Debates of April 1st, 2019

Canada Post Corporation

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, again, my colleague across started his initial comments saying that the people on the government side would like to forget last fall and the legislation. In fact, there is one thing that I will not forget. It is the sanctimony from the NDP when they stood and fought against it.

It was a last-step solution. However, we know that NDP governments have brought in back-to-work legislation 15 different times. The member for London—Fanshawe, the member for Hamilton Centre and the member for Vancouver East all passed back-to-work legislation.

The one that really gets it for me is back in 1995 during the railway strike. I will read from Hansard, which says, “I want to make it clear that though we object to back to work legislation, we think it should be passed in all stages today. The strike has gone on long enough.” That was in response to legislation that came to the House in 1995.

Do members know who said that? It was this member's father. There is a time to bring in back-to-work legislation and Bill Blaikie was a member who I had a huge amount of respect for. He knew it at the time and I would encourage his son to maybe have that conversation.

Veterans Affairs

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the member of Parliament for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, home to Garrison Petawawa, training ground of the Warriors, I am honoured to rise in this place on behalf of the women and men who serve in the Canadian Armed Forces. I appreciate the trust I have earned from our women and men in the forces.

During question period, I asked the scandal-ridden government a question regarding the mistreatment of our veterans and the fact that the Prime Minister could find over $10 million to give to a convicted terrorist. While I may have expected a lack of response from whoever was the minister of veterans affairs at the time of the question, there have been so many, Canadians expect better treatment of their soldiers and their veterans. I implore the latest Minister of Veterans Affairs, who will not be minister for very long, to become an advocate for veterans, which has been lacking in this scandal-ridden government.

My question referred to the decision by the Prime Minister and his party to play politics with military pensions. The policy decision to cut $8 billion from the defence budget and play partisan politics relates to the fact that the budget has not been increased, as was promised to soldiers and veterans.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer confirms that veterans are paying for this scandal-ridden government's mistakes. Veterans with severe and permanent injuries will be worse off, by an average of $300,000, with the latest pension shell game. In the last election, the “thank you for your donation” Prime Minister promised our veterans that he would restore lifelong pensions and that veterans would not need to fight the government in court. The Liberal Party broke that promise and has already spent nearly $40 million, which could have gone to veterans, fighting veterans in court.

The critical injury benefit is another example of the mistreatment of Canadian veterans. While I have raised the case of Afghanistan veteran and retired warrant officer Roger Perreault on more than one occasion, and the shameful treatment of that individual, his cries for help have been met with silence.

In the last year of the Conservative government, 2015, 114 veterans qualified for the critical injury benefit. From December 2018 to date, only four veterans have qualified for the critical injury benefit under the Liberal government.

In the last three years, 55 veterans who suffered a traumatic incident that qualified for the critical injury benefit received a total of $4 million for their pain and suffering. Compare that treatment of Canadian veterans to how the Liberal Party rewarded convicted terrorist bomb-maker Omar Khadr by giving him $10.5 million tax-free.

The new veterans charter brought in by the Chrétien government added a detention benefit for soldiers who, while serving in the forces, were detained by an enemy, opposing force, or person or group carrying out a terrorist activity or who evaded capture or escaped from any power.

I have been contacted by a serving soldier who was detained by Serbian forces for 18 days while serving with the UN in Yugoslavia, back in 1994, with 54 others. I was shocked to find out that the federal government will not consider a claim until a soldier has been a detainee for greater than 30 days. As a consequence of setting such high arbitrary rules to qualify for the detention benefit, this soldier and others in a similar circumstance cannot quality.

I was shocked, but not surprised, to learn that the Chrétien government refused to recognize the heroism of all but one member of the Royal Canadian Dragoons battle group, which was held hostage and participated in Operation CAVALIER, or CANBAT 2.

Where is the justice in the Liberal government coming up with the arbitrary number of 30 as the cut-off for the detention benefit announced in the new veterans charter? It would appear that this is another example, like the critical injury benefit, of the Liberal government announcing a benefit that excludes soldiers and veterans who should qualify.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to correct any misunderstandings from some members of the House may have regarding benefits for veterans, including the pension for life for members of the Canadian Armed Forces who have been discharged for medical reasons.

Canadians are proud of our brave veterans and we are proud of the investments we have made to improve the benefits available to these veterans. We have done a lot. We promised to restore a monthly pension, and this pension takes effect today, on April 1. The pension for life replaces the previous types of financial support and takes a holistic approach focused on the well-being of veterans who experience a service-related illness or injury.

The first benefit is the pain and suffering compensation, which replaces the lump-sum disability award with a tax-free benefit of $1,150 per month for life. Veterans can also choose between a monthly benefit or a lump sum benefit. Previously, a lump sum payment was the only choice. In addition, we replaced the career impact allowance, a taxable benefit, with the pain and suffering compensation, which is tax free.

These allowances are for veterans with a permanent severe impairment resulting from service. We listened to them and did something about it, unlike the Conservatives who cut services for veterans for 10 years.

We have the income replacement benefit, which provides the equivalent of 90% of a veteran's income during the rehabilitation period. This benefit is also available for survivors and orphans.

Before we launched the pension for life, on April 1, 2018, we introduced a series of new and improved initiatives to better support veterans and their families, including the caregiver recognition benefit, a tax free monthly benefit of $1,000 paid directly to persons who provide informal care to a veteran who receives a disability award or a pain and suffering compensation.

However, we understand that financial security is just one aspect of well-being. Transitioning from the army to civilian life is a big deal, especially for someone who is demobilized for medical reasons. The suite of programs and services for veterans and their families also seeks to help them transition successfully. Beyond the veterans emergency fund, the programs support physical, professional, and mental rehabilitation and reintegration into a new community.

One important part of a successful transition is finding a new career or new purpose. We also focused our efforts on new careers. Qualified career counsellors are available to help veterans find the career that suits them best. The veteran's partner, spouse or survivor is also eligible for training and career coaching, support for career development, and, in some cases, placement in a position directly related to the veteran. If education or training is needed to help them find a new job, the education and training benefit offers up to $40,000 for veterans with six years of service and up to $80,000 for veterans with 12 years of service.

Another important part of a successful transition is finding a place in a new community. By expanding the veteran family program to include medically released veterans and their families, we are helping them find the programs they need while maintaining precious ties to their military community.

We are proud of the improvements we have made to help veterans successfully transition to civilian life after serving in the military.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, since the detention benefit was announced, I can find no record of it ever being paid out or any figures of unsuccessful applications. The government announces programs for veterans and then makes it impossible to qualify. What a cruel trick. Promises to restore the funding after the federal budget is balanced do not count for anything because we all know there is no plan to balance the federal budget. It was just another fake promise from the fake feminist Prime Minister who just was not ready to be prime minister.

It is all about setting priorities. Veterans tell me they are outraged that it was a priority of the government to give over $10 million to a terrorist but cry poverty when it comes time to pay the benefits that were promised to soldiers and veterans. The health and safety of our women and men in uniform should be a number one priority for the government.

There is an opportunity for the new Minister of Veterans Affairs to make things right. He can either repeat the mistakes of the last ministers of veterans affairs or do the right thing and give the veterans what was promised in the last election.

[Stéphane Lauzon]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have a chance to answer that question.

Once again, my colleagues opposite are fearmongering. Veterans Affairs Canada is absolutely not creating a multi-tiered system. Rather, it strictly adheres to a “one veteran, one standard” model. Benefits are available to all eligible veterans, regardless of the application or number of applications. At the same time, Veterans Affairs Canada treats each veteran as a unique individual. Case managers inform all veterans and their families of the benefits and programs they are entitled to and work with them to come up with a plan that meets their specific needs and aspirations in post-service life. Three years ago we promised to bring back a lifetime monthly pension for veterans with a disability related to their service. We listened to them and we are responding to what we heard. We took the time to get it right. That is why we have invested over $10 billion in new funding for veterans and their families. Beginning today, April 1, we are delivering on that promise.

Finance

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising in the House on April 1, but this is no April Fool's joke. I am here to ask very pertinent questions. What was unfortunate about question period was that the government was just avoiding answering questions. I am here this evening to clear things up.

On January 4, I asked the Prime Minister a question about his budget plan not working. When you incur a debt, you must have a plan to repay it. That is the basis of any economy. As a father, if I decide to borrow some money tomorrow morning and do not have a plan to repay or reduce my debt, at some point I am going to go bankrupt. I hope that this government will not be re-elected so we can protect the Canadian economy. A deficit today means higher taxes tomorrow for us, our children and our grandchildren. We have to have a vision. We cannot take a short-term view of the economy. We have to have plans and structure, and we must plan to balance budget. The Liberals said that. However, what they say and what they do are two entirely different things.

The Prime Minister will have to increase taxes to pay for his irresponsible and out-of-control spending. That is the basis of any economy, as I mentioned earlier. When will the Prime Minister unveil his plan to increase taxes? I asked that question on February 4. The Minister of Finance has tabled another budget since then. This is the fourth year of the Liberals' mandate and they still have not balanced the budget.

My question was for the Prime Minister, but the finance minister is the one who responded to it. He told me that the Liberals' plan was very clear, that they had started by cutting taxes for the middle class. All the firms mention that. I have to say that I am not talking about Morneau Shepell, because that firm has already demonstrated that when it comes to professionalism and being an economic authority, it is just borderline. I would like to remind the House that one of the shareholders was the current finance minister, who once said that Stephen Harper made a good decision. It is written in a book. The book says that Stephen Harper's Conservative government made the right decision when it raised the retirement age to 67. It is simple mathematics. It was a difficult decision, but the Conservative government at the time made that decision. The Liberals, however, have not made any decisions.

How are we supposed to believe in this government's plan for the budget and the economy when, in 2015, it promised to balance the budget by 2019? We want to know if the Liberals intend to show Canadians their plan for paying back their debt. Will they tax Canadians more to fill the nation's coffers?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, if I could first clarify for all those in the House this evening, there were a couple of misstatements by my colleague.

He talked about the management of the economy. The fact is that this government has created 800,000 new jobs since coming to government in 2015. The fact is that unemployment rates are at record lows. The fact is that the youth unemployment rate is at its lowest level since records have been kept. When we look at under-represented groups in our workforce—women, persons with disabilities and indigenous Canadians—we see that those unemployment numbers are at all-time lows, so we can feel a great deal of pride.

The other thing he mentioned was the fact that we changed the OAS eligibility age back to 65 after the Conservatives had moved it up to 67. That will keep 130,000 Canadians, the most vulnerable Canadians, from the poverty lines. That is what that measure will do.

Since we came to office, the government has invested in the things that matter to Canadians and to middle-class Canadians. One of our first actions was to raise taxes on the wealthiest 1% of Canadians, while over nine million Canadians are benefiting from the middle-class tax cut.

We introduced the Canada child benefit, or CCB. Compared to the system of child benefits that it replaced, the CCB is simpler, more generous and better targeted to those who need it most. Indeed, nine out of 10 families are receiving more in child benefits than they did under the previous Conservative system. As a result, the typical middle-class family of four is receiving about $2,000 more in support than they did in 2015. This year, on average, families benefiting from the CCB will receive around $6,800 to help with the high cost of raising children. This benefit amount will continue to rise with the cost of living, as it has been indexed to inflation as of July 2018, two years earlier than promised.

It is worth reminding Canadians that the Conservatives voted against every one of these measures.

We have a plan to invest in and strengthen the middle class and to grow the economy, and the results are certainly beginning to show. There are strong employment gains for women, persons with disabilities and indigenous Canadians. The pace of job gains in these areas has been significant over the last three years.

Building on this momentum, we recently introduced in budget 2019 the next step to this plan. Our debt-to-GDP ratio has continued to come down. We know that in 2009, under the Conservatives, it was up to about 38%; it is back down now to about 31.5%.

We are on the right course. Canadians know that we are on the right course, and they will demonstrate that come October.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour is answering my questions is proof that things are out of control in the Liberal camp. When I asked the Prime Minister a question, the Minister of Finance was the one who answered. Does the Minister of Finance not have a parliamentary secretary? One does wonder what is going on.

The parliamentary secretary said that families are getting more money, but it is important to note that they are also paying twice as much tax. The government is giving with one hand and taking back twice as much with the other. Simple math: Canadian families are losing money. According to the Fraser Institute, at least 70% of Canadian families are paying more tax.

I want to close with a few words about the TrudeauMeter. According to the TrudeauMeter, as the government's term draws to a close, 32 of Trudeau's 231 election promises have not yet been started, 57 are in progress, only 40% have been achieved, or rather, postponed, and 44 have been broken. Come October 2019, I hope Canadians will remember the promises this Liberal government has not kept.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, if unmitigated gall were a currency here in Canada, I know we would have a lot of Conservatives driving Cadillacs because of what they did with the finances of this country.

When I look at Stephen Harper, I see he added $150 billion to the national debt. In 2009 it was a record $55 billion that he added to the national debt. We saw that year over year.

We know that our debt-to-GDP ratio has improved considerably since those Harper years. We will continue on this path to grow the economy and to make sure that young Canadians have the skills that they need to get those jobs and that those job opportunities are there for all Canadians.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 8 p.m.)