Debates of March 21st, 2018

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance

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

Madam Speaker, first let me say parenthetically that when I speak of the climate crisis, I am not speaking of an environmental issue. The environment is involved, but it is no longer fundamental in the same way that drowning is very rarely described as a water issue. This is a matter of life and death. It is a security threat. We are not dealing with it as a security threat. We are dealing with it as one more thing, a bauble on the tree that we can attend to now and then.

That may have been acceptable in 1995 or 1996. Even in 2005 it was too late for that. I lament it from the position of someone who is terrified of what will happen if we continue sleepwalking to the precipice of the climate crisis.

To the parliamentary secretary's point, absolutely there is much that has been done to improve the status of people who are low income. I like the national housing program. It is taking a long time to get roofs over people's heads, but at least the federal government is back in housing and looking at low-income housing. I agree the child benefit is better, but in a gender budget, where is the national program that we had in 2005 for universal child care in Canada?

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her concern around climate change, which is something that I am concerned with every day here in this place. I am very concerned with the government's putting things off, year by year, into the future, where it will be more of a cost to our children.

I would like to give the member more time to talk about things like the eco-energy retrofit program that was such a successful program under the previous government, which leveraged billions of dollars. Canadian consumers liked it. Canadian homeowners liked it, and the business and builders' associations liked it. Everyone benefited and the environment benefited as well.

When I talk to representatives from Germany, Norway, and Sweden about subsidies for electric vehicles, they cannot believe Canada is not doing anything in that regard. I want to give the member more time to talk about some of the possibilities.

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

Madam Speaker, the list of things we can do to stimulate the economy while reducing greenhouse gases is very long, and they are proven technologies.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, through its partners and climate protection program, has a litany of examples of where municipal buildings were built that circulated cold water through the building in summer to advance on the need for air conditioning and reduce electricity costs, and also circulated warm piping through. There are so many examples of the use of heat pumps and the use of better insulation, which saves money while reducing greenhouse gases and creating jobs. That is the true meaning of the economy and the environment going hand in hand.

To have an inconsistent statement like, “I can build more pipelines but because I am good person, therefore, the environment and the economy go hand in hand”, those kinds of meaningless bromides do violence to these concepts that are well understood. When one does something that actually reduces greenhouse gases and creates jobs, then the environment and the economy go hand in hand.

The environment and the economy are not going hand in hand when we build new fossil fuel infrastructure and incentivize more greenhouse gases at a moment when a moral responsibility should be on all political leadership globally to redouble efforts. As things stand in Canada, we are nowhere near our Paris targets.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Banff—Airdrie.

The easiest thing for a government to do is to spend money, because it is not its money. When cabinet ministers show up in communities with speeches and announcements, it is not that they are donating the money out of their own pockets. It is that the government has made a political decision to spend taxpayers' money on a particular expenditure.

There is nothing nefarious about this practice, except in the case where the government of the day starts spending money it does not have and has no rationale on why it is downloading that debt onto the next generation.

If we are looking for reasons for why spending is out of control, I suggest we look at how the government wastes taxpayers' money on outrageous items, such as a giant rubber duck, a temporary skating rink, or an international trip that had very foggy expected outcomes. I have always said that when the pennies are watched, the dollars will take care of themselves. Politicians need to be reminded, on a constant basis, that money does not grow on trees. It does not magically appear out of thin air, and budgets do not balance themselves.

The government has increased spending by 20% in its first three years, and there is no evidence that it created any growth in the Canadian economy. Just 2% of additional spending over the five years up to 2020 is on genuine efficiency-enhancing infrastructure that would increase productivity. I know the phrase “fiscal responsibility” does not exactly roll off the tongue or elicit great emotional responses, but I believe it should be the mantra of every member of Parliament.

The money that any level of government spends comes from taxing the people who create it through their own blood, sweat, and tears. People do not willingly give their money to the government. We actually have to pass legislation that mandates it. To put a face on these individuals who provide the government with its funding, we can just walk across the street and look at the individuals working at the Tim Hortons, the shoe shop, the Hallmark store, and the local pub. They literally are in the very shadow of the Parliament Buildings, as they are across Canada.

Now when a government is not collecting enough taxes for its planned spending, it just goes out and borrows it, or in the Liberals' case, it raises taxes and goes out and borrows it. We do not need to go far to see an example of this sort of behaviour. It is in the budget we are debating here today.

Make no mistake, governments need to collect taxes to pay for the society we want to create. Those tax dollars pay for our roads, highways, schools, and hospitals. My argument is not that a government should not have the resources to carry out its fiduciary duty to its citizens, it is that the Liberal government has no sense of purpose in running up massive deficits. The country is not in a recession. There are no real economic arguments to spend more than they are bringing in, and worst of all, there is no end in sight. This is the dilemma in which Canadians find themselves.

Every government is going to receive way more asks for funding than it could possibly be able to implement. The thorn in every taxpayer's side is that the Liberal government's priorities are questionable, and that is being generous with what some of the other phrases are that could be used.

Case in point is when convicted terrorists are getting million of dollars in settlements, and the Prime Minister has the gall to tell a veteran that he is asking for more than we can provide, or that Canada will be sending millions of dollars overseas to build infrastructure, and possibly even pipelines in Asia.

That is why Canadians are rapidly losing faith in this government. I am sure it is causing great consternation across the way when they read that Stephen Harper had higher approval ratings at this point in office than the current Prime Minister. The Liberals have money, and time, for everything except for the real challenges we face at home.

Now instead of doing fake consultations or preordained budget requests, I did something that elected representatives should do. I listened to the people I represent. In the middle of some of the coldest days in January, I held six public town hall meetings across my constituency. I made sure that everyone and anyone was welcome to come share their priorities on what they wanted to be included in budget 2018.

Over the span of three days, we loaded up projector and screen, and we travelled hundreds of kilometres to reach people in the surrounding areas of Brandon, Virden, Melita, Pilot Mound, Glenboro, and Souris. I represent the southwestern part of Manitoba. It is a constituency made up of over 30 communities, where our economy is rooted in agriculture, natural resources, and the service industry. We have very unique challenges facing our communities, compared with a more urban riding.

It was within those town halls that I drew my idea for my budget letter which I sent to the Minister of Finance. There was a constant drumbeat of concern on the overall direction and priorities of the government. There was a sense of disbelief that the government had thrown out the idea of returning to a balanced budget. There were concerns on how much of their tax money is being spent on just paying the interest on the new debt that the Liberals are racking up.

It bears repeating that the Liberals immediately broke their promise on running modest deficits. Over three years in power, the Liberal government has piled $60 billion onto the national debt. The deficit is $18.1 billion this year, which is three times their own original projections. That is a staggering number.

Just this past week the PBO released a report which said that the government is also refusing to release the necessary information to account for its borrowing and spending plans. If the PBO cannot get the necessary information to produce his reports, then that is very telling as to how MPs in this House must feel with regard to how they can have a meaningful debate on the numbers contained in the budget.

What we do know is that according to projections from the Department of Finance, the budget will not return to balance until 2045, by then racking up an additional $450 billion of debt. When the economy is growing at 3%, a responsible government would pay down debt so that we would have more fiscal room to deploy in case there is a downturn.

In 2008, the Conservative government was able to take decisive action to support the Canadian economy during a true recession. What makes this deficit hard to swallow is that the government has done a terrible job of explaining where the money is going. When I look across my constituency, there are no massive new projects to explain how this money is being spent. Even the PBO said that the government is failing to account for new infrastructure spending.

What I do hear from my constituents is how the government's policies are eroding their disposable income. There is very little in this budget that will immediately provide any form of tangible tax relief and improve anyone's quality of life. All this budget does is remind us of previously ill-thought-out Liberal decisions, like hiking Canada pension plan premiums on employees and employers, or hiking employment insurance premiums that will hurt small business owners and do nothing to create a better economic environment that would create private sector jobs.

What I was looking for in budget 2018 was a plan that actually improved the economic position of not only the constituents who I represent but the country as a whole. I was looking for timely and meaningful tax relief for those who need it. The mere fact that the Liberals' middle-income tax cut does not provide a nickel of relief to those making less than $44,000 is indicative of the priorities of the government. I was looking for ways the government would immediately improve the quality of life for seniors and students in my constituency, such as my ideas to immediately prioritize seniors co-op housing and make it easier for students to get loans.

In closing, the government's budget falls short of providing solutions to many of the challenges my constituents are facing. It does not set Canada on the right course, nor has it any substance that would justify the Liberals' tax-and-spend ways. I would ask the government members opposite to listen to our ideas and concerns. They need to go back to the drawing board and return with a budget that contains some form of reasoning for breaking their promise of running even modest deficits

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague's thoughts on the budget, but I have a couple of points of concern.

I would ask the member to reconcile his comments on the deficit with the fact that the previous Harper government ran a total debt of $150 billion over the period that the Conservatives were there, completely erasing the debt that was paid down during the Martin era. The Conservatives had the largest deficit in Canadian history. They ran deficits six years in a row and during that same period of time had absolutely anemic growth, the worst growth the country had seen in a generation, running at near zero per cent, at the back of the pack of the G7 countries.

Contrast that with where we are today, where we had campaigned on utilizing deficits to drive growth, job creation, and wealth for the middle class, where we have now moved to the top of the pack of the G8 nations in terms of job creation and growth, where we have left behind that period of anemic dead growth and are now driving forward with an economy that is working, creating more than 600,000 jobs.

How can the member reconcile his comments against a deficit when his party reigned supreme in the creation of deficits during its tenure on this side of the House?

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, that is probably the question that if I had to write one I would want to answer. I would write it and give it to them.

My hon. colleague across the way has failed to realize that, as I said in my speech, we governed in a true recession. We had a plan. Stephen Harper did return the country to a balanced budget in six years instead of seven, which was his plan. We left the Liberals a surplus.

They say they have created 600,000 jobs. We created 1.2 million full-time jobs in the middle of the worst recession we had seen since at least the thirties, if not even longer than that. We left the Liberals with the best GDP ratio of the G7. We left them with a balanced budget. It is the height of hypocrisy. Deficits were run but there was $150 billion, as the member pointed out, spent and invested in Canadian jobs by the Harper government during that recession.

The point of my speech was that there is no recession now. There was no plan by the Liberal government to do what it is doing today. There was a plan under the Conservative government and we returned to balanced budgets. We left Canada in a very strong position and the Liberals have wasted it.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague and I sit on the citizenship and immigration committee, where we learned this week from government officials that while the IRB will receive some money from this budget it is not nearly sufficient to deal with the increase in cases. Currently, there are 40,000 cases in the backlog. The amount of dollars from this budget will only process about 18,000 cases, which is not even half of the cases that are in the backlog. This is at a time when new applications are coming in at the rate of 2,100 per month.

I wonder what the member's thoughts are with respect to this urgent issue for the IRB. If we do not ensure that the IRB is functioning well and is resourced to do its work, it puts at risk the integrity of our entire immigration system. I would like the member to comment on that, please.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Speaker, I immensely enjoy working on the immigration committee with my hon. colleague from British Columbia.

This is an area of great concern for all of us in Canada as we are seeing greater numbers of refugees and immigrants coming into our country. As I said in my speech, the government just does not seem to get the importance of prioritizing how it deals with the dollars it has at its disposal in the budget.

The government continues to say that it has lots of money for both infrastructure and immigration, but where is it? It must be hidden someplace, because the government continues to shirk its responsibilities in getting infrastructure development going and it continues to leave a shortfall in regard to the requirements of our immigration process.

Both the member and I have had the opportunity to put forward ideas and recommendations in reports that have been done by the immigration committee that would improve the situation, but the government has not acted on them yet.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am rising today to speak about the federal budget and what a complete and utter disaster it is for Canadians. If a Canadian family ran its household budget the way the Liberal government runs our country's finances, that family would be in absolute, serious trouble. Of course, this is not something that is new or surprising to most Canadians. The only person who does not seem to get that is the Prime Minister.

It kind of reminds me of this cartoon I keep on my desk. Someone sent it to me during the days before the last election. There is a picture of the former prime minister, Stephen Harper, and behind him is a nicely built home. It talks about the home renovation tax credit that he put in place. Then there is a picture of the member for Outremont. He was leader of his party at the time. It says something relating to maybe he would not have to put a fourth mortgage on his house because of the home renovation tax credit. Then it shows the Prime Minister standing in front of a house that is kind of in ruins and shambles. Smoke is coming out of it, and it is falling down, and he is saying, “The house will build itself”, just like he famously said that the budget would balance itself. We saw how well that worked. That cartoon was a good illustration of that.

This is the same Liberal government that promised balanced budgets by 2019. The Liberals had a balanced budget when they started, and they went into a huge deficit. They said they would have a small deficit, but it turned out to be a lot more than small. They said they would get back to the balanced budgets they were left with by 2019. However, there is no plan, obviously, that we have seen to do that.

In this most recent plan, the Liberals' so-called budget offers absolutely no tax relief for Canadians. It piles on debt for future generations, and attacks the backbone of the Canadian economy: small businesses. The best way I have heard the budget summarized, certainly by the Leader of the Opposition, was that never has a prime minister spent so much and accomplished so little. That really says it quite well. More and more Canadians are seeing through these empty promises of the Prime Minister and his government.

Here are the facts: 92% of Canadian families are facing higher taxes than when this government came to power. Middle-income families have seen their average income tax go up by $840. Now, $840 might not sound like a lot to the millionaire Prime Minister, but it is a huge difference for the household budgets of a lot of Canadian families. It might be a month's worth of groceries for a family of four or a couple of payments on the car. Maybe it is an opportunity lost for ballet or sports lessons for the kids or maybe a plane ticket to visit grandma and grandpa. That is what it means for an average Canadian family. It is significant.

The government claims to be all about helping the middle class, but actions speak louder than words. Here are some of the actions the LIberal government has taken since coming into office: higher Canada pension plan premiums, up to $2,200 per household; cancelled family tax cut, up to about $2,000 a household; cancelled art and fitness tax credits, about $225 a child; cancelled education and text book tax credits, up to $560 a student; and a national carbon tax, up to $2,500 per household. We can start to add that up.

The Liberals have taken more money from the wallets of Canadians while implementing measures like a carbon tax that has made the price of everything go up. Groceries are more expensive. Heating one's home is more expensive. Filling up one's car with gas is more expensive. In what convoluted way would a Liberal see that as somehow relief for Canadian taxpayers? I cannot imagine.

The Prime Minister and the finance minister inherited a surplus. They inherited a surge in the global economy and the beginning of the recovery of oil prices. Things should be running quite smoothly and Canadians should be benefiting from the situation, but of course, they have blown it. They have absolutely blown it. The government can try to take credit for growth in our economy, but the reality is that the growth was driven by an economic recovery. That happened not because of the government but in spite of it.

The sensible thing to do when our economy is growing at a rapid pace is to pay down debt, the approach that was taken by the former government, to ensure there is more room to manoeuvre in case of a global downturn. As we saw in 2008, Canada is certainly not immune to these global patterns.

This brings me to my second point. The Liberals have continued to add to our debt and to pile on to our future generations debt they cannot possible hope to repay. The current government will be long out of power by that time, so it will be up to another generation to fix the problems left behind by this irresponsible administration.

In the less than three years since coming to power, the government has added $60 billion to our national debt, over $1,600 for every Canadian. Even projections from its own finance department are bleak, and that is that the budget will not return to balance until 2045, if we were to remain on this course. That means adding an extra $450 billion of debt. That is almost half a trillion dollars, a number that most Canadians cannot even comprehend. This is what the government will add to the debt and will saddle that legacy onto future generations.

The government continues to live beyond its means.

What happens when there is a serious economic downturn? By adding more debt to our finances, the Liberal government is selling our chances at a speedy recovery should anything happen to our economy. Make no mistake, there are signs of trouble just over the horizon. The Liberal government certainly has no contingency should the United States terminate NAFTA, for example.

The budget also contains no policies that make Canada open for business or that allows our businesses to be able to compete. Our neighbours to the south recently announced sweeping new tax reforms that would help businesses and Americans. In response, what has the government done? Absolutely nothing. Why has the Liberal government added $60 billion to our debt? That is the question many are asking, as everyday Canadians are seeing none of this money going toward helping them.

The government's economic policies include spending $35 billion on a new infrastructure bank that helps wealthy investors, but not everyday Canadians; and $1 billion on superclusters that help big corporations, but not Canadians who are struggling to find employment.

The amount of debt that the government is accumulating is absolutely staggering, and it will be a major impediment for future generations. It is irresponsible and unacceptable.

Meanwhile, the government also continues to attack our job creators, the people who are the backbone of the Canadian economy, our small businesses. Remember last fall, when the Liberals decided they would tax small businesses at a rate of about 73%? I certainly remember, because I received thousands of emails, phone calls, and letters from concerned small businesses and employees in our communities. No doubt the members over there have received those same kinds of emails, phone calls, and letters.

I think the Liberals heard the message to some degree because they slowly, at least partially, backed away from those controversial plans. However, it took a huge outrage from Canadians to do it. There is never going to be an end with respect to the attacks on small businesses.

With the proposals the finance minister has made, thousands of local businesses will no longer qualify for the small business tax rate or will see it reduced. In many of our communities, we rely very heavily on small businesses to provide jobs and opportunities, sponsor charities and sports teams, and to make our economy thrive. All those businesses are concerned about the future as a result of the actions of the government.

The government has even gone so far as to try to tell some businesses that they are too small to be a small business, when it went after campground owners. Too small to be a small business, how does that make any sense? Those are the kinds of actions of the government.

The Liberals are continuing to ask Canadian families and Canadian small businesses to pay more for its out-of-control spending. That is simply unacceptable.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Madam Speaker, that speech was delivered with so little passion, I have to conclude that the member did not even believe it himself. Let me just fact-check a couple of things. The first thing we did was lower taxes for the middle class, hundreds of dollars a year. Then we made sure nine out of 10 Canadian families got an extra bonus through the Canada child benefit. Then we brought in the Canada workers benefit that gets Canadians over that welfare wall and into the workforce, providing better incentives for people to get off social assistance and into the productive workforce.

The member talked about governments being unprepared. How about the unpreparedness of the Harper government, with $150 billion in deficit spending and presiding over a worldwide crash in resource prices for which the Conservatives were woefully unprepared and for which that member's constituents walked the unemployment lines because their government was ill equipped to deal with a crash in resource prices in Alberta and throughout western Canada. What does the member have to say about that?

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Madam Speaker, let me tell the member that it is time for school to come in because we have some explaining to do and some lessons to give here.

This is a member who stands up and tries to somehow claim that the Liberals have cut taxes for the middle class. Did he listen to the speech at all? I do not think he did. If he listens to the analysis, 92% of Canadian families are paying more taxes than when the current government took office. What do they have to show for it? It is not a whole lot.

The member talked about being ill prepared. Again, I do not think he listened to the speech because that is exactly what I was talking about. When we were in power, when the Harper government was in place, in the first couple of years of the previous government, before there was a huge global recession, what was the government doing? It was paying down the debt so that it could be in a situation where, if something were to happen, it would be better prepared to handle it. It happened and we had a huge global recession, so the government invested to try to create jobs and opportunities. I remember the other side. The Liberals were over there in the corner at that time, which is where they belong, and they were claiming that they wanted to see more money being spent. Now they are saying it was too much.

At the end of the day, we can clearly see what they really believed because here they are in good times wasting money like it is going out of style. They are just tossing it out the window. When we hit another recession, we are going to be in huge trouble in this country because of the current government.

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

Madam Speaker, I am the critic for the NDP and the member for Banff—Airdrie is the critic for the Conservative Party. As the co-critics for tourism, we have had a chance to sit on many panels and talk about tourism. Tourism is being talked about this week. We lost the last male northern white rhino in Kenya. Certainly we heard from our colleague today from Port Moody—Coquitlam about the fact that there are only 76 southern resident killer whales. I know that in the member's riding, the woodland caribou are at risk.

This is an important time in our history. We need to do more to protect our species and protect our environment. The government members have talked about their oceans protection plan. We need our salmon healthy and we have not seen that happen. Maybe the member could speak to where the government has failed to protect species at risk.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Madam Speaker, this is certainly one more area where the current Liberal government failed, just like everything else that it has tried to do.

The member also talked about tourism. I did not get an opportunity to talk about some of our small business owners and our campground owners in this country whom the government is attacking. The Liberals are saying those businesses are too small to be a small business. That is shameful. That is the kind of attitude we see from the government and it is the kind of attitude that has to stop.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

It being 5:15, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the ways and means motion.

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

In my opinion, the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #463

The Budget

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I declare the motion carried.

The House resumed from March 1 consideration of the motion that Bill C-364, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act (political financing), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Canada Elections Act

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill C-364 under private members' business.

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

Vote #464