Debates of Nov. 3rd, 2020

Opposition Motion—Consequences of the Pandemic on Canadian Workers and Businesses

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Madam Speaker, my region of Atlantic Canada has been hit hard in terms of the tourism sector and the aviation industry. My riding is home to the Halifax international airport, which serves as a major hub for our region. We have seen major airlines announce cancellations potentially indefinitely for regional air routes.

Many of the benefit programs we have put forward have been a lifesaver for the aviation sector and for air travel more broadly, whether it is financing for large employers, the wage subsidy or the other commercial programs. I know the government has been working with the aviation sector to continue to figure out specifically how we can support the long-term survival of air travel in Canada, because the full picture of this pandemic will not reveal itself until long after the public health emergency has ended.

We plan to be there to ensure the air sector has the support it needs. When it is safe to resume travel in the manner we did pre-pandemic, Canadian tourism operators are going to be among the primary beneficiaries globally.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I certainly agree with my colleague about the scale of the devastation in small businesses. This is the worst economic impact we have seen since the Great Depression. I think the saddest moments for MPs across the country have been in many cases small business people, who put their lives into their business, closing the door for the very last time because they are simply unable to continue.

The commercial rent relief program put in place by the government was handed to a commercial mortgage company. As the member knows, initially it only applied to landlords with commercial mortgages. This was completely unacceptable. Over a billion dollars that should have gone to small businesses was not able to get there because of the complexity of the program given to a company led in part by the spouse of the chief of staff to the Prime Minister. The government has said it will fix that massive error by putting in place a new program, but it is not retroactive.

Why is the government not putting in place retroactive measures for the hundreds of thousands of small businesses that were unable to access the first botched program for commercial rent relief so that those businesses could actually weather this storm and come out of the pandemic and the second wave intact and—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Madam Speaker, before I address the question, I would like to point out that I find it wholly inappropriate to deal with the drive-by smears of the family members of the Prime Minister's staff. He and others have raised complaints along this nature, which are personal attacks. They took it so seriously that they raised it with the Ethics Commissioner, who dismissed entirely the complaint they had made. It is inappropriate to continue the personal attacks on the families of both the Prime Minister and his staff.

With respect to the question, we launched a series of benefits to meet very specific needs: the wage subsidy to help people keep workers on the payroll; CEBA to help businesses keep the lights on; and initially the commercial rent assistance program to help them keep the doors open. We realize, through many conversations with our colleagues of different partisan stripes and, most important, the businesses themselves, that they wanted something that could help them better avoid the provincial responsibility for landlord-tenant relationships. We designed an innovative program that would allow them to apply directly for support.

From his statement, I anticipate that the hon. member will be vigorously supporting the legislation when it comes time for a debate and a vote on the floor of the House of Commons.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have a simple question for the member.

During this pandemic, clear communication has been important from all levels of government. In particular, though, one of the most disappointing things has been the announcements that have come out of the federal government and their lack of execution or implementation.

Specifically, when it comes to the CEBA, back in August the government made the announcement that it would support those businesses with personal chequing accounts. As of last Monday, the Liberals made this announcement on their website “Canada Emergency Business Account now open to businesses using personal banking accounts.” However, as we know this is not a fact. What has now happened is those businesses can open a business account and then qualify to apply for the CEBA.

Would the member agree that the message and this title on the government website could be a lot clearer so small businesses clearly understand the programs and how they are available to them?

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Madam Speaker, I would disagree with the member that this has been successful communication without successful implementation. The strength of our programs is the number of Canadians they directly support.

Before I address the personal account issue, CERB has benefited more than nine million Canadians. CEBA, about which he has complaints, has now helped over 750,000 businesses. The wage subsidy is helping to keep more than three million Canadians on the payroll. Yes, there are nuances that could have been improved, both in terms of communication and delivery over time, but this is precisely why we are making the kinds of changes we have for the personal account issue.

With respect to businesses that operate out of a personal bank account, this was a challenge because to prevent fraud, financial institutions, of which over 200 are involved in the delivery of this important program, needed to quickly verify the information being presented to them as accurate. It is easy for them to do this with a business account, but it is nearly impossible for them to do that with a personal account.

The solution that we have achieved is to allow businesses to go to the bank they normally deal with through a personal account, simply open a business account and they will then immediately have access to the Canada emergency business account, like the 700-some thousand that are already benefiting from this program, continuing to keep Canadians working as a result.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean.

Starting a business is one of the hardest things a person can do. I speak from experience. Entrepreneurs work hard, often more than 40 hours a week. They often take no salary. At first, they do not get paid. They are constantly looking for financing. They are often forced to refinance their home. We are asking these people, the cornerstones of tomorrow's economy, to make a tremendous effort. Close to 80% of businesses do not celebrate their five-year anniversary. It is extremely hard for these individuals.

Then the pandemic hit. This was the fault of neither the government nor the businesses. The pandemic came as a crippling blow. Some businesses were on the verge of becoming profitable. At last, they could see the light at the end of the tunnel. The pandemic put paid to years of hard work. It is incredibly sad.

Some sectors will feel the strain more than others. We do not know how they will be able to cope in the short or medium term. I am talking about tourism, hospitality, aviation and travel agencies. Unfortunately, the workers in these sectors are not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. We are therefore asking the government to make an effort to try to help them as much as it can.

Under these exceptional circumstances, exceptional measures were needed. Parliamentarians also needed to leave partisanship in the lobby. If we ask the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, he will say that he had a major ally at the beginning of the pandemic. The Bloc Québécois was in co-operation mode. I know this because I am the House leader of the Bloc Québécois, and I worked with the leader of the government. He said that the government was building the plane in flight, and unfortunately that was true. That is why we worked together. Unfortunately, the co-operation has eroded, giving way to partisanship.

On April 11, the emergency wage subsidy was created. Among other things, the Bloc asked that 75% of the payroll be subsidized. It was a good move on the part of the government, and naturally, we welcomed it. We wanted to include assistance for fixed costs in the subsidy. The wage subsidy was admittedly good for employees and employment relationships. Unfortunately, it may not have been enough to help businesses overcome the pandemic.

We asked the government to introduce assistance for fixed costs, and it agreed. However, the government did little or nothing to follow up on this request. The rent relief did not do the job. Less than half of the money earmarked for rent relief was spent. Perhaps the major issue was that the money was given to the property owners.

When I spoke with the government leader, I told him it was hard for us to say what help with fixed costs would look like. I told him that we were trusting them, because fixed costs are difficult to identify. They include electricity, insurance, rent and other things. We left the door open. We asked them to propose something, saying we were available to help if they needed input. We were there for the government, for the public and for the SMEs, our leaders of tomorrow. Unfortunately, the proposed help, as small as it was, did not serve its purpose. The government broke its promise, that is for sure.

The government broke another promise. We negotiated to adjust the CERB so that after the first wave, businesses could hire people who would benefit from returning to work. Business owners were telling us that they were unable to hire people, that it was too hard. That is when we got the idea to adjust the CERB. We needed to move faster to prepare for what was coming after the first wave.

The Deputy Prime Minister rose in the House and promised to respect the Bloc Québécois' idea of adjusting the CERB. That was another victory for the Bloc Québécois. Did the Deputy Prime Minister keep her promise? Unfortunately, she did not.

That is the recent history of the assistance offered by the government. Agreements came out of good-faith discussions between the Bloc Québécois and the current government. We had hope, but that hope is gone.

The help with fixed costs that was offered to businesses was too prescriptive and restricted to get the job done. We are now in the second wave of the pandemic, which in many ways is worse than the first, and, once again, we have nothing for businesses. That is the reality.

On October 1, in response to the second wave, the Quebec government added a fixed costs component to its concerted temporary action program for businesses and asked the federal government to follow suit. As I said earlier, it is hard to identify all fixed costs. That is why the Quebec government gave us the flexibility to determine which fixed costs the assistance should go to. All the federal government had to do was follow its lead, which it could have done quickly.

However, October 1 came and went, and nothing was announced. One month into the second wave of the pandemic, still nothing. At last, on November 2, the government came out with something to finally address the trauma faced by business people, who deserve our utmost respect.

We agree that the Conservative motion is interesting. It talks about helping businesses, and we cannot object to that. It talks about being flexible and giving businesses a break from the CRA until June 2021. Any time the CRA comes knocking, it is stressful for businesses. Giving businesses a break until 2021 is a welcome measure. Targeting sectors that have suffered more than others from the pandemic is important. I talked about that earlier. The Conservative motion opens the door to a possibility that we raised quite some time ago.

With respect to seasonal workers, the government has admittedly taken steps in the right direction, but it has not gone far enough. We are talking about tourism, hospitality and restaurants. How are restaurant owners supposed to survive? Many people in my riding are calling out in despair. We are trying to help them using the tools provided by the government. However, everyone here agrees that the help is woefully inadequate.

What about the aerospace industry and its 40,000 quality jobs? It is Quebec's main export. Montreal is one of only three places in the world that can build an airplane from nose to tail. However, the government has offered no assistance, a big fat zero. What a disappointment.

I know that I always seem to be in a good mood, but not right now. Why? Because the well-meaning Conservatives just told us today that despite raising $13 million in funding in the first three quarters of 2020, they will not be paying back the Canada emergency wage subsidy. This is shameful. They raised $13 million.

The Liberal Party is no better, since it claimed $800,000 in public money, Quebec and Canadian taxpayers' money, despite raising $8.6 million in political contributions in the three quarters. The Liberal Party said it would stop collecting federal assistance because it had taken enough. This is shameful.

The two richest and wealthiest political parties in Canada are a disgrace to Quebec and to Canada.

Some are looking at me as I speak, and I have no qualms about saying that the new leader of the Conservative Party, who stated during his campaign that he would pay back the amounts that the party received under the Canada emergency wage subsidy, is not going to pay back anything at all. As for the Liberal Party, it is led by a Prime Minister who keeps lecturing everyone and who prefers to give to his party, to give $237 million to former Liberal MP Frank Baylis and to give $900 million to WE Charity. Shame on him.

We in the Bloc Québécois are here for the right reasons. We are here to stand up for ordinary folks, and we will continue to do so.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, earlier we heard the hon. member for Guelph say that an audit in the public service was the same as an audit in the private sector. Can the hon. member for La Prairie clarify the difference between the work of a federal public servant and that of an entrepreneur who takes risks to create wealth?

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I must commend my colleague for making the effort and speaking French so well.

He is absolutely right to be upset about this flawed comparison. When an individual is audited, they are the one who has to pay for it. They often need an expert to provide the documents. In addition to that is the threat hanging over their head, even if they have done nothing wrong. Just go talk to business owners. They will say that it does not feel good. Is that same pressure felt in the public service? I think the answer is in the question. My colleague is absolutely right, and I agree with him.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Madam Speaker, doing a limited-scale audit of an operation during a pandemic is actually a way of managing risk on that operation. As a small business owner, audits would give me some corrections that I would be able to make before problems got out of hand.

As a businessman, I did not like auditors coming in either, but I did find them helpful in terms of managing the risk of my operation. A limited-scale audit such as this would be able to help a business owner do that. Could the hon. member please comment on that?

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I commend and thank my colleague for the question.

It seems that some people find clarity when they are under threat. In my colleague's case, a CRA audit helps him to manage his business.

Seriously, if his business is important to him, I am sure that he is constantly doing these checks. It is a work in progress, an ongoing task.

I think he is on the wrong track. A business owner is constantly aware of what is going on in their business.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

He touched on a number of important points. We are both concerned about the restaurant, cultural and tourism industries. I would like to focus on air transportation and the lack of a national aerospace strategy.

I would like to ask him why the government cannot come up with a clear plan and a recovery plan for the airline industry and the aerospace sector as a whole, a sector that is vital to Quebec.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would say that I agree with the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie.

Quebec needs a robust and sensible aerospace policy that has clear and informed objectives. The federal government has done absolutely nothing on this. It does little, and any actions taken are done piecemeal. As a result, our aerospace sector, which did not get much from the government in the beginning, is in an extremely precarious situation because of the pandemic. What has the government done? It has done nothing, even though this is the most important sector of Quebec's economy.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, at the beginning of his speech, my colleague pointed out that, from the very beginning of the pandemic on, the Bloc Québécois had suggested constructive ways to support small businesses.

In my riding, I would like to thank the CLD du Haut-Saint-Laurent, the Haut-Saint-Laurent RCM, the CLD de Beauharnois-Salaberry, the Suroît-Sud CFDC and DEV Vaudreuil-Soulanges, who were also key economic partners in supporting small businesses through the wide range of programs created in both Quebec City and Ottawa.

Could my colleague explain what these organizations go through from the moment a program is announced to its actual implementation? Is this lag time in fact prejudicial to these organizations?

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. Obviously, in a situation involving a promise, from the time it is made public to when it is fulfilled, a lot of people come knocking. The wait is even worse. These individuals working for all of us are in a situation where they have nothing to give despite the tremendous demand. It is a very unfortunate situation.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is always hard to rise to speak after my colleague from La Prairie because he is very eloquent. I will try to use fewer English words in my speech and I should be fine.

Without a doubt, Quebec businesses, Canadian businesses, and especially SMEs, were devastated by the pandemic. To be honest, I must say that I am very pleased that this motion is being debated in the House today. All of last week, the Liberals celebrated Small Business Week, almost as if it would magically solve the problems facing entrepreneurs who simply can no longer make ends meet.

The Liberals obviously love to hear themselves talk about the economy and entrepreneurship, congratulating themselves along the way. Their most recent display of boastful arrogance was on September 23, 2020, when the government announced that it intended to offer a wide variety of new measures to support businesses in need.

The government announced additional direct financial assistance to businesses that had to shut down due to a public health order; the extension of the Canada emergency wage subsidy until summer 2021; an enhancement to the business credit availability program; and support for industries hardest hit by the pandemic, such as travel, tourism and culture. Over one month has gone by since the government promised to support businesses, but they are still waiting.

The economies of Quebec and Canada are being devastated by the second wave of COVID-19. It is as urgent now to deliver this needed support as it was during the first wave. However, it took the government until yesterday to wake up and finally introduce a bill to extend the Canada emergency wage subsidy and create a new commercial rent subsidy program. That is the minimum.

The Liberals got the Governor General to deliver a throne speech chock full of lip service and empty promises, they got a certain opposition party that cares more about its survival than its values to do their bidding, and they threatened the country with a snap election, blaming parliamentarians who wanted to shed light on WE Charity for it. Now the Liberals are finally paying attention to businesses.

The people who elected us do not want lip service; they want action. Quebeckers and Canadians should know that their businesses and their employers are way down the list of priorities for this government and the opposition party that props it up. People can be sure that if my colleagues from other parties have to choose between working on getting elected and working to help businesses survive, they will focus on the former.

Today, we are debating a Conservative motion that will spur the government to action. I certainly agree with that.

Before voting on any motion or bill, I always ask myself the following: Who do I work for? My answer is always the same: I work for my constituents, for the business owners in Lac-Saint-Jean and for the workers they employ. I do not work to advance my own interests. When you look at it that way, it is pretty easy to make the right decisions. If you ask me, voting to support this motion is a no-brainer.

I would now like to make a few comments on the context of the motion.

First of all, I still do not understand why it took the Liberals over a month to come up with an alternative after the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program ended. On top of that, I also do not understand why, six months after it came into effect and after countless testimonials of its failure, the government still has yet to respond to the criticism of the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program, or CECRA. Do not get me wrong, I am glad the government has come to its senses on this.

However, since the start of the pandemic, SMEs have been constrained not just by the virus, but also by their landlords. Landlords wield a great deal of power over commercial tenants, because they have to absorb a certain loss. Like many from the business sector, the Bloc Québécois has always condemned this situation and repeatedly said that it would be easier to deal with the tenant involved rather than a third party. The program was also far too complex and would not exactly win any awards for ease of access. Ironically, less than half of the $3 billion initially allocated by the government was disbursed. I have been an MP for only one year, but I am told that it is rare for a government to spend less than expected. It is a first.

We see quite rightly that the government made its own bed. The bill is clearly an admission of failure accompanied by a “better late than never”. The government will have to convince us and do it quickly. The only thing worse than further delays would be to ram through a botched program under the pretext of urgency.

Let me be clear. The government can no longer claim that the situation is urgent. The government no longer has the right to cut corners. From now on, it must take responsibility for how quickly it takes action and, most of all, for the integrity and seriousness of the parliamentary process through which these measures are introduced and then approved.

In principle, I am in favour of extending the Canada emergency wage subsidy until 2021, which is what Bill C-9 proposes to do. That is something we have called for a number of times. It is also consistent with today's debate, which seeks to light a fire under this government.

I want to come back to what I was asking earlier. Who are we working for?

We work for people who clearly expressed their desire to continue to receive the subsidy. They want the government to keep the subsidy rate the same, maintain the basic subsidy rate until December, adapt the top-up subsidy as conditions change, be more flexible when determining basic income for employees who are returning from leave and include rent in the eligible expenses. They also want those businesses and individuals who are taking advantage of the pandemic to grease their own palms to pay back the subsidy, whether they are CERB fraudsters or political parties.

I know that I am repeating myself, but I find this important: Will the Liberals pay back the wage subsidy, since we know they made $850,000 out of it?

I believe they said that they would not pay it back. Also, we realized this morning that the Conservatives still have not paid it back either, despite their leader's campaign promise to do so. Who are we working for?

The government is quick to recognize its privileges, while finally admitting that being in power is a privilege and brings with it a higher standard of probity. The government and its cronies have had their hands in the cookie jar for over six months, but Halloween is over. It is time for the Liberals to take off their masks.

Quebeckers and Canadians are ready to see their hard-earned money used for the righteous cause of saving the economy. However, let us be humble enough to recognize that it is their money, and let us do things the right way. Doing things right also means acknowledging that to deal with businesses is to deal with human beings.

A few seconds ago I was saying that our constituents want those entities and individuals that are taking advantage of the pandemic to pay back their benefits. That is why the Canada Revenue Agency is auditing the accounts of small business that received the wage subsidy. However, I think the situation calls for more flexibility from the CRA.

In the beginning, the situation was urgent for everyone, for politicians and business leaders alike. I am sure mistakes were made when the subsidies were awarded, but I think they were honest mistakes. It is for this reason, more than any other, that I agree with the motion.

It seems clear to me that in the middle of a partial closure of the economy, starting audits now is a bad idea. We all know, personally or through our role as MPs, that businesses are struggling to make it and survive. That is their priority right now, especially since the measures to help workers, although largely beneficial, intensified the pressure to retain staff. This is an undisputed fact.

Make no mistake, in spite of everything we have done, the pandemic has severely hurt our economy, and in particular the tourism and restaurant industries, which are closely linked. Tourist season in Quebec did not benefit everyone equally. The second wave is dealing a fresh blow to a sector that has already been pummelled.

For example, back home, we usually get a huge number of international visitors during the fall. This year, a decade-long campaign to extend the tourist season came to nought. Spending by international tourists is down by 95% in Montreal. Although businesses across Quebec and Canada are trying to be positive, they continue to operate at reduced capacity. I and many others fear that many establishments, including hotels and restaurants, will shut down for good. I will wrap up with this: Once we have secured more generous programs for businesses, we are going to have to quickly develop an assistance program specifically for the tourism industry.

The Prime Minister has twice said that he is looking at a tailored solution for the tourism industry. I hope that is true. I hope that he will also fulfill his constitutional responsibilities by giving the money to Quebec and the provinces. I also hope that the Conservatives and New Democrats agree with me on this.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, tourism is important. I enjoy visiting my colleague's part of Canada. It is a beautiful place in our country, which has an industry that has been hurt.

However, there are two parts to this: We need to protect lives and we need to protect livelihoods. If we do not protect people's livelihoods, their lives will be challenging.

Over the last eight or nine months there have been many suggestions made to the Liberal Party of things to be changed. With regard to the legislation that is being proposed, I have lost small businesses in my riding because this is too late now.

Have businesses been lost in my colleague's riding because these changes that have been suggested for nine months have not been made?

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question.

I know people who have closed their businesses because the government took too long to change the emergency assistance programs it had put in place. For six months, the Bloc Québécois has been saying that the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program is not working. The proof is that not even half of the $3 billion for businesses has been spent.

I know some of these entrepreneurs personally. They have worked hard all their lives to build up these businesses. The government reacted too late, despite all the advice from the opposition. It should have listened. As a result, fathers and mothers were forced to close their businesses. It is sad and it is hard.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, there have been a suite of programs to support small businesses in all regions of our country. There is not a day that goes by in which there is not direct input going to individual members of Parliament, Liberal members in particular, I suspect, and government, related to businesses. The parliamentary secretary to the minister of finance has been very clear on our openness to make the changes that are necessary to support small businesses.

I would ask the member if my understanding is correct that the Bloc will be supporting the opposition day motion.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, of course we will support this motion.

The openness of the former minister of finance was just mentioned. The fact is that, for six months now, my colleague, the member for Joliette, has been telling the Standing Committee on Finance that the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program is not working.

This is serious. We hear about working collaboratively across party lines and making changes together, but what happens at the end of the day? Committees and the House are shut down, no one can talk about WE Charity, and the opposition parties are not being heard when they have good ideas.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, most of Quebec is in the red zone right now.

Unlike the first wave, restaurants are among the businesses that are closed. My riding is extremely agricultural and is currently in the red zone. In fact, my colleague knows it well, because he used to live there, in the charming community of Saint-Liboire.

When we talk about the food supply chain, we are also talking about its role in the restaurant business. I would like to know how the rent assistance my colleague talked about could have a beneficial effect on these places we like to frequent.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague's riding is indeed absolutely splendid. I spent seven beautiful years there.

Indeed, when the restaurants and hotels close, it means that they buy fewer local products. This hurts our farmers, which is why we have been saying from the beginning that when the Bloc Québécois proposes something, it works. We saw it with aluminum; we have good ideas. We are working for our constituents, whether from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot or Lac-Saint-Jean.

My riding is also very agricultural, and it has hurt a lot of farmers to see orders drop because of restaurant and hotel closures. If the other side of the House will roll up their sleeves and listen to what we have to say, we may be able to save a lot more businesses.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to rise today and talk about small businesses: the economic generators in our small communities, job creators and cultural innovators.

I am happy to be sharing my time with my colleague, our finance critic, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

Today, we are talking about those small business owners that I outlined and the sacrifices that they have made. Many have closed their doors to protect public health, and they have made the ultimate sacrifice. Many have created products to help people in our communities, including distilleries for our hygiene coordination and whatnot. It has been a tremendous effort, and we saw small businesses rise up, which they always do. In our communities, we know that they are the first ones to donate to our charitable organizations or volunteer to support those communities. Many owners are the coaches of our sports teams or teachers in the classes we take in our community. We owe them a ton of gratitude.

When I think back on when I was a small business owner and a chamber of commerce president, I think back to 2008 when the last recession hit us. The Conservatives were in power, and I watched the government of the day bail out its friends: the big corporations and big banks. With horror, I saw the sales in my own business drop 75% overnight, and there was no relief or help.

I was delighted when the leader of the NDP called to ask me what needed to be the priority for small business, and I identified that we could never let history repeat itself. We could never let another 2008 happen where small business owners and their workers took the brunt of the economic crisis. Instead, we needed to make sure that we helped everybody we could, especially small business owners, to get through difficult times.

I am glad to see this motion come forward today, especially the part about auditing small businesses, because there is nothing worse than being in a financial crisis and CRA is knocking on the door asking a small business owner to report to it with documents, which is not always an easy task when one is scrambling or pivoting to adjust to stay afloat, especially in times like this. It could wipe somebody out with the enormous time and energy that could be required.

I want to talk about the importance of parliamentarians working together and, for the most part, we have been doing that in this crisis. I think about the unprecedented actions, including the leader of the federal NDP and myself signing a letter with Dan Kelly, the head of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, and organized labour asking the government to increase its original rollout of the Canada emergency wage subsidy from 10% to 75%. The government has continued to roll out programs to support workers, but has always come out well below the bar of what is necessary. It has designed programs that are flawed, that do not get people the help they need right away.

This unprecedented effort of working together, organized labour, small business owners and New Democrats working with their colleagues across the floor kicking and screaming to get the government to fix these programs, has made an enormous difference to help many Canadians, such as getting sick days, which has helped support small business. The New Democrats have been there every step of the way, supporting indigenous-led businesses in the tourism sector or eligibility around the wage subsidy and bringing forward the Canada food procurement program idea.

One program that I worked very hard on with my colleague for New Westminster—Burnaby in early April was the idea of a Canada emergency rent assistance program. Of course, we expected that the program would be directed at the small business owners who needed help. What baffled me, and everybody across our country, especially those in need the most, was that this program was designed specifically for landlords who had mortgages, which no one can really explain to this day, and many small businesses were left out. In fact, at the end of the program, even in its extended version, only 128,000 businesses were able to access the program. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business cited that there were 400,000 businesses that wanted to apply, but only one-third of them were eligible.

By not fixing the program, the government left $1 billion unspent. That brings us to today. Many of those small business owners, including many in my riding, are steeped in debt or are facing bankruptcy and are under enormous pressure, because they could not access a program like the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program, the same program that their neighbours or their competition got.

In all fairness, the government has admitted its failure with that program by tabling the legislation it is going to table tomorrow, the details of which are public knowledge. We are glad to see those changes happening. However, we are really disappointed that the government is not going to go back to April 1 and allow the small business owners who were left out to have access to those funds. Those are taxpayer funds that they should have equal access to.

We are seeing a massive deficit that could be $400 billion to support small businesses and workers, gig workers and people across this country in this pandemic. At the end of the day, it is going to be those people or their children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren who will end up paying the debt on that, when it actually should be the big corporations and those who profited, as we have heard about from the New Democrats.

At the end of the day, that money is going to be paid back by everybody. It is absolutely unfair to those folks who have not been able to access those program. The government has a duty and an obligation to go back and fix that program, and to ensure that those people get access to it.

I am urgently urging the minister and the Liberal government to fix this program, and urging my colleagues to get on board. I did not hear the Conservatives answer my question today, whether or not they agree the government should backdate that program so that people get access to it.

We heard that businesses in Port Alberni, for example, that rent from a local government agency could not access the program. They were disqualified, just for renting from a local government that, under its own legislation, could not provide relief to them.

The government continued to watch small businesses either fail or rack up debt, and many of them could not access the loans because of the qualifying measures of the loan programs the government was rolling out, especially for the BCAP. These programs have been very restrictive. The small businesses need help; they do not need more debt. They are in fear right now. I know what it is like to be in fear of losing a business that they built over many years.

We urge the government to support this motion today, to back off on audits but also to come back and fix this program. I see my time is running short. We are glad to see these things roll out, things that have been asked for, including the extension of the emergency wage subsidy.

One thing we have not talked a lot about is that we do not see any strings attached to protect workers. For example, in the tourism and hospitality industry, laid-off workers have no guarantees from their former employer that they would be recalled to work, so that when the jobs are restored they get put back on the seniority list or taken care of.

Indigenous-led businesses and organizations, many of which were disqualified until we went to bat for them on the wage subsidy, or the indigenous tourism organizations have not had full participation to have an indigenous lens on the important programs that the government is rolling out.

We need the government to roll out the programs. A lot of these supports come a little too late. We need the government to come back with a recovery plan to support small business, but also to invest in social infrastructure. As we are seeing, child care is absolutely essential to support small business. Pharmacare, dental care and reformed EI are needed, so that those workers who are now on the new CERB can get the training they need to meet the labour market needs. Many of them do not qualify, because initially they did not contribute to EI.

We need the government to take more action and to have a more robust rollout. Instead of threatening Canadians about going to the polls over opposition day motions, the government needs to get this program across the finish line so that small businesses are not worried that they are going to have to wait months for the support they need.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member touched on many different areas with which I agree. I would like him to comment more on the timeliness of supports.

The government spent the summer mired in conflict of interest scandals and then prorogued the House. When it came back in September, it did not have any legislation ready to go. It just had a recycled Speech from the Throne, and here we are on November 3.

Could the member comment on the importance of timeliness of supports and how it affects real businesses in his riding?

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague's question is a great one. It has been an incredible journey for small businesses. They have been waiting for news on the extension of the wage subsidy program, or changes to the rent program.

The government prorogued Parliament. It delayed getting help to small businesses. In the meantime, every day we are seeing more and more small businesses close their doors permanently. We need the government to fix these programs, but we need the Conservatives to get on board and pressure the government to backdate the commercial rent assistance program.

Therefore, I urge that member and the Conservative Party to get behind the NDP call for the government to not just roll out the new legislation moving forward, but to help those who are steeped in debt and are looking at losing their businesses or even facing bankruptcy.

I appreciate him highlighting that the delays have cost thousands of workers and small business owners what really has been their life's work, and it is absolutely disappointing and shameful.