Debates of April 29th, 2019

Opposition Motion—Government Policies

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Jonquière.

I am incredibly proud to rise in the House to speak to our opposition day motion, an NDP motion that makes it clear that the Liberal government has been governing in the interests of its rich friends at the expense of working Canadians, at the expense of Canadians who are struggling day-in and day-out.

Our motion touches on a number of key points and provides a clear contrast as to how the Liberals have looked out for their rich friends rather than Canadians. I also want to outline the last part of our opposition day motion that demands action. We say that at the very least the government should recover the $12 million given to Loblaws for fridges and reinvest it to the benefit of working Canadians and their families.

We are here in the House today demanding action on behalf of Canadians. I want to touch on two main themes coming out of this opposition day motion. The first is the misplaced priorities of the Liberal government. The second is the way in which the government is greenwashing its agenda, pretending that it is taking on climate change when in fact it is not.

We heard Liberal members of Parliament today, and in weeks and months prior, talk about their defence of middle-class Canadians. The title of their most recent budget touched on their defence of middle-class Canadians. I welcome them to speak to Canadians where I am from in northern Manitoba, to hear how their lives have become more challenging in the last few years, yes, under the previous Harper government but also under the current government.

My region has seen sustained job loss. My home town of Thompson has lost 600 jobs in the last few months. In a community of 13,000 people, that figure is devastating. All of those jobs were in the value-added sector of mining in our community. They are the best middle-class jobs that women and men have done for decades, jobs that are integrally linked to processing the wealth that belongs to the people in our region and our province.

Unfortunately, both the previous Harper government and the current Liberal government did not stand in defence of those jobs. The previous government was all too happy to ensure the foreign ownership of the company that existed in our area was without any protection for jobs. Fast forward a few years later, we were sold out and the current Liberal government was nowhere to be found to mitigate the kind of damage we have gone through.

Flin Flon, another proud mining town, has also experienced great instability. Hudson's Bay most recently talked about the impending major job losses in that region. The labour movement in that part of our region is fighting hard to try to find solutions for workers. Unfortunately, once again, the current federal government is nowhere to be found.

We are also seeing major issues with respect to chronic high unemployment in first nations across our region. I want to touch on that point particularly because it is repeatedly overlooked in the government's rhetoric with respect to the middle class. The reality is that so many indigenous communities in our country are struggling in third world living conditions. Many people can only aspire to attain that middle-class lifestyle. However, as a result of chronic underfunding, systemic racism and generally an overall disrespect of indigenous rights, too many indigenous peoples in our region and across the country live below or around the poverty line.

To bring it back to this opposition day motion, I did talk about the government's misplaced priorities, in particular, this gift of $12 million to Loblaws, a large, successful company, owned by the second richest Canadian, to buy fridges ostensibly to take on climate change when communities, especially indigenous communities, are struggling on the frontline of climate change right now.

In fact, when I raised it in the House, it was on the heels of asking a very poignant question on behalf of people in Lac Brochet, one of the farthest-north communities in my region. When I visited there a few weeks ago, I was told by elders and leaders that they were deeply concerned that the caribou herds had moved further north because of climate change. That means their community, which has relied on the caribou since time immemorial, is struggling because caribou are their way of life. They wanted some financial support from the federal government to support a community hunt. They also talked about the need for immediate, urgent action to take on climate change.

I brought that issue back to the House of Commons. The government dismissed the demand I made on behalf of the people of Lac Brochet. A few short days later, to great fanfare, unfortunately the Minister of Environment and Climate Change announced that the government would be giving the famous $12 million to Loblaws to fight climate change. There is no money for Lac Brochet and no leadership on climate change for first nations and other Canadians, but there is all the money for some of the richest Canadians to greenwash their corporate agenda and the government's governing agenda.

What we are going through in our region is nothing short of a crisis in different ways. Repeatedly, when I go on the road when I am visiting in community after community, people tell me they feel abandoned by the federal government. I was just on the east side of Lake Winnipeg a couple of days ago, People were hopeful about the statements that were made by the Prime Minister. He talked about a new way of working with first nations. He committed to reconciliation and to working with first nations on a nation-to-nation relationship. Many people have seen almost nothing change in their daily reality.

It is no secret to many in the House that one of the biggest issues facing first nations and the on-reserve reality is a housing crisis. I visited Poplar River last week. I was told that there was a need for 80 to 100 homes. In Berens River, there is an average of seven to 10 people living in every house. The young man who works on housing made it very clear that the current housing that existed was not adequate for most families because it had mould and required major renovations. He asked where the federal government was.

While we hear a federal government that has, in rhetoric, a commitment to first nations, the reality on the ground is very different. It continues to govern in such a way that first nations people struggle, that people in resource-dependent areas struggle, for example where I come from, and repeatedly the federal government is nowhere to be found.

I will finish on the major question that we also ask through our opposition motion, which is the government's lack of action on climate change. I say this not just knowing the reality of our north where we live with climate change every day, but also in the Ottawa region where so many people are struggling right now to fight rising water levels.

I was moved by some powerful words of a young woman across the ocean. She is shaking people up and showing leadership on climate change. Most important, she is calling for leaders to do something about it.

Greta Thunberg, a 16 year old from Sweden, recently spoke to British parliamentarians. She talked about how she, “was fortunate to be born in a time and place where everyone told us to dream big.” She went on to say:

Now we probably don’t even have a future any more.

Because that future was sold so that a small number of people could make unimaginable amounts of money. It was stolen from us every time you said that the sky was the limit, and that you only live once.

Young people like Greta and young people and young indigenous people in our country are making the connection between the misplaced priorities of governments like the Liberal government to benefit its rich friends at the expense of so many Canadians and at the expense of truly showing leadership on climate change.

I am proud of the kind of leadership that we in the NDP are showing, not just today through this opposition motion but every day, in calling for urgent action on climate change, in making it clear that it is everyday Canadians who need and deserve a government on their side.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Madam Speaker, as parliamentary secretary to indigenous services, I am very proud of the work we are doing all over the country. We have invested over $21 billion in indigenous communities, and no riding has probably benefited more than the riding of Churchill.

Several months ago we announced $250 million to build four new schools in the riding of Churchill. Shortly before that, we announced $100 million for a new health facility in Norway House; $42 million for health transportation, in partnership with MKO, for northern Manitoba; $50 million over two years to upgrade health facilities in God's Lake Narrows, Lac Brochet and Red Sucker Lake; $47 million to upgrade Internet service in northern Manitoba for 48 first nations; and $120 million to finally solve the Churchill crisis, with an indigenous-led rail company.

I am wondering if the hon. member for Churchill—Keewatinook Aski could acknowledge the investments we have made. Also, why does she refuse to acknowledge the close to $1 billion this government has made in the riding of Churchill?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, I will be very clear. Every community in our riding welcomes federal partnership. I know I have limited time to respond to the points raised across the way, but I welcome the member across and other members of the government to join me in visiting first nations on the ground to see and hear the reality.

When I said the housing crisis was the number one issue, I cannot understate the extent to which there has been no federal leadership on this front. We are talking about third world living conditions. That must be addressed if we are to talk about an actual change in the quality of life that first nations people live.

With respect to the other areas, are we here to celebrate that first nations fought tooth and nail for decades to have new schools? I would like to congratulate the leaders, elders and young people who fought for that to happen. On that point, that same hand of the federal government that gave is also threatening to take away. Just a few days ago, I heard from leadership in one of those first nations that had signed an agreement for a new school. It was told by the ministry of indigenous services that the amount of funding initially committed was no longer available and it would have to cut the plan, including cutting building a new playground as part of the school. I am sure the member across does not think that is a good idea. Madam Speaker—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I have to allow for one more question.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

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

Madam Speaker, I disagree with the member opposite in many ways. This government placed great emphasis and priority on investing in Manitoba. My colleague made reference to Churchill. We talk about misplaced priorities. The greatest resource we have is indigenous children. In the last two decades, the peak of the worst was when there were thousands of children in care, and the provincial NDP government did nothing. We had a child care crisis for years under NDP rule, which chose to do nothing to try to fix the system. It did not want to assist in any fashion.

Could the member comment on that misplaced priority of the NDP government when contrasted to what we have been able to accomplish in the last few years, with hundreds of millions of dollars going to northern Manitoba and all regions dealing with indigenous issues?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, again, I welcome the member to join me and visit first nations on the ground across northern Manitoba to hear directly about the way in which the federal government is not there to respond to the major challenges people face on the ground.

As for the commitment to Churchill, why did the Liberal government privatize it in the first place? Why did the Liberal government take two years to act? I applaud the leaders on the ground who pushed for a solution that was finally supported by the Liberal government. We did not need to reach that point.

At the end of the day, I have made it very clear that people are facing immense challenges where we are. Like we have pointed out in this motion, unfortunately we have a government all too willing to support its rich billionaire friends instead of making the investments people on the ground need.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

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 Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Foreign Affairs; the hon. member for Bow River, Natural Resources; the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni, Fisheries and Oceans.

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Jonquière.

[Karine Trudel, NDP, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to speak to the motion moved today by my colleague from Elmwood—Transcona. I know he works very hard in his riding and is very close to his constituents.

Every month, I receive dozens of meeting requests from lobbyists from various sectors. I can only imagine how many requests the ministers and the Prime Minister must receive. In the case of the SNC-Lavalin affair, for instance, where attempts were made to help the company avoid a criminal trial, the Prime Minister's Office and various departments had dozens of meetings.

In Ottawa, lobbying has grown out of control since the Liberals took office. Lobbyists with Liberal ties can boast of having greater access to the highest echelons of government. In fact, the number of communications reported by lobbyists with federal government representatives has almost doubled since the Liberals took office. Corporate executives and their lobbyists have too much access to and influence over the Canadian government. In many cases, this sets working Canadians back.

Take Loblaws for example. It posted nearly $800 million in profits in 2018, and it received $12 million to help convert the refrigeration systems in its stores across Canada. The government gives huge gifts to its rich friends while everyone else has to pay even more. That money should be going to small and medium-sized enterprises, average Canadians and workers instead of multi-millionaire companies. The government should claw back those millions of dollars and invest them elsewhere.

Ridings like Jonquière are in desperate need. Unfortunately, the Liberal government keeps subsidizing big oil and gas companies to keep them operating. It puts the interests of businesses ahead of protecting Canada's Pacific coastal waters in the Kinder Morgan pipeline approval process. It also prefers to give $12 million to a multi-billion dollar company, Loblaws, which is owned by one of the richest families in Canada, the Weston family. That money should be going directly to the public. I have a lot of ideas for the government to consider, especially when it comes to investments.

We just went back to our ridings for two weeks. I got to participate in several activities and hold quality meetings with Jonquière residents. It is a big riding, but I am always honoured and happy to meet with my constituents.

During the past two weeks, I heard a lot about the Liberal government's bad decisions, especially the one to give Loblaws $12 million to buy fridges. In several municipalities in my riding, there are small independent grocery stores struggling to stay afloat. These stores are local services that often serve as community hubs, but sadly, some of them have been forced to close down due to a lack of funding.

It would have been a lifeline for these small grocery stores to receive financial assistance to help improve Canadians' quality of life. Quality of life and local services are important for our municipalities. This money would have been put to better use on that, rather than helping a big grocery chain like Loblaws. There are urgent needs in municipalities like mine, and many of them could have benefited from this $12 million, as I just demonstrated with a concrete example.

Furthermore, we have had discussions in the House about problems with the Phoenix pay system. This is another problem that has yet to be fixed and that affects workers who are trying to support their families. This affects 1,000 jobs in Jonquière, which is significant.

Other employment sectors have been affected by this problem. I have spoken to bus drivers at the Bagotville military base who drive cadets back to their camp in the summer. Many of them have not received a dime.

The NDP used one of its opposition days to move a motion calling on the government to compensate those affected and to take the measures required to effectively fix the situation.

I still get constituents coming into my office to tell me that they have not been paid. They are not getting paid for the hours they worked. This has caused many problems, as we have seen. Some workers are going four, five, six or even eight months without receiving the amount they are due, the pay they worked for. Some of them have had problems with their mortgages. This has even broken up families.

Pension theft is another problem. The government could have taken the $12 million and eliminated pension theft. How many times have we asked this government questions in the House?

I met with people from my riding after Sears closed. Last weekend, someone told me that he is not receiving a certain percentage of his pension. This man worked his whole life thinking that he could relax and enjoy his retirement. Now, he is struggling to make ends meet. It is not right for people who worked hard their entire lives and contributed to a pension plan to be told when it comes time to retire that they will be receiving 30% less than they expected.

I would like to remind members that the $12 million was invested in a very successful company. I spoke about buying groceries, and we talk a lot about affordable housing. In my riding of Jonquière, there are two Loge m'entraide projects. The Coopérative d'habitation La Solidarité could very easily be set up in Jonquière. Such a housing project would give many families and people living alone a place to live. The right to housing is an issue that we talk about regularly here in the House, but it seems to be a dialogue of the deaf.

Organizations such as Loge m'entraide do not have the funding necessary to build and run a co-operative. The government is always announcing measures, but I do not understand why Loge m'entraide is still saying in statements and interviews that it has not seen any of that money. Unfortunately, the project has still not been carried out. We are talking about a lot of people who are alone and who have to consistently use food banks to be able to pay for their housing.

I still have a lot to say, but my time is quickly running out.

That said, one thing is for certain: an NDP government would invest in people rather than giving money to millionaire friends, like the Liberals are currently doing. Human welfare is important, and an NDP government would take that into account.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Madam Speaker, I thank my NDP colleague for her speech.

When she talked about investments the NDP promised to make, that brought back memories of the 2015 campaign. The NDP promised people the moon. The NDP was going to fix all of our problems and balance the budget to boot. It campaigned on the same budget as Mr. Harper: austerity and cuts. I would like her to comment on that.

[Karine Trudel, NDP, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I would like to take this opportunity to discuss some issues I have not had a chance to talk about yet.

I remember the 2015 campaign very well. Even the Liberals promised people the moon. They claimed they were going to run a tiny little deficit. They promised all kinds of funding for infrastructure. Municipalities in my riding are still waiting for that money. Projects are in limbo and cannot proceed. People believed those promises. Promise after promise has been broken. There is no money and no investment.

Upping the ante and painting a rosy picture during election campaigns is nice and all, but I think the people who go to the polls in 2019 will not be fooled. They will do their homework and realize that all the promises made in 2015 were nothing but castles in the air.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, every time we get close to hitting a sore spot for the Liberals, they seem to want to reference the 2015 campaign, not understanding that it is now four years hence and that we are now in 2019.

However, I think my colleague brought up some good points. I was door-knocking in my riding in the great city of Langford over the last couple of weeks, and I went to a lot of constituents' doors and talked about a pharmacare plan. I was explaining that Canadian families have the potential of saving $550 a year, and some could benefit far more than that. The interesting thing is that the Liberals have promised pharmacare; I think their last major promise was in 1997. Here we are 22 years later, at the end of another majority government, and we are still waiting for the job to be done.

What is interesting is the amount of lobbying that happened with the government over the last couple of years. It went up quite a bit. In fact, it more than doubled in 2018, from the average, in their efforts to undermine what we are trying to achieve. I wonder if the member could comment on that and how it specifically fits into the motion we are debating today.

[Karine Trudel, NDP, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. He is doing excellent work. He sits on many committees and is very involved.

Pharmacare is really important to us. Several studies have already been done. In the last budget, the government told us that it was in place, that it was starting to look at it and begin consultations. I even heard some of my colleagues across the aisle say that the government was on the right track. However, that is not enough. We must act right now. I have had an opportunity to meet with some people, including a woman who had to remortgage her house because her prescription drugs are too expensive.

Saying that the government is going to do a study is not enough. In the meantime, the government needs to introduce policies that help Canadians. Universal pharmacare is one such policy. The government must have a much broader vision, one that goes much further than simply saying it is going to do a study. We have had plenty of studies and submissions on this topic.

I hope universal pharmacare becomes a reality, and I hope the government will bring in measures that really make a difference for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the House that Wednesday, May 1, 2019, shall be an allotted day.

Bill C-97—Notice of time allocation motion

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

While I am on my feet, an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Order 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the second reading stage of Bill C-97, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 19, 2019 and other measures. Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the Crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Government Policies

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be able to participate in today's debate.

I first want to reassure the House that in spite of what the opposition motion claims, our government is committed to strengthening the middle class and ensuring economic growth. Since coming to power, our government has ensured that this growth and prosperity are inclusive and benefit as many Canadians as possible, and it will continue to do so.

When we were elected in 2015, we promised that our government would be open and responsible and that it would better reflect the values and expectations of Canadians. Our government continues to be inspired by a simple but fundamental idea: everyone must benefit from the growth we have seen in Canada for decades and that we continue to enjoy. For our government, ensuring that Canadians have equal opportunities to succeed is not just the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do for the economy and for growth. We know that this is vital for a more just society and for growth that is more sustainable in the long term.

After decades of slow growth for the middle class and higher incomes for the wealthy, we made a real change. Almost four years ago, we asked the wealthiest 1% of Canadians to contribute just a little bit more so that we could lower taxes for the middle class. Single individuals who benefit from this tax reduction are saving an average of $330 a year, while couples who benefit are saving an average of $540 a year.

Our government also brought in the Canada child benefit. Compared to the previous child benefit system, the Canada child benefit is simpler, more generous, and better targeted to families who need it most. In fact, nine out of 10 families are better off with the Canada child benefit compared to the previous system.

Nearly 300,000 children have been lifted out of poverty thanks to the Canada child benefit. To make this effective benefit even better, the government is indexing it annually to keep pace with the cost of living effective July 2018, or two years earlier than planned. For this benefit year, families will be getting up to $6,500 for every child under six.

Thanks to the Canada child benefit, a working single parent with two children and an income of $30,000 a year now receives $3,000 more in benefits every year. That is $3,000 more to help a single-parent family pay for things like healthy food, sports activities and music lessons.

We made this investment because we realized that a better future for a child means a better future for our country. As a result of the middle-class tax cut and the Canada child benefit, a typical family of four has $2,000 more a year than before we were elected in 2015, and that includes this year and every year after. This figure does not come from me, it comes from the OECD. Last summer, the OECD published a report showing that a typical Canadian family of four was $2,000 better off than in 2015, thanks to more progressive, better targeted measures that were really helping families from coast to coast to coast.

However, we did not stop there. Our government also introduced the Canada workers benefit, or CWB, a strengthened version of the working income tax benefit. Over two million Canadians have benefited from the creation of the CWB, which is designed to encourage more people to enter or stay in the workforce. Under the new CWB, low-income workers earning $15,000 annually could get almost $500 more in benefits in 2019 than they were getting last year. In addition, the CWB's expanded eligible income range will ensure that more workers qualify and receive it.

Starting in 2019, we plan to make that benefit more accessible by allowing the Canada Revenue Agency to calculate the amount of the benefit for all eligible tax filers, even if they did not claim it. We expect this change to be particularly useful for people with limited mobility, those who live far from points of service and those without Internet access. Our government estimates that, as a result of these changes, an additional 300,000 low-income workers in Canada will receive the new CWB for the 2019 tax year. In general, the improved CWB will help lift roughly 70,000 Canadians out of poverty.

That is not all. As part of the government's plan, hard-working Canadians created over 900,000 new jobs, most of them full-time, bringing the unemployment rate down to the lowest it has been in nearly 40 years. There have been especially strong employment gains for women.

Our government continues to invest in people and to ensure the sustainable growth of the economy in a fiscally responsible manner while also ensuring that our debt-to-GDP ratio continues on the downward track.

However, we know that we cannot rest on our laurels if we want to continue to grow the economy and the middle class.

We are not just creating opportunities for the middle class to succeed. We are also creating opportunities for businesses to succeed: to create jobs, support their communities and grow the economy.

To support Canada's hard-working entrepreneurs, we cut the small business tax rate from 10% to 9.5% last year, and then to 9% at the start of this year. For small businesses, these cuts will mean up to $7,500 in federal tax savings each year, compared to 2017, savings that they can reinvest in purchasing new equipment, developing new products or creating new jobs.

Our government is committed to a tax system that is fair to all taxpayers and an economy that works for the middle class. By cracking down on tax evasion, particularly abroad, we can ensure that our government has the money needed to deliver programs that help the middle class and those working hard to join it. Preserving the integrity of the tax system also helps ensure that Canada remains positioned as an attractive place to work, to invest and to do business.

In recent years, our government has made significant investments to strengthen the CRA's ability to unravel complex tax schemes and to increase collaboration with international partners. These investments have already yielded positive results. Starting in 2015, the CRA expanded the number of audit teams that focus on high net worth individuals and their associated corporate structures. As a result, there are now more than 1,100 offshore audits under way, resulting in more than 50 criminal investigations with links to offshore transactions.

To further combat tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance, budget 2019 proposes to invest an additional $150 million over five years, starting in 2019-20. This investment will allow the CRA to fund new initiatives and extend existing programs. First, the CRA will be able to hire additional auditors, conduct outreach and build technical expertise to target non-compliance associated with cryptocurrency transactions and the digital economy. These investments will also help create a new data quality examination team to ensure proper withholding, remitting and reporting of income earned by non-residents in order to ensure tax compliance. Finally, these investments will allow the CRA to extend programs aimed at combatting offshore non-compliance.

Our government is also taking legislative actions, on both the international and domestic fronts, to enhance the integrity of Canada's tax system and give Canadians greater confidence that the system is fair for everyone. Let me share a few examples.

Legislation was enacted in December 2016 that requires large multinational enterprises to file country-by-country reports with revenue authorities to provide a clearer picture of their global operations. Budget 2017 introduced measures to prevent the avoidance or deferral of income tax through the use of derivatives. Budget 2018 introduced measures to strengthen international tax rules, including by preventing unintended, tax-free distributions by Canadian corporations to non-resident shareholders through the use of certain transactions involving partnerships and trusts. Budget 2019 proposes measures to keep mutual fund trusts from using a method of allocating capital gains to their unitholders in a way that inappropriately defers tax and to stop the use of individual pension plans to avoid limits that generally apply to transfers out of defined benefit pension plans.

There are many more examples of such measures. The one thing all of these measures have in common is that they are motivated by an understanding that an economy that works for everyone needs a tax system that is fair and we need all Canadians to pay their fair share of taxes. A fair tax system instills confidence and helps create opportunities for everyone.

Another particularly important part of our plan is improving financial consumer protection. The government is committed to ensuring that a strong and effective banking system is in place to guarantee the best possible protection for all financial consumers when they do business with their bank online or in person. That is why we have strengthened and modernized the financial consumer protection framework.

To give all stakeholders an opportunity to express their views, our government asked the Commissioner of the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, the FCAC, to consult a broad range of stakeholders, including provincial, federal and territorial regulators, to identify best practices in consumer protection for the banking sector.

That move enabled us to achieve our goal of ensuring the best possible overall protection for Canadians across the country. Canadians deserve a banking system that adheres to the highest consumer protection standards. That is why, following a comprehensive review of bank sales practices and consultations with the provinces and territories, as I mentioned, our government took significant measures to promote Canadians' rights and interests. By implementing a new set of rules to protect Canadians when they use their financial institutions, our government introduced the most significant change since the creation of the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada in 2001.

These legislative measures targeted three main areas. First, they would ensure that banks had internal operational practices to further strengthen outcomes for consumers, including ensuring that consumers' financial needs are considered when selling them financial services and products. Second, they would ensure that the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada has the necessary tools to implement monitoring best practices, including requiring banks to comply with their legal obligations and ordering charges that have been improperly collected always be returned. Third, these measures require banks to provide timely electronic alerts to consumers when they are at risk of incurring fees, which further empowers and protects consumers. Our government will continue to hold banks to account, to treat Canadians fairly and to provide better results for consumers.

In closing, the government, guided by what is most important to Canadians, will continue to work on ensuring that as many Canadians as possible are better off while we ensure the growth of our economy today and in the long term. We believe that is the right thing to do for all Canadians.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

I must say, there is one question I have been dying to ask all day. I will take my chances with my colleague from the Quebec City area.

When we ask about the $12 million given to Loblaws, the response we often get is that it was part of a standardized program. That is not the question. The member is probably in the same situation as me. Regardless of the salary we have earned throughout our lives, we always have more ideas about ways to spend money than actual money to spend on them.

The truly fundamental question is this: If the government really believes this is about fighting greenhouse gases effectively, why, with a limited budget, would it choose to give $12 million to someone who does not need it and who would have found a way to contribute without help from the government?

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Madam Speaker, in response to my colleague's question, I would say that it is important to note that in the case of this particular company, 75% of the funding comes from private enterprise. This will be like taking 50,000 cars off the road in Canada, which is something very concrete to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is just one initiative among many. It was assessed on its merits through a very rigorous process.

Our government's plan to combat climate change goes beyond this initiative. We have made historic investments in public transit, and these investments are helping to develop a vision for public transit across the country. As members know, this is a good way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Other investments in the environment include programs like the clean water and wastewater fund, or CWWF, which helps municipalities across Quebec and the rest of Canada with their waste water treatment systems. These types of investments do not always make the headlines, but they are helping us protect the environment and do our part in combatting climate change.

Putting a price on pollution is another aspect. Phasing out coal is another. People like Steven Guilbeault and Sidney Ribaux, from Équiterre and who now work for the City of Montreal, say that they have never before seen a federal government so committed to climate action. We have a range of measures for combatting climate change, as I have demonstrated.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is very interesting that when the NDP members speak about this debate and the $12 million, out of a $48-million investment, they do not mention the fact that it will be the equivalent of 50,000 cars taken off the road. I do not know why they would hide that. The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay is laughing, because he thinks it is funny that there will be a GHG reduction. I do not know why he finds that funny, coming from the north.

That being said, my question is in regard to the official opposition. It has been said that the Conservatives do not have a climate plan. It turns out that they do, but it seems that the only plank of that climate plan is to build a pipeline through Quebec. I was wondering if the hon. member could comment on the plan the Conservatives have put forward.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

Anyone willing to believe the Conservatives on the environment is extremely naive. For 10 years they did nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. They did nothing to fight climate change. In fact, the only thing they did was embarrass us when it comes to Canada meeting its international obligations on climate change and environmental protection.

They won the fossil awards five years in a row for Canada's inability to acknowledge climate change. Let's not forget that Mr. Harper's science czar was a creationist, which says it all. This was all part of their fight against science that went on for 10 years, a fight against the environment where we saw inaction. Remaining inactive in the fight against climate change when we see what is happening all around the world is abject and shameful. The fact that they still have nothing to say about it is just as abject and shameful.

Canadians are no fools. Whatever the Conservative Party proposes, Canadians will see through that party leader's smile and find Stephen Harper's same old policies, if not worse ones. Faced with the choice, Canadians will agree that the Liberal government may be the one that has been willing to do the most for the environment in the history of Canada. Yes, there remains a lot to be done and yes, we must do more.

People can certainly count on me to keep advocating for that.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, my question is very simple and very brief.

In view of what I just heard from my colleague from the Quebec City region, if we were so inept on the environment, why did the Liberals adopt the same environmental targets that we introduced? They are not even able to achieve those targets.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is one thing to have targets and another to have a plan to reach them. That is what sets us apart from the Conservative Party, which never had a plan.

The only plan they could count on to reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions was the 2008 financial crisis. Then there was the 2015 recession, into which they thrust us with their disastrous environmental and economic policies.

If greenhouse gas emissions were cut during that period it was mainly due to Ontario's Liberal government, which decided to eliminate carbon. No one in the House is naive enough to believe that the Conservatives have a serious environmental plan and that they can defend their record on environmental protection and fighting climate change.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is fascinating to hear my hon. colleague talk in this debate about trying to deal with offshore tax havens and how the government is going to deal with them, when this is specifically about the $12 million we gave to Galen Weston, who lives in a gated community, who is now facing, through the justice department, the fact that Loblaws' financial holdings were seen to be holding upwards of hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes that should have been paid to Canada. It set up an offshore haven in Barbados so that it did not have to pay taxes.

People who are super-rich and friends with the Liberals get money, and then we are told what great people they are. However, when the people I represent do not pay their taxes and do tax cheating, they do not get gifts. They do not get people buying them fridges. They get charged.

Whether it is KPMG, where one of the KPMG directors was appointed to oversee the finances of the Liberal Party after KPMG was found to have set up an international tax fraud scheme, or whether it is Loblaws, which set up its offshore tax haven to avoid paying taxes, the government gives them gifts, because this is the government of the 1%.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague why he thinks it is good government policy to give tax money to tax cheats.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Madam Speaker, as usual, the member opposite is mixing up a number of issues to try to leave a certain impression. I think that is disingenuous.

He wants to talk about tax evasion, aggressive tax avoidance and what our government is doing, when the fight against tax evasion was not a priority for a decade. Minister Blackburn in the Harper government said on air on TVA last summer that it was a taboo subject, that they never talked about it and that it was never a priority.

Under our government, the Minister of National Revenue and the Minister of Finance have invested considerably to provide the Canada Revenue Agency with the resources needed to prosecute those who try to hide their assets, their fortune and their income through tax evasion or aggressive tax avoidance. Nearly $1 billion has been invested over the past three years. Before that, the agency did not have the necessary resources, because it was not a priority. It is for us. There have been more investigations and more criminal proceedings, but these things take time.

As for the project he referred to, it is important to remember that the company that makes the refrigerators is in Mississauga, that this will be like taking 50,000 cars off the road and that 75% of the money is coming from the company. It is important not to confuse matters.

If my colleague wants to talk about tax evasion or tax avoidance, unlike the previous Conservative government, our government is giving the Canada Revenue Agency the financial and legislative means to prosecute those who try to evade taxes and avoid paying their fair share.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am so proud to rise for the New Democratic Party today. I will be sharing my time with the member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques.

I rise to talk about the corrosive power of the 1% with the current Liberal government. We have a Prime Minister who won so much support from Canadians, because coming after the years of Stephen Harper and the ugly scandals with Nigel Wright and the dodgy senators the Conservatives appointed, such as Pamela Wallin and Mike Duffy, we had the present Prime Minister promise to do government a different way. What we saw quickly after the Liberals came to power was the same old grotty, rum-bottle politics on the Rideau that have been the mark of the Liberal Party for the last 150 years. It is always about the friends. It is always about corruption.

When I talk to people back home, they cannot for the life of them understand why this Prime Minister thought it was a good idea to give $12 million to a guy who lives in a gated community in Florida, who fought against giving his employees a living wage and whose company was found guilty of cheating Canadian families out of bread. These are the people who belong to the Laurier Club, and these are the people who are invited to hang out with the Prime Minister and with the senior staff of the environment minister because they give money to the Liberal Party. Canadians know that it is wrong.

The Canadians I represent in the north work hard. They play by the rules. Many of them do not have pensions. Many of them are facing increasingly perilous short-term and contract work. We see not just an attack on the traditional working class but on the new white-collar working class of people who are working as professors with short-term contract work or as health care workers with short-term contract work. They see a system that is moving increasingly against them, yet they have this Prime Minister who said that the Liberals were there to support the middle class and those wanting to join it. This Prime Minister made them believe, but what we have seen with the current government is that it is always about the super-rich and the policies that favour them.

When we saw the Stelco pensions being undermined, just as the Nortel pensions before them had been undermined, and we saw the Sears workers being ripped off by hedge-fund predators, and we asked day after day in this House that the government do something, the Liberals were not going to do anything to help those pensioners. They got up and cried crocodile tears and showed their emotion, but the family business of the finance minister, Morneau Shepell, is the company that got the contracts to wrap up those pensions.

It is about the power of lobbyists. In fact, the Liberals are so tightly in with lobbyists that we had the present finance minister, in 2013, talk about the need to change legislation so that it would be easier for Morneau Shepell to take over the defined pension benefits. In 2014, Morneau Shepell gave recommendations about changing the legislation to make it easier for its business model. Instead of having to have a lobbyist, the company just got its guy elected as finance minister, and the very first thing he did was Bill C-27, which would have made it easy for the privatized pension industry to retroactively go after pension benefits. They were not here to represent working-class people. They were here to represent the investors and the 1%, of which this finance minister is a part.

We have been going after the Liberals for their unwillingness to go after international tax cheats. We have just heard from them that they are taking tax fairness seriously. Really? Loblaws has been found to have set up a Barbados bank. It is claiming that it was just holding the money, but hundreds of millions of dollars of tax money Canadians should have received to improve the system of services for Canadians are not being paid because of this offshore tax haven.

In Canada, when ordinary workers do not pay their taxes, the government comes down on them with all the power it has. However, when Loblaws does not pay its taxes because it has set up an offshore tax haven, it gets a $12 million gift. Then we get told how great it is for the environment. Thank God for Galen Weston.

Canadians might think I am just picking on Galen because he lives in a gated community in Florida and rips families off for the price of bread and does not want to pay a half-decent wage. Canadians might think I am just being mean; it is the whole class-conscious NDP who do not understand how things are with their betters. However, it is the pattern.

It is the pattern we saw with KPMG that established an international tax fraud scheme for the millionaires and billionaires. When it was caught, not a single person was found guilty. Nobody. I go back to folks back home, and my God if they got an overpayment on their EI, there is no mercy. However, KPMG set up this offshore account for rich billionaires to not have to pay taxes, and no one was charged. In fact, not only were there no charges, but, lo and behold, the same month that the Prime Minister stopped the investigation into KPMG, the Liberal Party of Canada hired a KPMG director to oversee the finances of the Liberal Party. I guess if they can set up offshore tax havens, they probably have the moral backbone to represent the Liberal Party.

It is the same with SNC-Lavalin. The government does not understand why it is in trouble. It thinks that getting someone to call into the Prime Minister's office because they worked on the Trudeau Foundation or they go to the same country clubs that it is, “Hey, what is the problem? We were just trying to change the law.” The law on deferred prosecutions was actually rewritten for SNC-Lavalin, and it still did not meet the criteria.

They had a whole series of efforts to intervene and undermine, and get to the director of public prosecutions, which is why the OECD anti-bribery unit is investigating and watching Canada. It said that the government's actions have lit all the alarm bells. We could go on about the SNC issue all day.

However, what I thought was fascinating is that the SNC lawyer fighting Canada is Frank Iacobucci. Michael Wernick told the former attorney general that she had to be careful with this guy, that he was not a shrinking violet. He is also the same guy who was appointed by the Prime Minister to oversee the Trans Mountain consultations. It is the same little circle of friends who look after each other time and time again.

We have a situation here. We need to have a system where Canadians can trust that there is fairness. They cannot have belief and trust when what is being run in Ottawa are the phone calls into the Prime Minister's office to change laws, to do favours, because of who people know in the PMO. That is the fundamental rot that makes people not believe in the system.

We are looking at the environmental crisis we are facing. The government came back, after the Prime Minister showed off his Haida tattoo, and said they would make everything work. It decided that it would stick with Stephen Harper's greenhouse gas emission targets and with Stephen Harper's investments into the oil sector. Our greenhouse gas emissions, because of what is going on in the oil sands, are higher this year than they were last year, which was higher than it was the year before. Year in, year out, the gas keeps rising. Year in, year out, the government continues to subsidize.

The government tells us that if we give $12 million to Galen Weston to fix his fridges, it will show a whole new commitment to environmental change. What it is really showing is that those who are the super-rich, the super-powerful, those who can get invited to the Laurier Club, can get the lobbyists in to see the key ministers and the Prime Minister and go to cash-for-access events will get their way. That is the broken trust that the Prime Minister is going to have to explain to the Canadian people.

I am more than willing to take questions.