House of Commons Hansard #281 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was women.
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the comments of the minister; however, based on what the member has just said, it sounds inappropriate and irresponsible.
We have an obligation to look after the disabled and the handicapped, the same as we do for veterans and seniors.
We all know that the minister said that the veterans asked for more than the government could give. It sounds like it was the same thing for disabled people.
Terry Duguid LiberalParliamentary Secretary for Status of Women
Mr. Speaker, advancing gender equality is one of our most important priorities. From appointing the first gender-balanced federal cabinet and the first federal minister fully dedicated to gender equality, the government continues to introduce new measures and key investments that underscore our ongoing commitment.
Since then, we have launched the first federal strategy to address gender-based violence, released the first gender statement as part of last year's federal budget, and enhanced the use of gender-based analysis by federal organizations. To ensure our leaders better reflect Canada's diversity, we have increased gender diversity across 4,000 senior federal appointments and used the comply or explain approach to increase diversity on corporate boards.
Our efforts to advance gender equality extend beyond our country's borders through our work and membership on the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, which I attended a few weeks ago. We are taking an active role in shaping gender issues on the international stage. Through these and countless other actions, we continue to play our part and lead by example.
Budget 2018, “Equality + Growth: A Strong Middle Class”, builds on these achievements. It is a bold step forward that reflects the government's feminist agenda, putting gender at the centre of decision-making, and focusing on equality as a driver of economic growth. It recognizes a simple but powerful idea that when we invest in women, we strengthen our economy for everyone.
Budget 2018 ensures that this idea will continue to guide Canada's way forward. It introduces new GBA+ legislation that would enshrine gender budgeting within the federal budget-making process. Moreover, Status of Women Canada will be made an official department, strengthening its capacity to apply the gender and diversity lens.
Budget 2018 proposes a number of investments in Status of Women Canada including, very importantly, $100 million over five years for the women's program, which will strengthen the women's movement. This will fund projects to end violence against women and girls, improve their economic security and prosperity, and advance women and girls into leadership positions.
Budget 2018 will also invest $25 million over five years for research and data collection in support of the government's gender results framework. The framework is essential to measuring our progress towards our gender equality goals.
Building on our efforts to end gender-based violence, budget 2018 invests $86 million over five years in the gender-based violence program. That is over the $100 million that we invested in the previous budget. This will increase our capacity to meet the needs of vulnerable survivors.
The budget also invests $6 million over five years in a national framework to address gender-based violence in post-secondary institutions, our university campuses. Engaging youth is key to creating an inclusive society, which is why the Government of Canada is proposing an additional $7.2 million in funding over five years to lead a national conversation on gender equality with young Canadians. This is in addition to the $2 million over two years put forward for a strategy to engage men and boys on gender equality, which is a topic I will be playing a leadership role in.
Finally, as part of our commitment to GBA+, the government will invest $1.3 million in 2018-19 in a national round table to share results and best practices with key stakeholders, including provinces and territories.
These investments recognize the role Status of Women Canada will continue to play in implementing the government's feminist agenda.
As budget 2018 makes clear, gender equality is a government-wide priority. The budget includes a number of important measures that will create opportunities for all Canadians.
Introducing proactive pay equity legislation is an important step on the road to fulfilling the government's feminist agenda. It will help reduce the gender wage gap and support women's economic empowerment.
The new women's entrepreneurship strategy, which I hope all of us in this place will support, will help women entrepreneurs grow their businesses through access to financing, talent, networks, and expertise.
The strategy will help break down barriers to growth-oriented entrepreneurship, including new direct funding from the regional development agencies targeted to women entrepreneurs, mentorship, and skills training, as well as targets for federal procurement from women-led business.
The new employment insurance parental sharing benefit supports gender equality in the home and in the workplace. The government is proposing an investment of $1.2 billion over five years, starting in 2018-19, and $344.7 million per year thereafter. The benefit will provide additional weeks of “use it or lose it” El parental benefits when both parents, including adoptive and same-sex couples, agree to share parental leave. This incentive is expected to be available starting in June 2019.
In addition, we are strengthening the Canada child benefit so that it continues to help families that need it most. The 2017 fall economic statement indexed these benefits, starting in July 2018, to keep pace with the cost of living. This will provide an additional $5.6 billion in support to Canadian families over the 2018-19 to 2022-23 period.
Winding down, we also know that indigenous peoples, especially those living in remote and northern communities, face distinct barriers when it comes to accessing federal benefits, such as the Canada child benefit. To help indigenous peoples access the full range of federal social benefits, the government will provide $17.3 million over three years, starting in 2018-19, to expand outreach efforts to indigenous communities and to conduct pilot outreach activities for urban indigenous communities.
Finally, through innovative initiatives and essential investments, budget 2018 is helping create a strong foundation to achieve gender equality in Canada. Gender equality is not just a shared goal, it is a pathway towards an inclusive, prosperous country where everyone has the opportunity to thrive and succeed.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's speech specifically dealt with some of the gender elements in the budget.
A friend of mine, a young woman, said to me that this appears to be a budget written for women by men. I think part of the reason many people see the budget in that way is that it talks about gender equality, but it really tries to dictate to women on the choices they make, and in a way which I think is out of step with where society actually is right now.
The biggest instance of this is the “use it or lose it” parental leave. The government wants to say to families that parents can no longer decide for themselves how they divide up their parental leave. From now on, the government thinks that each person has to take a certain portion of parental leave. That is because the government wants to micromanage how families divide up their responsibilities. For many families, it is not going to work. It may be a single parent family. It may be a family where one person has the kind of job where it just is much less practical for that person to take the leave than for the other person. In many cases, there may be a desire to breastfeed, which is something that men cannot do.
I wonder if the member can tell us why this budget presumes to dictate to families how they divide up their child care responsibilities. Is it not more in keeping with the nature and goal of feminism to let people make their own choices, to give them the tools and the ability to make their own choices about how they divide up responsibilities within their own family?
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his commitment to feminism. I appreciated his remarks.
As the hon. member will know, according to our present legislation and the way that maternity and paternity benefits work, there is enormous parental choice. The father or mother can take parental leave. My next-door neighbour, who is a man, has done exactly that.
For the first time, we are introducing “use it or lose it” benefits for the second parent. We know that this has worked well in Scandinavian countries. We know that this has worked well in Quebec. We are on that pathway. We know that this is going to help more women get into the workforce and increase labour attachment. It is a very good policy.
Women's organizations across the country have applauded this budget, and I think would take issue with the hon. member's opinion.
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the member spoke a lot about the importance of gender equality. I said earlier that what is in the budget is as important as what is not there. I looked, in vain I might add, in the budget, and it does not include the much-anticipated and hoped-for pay equity legislation. It is a promise that the Liberals made 40 years ago. It is a promise that the current Liberal government made back in 2016. It is a promise that the Liberals made in the budget speech. However, in the bill itself, when the rubber hits the road, there is no pay equity legislation. How can the member square this circle? When will women finally see pay equity legislation pass in the House? Talk is cheap, and we are constantly asking women to wait, and to wait, and then to wait some more.
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member that it is about time, and it will be time. She is absolutely right. It was a commitment in the Liberal platform and in the budget, and proactive pay equity legislation will be brought in, in the fall of 2018.
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to thank the Minister of Finance and his staff for all their hard work over the past several months to create this year's budget. Their efforts have more than paid off. Budget 2018, entitled “Equality + Growth: A Strong Middle Class”, is a win for all Canadians, including my constituents of Brampton North. I am particularly excited to see the changes to the small business tax rate, which was one of our campaign commitments. It was announced in the fall of 2017, and it will come into effect once Bill C-74 is passed. We made a promise to middle-class Canadians that we would lower their taxes and make sure that everyone pays his or her fair share. With this reduction in the small business tax rate, we are keeping that promise.
When we first took office, we cut the small business tax rate down to 10.5%. We are cutting it again, down to 9% by 2019. For small business owners, this latest change would mean savings of up to $7,500 per year.
There are almost 900 small businesses in my riding alone, a fact that continues to impress me, given that Brampton North covers just 36 square kilometres. We should never underestimate the entrepreneurial spirit of Bramptonians, and indeed of all Canadians. That number should tell us just how many of my constituents this would impact.
It would mean that local institutions like Mackay Pizza, a place I loved to visit growing up as a kid, can save up more quickly for a new oven, stove, or fridge. It would mean that new restaurants like Paranthe Wali Gali, which I just visited last month and which opened a little while ago, can have the financial flexibility they need to get the most out of their first year in business. It would mean that day care centres like Alpha Child Care can buy more blankets for nap hour and more books for storytime. When small local businesses can invest in themselves, that is a win for all Canadians.
Budget 2018 also takes significant steps to strengthen Canada's workforce, making sure that for every new job our economy creates, there is a Canadian ready to fill it. We will provide $448.5 million over the next five years to the Canada summer jobs program, building on our budget 2016 commitment to more than double the number of jobs in the program.
There are many programs in my riding that take advantage of the Canada summer jobs program to hire students and provide fantastic services to the community. The Aspire for Higher basketball camp is just one of many excellent examples from Brampton North. Founded in 2013 by a group of young but passionate men and women, Aspire for Higher has made a change in the lives of many kids through sport, and makes this its number one priority regardless of each child's financial circumstances. I am grateful to Aspire for Higher for the work it has done in the Brampton community, and I am happy to say that our government has been able to provide support to its summer programming every year since we were elected. By increasing Canada summer jobs funding, we can support even more local initiatives like Aspire for Higher as they continue to build a brighter future for our communities.
This year's budget also provides substantial investments in job training for Canadians who are no longer in school, with a focus on women and minorities. The key to ensuring strong and sustainable growth is to make sure these groups have just as much opportunity to succeed as every other Canadian.
Skilled trades, especially red seal trades like welding, baking, and electrical work, offer high-quality and well-paid middle-class jobs that are critical to Canada's economic growth. Despite this, women are often significantly under-represented in these fields, making up just 11% of new registrants. As the Minister of Finance pointed out in the new budget document, this shortage hurts the few women who do work in the skilled trades. Many are both paid less and viewed as less capable than their male counterparts.
Let me be very clear: this is unacceptable. That is why we are providing $19.9 million over the next five years to a pilot apprenticeship incentive grant for women. The grant will provide funding to any woman who decides to receive training in a red seal trade that is male-dominated. Based on current industry demographics, almost 90% of red seal trades fit that definition. This means that with this one grant, we would be making an entire job sector more accessible to women. This is nothing short of remarkable.
Finally, I was thrilled to see that the budget is allocating $81.4 million over the next five years to improve the passenger protect program. The No Fly List Kids organization did invaluable work to make sure that this funding was included in budget 2018. I would like to take this opportunity to applaud its members for their tireless advocacy on this issue.
I would also like to thank the Ontario caucus, which I chair, for its work on this file. In the fall of last year, we sent letters to both the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Public Safety asking that they take action on updating the passenger protect program. Looking at budget 2018, it is clear that our government is listening. The money would make a world of difference to the innocent Canadian children and their parents who have been unfairly caught up in Canada's air traveller screening program. It is unfair. Travelling as a family is stressful enough without delays. My son is just five years old, so I can speak from personal experience. I cannot imagine what it must be like to have one's young child stopped again and again every time one tries to fly. Our government is going to make sure that we have a fair redress system in place, so that Canadian children and their families can book flights and know with confidence that they will be safe from unnecessary and excessive screening. This is real, significant change.
Budget 2018 would have an overwhelmingly positive impact on the lives of Canadians, and I look forward to watching that happen.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, it was very generous of my friend to congratulate the work of the caucus that she chairs, and I appreciate the Brampton restaurant recommendations. I can assure the member that next time I am door-knocking in Brampton, I will pull up that list and be sure to take advantage of those opportunities.
I want to ask the member about the supercluster policy in this budget. She spoke about small businesses. On this side of the House at least, we agree that small businesses are very important. However, what the government is doing is continually squeezing small businesses. On the other hand, the Liberals want to spend public money from those taxes on some of these superclusters. The government wants to be involved in picking winners and losers in the economy, when it will not actually support businesses by allowing them to keep more of their own money and have the flexibility to make those investments. It is no wonder that as a result of these policies we are seeing a decline in business investment.
I wonder if the member would support the idea of moving away from these kinds of big-business government subsidies, and instead moving to a system where we actually recognize that business is best left alone to create value on its own, without the kind of interference in small-business activities that many people were concerned about in the fall and that we know still needs to be rolled back.
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to address that. As I mentioned in my speech, we have lowered the tax rate for small businesses. For corporations, our tax rate is extremely fair, one of the lowest in comparison with many countries. The supercluster idea is a phenomenal idea. So many small businesses have actually created relationships in the city of Brampton. Our educational institutions and our big businesses have reached out and created bonds that are going to last a lifetime. Whether they were the chosen ones or not, businesses have been coming up to me saying that they have immensely benefited from the relationship-building and the bonds they have created by working with industry partners and institutions in their local areas.
The program is a success, and our tax rate cuts are a success. Businesses feel the confidence they need in order to create jobs and spur growth. That is exactly what our government and Canadians have done over the past several years. We have created over 600,000 jobs for Canadians, and that is with the help of the businesses that are creating these jobs, because they are confident in the work and the investments that this government is making.
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, one of the key issues Canadians are faced with, particularly in the immigration stream, is around the work of the IRB. At the moment, the IRB is faced with a major shortfall in resources. Although the budget recognizes that and has put some resources into it, the amount of money put into the IRB from budget 2018 would not reduce even half of the backlog of existing cases that are sitting there waiting to be processed. Over 40,000 cases are waiting to be processed, at a time when we have a situation where new claims are being added on a monthly basis to the tune of 2,100 cases.
Does the member not think that the dollars in the budget are inadequate for the IRB to do its job, and that if the government does not ensure that the IRB has the resources to process the cases in a timely fashion, then we actually put our immigration system in jeopardy?
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am a tireless advocate for immigration and for making sure that we have an effective immigration system that Canadians and those wishing to become Canadians and members of our society can rely on.
When we took office, the immigration system was a complete mess. What hurt me the most were those cases that had to go before the IRB, such as the legacy cases that existed because the Conservatives had just said, “Whoops, well, we don't have the time to process these cases. You can wait five to six years.” I had constituents waiting five to six years who had not even had a single hearing. That is ridiculously unfair, because as we were processing new people who were arriving to the country, those people had been completely forgotten.
Now, finally, I can say that with the help of our immigration minister, the department, and the IRB, they have been quickly getting through all of those cases that were long forgotten. My constituents, those legacy cases, are getting processed. They are having their hearings. As of this last fall, I have had such good news to share with my constituents.
We have made immense improvements and we continue to make it even better. We hope to make sure that the system is perfected by the end of our term.
Kevin Sorenson Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, before I begin, may I, on behalf of my constituents in Battle River—Crowfoot, pass my condolences to the people of Humboldt and to the parents who lost a child and a hockey player in that horrific accident. I know we are all moved and we have seen other statements, but on behalf of my constituency, I want to pass on our sympathies and condolences.
It is a privilege to stand in this place this afternoon to speak to budget 2018. I would like to begin by echoing the words that our Conservative leader said on budget day, words that have been mentioned many times here in the House already. I would quote him when he said, “Never has a [Prime Minister] spent so much to achieve so little.” I may add that never has a Prime Minister so blatantly made a promise and so blatantly broken a promise, not only once, not twice, but now three times.
During the 2015 election, Liberals promised there would be three modest deficits of $10 billion or under before they would return to a balanced budget in 2019. Did they keep that promise? Obviously, no. As a direct result of that broken promise, the Liberal government is on track to add $450 billion to Canada's national debt over the next 27 years, with a budget projected not to be balanced again until 2045.
The deficit this fiscal year is $18 billion, three times that which was promised. We now have a national debt of $669 billion, and the interest rate for that crippling debt is rising. This year it will be $26 billion and by 2022 it is projected to be $33 billion, which is more than the spending on any one government department, including the $25 billion that is spent on our national defence. If this is not an insult to our men and women in uniform, perhaps the fact that there is no mention of military spending in the budget is.
Of extreme disappointment to many of my constituents, there was also no mention in the budget of the agricultural sector. The only reference to farming in the budget was the $4.3 million over five years that was brought forward to support the reopening of farms at two Ontario federal penitentiaries. What does it say about Liberal priorities when inmates in our federal penitentiaries come before our farmers?
Budget 2018 also failed to address any uncertainties related to the North American Free Trade Agreement or provide a response to the major tax cuts that were announced in the United States. One month after the finance minister delivered the budget, he was quoted in the Financial Post as saying in reference to the significant tax changes in the United States:
There was no place in our budget for saying speculatively what we might or might not do in the future based on analysis that hasn't been completed.
I could argue with that. I could argue, knowing the finance department, that I very much doubt that there was no analysis done or that it was incomplete moving into a budget. In terms of a budget that is going to give confidence to investors and people here in Canada, he backed away from mentioning anything that would give some confidence on the completion of that trade agreement.
He said that the Liberal government is not yet prepared to help Canadian businesses tackle competitive challenges in the face of the corporate tax rate in the United States being cut from 35% to 21%, in the face of a U.S. tax system that fully supports the adoption of new technologies, and in the face of new U.S. incentives for intellectual property and marketing until he has undertaken a complete analysis of the impact of these reports.
He said this despite the fact that investment in this country has been waning since the oil price collapse of 2014, with a total decline of almost 18%. Once the strongest in the G7, it has been the weakest over the past four years.
He said this despite the fact that we are struggling to attract capital investment from abroad, with foreign direct investment plunging last year to the lowest level since 2010; despite the fact that Canada's average corporate tax rate is about 27%, three percentage points above that of the world's advanced economies; and despite Canadian businesses being faced with regulatory changes, new carbon taxes, carbon prices, minimum wage hikes, and higher energy or electricity prices. He said this despite the fact that the Business Council of Canada, representing chief executives from dozens of major companies, asked the finance minister prior to the release of budget 2018 for an immediate response. There was silence.
John Manley, former Liberal finance minister and head of the Business Council of Canada, stated:
We’re hoping for a signal that the government is on the case. There’s really no indication in the budget they’re on the case. The first step to solving the problem is admitting that there is one. And they’re not admitting that there is one.
The Canadian Chamber of Commerce concluded that budget 2018 is long on spending and short on growth. It agrees with the Business Council of Canada and has implored the Liberal government to “...act with urgency to implement measures that will retain and attract business investment in Canada.”
They get it: we need to attract business investment opportunities back to this country.
We on this side of the House applaud the efforts of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Business Council of Canada because we know, as do many economic experts, that business investment is the most important source of economic growth in this country. The government must leave more money in the hands of business so that it can invest more in innovation, productivity, and enhanced technologies.
However, before the government takes any steps that affect business, it needs to invite small and medium-sized business owners to the table. In his keynote speech at the April meeting of the chamber of commerce, Ken Kobly, president of the Alberta Chamber of Commerce, called out our provincial and federal governments for failing to talk with business owners on policy that affects them. As a result of this failure, Mr. Kobly said, the federal government’s budget “was heavy on platitudes but light on any real long-term economic diversification plan.”
Jack Mintz, of the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy, said that rather than providing real tax reform to more powerfully impact economic growth, most provisions of budget 2018 are “aimed at raising taxes, whether it's tightening international rules, throwing money at CRA to curb avoidance, [or] capping the deduction for small businesses on passive income.” He said that to get any economic growth, “the Liberals are relying heavily on government spending.” He further said, “It all harkens back to the 1970s, when Pierre Trudeau's policy framework offered regional development, politically driven grants, wage and price controls, a far-too-generous employment insurance program, and subsidized Crown corporations.”
Obviously it comes as no surprise that the apple has not fallen far from the tree.
The province of Alberta has experienced the worse decline in investment in this country. Energy investment is at the lowest level on record, below even the worst of the 2009 recession, with a loss of over $80 billion and more than 110,000 jobs. With drilling rigs heading to the United States, where there is a more hospitable investment climate, there has been a significant decline in capital spending.
If these facts are not bad enough, a week ago Kinder Morgan announced that it has suspended work on the Trans Mountain expansion project. The blame for this development rests squarely on the shoulders of our Prime Minister, who has failed to take a single concrete step to ensure this project is completed.
John Ivison said last week, “The consequence of failure is the collapse of his entire economic and environmental framework, not to mention reputational damage from which he might never recover.”
We need this project in Alberta. We must do all we can to get the oil moving again to a deepwater port so we can build our markets around the globe. We cannot rely on the United States. The budget does not give any encouragement for investment to come back to our country. We need to see a plan, soon, that will do this.
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his great display of passion and conviction as he was alliterating his points today. I heard him reference a lot of different sources, such as Jack Mintz and various other individuals who provided their input. The fact is that we are the fastest growing country in the G7 right now. Canada is doing extremely well.
My question for the member opposite is very simple. Does he ever look to get any facts from sources other than the Fraser Institute and Rebel Media?
Kevin Sorenson Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, I quoted a number of other articles, authors of those articles, and economists. I know the member would rather quote George Soros and that group.
However, what we have seen with the Liberal government is huge growth in program spending. The member wants to talk about all of the other things, but there has been a huge growth in program spending.
Since coming to power, the Liberals have increased program spending by 6.3% each year. This amounts to $304.9 billion projected for 2017-18, from $253 billion in the fiscal year 2014-15. This is much faster than the growth in revenue coming into the federal government, which is at 3.3%.
If we fall into another downturn and if we should fall into another recession, with the government spending as it is in good times, what will the response be in times when we fall back into zero growth or negative growth? We would not have the opportunity then to invest and kick-start the economy. We will see that it will not have the impact it would if we had balanced budgets, paying down debt, lowering taxes, and all of that, which the Liberal government has negated and not done.
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, could my colleague comment on the fact that we have a 556-page bill. It is an omnibus bill, which is rather obese, not just omnibus? Could he suggest to the Conservatives that they support the NDP motion to split the bill in two? The government should take out the greenhouse gas pollution act part of it, which really stands on its own, so we can debate it properly in the House. It is a very important issue. I think perhaps the Conservatives would have very different reasons to want to pull that out than the NDP, but it is a very important part of the bill. There are a lot of parts of it that need more clarity.
Will the Conservatives support our desire to have that part of the bill split out so it can be debated properly here and in committee?
Kevin Sorenson Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, I would like to answer the member by relating a story. Not that long ago, I went to a restaurant. I sat down and had the salad. This nice big salad came, but then a bug crawled across the top if it. The waiter came, took the insect off my salad, and said “There you go”.
There is nothing in this budget that is good. When we see the bad crawling across the budget, as this is, then removing one or two pieces of it is not going to make it good again. It is a bad budget. It does not meet the needs of Canadians. It is a budget that adds taxation. It is a budget that does not bring investment back to Canada. It is a budget that we see a lot of spending that even former Liberal governments would not have been caught up in.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated that in 2017, only $1.9 billion was spent in infrastructure. The Liberals brag about their infrastructure, but the budget does not answer the questions of why they were incapable of getting their infrastructure dollars out the door.
Although the Liberals may talk about gender equality and some of the things that may be very well intended, as far as bringing economic growth, even John Manley, former deputy prime minister in the Liberal Party and finance minister, said this budget offered very little.
Therefore, I do not think that opening it up and pulling one or two parts out it is going fix anything in this budget.
Kamal Khera LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today in support of Bill C-74 and budget 2018. This is our government's third budget and another step to ensuring every Canadian has a real and fair chance at success.
Our government's plan to strengthen the middle class and to grow the economy is working. Since November 2015, the Canadian economy has created nearly 600,000 new jobs, most of which are full-time positions. Our unemployment rate is at near historic lows. Canada has had the fastest-growing economy among the G7 countries. I have heard this optimism first hand from the residents of Brampton West.
In budget 2018, we put forward steps to ensure the benefits of our growing economy would be felt by more and more people. This budget supports our government's people-centred approach and introduces policies that will help Canadians and the middle-class, and those working hard to join it.
Imani, a constituent of mine, is a single mother and is working hard to make ends meet. She is working part-time as a server at a restaurant, while searching for a full-time job as a research analyst. Imani did not know that she was eligible for the working income tax benefit last tax season, so she did not claim it. To give Canadians like Imani a real chance at success, our government will replace the working income tax benefit with a new and improved Canada workers benefit for up to $2,335. The Canada workers benefit will increase both the maximum benefit amount and the income level at which the benefit phases out.
The Canada Revenue Agency will automatically consider residents for the Canada workers benefit when they complete their tax return, even if they do not claim it. This means Imani and 300,000 other low-income workers who did not claim WITB last year will receive CWB in 2019, and 70,000 Canadians will be lifted out of poverty by this policy by 2020.
Speaking of significant policies, we have to talk about the Canada child benefit. The Canada child benefit has proven to be one of the most impactful social policies for the lives of hard-working middle-class Canadians. The CCB is helping nine out of 10 families in Canada. In Brampton West alone, 36,000 children have benefited from the Canada child benefit, with $134 million in payments last year. Across our country, six million children have benefited from the CCB, with $23 billion in payments last year, with an average payment of $6,800.
At a hockey tournament in Brampton West last week, I met Reena. She told me about her 10-year-old son Raj's dream of goal tending for the Toronto Maple Leafs. With modest incomes, Reena and her husband Gautam could not afford to enrol Raj in a hockey league without the Canada child benefit. This year's CCB payments went toward Raj's goalie equipment. I am proud to report that Raj earned his first shutout last week. Increasing the Canada child benefit payments amount and indexing payments will help ensure more children like Raj have the opportunity to explore their dreams.
Budget 2018 is also putting gender at the heart of its decision-making. Advancing gender equality is not only the right thing to do; it also makes sense from a purely economic standpoint. A study by McKinsey and Company states that we could add $150 billion to the Canadian economy by 2026 through steps to advance gender equality for women.
Budget 2018 was guided by a gender results framework and helped form policy that would work to help support women and girls, reduce the gender wage gap, and increase the participation of women in the labour force, which helps boost economic growth for all Canadians.
An example of this policy-making is the new employment insurance parental sharing benefit that will give greater flexibility to parents by providing an additional five weeks of El parental benefits when both parents agree to share parental leave. This “use it or lose it” incentive encourages a second parent in two-parent families to share more equally in the work of raising their children, which will allow greater flexibility for new moms to return to work sooner, if they so choose.
A few months ago, I had the opportunity to meet a young family in Brampton West. I heard about the challenges the parents faced in raising their newborn child while having to worry about how the mother would return to work. With the changes made by our government, she will be able to go back to work to support her family and not fear being left behind when it comes to her career.
Budget 2018 id also supporting women-owned businesses so they can grow, find new customers, and access more opportunities.
Balbir is an extremely motivated entrepreneur with a passion for teeth as a dental hygienist. Some members of the House may have seen her on the last season of CBC's Dragon's Den, discussing her mobile dental hygiene practice. Through budget 2018, we would make more capital available for women entrepreneurs, like Balbir, so many more women can take their businesses to the next level.
The $1.65 billion in new financing for women will help us create the economic foundations of tomorrow. Additionally, with a total commitment of $105 million over five years, budget 2018 also supports investments directly in women-owned businesses and in initiatives that provide women with better access to essential business resources, such as networking and mentorship opportunities.
While we work to become more inclusive of women in our economy, we must also look to supporting those who have served our country. As a proud sister of a brother who continues to serve our country in the Canadian Armed Forces, the government is committed to ensuring the well-being of our veterans and their families. The budget delivers for our veterans and helps them live a productive life post-service. In budget 2018, we are implementing our new pension for life option for veterans which will deliver a tax-free monthly payment for life to recognize pain and suffering. It will provide an income replacement payable at 90% of a veteran's pre-release salary, indexed annually.
The Conservatives had 10 years to make the changes veterans were asking for, but they did absolutely nothing. They did nothing but cut budgets, close offices, and ignore the voices of our veterans. Budget 2018 also shows our continued commitment to veterans and their families. That is a commitment we made to our veterans and we will do exactly that to support them and their families.
The steps we have taken in budget 2018 will help Canadians of all stripes access more opportunity by ensuring they have the support, the resources, and the confidence they need to succeed. We have made great strides for the past three years. I know Canadians are looking forward to many more this year, and we will continue.
I am proud to be part of a government that is committed to improving the lives of so many Canadians in Brampton West and across our country. I am proud to support the bill and the budget. It creates opportunities for middle-class Canadians, while making lives easier. I strongly encourage all members to do the same and support this critical legislation.
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, with the parliamentary secretary for national revenue's expertise on the national revenue file, why is there nothing in the budget implementation bill, or the budget, or anywhere else in the government's legislation plan to tackle issues such as the CEO stock option loopholes, and especially the offshore tax havens? There are estimates that we could bring in $10 billion to $12 billion more revenue every year if we closed down offshore tax havens, which would help her government pay its debts.
I will again mention one egregious example. A Canadian mining company has gotten away with not paying $690 million in Canadian taxes because it funnels its profits through Luxembourg, where it has one part-time employee. Could she comment on that, and why we continually not only allow this but add to the number of countries where we allow people to put their tax money offshore instead of in Canada?
Kamal Khera Liberal Brampton West, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have said many times in the House that cracking down on tax evasion is a priority for our government. Budget 2018 invests almost $100 million in the CRA, and that is in addition to nearly $1 billion in the last two budgets to allow it to go even further in terms of fighting tax evasion.
This budget also includes legislative changes that would close tax loopholes used by multinationals. We have fully adopted the international standard for the automatic exchange of information with our OECD partners. Starting this year, we will have access to even more data from other jurisdictions, which will enable us to pursue tax cheats even more efficiently. As I have said before, tax cheats cannot hide anymore.
This government has shown leadership on this, and we will continue to do just that.
Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Mr. Speaker, I heard an earlier speaker talk about SMEs. I am an entrepreneur, and as an entrepreneur and a woman, I appreciate so many of the measures in the budget that support women and the work we do.
In my role as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources, I have the great privilege of meeting with many industry leaders and having conversations about how they see the benefit of more women, more indigenous people, and more people with disabilities involved in the world of work as well as on boards and in positions of authority.
I wonder if the member could talk a bit about the importance of getting women into these roles, and particularly about the $74 million for women to get into the red seal trades. There is a shortage of trades in this country, and we are getting a great response to that. I wonder if she could talk a bit about that as well.
Kamal Khera Liberal Brampton West, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of budget 2018, because it puts gender equality at the centre. For the first time ever, a GBA+ analysis was done on the entire budget to make sure that every budget policy was looked at through a gender lens. This is a policy we will continue in the future.
We are taking a leadership role in addressing the gender wage gap in the budget, in supporting equal parenting, and in tackling gender-based violence and sexual harassment. We are also introducing a new entrepreneurship strategy for women.
As I stated earlier in my speech, and as studied by Mackenzie Global, by taking steps to advance equality for women in the workforce, such as employing women in technology and the trades and boosting women's participation in the workforce, we could add $150 billion to our Canadian economy by 2026.
We understand that to move forward as a country, we have to include everyone, including women, indigenous voices, and minorities in this country. That is exactly what the budget does, and that is exactly what we will continue to work toward.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota
Order. 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 Peace River—Westlock, Natural Resources; the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, Employment Insurance; and the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, Indigenous Affairs.
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise today to speak to Bill C-74, the budget implementation bill for 2018, and to provide comments on the budget in general.
I will start by simply pointing out that this is another unnecessarily huge bill that is very difficult to digest and properly critique in the time allotted. It is not just an omnibus bill. It is really an obese bill that is 556 pages long and amends 44 separate pieces of legislation.
The Liberals decried the practice of the past Conservative government numerous times and ran on an election promise to abolish these bloated bills. However, they have not only continued the practice but have actually restricted the length of debate on these bills at committee.
The NDP, for one thing, is asking that the greenhouse gas pollution pricing act within this bill be pulled out and debated separately. This is a very important issue on carbon pricing, and I think it needs a full debate so that Canadians can hear how critical it is to our efforts to tackle climate change and meet our Paris targets. There is a lack of clarity in the greenhouse gas pollution pricing act, and a lot of details have been left out. It really needs to be studied carefully at committee.
Carbon pricing is an important tool in our fight against climate change, and we need to ensure that the positive outcomes from such legislation in British Columbia, where carbon emissions declined as long as its carbon tax was gradually increasing, are replicated federally.
In such a large bill, it is perhaps not surprising that there are a few parts of the budget I was very happy to see. One is the nature fund, a $500-million fund that will be matched by non-governmental partners to provide over a billion dollars to protect important ecosystems across the country.
Before I was elected to this place, I sat on the board of the Nature Conservancy of Canada, and I was proud of the accomplishments of that organization in protecting more than a million hectares of land across the country. Many of those projects were at least partly funded by a similar fund created by the former Conservative government.
I do not often have good reasons to thank the previous Conservative government, so I will take this opportunity to do that and hope that this nature fund will do even more for conservation efforts across Canada, such as in the Garry oak savanna of southern Vancouver Island, the desert grasslands of the Okanagan valley, the native prairie grasslands, the Carolinian forests of Ontario, and the salt marshes of Atlantic Canada. This fund provides an exciting opportunity to really make a difference, and I commend the government for creating it. I wait anxiously to hear the details, because they seem rather lacking right now.
On the subject of protected areas, I must add a bit of disappointment related to the Minister of Finance's budget speech. He clearly said that the national park fees were going to be done away with for good. I actually applauded that, and I do not really applaud the Minister of Finance very often. Unfortunately, I found out the next day that he had misspoken and that the promise only applied to youth. I will say that free parks would be a brilliant way to get Canadians out into this country's most beautiful places to appreciate the natural wonders Canada has to offer.
Getting back to the good news in the budget, I was also glad to see the significant new funding for fundamental research, an action that was recommended in the recent Naylor report. I used to work at the University of British Columbia and can speak first-hand to the essential nature of basic research. While applied research is important, the most innovative and game-changing discoveries science has given us have come from the pure curiosity of scientists, and this funding is most welcome.
We in the NDP were very happy, at least initially, to hear the word “pharmacare” mentioned in the budget. Canada is the only country in the world with universal health care that does not have universal coverage for prescription drugs. The Parliamentary Budget Officer reported last year that Canada would save a minimum of $4 billion per year if we had a universal pharmacare program. We in the NDP have been championing this for years, and last year we tabled a motion asking the government to begin talking with the provinces within the next year about creating a pharmacare system across Canada. The Liberals inexplicably voted against this eminently reasonable motion, saying that it was not the right time.
Now is the time for pharmacare. Unfortunately, our initial excitement about the mention of pharmacare in the budget was dashed when we realized that this would be only another study, and a study without a dime of spending attached to it. Of course, it is not mentioned at all in Bill C-74.
The government should act immediately to bring pharmacare to Canada, and while it is at it, the Liberals might want to consider adding teeth, eyes, and ears to universal health care, and any other body parts we might have forgotten about when we created medicare.
What else is missing from this budget and from this massive bill? Despite government claims that this budget was all about equality in gender, there is not one cent in it to tackle the pay equity gap in Canada. I was really encouraged a couple of years ago, very early on in this Parliament, to see the Liberals vote in favour of an NDP motion on pay equity, but two years later, there has been nothing done to really advance pay equity across this country.
For a budget on equality, this budget completely missed the boat on narrowing the income gap between the one per cent, the wealthiest Canadians, and the rest of us. Today the two wealthiest Canadians, two individuals, have as much wealth as 11 million other Canadians. Many CEOs of big Canadian companies receive much of their salary, millions of dollars per year, in stock options, on which they pay only a fraction of the tax that we mortals pay. Fixing this inequity alone could bring $800 million to help balance the budget or fund programs that would make Canadians' lives easier.
Offshore tax havens are an even more blatant form of tax avoidance. Following the release of the paradise papers, some analysts calculated that Canada is losing between $10 billion and $15 billion per year in lost taxes. The Conference Board of Canada has suggested that the gap between what taxes are owed in Canada and what the government actually collects may be as high as $47 billion. One Canadian mining company has avoided paying $690 million in Canadian taxes simply because it reports its profits in Luxembourg, where it has one part-time staffer. It is ridiculous and shameful, but it is completely legal, because the country got written permission for the scam from the Canada Revenue Agency. The government continues to add offshore tax havens to the list available for Canadian companies and individuals, so now they can hide their wealth in Granada or the Cook Islands if Barbados and the other many countries with very low tax regimes do not suit them.
Finally, I will wrap up by simply pointing out that there is no new spending in this budget for climate action, despite the clear signals that Canada will fail to meet its Paris climate targets. We need bold action and significant investment on this front. Instead of pouring money into Barbados, the Cook Islands, or Luxembourg, let us invest those billions in eco-energy retrofits, renewable energy incentives, and electrical vehicle infrastructure to get back on track and make Canada a better place to live for our children and their children.
Celina Caesar-Chavannes LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development
Mr. Speaker, I just heard the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue talk about the investments we have made over the last three budgets in the CRA. I happened to be in Granada when we signed the agreement between our two countries to share information around our taxes to ensure that we were adequately taxing companies that had accounts there, and they were able to share that information with us. I wonder if my hon. colleague could correct the record on the relationship we have with some of these countries to ensure that the companies are sharing the information we need to crack down on tax evaders.
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am not an expert on the Granada situation, but I do know that Canadians and Canadian companies can funnel their profits through other countries that have very low tax regimes. There is the example I just gave. Here we have a company that puts its profits through Luxembourg, where it has a part-time consultant staffer and can report that profit as being made in Luxembourg, and the company is avoiding $690 million in Canadian taxes. It does pay $80 million or something to Luxembourg, but Canada is losing $690 million. That is not some shady thing. It is legal, because the company went to CRA beforehand and got a signed letter saying that it was okay. This is where that has to stop.
I am not a tax lawyer. I do not know how these things work, but that is wrong, and we have to fix it. All the talk about how much CRA is working to go after the little fish in Canada and after the small businesses is really annoying to most Canadians. They want the big fish caught, and they want to see that money stay here in Canada where it can be put to good use.