House of Commons Hansard #27 of the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was impact.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals do it properly, I will. They did not.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:55 p.m.

Vaughan—Woodbridge Ontario

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by reassuring the hon. member that our government is addressing the concerns being raised by Canadians about the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak.

Just last Thursday, the Deputy Prime Minister convened a new cabinet committee on the federal response to the coronavirus. They discussed in detail the measures taken by the government to limit the spread of the virus in Canada and in the area where I live, York Region.

At the committee meeting, the Minister of Health and Canada's chief public health officer, Dr. Theresa Tam, provided an update on the evolving situation and the ongoing collaborative engagement with provinces and territories, as well as with our international partners, including the United States, to limit the spread of the virus.

If I may, as a Canadian of Italian heritage, I wish to express my thoughts and sympathies over the ongoing outbreak that is happening back home where many of my relatives still live. Our prayer is that it is controlled and that the numbers start coming down in Italy.

The finance minister has also provided an update of the impact of this evolving situation on the economy. The impact of COVID-19 on the economy is of concern. I understand, and so do my colleagues, the challenges many companies and Canadians face, including those in Vaughan—Woodbridge.

I will be splitting my time with my esteemed colleague and friend, the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

I want to assure hon. members, Canadians and my constituents that we have a sound fiscal and economic track record. We will remain ready to respond to whatever may come our way.

In 2015, we proposed a plan to invest in Canadians and strengthen the middle class. That plan worked. Canada is in a good position to deal with this challenge. Our government's plan over the past four and a half years has been clear: to invest in the middle class and help those working hard to join it.

Canada's economy is healthy and, this year, Canada should rank second in the G7 in terms of economic growth. We are convinced that all Canadians should benefit from the country's economic success. That is why we are working to grow the economy in a way that will benefit all Canadians.

Lowering taxes for middle-class families and those who need help the most, for all but the wealthiest Canadians, is just the first step in our new mandate. What is more, we will ensure that people can further their education more easily, buy their first home and have access to care for their children. As part of our previous mandate, we reduced poverty across the country.

We have reduced poverty. We have lifted a million Canadians out of poverty.

We will continue to make crucial investments, especially in affordable housing. We will help workers enter the job market, develop their skills and move from one job to another. This is part of our government's responsible plan to build a modern, vigorous and growing economy. We will build on the progress of the past four years and continue to truly change the lives of Canadians today and in the future. We know that there is much more work to be done. The work begins with supporting business investments.

Our government knows that small business is a key driver of Canada's economy, accounting for 70% of all private sector jobs. In the city of Vaughan, where I am proud to live and call home and where I am raising our family with my wife, there are over 12,000 small businesses. Our entrepreneurial spirit is strong and second to none. These very small businesses play a supporting role in the resource sector, supplying goods and services to larger resource companies.

In support of my hard-working small business owners in Vaughan—Woodbridge, and all of those across Canada from coast to coast to coast, the government reduced the small business tax rate as of January 2018 to 10%, and then reduced it to 9% as of January 2019. I believe if members check, they will see that is $7,500 in lower taxes for individual small businesses across Canada.

In addition, in the 2018 fall economic statement, our government introduced three changes to Canada's tax system to attract investment and build the business confidence we need to succeed. This included allowing businesses to immediately write off the full cost of specified clean energy equipment to spur new investments and the adoption of advanced clean technologies in the Canadian economy. It also included allowing businesses to immediately write off the full cost of machinery and equipment used for the manufacturing or processing of goods.

Our government also introduced the accelerated investment incentive, which allows businesses of all sizes in all sectors of the economy to write off a larger share of the cost of newly acquired assets in the year the investment is made.

Taken together, the incentives make it more attractive for businesses to invest in assets that help drive business growth, thereby freeing up capital that businesses can use to create more good, well-paying jobs for Canadians, including the hard-working residents in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge.

In addition to changing the tax system, the government did more to strengthen its investments in key drivers of economic growth by introducing new measures that will boost investor confidence in Canada and attract investment.

In budget 2018, the government made a commitment to regulatory reform, including a review of federal regulatory regimes; the goal of this review was to determine what is working and what is not.

We backed that commitment by announcing a legislative review. We want to look for opportunities to modernize the mandates of departments responsible for making regulations. The goal is to better integrate the importance of regulatory efficiency and economic growth. We also introduced an annual modernization bill to help eliminate outdated or redundant regulatory requirements and keep existing regulations up to date.

Measures like these are indicative of our government's proactive approach to helping Canadian businesses grow and compete by removing barriers at home and abroad.

Even with the concerns surrounding the COVID-19 outbreak, Canada is well positioned to continue to prosper from our unique strengths and advantages. I worked at a bond rating agency for many years. Canada's AAA credit rating across the board is solid, and according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, our financial flexibility is sound. We are going in the right direction in our country. Our foundation is strong. Being a son of a carpenter and a roofer, I can surely say that our roof is sound as well.

We are building an internationally competitive environment for Canadian businesses, one that attracts investment, contributes to our economic growth and creates jobs that support families and communities such as Vaughan—Woodbridge.

At the same time, our government is maintaining our steadfast commitment to a fair and inclusive society in which all Canadians can contribute to and benefit from a strong and growing economy. Economic growth must be for the benefit of all Canadians, not just the few. It must be inclusive.

We believe that our goals of not only a competitive economy but also a fair and inclusive economy are fully complementary. They reinforce and strengthen one another. Giving people the chance to succeed is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do for the economy, for Canadians and for the residents of Vaughan—Woodbridge.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if I had a chance to do it yet, but I congratulate my colleague on his re-election. We had a good opportunity to debate during the election. I went all the way to Toronto just for the honour of debating against him, and it is great to have the chance to do so again.

At a basic level of philosophy, why does the member believe it is right for us to enjoy benefits today that will have to be paid for with interest by future generations? In my own life, it does not seem that it would be right for me to say to my kids that I am going to spend more than we have today and they can pay it back for me later on. We would accept that is not the sort of thing one should do in the private context of one's family, so perhaps he could tell me why it is acceptable for us collectively to say that we are going to spend so much more than we have today, during good times and bad, and expect my kids, the member's children and our grandchildren to pay back bankers with interest for the things we are enjoying right now.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to work with the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan on the Canada-Holy See Parliamentary Friendship Group and we chatted on many different topics.

If we look at the government's program over the last several years, it has been balanced. It has been about investing in Canadians and putting money back into the pockets of Canadians. We had the first middle-class tax cut when we first assumed power in 2015. Almost $30 billion has been returned to Canadians. It is their money. They work hard. They know how to spend it, invest it and put it to use for their families. We are doing it again. When fully implemented, there will be, roughly, a $6-billion tax cut, which will benefit over a million Canadians and remove 700,000 Canadians from our tax rolls.

As an economist, I am very happy to see that. I am also very happy to see that our fiscal anchors, our AAA credit rating and a stable and declining debt-to-GDP ratio over the medium term, is what we need to do. We will undertake the critical investments to fill the deficits that were left behind in the prior years, a social deficit, a cultural deficit, a transportation deficit and a green deficit. We need to continue doing that.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a motion that speaks to transparency, openness and accountability, more information that needs to be provided to Canadians. To that end, I am particularly interested in where the government is going to get the money to support the Trans Mountain expansion project. We now know that the dollar figure is projected to be $12.7 billion. Is that going to be off-book financing? Where is that money going to come from? I wonder whether the member can speak to that and, in the spirit of transparency, let Canadians know.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Mr. Speaker, the member is from British Columbia, which is my home province. I grew up there before I moved to Ontario. My family lives in the Lower Mainland.

I am glad the hon. member highlighted our support for the TMX pipeline. I am in support of energy workers in Alberta and across this country. Nearly 10% of our GDP comes from the energy sector. We need to support those hard-working families these days when there is uncertainty in this sector. We need to show our support for those individuals working coast to coast to coast, the drill workers, carpenters and so forth. It is very important that we show support.

With regard to financing the project, we know that the existing pipeline does earn revenues and cash flow, which is helping build the second leg of the project.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to the opposition motion.

Before I do that, I want to take this opportunity to thank all of the people who have been reaching out to me to express their concern over the fact that my parents are two of the approximately 230 people who are stuck on a cruise ship off the coast of California. They are doing well and they are healthy but they are suffering a bit from cabin fever. They are looking forward to getting back into Canadian hands and back home soon and then being quarantined in Trenton for a while.

I do appreciate the opportunity to speak to this motion. The premise of the motion wants to hit on the economic performance of the government in the last session of Parliament and the beginning of this one, and I am happy to talk about that.

We have seen record amounts of success. Unemployment has dropped to the lowest it has been in over 40 years, since we started recording unemployment. Our debt-to-GDP ratio is the best amongst the G7 countries and continues to remain low. Canada has been the leader in economic growth of the G7 countries in the western world. This is a result of hard work by Canadians and a government that supports them.

Through this we have seen a dramatic drop in our poverty rates. One million fewer people are now in poverty compared to when the Liberals came into power in 2015. I would argue that this has a little bit to do with policy and a lot to do with Canadians, how Canadians are investing and making the decision to be part of an economy that they believe in and that they trust.

In my opinion, that is where government comes in. Government comes in with respect to putting the right policies in place to give Canadians the confidence to succeed and help to create an economy that we can be proud of and an economy that produces results like dropping the unemployment rate and fewer people living in poverty.

When we look at some of the things that were done over the last mandate, we can talk about making investments in Canadians that matter. We strengthened the middle class. We brought in a tax cut that actually targeted the middle class based on how much people were making.

We wanted to make sure that the middle class had a tax cut, because we know that when the middle class is strong, the economy is better for everybody. The economy is better for people who are struggling. We have seen that people have been lifted out of poverty. The economy is better for people who invest in the markets. We have seen the markets over the last five years continue to rise and people's investments are doing well. We have seen job numbers go up. We have seen people, particularly women, whom I will talk about later, getting involved in the workforce that they previously did not participate in. This is because we are investing in the future.

We decided consciously that the 1% have to pay a bit more so that we can give a break to the middle class. By doing that, those 1% will probably end up better off because we have a healthier economy and a healthier middle class.

Our government also brought in the Canada child benefit. This is a benefit geared at parents. Rather than giving the same amount to every child regardless of how much money the parents make, which is what unfortunately the universal child care plan did under the previous Conservative government, our approach said that depending on how much money the parents make will result in how much money they will get in this benefit.

When a cheque of a few hundred bucks or a couple of thousand bucks is given to a millionaire over a year, what is that person going to do with it? That person is going to put it into a tax-free savings account. That person is going to invest it. That person is not going to put it into something that would necessarily help to stimulate and work the economy. However, when we give that same money to middle-class people, when we give that same money to people who are struggling, when we give that same money to a single mother, those people are going to spend that money and that helps to stimulate the economy. That helps to drive our economy forward, which is better for everybody.

I have talked about a couple of things that we did in the previous session of Parliament. What are we talking about doing now to continue to invest in Canadians?

One of the things is reducing the basic personal income allowance to $15,000 by 2023. This would result in cutting taxes for almost 20 million Canadians, putting $3 billion back into the pockets of people in 2020 and up to $6 billion by 2023. It would result in 1.1 million more Canadians who would pay zero federal income tax. This is important because we are investing not in the 1%, not in people who do not need to be invested in. We are investing in the people who actually need it.

I heard one of the Conservative members a few minutes ago asking about why money was being spent, and how we were spending more money that people would have to deal with later on. This discussion, the question and the answer, underscore the fundamental difference in fiscal policy between Conservatives and Liberals. A Conservative believes in waiting for a problem to arise and then throwing money at it to try to fix it. The Liberals believe that the solution is to actually invest in people at the forefront.

I will accept that as a nervous laugh coming from a couple of the members across the way, but it is a reality. Conservatives refuse to actually invest in people. What they want to do is wait for a problem to arise and then try to throw money at it. The Liberal approach is much different. We would rather invest in Canadians at the forefront, giving them the tools and the resources they need to help grow our economy so that everybody is better off. It is very simple.

The “every person for himself or herself” mentality is what Conservatives historically like. I come from a riding where we had an extremely progressive Conservative, Flora MacDonald.

Members could give her a round of applause if they want to. They are willing to make so much noise when I say other things.

Again, there is a key difference here. I know that Conservatives in the House like to invoke previous Conservative times, but that was genuinely a progressive Conservative party. Flora MacDonald even said, during the Stephen Harper years, that she no longer considered herself to be a Conservative because the Conservatives had lost the progressive way.

This is where I come back to the point that it is about investing in people. Progressives believe in investing in people. They do not believe in necessarily waiting until a problem presents itself and then trying to jump all over the problem as a reaction to that.

One of the things I said I would touch on is where a lot of the impact and a lot of the growth have come from in our economy over the last five years. The increase in participation of women in the workforce accounts for one third of our per-capita economic growth. That suggests that there is a massive untapped resource there, to see people's abilities come forward, and in particular for women to become more vibrant and more pronounced in the workforce and to become part of the labour force in a way that we have never seen before.

Whether we are talking about child care or about investing in businesses and entrepreneurships that are led by women, these are the kinds of investments that are going to lead us to an untapped resource that exists right here within our country now, and that is by investing in women.

However, women still face barriers that we are going to have to overcome as a society, and the House will be charged with doing that. One of those barriers is that women often earn less than men and more likely are finding part-time work. We want to see a world where women match men in participation and in income.

These are amazing opportunities as we look forward to ways to continue to build our economy, continue to strengthen our middle class and make sure that we have the proper tools in place so we have economic resiliency to last well into the future, even when recessions come, as we know one will at some point. These are natural occurrences in the economic cycle and we need to be able to deal with them.

I am suggesting today that we have been putting those tools in place over the years so that we can properly deal with economic uncertainties when they arise. We have the fiscal firepower to deal with this, and that is exactly what we will do.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, what we are talking about today is a motion that the government release to the House, within 45 days, documents provided to it about any warnings that the government has been given about how it is managing the economy on any potential economic downturns.

I would like to talk to my colleague briefly about the new CUSMA. The government had economic impact studies that it started before 2017, and it did not give the economic impact studies to committee until one day before the end of the shutdown of the study. We all know that, before the election, the Liberal government said the new CUSMA was going to be a win-win-win, a great victory for Canada. It told auto workers it would be a win-win-win for them, but the Liberals' own studies are showing that this is going to be a $1.5-billion hit for the auto sector and decrease production by 1.7%, so the government really does not have a strong record on transparency.

I am wondering if the member will support the motion, because all we are asking for is documents the government has. Will it share them with Canadians, please?

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will go to the last part first. I am very much interested in listening to this. I have had an open mind about this the whole time I have been participating in the debate today, and I will definitely come to a conclusion after I have the opportunity to hear everybody speak.

The member specifically talked about some of the economic impacts of this and what the Conservatives are looking for specifically in the motion. We know that this is political gamesmanship when they are only asking for half of it. They did not ask what the government did in response to any information it got. All they want to know is what the government got. I would expect that, if I owned a personal business and I got information that suggested that my business, or in this case the government, might be hurt, I would probably want to know what I was also going to do in response to that.

Of course, that was not asked for, because all the Conservatives want is to know what the warnings are so they can jump all over those in a political manner.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

March 9th, 2020 / 5:20 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to give my colleague a chance to expand a little on something he was saying, that being the difference between the approach taken by the Stephen Harper government and the approach our government has taken.

We all know that during his time as prime minister, Mr. Harper rang up over $150 billion in additional debt and, at the end of it all, we were technically in a recession in the summer of 2015. We had very low growth and very stagnant employment figures. Now we turn in contrast to investments as opposed to stimulus, and the results have been very different.

I would like my colleague to give us a sense of what those differences are.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, that is what I was trying to get at when I was being heckled.

It is the fundamental difference between investing in people so that problems do not happen and trying to react once problems do happen. I was a municipal politician at the time. I saw the way that money from Ottawa was being cut for municipalities at the time.

I would suggest that this government has taken a completely different approach to investing in people. This government is not necessarily waiting for all the problems to get there before it tries to deal with them, as the previous government did. This government has decided proactively to invest in people so that we can grow our economy now and not necessarily have to wait for a recession to grow our economy.

If Conservatives want to compare the records, and if they are going to be honest about it, they are going to look at the whole picture. Unfortunately that is something they are just not interested in doing, in my humble opinion.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member on his excellent comments and his bid at comedy.

I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Kootenay—Columbia.

In all seriousness, we are facing an economic crisis. The TSX dropped over 1,600 points today. It is serious. What is more, the TSX dropped 31% more than the Dow. Across the border to the south, their economy has been roaring. The Dow has been outperforming the TSX. They are a natural comparison in the United States. Our stock exchange, the TSX dropped 30% more. Why is that?

I ask every member, in all seriousness, to consider that. Why is our stock market bleeding a third more than the market to the south?

To carve through the demagoguery and clarify the economic reality that the other side is desperately trying to obscure and obfuscate against, including the finance minister, who will not comment on whether we are heading into a recession or on the finances of our country, is a problem.

In order to go there, I think we have to start at the beginning. Any capitalist economy is cyclical, it is true. It goes through a series of expansions and contractions. There are various economic theories. There is the Keynesian theory that says when times are good, we should save more money, we should raise taxes and decrease spending. In bad times, we should spend more and cut taxes to give stimulus to the economy. However, there is a more free market, laissez-faire theory that says to keep spending low, keep taxes low and the private sector will overcome and come to equilibrium.

The last five years have not borne a resemblance to any economic theory known. It has just been spend, spend, tax more and spend in the good times. The Liberal government's attack on businesses, the institution of the carbon tax, its weak leadership, failure to address Canada's productivity gap and reckless spending have left our country without many of the resources that are required to counteract the effects of a recession.

Small business is the very heart of our country. Nearly 70% of private sector employees come from small business. These individuals have had to deal with increasing regulations, increasing taxation, and, worst of all in my opinion, the finance minister had the chutzpah to call these individuals, who are some of the most honourable, hard-working people I have ever met, tax cheats. In my mind, that is utterly reprehensible.

In my local riding, we have seen the impact of the Liberal government's policy of taxation, which has meant the closure of the Weston bakery and of Saputo in the riding next door to me. It is costing us real jobs, and it is having a real impact on the people in my riding.

Another detrimental impact, a self-inflicted wound, is the carbon tax. The carbon tax has been an unmitigated economic disaster. It has increased the cost of inputs into our businesses, making our businesses less competitive. Many of our foreign competitors do not have to pay a carbon tax, so they have a competitive advantage, most notably those in the United States. I repeat, the TSX dropped 30% more than the Dow.

Could the carbon tax have something to do with it? I think so. The carbon tax has a negative, insidious multiplier effect. We have more and more carbon tax, which makes our products more and more expensive, and our economy less competitive.

In my riding of Northumberland—Peterborough South, which I think is the greatest riding in Canada, the agricultural sector is incredibly important. In the agricultural sector, we have seen farmers lose 12% of their net income because of the carbon tax. Once again, the TSX is down 30% more. Why is that?

It is self-evident that a more productive economy is a more stable economy, so we need to pursue an economy that is more competitive and more productive.

As we have seen over the last five years, businesses have invested 20% less. We have seen Warren Buffett pull out of Canada. Teck Frontier has decided not to go ahead with its tar sands expansion. Over and over again, we see less capital being invested in Canada. Could that have something to do with why the Dow Jones is ahead of the TSX by 30% today?

At the heart of many of our economic problems is a serious structural competitive issue. In Canada, we measure productivity globally by the amount each worker contributes to GDP per hour. In Canada it is a low $50; in the United States it is $60; in Switzerland it is $65; and in Ireland it is $84. Why does productivity matter? Is this just the Conservatives talking about numbers? No. This has a real impact on human beings. It is for the people of Canada that productivity matters. The average wage earner in Canada earns $19 an hour. The average wage earner in the United States earns $23. In Switzerland, the average wage earner earns $33. Are these related? I think so.

When we look at the impact of government on the economy, the productivity gap, the loss in our stock markets today and the broader picture, we see that Canada is falling behind. Could that also be related to the fact that the average Canadian now spends more on taxes than on food, clothing and shelter combined? The idea is to save for a rainy day, but the government has not done that itself and has also made it impossible for Canadians. The average Canadian is $200 away from insolvency every month, 50% of them.

The other major issue is the weak leadership we have seen from the Prime Minister. Our weak economy is a direct result of the Prime Minister's weak leadership. His dithering and dialogue failed to effectively lead our country through the blockades and trade disputes. The economic impact of the blockades has yet to be determined, but it will no doubt be in the millions of dollars.

In my riding, I have had a lot of conversations with business owners and individuals alike who have struggled with the impact of the blockades. They cannot get their goods to make other goods and they cannot ship their goods. This is impacting all Canadians, and the folks in my riding are hurting. Some of the businesses will not be able to make payroll this month because of the blockades. If the Prime Minister had stood up 19 days before with the vast majority of the Wet'suwet'en people and the vast majority of hard-working Canadians and shut the blockades down, all of this hardship would have been avoided.

When we look at the overall picture, there is no question that today is a bad day for the global economy. We are looking straight down the barrel of a downturn. The government did not act with the due diligence that it should have.

As a key device, according to Keynesian economics, a government can counteract an economic downturn with deficit spending. However, when we spend the cupboard bare, there is nothing else to grab from there.

The Prime Minister talked repeatedly, during his 2015 campaign, about the importance of maintaining a balanced budget. He was on record saying that we needed to have a balanced budget. Indeed, as he famously said, “the budget will balance itself.” Of course, budgets do not balance themselves and we are left with a $30-billion structural deficit, in addition to over $100 billion of deficit spending.

My friends across the aisle like to say that Stephen Harper had billions of dollars in deficit. We were going through the worst global recession in the last 50 years and he balanced the budget so we could outperform the rest of the G7. The Conservatives took the necessary steps. I stand by Prime Minister Harper's record. Now we see the opposite. When times are good globally and economically, what do we do? We sing, dance, spend and tax, over and over again, leaving our cupboard bare.

I feel as though we are watching the economy go over the edge and the Conservative Party is yelling for us to stop, hit the brakes and change direction, but you refuse. We will go over the cliff. For goodness' sake, we need to change direction. We need to go forward with a more productive and efficient economy, and not slide into a further—

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:30 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I just want to let the member know that although his time is up, maybe he will be able to use his time in questions and comments to get more of his points across.

I also want to remind him that he should not use the word “you”, because he should be talking through the Speaker as opposed to individual members.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Kings—Hants.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Madam Speaker, there has been a lot of conversation about cupboards, and I think that came from the member for Carleton, who has used that analogy. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has said that there are enough goods in the cupboards for us to weather the economic storm related to coronavirus.

Would the member opposite care to opine on this? Is the Parliamentary Budget Officer correct or does he somehow not have the right facts in front of him?

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Madam Speaker, toward the end of last year, we grew at 0.1% to 0.3%. That will almost certainly make our debt-to-GDP ratio go up. We are spending billions of dollars. I do not think it is unreasonable to say that if we did not have our sizeable $30-billion deficit and a declining GDP, we would be in a better position today to handle an economic downturn.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Madam Speaker, all throughout the day, the Conservatives have been talking about and speaking against government spending. It has been interesting. I would like to point something out and invite the member's comments.

The Canada Development Investment Corporation, which is the parent company to TMX, admitted in its second quarterly report that TMX is a risky project with no guaranteed economic returns. If we account for items like interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, it would leave a net loss of $140 million annually. As we know, this project is now costing taxpayers to the tune of $12.7 billion for the construction of the expansion. That means taxpayers will be on the hook.

If the Conservatives are against government spending, could the member tell the House that he is against the TMX project? It was purchased with taxpayers' money and now taxpayers' money is being spent on the expansion.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Madam Speaker, to the member's comment, no, I will not be making CBC News tonight in talking out against the TMX.

I will agree wholeheartedly with the member that it was a foolish move for the government to purchase it. When the government selects winners and losers in the economy, it has been proven over and over again that we are all losers.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Oakville North—Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Pam Damoff LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services

Madam Speaker, I listened to the member's speech and in it he talked about how investment was fleeing Canada. What are the facts? Global investment in 2018 was up 60% year over year. In 2019 it was up 19% year over year. In fact, in 2019 we had $66.8 billion of investment in Canada from global firms.

Could the hon. member perhaps correct what he was saying and speak about the fact that companies are, in fact, investing in Canada because they see it as a good place to put their money?

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Madam Speaker, the facts are clear here. Canada's economy is grinding to a halt. At the end of Q4, before the effects of blockades and COVID-19, we were at 0.1% to 0.3% growth. The Canadian economy is suffering. About $200 billion has been left out in products from Alberta.

Alberta is struggling and Canada is struggling, and there is no doubt that the actions of the Liberal government have created this.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, my colleague talked about the Prime Minister's weak leadership. I want to come back to transparency.

I am on the international trade committee and we just finished with CUSMA. The Liberals knew back in 2017 that this was not a good deal, but they said it was a win-win-win. From their own numbers, this will be a $1.5-billion hit to the auto industry and will decrease production by 1.7%.

Why is it so important that we get the information from the government, especially now with the economic downturn?

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Madam Speaker, we are in a minority government and information has never hurt anything. It has been said before that sunlight is the world's best disinfectant, so why not put a little sunlight on the reports the government has about the potential upcoming economic downturn?

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Morrison Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC

Madam Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to stand and speak in the House today. I stand on behalf of all Kootenay—Columbians who are struggling to get by and looking for some meaningful action from the government to help make their lives better.

I must begin by bringing the government's attention to a dire economic situation in the village of Radium Hot Springs. This community is a wonderful gem within my riding. It is uniquely located at the edge of Kootenay National Park and overlooks the beautiful headwaters of the Columbia River.

The good people of this village and businesses within it depend heavily on tourism dollars generated by the hot pools located in Kootenay National Park. These pools were closed on January 11, 2020, until further notice due to a structural safety concern, and they remain closed today. The economic impact on the village of Radium Hot Springs as a result of the closure continues to be severe, with job losses expected. Timely repairs and upgrades are needed, and they need to become a priority for the government, which must take action to expedite the process of repair that has been delayed by the procurement process.

The end result of the delay is a severe economic hardship on the people and economy of Radium Hot Springs. My constituents are wondering when the minister responsible will create an expedited solution that will lead to the reopening and stabilization of the local economy.

We have been elected to represent our constituents, and there is a need to acknowledge the hard work and diligence of all members of the House. All of us, those currently serving and those who have come before, are passionate Canadians possessing a desire to create a better future for those who call this country home.

I naturally gravitate to constructive dialogue and positive action stemming from good discussion. However, today requires something different. The role of Her Majesty's official opposition must create room for constructive criticism. Discussion about the economy, recessions and wasteful spending are at the top of my mind for my constituents. I am here on their behalf with questions for the government. My riding of Kootenay—Columbia depends on both industry and tourism, and with its proximity to Alberta, we have felt the economic difficulties created by the government.

The Prime Minister cannot blame the current economic position on the coronavirus. Our country's economic growth slowed to 0.3% in the fourth quarter of 2019, the worst performance in almost four years. That was all before the impact of illegal blockades or the coronavirus.

The Liberal government's lack of accountability has weakened the Canadian economy. Investment is falling and jobs are leaving Canada. In some cases this is from a blatant lack of leadership on the part of the Prime Minister, who places a higher value on a UN seat than on leading our country through a blockade crisis. In other cases this is from the government's wilful dismissal of the west's resource sector. In either case, Canadians deserve more from their government. Investment in plant and equipment by Canadian businesses has dropped 20% over the past five years, the worst performance in more than five decades. Since 2017, over $192 billion of investment in the energy sector has been cancelled.

At a recent meeting, the Cranbrook Chamber of Commerce expressed a genuine concern that we are blindly moving into a recession similar to that of 2008. The chamber is reporting that foreign investment in the Kootenay region is dwindling and that there is a general drop in confidence within the business community.

These issues are directly tied to the government's approach to dealing with small business owners, who the Prime Minister has referred to as tax cheats. Tax rules for small businesses, implemented by the government, make it impossible for them to operate.

Thousands of businesses across Canada, including those in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia, will no longer qualify for the small business tax rate or will see it reduced. With new carbon taxes and increased CPP and EI premiums, businesses are facing difficulties. These tough new rules will also raise taxes on compensation paid within family businesses, which will have a devastating impact on families within my riding.

The former CEO of the Bank of England has warned that we are “sleepwalking” into a financial crisis. The Liberal government is both blind to it and wilfully unprepared. When will the government begin to listen and act in the best interest of Canadians?

We now have some of the most burdensome regulations on earth, which are strangling the energy industry and making it impossible to move the country forward in a way that allows us to make meaningful contributions, through the export of LNG for example, to reduce the impacts of climate change.

The government has implemented a taxation strategy that takes more from the paycheques of hard-working Canadians and then pickpockets the very same families through cancelled tax cuts, such as a cancelled family tax cut of $2,000 per household, cancelled arts and fitness tax credits of up to $225 per child and a cancelled education tax credit of up to $720 per student. The list is too long.

As a result, 48% of Canadians are within $200 of not being able to pay their bills and debt obligations; 10% of Canadians are within $100; and 33% have no money at the end of the month and are unable to cover their payments. My constituents are barely making it by and these increases make it impossible to cover the bills. Canadians are falling further into debt.

During the recent election, I was asked by constituents for tangible solutions the government could provide to make things a little easier. They were hopeful for any action that would help them obtain a more affordable life. If elected to govern, the Conservatives are committed to do more than just help them get by.

I made this promise to Kootenay—Columbians and look forward to the next election when Canadians will have an opportunity to choose a different path forward, one that will deliver tangible results and solutions that will actually help Canadians get ahead.

The Liberal government could have built a world-class infrastructure that would improve Canada's competitiveness and our quality of life. Instead, it squandered billions in an infrastructure plan that did not exist, according to the PBO. The Prime Minister's billions of dollars in spending did not result in any additional infrastructure built in Canada.

The government could have chosen to improve Canada's innovation programs to refocus research and development on commercializing products. Instead it created subsidy programs that have not created any growth.

My constituents are wondering why the government has created financial roadblocks for their families, while at the same time shelling out massive corporate welfare cheques, such as $50 million to Mastercard, $12 million to Loblaws and $40 million to BlackBerry. That is $102 million handed out to profitable multibillion dollar companies for projects these organizations would have undertaken anyway. In the case of BlackBerry, the CEO candidly admitted it did not need the money. From the perspective of a hard-working Kootenay—Columbia, imagine hearing the news that the Prime Minister gave $40 million to an organization whose CEO said it did not need the money.

The Prime Minister's sky-high taxes, wasteful spending and massive deficits have put Canada in an incredibly weak position. The possibility of a made-in-Canada recession is becoming more real.

Despite a healthy Canadian economy, boosted by a booming southern neighbour, soaring real estate prices and record low interest rates, the government still managed to add $72 billion to the national debt during its first four years in power.

What is worse is that so much of the money has been wasted. There is no evidence that there is any increase in growth. There is little to show for it. Never before in Canadian history has so much been spent to achieve so little. It is unprecedented for a government to have a $187 billion infrastructure program that the Parliamentary Budget Officer said resulted in a zero increase in infrastructure built in Canada and no increase in GDP growth because the infrastructure plan did not exist.

Imagine spending $1.6 million to renovate the offices of ministers, $23 million to buy cars for a G7 summit and $8 million for a skating rink. Imagine promising to spend $150 million on subsidies to help people go camping.

Let me be clear. I love the idea of investing in the outdoors and fostering the reality of spending more time enjoying the great outdoors. However, practically speaking, imagine the government telling a family that is barely making ends meet that it will give it $2,000 if it goes camping in the Laurentians. The government is out of touch financially and it is out of touch with Canadians families.

When a recession hits, deficits soar as the economy's automatic stabilizers kick in. Government revenues fall because people are earning less and paying less in taxes, while spending surges on unemployment insurance and other programs. If we start with a $30 billion deficit and Canada goes into a significant recession like we saw in 2008, that deficit can grow to $60 billion or $70 billion. That is before the government has to spend the money to stimulate the economy to get us out of the recession.

In the lead-up to the global recession from 2006-08, the Conservative government paid down $37 billion in debt. This gave Canada more financial resources to navigate the storm. Canada came out of the crisis faster and with a stronger growth than any other G7 country.

That is a true example of leadership and that is what Canadians and those in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia expect from the government. They expect the government to be open and transparent and to provide the documents that shed light on the spending of taxpayer dollars.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:45 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary 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, when I listen to the Conservatives, they tend to forget the global economic meltdown that took place in 2008. If we look at the Stephen Harper economic update in November of that year, we will find it was completely ignored. There was not a word with respect to what was happening to the economy. If it were not for the diligence of the opposition, there would have been no acknowledgement by Stephen Harper that a recession was taking place.

I wonder if my friend and colleague could explain why there seems to be a double standard? When the Conservatives were in government, they completely ignored their responsibility to the House. Compare that to what we are doing with respect to providing transparency and accountability on a daily basis.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:50 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Morrison Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC

Madam Speaker, at that time, it was a minority government and the other parties were pushing that government. That is why, as you were talking about, there was no leadership at that time.

Opposition Motion—Documents on Economic DownturnsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:50 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I want to remind the member that I was not talking about that. I remind him that he is to address his questions to the Chair and not to individual members.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Red Deer—Lacombe.