Debates of April 29th, 2020

Canada Emergency Student Benefit Act

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, from the beginning of this crisis, New Democrats have said there are three things that Canadians need. They need to have the money to be able to pay their bills, the confidence that they will have a job to return to and a safe place to live. Throughout this crisis, we have seen that the government has acted too slowly and, in many cases, with too little to help Canadians get through this crisis.

We have said from the beginning that the simplest and most effective way to ensure that no one is missed or left behind is to send support directly to all Canadians. Absent that, we have said that if the government is not willing to have a universal basic income for Canadians during this crisis, then at least make the CERB universal. Make the CERB universal so that anyone who needs help right now can access that help.

Every step of the way, instead of a simple solution that prioritizes making sure Canadians who need help can get it, the Liberals have preferred a complicated approach, one that they are constantly changing and upgrading. Contrary to the Deputy Prime Minister, I do not believe that is a strength when there is a clear solution that they have completely avoided. It would have been a strength if we had a universal program and then had to modify it to expand to other things not expected in terms of businesses and other groups. If there is an easy solution to provide help to all Canadians and the Liberals are ignoring that option, only to have to return to Parliament to update and continually change it because we push them to close the gaps, that is not something they should be proud of.

In fact, what the government is doing is making a choice. The government is choosing to deny help to those who need it most. It is choosing to deny help to those desperately in need. The Liberals' position is this. They would rather deny help to those who need it most than risk people getting more help than they need. That is really the choice they are making. They are so afraid there may be some people who do not need help and might end up getting it that they are willing to risk people in desperate need falling through the cracks. That is a choice they are making.

However, New Democrats have a solution to that. We can easily tax back those who get extra help and do not need it. We have a year until the next tax season. In that time, I am confident that if it were a priority of the government to ensure Canadians got the help they needed, those who received extra help could be taxed back very easily. We are in a crisis. We are in a pandemic. The priority should not be excluding or denying people in need and then trying to catch up and find solutions. The priority should be that they do not want people falling through the cracks and they will tax back those who did not need the help. That should be the solution. This is not the time to deny help; this is the time to deliver help as rapidly as possible to everyone in need.

This government is making a choice. It is a choice. It is choosing to leave some people behind, to deny help to people desperately in need. It would rather deny help to those who need it most than risk people getting help they do not need.

There is a simple solution. Give everyone the help they need now, and if someone does not need the assistance, it can be taxed back.

This is not the time to deny help to people. It is the time to help people as quickly as possible.

Now I want to talk about the approach to students. We have said from the beginning that there were too many people missed by the CERB. Notably, we mentioned students as well as owner-operators, seniors and people living with disabilities, but let us focus on students.

It is clear from the approach that the Liberal government is taking that the Liberals believe that there are some students who are deserving of help and there are others who are not. The Liberals are basing their assumptions on a very privileged view of the world. In his announcement about students, the Prime Minister actually said to the public, when referencing this aid, that maybe students are going to have to go to mom and dad and ask for help and it is going to be harder to do that these days. What the Prime Minister did not really reflect on is that many students are moms and dads.

In their initial proposition, until we pushed them, the Liberals thought they were justified to give students with children and students living with disabilities less help. They thought it was okay to cut the help that went to moms who decided to go back to school to get an education, and that they somehow deserved less help. The government members thought it was okay to tell students living with disabilities, who already face challenges getting jobs, that they deserve less help, as if students living with disabilities have to pay less for rent or less for groceries, as if moms who go back to school have some sort of discount on their groceries or their bills. In case the government does not know this, they do not have a discount. In fact, it might be more costly and more difficult for them. It seems like the government wanted to penalize people for going to school, that it wanted to penalize students living with disabilities and parents who went on to get an education.

I want to give a clear example of what this means for a student, which provides a picture of what this decision meant. Miranda is from Victoria. She is a single mom who was in full-time studies last year. She did not make the $5,000 cut-off to qualify for the CERB. She is now unemployed because she has an eight-year-old daughter and, as a result of COVID-19, has no child care. She has lost her child care. She does not qualify for the CERB. She is wondering how she is going to pay for the rent, food and bills. The government thinks that Miranda deserves less simply because she went to school.

What is the government's response to someone like Miranda? The Liberals initially thought that she did not need help or she did not deserve as much help or that since she was struggling before the pandemic, it was okay that she was struggling. They thought that it was okay that things were tough for her because she was used to it. That logic is simply inexcusable and it is wrong.

What is the government's general response to the students it has left behind? It says they do not need help, that they do not deserve as much help as someone who was working, that they were struggling before the pandemic and they should get used to it. That is inexcusable. It makes no sense.

I just cannot understand why the government thought it was okay to initially leave students with disabilities behind, and that it was okay to offer an arbitrary sum of money and say that it would give these students living with disabilities an arbitrary sum less than anyone else. That, to me, speaks to a callousness around its decision-making when it comes to students and perhaps a privileged world view of what it means to be a student.

When it comes to students living with disabilities, the fact that they were particularly given less funding as well really belies the reality. These are students who probably have to pay far more in costs, such as the cost of transportation for someone living with a disability and health care that is not covered. Their costs are probably higher, not lower.

We know that people living with disabilities face higher rates of unemployment, so it is probably more likely that someone with a disability is not likely to have had a job to qualify for the CERB. As students are trying to improve their lot in life, why would the government discriminate against them in that way?

However, what makes all of this even more hurtful, even more callous, is when we contrast the government's approach to students like Miranda, students living with disabilities, with its approach to wealthy, powerful businesses. Let us contrast the two. The government is not worried about the billions of dollars that we, as a country, we as people, are losing to those companies that choose to cheat our system by using tax havens. The government is not worried about that; it is okay, but Miranda deserves $250 less. A student living with a disability deserves $250 less because this is a student living with a disability. However, a company like Loblaws can use, legally, a tax haven and avoid paying $400 million in taxes, approximately.

It is unreal that the government thinks it is okay to allow a company like Loblaws to use offshore tax havens. Again, it is legal. That is the problem here. That company is legally allowed to do that and not contribute $400 million to our country to help with services and programs, but Miranda deserves $250 less. That is a choice. That is a decision that the government is making. That is not happenstance. It is not a coincidence, but a thoughtful choice that the government is making, and it is wrong.

This government is so worried about people like Miranda getting more money than they deserve that it is willing to give them $250 less per month. Meanwhile, it cannot be bothered to go after the billions of dollars that are lost every year when big corporations cheat the system by using tax havens. It is absolutely crazy. I am sorry, but it is true.

We have asked the government to commit to something really simple, and we have seen other countries do this. Denmark, France and Poland have all committed to the very same thing we are asking this government to do.

If a company in Canada thinks it is okay to cheat our tax system and put its money in an offshore tax haven, to purposely avoid contributing to our society, contributing to the social programs in our country and paying its fair share, then that company does not deserve public help. We have asked the government to commit to that. Other countries have committed to it clearly. The Canadian government has not. The Prime Minister has not committed to this. It is a simple solution.

If a company thinks it is above contributing its fair share, or if a company thinks it is going to save billions or hundreds of millions of dollars and it is not going to contribute to the public good, then that company does not deserve the public good to help it out when times are tough, yet the government has not committed to that. To date, the government has not committed to doing this.

Again, I asked the Prime Minister earlier today. I asked the government today. There are ministers here. Will they commit to ensuring that a company in Canada that uses offshore tax havens will not get public funding and will not be bailed out during this time? I ask them to commit to that. It is a simple solution. Denmark, France and other countries are doing the same thing. Even Poland is doing this. Why will this country not do it? Why will this government not do it, when there are so many examples of other countries doing it? It is a clear solution. There are billions of dollars that we can recover. I am asking the government to do it.

More than I do, Canadians want the government to do this. People want to know that they are getting a fair share. It does not make sense that the government is going to deny a universal CERB at the same time that there are companies that are stealing, effectively, billions of dollars out of our coffers to contribute to our social good. That does not make any sense. It is beyond time that the Liberal government committed to closing these tax loopholes to ensure that we have the revenue that we can invest in Canadians and to ensure that people are lifted up in this time.

The government should not worry about nickel-and-diming students when wealthy corporations like Loblaws can get away with not paying hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes. Single parents like Miranda are not the problem. Company owners like Galen Weston are the problem, and it is not his fault; it is the government's fault that it is allowing offshore tax havens to exist.

I want to talk about another issue that is hurting Canadians and that people are desperately worried about. That is rent. Rent is due again on the first of the month, and that is going to be this Friday. There are far too many Canadians who do not know how they are going to pay their rent. We have urged the government to use the powers and jurisdiction that we have at the federal level over banks to ensure that there is a pause on mortgage, not a deferral. People who use a deferral end up having to pay far more in the long run. It would cost them far more. We are asking the government to use the powers we have expressly in the Constitution, section 91, and in the Bank Act to put a pause on mortgages, and then to negotiate with provinces to ensure there is a pause on rent. We know that mortgage and rent are connected. If we negotiate that pause, we can ensure that people are going to be able to stay in their homes.

We have also heard from small business owners who have said that one of their biggest concerns, one of their biggest fixed costs, is commercial rent. We were pleased that after a lot of pressure and great work from a lot of activists across the country, small business owners and New Democrats, the government announced some help and relief for rent, when it comes to commercial properties. That is a good thing, but if the government has been able, working with the provinces, to figure out a way to put in place relief on commercial rent, I implore the government that people need that help as well. In the same way it was able to figure out how to work with the provinces to bring in place relief for small businesses, which is much needed, I ask the government to do the same for people who are worried about paying their rent.

There is no reason why we cannot extend that same relief and support to people. If these people cannot find a place to live, we are not just going to have a problem with homelessness or a lack of housing; we are also going to have a public health emergency when people who have been told they need to stay at home are no longer able to, and that would put more risk of infection and spreading the disease into our health care system.

The Prime Minister does not need to wait for a press conference. The Prime Minister can announce today that there will be relief for Canadians who need help when it comes to their rent, and that Canadians who need help with their mortgage can count on help. That can be announced today.

In closing, I want to point out that in every moment of this crisis, the Liberal government's first impulse or first reaction was to leave people behind. The Liberals left workers out of EI, and we pushed them to fix it. They left out workers in general who were not covered by EI. We pushed them, and they brought into place the CERB. They left small businesses behind, and we pushed them to fix that as well. Now they wanted to leave students behind. We pushed them, and they have come some of the way, but we are going to keep pushing them to make sure they go all the way.

The right thing to do now is help people out, not complicate things with different programs that have different criteria and different levels of support. What people need right now is to know that if they need help, they can apply for it and get it. The best way to help people right now is to make it easy to get the help they need, to make it quick and accessible.

I believe that if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: that the House call on the government to make the Canada emergency response benefit a universal benefit, such that students, seniors and anyone in need can apply for and receive $2,000 a month to help them through these difficult times.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Does the hon. member for Burnaby South have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, just to put it on the record, the Green Party would have been very happy to give unanimous consent, had there been enough others to do so. The Green Party has been calling for a guaranteed livable income for two decades now, and we will continue to do so.

I would like to put it to the hon. member that I agree with the proposition that we should not be providing COVID relief to corporations that hide their money in offshore accounts, but I can see the issue with saying that their workers cannot get the 75% wage benefit.

I note that some NGOs that work in this area, Tax Fairness for example, are saying that there are other things that could be targeted besides all COVID relief programs. I suggest, for instance, that corporate stock bailouts not be allowed and that executive bonuses, golden parachutes and shareholder dividends be held off for a full year.

For any corporation that hides its money offshore but also receives COVID benefits, we could also look at an excess profits tax to recoup those benefits. Although I agree totally, on principle, that companies that hide their money offshore and evade taxes should not be able to benefit from COVID-19 relief measures, the problem is that their workers should.

I would ask the hon. member what he would propose and whether we can find another solution.

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we could absolutely solve this problem.

First, if a company right now is registered in an offshore tax haven and wants government support, it can commit to removing its money from that offshore tax haven and putting it back into the public. It can commit to contributing its fair share. With that ironclad commitment, it can receive support.

In addition, we need to make sure that any support we deliver is guaranteed to go to workers. We do not want a situation in which a company receives a blank cheque. We have seen the Conservatives do that in the past, during the 2007-08 crisis, when companies received billions of dollars of public money, only to shut down their factories and move them to other jurisdictions while jobs were lost in Canada.

There should never be, in any sector, a blank cheque given to any corporation. Corporations should be required to have ironclad agreements that the support will go directly to maintaining or creating jobs, hiring people in the country where that support is given.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the hon. member, my leader, mentioned this. I know that this happened in my riding. Caterpillar received a significant amount of money from the federal government several years ago. Then it picked up and left, and there were no jobs left in my community under that company, so I am really glad that this was raised.

One of the key things that I am grateful the federal government has done is that it waived interest fees for students for six months. However, New Democrats have been pushing and calling for that to be a permanent move. How important would it be for the government to do that, to take that initiative, that bold step? How important would that be for students?

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I think we should start thinking about making many of the programs we are contemplating now as things to move forward with in a future that is better than the past. We do not want to go back to normal; we want to go forward to something better, a system and social programs that allow us to take better care of each another, and in that, the idea of waiving student interest is something we should absolutely do. There is no reason that the federal government should be profiting off the backs of students who are in debt. Loans should be interest-free and should continue that way. That is something New Democrats believe in and that we should do on a go-forward basis as policy.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on what my colleague said about the investments that we need to make. This is not just some kind of stop-gap emergency. The whole Canadian notion of our economy and our social life has broken down, and the investments we make will pave the way for a stronger and more resilient Canada.

One of the areas that has always concerned me is the breach of trust with post-secondary students who have enormous debts and have come out into the gig economy. We see contract professors barely making minimum wage. When COVID-19 hit, within two weeks, many people who had post-secondary degrees, who had put so much effort into improving themselves, did not have enough money to pay for rent and to get through, and yet we have the Prime Minister saying they should call on mom and dad to help them out. To me, it speaks to an attitude. The Prime Minister believes that this middle class exists. It has not existed for a long time. It is the gig economy; it is the precarious economy.

What steps will we take coming out of this to learn the lesson that never again should Canadians be left in such a precarious situation with so little financial support at the end of the month, particularly if they have spent so much in student debt to better themselves?

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Timmins—James Bay has touched on a lot of what we need to consider when we move forward.

We have seen in this crisis a lot of the glaring inequality laid bare. It has shown what we have known for a long time and has made it abundantly clear that what happened in the past was not good enough: the precarious employment that people suffered, the lack of social programs and a social safety net that was not designed for the realities that people are facing right now. That is why we need to not only waive interest on student debt, but also look at supports.

People no longer have the benefits they once had. That is why we need a head-to-toe health care system that covers people when it comes to their mental health, medications or dental care. We need to make sure that we are investing in people, and we have an opportunity to do that right now. When we make choices in the following weeks, months and years, we can make choices to build a better future, not to return to normal but build a better future, where we do not see some of these inequalities laid bare again, but where we are more resilient and have a fair society where people can achieve their greatness and full potential.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a rare opportunity to ask a follow-up question of the hon. member for Burnaby South.

As we look to the post-pandemic world, we may all agree in this place that we may not want to bounce backwards, but instead bounce forwards. Looking at where these social inequalities were laid bare, I want to speak to the ones that we now see, to our shame, with seniors homes. We have too much of what looks like the for-profit warehousing of seniors when we would have thought that our elders would be treated with greater dignity and as part of our health care system.

I would like to ask the member for Burnaby South for his thoughts on this.

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for this question because it gives us an opportunity to talk about the impact of decades of neglect of our health care system.

Decades of federal government cuts, Conservative or Liberal, to health care have resulted in provincial health care systems that have been starved of funding. The worst examples of this neglect, the horrible toll of this neglect, are the conditions in long-term care homes, where seniors who should be able to retire with dignity, safety and security, where family members should have confidence in knowing that their loved ones will be cared for are now, instead, seeing these as sites of some of the worst conditions. As the member pointed out, it is often and mostly the for-profit and privatized long-term care homes where we see some of the worst conditions.

More than ever, we need to commit to no longer allowing the for-profit model of health care, particularly for vulnerable people like seniors. We need to invest more in our health care system and make sure that workers at long-term care homes are paid a good salary so they do not need to work at multiple homes where there is an increased risk of the spread of an infection. We need to do a lot more to treat the people who have sacrificed so much, the seniors who have given their whole lives to this country. They should be able to retire with dignity, and long-term care homes should be places of security and safety, not what we have seen, places where COVID-19 has had the worst toll.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging my constituents in Ottawa—Vanier, who have stayed in touch with me since the beginning of this crisis and shared their ideas and concerns. It is truly by working together in our community that we can support Canadians and especially those in my riding, Ottawa—Vanier.

I am also grateful to be able to address the House on COVID-19 and the supplementary measures we are taking to further help Canadians throughout this unprecedented situation.

During these extraordinary times, the realities of the job market change every day. The government continues to look for ways to offer programs and support that work for all Canadians, including students and young people, as we deal with this pandemic.

Through the Canada emergency response benefit, the government has created a financial aid package to support Canadians in these unprecedented circumstances. This benefit provides Canadians who are no longer working because of the COVID-19 pandemic and those whose hours have been considerably reduced an amount of $2,000 every four weeks for up to 16 weeks.

Over 1.9 million applications have been processed to date under EI and the Canada emergency response benefit. These numbers are simply incredible and give us an idea of the number of people who are financially impacted by this pandemic. However, the government realized that certain Canadians were falling through the cracks and were not eligible to get the help they needed with the existing CERB criteria. This is why today we are proposing to take the next step in our approach to supporting all Canadians who need it most during this pandemic.

It is now time to look more closely at the situation of Canadian students, because they need specific help and support. Right now, as they are self-isolating like everyone else in the country, many Canadian post-secondary students are left wondering how they are going to provide for themselves. Even students from the University of Ottawa and La Cité Collégiale in my riding have been reaching out to find out how we will support them.

Whereas they would usually ask their parents for help, they now have to face the harsh reality that mom and dad are probably having a hard time meeting their own needs during this crisis.

Some students are eligible for the Canada emergency response benefit. Students who earned less than $5,000 in the past year and those who were working but lost their jobs because of COVID-19 are eligible, but many other students are not. More than one million post-secondary students may not be eligible for the COVID-19 CERB.

Students are facing some serious problems. Their studies have been interrupted, they have fewer job opportunities, and all of their co-op, internship and community service opportunities are up in the air. As a result, young people are worried and wondering what to do.

The government wants to make sure that young people know they matter and that we are there for them in these difficult times. That is why we are proposing this complementary bill to the Government of Canada's COVID-19 economic response plan, which already commits $146 billion in direct support for Canadians and businesses through these unprecedented times. It is the next logical step.

Our comprehensive package of measures for students will allow the government to implement a range of measures designed to help three broad groups of young people: students, job seekers and youth looking for service opportunities. As the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion previously explained in more detail, the Canada emergency student benefit is the largest piece of the framework. It will provide immediate help to support students right across the country.

In a nutshell, it would provide $1,250 a month, from May to August, to post-secondary students and recent graduates who cannot find summer employment due to COVID-19. Students who care for dependants or have a disability would receive an additional $500 a month for a total of $1,750 a month. High school graduates entering post-secondary education would also be eligible. The government expects that more than one million students and recent graduates would benefit from this financial support.

To help students with fall tuition, the Canada student loans program would double student grants, lower expected contributions and expand eligibility for student loans and grants. This would be in addition to the six-month interest moratorium on repayment of student loans. All student loan borrowers automatically had their repayments suspended until September 30, 2020. No payment is required and interest will not accrue during this time. All of these measures will make students' lives a little less stressful during these difficult times.

Since our government rolled out the CERB, questions have been asked in the public sphere regarding the concept of a national universal basic income. We are listening. These questions deserve to be properly considered and debated in due course, but now is not the time.

From the beginning of this crisis, we have had to adapt to the changing reality of the pandemic. Given the urgency of the situation, the government had to act quickly, very quickly. Millions of Canadians needed financial assistance so they could pay their rent, buy groceries and support their families. Fortunately, many Canadians are still getting a paycheque and do not need emergency funds to pay the bills.

However, we needed to provide support quickly for those who needed it, and our biggest priority was making sure that the help got to those who needed it the most. This being the end of April and the beginning of May, now is the time when post-secondary studies and school terms end and when students are looking for summer jobs. Of course, that is not going to happen as easily this year, and these students might not be eligible to apply for the CERB. That is why we require Parliament's approval to move forward with the Canada emergency student benefit, which is the next logical step to help more Canadians in need to get through this pandemic.

By tabling Bill C-15, our government is telling Canadian students that they are important, that their plans for the future are important, and that we are here to help them and support them. We are all in the same boat, and we remain committed to helping all Canadians in these difficult times.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this is Bill C-15. Bill C-13 was the first wage subsidy and first emergency bill, which the government did not get right. It listened and brought Bill C-14 forward. I am hoping, therefore, that we might see a Bill C-16 so that we can actually fix this new project.

With half of the $9 billion the Liberals are committing overall to student relief, they could massively increase the Canada summer jobs grant and allow half of that investment to trickle down to small and medium-sized businesses and farms and provide relief for many of the front-line essential services, as well as jobs for students in return for the money. There would still be enough money left over for a $1,000 tuition credit for all students, at half of the overall cost of this program.

For the minister in charge of the middle class and those working hard to join it, why is the government's program so structured to prevent people from working? We should incentivize work, and wherever that government investment in students can trickle down to small businesses and farms, why would we not do it that way?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, also as associate minister of finance, I have been looking at different ways to help students from different fields and different realities across the country, to see how our supports can help them during this summer period and also prepare them for the fall. We have developed different measures to support these students. In the youth employment and skills strategy, we are investing $153.7 million to help youth develop the skills and gain the experience they need to successfully transition into the labour market. We are also changing the youth employment and skills strategy, Canada's summer jobs program, by extending it until next February to make it more flexible. As well, we are creating the student work placement program to support up to 20,000 post-secondary students across Canada to obtain paid work experience. We have looked at the needs of students across the country, and that is why we are proposing these measures.

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

Mr. Speaker, when COVID hit, university students started saying that their future was in peril. Suddenly, their work disappeared, and their student debts are massive. We see that the federal government has actually started telling students who they normally hire for research that it is not hiring them this year because of COVID, and so the federal government is not stepping up, yet a 15-year-old who made $5,000 last year would be eligible for $2,000 a month. For a full-time post-secondary student who is now unable to work, he or she would get $1,250 a month. That makes no sense, and it speaks, I believe, to an attitude about university students that they are somehow there for a lark. When so many of them have had to go back to school, and so many of them have massive levels of debt already, to say that $1,250 is enough to get by just does not make sense.

How does the government justify this two-tier standard in response to emergency measures, given that for other people the government has recognized that a bottom line of $2,000 a month is the minimum that one needs?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the conversation we are having today, and I believe that we have a broad set of programs and supports for students all over Canada.

The member mentioned research. I can tell him that we are increasing by $291.6 million, through the federal granting councils, to support up to 40,000 student researchers and post-doctoral fellows. This is really important for students who are in research to continue their studies, and we will continue to support them.

[Mary Ng, Liberal, Minister of Small Business]

Mr. Speaker, it is incredible for us to be debating this today.

Today's youth are tomorrow's leaders, and, indeed, they are the future of Canada. For me, it sort of hits to the heart, because before coming to this place I spent many years at an incredible post-secondary institution. I saw these incredible young people contribute their ideas, service, research and entrepreneurship to create that next venture and contribute to Canada's economy.

COVID-19 has been really hard. It has been hard for our young people and hard for students. I would love for the minister to talk to us about how this benefit is going to help those incredible young people and students here in Canada.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. I will answer in French to make sure there is a balance in the House.

I would like to say that in preparing these emergency measures for students, we consulted with student associations. We talked to students across the country to find out how we could better support them in this time of crisis. That is why we are offering this series of programs that will help them to get through the summer and prepare for the fall.

I would like to say that the Canada summer jobs program is a solution that will help many students. What is more, many other programs, such as the Canada student service grant, will help many students across the country gain volunteer experience and get experience in their field.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I know the minister has a warm place in her heart for Oshawa and I hope to welcome her there for her next tournament, perhaps when this pandemic is over. I know that she believes in students and our young people, as we do on this side of the House. I like the fact that she is reaching out for the conversation side of things because here, in the Conservative Party, we have different ideas. The hon. member for Durham put forward a good idea.

Conservatives have proposed that the government create a program to match students and youth employees with jobs in the agriculture sector. It would be like the Canada summer jobs program where the program would cover the minimum wage for the new student, but then the wage could be supplemented by an employer. Of course, the employers would look after health and safety, but this way the student would get a higher salary for their job and put more money into their pockets at the end of the summer, but it would also allow employers who need that labour to get out there.

Is the minister open to supporting a program like that? I would love her answer to that question.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for his invitation. I have been in Oshawa many times in the past year for volleyball tournaments and it is always a great honour to go to his riding. My kids were playing volleyball, of course, but I support them, I am a mom.

Let us get back to the seriousness of this. We know we need to enhance these programs and we have to identify jobs that will give these students an opportunity to work during the summer. I believe the agriculture sector has been encouraging students to go and work. We will help by encouraging students to go work in the agriculture sector during the summer.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, one of the interesting comments that my hon. colleague made across the way during her speech was that now is not the time for this benefit to become universal and maybe they would look at it again at some point. I cannot imagine any other time than now to ensure that everybody is covered and has the supports that they need.

The Liberals had four years in government to bring forward a universal basic income, but they failed to do that. Hopefully it is something that they move forward with seriously. We come back here time after time to fix these issues that arise from the fact that all of these people are falling through the cracks.

Could the minister explain why not making this a universal benefit is the best policy?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I was mentioning in my speech, we think that we should have a conversation at some point, but this is not the time. Currently, we are unwavering in our commitment to support Canadians who are facing hardship during this challenging time. Rather than sending a modest amount to every Canadian, we chose to send money to those who are impacted by COVID-19. As the Canada emergency response benefit helps by providing $2,000 a month to those who have lost income, that is one of the solutions.

We are also making sure that employers who have been hit the hardest will continue to pay their employees with the Canada emergency wage subsidy. We will continue to work with our hon. colleagues to make sure we can support all Canadians.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Peace River—Westlock.

I wanted to start off by saying that when I was younger, Oshawa was a bit of a different town. Oshawa was proudly able to support many students who were working in good summer jobs at the GM assembly plant. I remember working eight years in that plant, and it was a good wage and a great experience. Many of my friends in different programs, whether engineering, management, trades or labour, gained great experience at that plant.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, I am a chiropractor. One may ask what kind of experience I received working on the floor at GM to be a chiropractor. It has allowed me to connect with my constituents and know what they are going through when they came to see me. I always joke that it even maybe helped me in politics. I have said that I have come to Ottawa to straighten out those politicians. When one gets to work in one's community, it is a wonderful experience.

Today it is a different environment in Oshawa, and there are no longer the same opportunities. We have lost our assembly plant. There are still good opportunities in the auto sector, as well as some growth in health care and education, but students still make up a great part of my constituency and this bill hits home.

Between the Ontario Tech University, Trent University Durham campus and Durham College, Oshawa is home to literally thousands of students. In 2019, Ontario Tech University had a total of 10,348 students. Durham College has more than 13,600 full post-secondary and apprenticeship students, with more than 2,000 students from over 60 countries, along with thousands of students in part-time, professional and online studies. Trent University Durham campus has over 1,600 undergraduate students, with 41 graduate students as well. Unlike years past, I am hearing from our young people that they are hurting.

Young people want the same thing that we wanted. They want a job; they do not want a handout. They want a future, experience, a better life and they want opportunities. I love hanging around young people because they really inspire me. They know Canada is the best country in the world with the best potential and that it is the best place to live.

This bill is about students and their futures. I am hearing from the students in my riding that they are in immediate need, as are their families. I am very happy to be here today to support this bill. Conservatives have been working very hard to help the government to better these bills and make better programs available for students and Canadians who need them.

Conservatives have negotiated several changes to this proposed legislation, which includes requiring the government to connect all applicants to the Canada job bank and providing them with job availability information before applying, requiring parliamentary review of the legislation and benefit and instituting a legislated sunset clause so the benefit could not be extended through regulation and there would be accountability.

We recognize unemployment in some parts of the country is extremely high because of this pandemic and that some of these jobs just are not available, so Canadians and students need real help right now. In normal times, this would be a time when students would be starting their new summer jobs so they could save up for the next school year and pay for their rent and groceries.

While the $1,250 that students will be receiving through the Canada emergency student benefit is a step that will help them pay their rent and buy their groceries, it will not place them in a position to pay for their books and tuition come September. They need more. Students need to be able to work in a safe, sanitary environment that will not only pay their bills but also give them experience in their chosen field or even in a field that gives them valuable experience.

What energizes me when I talk to students is that students believe in the future of Canada. Many students come here from all over the world, and a kid in Oshawa can make new friends and learn from friends who come from all parts of the world. They all understand the importance of experience and the potential that Canada offers these students.

Students also believe in the Canadian dream. That is why I love listening to their ideas. The government sometimes has a difficult time defining what the middle class is, but the students I have talked to know what that means. They know what they are aiming for. They want to join the middle class and contribute in a significant way to the Canadian economy. Students want to do their part. They want to contribute to Canada's future. They want to settle down, pursue their careers, raise their families, reach for their dreams and help continue to make Canada the best country in the world.

Right now students are hurting. There is uncertainty. There is fear. It is not just about the COVID virus; they are worried about their future and their families. I have been hearing from mature students with dependants. They have concerns with this ongoing crisis. This is real. They are very concerned about paying their bills while also taking care of their kids. They want to be able to graduate and get a good job in their field, and, if they want, get married, pay for their kids' hockey or volleyball, buy a house, buy a car or go on vacation once a year to get away from our famously frigid Canadian winters. Students know what they want. They understand the definition of middle class and what a Canadian dream is. Students know this.

As Conservatives, we want to help improve these government programs in these trying times. We have some really good ideas, which we have heard in the House today. We want to put them forward to help students in the long term and in an effective way. We offer these ideas for the government's consideration, and we want to help it develop and improve its programs.

Therefore, along with this bill, there should be a priority to expand the Canada summers job program and create a central database to ensure that these critical jobs are filled and students not only receive valuable experience but limit their student debt by making more money during the summer. This program should focus on jobs in the agricultural sector, because we are hearing more and more concerns about our critical supply chains and the difficulty people in our agricultural sector are having in getting the labour they need. At the same time, we want to put our students to work in a helpful and meaningful way that gives them practical life experience, which can also be valuable for their future careers.

When people think of Oshawa, they think about cars. I am really proud of that history, but many people do not realize that the Durham region adds $300 million every single year to Ontario's farm production. In 2017, there were 3,400 jobs in the forestry, fishing and hunting sectors. There are over 200 farms in the Durham region. These farms produce high-quality food for Canadians. Whether it is beef, lamb, honey, cider, fruit, vegetables or wine, we are very proud of the products we produce in the Durham region.

We have been hit with hard times before, but sometimes the hard times have a silver lining: They bring people together. I think our Conservative idea will really help benefit employers who are looking to give those students the experience they need but maybe cannot afford right now. It will give students more money so that when they get back to school in the fall of 2020, they will have fewer loans and more money in their pockets.

In the end, although the Canada emergency student benefit provides assistance to students in the short term, it is important that our young people and mature students be able to get the supports they need so they can be prepared for the opening of the fall 2020 semester, whether it is online or in a slightly modified environment. This can be done by expanding the Canada summer jobs program so employers can get the help they need and supply chains can be secure, all while putting more money in the pockets of students and giving them experience that will last a lifetime.

What the Conservatives want to do is offer Canadians a win-win-win. The program we are offering gives students a win, businesses a win and Canadians a win. When Canadians, students and businesses win, it ensures we all have a future we can be proud of.

I anticipate some great questions from my colleagues on this.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we all look forward to seeing young people find work in their chosen fields when this is all over. I am pleased the Conservative Party is supporting this emergency aid to young people.

However, I am concerned about the sunset clause. I preferred the bill before the change that was just advocated by the Conservative Party, because allowing that change to be made by regulation could help us avoid coming back into Parliament to change the legislation, given that the pandemic may have a second wave that impacts our workforce in the fall.

I wonder if my hon. colleague from Oshawa could reflect on why the Conservative Party felt that the benefits of that sunset clause outweighed the downside of our having to come back and re-legislate if we need the benefit to last longer.