Debates of Nov. 29th, 2021

An Act to Provide Further Support in Response to COVID-19

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Winnipeg North for his very often speaking points in the House.

We have supported these programs as they were rolled out to ensure that the people who needed the support the most got that support, but we were not supportive of large corporations paying out executive bonuses. We were not in support of frauds, people receiving benefits who were not entitled to them. We certainly were not in favour of seniors being impacted in their GIS payments for at least a year, sometimes two years down the road, because of the way the government failed to roll out the program.

That is why we are going to take a much closer look at the bill to see if amendments are needed to ensure it serves the people as efficiently and properly as possible.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Before we continue, I would like to make sure everyone is wearing a mask.

Members should ensure they have their masks on if they are not speaking.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the last time I got up to speak, I do not think you had yet been appointed as Deputy Speaker. Your predecessor, who was also a member of the Conservative Party, was an excellent Speaker and I have no doubt that you are already on your way to following in his footsteps in that regard. Congratulations on your new role and I look forward to working with you in the months and years to come.

We are talking today about this very important legislation, Bill C-2. It is a bill that would continue to provide necessary supports for businesses and individuals, in particular the hardest hit. This is part of a phase-out program. It is part of moving toward getting back to normal in terms of our economic activity, but it is still extremely necessary.

Before I go down the road of talking about why the bill is so important, I want to go back to a number of things I have heard from the opposite side of the House today. The last speaker, in particular, mentioned it, but a number of other Conservatives have as well, which is the rollout of the initial programs back to March of 2020 and those that followed. I believe I am quoting the previous speaker correctly when he said that it was a poor rollout.

Let us go back to March of 2020 for a second and consider exactly what was going on. The world was in confusion and chaos not knowing exactly what was in front of us, not knowing how long it was going to last, not knowing how people were going to be supported and yet our incredible public service was able to put programs together and get them out in lightning speed, when we think about it. I have said this many times in the House before that it only took four weeks to go from the World Health Organization declaring a global pandemic to getting money into the bank accounts of 5.4 million Canadians.

When we talk about the rollout, it is important to reflect on the fact that there was a lot of confusion. Perfection was not the goal back then. The goal was to help as many people as possible and then deal with the imperfections later on. I will be the first to admit, as I did in a previous question, that a lot of those imperfections that were identified and addressed came through deliberations and discussions with the other parties and debate in the House.

That is why, in my opinion, all members of the House supported those measures through unanimous consent motions at times. For those who do not know, a unanimous consent motion basically means everybody agrees without debate and we move on. That is how we were passing a lot of those measures back then.

For members of the House to be hypercritical of the rollout and of the measures that were put in place is absolutely confusing when they participated in these unanimous consent motions. Nonetheless, here we are.

Let us talk about Bill C-2 in particular. This is about helping businesses that are still struggling. As we know, a lot of businesses are not struggling anymore, but many are.

There are three main components or programs in the bill.

The first is the tourism and hospitality recovery program. As we know, a lot of tourism operators are still struggling, and this is one of the most affected industries by this pandemic. We know we need to continue to deliver supports. A lot of these businesses are seasonal by nature, so as we push toward getting through this pandemic, they may have lost a significant chunk of income or revenue stream in the season that just passed, being the season that a lot of people travel. That is why ensuring the subsidy of 75% of wages can continue is extremely important. There are a number of criteria. Not all tourism sectors are included. Some are hit harder, so the program is designed in a way to be reflective of the actual need.

The next one is the hardest-hit business recovery program, and this is to help those businesses that have been hit the hardest by this pandemic. I think of a good friend of mine. He is an audio engineer. When we go to conventions with several thousand people, we go into a ballroom and we often see all the lighting and sound equipment that is set up. There is a lot of work that goes into that, and an audio engineer is somebody who will go in and assess a room to determine exactly what is required to put a production on. My friend, in the beginning of March 2020, had nine months' work ahead of him. He is a contractor who contracts out his services. In a matter of 48 hours, he went to no work at all. Every single contract that he had lined up for the next eight to nine months had been cancelled, all at once.

In this particular sector, we see a lot of people coming together, with people moving around like at conventions, which are unlike a hockey game, where people are stationary for the majority of the time they are there. What makes it worse for these sectors is that they are going to come back the latest. They are the ones that are taking the longest to come back online. This particular sector, when we think about it, was hit immediately, right at the beginning, and is going to be one of the very last to come back online. That is what we are talking about when we talk about the hardest-hit business recovery program. This is about providing subsidies to make sure eligible organizations can continue to get through the rest of this pandemic.

Finally, there is the local lockdown program. This one is probably, in my opinion, the most important. What we have seen through the pandemic, at least as I have been able to observe in Ontario, is that putting in the hands of the local or regional health units the power to implement lockdowns from time to time really gives an opportunity to spread out the need for various different tools at various different times. While one region might have a lockdown and another one does not, it gives those localized areas that have really been affected the opportunity to have different supports in the event that they are going to be locked down. Therefore, this is a program that is extremely important in terms of continuing to provide a wage subsidy and various other supports.

The only other thing I wanted to touch on is with respect to the discussion that has been going on today around inflation. We heard it a lot during question period. We heard it a lot from the opposition in terms of questions in this debate. It is important to point out that despite the rhetoric in everything we are hearing, we have to look at this in a global perspective. I find it quite hilarious that the Conservatives, who have for so long criticized this Prime Minister and this government for not being able to accomplish anything, have now suddenly given them credit for being able to control global inflation, as though the Prime Minister and this government can now set global inflation.

Let us look at what is actually going on in the world. Let us look at the OECD countries. These are the developed countries that we do all our trading with. These are the countries that are quite often in the same boat as we are. We are well below the OECD average for inflation right now. Let us look at our neighbouring partner, with which we do the most trade, the United States. It is almost a full two points higher than Canada in terms of inflation. Although we must treat inflation extremely seriously and we must be very careful with the tools and with what we are doing right now, it is germane to at least recognize that it is not a problem that has been created by this Prime Minister and this government. It is indeed a global problem that is going to have to be addressed through various different policies from various different governments throughout the world.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will ask a very simple question in the context that we are more than two months behind what should have been the regular sitting calendar of this place. Many, many weeks' worth of legislative work was delayed, stopped and interrupted by the Prime Minister, who called an election on which, let us just say, he misrepresented himself in previous statements until the point where we have now learned that he received polling information that he could divide Canadians on controversial issues.

Does the member support an expedited reinstatement of committees, so that we can get to work studying legislation like this for the benefit of Canadians?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think the election was a lesson for everybody in the House, in particular for the Conservative Party. I sat in the House for five months, and I witnessed first-hand the obstructionary tactics that were being used to delay everything. It did not matter what the piece of legislation was. The Conservatives just wanted to delay everything.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

It is called doing our jobs.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

If this election has taught us anything, and if the Conservatives are able to be self-reflective and to think of what this election taught them, it should have taught them that the electorate has put them back in the same position to be the opposition—

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

To do our job.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

—and that they should use that opportunity to try to genuinely make things better. That does not mean making personal attacks and trying to demean every single individual in the government. It means actually working collaboratively for policy to be better for all Canadians.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind the member for Battle River—Crowfoot one more time that he should allow members who have the floor to speak. If he has questions and comments, he can do that, and he should also have his mask on at all times, unless he is getting up to speak.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean.

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

Madam Speaker, “once a technician, always a technician”: that is our motto. I was an on-set technician for 19 years, so I understand the story about the audio engineer that the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands shared with us.

The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage did a study on the challenges that the pandemic was causing for the cultural sector and came to the conclusion that money from the assistance measures was not reaching the artists and technicians.

There is currently a question that no member of this government seems capable of answering. There were problems, and emergency measures had to be put in place quickly. No one from the party in power is able to justify the decision to call an election while Canadians were suffering and needed help.

This government that told us that putting these assistance measures in place was urgent is the same one that called an election for absolutely no reason.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I do not know about the report. I am not on the committee. I have not read it, but I will say that there has been a lot of activity with respect to film and culture in my riding. Actually, in the former Kingston penitentiary, which is a federal building, at least three or four different series have been filmed, including Mayor of Kingstown. They are being featured right now, as we speak.

There is actually a lot going on, although I appreciate the fact that the member knows more about this than I do, seeing as he has had the time to go through that report.

The only other thing I will say is that, yes, the election was important in my opinion. I sat here and watched how the opposition tried to prevent anything from getting through, so I think the electorate has had the opportunity to give everybody direction and to tell us to go back and continue to function in the way we are and make meaningful policies for Canadians.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member stated that some businesses are not struggling anymore. Some businesses never did. Throughout this pandemic there were businesses that made outsized profits, pandemic profits. For those businesses, is the government open to additional taxation on a portion of these outsized profits to pay for COVID supports for people?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the member on being elected to this place.

I cannot speak on behalf of the government. I am not the government, so I cannot tell her what it will be bringing forward in the future, but I would agree with her that there are various different businesses that were not affected at all, some that were less affected, some that were affected and have recovered, and some that are still struggling in the extreme right now and that need to continue to get supports. That is what this bill is all about.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Madam Speaker, today I rise to continue debate over Bill C-2, the government’s inaugural post-election spending bill, targeted to support businesses and those impacted by COVID-19 lockdowns. This $7.4-billion piece of legislation may seem like a drop in the bucket compared to the spending that was approved in the last Parliament, but we know our nation’s finances are increasingly in precarious shape.

As we seek to navigate our way out of this pandemic, the responsibility we have as parliamentarians to do our due diligence is vital to our recovery. There are many examples from the previous Parliament on why it is so essential to do our due diligence and ensure that this and other spending bills are providing targeted support to precisely the sectors that need it the most.

The fact is that in the last Parliament, billions of dollars in taxpayer funds were needlessly directed to otherwise profitable businesses in the form of wage subsidies and other subsidies. In fact, even in 2020, with the carnage of the COVID-19 lockdowns from March onward, the TSX, the Toronto Stock Exchange, was still able to post a modest gain of over 2%.

In 2021 alone, year to date, with wage subsidies and other subsidies in place, the TSX has grown by over 20%, dwarfing the 10-year annual return of around 6%. It is abundantly clear that the fiscal stimulus, provided by the Liberal government through taxpayer resources and debt-financed by those taxpayers, and the unprecedented amount of quantitative easing by our central bank, have significantly propped up the returns of Canada’s biggest businesses.

These same factors have also led to a massive rise in inflation that is unrivalled in most of the developed world. The price of housing in some parts of Canada has skyrocketed to all-time highs, with prices in Ontario jumping between 20% to 35% this year alone. It is no wonder so many people in my generation, the millennial generation, and following generations will have to wait years longer than previous generations to own our very first home, if we ever can.

Those millennials who are fortunate enough to be able to purchase their first home are often doing so through generous gifts from their parents or grandparents. Otherwise, they are often leveraging themselves to the hilt, sometimes by 20 times, just to afford a modest townhome in the suburbs. We know this is unsustainable. We know interest rates are going to increase, making the cost of servicing that massive mortgage debt for young families more and more unaffordable.

As well, we know the government, while trying to get families into their first overpriced home, will do nothing or little to avert or mitigate the carnage we will see when mortgage rates reset over the next few years.

If the increasing price of housing was not bad enough, the increases to other essentials for families due to inflation and flawed government policies will also contribute to major economic problems for Canadian families. The prices of inputs into agricultural production are growing fast. The prices of fertilizer and fuel, the cost of drying grain due to carbon taxes, clean fuel standards and now inflation threaten to make all food products less affordable for families.

The price of a pound of bacon is up over 20% since January 2020, and that is just one example from hundreds where food prices are going up. Consumers are getting big cost increases, while the government, the central bank and the big producers pass along the costs.

Sadly, many of the farmers I know and have the honour of representing, especially the cattle ranchers, are not benefiting from these cost increases. While beef at the grocery store may be up 20% since the beginning of 2020, the price of a head of beef cattle has gone up by only 2.7% since 2017. It is not the farmers who are getting rich off the government's inflation.

Across Canada, we also see that there are over a million job vacancies. This labour shortage affects all regions of Canada and it persists in all sectors of the economy. Supporting Canadians in need was the right thing to do, and it always will be. That is why the Conservatives supported help for Canadians who were prevented from working because of the COVID-19 lockdowns.

However, we cannot continue to support people to not work while our economy is open and there is a nationwide labour shortage. The hospitality and food service industries are experiencing an all-time high in job vacancies, with over 89,000 vacancies. In manufacturing and construction, there are over 60,000 job vacancies. In the retail sector, we are seeing 84,000 unfilled jobs. How will this bill address those vacancies?

The Business Development Bank of Canada has reported that 64% of Canadian businesses say that labour shortages are limiting their growth. These labour shortages are severely impacting the ability of Canadian businesses to recover from COVID-19. As a result, our economic recovery in Canada is stalling. I see nothing in Bill C-2 that would address or alleviate these rampant job vacancies across the country.

Getting back to the specifics of Bill C-2, it is positive that the government is taking a more targeted approach to pandemic stimulus. I have been calling for that in the House for the past year. It is critical that the industries that are the most impacted, like tourism, hospitality and travel, get the resources they need so we can ensure job creation, retention and a strong economic rebound.

That being said, I am deeply concerned that the government is seeking to fast-track this legislation before the House of Commons has even convened its finance committee to undertake a review of it. I like that one of the Liberals who spoke earlier did admit that the programs were not perfect, but given how flawed some of the pandemic spending is, we have seen that negative consequences have been created. Should the government not be welcoming strong oversight from opposition parties to ensure the strongest possible legislation?

Here are a few examples of how previous pandemic spending was flawed.

I had constituents reach out to me who needed to access the CERB. They were seniors who are not used to using a computer. Instead of accessing their benefits through the Canada Revenue Agency portal, they felt prey to a third party group that promised to process their benefits for them. In fact, the Competition Bureau of Canada is investigating one such firm for suspected deceptive false and misleading practices that saw Canadians lose out on 8% to 10% of their entitled benefits.

These constituents, when accessing the website of this third party, believed that they were being assisted in accessing benefits directly from the government. The reality was that they were accessing these benefits through a deceptively designed website that charged significant fees for their services. Those who did not want to pay those fees were subject to an aggressive collections campaign that threatened to ruin their credit scores.

Why did the government design this legislation to allow unscrupulous businesses to benefit on the backs of unaware Canadians? Why is it that when I raised my concerns with the minister, I was told that it was not illegal?

We have heard multiple times already that prisoners, suspected fraudsters and members of organized crime have accessed pandemic benefits, and there is no plan from the government to recoup those monies. Canadians are furious that this happened, and they want a full accounting of those funds and a plan to ensure that this abuse does not happen again. So far I do not see that with this legislation.

It is therefore critical that we bring the finance committee back into session so that we can thoroughly examine the bill. Enough is enough. The trust that opposition parties gave to the government in the last Parliament to fast-track legislation for pandemic benefits has been abused. This is unacceptable and it demonstrates the need for a thorough study by the finance committee before moving forward and passing this bill. Once we are assured that this due diligence has been done, we can move expeditiously to ensure that Canadians who need their benefits can get them. I know many in the hospitality industry and in the independent travel agents sector who desperately do need support to keep their businesses alive until we can get through the pandemic.

In closing, we have seen how well-intentioned spending designed to help Canadians who are in need can be misused or used by those who do not really need it. It is critically important that we get the finance committee in order so that we could thoroughly study this bill to ensure that spending goes where it is needed and it does not contribute to the further rising inflation that we see in this country.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, in the past it was somewhat clear that Conservatives recognized there was a need for the government to step up to the plate. It might not have been unanimous within their caucus, but at least a good number of them felt it was important to bring forward the programs we brought forward. When we create programs, I think it is fair to say that there will be some flaws in them, and we do what we can to fix them, but the principle behind the need for the programs was there.

Does the member feel the principle of this legislation, which is to continue to support businesses and people across Canada, is still needed? Does he support that? Would he at least indicate his personal support for seeing this and vote in favour of it?

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Madam Speaker, there is a lot of uncertainty in the world today. We have had a new variant of the COVID-19 virus, the Omicron variant, come up, which is now public knowledge. We do not know what the next few months will bring.

In principle, I would say that there may be a need for further pandemic benefits to support businesses if we do see a strong resurgence of this virus. However, what I am not willing to do is give this government, as my colleague previous said, a blank cheque when, by its own admission, although the principle may have been good, their programs were not perfect. It is our job as members of the opposition to call out the government when it is not doing its job 100% right and to ensure that there are alternative solutions so we can get this legislation right.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, earlier my hon. colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean mentioned the study done by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage last year. The study looked at the impact of the pandemic on the cultural sector and noted something, nearly a year ago, about organizations representing the cultural community. It found that support from government programs at that time was not reaching artists.

We were hoping that Bill C‑2 would provide some concrete evidence that the message being sent by the cultural sector had been heard, specifically in the form of direct assistance to artists and technicians.

My question is for my Conservative colleagues. What would they have done to provide immediate, concrete support to the cultural sector?

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Madam Speaker, we all respect and treasure the artists in our country. I know that members of the Bloc Québécois particularly cherish their Québécois cultural sector, and I think all Canadians cherish the very unique, strong and beautiful cultural sector of Quebec. That is why it is important that these artists were able to access benefits at a time when we were not having concerts or opportunities for new artists to emerge or perform at local venues. There were benefits to support those artists, and I think that was appropriate.

However, as we come out of the COVID-19 pandemic, and I certainly hope we are coming out on the other side of this, it is important that the economy is open so we can get these artists back into the public forum. They need to increase their digital and physical presence to get the exposure they desperately need to survive and thrive. We absolutely want to see those sorts of economic and cultural reopenings to support our artists.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague mentioned housing, and I think I speak for every member in the House when I say that it is the dream of every Canadian, and their right really, to have access to affordable, appropriate, secure housing. If there is any issue that speaks to a failure of public policy at all three levels of government, it is the fact that in this country we have a housing crisis. This did not happen this morning. This has taken years and, in some cases, a few decades to develop.

I am wondering what my hon. colleague thinks of the impact of foreign capital has as a destabilising factor on residential real estate and whether or not his party has any recommendations as to how they might curb that destabilizing impact on residential real estate markets.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for the question, and I am well aware that he comes from one of those real estate markets in our country that has been the most impacted by foreign investment.

In a lot of places in the country foreign investment has been a blessing, but we have seen the terrible, negative consequences when we have so much foreign investment, speculative foreign investment, lead to rapid price increases that price out folks who live and work and want to raise their families in this country. They cannot even afford a decent place to live. In the last election, the Conservatives put forward a very strong plan to ensure that we could support families while also cracking down on speculative practices that are making homes unaffordable for Canadian families.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be here today to speak to Bill C-2, an act to provide further support in response to COVID-19. Our government is moving into the next phase of the recovery, with more targeted support for Canadians, as our economy continues to reopen. The benefits outlined in this bill are and will continue to be essential for Canadians who will be impacted by the pandemic in the months to come.

I do not think any of us in this room could have imagined the immense cost that the COVID-19 virus was going to take on the world when we left the Hill for the weekend and headed home to our constituencies on March 13, 2020. However, here we are about 20 months later continuing to find new ways to respond to the individual and collective toll that the virus has taken on us all.

In the midst of all this hardship and heartbreak, we have also seen incredible resilience and innovation. We have seen health care workers, first responders, service providers and government employees work through continually evolving situations for months to take care of patients, provide essential services and ensure that our country was able to continue to function. We saw the creation, clinical trials, approval and distribution of multiple vaccines for COVID-19.

I heard from many Surrey Centre constituents who expressed how important the previous round of pandemic benefits were for them. I would like to extend my extreme gratitude to all those constituents and stakeholders who have provided very important feedback to us throughout the last year and a half, as well as to the government officials, who have listened to that feedback to make our pandemic supports stronger to support more individuals and businesses.

As we continue to see the evolution of the pandemic, we will continue to adapt our approach to address it. That is what our government is doing with Bill C-2. Our strategy to support Canadians is evolving with the situation, and we are now shifting our focus from blanket support measures to a more targeted approach. By taking a more targeted approach, we will reduce our spending on COVID support while continuing to support those who have been hit hardest by the health and economic impacts of the virus.

I would like to take this opportunity to talk about the proposed support and extension of support in this bill for individuals and businesses. They will be essential to Canadians as we move forward through pandemic recovery.

The bill proposes extending some existing COVID support benefits, including the Canada recovery hiring program; the Canada recovery sickness benefit, which has given income support to employed and self-employed individuals who are unable to work because they are sick or need to self-isolate because of COVID-19; and the Canada recovery caregiving benefit, which has given income support to individuals who are unable to work because they must care for a child or family member who needs supervised care. This applies if their school or care facility is closed or unavailable to them because of COVID-19, or if they are sick, self-isolating or at risk of serious health complications because of COVID-19. These three benefits will be extended until May of next year when this legislation is passed. This bill also proposes the creation of new benefits, including the Canada worker lockdown benefit, a measure that will support workers who are unable to work because of a government-imposed public health lockdown; the tourism and hospitality recovery program; and the hardest-hit business recovery program.

We all know that the tourism and hospitality industry, in particular, has been extremely hard hit by the pandemic. With most of world shutting their doors to non-residents in the early months of the pandemic, the tourism industry faced a sharp decline. Canadian cities and towns across the country rely heavily on the tourism industry to support their local economies. According to Statistics Canada, in March 2020, Canada saw a nearly 55% decrease in international arrivals. With travel and movement restrictions across the country, hotels were at less than 20% occupancy levels. Restaurants and bars were also hard hit during this time, when real GDP dropped by 39.5%.

I met with many constituents and local stakeholders to hear about their concerns, especially restaurant, hotel and banquet hall owners and operators in Surrey. The hotels, restaurants and banquet halls in my riding were particularly hard hit by the lockdown, with local lockdown restrictions forcing many establishments to close their doors completely for a few months, which meant cancelling weddings and other events, and requiring them to switch their service operations to provide takeout and delivery options. Similarly, restaurants had to shut down dining rooms and have takeout only, therefore having to let go of the servers and staff who normally worked there.

Surrey's hotels, like the Civic Hotel, rely on business travel, most of which had come to a virtual halt. That made it very difficult for them to survive. Surrey has a large banquet and wedding industry that was also hard hit due to severe restrictions on the size of weddings. Therefore, many venues and vendors were completely shut down, leaving hundreds out of jobs.

Things have begun to look up for these industries. In the second quarter of 2021, there was an increase of employment generated by the tourism industry with 453,200 jobs added. This time also saw an increase in tourism spending in Canada by over $10.6 billion. We may not have the international travellers coming and going as we are accustomed to, but Canadians have been stepping up and increasing local travel within the country.

With winter coming, though, we know that many businesses and workers will need support as tourism winds down for the season. I am confident that the travel and tourism industry will come back after these hard times. They have shown their resilience and the support offered through these proposed benefits will help this industry though the end of the pandemic.

Our government is committed to working with our international partners to ensure that countries around the world have fair and equitable access to vaccines. As we continue to see the rates of vaccination increase, we will be able to continue to reopen our beautiful country to the world once again, with the knowledge that our families, friends and neighbours will be protected.

We know that winter will most likely bring more challenging times related to the pandemic in different regions across the country. I am very pleased to see that this bill addresses the possibility of local lockdowns, with the Canada workers lockdown benefit. Anticipating these events now will ensure that Canadians have the support they need to get through these challenging times, whether it be to support an ill relative, care for their children or ensure that they can continue to put food on the table should they become ill and need to take a few days off work.

Our health care providers have done a phenomenal job of getting Canadians vaccinated well ahead of our original schedule. We now have 76.3% of the population who have received the full dose of vaccines and the numbers continue to grow.

As vaccine manufacturers continue their clinical trials for younger children and with the approval of the Pfizer vaccine for children ages five to 11 by Health Canada, we are well on our way to ensuring that all Canadians who are able to receive the vaccine have access. As we continue to move through the changing circumstances of this pandemic, our government will continue to be there for Canadians and Canadian businesses.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Madam Speaker, we welcome the fact that the tourism and hospitality sectors were included in Bill C-2. However, the bill does not currently cover upstream industries in the supply chains of those sectors, such as aircraft or bus manufacturers, or those that manufacture goods for the tourism and hospitality sectors.

My question is this: Do you think that the list currently included in Bill C‑2 is exhaustive?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I would remind the hon. member to direct her questions and comments to the Chair, not directly to another member.

The hon. member for Surrey Centre.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Madam Speaker, that was a great question from my colleague across the aisle.

Bill C-2 covers all of the industries that are hard hit. It is based on the economic hit that the industry has had and whether it has reached the threshold. Those that are hard hit will receive the wage subsidy, as required, and we know that the tourism and hospitality sector have been the hardest hit currently and the slowest to recover, due to the travel restrictions. I think that those industries and those pilots will benefit from it. The larger industry, as a whole, has been provided assistance and those in smaller industries will also get the assistance they need.