House of Commons Hansard #353 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was balanced.

Topics

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, it sounds very much like a question he should be asking himself, quite frankly.

Let us look at the history of deficits in this country and the fact that we came out of a recession. I will remind Canadians that it was during a minority government when a lot of demands were placed on it by the Liberal Party and the NDP to spend that money, but the one thing that was clear was the fact that finance minister Flaherty at the time had a plan to return to a balanced budget, and he did that in 2015.

Why is it that every time the Liberals make a mess, it is the Conservatives who have to clean it up?

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:30 p.m.

Steven MacKinnon Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility, Lib.

Mr. Speaker, I would echo the comments of my colleague from Kingston and the Islands. However, my question for the hon. member would be a little more specific.

Conservatives stand up, gallivant around and talk about balanced budgets. The member for Kingston and the Islands outlined the lamentable record of the Conservative Party throughout history and in the recent past, racking up a considerable portion of our national debt during the Harper era. I guess they were going to get to balance during the fourth Harper mandate. Since they are calling for a balanced budget, I would ask the hon. member, since I know he has looked at this, to be very specific and detail precisely what things he and his party would have us cut in the near term. I would ask him to be very specific and tell us where the cuts should be made.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will again remind the hon. member that it is his government that is recklessly spending money on programs and services. I mentioned a couple of them in my speech. I mentioned the Asian infrastructure bank. Time dictated that I could not mention other things to cut, but there are lots of things the Liberal government is spending money on that I would not characterize as the priorities of Canadians. There is a lot of money going outside this country when Canadians are saying today that we need to take care of ourselves. Our seniors and our veterans are suffering. There are others more vulnerable in our society who are suffering as a result of what should be Canadian priorities but now are not the priorities of the Prime Minister or the Liberal government. These priorities are not their pet projects. Let us start looking after Canadians. They are the ones we need to start looking after and start prioritizing where money is going to be spent.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship; the hon. member for Essex, International Trade.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

November 19th, 2018 / 4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to participate in a discussion with hon. members about the government's fiscal management. I cannot blame the hon. members opposite for wanting to talk about how the government is strengthening the middle class and growing the economy by investing in people and communities.

Three years ago, Canadians made it clear that they did not want the budget balanced on the backs of hard-working Canadians, or at the expense of the poor and vulnerable. They have seen time and again all around the world, from country to country, what austerity brings. It brings poverty. It causes economies to shrink and collapse. It drives people to desperation and leads countries toward nationalism and upheaval. Canadians have seen this with their own eyes, and they do not want it. They chose a government that will invest to grow the middle class and to create new opportunities for Canadians to succeed, while keeping the deficit on a downward track. They want decisions based on facts and science. They want solutions that work, with a proven record of delivering positive results.

Our government has strengthened the middle class. We have provided real help for those who need it, and we have grown the economy with more good, well-paying jobs for Canadians. By investing in people and their communities we have created both hope and opportunities for success. Hard-working Canadians are seizing these opportunities, building better lives for themselves and their families.

These results are not built on ideology. They are built on facts, and the facts are clear. Over the course of the past three years, Canadians have created over half a million full-time jobs. The unemployment rate is at a historic 40-year low and the share of working-age Canadians with jobs is at a historic, all-time high.

Our economy grew at the fastest pace among our G7 peers in 2017, and we are expected to remain among the leaders in growth this year and next year. Most importantly, the benefits of this economic growth are being widely shared among Canadians. Groups that have been under-represented in the labour force, such as young Canadians, new Canadians, women and indigenous people, are seizing the new opportunities we are creating, joining the workforce or improving their position in it, and contributing to a stronger, growing middle class.

We came into office determined to help hard-working Canadians have more opportunities to share in the benefits that come from a strong and growing economy, and that is exactly what we have done. We have taken decisive and effective action based on the shared values that define us as a country, and to make Canadian priorities a reality. We asked the wealthiest 1% of Canadians to pay a little more so that we could cut taxes for the middle class. This middle-class tax cut is benefiting over nine million Canadians.

We created the Canada child benefit, the CCB. Compared with the previous system of child benefits, the CCB is simpler, more generous, entirely tax free and better targeted to those families who need it most. With the CCB, nine out of 10 Canadian families are getting more in benefits than they did under the previous system, and Canadian children are better off as a result. The CCB has helped lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. The extra support it gives makes a big difference to those working hard to make ends meet, including, for example, single working parents. This additional support from the CCB helps pay for things that can make a real difference in a child's future, like nutritious food, sports activities or piano lessons.

Thanks to the middle-class tax cut and the Canada child benefit, by this time next year a typical middle-class family of four will receive on average about $2,000 more each year to help with the cost of raising their children, save for their future and help grow the economy for the benefit of everyone. For a single parent of two children, earning the average wage, or for families with two children where only one parent works at the average wage, the benefits are even more significant. According to the OECD, when the CCB and other benefits are added to family income, those families effectively pay personal tax rates of just 1.8% and 1.2% respectively. This means they keep more than 98% of what they earn. In this respect, I am proud to be able to say that Canada truly is a global outlier.

We have gone even further, to ensure that the benefits of economic growth are widely shared. In our 2018 budget, we introduced the Canada workers benefit, or the CWB. The CWB will put more money in the pockets of low-income earners, encouraging more people to join and stay in the workforce and offering real help to more than two million Canadians who are working hard to join the middle class. The CWB will replace the working income tax benefit beginning in 2019, providing a benefit that is more generous and more accessible. To give a sense of what this will mean for Canadians, a low-income worker making $15,000 a year could receive up to $500 more from the Canada workers benefit in 2019 than he or she would have received under the old working income tax benefit in 2018. That money will be used to support their priorities to get ahead, making a real difference for Canadians who are working very hard to join the middle class.

With these investments in Canadians and a growing economy, we are proving what Canadians already know, that a country cannot cut its way to prosperity. A different approach, one that includes smart investments and fair choices, is what keeps us strong, united and, indeed, growing together.

That is especially the case when it comes to Canada's most vulnerable, including many who worked hard to build this country. Rather than balance the books on the backs of the vulnerable, we are supporting our most vulnerable, while bringing the books back toward balance. For Canada's most vulnerable seniors, we have increased the guaranteed income supplement top-up, providing greater income security for close to 900,000 seniors, 70% of whom are women, while helping to lift 57,000 vulnerable seniors out of poverty.

We have also introduced Canada's first-ever national housing strategy. This 10-year, $40 billion plan will give more Canadians a safe and affordable place to call home, lifting 530,000 households out of housing need and reducing chronic homelessness by 50%.

Investments in infrastructure, including public transit, roads and bridges and ports that support trade, water and waste-water facilities, cultural and recreational infrastructure and affordable housing, are helping to improve the quality of life of people across our country while setting the stage for sustained economic growth over the long term.

In addition, support for Canadian scientists, researchers and innovators; and new trade agreements, including the United States-Mexico-Canada agreement, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union, and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership will mean even greater economic opportunities for Canadians in the years ahead.

Canadians deserve to feel confident that their hard work harnessing these opportunities will be rewarded with a fair chance at success. That is why we are improving the tax system to deliver on this promise. Our government has taken action to support hard-working small business owners by reducing the small business tax rate to 10%, effective January 1, 2018; and to 9%, effective January 1, 2019. Starting next year, the combined federal-provincial-territorial average income tax on small business will be 12.2%, the lowest in the G7 and the fourth-lowest among members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD. For small businesses, our actions mean up to $7,500 in federal tax savings per year. For the average small business, this means an additional $1,600 per year to reinvest in new equipment, growth and job creation.

Small business is a key driver of Canada's economy, accounting for 70% of all private sector jobs. The small business tax reductions introduced by our government will support jobs and growth in small businesses and create new opportunities in communities right across this country. We are taking action to ensure that all Canadians benefit from the opportunities we are creating and continue to benefit from our actions in their retirement years.

We have worked in collaboration with our provincial and territorial partners to enhance the Canada pension plan so Canadians can enjoy a secure and dignified retirement.

The CPP enhancement will be phased in starting January 2019. It means more money for Canadians when they retire so they can worry less about their savings and focus more on enjoying their time with their families. Over time, this enhancement will raise the maximum CPP retirement benefit by up to 50%. This translates into an increase in the current maximum retirement benefit of more than $7,000, from just over $13,600 to nearly $21,000 in today's dollar terms.

With the action taken by Quebec to enhance the Quebec pension plan along similar lines, all Canadian workers can now look forward to a safer and more secure retirement.

We have accomplished all of this, creating jobs and economic growth, investing in new opportunities and the future and supporting our most vulnerable, while carefully managing deficits. We are being fully responsible in safeguarding the advantages that Canada enjoys as a result of this approach to financial management.

Canada's strong fiscal position has allowed our government to respond to international developments while keeping the debt-to-GDP ratio on a downward track and protecting the long-term fiscal sustainability of Canada's economy.

As hon members will know, in just two days' time, the government will present comprehensive and up-to-date details on the federal fiscal outlook in the fall economic statement. As we head into Wednesday's update, I would like to thank the hon. member for the opportunity to remind the House of the government's accomplishments and the importance of fiscal management and an economy that works for all Canadians.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her remarks.

I certainly understand her wanting to share an update about her and her government's vision for the Canadian economy and the management of public funds, but the facts are the facts. A little over three years ago, the governing party promised Canadians it would run small deficits of $10 billion, $10 billion and $6 billion before balancing the budget in 2019. Now 2019 is just 40 days away, and it is painfully obvious there will be no balanced budget.

I have one very simple question for my colleague. How can she possibly stand before her constituents after breaking her election promise?

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, as I rose in the House today to deliver this speech, I was thinking back to last week in my constituency of Northumberland—Peterborough South. As I did my four Santa Claus parades and participated in remembrance activities, as I am sure many of us did, I was able to talk to people about what was important to them.

What is important to them is a just society. What is important to them is a growing economy. What is important to them is ensuring that Canada is a leader on the world stage in the global economy. In my speech, I talked about the trade agreements that we negotiated and that were being implemented. We are the only country in the G7 that has trade agreements with every country in the G7. That is quite a feat.

One of the things Canadians want us to do is to ensure we have a complete and clear focus on ensuring that Canadians have every opportunity to succeed, that they are able to provide all of those opportunities for children and seniors, such as health care, income and all of those aspects of life. We want to see every Canadian able to access those.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, over the years, the Conservatives lowered taxes for large corporations from 22% to 15%, which cost the government $12 billion.

I would like the member to tell me whether we can expect more corporate tax cuts in Wednesday's economic update. I have some news for the Liberals. That is not the way to balance the budget, if that is their goal.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague mentioned tax cuts. As an MP who gets to talk to folks in my riding all the time, whether it is municipal or business leaders, and being a small business owner myself, I know no one wants a race to the bottom.

I come from the province of Ontario and lived through a former Conservative premier by the name of Mike Harris, who did all sorts of things with tax cuts. He did them on the backs of the most vulnerable, on the backs of teachers, health care workers and child care workers. I see a lot of those same elements in the current Conservative provincial government in Ontario, which seem to be echoed by the members across the way. It is certainly not something I want to see.

I look forward to hearing more on Wednesday, about what is in the economic update, knowing that all the work we are doing is to benefit all Canadians and to ensure everyone has an opportunity to succeed.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, as I listened to my friend talk about the economy, it really made me think about the conversations I have had with people in my community about what is important to them and also what their concerns were going into 2015 when I decided to run and take my seat in this place.

We are talking about tax cuts. In fact, there have been tax cuts for families and the middle class across our country. Perhaps the member could talk about what she has seen in her community as far as advantages. How are families doing now with the investments our government has made in order to help build our communities and create supportive communities that are inclusive?

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, we talked about tax cuts. As I mentioned, we asked the wealthiest 1% to pay a little more so we could provide a tax cut for the middle class.

One of the other things I talked about was the Canada child benefit. As an example, my riding of Northumberland—Peterborough South brings in $5 million a month to help families. That money is being spent in the riding, so it is helping grow the economy as well. It is giving parents more opportunities to sometimes live in better housing, or buy new snowsuits for their children, or maybe even get them skating lessons or playing a sport. It is life-changing for so many families in my riding.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke about a just society. To me, this cuts to the heart of the question about budgeting. It is the issue of intergenerational justice.

The member talks at great lengths about the things the Liberals are spending on today. My five-year-old daughter is here with me on the Hill today. I do not think it is right for me to tell her that she, in her working life, has to work harder and pay more taxes so I can enjoy the things I enjoy today. That is a question of intergenerational justice, of fundamental fairness to the next generation.

Does the member agree that a just society is one that does not leave the next generation to pay for the overspending of the present generation or does she think it is just to do as her government is doing, which is passing that credit card bill along to my daughter?

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, I guess it is the glass half full, glass half empty. The increase coming to the Canada pension plan will give the member's daughter 50% more in Canada pension when she is ready to retire. That is the legacy going forward and that is intergenerational. As well, it is about taking care of the seniors we have by providing things like the increase in the guaranteed income supplement to help the help the most vulnerable seniors while planning for the future. They are both my children and my grandchildren.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Mr. Speaker, whenever a government talks about how well the economy is doing on average, it reminds me of that saying that when Jeff Bezos walks into a bar, everybody is a millionaire on average.

The truth is that if we go into communities across the country, working people, seniors, single-parent families and children are living in poverty and struggling to get by. While the government tends to boast about how well the economy is doing, quite honestly it is only a very small percentage of Canadians at the top who are doing well. In fact, the majority of Canadians are struggling, including those in the working class and lower middle class who are living paycheque to paycheque and are carrying untenable amounts of debt.

What does my hon. colleague have to say to those Canadians who cannot afford to buy a house, or are struggling with astronomical rent or living paycheque to paycheque? What can her government offer them? How is the government's economic performance really translating into their lives?

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, we have taken a number of measures that respond to that question.

I will go back to the Canada child benefit. Again, that is providing $2,000 approximately to every family eligible to receive it.

It is also about the Canada workers benefit for those workers making low wages, assisting them with moving forward and giving them a little extra to help them.

As well, there is the guaranteed income supplement for seniors. It really is about helping vulnerable seniors, 70% of whom are women and are single seniors. It will help them have a better quality of life in their retirement.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, before I begin my speech, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my excellent colleague from Souris—Moose Mountain. It is interesting that his riding name contains both French and English. I think that this is a very important debate. As a member of the Association parlementaire de la Francophonie, the French fact is very important to me and to the Conservatives.

Today's opposition motion is very simple. There is nothing complicated about it. We simply want to know what is really going on. We want to know where we are going. I think that any self-respecting government needs to know where it is going. The motion is simple, but I want to make sure that it is clear for all parliamentarians, so I am going to read it. It says, and I quote:

That the House call on the government to tell Canadians in what year the budget will be balanced, and to do so in this week’s Fall Economic Statement.

I have been told that the government will likely present its fall economic statement on Wednesday of this week. I hope that the Minister of Finance is ready. I hope that he has worked hard to answer this question, which is vital for a good manager. I hope that he was professional when he was in the private sector and that he will continue to be professional in his role as finance minister.

The Prime Minister inherited a balanced budget. Say what you want, but that is not fake news. It is a reality. Every expert confirms it. It is not partisanship. It is a fact. In 2015, there was an election and when the Conservative Party left the government, it left some money on the books. The U.S. economy and the global economy were growing and the real estate market was booming. Those are facts. I said so at the time: the real estate market was booming in Toronto and Vancouver and interest rates were very low, a record low. Last year, there was a $20-billion deficit. In 2017-18 alone, the government ran a $20-billion deficit. We do not get the impression that the current government has any fiscal restraint. It has decisions to make, plans to make, programs to implement, inputs and outputs to manage, revenues and expenditures to manage, but we get no sense that the government has any fiscal restraint. The Liberals have no plan.

There was an extraordinary increase in revenues due to the economic situation: we had a surplus of $20 billion last year. Instead of paying down the debt, the Liberals spent that money, but we do not know on what. The Liberals prefer to waste money. As the member for Papineau has never had to worry about money, he is not really concerned about Canadians' money. I would like to inform the government and its leader, the Prime Minister, that Canadian workers' money does not belong to them. They have a responsibility.

Before he was elected in 2015, the member for Papineau, who is our Prime Minister today, said that budgets balance themselves. Wow. That really says a lot about what the future holds for the manager of public funds. In the 2015 campaign, he promised a slight deficit, which happens from time to time. It has happened in the past. In certain circumstances, there may be temporary deficits. The Prime Minister and the Liberals campaigned across Canada in 2015 and said that they would run small deficits and then balance the budget by 2019. The reason for today's motion is that there is every indication that this will happen after 2035. Some even say that it will not happen until 2045. That is really reassuring. Is that responsible? I think not.

As I mentioned, Canada has a deficit of nearly $20 billion this year, three times what the Prime Minister had promised during the campaign. The debt has increased by $60 billion in three years. We will not engage in partisan politics. The Department of Finance Canada is not Conservative, Liberal or affiliated with any party of the House. I hope we can trust our public servants.

The Department of Finance Canada is predicting another 25 years of deficits if the Liberal Party of Canada, the party that currently forms government, is left in charge.

If we, as a good father, good mother or a family's financial manager, acted that way, it would not take 25 years to have to declare bankruptcy.

It is important to be responsible, which is why we, the Conservatives, are asking when Canada will return to a balanced budget.

Under the Liberals, the future will bring a higher cost of living and tax increases for all Canadians. It is simple math. If the government continues to spend and spend, it will eventually have to meet with specialists and have a recovery plan. In a recovery process, either drastic cuts or increased revenues are needed.

How does the government increase revenues? Quite simply, it raises taxes and income tax. It is not complicated. I am not inventing anything and I make no claims of being any kind of tax expert. This is just common sense.

My personal and family budgets are balanced, and there have been surpluses for many years. For over 30 years, I have been waking up every morning to go to work. I am very proud of that, and I am trying to instil that work ethic in my children. I think that we need to lead by example. I am not sure that the Prime Minister is currently leading by example. At any rate, the example he is setting is not a very good. Normalizing the use of marijuana is not setting a good example either, but that is another issue.

The Liberals are going to spend more paying down interest on the debt than we are currently spending on health transfers. Is that reasonable? The answer is no.

According to the Department of Finance, the budget will not be balanced until 2045. The debt has gone up by $450 billion. More debt today means more taxes tomorrow. That is how it works. Last year, Canada's debt hit a record high. This government will go down in history for racking up the highest debt in Canada at $670 billion. That is the equivalent of $47,612 per family.

I do not have much time, but this is the first time that I have had so much material for a speech. I have a giant pile of material. I will try to cover as much of it as I can.

I would like to get back to the government's broken promises. It promised $25 million for Telefilm Canada and the National Film Board. It promised to run a short-term deficit of $10 billion, balance the budget in 2019, and provide costing analysis for every bill. It said that cutting taxes for the middle class and creating a new 33% tax bracket in 2016 would have no fiscal impact. It promised to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio to 31% in 2015-16, 30% in 2016-17 and 29% in 2017-18. Other things it promised to do right away were to invest $3 billion over four years to improve home care, eliminate the $1,000 labour market impact assessment fee to make it easier and more affordable to hire live-in caregivers, and set a cap on how much can be claimed through the stock option deduction on annual stock option gains higher than $100,000. I hope that is clear.

It promised a 12-month break on EI premiums to encourage businesses to hire young people by waiving employer EI premiums for all those between the ages of 18 and 24 who were hired into permanent positions in 2016, 2017 and 2018. It promised to invest an additional $100 million each year in the industrial research assistance program and an additional $6 billion in infrastructure, as well as an additional $775 million per year in worker training.

It promised to remove the GST on new capital investments in affordable rental housing, invest $300 million more in the youth employment strategy in order to create 40,000 jobs, including 5,000 green jobs, each year for three years, and invest $40 million each year to help employers create new opportunities.

It promised to phase out subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, re-evaluate the expansion of Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline project—it did not say it would invest $4.5 billion—review the previous government's repeal of the Navigable Waters Protection Act, and require all parliamentarians to disclose their expenses in a common manner each quarter.

I am out of time, so I would be happy to answer any questions my colleagues may have.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his passionate speech. We are definitely going to need a history lesson to set the record straight.

My colleague said that the Conservatives left us a balanced budget, but that is not at all the case. It was an artificially balanced budget because they sold GM shares just before the election to inflate revenues. It is important to mention that. They also fired thousands of employees who had been working on the Phoenix system, which caused and continues to cause enormous problems. They also cut veterans services, mainly by closing offices.

The important thing here is the difference between investing and spending money. Our government is investing. We are not spending money, we are investing in Canadians.

The unemployment rate has dropped from 7.2% to 5.7%. That is a big difference. There are also 700,000 more jobs in Canada than there were when the Conservatives were in power. That is because of our investments, which generate profits and revenues. That is what we are doing.

I really appreciate my colleague's argument about an artificially balanced budget.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, but I did not understand the question.

I will simply tell him that we took draconian measures in a draconian global economic context. There was an economic crisis in 2008, and we were the first G7 country to emerge from it. We made tough choices. Indeed, we did not govern the country to get ourselves re-elected. We governed the country responsibly, and we got results.

Today, the Liberals are living with the consequences of the tough, dramatic decisions that Canadians experienced under our government. Making those decisions was the right thing to do. I am proud of that. However, I will not give the party across the way any credit because they were not the ones who put job-creating measures in place.

I would simply say to my dear hon. colleague that if I had a budget to manage, I would not trust his colleagues at the Department of Finance or the Prime Minister of Canada with my money.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, if he had a budget to manage, I wonder if my colleague would even want to achieve a balanced budget. If so, would he follow in the former Conservative government's footsteps and cut essential services for veterans?

The Conservatives and Liberals allocated money for veterans, but not only did they both make cuts to veterans' budgets, they did not spend the money that was allocated.

Is that what a Conservative government would do to balance a budget? That is what we are seeing now.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Hochelaga.

It would be irresponsible of me to answer her question, since we are not in government. We made tough decisions because of the fiscal climate at the time. Now, the money is flowing and our economic situation is quite comfortable, but the government just spends, spends, spends. It even claimed that now was the time to borrow because interest rates are low. The government forgot to mention that although interest rates are low, they eventually rise. Trends indicate that this will likely happen soon.

It would be irresponsible of me to answer my colleague's question, but if tough choices need to be made in the interests of Canadians, the Conservatives will make the right decisions.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to speak to this important motion we are debating. This motion calls on the government to tell Canadians in what year the budget will be balanced and to do so in this week's fall economic statement. This is a question many Canadians would like an answer to, yet the Liberals have refused to provide this information time and time again.

During the campaign for the 2015 election, the Liberals made a lot of promises. One of the major promises was that they would run a deficit of $10 billion per year for three years, assuring Canadians that the budget would be back to balance by 2019. However, this year's budget projection is that the deficit will be $18.1 billion for 2018-19 alone.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer has stated that the budget will not be balanced until 2045 the way we are going, and the Liberals still refuse to provide us with their projected date for when a balanced budget might occur.

To be frank, the fiscal mismanagement that has occurred under the government is astounding. Although we are here today to talk about a balanced budget, there are so many other areas of failure we could discuss, but that is for another day.

The Liberals can point a finger at whoever they like, but as my kids say, in doing so, three fingers will be pointing back at them. The fact of the matter is that they inherited a great fortune when they came into power. They came into a balanced budget, a booming U.S. and global economy, outstanding housing markets in Toronto and Vancouver, and record low interest rates. They were set up to succeed, in large part due to the work of the previous government. Instead of taking this great inheritance and building upon it, the Liberals took the $20-billion windfall of extra revenue and squandered every nickel.

I often wonder if perhaps the Prime Minister is so out of touch with the way regular Canadians live that he simply cannot see the issue. The majority of people in this country do not grow up in a wealthy, high-profile family that rarely needs to bat an eye when it comes to spending money. They understand the need to be fiscally responsible, and they work hard to ensure that they can pay their bills. They do not count on anyone else to pay their expenses. lt seems that because the Prime Minister has never had to worry about money, he does not worry much about recklessly spending Canadians' money and about a plan to get back to balanced budgets. I believe it was Margaret Thatcher who said, “the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.”

Instead of keeping their money for groceries, gas and other family essentials, Canadians will be paying more to bankers and bondholders to fund the growing interest on the Liberals' spiralling debt, with no light at the end of the tunnel. Interest on the national debt is expected to grow to $37 billion per year, an increase of two-thirds from what it was. This money could fund the building of hospitals, schools and more around the country. It appears that yet again, the Liberals are foisting the cost of their irresponsible financial planning on the backs of all taxpayers. When will they realize that their job is to stand up for the little guy, not saddle him with ever-growing debt?

Interest rates are rising, and consumer debt, including mortgages, is climbing rapidly, reaching $1.864 trillion, yes trillion, creating a growing concern about delinquency rates.

I know that my constituents simply do not buy that these Liberals will balance the budget. I was recently speaking to a friend of mine, Maureen, in my riding. Maureen has been working in the Canadian banking sector for over 30 years. She has seen governments come and go, and she knows the ins and outs of her industry. When speaking to her about the current deficit and the notion of when the budget will come back to balance, she said, “They will never do it in my lifetime.”

The reality is that at this rate, not only will the budget not be balanced in Maureen's lifetime, her children and her grandchildren will still be paying it off long after this government has left office. That is the legacy the Prime Minister will leave: attempting to balance the budget on the backs of hard-working Canadians and spending recklessly while breaking promise after promise at the same time. If and when this budget gets balanced, it will be in spite of this government, not because of it.

As I said, the people in my riding know that nearly all promises made by the government are a farce. They know that a Prime Minister who regularly says one thing and does another cannot be trusted. How can they, or any Canadian, believe that a government that spends taxpayer dollars so recklessly is actually able to balance a budget, especially since it has clearly gone back on the promise made in 2015?

The deficit this year is now closing in on $20 billion, more than three times what was initially promised, yet there is very little to show for it in my constituency. In fact, the Liberals have made life significantly more expensive for the people of Souris—Moose Mountain. They attack farmers and other small business owners with their changes to tax rules that would have serious repercussions for businesses and their ability to succeed.

They failed to champion a pipeline that would have provided much-needed jobs in some of our communities. They are shutting down the coal industry with barely any consideration for the thousands of people, including workers, families and businesses, who will be affected by it.

The Liberals are also hurting my constituents with their job-killing carbon tax that is proving less and less effective by the day. After realizing that Canadians, namely those in Saskatchewan, Ontario, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, rejected the tax, the Liberals went back on their word and ended up giving allowances.

I have said it before and I will say it again: the role of government is to help its citizens, not hurt them. In health care, we say “do no harm”. Since the Liberals took office, the average Canadian middle-class family has paid over $800 more in income tax. That figure does not include the Liberals' new payroll taxes, which affect both employees and employers, or the carbon tax, which will have serious effects in my constituency in particular.

That means that the worst is yet to come, and even more money will be taken out of the pockets of hard-working Canadians and put into government coffers. All of this, combined with the lack of an action plan for the future and uncertainty about getting the budget back to balance, does not foster a positive and trusting relationship between the government and the people who elected it. To make plans for the future, we need to know when exactly the budget will return to balance.

I understand that in some situations, running a deficit is necessary. In 2009, the GDP growth rate was negative 2.9%. There was a global recession, and running a deficit was a necessary tool to help stimulate the economy in a time of need. Due to good planning, that deficit was gone, and we were back to balance by 2015.

Last year, GDP grew by 3%, a huge contrast to the economic climate in 2009. We have growth, so why does the Prime Minister continue to pile on debt, with no action plan for the future? Furthermore, what will happen if there is another downturn in the global economy? With the government's spend, spend, spend mentality, these are important questions that deserve answers.

ln the oil field, there is a saying: When times are good, we only buy toys with cash, not with credit, because when it goes bad, and it will go bad, being too deep in credit will come back to haunt us.

Furthermore, in 2017, Canada's national debt reached an all time high of $670 billion, averaging out to almost $48,000 per Canadian family. Last year the Liberals had to spend $23 billion just to pay interest on that debt, a figure the Parliamentary Budget Officer says will rise to $40 billion by 2021. That is almost a 60% increase. That again means that the Liberals will be spending more on debt interest than we currently spend on health transfers. That is absolutely absurd.

There are so many better and more productive things this money could be used for, but instead, it goes towards servicing an ever-growing national debt. This is just one of the consequences of the Prime Minister's failures. Something needs to be done, and it is the Liberals who have the power to do it. Unfortunately, their track record is clear. They make big promises and fail to deliver, yet they expect Canadians to trust them. They spend recklessly, yet they expect taxpayers to be okay with the fact that at this rate, we will now have 25 more years of deficit.

It seems so simple to say that Canadians have a right to know when their government will stop running a deficit and get to balance. I sincerely hope that there is a plan in place. That is why Conservatives are calling on the government to announce, this week, the year in which the budget will finally be balanced. The government needs to do the right thing, stop spending so recklessly, and acknowledge that no, budgets do not balance themselves.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

Marwan Tabbara Liberal Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON

Mr. Speaker, the member talked about having a plan in place. I will reiterate what our plan is and what it has done over the years.

Our plan has created over 600,000 jobs. We have the lowest unemployment in over 40 years. We have access now to 1.5 billion customers through CETA, the TPP and the United States trade agreements.

The member mentioned in his speech that the GDP in 2008 was 3%. Does he not believe that this is a good number with respect to growth? We have opened up our markets to 1.5 billion people, and our exports have jumped 12.3%, the biggest quarterly gain since 2014.

Does the hon. member not see that this plan is working?

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, in the past, the Conservative government created more than 50 free trade agreements. It is great to have more. We need that trade. I come from an exporting riding. We export our wheat, pulse crops, potash and energy. However, we are exporting our children. During the last 10 years the Conservatives were in power, we brought our children back to our riding. My riding is losing constituents at this point in time. These jobs are not happening in my riding. In fact, the present government is going to shut down the oil and gas industry. The Prime Minister said he wants to shut that industry down. He is shutting down coal. That is going to have a huge impact on my riding.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Mr. Speaker, I was fortunate enough to be in this House from 2008 until now. I well remember the recession that occurred in late 2008, one the Conservative Party, during the 2008 election, called a fiction. It actually denied that there was a recession coming, and of course, it was a very great recession that happened.

My question is about the subsequent behaviour of the Conservative Party. I understand, and our party supported, extraordinary spending in 2009 to prime the pump and get the economy going. A lot of that was one-time spending. Instead, the Conservatives took a number of what I think were irresponsible fiscal measures, including reducing revenues at that time, which put us into a structural deficit.

I have a simple question for my friend. Once the recession was dealt with, by about 2010-11, his party claimed that Canada was performing extremely well economically. Can the member tell us how much of the federal debt the Conservative Party paid down from 2008 to 2015? I will give him a hint. It was not one penny.

Opposition Motion—FinanceBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak for the previous government, because I was not part of it. I am a rookie MP. Therefore, I will not speak on its behalf. However, I can say that Minister Flaherty did balance the budget. He campaigned on the fact that he would balance the budget, and he did come up with that balanced budget.