Debates of April 23rd, 2018

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to choose to answer the first question, if that suits the member.

When the budget is balanced, it will not be on the backs of veterans. It will not be on the backs of families nor on the backs of our service men and women. It will not be on the backs of people who provide health support to our communities. It will not be on the backs of people who keep our country safe and secure. The budget will be balanced because we have the economy going in the right direction.

This historic investment in infrastructure comes not a moment too soon. Any further delay in repairing the state of Canadian infrastructure will only cost the next generation unimaginably more than what we are investing now, and it is exactly the right time in history to be investing.

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague and I share a passion for old homes. My house was built in 1840. In 2014 it was in much better shape than it is now in 2018.

Perhaps my hon. colleague could comment on the outcome when we do not invest in infrastructure and do not invest in people, but invest in areas where it is not necessary. Why would we make the kind of changes we have made in that investment?

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my home was built in 1892, so I know about these issues as well.

The decision to invest heavily in Canadian infrastructure now is not just a good idea, which we know because it is working, but it is also a moral imperative. I already mentioned to another member in the House today about deferring investment into the state of infrastructure in Canadian communities to which the FCM is giving a failing grade. A very high percentage of Canadian infrastructure needs complete recapitalization and another great percentage requires a great deal of maintenance. If we do not invest now, we would only be putting that investment onto the shoulders and backs of generations to come. We simply cannot afford to do that.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

The Parliament website informs us that the two last bills that the member spoke about are Bill C-377 and Bill C-364, which are between two and four pages. He must therefore have worked hard to prepare the speech he gave today about a bill that is 556 pages long.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, there are many ways to judge the quality of a bill, but I do not believe that it being long or short in length is one of them. The way we measure the impact of the bill is not by its size, but by its impact on the lives of Canadians every day.

What we have clear evidence of, two and a half years into this government and after the three budgets we have presented, is that our bills of any size are having an enormous impact on Canadians.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, obviously, there are many, many things to say about the budget, considering the record number of pages, 566 to be exact, and the fact that it amends 44 laws. It would be exhausting, but I could probably talk about it for three days. Unfortunately, I do not have three days to analyze the budget. Thus, I will concentrate on issues specific to rural areas because it is very important to understand what this budget means for people living there.

Our rural communities face many issues on a daily basis. Unfortunately, the government never has any solutions for them, and sometimes there is a real lack of understanding. For example, the labour shortage is a huge problem in rural areas. There is a shortage of not just skilled workers but also of unskilled workers. What this means is that we cannot find people to work in fast food chains, scrub the floors, all the basic tasks that require no specialized skills. People could fill these jobs quickly. Companies have closed their doors because they were unable to continue operations for lack of workers. Some companies have had to cut their hours. Companies operating as a franchise are threatened by their head office because they are unable to meet their contractual obligations due to a lack of workers. In the meantime, many migrants have crossed the border. Many people in my region are wondering if these people could be of some help to them. They have jobs for everyone who is prepared to work and no special skills are required.

Furthermore, housing prices are lower in Abitibi—Témiscamingue. There are some cities where housing prices have risen significantly, but a house in Rouyn-Noranda still costs three times less than a house in Toronto. Why can the government not inform immigrants who come here wanting to work, and whose unemployment rate is typically much lower than in the general population, that rural regions offer not only job opportunities, but a chance to build a new life?

There is no shortage of immigrant success stories to draw from. We have only to think of the late Ulrick Chérubin, who was born in Haiti and served as mayor of Amos for 17 years. He made an immeasurable contribution to Abitibi—Témiscamingue and made quite an impact on the community as Quebec's first black mayor. He was widely known as a staunch champion of the regions. There are many more examples of immigrants successfully integrating into the Abitibi—Témiscamingue region. They made the choice to not just live in Abitibi—Témiscamingue, but to become a part of the community. However, it is apparently impossible for the government to let new immigrants know that there are opportunities waiting for them in rural regions. The jobs available would be entry-level jobs, but filling them would have an impact on the economy and help us keep local businesses open. However, the government is not lifting a finger to help.

I touched on housing. Abitibi—Témiscamingue has been grappling with a housing shortage for a decade or so. Businesses are thinking about leaving because they cannot find housing for potential future workers. Instead of finding places for people to live locally, they end up in fly-in, fly-out situations. It is absolutely ridiculous. If the government builds social housing units, that will free up housing that is not at all affordable for people who have to pay rent they really cannot afford. If people have access to social housing, that will free up housing for people who can pay. I think that is important. Many other rural regions have housing shortages, but the government does not seem to understand. Every time they announce social housing programs, they talk about having to build 48-unit buildings. How about offering the people of Abitibi—Témiscamingue projects that actually meet their needs?

Can we get projects whose administrative demands are realistic given the size of our population? I think that would be entirely appropriate.

With regard to fly-in, fly-out systems, have my colleagues ever seen the price of airline tickets in Abitibi—Témiscamingue? It would almost be easier to book a flight from Rouyn-Noranda to Paris, then forget about Paris and get off in Montreal. It is cheaper to do that than to fly from Rouyn-Noranda to Montreal. It is completely ridiculous. What is more, in many regions of Quebec, there is a monopoly, unlike in Ontario where there are often at least two competing companies. That has a major impact. If I drive 45 minutes more to Timmins, Ontario, it generally costs $400 to $500 less for a return flight to the same destination than it does if I depart from Rouyn-Noranda. It takes me an hour and fifteen minutes to drive to Rouyn-Noranda and two hours and fifteen minutes to drive to Timmins. It is completely ridiculous.

This has a major impact on the economy because many workers use regional airports. Employees and executives often need to travel quickly from one place to another. Companies cannot send them by road because it takes three days, one day for the meeting and two days of driving, not to mention two nights accommodations, whereas, if they fly, employees can go and come back in the same day. Air transport is used extensively by companies, but if they have to pay ridiculously high prices, then they will be forced to move because that is not good for business.

There are some people that fight every day to stay in Abitibi—Témiscamingue, even if it would be much easier to leave. Take for example, Steve Jolin, also known as Anodajay, who owns Disques 7ième Ciel and does great work in support of Quebec's rap and hip-hop scene. It would be much easier for him to move to Montreal and manage his business from there, but he chooses to remain in the region. If there are no concrete measures to help our entrepreneurs to continue to work from the regions, very little progress will be made. This sort of thing directly impacts the economy.

One of the major problems is the infamous cell phone. I do not know how many times I have asked the minister about it. Every time I ask questions about half of our region being without cellphone service, even on major highways with a lot of traffic, the response I get is about the Internet. Those folks over there do not even know the difference between Internet and cellular service, or perhaps they simply cannot understand that there are places with no cellphone coverage. I would venture to say that the places in Abitibi—Témiscamingue where cellphones do not work outnumber those where they do. I think it is high time that the members opposite understood that without cellphones, it is very difficult for regional economies to work. It is very difficult for businesses, and a lot of time is wasted. Imagine if you had to go to a meeting and, in the end, after driving an hour to get there, you find out that the meeting is cancelled and you have to turn right around and go back home. You will have wasted two hours of your day, driving for nothing. Meanwhile, if you had a cellphone that worked all along the route, you would have gotten the message that your meeting had been cancelled and not to drive all the way there for nothing. It is as simple as that, but unfortunately, they just do not get it.

Another thing is the mineral exploration tax credit. For years, we have been pleading with the Conservatives and now the Liberals to make it permanent instead of extending it year after year. Mining companies need to be able to plan their exploratory work over the long term. When metal prices are low, it is the perfect time to explore for deposits that they can mine once mineral prices go up. In order to do that, they need to be able to plan, but that is hard to do when they are never sure if the tax credit is going to come back. Furthermore, consultation-related expenses are not eligible for the tax credit. This means that consulting local populations, especially indigenous communities, to find out what they think about the possibility of exploration work and how they view the situation is not even considered part of the mineral exploration process. It is viewed as something that should be done, but unfortunately, an attitude like that toward consultation and mining work makes it all too clear that natural resource companies are not being encouraged to think about consultation and social acceptability.

Unfortunately, this budget does not meet the expectations of rural Canadians. I am extremely disappointed. I will now take questions.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, what I have seen over the last two and a half years, whether it is budgets or budget implementation bills, is that the NDP has consistently voted against them. However, I would argue that in the last two and a half years, we have very much seen a progressive government on a number of wonderful and positive social fronts. We have seen that with things such as the Canada child benefit program, increases to the guaranteed income supplement, tax breaks for Canada's middle class, and a special tax on Canada's wealthiest 1%. We have seen literally hundreds of millions of dollars invested in Revenue Canada to go after those who try to avoid paying taxes. We have seen a pharmacare program being advanced, the health care act, and the expansion of the CPP. There has been so much that has been done.

My question to the member is, what more does she believe the NDP could have done, given the fact that its campaign commitment was to have a balanced budget, yet NDP members constantly criticize us for not spending enough?

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the Liberals ever decided to eliminate all of the loopholes CEOs use to hide money in tax havens, we would probably have enough money to do some much more useful things for rural regions. It would be dishonest to state that not a single positive measure can be found in these 566 pages. However, on average, I believe that the bad outweighs the good in this 566-page budget. When the time comes to vote on a 566-page budget, we have to find a balance. Unfortunately, the Liberals do not deserve my vote on this budget, because there are not enough measures for people in rural areas. Out of respect for my rural constituents, I cannot support a budget that does not do enough for them.

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

Mr. Speaker, we hear so much from members across the way about the alleged progressivity of this budget in comparison to what has happened in the past. However, the Liberals forget that the government is imposing taxes that have a punitive effect on low-income Canadians, in particular the carbon tax. They will not release information about how that budget impacts Canadians based on income.

Contrast that to the previous government, which raised the base personal exemption, lowered the lowest marginal tax rate, lowered the GST, and introduced a taxable child benefit. All of our tax reductions on the income side were targeted at those who needed that relief most, those who were taken off the tax rolls completely, or those who were paying the lowest marginal rate. I think objectively that it is decidedly more progressive in terms of targeting benefits to lower-income Canadians than anything we have seen out of the government.

I would be curious if my friend and colleague can comment on that.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government could have proposed all kinds of measures to help people who are struggling to make ends meet. I introduced a private member's bill featuring a budget measure that had the support of some Conservative members. It sought to eliminate the GST on basic baby products. This is a simple measure that can really help parents who simply need to buy these products. All parents buy things like diapers. This measure would have been easy to include in the budget, but sadly, the Liberals did not. I know that this measure has the support of some Conservative members. It is a very simple measure that the Liberals could have implemented to help low-income Canadians. They did not. This shows that the Liberals have their own vision and are not thinking about the daily reality facing people who are struggling to meet their family's basic needs when shopping at the grocery store, for example.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Kitchener Centre. I would point out that the hon. member will only have nine minutes, and then we will bring the bill to a vote.

[Raj Saini, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would like to take a moment to offer my condolences to the victims of the van attack in Toronto. My thoughts and those of my constituents of Kitchener Centre are with the victims, their families, and the first responders on the scene.

Our government supports researchers, scientists, and organizations that drive fundamental research as we seek to foster the innovation which will create a better world for everyone to live in.

We believe in science. We believe in the power of ideas and the benefits of technological innovation and investment, and in supporting the work of the brightest minds as they come together to create a bright future for Canada.

That is why I am so proud to rise in the House today to talk about our 2018 budget. It is a budget that builds on our work to foster innovation while ensuring that economic growth and social progress benefit the lives of every Canadian.

Innovation is everywhere, and innovation is certainly at the heart of my own community of Kitchener-Waterloo. As we speak, Redtree Robotics is busy developing chipsets that enable users to connect sensors to robots, Miovision is finding solutions for advanced traffic signal operations, Thalmic Labs is on a mission to merge people and technology, and Clearpath Robotics is working to develop self-driving vehicles and to get drones to factory floors.

In order for us to remain at the forefront of global innovation breakthroughs and scientific discovery, we need to keep this momentum going. We need to be investing now to support our future thinkers, scientists, and innovators.

That is why I am so proud that budget 2018 proposes a historic investment in support of researchers, in big data and in the equipment Canadian researchers need in order to succeed and become world leaders in their field. This includes more than $1.7 billion over five years to support researchers, and $1.3 billion over five years that will be invested in labs, equipment, and the infrastructure they need.

As we invest in the next generation of innovators, Canada is also responding to the ongoing shift toward a knowledge-driven global economy. Brilliant minds will travel to wherever they can find a good home. We intend for Canada to be that home.

In budget 2018, our government proposes a new investment of $210 million over five years, with $50 million per year ongoing, to support the Canada Research Chairs. This program supports researchers and will help Canada attract and retain the best minds in the world, in the hope that we can benefit from their energy, their skills, and their potential. Their initiative will help Canada shine on the world stage.

Fostering innovation and investing in technology also fosters unprecedented opportunities to change social norms and foster equality.

Speaking at the SAP Next-Gen program last year, the UN Women deputy executive director highlighted that innovation, technology, and partnerships are prerequisites for the achievement of the sustainable development goals.

Social progress and innovation must go hand in hand. When small, medium-sized, and large companies, government, academic institutions, and not-for-profit organizations come together to generate bold ideas, all Canadians benefit from more well-paying jobs, groundbreaking research, and a world-leading innovation economy which fosters opportunities and improves quality of life.

Bold ideas will come out of collaborations like the ones proposed in budget 2018. In the budget, the government is proposing to provide $140 million over five years to enhance support of collaborative innovative projects involving businesses, colleges, and polytechnics.

Our government is working hard to make sure that every Canadian has the opportunity to be part of the success in an innovation-driven economy.

In part, this involves ensuring that Canadians are given opportunities to build new skills which will help them adapt to a changing economy.

Budget 2018 also contains measures that will protect workers in this new environment. In it, the government proposes legislative amendments to the Wage Earner Protection Program Act that seek to make the program fairer and to increase the maximum payment to seven weeks from four.

Our plan is working. Unemployment rates are at historic lows and we lead the G7 in economic growth. Of particular note is that over the past six months, there has been a 16% drop in El claimants from the manufacturing and utilities sector. We are making progress, but there is still much work left to do if we want to unlock Canada's true potential.

In Canada today, women earn 31% less than men. For every dollar of hourly wages a man working full-time earns in Canada, a woman in the same position earns 88 cents. Our government knows that, when women have more opportunities to earn a decent income, everyone benefits. To advance women's equality, budget 2018 will introduce a new proactive pay equity bill. To close the gender wage gap, the government will adopt measures in budget 2018 that enable women to access leadership positions and encourage them to choose non-traditional careers.

Women still only receive 38% of doctoral degrees, and in the STEM fields, that number drops to 20%. The participation rate for women in the economy is 10% lower than it is for men. The Canadian gender wage gap is larger than the OECD average. Just 25% of senior management positions are held by women. Not only are these numbers unacceptable, but this gap is potentially damaging to our economy. Clearly, we must do better.

We recognize there is a need to deliver positive systemic change. Innovation in every sector works best when diverse voices have the opportunity to be part of the conversation. It was with this in mind that in budget 2018 our government has committed to improving diversity in the research community through investments in the granting councils, data collection initiatives, early career researchers, new gender equality planning, and to investments in new El benefits through a use it or lose it incentive which encourages a second parent in two-parent families to share the work of raising their children more equally and allow greater flexibility for new moms who want to return to work sooner.

We have also committed to investments which will help women entrepreneurs grow their businesses through the new women entrepreneurship strategy, and to supporting the advancement of women in senior positions by publicly recognizing corporations committed to promoting women leaders.

We live in an era of social progress, economic prosperity, and technological change. I am proud to live in a time and place in which the celebration of diversity and the commitment to strive to equality are at the heart of policy-making, and in which we realize that our country's economic advancement and our work towards the elimination of barriers to equality must go hand in hand.

As we foster this innovation, as Canadians explore new ideas and build new paths to the future, I believe that the policies of budget 2018 will work to ensure that our country has the brainpower, the diversity of thought, and the potential to continue Canada's success tomorrow and well into the future.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

It being 6:45 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill now before the House.

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

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

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

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

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

Vote #651

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I declare the amendment defeated.

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

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

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

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

All those opposed will please say nay.