Debates of Nov. 1st, 2018

Budget Implementation Act, 2018 No. 2

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

Madam Speaker, the hon. member is absolutely correct with respect to the economic impact that would be had in Canada if women were contributing in the workforce in the way they should be. Quite frankly, it is about fairness for all Canadians.

It disheartens me when I hear people, in particular on the opposite side, talk about how women do not want these opportunities and say that we are trying to push women into jobs or positions they do not really want.

In fact, given the opportunity, groups like YWCA Canada do an incredible job of retraining and providing skills to enable women to re-enter the workforce so they can make a good middle-class wage and provide for their family. Therefore, it is incredibly important, not just because it is right for women to be involved in the economy, but also because it is the right thing to do in terms of our economy and growing our economy going forward.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, a colleague who, like me, was elected in 2000.

I am very pleased to speak to Bill C-86, the Liberal government's budget implementation act, 2018.

When we stand in the House to speak to bills such as this one, we do a synopsis of the bill and ask how it is going to help future generations and how it is going to help right now. Regrettably, the more we look at it, the more we realize there is nothing in this bill that can secure the future of our country for generations to come.

What we have here is a simple continuation of the Liberals' failed policies, especially their failed fiscal policies. There has been deficit after deficit with no end in sight, despite the Prime Minister's promise in the 2015 election that he would only run small deficits. I sincerely hope that in 2019 Canadians will not forget how promise after promise has been broken by the government.

The Liberals promised a very small deficit of $10 billion a year, but what we have now, as revealed by the public accounts for 2018, is a deficit of $19 billion, which as the Auditor General points out is essentially the same amount in percentage as the previous year. Our country's net debt is $759 billion. The net debt is the amount by which the government's liabilities exceed the value of its financial assets and revenue.

The Auditor General also reported that revenues were $313.6 billion, an increase of $20.1 billion over the previous year. What is truly shocking is that the government did not use the increase of revenues to eliminate the deficit, but rather, in true Liberal fashion, continued to increase its program spending.

Why has such grave concern been expressed about the many families across the country who are unable to balance their household budgets and are accumulating debt at an alarming rate, while the Liberal government is unfazed by the national debt that it is mounting?

When we were in government, household debt was one of the biggest concerns to a growing economy. Household debt in Canada increased to 171.3% of gross income in 2018, up from 170.20% in 2017. Household debt continues to increase in our country.

Household debt to income averaged 127.31% from 1990 to 2018, reaching an all-time high of 173.34%. There have to be warnings as to what could happen in the future with household debt increasing in this way, especially as we see our Governor of the Bank of Canada raising interest rates.

We should be very concerned about these statistics, and equally concerned about the national debt, but we also need to be concerned that the government does nothing to address that. The Liberal government must stop borrowing money that other people will have to pay back, including Canadians who are not even born yet.

However, we have a Liberal government that has no plan to get out of debt and no plan to stop overspending. It has no plan to balance the books. It has no plan to start paying down the accumulated national debt. All the Liberal government can manage to do is pay interest on the massive amounts of money it has borrowed.

While it is failing in this regard, and in so many other ways too, this government continues to raise taxes on the middle class. Since 2015, the Liberals have cancelled tax credits and raised CPP and EI premiums. The price of everything continues to rise: transportation, fuel, groceries and rent, and very soon Canadians will be suffering under a carbon tax on everything. That carbon tax will not be used to reduce carbon emissions. Rather, it will be spent by Liberals on their millionaire friends and their pet projects.

The Liberals' so-called new tax bracket to tax the top one per cent of income earners has not worked. After the Liberals hike taxes on the wealthy, we find out the wealthy top one per cent of income earners are actually paying a billion dollars less in taxes per year than they did before the Liberals tried to increase their tax level.

The middle class did not receive any of the revenues from the top one per cent of income earners because there was not enough revenue raised by hiking taxes on the wealthy to pay for the programs and services the Prime Minister implemented. Those programs and services did not lead to real and sustainable job creation within the private sector.

The Liberals bragged about the income and the employment rate, but 11 out of 12 jobs that have been created under the current government are in the public sector; they are government jobs. Let us think on this for a moment. The economy has not given the confidence to the private sector to see massive growth. One new job in 12 is in the private sector, and 11 in 12 are in the public sector.

This is not sustainable. Revenues from the private sector pay for jobs in the public sector. Revenues from public sector jobs do not create more jobs in the private sector, or even in the public sector. Still, the Liberals say there has been a reduction in the unemployment rates this year, and they continue to hire public servants.

The Liberals do not talk about the fact that fewer people are looking for work. Statistics show that two-thirds of the unemployed in Canada are not looking for work anymore but remain unemployed.

On the issue of the public sector, or rather the public service, I would be remiss if I did not talk about the recent observations by the Auditor General of Canada in the 2018 public accounts. The Auditor General, along with the deputy minister for the Department of Finance and officials from the Treasury Board Secretariat, appeared before the public accounts committee, which is a committee I am honoured to chair. As most here today would know, the public accounts committee examines in a non-partisan manner the performance of the public service and the federal departments and agencies in implementing what the government has been ordered to do by the Parliament of Canada.

For the past three years, the Auditor General has been tabling separate documents entitled, for example, “Commentary on the 2017-2018 Financial Audits”. This year, the document includes a section entitled, “The Auditor General's observations on the government's 2017-2018 financial statements”, which was previously provided in the public accounts.

The first observation is on the transformation of pay administration, better known as the Phoenix pay system. The Auditor General noted that as of March 31, 2018, there were 615 million dollars' worth of pay errors. I think back to my meetings in Wainwright, Drumheller, Stettler and Camrose, where massive numbers of federal public employees were expressing their frustrations toward this Phoenix system.

Furthermore, for the last pay period, the percentage of employees with pay errors was 58%, an increase of 7% from the previous pay period. Despite the minister saying that things are getting better and that by October 2018 things will be solved or we will have a real goal that can be accomplished, she is failing. It was 51% last year and 58% this year.

While the government says it is working to solve this horrific problem for public servants, the situation has become worse. As the Auditor General reports, the government underpaid some employees by $369 million and overpaid others by $246 million, and now we are trying to figure out how to claw back that money. This significant number of individual pay errors did not result in a financially significant error in the government's total reported pay expenses, because overpayments and underpayments basically offset each other.

The Auditor General further explained to our committee yesterday that while the government recorded year-end accounting adjustments to improve the accuracy of its pay expenses, it did not correct the underlying problems, nor did it correct the pay errors that continue to affect thousands of employees.

Through budget 2018, the government plans to spend $16 million over two years, beginning in 2018-19, to work with various experts and public servants toward implementing a new pay system. Furthermore, it has committed $431 million over six years beginning in 2017-18 to fix Phoenix.

I have grave concerns, as do some people within the public service, that we do not have the necessary IT expertise to manage complex IT problems like these. These are not being addressed in this budget. People are not being paid. It is unacceptable.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Madam Speaker, there is so much in the member's intervention to deal with in a short period of time.

The member mentioned that the private sector growth was not there, when in fact Statistics Canada's labour force survey in September said that employment rose by 96,000 among private sector employees, the first increase since 2017, but also there was no change in the public sector.

The investments we are making are driving private sector growth. I wonder whether the hon. member could contrast that to the cuts the previous government made to try to get economic growth, when in fact investing in Canadians and investing in the Canadian economy is truly the way towards growth, and the growth that we are now seeing.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am not sure where the member is citing his statistics from.

Statistics that I have seen show that 11 out of 12 jobs that have been created over the last year or two years have been in the public sector. As I stated in my speech, that is no way to grow an economy. An economy is not grown that way.

The member also spoke about the extra money that is being invested back into our economy. Certainly, when we go into a recession, it is vital to kick-start growth in some regard and show that the government is willing to do that. We did that.

Now that we have come out of the recession, basically on the back of a strong United States economy and, indeed, global economy, Canada shows less growth than other countries. Again, if we are spending this much money when we are in an economy that is expanding, what happens when interest rates go up, and what happens should we fall into another downturn or recession? Can the government continue to drive up debt then at the same levels it is doing now in times when there is growth?

This becomes a massive problem for countries when they then experience a downturn.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, speaking of massive, I would like to make a general comment on the size of this omnibus bill and all the things that are included in it. I would assume that my hon. colleague would agree that parliamentarians are not given enough time to actually scrutinize, on behalf of their constituents, what exactly is in the bill.

I was on the pay equity special committee. We made a recommendation that the government implement the recommendations from the 2004 task force. In the short time I was able to actually look at the document, it appears the government has not followed up on that unanimous recommendation from the committee. I wonder if my hon. colleague would like to comment on that.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, I remember when we brought forward budget after budget. I think for our last budget, which was a balanced budget, the budget implementation bill was, if I remember correctly, 400 pages, maybe 500 pages.

Members of the opposition party at that time which is now the government just attacked us as having what was not so much an omnibus bill but 500 pages that they were expected to read through, come and debate. Now we see the Liberal government with an 800-page budget implementation bill.

The member is right. There are a lot of things that the Liberals promised in the last election and since being elected that they were going to bring forward for Canadians. They were going to have minuscule deficits. They were going to have pay equity. They were going to do all of these things, but the Liberals are failing on one after another.

I honestly believe that next year, in 2019, Canadians are going to hold the government to account, and rightfully so, but not just rightfully so for breaking promise after promise, but rightfully so for not providing strong governance and leadership when it comes to the fiscal management of where we are and how we want to move forward.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, as the federal member of Parliament for the Ottawa Valley riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, I welcome this opportunity to inform Canadians about the deteriorating state of the nation's finances, as demonstrated by the legislation before Parliament today.

I begin my comments by reiterating clearly that Conservatives believe in clean air, low taxes and a healthy economy. A clean environment and well-paying jobs are only possible when taxpayers are treated with respect. Bill C-86 is 850 pages of failure to treat taxpayers with respect. It is time to stop the policy of the Liberal government to spend this country into bankruptcy.

While claiming to affect climate change in Africa with billions of Canadian taxpayer dollars may assuage the Prime Minister's vanity and his project to buy a seat on the UN Security Council, his new carbon tax or pollution tax or whatever new name he dreams up for his massive tax scheme this week, next week or next month does not change the fact that a tax is a tax is a tax. Excessive deficit budgets year after year with no credible plan to balance spending with revenue are behind the carbon tax policy.

The Gerald Butts talking points failed with Dalton McGuinty and the thoroughly disgraced Kathleen Wynne, and at the end of the day, will fail the Prime Minister. Kevin Libin, in the Financial Post, accurately summed up the carbon tax grab as a “wealth redistribution scheme”. He wrote:

It certainly will take money from consumers, businesses and high-income families and reallocate it to others using tax rebates (minus, of course, the cost of administration, which is never zero). But it’s so much more irrational than that. More accurately, it’s a plan to raise business costs and give imports an advantage at the very moment that our economy is already burdened by a tax regime judged far less attractive than those of our economic competitors, using levies that economists agree are too low to seriously affect emissions but are enough to harm the economy.

Using the concern Canadians have for the environment as cover for the Liberals' wacky left-wing wealth redistribution scheme failed Ontario. Phony concern for the environment will be exposed this time also. Canadians are smart. They know a tax grab when they see one. Contrary to claims being made about the new carbon tax being revenue neutral, Canadians are not fooled by that nose stretcher.

The federal carbon-taxing system sets out two mechanisms for taxing carbon: one, a charge on fossil fuels for fuel producers, distributors and importers, and two, an output-based pricing system for industrial facilities. Fuel charges specific to each type of fuel, including gasoline, aviation fuel, natural gas, coal and combustible waste, among others, are meant to reflect a carbon pollution price of $20 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2019, rising by $10 per tonne every year to reach a total of $50 per tonne in 2022. For example, a carbon price of 4.42¢ per litre would apply to gasoline as of April 2019, and would rise to 11.05¢ per litre by April 2022. Taxes on fuel for home heating and for transportation are examples of direct taxes.

While the government has indicated that 80% or 90% of the direct carbon taxes collected may trickle back to the households as a re-election bribe with the other 10% or 20% handed out as exemptions to others hard hit by the new carbon tax, what is not accounted for are the indirect carbon taxes. The HST that would be added to the carbon tax is an example of an indirect tax. These indirect carbon taxes, which represent about 70% of the new carbon tax revenue that would be collected, would increase the cost of other consumables by about $522 per household. Therefore, while the election bribe may return an amount of what has been paid by families directly, Canadians would get nailed by the hidden taxes, which are more difficult to calculate.

For taxpayers in Ontario, they have seen this story before with electricity prices. First, Ontario ratepayers were told that huge increases in the price of electricity were necessary to pay the owners of industrial wind turbines, who just happen to have close political ties to the Liberal Party. These taxpayers were told it was necessary to stop man-made global warming, or I mean climate change, or is it pollution, or whatever other label the Liberal Party thinks will fool people. Then the carbon tax that was added onto Ontario ratepayers' electricity bills was given a misleading title of “global adjustment” to fool some gullible consumers that somehow this amount was not just another tax. With this, the Liberal Party proceeded to increase the carbon tax on electricity, ending up in a new term being coined in Ontario of “energy poverty”.

Ontario is now burdened by some of the highest power rates of any jurisdiction in North America, throwing households into energy poverty and forcing industries to close shop or move to the United States. Ontario taxpayers have been suffering with carbon taxes for years.

This week, in my riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Sandvik Materials Technology in Arnprior announced it will be closing its doors and moving production south to the United States by the end of 2019. Sandvik, which makes steel pipes and tubes, currently employs 160 people at the Arnprior facility. It opened in 1975 and now, after 43 years in business in Canada, those jobs will be lost, thanks to Liberal policies. With high electricity prices, the tariff on steel, which the government has failed to resolve even after selling out Canadians with the failed NAFTA negotiations, rising interest rates, and the massive hike in taxes that is coming with the new carbon tax, the line-up at the border is only going to get longer.

Bill C-86 should have been a plan to control government spending. The fiscal policy of the government, which has been essentially to keep spending levels and deficits elevated until1 at least after next year's federal election and beyond, is not sustainable. The Liberal Party has been taking on debt for little gain.

Thanks to the spillover effect of a booming American economy, our economy is running at capacity, but rather than directing the Bank of Canada to raise interest rates to slow our economy, a faster drawdown on deficits would ease pressure for rate hikes. This would help the country's most indebted households, who are disproportionately young urban families with huge mortgages in places like Toronto. An Environics Analytics study has already calculated that rising interest rates will squeeze out of households an extra $2,516 each year. Add higher mortgage payments to the new Liberal carbon tax that is set to escalate every year and all the other tax increases and the future looks bleak for average middle-class Canadian families.

According to Craig Wright, the chief economist at the Royal Bank of Canada, “At this point of the cycle you want to see surpluses and paying down debt.” The recent billions in extra revenue the government collected from Canadians should have been used to pay down debt, not given to other countries as a bribe for a UN Security Council seat.

Canada's deficits are out of control. Canada spent the financial reserve it needed to fight the inevitable next recession.

The Liberals cannot even get the basics right when it comes to the day-to-day operation of government. At 850 pages, Bill C-86 is sparse when it comes to detailing how the federal government intends to correct the poor service Canadians are getting.

This legislation talks about “ensuring that social assistance payments under certain programs do not preclude individuals from receiving the Canada child benefit”. This issue should be addressed separately, not buried in 850 pages of an omnibus budget bill. The government broke its promise to never present omnibus legislation to Parliament, just like it broke its promise for modest deficits. Today's deficits are tomorrow's taxes.

Christopher is an average single parent in my riding. He works at a grocery store. Unlike the one-percenter finance minister, the member for Toronto Centre, he does not vacation at a villa he owns in the south of France. Christopher submitted an application to receive the Canada child benefit for his teenage daughter on October 15. On October 30, he was informed that his application was sent for processing and that it would be at least mid-January 2019 or later before it would be looked at. This is something new.

Under the Conservative government of former prime minister Stephen Harper, this process took 21 days. Now it takes three to four months, if one is lucky, with the same workforce. The Liberal government has added a new level of stupidity that is slowing everything down.

Heaven forbid if Christopher had not contacted his member of Parliament to help with the application rather than trying to apply for the benefit on his own. First sit on the phone for hours, leave a message and maybe get contacted a week later. Staff on the phone lines are the newest employees who do not know the programs—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The time is up. I am sure the member will be able to add more content with the questions and comments.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Guelph.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member across the way for sharing a different perspective on our economy. It is always good to have differing opinions in this place, but when we look at our economy, we are outpacing the growth of all G7 countries and our debt-to-GDP ratio is lower than all other G7 countries. We are investing in the right way to get growth rather than the previous way of the Conservative government under Stephen Harper, which cut expenditures until we had no growth and then cut them even further. Therefore, investing in growth is smart for our economy and our government is very proud to see the success we are having.

Could the hon. could think about the debt-to-GDP ratio and what that means to her constituents?

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, they can recalculate the debt any way they want, but when the country is in the hole, we are in the hole, and new taxes are not going to dig us out of it.

Getting back to Christopher, he calls five times, talks to five different people, gets five different answers to his questions, and my office has a dozen of those child benefit horror stories.

Also, this omnibus budget is the wrong place to remove the responsibility of the Minister of National Defence for determining the compensation of members of the Canadian Forces who participate in operational missions internationally. This is a dishonest way to cut the pay of soldiers doing the most dangerous tasks. The Minister of National Defence should be ashamed that he allowed this to happen. The Minister dropped the ball when the issue of danger pay for soldiers was raised previously. However, once all the facts about his role in the Admiral Norman affair are made public, the member for Vancouver South will not be minister much longer anyway.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member talked about the Conservatives caring about a clean environment and low taxes. I got an email from Mark Bottomley from Lasqueti Island, where he has spent time cleaning up styrofoam and plastic from our beaches. He said that “I have decided that cleaning up the ocean is one of the most important things I can do in this time when I am overwhelmed by the degradation of the natural world.”

Of course, we owe Mark, and Canadians like Mark who are selfless and cleaning up our beaches, a ton of gratitude. However, we know that the cost is significant to our environment, the shellfish industry and to the salmon ingesting plastics. We know that in this 850-page omnibus bill and its 5,000 clauses, there is no funding to back up the Liberal government's ocean plastic charter, and no resources to help people like Mark.

Could the member speak about the resources we need and how she could fund those resources to help volunteers and good Canadians like Mark and coastal people from coast to coast to coast to help deal with this important problem?

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, my colleague raises a very important point.

We should be taking the garbage out of our lakes and rivers and not putting it there in the first place. Take Montreal with the billions of gallons of raw sewage it has put right in there. That is pollution. It is not carbon dioxide.

Real pollution, like my colleague described, is blue algae. We have it in the Ottawa River, and now maybe the Minister of Environment will pay attention because it is also in the Rideau Canal right down her alley. However, we are suffering from this blue-green algae all around. That is pollution. It is right in front of us and it is affecting health as well as the economy.

I want to go back to the Minister of National Defence, the temporary one, because the responsibility for Canadian women and men in the Canadian Forces should not be parcelled out to another department just because the current minister is not up to the job.

Bill C-86 is a disaster and tax-weary Canadians look forward to a change in government.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to rise today to speak on Bill C-86, which implements into legislation a number of provisions that were laid out in budget 2018.

Today, I will be splitting my time with my hon. colleague and friend from Saint Boniface—Saint Vital.

When I speak to this bill, I would like to focus my thoughts on the hard-working middle-class families in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge, who, like Canadians from coast to coast to coast, know that our government is working for them to build a stronger economy and a healthier environment, not only for today but also for generations to come to ensure that our children, much like my children, will have a prosperous future and confidence knowing that our government made the right decisions for their future.

I also wish to salute the entrepreneurs in the city of Vaughan, who run over 12,000 small and medium enterprises. They know they have a strong advocate in me as their MP and in our government to ensure they have the tools to compete and succeed both domestically and globally.

Our government is committed to building a strong middle class and helping those working hard to join it. We know the results to date and are very proud of our record: a record low unemployment rate; over 500,000 or 600,000 new jobs created in the last three years, the majority of which are full time; and, amazingly, over 500,000 job vacancies in Canada. A majority of the jobs that have been created in this great country have been from the private sector, another thing we should be proud of.

There are many elements in Bill C-86 that I could speak to, everything from the pay equity act to the Canadian gender budgeting act to the wage earner protection program to the enactment of a department for women and gender equality act, which, as a father of two young daughters, I am very proud of. It would establish a department for women and gender equality to assist the minister in ensuring that we as a society and a government advance equality with respect to sex and sexual orientation. There are even amendments to the Bank Act to strengthen provisions that apply to a bank in relation to the protection of customers and the public. Canadians expect and deserve the strongest consumer protection standards when dealing with their financial institutions and we will deliver on that.

However, I wish to focus my time this afternoon primarily on one aspect of Bill C-86, which for me represents our government's commitment to building a more prosperous country and that would ensure that all Canadians benefit from economic growth and a more inclusive and fair society.

Division 21 of part 4 of Bill C-86 enacts the poverty reduction act, which sets out for the first time in our country's history targets for poverty reduction in Canada from coast to coast to coast. The poverty reduction targets our government has put forward are ambitious and realistic, and are lifting and will lift hundreds of thousands of Canadians out of poverty from coast to coast to coast. Our government aspires to achieve a poverty reduction target of 20% below the poverty level in 2015 by 2020, and 50% below by 2030. These targets are not just numbers, because behind them are the stories of hard-working Canadians from all walks of life and all parts of this great country. Canadians are ambitious and steadfast. They expect nothing less from their government. When we look at the measures behind the poverty reduction act we can not only be proud of the work we have done as a government but, more importantly, also of the work we have done as a country.

The pillars of our poverty reduction strategy are based on the following: dignity to lift Canadians out of poverty by ensuring that basic needs are met; opportunity and inclusion to help Canadians join the middle class by promoting full participation in society and equality of opportunity; and resilience and security to support the middle class by protecting Canadians from falling into poverty.

How do we achieve these targets? Let me list the measures that our government has put in place: the transformational Canada child benefit; a 10% Increase in the guaranteed income supplement; the Canada workers benefit; and the profound national housing strategy, a $40 billion plan over 10 years, that will see housing needs reduced or eliminated for over half a million Canadians across this country. In my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge, we will see more than 150 units of affordable housing built in 2019.

Moreover, investments in public transit under the PTIF 1 and now PTIF 2 will deliver sustained secure funding for public transit across Canada.

There is also the Canada workers benefit, which in budget 2018 provided a tax benefit that will put more money in the pockets of low-income Canadians. In fact, it is estimated that over 70,000 Canadians will be raised out of poverty, and over two million Canadians will receive assistance, from the CWB. Someone making $15,000 a year will receive $500 more from the CWB in 2019 than in 2018.

In Bill C-86, our government will enact changes that will ensure that an individual who is eligible to receive the Canada workers benefit can receive the benefit without having to claim it. Enrolment will be automatic. No Canadian will be left behind by our government, and the automatic enrolment mechanism that we have included in Bill C-86 is one further step to ensure this.

In achieving our poverty reduction targets, we also need to consider the transformational social program that we introduced, the Canada child benefit. We are delivering it to families who need it, not millionaires but hard-working, middle-class families across this country. In my riding alone, it equates to about $5 million a month, helping over 17,000 children and 9,000 families, with an average payment of over $500. That is real change that is working for Canadians from coast to coast to coast. That is real change that is benefiting middle-class families from coast to coast to coast.

We also indexed the CCB two years ahead of schedule, which will mean hundreds of extra dollars for families to help them pay for their kids' sports activities, to save for their education or buy clothes for the upcoming winter. It is estimated that the CCB will lift nearly 300,000 children out of poverty.

For our most vulnerable seniors, our government has raised the guaranteed income supplement by 10%. Promise made; promise kept. In my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge, over 2,000 seniors received, on average, over $800 extra per annum. That is real change, helping real Canadians, our most vulnerable seniors. Furthermore, we came to an agreement on the CPP, the Canada pension plan. We enhanced and strengthened it for future generations.

There are other measures that we have instituted, but I would like to talk briefly in my remaining time about two measures in Bill C-86. One deals with the Canada Labour Code. For many of us who follow labour relations, there was an element in labour relations dealing with contract flipping or contract re-tendering. It was one of these things that was really unfair to the middle class, unfair to hard-working workers. We have addressed that.

It is contained in division 15 of part 4 of this bill. Our government will address continuity of employment issues when a work, undertaking or business becomes federally regulated, or in case of contract re-tendering. This is important, as there are instances where employees obtain a new employer through a contract tendering process, and then face much lower wages for exactly the same job.

Anyone who follows what happened at the airport in Toronto knows that this happens to many workers there, where they will be employed by an employer, making $20 an hour, and a contract re-tendering will come up and they will have to go to a new employer who imposes a much lower wage rate. It is unfair. We have addressed it. The legislation is in line with that in other jurisdictions, including the U.K. and Australia.

I will not read the pertinent section of the bill, but I encourage my colleagues from all parties to do so. It is groundbreaking, and it will ensure that we help all middle-class Canadians, all hard-working Canadians, including those workers who face a contract re-tendering.

In Bill C-86 and prior budgets, we have also addressed the issue of tax fairness and tax avoidance. Our government has invested approximately $1 billion in the Canada Revenue Agency. This morning there was an article in one of our national newspapers applauding our government for taking the concrete measures that are in Bill C-86, when looking at the issues of tax fairness and tax avoidance. We have a prosperous economy, Canadians are working at record levels, and we have the highest labour force participation rate for women in our country's history, but we must ensure that all individuals and organizations pay their fair share, including large corporations and wealthier Canadians.

We are preventing banks from creating artificial losses. We are enhancing tax reporting requirements for trust funds. We are strengthening rules for limited partnerships. We are cracking down on tax-free corporate distributions. We are also increasing ownership transparency.

It has been a pleasure to speak on Bill C-86. There are a number of great measures in this budget implementation act. I did not even touch on the pay equity bill, which will be transformational for millions of folks in this country. It will reduce the gap between what men and women are paid, which we must do. It is the right thing to do. It is the fair thing to do. It is the thing to do for my two daughters, who are at school today, for their futures. I am proud of our government that has acted on so many fronts.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I share the member's interest in pay equity. However, I would ask him to comment on the very unusual fact that the budget implementation bill contains a whole range of provisions unrelated to the budget in what the Liberals used to relish calling an omnibus bill. In fact, the deputy House leader of the Liberal Party used to call these types of bills an assault on democracy. Now their omnibus bills are larger and more comprehensive and complex than ever before in Canadian history.

Beyond some of the elements of the budget and budget implementation, is he uncomfortable with the fact that Liberals ran for office, saying they would not have such omnibus bills and now seem to relish introducing them?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, when I knock on doors in my riding, the issues residents are talking about are having a good future for their children, having good jobs for themselves, being able to spend time with their families and ensuring we are doing the right things for the economy and the environment. Whether it is our record-low unemployment or climate change, which the hon. member and his party are completely ignoring, which is unfortunate, we are doing the right things for Canadians. We are doing the rights things for middle-class Canadians and those working very hard to join it.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, I know my friend is originally from the north coast of British Columbia, so he will understand this issue.

As he knows, those of us on the west coast are all very concerned about the northern and southern resident killer whales. Right now, through the Species at Risk Act, the government is going through a 180-day process to identify critical habitat. If the government were really serious about helping identify critical habitat for our southern and northern resident killer whales, it would be investing money in restoration for our salmon. The government cites the $1.5 billion for the oceans protection plan, yet through the coastal restoration fund, the Somass River has seen nothing, Clayoquot has seen nothing. Our hatcheries have not had an increase in 28 years. This is an urgent situation.

While the process is proceeding, if Liberals wanted to build credibility with coastal British Columbians, especially the people in the District of Ucluelet who rely on our fishing industry, they would be investing money right now in that habitat, not just for killer whales but for the communities and the health of our fish. This could be a solution for all of us.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member is correct. I grew up in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, which was once held by the Liberal Party of Canada. Hopefully it again will be held by the Liberal Party of Canada.

I worked in a cannery growing up and cleaned all of the different types of salmon, including Chinook, sockeye and so forth. We want a robust fishing industry from coast to coast to coast. The reality is that many of the canneries in the town of Prince Rupert where I grew up are no longer there.

The fishing industry has changed, unfortunately. A lot of those canneries have shut down. I worked there, my mother worked there and my five aunts worked at canneries along the north coast. I am proud of my middle-class background, I am proud of the work my mom did to pay for our schooling and education, spending 12 to 14 hours a day, on her feet, cleaning fish, as did my aunts. They are hard-working Canadians.

I thank the hon. member for pointing out where I grew up. I am very proud of my background, being a working-class person and my parents being working-class union members.

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

Madam Speaker, I appreciate working with my friend on the Canada-Holy See Parliamentary Friendship Group.

He talked about poverty. Fighting poverty in our country is very important. He talked about a bill that legislates aspirations. I will confess that I do not think that legislating aspirations is that big a step forward. Could the government not have done more in moving forward with policy that would combat poverty rather than legislating aspirations?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, in light of all of the measures we put in place in the last three years, the Canada child benefit, the Canada workers benefit, a 10% increase in the guaranteed income supplement, a tax cut for nine million Canadians, a national housing strategy, when we wrap them up, those are great measures. In three years we have done more than what the Conservatives did in 10 years when they were governing, and we need to be proud of that.

Putting all of those measures together, in tandem, constitutes a national poverty reduction strategy. We are going to hit our targets. We have set our goals. Like we have done in the past, a promise made, promise kept, and we will do that with our national poverty reduction strategy.

The Environment

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on October 15, we held an emergency debate in this place on the IPCC report on the climate crisis. The debate is over, but the emergency is not.

We have allowed greenhouse gases to accumulate in the atmosphere to the point where there has been a change in its chemical composition. We can never go back. We are reaching the end of the era that made it possible for human civilization to develop. We are entering the anthropocene era.

Dawn in this new era: We dominate life on Earth and we threaten life on Earth. It is essential that before the climate negotiations open in one month, the government readjust our target to be consistent with the one the IPCC insists upon.

Afghan Students

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Shamim Ahmadi grew up in a Taliban-occupied city in Afghanistan, where girls who tried to go to school faced threats and danger. However, when her six-month old brother passed away due to illness, she knew she needed to go to school to become a doctor.

In a recent interview, she said, “I see a family that is struggling, as a doctor I could help them. And that became my dream.” Shamim came to Canada in 2013 at age 21. When she arrived she had no money, nowhere to stay and struggled with English. Toronto's Covenant House provided her with a room, English classes, access to school and help navigating the immigration system.

Shamim is now a permanent resident and following her dream of becoming a doctor. She will graduate from Centennial College's practical nursing program next month and intends to continue her studies at medical school.

Shamim has also started a charitable organization, the Ahmada Development Organization, to provide scholarships for Afghan students. Recently, she shared her story at TEDx's first Centennial College Toronto event dedicated to stories of resilience. In her words “I have my status, I have my life in Canada, and now I'm going for my higher education and there is nothing to stop me.” She is right.

Riding of Chicoutimi—Le Fjord

[Richard Martel, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, CPC]

Mr. Speaker, I learned yesterday that the government was going to award Davie shipyard the largest federal contract in its history. I do not think this is a simple coincidence. Our party and our leader are rising in the polls across Canada and Quebec. Furthermore, the government came off very poorly in sacrificing Vice-Admiral Norman.

In recent weeks, our party has been pointing out the inequality among Canada's three major shipyards, and this announcement was the result of that pressure.

The Conservative party is the only party that can stand up for the interests of all Canadians and Quebeckers.

As a side note, our leader will be in my riding tomorrow. If the government wants to one-up our leader, here is a wish list. The civilian airport in Bagotville is in need of massive investments, as the region works on attracting tourists from Europe, and Mont-Édouard in the Lower Saguenay is in need as well. The Saguenay port is gaining momentum and is also in need of investments so that it can continue to generate more opportunities in the north.

We will welcome investments with open arms.

Sikh Society of Manitoba

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Sikh society, for 50 years, now has been meeting the spiritual needs of the people of Sikh faith from Winnipeg North and beyond. Personally, I have been visiting the Sikh society gurdwara since 1988. The warmth, generosity, kindness and friendship I have witnessed first-hand is one of the reasons I am still in politics today.

The Sikh Society of Manitoba has done much more than just meet the spiritual needs of its congregation. It plays a critical role in advocating diversity, promoting cultural awareness and harmony. The gurdwara is responsible in many ways for not only supporting the growth of the community, but also ensuring a better understanding of Sikhism in the general population.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the past and current leaders of the Sikh Society of Manitoba. The society continues to build a better environment that goes far beyond north end Winnipeg.

Caribou Herds

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, while Canadians have waited patiently for the government to act, growing numbers of woodland caribou herds have declined from threatened to endangered status. The last remaining herds of mountain and woodland caribou in B.C. and Alberta are on the brink of extinction, a situation so dire a judge called the federal minister's lack of action egregious.

Federal law mandates the federal minister of environment to intervene where the provinces fail to take action to stop the degradation of critical habitat needed for survival of these iconic animals. Alberta has some of the most highly disturbed caribou ranges in Canada, with populations declining by 50% every five years. A growing number of caribou herds are now endangered.

We are simply running out of time. Promised spending on future conservation just will not cut it. Canadians are calling on the current environment minister to immediately issue a safety net order and save the endangered northwestern Alberta herds. A strategy is in the works to protect the critical habitat and maintain a viable economy in the region, but for the sake of the caribou we need federal action now.

CIEU-FM Radio Station

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to inform the House that today marks the 35th anniversary of CIEU-FM radio.

A fixture in the Chaleur Bay area, CIEU-FM has been airing high-quality local radio programming that speaks to residents and their interests for three and half decades.

I salute all the dedicated radio professionals who have kept the station going all these years. It cannot be said often enough that local media are the backbone of our communities and contribute enormously to community development. CIEU-FM is a great example, as it plays a key role in the region's diverse media landscape and also in residents' everyday lives.

To all the employees, administrators, announcers and listeners of CIEU-FM, happy 35th anniversary.