budget presented on March 22.
What is strange, or maybe not, ultimately, is that it seems to me that I did hear the Liberals criticizing the previous government many times for the excessive use of omnibus bills. In fact, they promised to abolish this practice, which they deemed to be undemocratic.
I would like to read from page 30 of the Liberal Party of Canada's election platform:
Stephen Harper has also used omnibus bills to prevent Parliament from properly reviewing and debating his proposals. We will change the House of Commons Standing Orders to bring an end to this undemocratic practice.
Those are the very same Standing Orders that the Liberal Party of Canada is trying to change in an undemocratic way, but that is another issue.
The platform is not the only place where the Liberals have called omnibus bills undemocratic. On June 9, 2015, the member for Kings—Hants, who is now President of the Treasury Board, said this in the House:
For years, the Conservatives have crossed the line in what is acceptable in a functioning democracy as a government in the of respect for Parliament. It is not only how they have now normalized the use of massive omnibus bills, they regularly shut down debate in the House....
Nevertheless, here we are debating the budget implementation bill under time allocation.
Here is another empty promise made in the House:
Liberals will end the abuse of omnibus bills which result in poorly reviewed laws.
Who said that? The Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, the member for Vancouver Quadra.
The member for Bourassa had to remind her of the following:
I must tell my colleague that we are against omnibus bills. A few years ago the current government claimed that it was against these bills, which at the time might have had 20 or 30 pages. Now we have a bill with more than 175 pages.
I just wanted to point out to my Montreal colleague what he said in the House because his government's budget implementation bill is essentially an omnibus bill, even though it is not quite 290 pages long. He should be pretty ashamed, but do I look surprised? No.
It is part of the DNA of the Liberal Party of Canada to say one thing and do the opposite, the best example, of course, being electoral reform, a promise they broke, plain and simple, despite the fact that they solemnly promised that the 2015 election would be the last election under the current voting system. Shortly after that, they tried to force changes to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons down our throats, changes that are likely to affect our members' privileges, saying that they had promised to do so. Talk about hypocrisy.
During the election, and again today, the Liberals and the Prime Minister talked ad nauseam about “the middle class and those working hard to join it”, and yet those working hard to join it are by no means the people who are given priority in this bill.
In fact, while they eliminated the public transit tax credit that middle-class Canadians actually used, the Liberals are also making it easier for their rich friends to purchase our public infrastructure, the kind of people who can afford to pay $1,500 to have access to the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister, by creating the Canada infrastructure bank.
I want to emphasize that this is not about the middle class and those working hard to join it.
This bill also severely limits the parliamentary budget officer's role, which is to conduct independent studies and produce reports that he believes are in the interest of Canadians. This changes the role of the PBO, who would now have to submit a work report for the approval of the Speaker of the House and the Speaker of the Senate, as well as the chair of the finance committee, who is an elected member of the governing party. He would be the only officer of Parliament whose work plan must be approved.
In addition, research requests to estimate the costs of measures that fall within Parliament's jurisdiction would now be reserved for committees, whereas at the present time all MPs and senators can make such requests.
Incidentally, it is the research of the parliamentary budget officer, made at a member’s request, that showed us that the Liberals’ tax breaks benefited only the wealthiest, and not the middle class and those working hard to join it.
It is clear that this bill seeks to limit the ability of parliamentarians to hold the government to account and demand that it take responsibility for its actions.
I have spoken enough about what this omnibus bill contains. Now I want to talk about what it does not contain.
The 2017-18 budget provided substantial long-term funding for social and affordable housing. Following the government’s announcement, we were expecting to move on to consultations in preparation for the establishment of a real national housing strategy, for which the NDP has been calling for many years. We also thought they had finally acknowledged the ongoing housing crisis in Canada. It would seem, however, that they are in no rush to allocate the necessary resources immediately, in this budget and associated implementation bill. In fact, the government has decided to hold off on releasing over 90% of the budget announced for housing until after the next election.
However, the needs exist right now. More and more Canadian families are finding it hard to find adequate and affordable housing. The 2011 national household survey showed that 40% of Canadian tenant families were spending more than 30% of their income on housing, 19% were paying over 50%, and 9.5% of families were spending over 80% of their income on housing. There are many reasons to believe that these figures are no better today.
At the present time, the waiting lists for low-income families in need of social housing have hit record highs in our country's cities. For example, in Edmonton, 5,800 households are waiting for housing. In Montreal there are said to be 24,000, and in Toronto, 90,000. Ageing social housing infrastructure is in need of major renovations, and with the lack of funding, many housing projects have simply closed down. Property prices in major Canadian cities are skyrocketing because of speculation, to the point that fears of a real estate bubble are growing. For too many Canadian families, access to property is virtually impossible.
I have not mentioned the housing conditions and shortages in indigenous communities. However, in response to immediate and urgent request, the government has announced several billion dollars over 11 years, but has injected only a meagre $20 million in new money this year under the 2017-18 budget, $8 million of which will go to research on housing. Considering the immediate needs, $12 million more is not going to house a lot of people.
Last week I went to the national convention of the Canadian Housing and Renewal Association, the largest national association of housing stakeholders.
While people were generally happy with the investments announced in the last budget, many concerns came up regularly. Since we are already drafting omnibus budgets that include non-budgetary measures, I will cite a few of the measures that were suggested at the convention.
The association would like the housing strategy to formally recognize the right to appropriate and affordable housing, and would like the government to speed up the funding announced for housing in order to meet immediate needs, because the longer we wait, the worse the situation becomes; to take concrete steps to counter real estate speculation; to announce the construction of new social and community housing units; to establish a special strategy for the immediate and glaring housing needs in indigenous communities; and to include in its budget incentives for renovation and energy-efficient construction, which would be a smart investment.
I would add that the government should provide funds that are specifically dedicated to social and community housing, instead of including that funding more generally in the category of affordable housing.
Although I know that the government is going to remind me that I voted against certain measures it put forward in its budget, I will be obliged to vote against this bill, both for what it contains and above all for what it does not contain.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Madam Speaker, I always have found it interesting when members of the New Democratic caucus talk about the things that should have been or could have been in the budget. The member raises concerns about housing. We have invested literally billions of dollars in trying to ensure Canadians will have better housing into the future, no matter what region of the country they are from. However, when it really comes time to demonstrate support for a progressive budget, the NDP continues to vote against it. We have seen very strong, progressive budgets that have dealt with tax breaks for Canadians, that have increased the Canada child benefit program, that have increased the GIS, and many other tax initiatives.
In its platform, the NDP said that it would balance the budget. Where would it have drawn the funds from to pay for some of the things member talked about? Please do not just say it is corporate taxes, because that continually comes across from the NDP.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
Well, I certainly will not say that. I would just remind the parliamentary secretary to address his questions to the Chair.
The hon. member for Hochelaga.
Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC
Madam Speaker, the answer could not be simpler.
Making a budget comes down to making choices. When they decide not to invest enough money to go after tax cheats, or to let big corporations pay only 13% income tax when it is more than that in the United States, I say that they could have made different choices. For example, they could have invested more money in aboriginal housing.
Looking at the budget, in 2017-18, $56,7 million will be invested in housing in northern and Inuit communities. I don’t know if the member has gone to Nunavik, as I have, but that amount is not going to build a lot of dwellings and houses. Choices could have been made to increase the budget in the right places. In my opinion, those choices were poorly made.
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate being here today. Earlier today the finance minister said that the Liberals had heard, in the short time we have had, some good suggestions that they would take under consideration.
In the speeches today, there have been several instances where I heard members making specific references to specific things. If we had more opportunity, rather than only 12%, we could provide more solid and good possibilities for the government to consider. Maybe she could respond to the short time we now have had to suggest more ideas, which the finance minister said were credible ideas, the government could take under consideration.
Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC
Mr. Speaker, if I understand correctly, the member is referring to time allocation and the short time we have to discuss all of this.
If that is his question, in fact I do not agree with limiting the time for debate. We have had very little time to discuss everything that is in this budget. Earlier, I mentioned that 30 laws will be amended. this morning, the Minister of Finance said that 39 people spoke. In fact, 39 members did not speak; I believe that it was 32. That is one-tenth of the members sitting in the House of Commons.
There are many very important topics, such as the infrastructure bank. First, this bill should be split. Several items should be studied separately and we should have more time to study each of them. We are under time allocation, we have to hurry, and the majority of members cannot even take the floor.
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today to speak to our government's second budget.
Budget 2017 is the next step in our government’s ambitious plan to make smart investments that will create jobs in the four cities in my riding. It will also grow Canada's economy and provide more opportunities for the middle class and those working hard to join it in communities all across the country.
As a member of Parliament and a businesswoman who is very involved in my community, I cannot help but be pleased with a budget that does not leave anyone behind and that addresses real issues. This budget provides opportunities for seniors, families, entrepreneurs, and job creators.
The concept of providing opportunities for all is the cornerstone of the new Liberal approach, and that approach is working. Over the past seven months, the Canadian economy has created some 250,000 jobs. Since December 2015, Canada's unemployment rate has dropped from 7.1% to 6.6%. What is more, January marked the longest run of trade surpluses since 2014, a sign that we are finding more buyers around the world for our exports.
As a member of the Standing Committee of International Trade and the only member from Quebec on this committee, I am proud that businesses back home will have new opportunities to export their products and find new clients around the world. The Liberal approach is indeed working as we can see by the growth rates. As a government, we have made decisions and implemented important measures for the people back home and across Canada.
Over the past year, our government has implemented a plan to grow our economy in a way that works for the middle class and those working hard to join it. Again, under this plan we raised taxes for the wealthiest Canadians who represent 1% of the population in order to lower taxes for the middle class. We implemented the Canada child benefit, which gives more to nine out of ten Canadian families, including 10,000 families in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, and which will lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. We also enhanced the Canada pension plan in order to help Canadians have the secure and dignified retirement they deserve.
Budget 2017 also contains new measures to make the tax system fairer by eliminating the tax loopholes that create unfair advantages for some at the expense of others, by investing $524 million more in the Canada Revenue Agency to support its sustained efforts to counter tax evasion and fight tax avoidance, and finally, by eliminating tax measures that are of inordinate benefit to the wealthiest.
When I go meet with my constituents, they are proud that our government is acting to ensure more tax fairness for the middle class.
Budget 2017 directly affects my riding with three important measures: major health transfers, especially for our seniors; infrastructure investments, particularly in affordable housing; and finally, investment in our human capital and innovation.
As I have just mentioned, budget 2017 provides for clear action on health. As of today’s date the government has concluded new health funding accords with the 12 provinces and territories, which have accepted their share of the federal offer of $11 billion over 10 years to provide better support to Canadian families in the areas of home care and mental health.
In my case, when I led round tables in my riding, the vast majority of stakeholders were in favour of more support for home care. I am therefore very happy that budget 2017 responds to this important demand.
The government will also be simplifying the current tax relief for caregivers by replacing three existing income tax credits with a new tax credit called the Canada caregiver credit. This new credit will offer improved support for those who need it most, and will apply to caregivers whether they live with the family member they are caring for or not.
That is why the Government of Canada will be allocating $11 billion over 10 years, $2.5 billion of which will go to Quebec, to support home care and improve mental health care.
The infrastructure investments, including in public transit and affordable housing, are another strength of budget 2017, and directly affect my constituents in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. The infrastructure investments we make today will be beneficial for many years to come. They will ensure clean and sustained economic growth, make it possible to build stronger, more inclusive communities, and create more good jobs for the people of the Lower Laurentians region and elsewhere.
To do this, our government has set up the Canada infrastructure bank, which will be charged with making investments totalling $35 billion over 11 years. Our infrastructure plan will include investments in the Montreal region that could help build the réseau électrique métropolitain, the REM, a high-frequency train project with a branch line starting in Deux-Montagnes, in my riding.
On affordable housing, we realize that housing needs vary greatly across different communities, and that is why our government is determined to work with the provinces and territories to ensure that the specific needs of communities all across Canada are met.
Budget 2017 thus proposes to grant some $3.2 billion over the next 11 years to the provinces and territories so they can address their main affordable housing priorities. This news has been very well received by the local stakeholders in my riding, who took part in large numbers in a round table recently organized by my staff.
Finally, budget 2017 puts the skilled, talented and creative people of Canada at the heart of a more innovative economy of the future, which is good news for the dynamic and innovative companies in my constituency.
For our government, relying on innovation also means relying on the know-how of Quebec and Canadian society, and that is very important in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. The role of elected officials is now to focus on and invest in their fellow citizens, and to give the workers of the Lower Laurentians region the tools they need to succeed in the economy of the future.
Many of the measures in budget 2017 are designed to put Canada in a leadership position within the global economy.
First, we will be investing $225 million over four years to identify and address skills gaps in the economy and help Canadians to be as prepared as possible for the economy of tomorrow. Next, we will create a strategic innovation fund which will serve to attract, support and grow Canadian companies in dynamic and emerging sectors, such as agrifood, digital technology, green technologies and advanced manufacturing, thanks to an investment of $1.26 billion over five years.
We will also be offering greater support to “superclusters” of companies that innovate in key sectors such as digital technology and green technology, and that offer the greatest potential for accelerating economic growth, thanks to an investment in 2017-18 of up to $950 million over five years.
I have always been proud to say that the greatest strength of Canada and of the Lower Laurentians region lies in its skilled, hard-working and creative workforce. Hence it is important to strengthen Canada as a global leader in the innovation economy, so as to create jobs and grow the middle class, since innovation is transforming the way we live and work, ushering in new challenges and new opportunities for everyone.
Innovation is the economy of tomorrow. Let us work in lockstep and, together, seize this opportunity to become a world leader in tomorrow's economy. I would like to inform the House that I have full confidence in budget 2017 which, with its concrete measures, will enable the middle class, seniors and innovative companies in my region to prosper in the years ahead.
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.
The Liberals used to think that omnibus bills were not fair, that they were a bad idea, but then they went and put a lot of different things in this bill, including the new infrastructure bank.
Since the government seems to think this is an innovative way to make infrastructure projects happen, does the member think this measure should be examined on its own, apart from the other measures in this budget implementation bill?
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for his question about infrastructure.
The infrastructure investments we are making will pay dividends for years to come. They will deliver clean, sustained economic growth, build stronger, more inclusive communities, and create more good, middle-class jobs for all Canadians.
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Mr. Speaker, in our budget we have announced some significant investments in health care and child care spaces: $11 billion in health care, $11 million in affordable housing, and $7 billion to create 40,000 child care spaces. How are these kinds of investments going to benefit the constituents of the member's riding?
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague for his question.
This budget will definitely help people in my riding. When I went door to door in 2015, lots of people told me they wanted our health care system to include home care for seniors. That is why we are investing so much in this area. We will also be investing heavily in mental health, which is something that affects a lot of people.
Jean-Yves Duclos LiberalMinister of Families
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by congratulating my colleague from Rivière-des-Milles-Îles on her speech. I also want to thank and congratulate her for all the work she does for the people in her riding. I had the chance to see her over the past few months not only in Ottawa, but also in her community. I know how important it is to her to work for all the constituents in her riding, especially those who are less fortunate, such as the people whose housing conditions are less than ideal. I know she is working very hard with agencies in her riding to try to improve life for these people.
I want to ask her what are the greatest socio-economic challenges that she sees in her community and that will be alleviated by the Canadian government's investments.
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development for the question.
Budget 2017 considerably helps my constituents. In Saint-Eustache, we have housing for the homeless. There are units for youth aged 12 to 17 and for those aged 18 to 25 years. Many people benefit from this. The homelessness partnering strategy will help ensure that people have access to these units. The challenge is to get homeless people to live in social housing and regain control of their lives. There is a clear need for affordable housing, but first we need homes to fight homelessness and to bring these people back to a way of life where they are contributing to our society.
I thank the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development for helping provide assistance to all these people in my riding and to all the stakeholders.
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 84(1), I would like to designate Wednesday, May 17, for consideration in committee of the whole of the main estimates for the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development.
I would also like to designate Monday, May 29, for the consideration in committee of the whole of the main estimates for the Department of National Defence.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton
The House appreciates the notice on the part of the hon. government House leader.
Before I recognize the hon. member for Richmond—Arthabaska to resume debate, I must inform him that he will have approximately three minutes remaining in the time provided for government orders.
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-44, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 22, 2017 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.
Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Mr. Speaker, in your presentation, you did a masterful job of highlighting the absurdity of our current situation. I have exactly three minutes to talk about Bill C-44, which the government is ramming down our throats as hard as it possibly can, to shut us up and make sure that we cannot point out the inconsistencies and everything that will happen after this budget implementation bill passes.
The bill makes amendments that will affect 30 departments. I will name a few of them. I will talk about the entire mechanism the Conservatives had put in place, during the previous government, in order to prevent the government in power from increasing fees unreasonably on the backs of Canadians.
The Liberal government will simply eliminate this mechanism and will take more money out of taxpayers' pockets. We are not at all surprised, given that the Liberal government is accumulating deficits. The only way for the government to generate revenue, which it does not have enough of, is to legalize marijuana, which will generate revenue at the expense of our youth and Canadians, and to increase costs by cancelling the public transit credit. That is absurd coming from a government that calls itself green.
In the last budget, the government eliminated tax credits for families whose children play sports or participate in cultural activities. Even worse, when tired Canadians go home on Friday and want to relax, the beer they open or the wine they pour will come with another tax on alcohol.
What we are seeing is completely ridiculous. I am not even talking about the infrastructure bank, which will be established at the expense of Canadians. The $35 billion should be used to help all municipalities across Canada, but will grease the palms of private investors who are controlling the government agenda.
Given all of that, we do not understand the purpose of this budget. The government says that it wants to support the middle class, but it is currently doing exactly the opposite.
The government gave us three days to discuss the budget. Really, it gave us only two days, not three, because last Friday, we had only an hour and fifteen minutes to discuss it. Today, I have only three minutes to tell my constituents about the aberration we are dealing with today.
What the government is doing does not make any sense. It is racking up debt for future generations, going forward with spending, and leading people to believe that it is lowering their taxes. It does not make any sense. As an MP who represents his constituents, I am extremely frustrated with this situation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the three wonderful minutes you gave me to speak.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton
It being 5:53 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill now before the House.
The question is on the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton
All those in favour of the amendment will please say yea.