Debates of May 1st, 2019

Automotive Industry

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

—in the industry over the last three years or four years.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I just want to remind the hon. members that I know these are adjournment proceedings, but the rules of the House still apply, so when someone is answering or asking a question, I would like to see a little respect for the person who is speaking. I think that would be fair for all the members. I just wanted to point that out for some of you who may have forgotten.

The hon. member for Regina—Lewvan.

Natural Resources

[Erin Weir, Independent, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the question that prompts this adjournment debate is with respect to the agenda for a premiers' conference that occurred months ago. I would like to broaden the adjournment debate to talk about the federal government's role in coordinating among provinces. Specifically, I would like to address the new Alberta government's proposal to slash its provincial corporate income tax rate to 8%.

The reason this should be of concern to the Government of Canada is that our federal corporate tax structure includes a 10 percentage point abatement to allow provinces and territories to levy their own corporate taxes. Currently, all provinces have corporate tax rates of around 12%. The only exceptions are in Atlantic Canada, where provinces have slightly higher corporate income tax rates. Therefore, that obviously accounts for the abatement from the federal government.

In proposing to slash Alberta's corporate tax rate to 8%, Jason Kenney is effectively asking the federal government to continue to provide a 10% abatement to companies operating in Alberta, even though they will only pay 8% provincial corporate tax. I do not think this makes sense and I want to suggest that the federal government should not go along with that. The federal government should require that to receive a 10% abatement, a province should be levying a corporate income tax rate of at least 10%.

Why would the federal government want to establish this type of a corporate tax floor for provinces?

The first point is obviously one of common sense. If the federal government has provided an abatement of 10% to allow provincial and territorial corporate taxes, those provincial and territorial corporate taxes should be at least that amount. However, a more fundamental reason is that the federal government should not want to encourage a race to the bottom on corporate taxes.

The federal government has wisely resisted the temptation to engage in such a race to the bottom with the United States. When confronted with the Trump administration's corporate tax cuts, the Government of Canada did not actually cut the federal corporate tax rate in this country. Instead it provided an accelerated depreciation for companies that were making investments in Canada.

Therefore, I do not think it makes any more sense for the federal government to be facilitating a race to the bottom among provinces on corporate taxes. That is exactly what Mr. Kenney is contemplating in proposing an 8% corporate tax rate for Alberta. He has specifically talked about achieving a competitive advantage relative to B.C. and Saskatchewan.

Clearly, the federal government needs to look out not only for Alberta's competitiveness, but also for the competitiveness of its neighbours. Indeed, in preserving our economic union, we should hope that industries will make decisions about where to locate among provinces based on real economic factors, not based on tax differences. It makes the Canadian economy less efficient if companies are moving around between provinces simply to take advantage of lower corporate income tax rates.

In summary, I believe the federal government should make its corporate tax abatement of 10 points contingent on provinces and territories levying corporate taxes of at least that amount.

[Kate Young, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Science and Sport and to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility (Accessibility)]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his comments, although I was informed we would be talking about the challenges facing Canada's energy sector, and I will comment on that.

Our government has been seized with expanding Canadians' access to global energy markets from its first day in office, and I will give the hon. member an overview of what we have been doing. That is why we approved the Line 3 replacement pipeline. It is why we have continued to support the Keystone XL project. It is why we are moving forward the right way with the Trans Mountain expansion projects in accordance with the guidance we received from the Federal Court of Appeal through meaningful consultations and broader environmental considerations.

While we work to build new pipeline capacity and open new access to non-U.S. markets abroad, our government also continues to take action to support Canadians.

The hon. member may recall for example that we announced a $1.6 billion package last December to support workers and boost the industry's competitiveness. That package includes $1 billion in commercial financial support from Export Development Canada to invest in innovative technologies, address working capital needs and explore new markets.

It also includes a new $500 million energy diversification commercial financing envelope over three years from the Business Development Bank of Canada; $50 million through Natural Resources Canada's clean growth program, which is expected to generate $890 million in new oil and gas investments; and $100 million through Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada to support energy and economic diversification related projects. All of this is in addition to our $4.5 billion investment in the Trans Mountain pipeline and its related assets.

I am pleased to say that our efforts are helping. For example, the oil price differential is at its lowest point in more than two years and this comes as Canada has also secured more than $50 billion in new private sector investments in the oil and gas sector, projects such as LNG Canada's $40 billion plan to build the world's cleanest LNG facility of its kind, not to mention the single largest private sector investment in Canadian history.

Then there is the $4.5 billion petrochemical chemical facility planned in Sturgeon County, two new inter-pipeline projects, including the Heartland Petrochemical Complex in Strathcona County and Nauticol methanol plant just south of Grand Prairie. Together these projects will create more than 16,000 new jobs at the peak of their construction.

These are real investments in our energy sector and in Canadian ingenuity and knowhow.

[Erin Weir, Independent, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to apologize to the parliamentary secretary. It certainly was not my intention to catch anyone off-guard. The question that this adjournment debate was based on was indeed about energy issues on the agenda of the premier's conference. However, since that conference is over, I wanted to speak about another federal-provincial issue that has a big impact on our energy sector, which is Alberta's proposal to slash its corporate income tax rate to 8%.

I certainly do not expect the parliamentary secretary to come up with a snap response to that issue. However, I would encourage the federal government to seriously consider whether it makes sense to continue extending a 10% corporate tax abatement to corporations in Alberta if that provincial government decides to cut its corporate tax rate below that 10% threshold.

This is an important issue for the House to deal with going forward.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member's points are well taken. I wish I had an idea that this would be the topic and be able to offer a more fulsome response.

I will add to some of the things I was saying. In addition to everything I listed in my previous remarks, we are also investing $72 million to fund three clean-tech projects in Alberta's oil and gas sector. Those investments will leverage another $415 million from other sources. We are also investing $49 million to support petrochemical innovation in Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta. Through budget 2019, we are providing $100 million toward the clean resource innovation network.

It bears repeating that our government and all Canadians stand proudly with workers in our energy sector.

Social Development

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, at the G20 in Argentina, the Prime Minister once again made headlines for his disparaging remarks. He said that the influx of male workers in rural Canada would have a negative social impact. Seasonal workers have been coming to our rural regions for many years. They drive our economy and no one complains.

Instead of wondering how to adjust and adapt, should the Prime Minister not be happy that Canada has access to such a skilled workforce?

[Kate Young, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Science and Sport and to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility (Accessibility)]

Mr. Speaker, every day construction workers across the country, both women and men, are working hard to build a better Canada. They are the backbone of our country, and their efforts are paying off. We are seeing real growth across the country, the fastest growth among all G7 countries last year, and the lowest unemployment rate in 40 years. This is to be applauded. We are proud of their contributions, but we also know that Canadians expect the economy to work for everyone, including those who are in jobs far from their communities and support networks, as well as those working on major projects close to home.

There are real challenges associated with these opportunities, including gender-based violence, which disproportionately affects women and girls, as well as other diverse populations such as indigenous peoples and those living in northern, rural and remote communities. That is why our government adopted the gender-based analysis plus, or GBA+, to inform all of our decisions and to ensure a safe, inclusive and more equitable workplace for all Canadians. Why is GBA+ important? It is an analytical tool that can be used to assess how diverse groups of women, men and non-binary people may experience policies, programs, legislation and initiatives differently.

The “plus” in GBA+ acknowledges that equality goes beyond biological and socio-cultural differences. It recognizes that we must consider all intersecting factors that shape our experiences, such as age, region of residence, indigenous status, income and so on. The federal government has committed to using GBA+ in the development of its policies, programs and legislation since 1995. It has led to real progress in the workplace, but we also recognize that more needs to be done. The alternative is to simply deny facts and hope problems go away. That may be the easy way out, but it is not leadership.

We have heard from many Canadians, from all parts of the country, who are disappointed with attempts to pit Canadians against one another. They are saddened by what they are seeing. They believe we should be working together to support workers and marginalized Canadians. That is what we are committed to doing on this side of the House, because that is the Canadian way. It always has been and always will be.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect for the parliamentary secretary, that was not the issue. We are not talking about pitting people against each other. This is not about us or about other MPs. It is the Prime Minister himself who made headlines for his disparaging remarks. He said that the massive influx of male workers in rural Canada would have a negative social impact.

I live in a rural area where there are foreign workers. We have nothing negative to say about them. They work hard and contribute to our economy. My concern is that our Prime Minister is making insulting comments when he goes abroad. Whether it is about men or women, it has to stop. We are not the ones who need to apologize. It is the Prime Minister who needs to apologize for his comments—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the member opposite is against: ensuring Canadians have safe workplaces or recognizing the reality that some workers face when they are far from home.

However, I can tell her that a succession of federal governments have been using gender-based analysis to inform their decision-making for more than two decades. There has been important progress made, but we know that more needs to be done to narrow the gaps that exist not only between women and men but among historically under-represented groups, such as indigenous peoples, visible minorities and people with disabilities.

We are proud to be standing up for all workers.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The motion to adjourn the House is now 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 7:09 p.m.)