House of Commons Hansard #373 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was conservatives.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Mr. Speaker, we are at the table with the municipalities. We have been at the table since 2015, rolling out PTIF 1, which was our first plan for infrastructure, and PTIF 2, which was our second plan for infrastructure. There is money on the table for cities. It is being invested in thousands of projects across the country.

In terms of the agreements, as the hon. member knows, the federal government is there in partnership with the provinces and the cities. We need full co-operation on that front. The hon. member also knows that constitutionally, the cities in Canada do not have a role. It is between the provinces and the cities.

We are not going to do what the Province of Ontario did, when it jammed through changes to the Toronto city council without consultation. We are not going to do any of those things.

We are at the table. We are working co-operatively with our provincial partners and with our municipal folks, and we will continue to do that. The money is there, there is funding, programs are laid out, and we should be proud of the amount of infrastructure that is happening in Canada. That will continue to happen under our $180-billion plan over 12 years.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, there were a couple of things that really interested me in the member's speech. Number one was about listening to his residents. I would suggest that the member indeed listen to his residents, because in the last provincial election, Michael Tibollo was elected as a Conservative MPP in his riding, where the Liberal cabinet minister was running on the very same things that the federal Liberal government is running on: higher debts, higher deficits and structural deficits that were going to impact the economy.

However, it is what the member said at the beginning that really piqued my curiosity. He said he felt that this motion today, which calls for reducing deficits and balancing the budget, was a useless exercise. Does the member actually believe that lowering taxes for Canadians, balancing budgets and lowering deficits is a useless exercise?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to thank the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil for acknowledging the fact that we have reduced taxes for nine million Canadians. I thank him very much for acknowledging in his comments the fact that the deficit is going down on an absolute basis year after year. It is also going down in percentage on a relative basis year after year in terms of debt to GDP or deficit to GDP, whichever number you want to look at. The United States is running on about a 5% deficit-to-GDP basis. We are well below 1%. We are trending lower. We are going in the right direction, and we are making the right investments in Vaughan—Woodbridge and in the member's riding.

I would ask the member what services he would cut. What taxes would he increase? He is saying he wants to balance the budget right away. You have to cut something or raise something. What is it? What choice would you make?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

We are getting a lot of the “you” word in play. I would ask hon. members to direct their speech to the Chair and keep it in the third person.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Hull—Aylmer.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my hon. colleague's speech. I want to ask him a question, because I realize that, when investments are made, it is important that they eventually produce results. One does not invest money to see it wasted. Ideally, it should result in something concrete.

One measure that I find very concrete, and my hon. colleague mentioned it in his speech, is the Canada child benefit. Once again, it is a remarkable, unprecedented Canadian program that helped reduce Canada's child poverty rate by more than 30% in one historic year. That is amazing.

Does my colleague think that is a good outcome for a government program?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

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

How many kids in Barrie—Innisfil receive the Canada child benefit? It is around 10,000 to 11,000 families every month. Does he want to cut that? That Canada child benefit is tax-free and simple, and they receive it every month. They depend on it. It helps them enjoy a good quality of life. That is what our government is about: lifting children out of poverty, helping families and helping middle-class Canadians. That is why we have created 800,000 jobs, ensuring good services for families. It is why our unemployment rate is at a 44-year low. That is the record, and that is what we need to speak about.

We will continue to reduce and maintain a strong fiscal situation as our debt-to-GDP ratio declines. We will do it in a prudent manner that ensures our services are kept and that we continue to maintain a low tax jurisdiction both on the personal side and on the business side. That is what Canadians expect of us.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to commend my colleague for giving part of his speech in French. I greatly appreciate it.

I would also like to remind members that the Bloc Québécois believes it is important to have a plan to quickly eliminate the deficit. We agree with the principle of the motion being debated today. There is no justification for spending more than we take in, given the economic climate.

We are concerned that the government solution to reducing the deficit is to again cut transfers to Quebec and the other provinces, in such sectors as health, even though the needs are real.

However, we cannot accept the part stating that the government should commit to never raising taxes of any kind. For example, we want the richest 1% to pay more taxes. We also agree with the whole issue of fighting tax havens. We want the government to look for more money in tax havens.

I would like to ask my colleague about that. Does he agree with the idea of doing more to recover money from tax havens?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. I would like to answer him in French, but I am sorry, I find it very difficult.

We will not do what the Conservatives did and undertake austerity measures where we cut. That is not something any government wants to do or should do. However, the Conservatives decided to do that, and it hurt our economy in 2014-15. Job growth was very anemic and very weak.

On the question of tax evasion and tax avoidance, our government has invested $1 billion into the CRA. We have invested a lot of funds in beefing up measures. Another measure we have undertaken is on base erosion and profit shifting, and we agree with our international partners. Obviously, that is a big issue for us. It has been a big issue since we came to power.

It is very important, because we want to ensure that hard-working Canadians who are paying their taxes receive the services they deserve, and that any high-net-worth individuals or corporations that are avoiding paying their fair share do pay their fair share. That is what Canadians expect us to do, and everyday, hard-working Canadians demand that.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is a real pleasure to rise today in this new interim House of Commons, representing the good people of Barrie—Innisfil. History will certainly be made in this place over the course of the next 10 years or more. It is nice to know that we will get back to Centre Block before a balanced budget is even expected in this country.

Last year, on December 21, four days before Christmas, the finance department released a report, from which we learned that the budget will not be balanced until at least the year 2040. Let us think about that. My son, who is now 14 years old, will be 35 years old before the budget is balanced. I do not even want to begin to think how much he and those his age will have to pay in taxes.

Like many Canadians, I am worried about my children and their children. With the current government's record on spending, I want to know what tomorrow's Canadians are going to have to pay. I want to know whether they will be able to buy houses and have a good quality of life in spite of the government's spending.

I am also worried, quite frankly, for the residents in Barrie—Innisfil who are heading into retirement, seniors who will be profoundly affected by this fiscally irresponsible government. That is why I am happy to speak today to this motion by the member for Carleton. I will again remind the House what the motion says. It states:

That, given the Prime Minister broke his promise to eliminate the deficit this year and that perpetual and growing deficits lead to massive tax increases, the House call on the Prime Minister to table a plan in Budget 2019—

That is in a few short months.

—to eliminate the deficit quickly with a written commitment that he will never raise taxes of any kind.

It stands to reason that when a country is faced with debt and deficits, the inevitability of raising taxes is going to happen. There is no question about that. Canadians should not be questioning that. The government ran on the fact that the budget would be balanced this year. We are finding out that the deficit this year will be $20 billion, and in fact the budget will not be balanced until the year 2040.

Think about the impact that is going to have on everyday working Canadians who quite simply cannot afford it. A report came out last week that said that 46% of Canadians are $200 away from insolvency: $200. It is a very fine line that Canadians are walking right now with respect to the level of debt and deficit they are facing, not to mention the fact that the government is putting it on.

I am also very pleased and honoured to be sharing my time today with the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.

The Prime Minister does not have to worry about household debt or incurring deficits. In fact, he has inherited a family fortune, so he has no worries at all, unlike the families in Barrie and Innisfil who have to worry on a day in, day out basis about their financial situations.

The other thing is that the Prime Minister got caught trying to impose tax hikes. He tried to put a 73% tax hike on small businesses. It was not until the opposition brought that forward and spoke to businesses across the country that the backlash occurred and the Prime Minister and the Liberal government backed down on those tax hikes.

Do not think for a second that those tax hikes will not come if the Prime Minister is re-elected. He also tried to impose a tax on health and dental benefits and employee discounts. Waitresses and waiters who get free meals as part of their working conditions were going to be taxed on those things. Again, the opposition brought that forward. He also tried to impose taxes on a disability tax credit for diabetics. These tax hikes, make no mistake, will be on the table again if the Prime Minister is re-elected.

As I mentioned earlier, he has also broken his promise on higher deficits. Higher deficits today mean higher taxes tomorrow. Somebody has to pay for this.

Those living in Ontario saw 15 years of Liberal mismanagement. The Liberal structural debt was the largest sub-sovereign nation debt in the world. It was billions of dollars of debt. Billions of dollars were being paid toward interest payments that could have gone to government services to help those who were vulnerable and in need. Instead, the provincial Liberal government ended up incurring debt and deficits.

We are on the same path. In fact, during the last election, I spoke often in all candidates debates and I toured around, talking to my constituents. I spoke about the fact that we were on the same path federally as we were provincially in Ontario. That path was one of structural debt and deficits from which it would be very difficult to recover.

That is why the election in 2019 has become one of the most critical elections in the country's history. We cannot allow the federal Liberal government to do what the Ontario Liberal government did in Ontario. We have to stop it now. As we have seen from finance department reports, the budget will not be balanced for another 31 years.

We know this is the Prime Minister's plan. There is no reason to believe him on a lot of things he promises. He promised that the deficit would be low. He promised that he budget would be balanced this year. The only thing that is sure, as a result of what the government's fiscal policy has shown, is that taxes will rise after the 2019 election once he is given that further mandate. Canadians cannot afford that.

They cannot afford a carbon tax either. We have heard that the carbon tax will cost $20 a tonne. Some finance department projections say that it could cost upwards of $300 a tonne. What would that mean for families in Ontario? It would mean $3,000 extra a year in carbon taxes when they are already struggling. When they are already on a razor-thin line of insolvency, how will this help them meet their economic needs? It will not.

We also heard that families in Saskatchewan will be spending up to $5,000 with the carbon tax. It is really interesting. When the Liberals are talking about taking from one pocket and giving to another, they are talking about giving a rebate. If the purpose of a carbon tax is to change people's habits, what incentive and motivation is there when the government taxes them and then gives them a rebate?

How is that going to help families in Barrie—Innisfil that are required to drive up and down Highway 400 every day to get to Mississauga or Vaughan to go to work? What about those soccer moms who have to drive their kids to soccer? What about those hockey families that drive all over Ontario? My family was one of them. We would drive from Barrie to Peterborough to Kingston so our kids could play hockey. Why are those families going to be penalized with a carbon tax that the Prime Minister even admitted on a Quebec television show would have no difference in the country at all in reducing greenhouse gas emissions?

The government's own documents say that it has to raise that carbon tax by $300 a tonne. That is 15 times more than what it is going to cost now. The only way the Liberals are going to do that is if they raise it after the election, if they are elected again.

Just as in Ontario, we cannot let this take root. We as Canadians have to stop this now. If we allow the Liberal government four more years or more, we will be in a structural deficit and debt situation that will profoundly impact the lives of Canadians in a negative way.

We as an opposition are here to stand up for Canadians. We are here to stand up for them and their dreams, not what the government wants to impose on them. We and our leader will continue to fight. We will continue to stand up for what is right for Canadians. We will ensure that we balance the budget and that Canadians pay lower taxes so they can achieve their dreams for their families.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague from Barrie—Innisfil, whose speech was very interesting.

I would like to know what they would promise voters. I would also like to know if my hon. colleague is aware that his constituents received 11,610 tax-free Canada child benefit payments, which helped 20,870 children. At an average of $7,080 per family, those payments are among the highest in Ontario.

Supposing the Conservatives were to be in office in 2020, would my hon. colleague scrap the Canada child benefit?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, we will cut the things that are most important to the Prime Minister but not necessarily important to Canadians. The Prime Minister has spent billions of dollars to send money outside the country when he should spend that money inside our country. Therefore, we will find ways to cut without affecting and impacting the lives of people in a negative way.

The hon. member brought up the Canada child benefit. The other side forgets that it is income tested. In Barrie—Innisfil, the median average household income for families is roughly $80,000. Those families were receiving a universal benefit before to help their children. Now, in many cases, they are receiving less. In fact, I had a phone call last week from a family that was quite concerned. It was making $47 a month on the Canada child benefit when it was making more before. Why? Because it is income tested. That is why the Canada child benefit is a lot less than what the Liberals purport it to be.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate a Conservative motion on balancing budgets, and part of the motion is about no new taxes. I think what Canadians want is a fair tax system. We hear every year that inequality in Canada is growing. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Most Canadians do not feel they are getting ahead. We hear stories such as the mining company in Vancouver that has a mine in Mongolia. It is supposed to pay $600 million in Canadian taxes and $200 million in Mongolian taxes. However, because it opened a post box in Luxembourg, it pays no tax at all here or in Mongolia. Mongolia is taking it to court, fighting back. In Canada, the CRA has said it is okay. It even got a letter from CRA to say it was fine. Could he comment on that?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, one of the important points within the motion is that we get a written commitment that the Prime Minister will never raise taxes of any kind.

I spoke specifically about the carbon tax issue. The government's own documents show that the carbon tax has to increase to $300 per tonne. That is a tax. We are trying to get the Prime Minister to commit not only to balance the budget and reduce the deficit, but also to ensure he does not commit to any new taxes.

Therefore, let the Prime Minister and the Liberal government tell Canadians that they will not raise taxes. Let them say that so Canadian can be sure as we head toward the 2019 election. As I said earlier, the one thing that will happen as a result of the debt and deficit situation is taxes will have to go up. Let the government tell us they will not.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, let me try to explain carbon taxes for the member for Barrie—Innisfail. We had five serious national experts before the environment committee yesterday who explained it. The reason a carbon tax works, even if a consumer gets a rebate, is as the price goes up, people try to avoid paying it. Therefore, they will economize within their own home and then they benefit even more when they get a rebate.

This is the essence of what the Green Party has been proposing, which is carbon fee and dividend, which has recently been endorsed by two prominent Republicans in the United States, George Shultz and James Baker. Does the hon. member recognize that carbon taxation was developed by Republicans?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Conservative

John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the carbon tax in the area I represent is that if it is intended to change people's habits, as the hon. member says, there is no way that will happen. They have to heat their homes. They have to drive their cars. They are involved in all kinds of things. Therefore, this carbon tax represents a tax on the necessities of life.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, first off, I want to thank my colleague from Barrie—Innisfil for giving a speech that reflects our philosophy as Conservatives.

Since this is my first time speaking in the new House, I also want to take this opportunity to thank the people who built it, the craftspeople who succeeded in melding the modern with the historical. I think they did an incredible job.

I invite all Canadians to come and visit this place to meet us and discover the new House, because we will be here for at least 10 years.

I rise today because the current government is not keeping its promises. Back in 2015, it got elected by saying it would start by running a modest $10-billion deficit in 2016 and balance the budget by 2019. It is therefore perfectly fair for every Canadian to have questions today about our country's future. I think that the motion tabled by our party is very timely. I will read it out:

That, given the Prime Minister broke his promise to eliminate the deficit this year and that perpetual and growing deficits lead to massive tax increases, the House call on the Prime Minister to table a plan in Budget 2019 [which will come out in a few weeks, in April at the latest, or maybe in March, depending on the Liberals' agenda] to eliminate the deficit quickly with a written commitment that he will never raise taxes of any kind.

That is what the motion says, and I think it is responsible. I simply want to remind the House that, during the 2015 election campaign, the Liberals made a lot of promises that they did not keep. I would like to mention a few of them. There is an extremely long list and I only have 10 minutes, so I will not be able to talk about all of them.

I represent the beautiful riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier in the Quebec City region. The Liberals promised to have the Quebec Bridge painted or to find a solution before June 2016. No one forced them to make that promise. It is now January 29, 2019, so people can reach their own conclusions. Of course, on a national scale, that is a very small promise.

The Liberals also promised Canada Post letter carriers that they would send them back out to do home mail delivery. Did the Liberals do that? Unfortunately, the answer is no. Furthermore, in 2015, the Liberals said that the 2015 election would be the last under the existing voting system. This is an election year. Has anyone heard anything about a new voting system? I do not think so. Elections Canada is giving training sessions, but no one has told the organizers or those involved in the election anything about a new voting system. That is another promise the Liberals did not keep.

The Liberals also said they would change the House of Commons Standing Orders to put an end to omnibus bills, which interfere with proper debate in the House. We all know what happened in December. They bundled a bunch of bills and muzzled us.

Now I want to remind everyone about the most important promise the Liberal government made in 2015, the one about running small deficits early in its mandate and balancing the budget. Today the Liberals are accusing us of moving a ridiculous motion. How absurd. The deficit is $80 billion. It is unbelievable.

We just want the government to behave responsibly and take real action. How can Liberals travel across this country, look Canadians in the eye and tell them they should put their trust in them and vote for them? How can they tell Canadians that they are meeting expectations and keeping their promises? Seriously. We are giving them an opportunity to table a plan to balance the budget, an opportunity to promise they will not make our children and grandchildren pay the price, because that would be irresponsible.

Speaking of children, I would like to talk about a fable by Jean de la Fontaine, The Cicada and the Ant. It is not very long, so I would like to read it now:

Cicada, having sung her song
All summer long,
Found herself without a crumb
When winter winds did come.
Not a scrap was there to find
Of fly or earthworm, any kind.
Hungry, she ran off to cry
To neighbor Ant, and specify:
Asking for a loan of grist,
A seed or two so she'd subsist
Just until the coming spring.
She said, “I'll pay you everything
Before fall, my word as animal,
Interest and principal.”
Well, no hasty lender is the Ant;
It's her finest virtue by a lot.
“And what did you do when it was hot?”
She then asked this mendicant.
“To all comers, night and day,
I sang. I hope you don't mind.”
“You sang? Why, my joy is unconfined.
Now dance the winter away.”

Obviously, the cicada is our current Prime Minister, and the ant represents workers, people who are responsible and hard working, our leader, and the entire team at the Conservative Party, which is currently in the official opposition. We are a government in waiting.

The moral of this story is that hard work always pays off and that we must work instead of dreaming. The ant worked hard to collect provisions for the winter, while the cicada was singing and lounging around, and then found herself in a difficult situation.

It is unfortunate, but that seems to be the situation in Canada. We have been in a period of economic prosperity for the last three years. Any good manager would take this time to fill the coffers. It is only logical. If we look back through history, there are always recessions and periods of lower prosperity. I do not want to be alarmist, but we have to be responsible. We do not know what the future holds, but we know that we have been prosperous for the last three years.

What did the current government do? It spent money like crazy without keeping its promises, without meeting expectations, and without improving life for hard-working Canadians. Canadians are paying higher taxes, and more tax increases are coming. Their children and grandchildren will also be left paying the price for this Liberal government's irresponsibility.

I am not a prophet or an economist, but we have resources, and I am smart enough to do my research. Many economists are saying that an economic slowdown is on the horizon. When heading into a period of uncertainty, it is important to have a plan and to be prepared.

The members opposite are accusing us of having run up deficits, but we have to consider the circumstances. The worst economic crisis took place when the Conservatives were in power. We invested in infrastructure, we took steps to keep the economy going, and we were applauded by the international community. We were told that we did a good job in Canada, under the circumstances. We took charge, and we were responsible.

Since April 26, 2018, my riding has had a pilot project to provide labour to private businesses and to work on economic development in the regions. We have not asked for any money. These are initiatives driven by entrepreneurs. Today is January 29, 2019. I am not asking for money. I am only asking that we do what we have to so we can look after the regions.

Can the members opposite govern, think about what is in Canadians' best interests, and commit to balancing the budget and not passing the bill on to future generations?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question. I am very pleased to hear him talk about our grandchildren. I am also hearing the Conservative members talk about the price on pollution, a measure they oppose.

When I think about our grandchildren, I think about the future we are leaving to them. Thinking about climate change is very important. My kids play soccer and do synchronized swimming, and like all mothers, I have to drive them to their activities. We always hear that “soccer moms” do not want a price on pollution, but that is not true. In my community, people are always saying that we need to take care of our children and grandchildren and that climate change is an important issue.

My colleague said we need to cut all spending, but when it comes to climate change, will it not cost more to do nothing? Insurance costs will rise, and there will be more costs associated with the natural disasters that will destroy our infrastructure. Inaction will cost us even more.

What is my colleague's plan for fighting climate change?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Toronto—Danforth for her great question. I am glad she is asking me this kind of question, because just yesterday, I was at a meeting of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, of which I am a member. I am happy to reiterate that we, the Conservatives, do not get up in the morning planning to destroy the planet. We are responsible people. We do not agree with the carbon tax, but we are interested in finding solutions.

At the end of yesterday's committee meeting, I asked five witnesses if the carbon tax is the only possible solution. The answer was no.

We need to be responsible. We need to stop taking money out of taxpayers' pockets to mortgage our workers' future and place an even greater burden on our children and grandchildren.

I would like to close by saying that we do have a plan for the environment. The Prime Minister is going to call an election. Right now, he is the one in office. Until we form government, we do not have to release a plan. We will release our plan for the environment once the campaign gets under way, and Canadians will be able to trust us to protect the environment, our children and our grandchildren.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier gave a very interesting speech.

I did some research on La Fontaine's fable, The Fox and the Crow. The moral of that fable is this:

The flatterer
lives at the expense of those who will listen to him.

The Conservatives should be careful about what they are proposing.

Does my colleague know that his riding received 12,780 tax-free child benefit payments and that the average payment was $5,760?

We created 800,000 new jobs in Canada. The unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in 40 years. Our debt-to-GDP ratio is on a downward track. We are in the right place.

My colleague said earlier that he did not want to say what his party's plan will be. Will the Conservatives make a commitment? All they do is criticize the government. What is their plan?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my colleague from Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.

The fact remains that the past is the foundation of the future. Our government left a budgetary surplus.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

January 29th, 2019 / 1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

With help from the EI fund.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would answer my colleague's question by saying that we left the house in order. The Liberals have been wasting money for three years. It has been ridiculous and irresponsible. We already know that the next government will have to be a responsible government. We know that the current Liberal government has not kept its promises.

I am sure that Canadians will make the right choice on October 21, 2019.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Kingston and the Islands.

I often wonder what newspaper my colleague from Carleton, who moved today's motion, reads. He clearly does not read all the news and wants to breed uncertainty among the Canadians watching us today.

Canadians made a choice in 2015. They chose a plan to invest in the economy, strengthen and grow the middle class, and provide real support for those who are working hard to join the middle class.

Since 2015, the government has continued to focus on the middle class and on helping make life more affordable for hard-working Canadian families.

The government lowered taxes for the middle class and increased taxes on the wealthiest Canadians in order to allow Canadians to save more money, invest and help grow the economy.

To help families with the cost of raising children, the government created the tax-free Canada child benefit, or CCB, in 2016, and we indexed it to increases in the cost of living as of 2018, which was two years earlier than planned. In the riding of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, 10,270 CCB payments have been made, totalling nearly $6 million a year, for an average of $6,840 per family. This makes a big difference for all families.

I would like to tell you about the Boisbriand family. The mom, Sabrina, has three wonderful little girls aged three, six and nine. She works for the Government of Quebec, and her husband is a retail sales director. Every month, they get $1,350, which makes a big difference when it comes to paying for their children's activities and school supplies and making the investments they want to make for their family.

I would also like to emphasize that our government recognizes the importance of fiscal responsibility and a strong fiscal position.

I would like to remind the member that, before we took office, the Canadian economy was struggling. When I was knocking on doors in 2015, the economy was sluggish. That is what people were saying. Half of the jobs in my riding were precarious. In late 2015 and early 2016, national and international economic conditions pointed to Canada slipping into yet another general recession. Canadians were apprehensive about their future.

That is why the government took immediate and decisive action to address the growth problems and respond to Canadians' concerns by doing what needed to be done, which meant investing in Canadians, in communities, in the economy and in Canada's future.

In 2016, in our first budget, the government took a head-on approach to tackling the challenges faced by Canadians and the Canadian economy. We focused on a certain number of key principles with a view to strengthening the middle class and Canada's economy.

First, we took advantage of record low interest rates to make responsible, targeted investments that will stimulate the economy over the long term. These investments were intended to stimulate robust growth, increase employment and create more opportunities for Canadians across the country.

Our efforts yielded real results. For instance, over the past three years, thanks to their hard work, Canadians have created more than 800,000 new jobs, bringing the unemployment rate to its lowest level in over 40 years. This year, we expect Canada to have one of the fastest-growing economies in the G7 once again. The government is also committed to advancing gender quality, which will support growth in Canadian businesses.

We lowered the small business tax rate to 10% as of January 1, 2018, and we reduced it again to 9% as of January 1, 2019.

We signed new, modern trade agreements, namely the CPTPP, CETA and the USMCA, which will create more economic opportunities for Canadians.

Canada is making historic investments in infrastructure, innovation, science, research, and training and skills development.

However, to maintain that momentum and remain competitive in a complex global economy, Canada needs to become even more innovative.

We need to be more open to the world of science, technology, engineering and math. Today, we need to work together to achieve even better results than we thought possible.

In budget 2017, the government launched the innovation and skills plan to build an economy that benefits everyone, an economy where Canadians have access to good quality jobs and Canadian businesses are well placed to compete in a rapidly evolving global market.

Over the past 18 months, the innovation and skills plan has made it possible to launch the pan-Canadian artificial intelligence strategy to ensure that Canada remains a global leader in that field.

Montreal is home to the artificial intelligence supercluster. Many businesses in my riding benefit from that supercluster. Take, for example, Kinova, which manufactures robotic arms. Those are really good jobs that attract a lot of people to my region.

The global skills strategy was also launched under that plan, ensuring that companies can have more predictable access to top talent.

Our innovation and skills plan also helped create six new economic strategy tables that serve as a new model for industry-government collaboration, and five new innovation superclusters around the country that have created tens of thousands of middle-class jobs.

To make the most of this plan, we need to focus more on the foundation of innovation, namely, science. That sector was completely ignored by the previous government.

A strong science sector is the pillar for the discoveries and innovations that improve our world, such as new medical therapies, quantum computing technologies and new agricultural practices, to name just a few.

We expect these investments to lead to greater benefits for all Canadians.

In closing, all of these policies correspond to promises we made to Canadians during our mandate. We made these investments because it was the right thing to do for Canadians, to create jobs for the middle class and build a stronger economy.

As we have seen, when we invest in Canadians, when we give them the tools they need to succeed, they contribute by working hard and generate economic outcomes that are among the best we have seen in a generation.

Together, we are strengthening the middle class, ensuring its growth and helping those working hard to join it. We are giving Canadians the help they need to succeed by making targeted investments to grow our economy for the long term, while keeping the debt-to-GDP ratio on a downward track.

That is what Canadians expect from us, that is what we promised and that is exactly what we are doing.

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK

Mr. Speaker, there is not a great deal of specific information about the Liberals' plans for Canadians, so I am hoping that the member will respond to my question with details in regard to the actual motion put forward today.

Could she tell me specifically what the Liberal plan was in regard to deficits and balancing the budget?

Opposition Motion—Federal DeficitBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, our plan is working. We have created 800,000 new jobs, pushing unemployment to its lowest level in 40 years and giving Canada one of the highest economic growth rates in the G7.

Our debt relative to the size of our economy is clearly on a downward track. Recent reports have shown that our plan is working. Last year's positive economic results have a significant impact on our long-term projections.