Debates of April 22nd, 2021

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance

[Louise Charbonneau, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Scarborough—Guildwood for his speech.

These are huge and unprecedented expenditures. Let us remember that this spending comes on top of Ottawa's deficits.

Moreover, the government is investing very little in health transfers and support for seniors.

Could the member comment on that?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Madam Speaker, what I would say about that is simply that the government has provided massive amounts of stimulus to be put into the economy in order that provincial governments survive and service their own jurisdictional responsibilities.

The transfers to provinces in the past 18 months are unprecedented. The provinces have, by and large, spent the money quite wisely on health and other related issues.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Madam Speaker, I will start by acknowledging the people in my riding of Hochelaga. During this unprecedented and ongoing crisis, the people of Hochelaga have been resilient, supportive and engaged. I am so proud to represent them in the House, especially today, as I rise to speak to a progressive budget focused on an inclusive and feminist economic recovery.

I too want to commend my colleague and Minister of Finance, who is the first woman to table a federal budget in the House. A significant glass ceiling has just been broken.

Since the start of the pandemic, more than one million Canadians have contracted COVID-19 and more than 20,000 Canadians have died from it. I want to tell the families and friends who lost a loved one that I am thinking of them. I also want to thank health care workers for their dedication and tireless efforts. In Hochelaga and Montreal East, the vaccination campaign is making great progress. More than 83% of seniors over 70 have already been vaccinated.

We are still living with a great deal of uncertainty and facing a global health crisis. Now is not the time for austerity. We cannot ask the most vulnerable to go into debt to pay for food and shelter or just to live during this period of uncertainty. The federal government decided to be there for Canadians and support them in the fight against COVID-19.

I come from a family that strongly believes that the role of government is to fight for society's most vulnerable and to ensure that it is ready to step up in times of crisis. That is what this budget does. Our budget seeks to meet today's urgent needs, namely overcoming COVID-19 and building a fairer, more prosperous and more innovative future for all. This budget will have an important impact on the people of my riding and of Montreal East.

In my riding, many businesses and organizations have benefited from the Canada emergency wage subsidy. “We would not be here without the federal government”: This is a strong message from Benoist, director general of Hochelaga-Maisonneuve community kitchen. Without the help of this wage subsidy, this jewel of Quebec's social economy, this pioneer of community kitchens in Quebec, which has provided more than 140,000 meals, would no longer be there. In fact, the budget allocates an additional $140 million to the emergency fund for food security.

The wage subsidy has helped several industries and small and medium-sized businesses. We can be proud to have supported two new businesses in Hochelaga and Montreal East, Oshlag and Glutenberg. A few months ago, the Prime Minister and I met with co-owners David and Frédéric to talk about the impact of COVID-19 and the federal programs that helped them. I am proud to tell Benoist, David and Frédéric, as well as thousands of organizations and businesses throughout Quebec and Canada, that our budget will extend the wage subsidy until September 25, 2021.

On top of helping these companies and making it easier for them to keep their workers employed, we are jump-starting the economy by increasing the Canada workers benefit, enabling thousands of workers to upgrade their skills in this modern, ever-changing world. With this budget, our government aims to support a sustainable green recovery, focused on the jobs of tomorrow.

Community organizations have been there for the most vulnerable Canadians since the beginning of the pandemic. Volunteers have been working every day to help the less fortunate. In Hochelaga, more than 35 community organizations received assistance from the emergency food security fund. I want to tell all of the organizations serving our community, including Le Mûrier, the Fondation des aveugles du Québec, Le Chic Resto-Pop, Projet Harmonie, Un prolongement à la famille de Montréal, and the Un Élan pour la vie foundation, that the government is supporting them in this budget. They play an important role and we recognize that. This is why we plan to invest $400 million over three years to create a temporary community services recovery fund that will help organizations adapt, modernize and participate in the economic recovery.

One of the main concerns for people in eastern Montreal and Hochelaga is the high cost of housing, which continues to put financial pressure on families. These high costs undermine the economic and social prosperity of all families in Hochelaga and across Quebec and Canada. A family should not have to choose between paying rent or buying groceries, and families will not have to do so. In addition to investing in safe, affordable housing, we plan to increase the Canada child benefit, which has lifted more than one million Canadians out of poverty for good.

I want to tell organizations like Maison Tangente, Centre NAHA, L'Anonyme, CARE Montreal and CAP St-Barnabé that the budget provides an additional $567 million over two years to support people experiencing homelessness. An additional $2.5 billion is also being invested to speed up the construction of affordable housing.

COVID-19 has disproportionately affected women. In the labour market, women were hit early. Schools and child care centres had to close, making it even harder to achieve work-life balance. The budget includes a fundamentally feminist plan to support growth and jobs. This includes creating a nationwide early learning and child care system based on the Quebec model. Creating such a system will help ensure that women can contribute to economic growth.

I would like to remind the House that Quebec is one of the best places in the world for women to enter the workforce. It is time for the rest of Canada to follow that example.

A feminist recovery also means supporting women entrepreneurs, strengthening diversity in corporate governance and creating a national action plan to end gender-based violence. We must act.

Our thoughts are with all the victims of femicide. I want to say to all women at risk that we think of them every day.

Lockdowns and reduced social contacts during the pandemic have had serious repercussions on mental health. We have a duty to ensure that Quebeckers and everyone in Canada are getting the help they need when they need it. As a mother of two young adults, I can say that the pandemic has hit hard at home.

I spoke at length with two young students at Collège de Maisonneuve, Estelle and Jean-Emmanuel. The mental health of young people has been hit particularly hard. Overnight, they ended up isolated without necessarily having access to resources to help them prepare for these changes. I want to say to Estelle, Jean-Emmanuel and the thousands of young people in Hochelaga that the government has heard them. The budget we are proposing today includes $100 million in funding to support mental health interventions, including for young people.

For the first time, the federal government recognizes the precarious state of the French language in Canada. We have a responsibility to protect and promote it. We recognized the need to protect the French language in Quebec, but also across the country, because the declining demographic weight of francophones is very real.

The time has come to modernize the Official Languages Act, and that is what we are going to do by providing funding to Canadian Heritage and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat for that modernization.

By providing $180 million to enhance French immersion and French second-language programs in schools and post-secondary institutions, we recognize that the status of the French language is at risk in Quebec and Canada and that we have a responsibility to protect it.

I would like to close by letting the House know how proud I am that east Montreal, which I proudly represent, is included in budget 2021. Our government recognizes the potential of east Montreal, its potential for innovative research, for new and growing businesses and for the economy of tomorrow.

As the proud government representative for Hochelaga and east Montreal in the House of Commons, I will continue to work hard to defend the economic and social interests of our area and, more importantly, to support all Canadians in the recovery of tomorrow—a green, sustainable, inclusive she-covery.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Vegreville had commented earlier today about the Liberals' propensity for announcements instead of actual action, and I want her to reference this.

She talked about the need to promote entrepreneurship among women. I will note that three or four years ago the operations committee tabled in the House a report on helping women entrepreneurs with government procurement. Now, three years later, the government has not acted on a single one of over two dozen recommendations.

She also talks about the need to promote French language in Quebec, which I understand and I support. I will note that the Treasury Board, in providing a billion-dollar, sole-sourced grant to its friends at WE, violated Treasury Board rules and did not do the official languages impact analysis. The President of the Treasury Board from Quebec City violated his own rules. Why the hypocrisy?

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I think that we basically share the same concerns, particularly that of ensuring that women are able to return to the labour market, and that is exactly what our budget proposes.

I would also like to remind my colleague that our government is the first federal government to recognize the decline of French and the need to protect the French language to ensure its vitality and demographic weight in North America.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to pick up on the idea of a she-covery and the importance of women in the workplace.

Not only are many women in the workforce, but they are also caregivers. The number of patients per nurse, most of whom are women, keeps rising because of diminishing health transfers and the government's refusal to grant permanent, sustainable, ongoing transfers.

In Montreal, 800 nurses have resigned over the past year, and that has increased the workload for those who remain.

By denying the health transfers that Quebec and the Canadian provinces are calling for, is the federal government not shooting itself in the foot when it comes to a she-covery?

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

This question really resonates with me because my mother is a caregiver and has been her whole life for my brother, who is now in a long-term care home. I have not seen him in almost eight months. All that to say, I truly understand people's concern about caregivers.

I would like to remind my colleague that our government was the first to introduce a strategy to recognize caregivers and people with disabilities by increasing the disability benefit.

My colleague mentioned health transfers. I would point out that our government had to contribute $8 out of every $10 during the COVID-19 pandemic. That is over $40 billion transferred and allocated to various health programs across the country.

We are there, and we will continue to be there for all provinces to support Canadians through health care challenges.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Hochelaga.

She knows that many people have suffered during this pandemic, in particular workers, seniors and business owners in her riding.

Many others have become much richer. The wealthiest have amassed an additional $78 billion during this crisis. Big companies like Amazon and Netflix have made record profits.

Unfortunately, her government refuses to create a wealth tax or an excess profits tax. Why are the Liberals going to make families pay for the economic recovery?

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would remind my colleague that our government is committed to making GAFAM and their ilk pay and ensuring that they contribute to our country's economic and cultural system.

However, it is up to Canadians as a society to take on debt in order to get through this pandemic.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley.

Today, we are debating the federal budget, which outlines how much money the federal government is going to spend in a period of time. We have not had a document like this, an outline, in over two years. During that period of time, the federal government has spent an enormous amounts of money.

When a federal budget is put together, typically a government looks at how much revenue is coming in, and revenue is, of course, in the form of taxation, fees, levies, etc., and then how much it is going to spend against that. There are two ways that the government can fund spending, and that is either through revenue from taxation, etc. or by borrowing.

In 2015, when the Conservative Party left power, we had a balanced budget. This meant that how much we were spending was about equal to what was coming in. We did not have to borrow.

In the six-year period, including what is in the document we are debating today, the federal Liberal government has added more debt to Canada, more than every other government in the history of country combined. That is really quite something.

The question that everybody in Canada should be asking is whether he or she is getting value for that money. People who are watching today know that when they put money on their credit cards, they have to pay interest on it. That interest payment could prevent them from spending on other things. Our whole country is in that situation now.

I want to speak to this from three perspectives: the pandemic, moving forward in the pandemic, and from my province of Alberta.

First, the budget should have been tied to a plan to move Canada permanently and safely out of lockdown restrictions. We know that a lot of spending in there is related to spending on measures that are needed when people are forced to sit at home by the federal government. That does not help everybody. Restrictions do not have an equal effect on everybody in Canada. A lot of people are more impacted by these restrictions than others.

For example, a government employee who has the ability to work from home, with a permanent paycheque, might not be financially impacted in the same way as a small business owner who has to close his or her business because of uncertain restrictions.

A year into the pandemic, other countries around the world, like the United Kingdom and the United States, have started to tie reopening to benchmarks like vaccination rates. We have heard nothing from the federal government on that. In fact, it has shied away from talking about this. I realize we are in the third wave right now. I do believe the federal government's failure to deliver vaccines to Canadians in January and February exacerbated the third wave. However, without that plan, those targets, that line of sight on when the economy could reopen, this plan is a house of cards. There is a lot of assumptions that we cannot evaluate, and that is a problem.

After the pandemic, at some point, and I am hopeful Canada can move out of this, we will have a major challenge as a country. I know that some people who are listening today have lost their businesses or their jobs. Those are not things that will easily come back.

This plan should have outlined measures that would attract investment into Canada, things that would have made Canada an attractive place to do business. Some people think that government spending creates jobs, but what creates sustainable jobs is an environment in which people can take risks, invest and hire people. That means lower taxation, consistent and lower regulatory burdens, a skilled workforce and other factors.

There is really nothing in this record amount of spending and of borrowing to do that. Why is that important? Without that clear line of sight on attracting investment and job creation, it means that we are artificially creating growth. Let us think about this for a second. It is like saying we are getting more money because we are spending more money on our credit cards. It is like taking cash out of an ATM on a Visa. This is essentially what the budget would do, and that is a huge problem.

With the time I have left, I want to talk about my province of Alberta. Alberta was in a very bad economic situation prior to going into the pandemic. We had some of the highest unemployment rates in the country, and this is because the federal Liberal government disrupted the energy sector with policies that made it almost impossible for projects to move forward. This is classic Liberal political philosophy, to paint Albertans as people with dirty jobs who do not care about the environment, put in place policies that are punitive to them without any plan to support workers, and then buy off votes in central and eastern Canada and hope the Liberals continue to hold power.

We know that a government that wants to maintain Canadian Confederation should put in place policies that benefit the whole country, which the Liberals have consistently failed to do, and this budget does the same thing. There is nothing in it to address the severe economic downturn that my province is facing, because the little bits of hope that we had after the Liberals' destruction of the energy sector, like the hospitality and tourism sector, like the airline sector, etc., are all wiped out now.

The Calgary Stampede, for example, brought $500 million into the city every year, but without a plan on reopening or some benchmarks, it cannot proceed and no amount of government spending is going to fix that. We need that plan. I will bring up WestJet. WestJet is a huge source of jobs for Alberta, and the federal government has done nothing for the workers in that industry. They have been begging for a plan for rapid testing at airports that would make things safer, but the Liberals have left this company out in the dark. In fact, they have made it worse in a lot of ways, and there are so many examples like that.

This budget, which spends so much money, really sets my province back. From 2007 to 2018, my province provided $239 billion in net fiscal transfers, essentially equalization, to the country. How much did it get back from that program? It got zero dollars. Think about what my province could have done with $239 billion. Instead, people in my riding are sitting at home. I have seen high levels of suicide and domestic violence, and it is because the government consistently overlooks that. The government thinks we can somehow put money on a credit card and magically hope things get better.

What we need is a stable macroeconomic situation to allow growth to happen over time, not artificial growth through government spending, which creates inflationary pressures, makes things more expensive and does not really create any sort of long-term growth. In fact, it actually hinders growth because of those interest payments on that debt. We cannot accept this. I believe this is a way to buy off votes in a feeble attempt that undermines the intelligence of Canadians ahead of a federal election that the Prime Minister's party really wants to have happen during a pandemic. I think that is morally bankrupt.

Instead, what the government should have done is have a plan that clearly states the benchmarks by which Canada can safely reopen. Liberals should have had a better plan for vaccination. They also should have ensured that there was regional specific support for hard-hit regions like Alberta.

I am really tired of policy happening to my province. If the Liberal government was really serious about helping every region of this country, it would be ensuring that the workers in my province who have been left behind by its policies have things like skills development or specialized support. We should be looking at ways to create a stable economic climate in Alberta to attract more investment right now, but that is not what this budget does. What it does is put a lot of money on our nation's Visa card for not a lot of return. There is a lot of structural spending in here with not a lot of return, and that is a huge problem. That is why I do not support it, and no Canadian should, either.

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

Madam Speaker, I know that this member, the opposition critic for health, speaks a lot about comparing us to the United States and tries to paint a picture that the United States is in a much better position right now than we are. However, the reality of the situation is that yesterday Canada added 5,859 COVID cases for the entire country. By comparison, Michigan added 5,900 and Florida added 5,571. Just those two states alone had double the total cases throughout all of Canada.

How can the member justify continually pointing to the United States as a huge success story when the numbers do not support it?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, this may come as a surprise to the member, but the United States has 10 times the population of Canada, and I believe the figures that have come out of the United States recently have shown that on a per capita basis—because that is how we measure things when there is not an equal amount, we have something called a common denominator—Canada's cases are actually outpacing the United States, and that is because the member's party failed to deliver vaccines to Canada in January and February, unlike the United States.

I will take this opportunity to thank President Biden for announcing that he plans to give Canadians some vaccines, where the member's Prime Minister failed to do so. I thank President Biden.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

The Conservatives' proposed amendment to the budget highlights the importance of accelerating vaccinations to end the third wave of COVID-19. That will require greater investments in health care. We have spoken many times about the importance of increasing health transfers. In fact, that was part of the Bloc Québécois' amendment to the amendment.

Why did my colleague and her Conservative colleagues vote against the Bloc Québécois' amendment to the amendment?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, certainly the Conservatives understand that the federal government's delay in getting vaccines during that crucial period in January and February, when only 5% of Canadians even got their first shot, put an enormous pressure on provincial ICU capacity, for example. Of course the federal government should be helping provinces in every way possible, including increased transfer payments during this crisis. The Bloc's amendment, though my colleague makes it sound like it was just that, had some other, problematic components. As responsible legislators, I think we made a good point on that, but we do understand and agree that the federal government has left most provincial governments in a deeply untenable situation and needs to do more to secure vaccines.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, my question for my colleague is around working people. The Conservative leader talks a lot about standing up for the working class. However, the Conservatives have not supported federal leadership when it comes to paid sick days. We know from everybody, from public health experts to doctors, that paid sick days are critical in dealing with workplace outbreaks of COVID-19.

Does she agree that if we are going to actually stand up for working people, we need to see national leadership and provincial leadership in ensuring paid sick days for workers, so that they can stay home safely?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, gig economy workers and workers in grocery stores are the real heroes of the pandemic, but they have also been treated the most abysmally by the federal government. Of course, we need support for them to be able to isolate when they need to. We also need a plan to get them vaccinated and to make working conditions safer. The fact that the federal government has not done more on rapid testing in workplaces, and has not done more on things like seeing danger pay for grocery workers be abolished by a virtual monopoly of grocery companies in this country, is ridiculous and unconscionable. Yes, we need to do more, but we also need a path forward through vaccines, rapid tests and therapeutics.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Madam Speaker, in my short time as an MP, so much has changed in our country and in our world. I could not help but be reminded of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, when Brutus says, “There is a tide in the affairs of men, which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune.... On such a full sea are we now afloat, and we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.”

As legislators, it is time to recognize that we are in the throes of history. What we decide today will either lead us to future success or down a dangerous path. I am saddened to say that the path this budget presents is one that could really lead our country into peril. Even before the pandemic, the government’s vacuous promise to balance the budget by 2019 had long been abandoned and broken. Canada’s debt had risen, and a view of the horizon displayed a sea of deficits and red ink for years to come. The cupboard had already been spent bare.

By June 2020, Fitch had already downgraded our national credit rating. Standard & Poor's was warning at the same time that it could also downgrade us at some point over the next couple of years “should the deterioration in the government's fiscal position become more severe and prolonged than we currently expect.” I think we can safely say that Canada's fiscal position is more severe and prolonged. Credit rating agencies do not react well to vast, irresponsible spending with absolutely no plan to return to balance. Based on what I see in this budget, the government could not care less what the credit rating agencies think. There are real consequences to being downgraded. It means more difficulty borrowing and higher interest rates.

The government has at best treated any fiscal anchors with disdain, and they are in fact absent from this budget. From breaking promises to balance the budget by 2019 to maintaining a decreasing debt-to-GDP ratio, these measures were simply ignored. The lack of fiscal responsibility has been absolutely staggering, and all Canadians should be very worried about what is coming next.

I want to be clear, because the government will say that surely I am not saying I would not have protected Canadians during the pandemic. I am not saying that; I am saying that things could have been done far better. I believe the Conservatives would have avoided many of the errors in the emergency programs that we have seen. There were so many obvious errors that led to gaps in the commercial rent subsidy, the wage subsidy and the CEBA, leaving so many Canadians out in the cold. Some of these errors border on negligence at worst and incompetence at best. It took our continued efforts to point out these errors time and again before the government made necessary changes.

My caution today has to do with interest rates. I really want to talk about interest rates because the rationale used by the Minister of Finance for this massive past and future spending has been that interest rates are historically low. On Monday, she said, “In today’s low interest rate environment, not only can we afford these investments, it would be short-sighted of us not to make them.” She was basically telling us that it would be irresponsible not to borrow.

All this new debt presents huge risks in reality that vulnerable Canadians just cannot take in this precarious time we are in now. This abandonment of prudent financial management without sound fiscal anchors should worry future generations. The Liberals are literally rolling the dice, playing with real lives and gambling that interest rates will not rise.

What my colleagues across the way fail to mention is that the government does not entirely control these rates. Market forces also establish interest rates. Just ask former prime minister Paul Martin, who, as the finance minister in 1995, brought in the most draconian budget in Canadian history, actually cutting health transfers to provinces. It took Martin’s 1995 budget, with its $25 billion in cuts, to address the problem head-on. Canada was so substantially downgraded by the credit rating agencies in the mid-1990s that in June 1995 The Wall Street Journal called Canada “an honorary member of the Third World”. That year, the federal budget included cuts of over 10% in total spending. It slashed national defence, customs and immigration spending. It reduced the size of the civil service. Health care transfers were slashed, and other things as well. This, I might add, was all under a Liberal government.

In 1995, the bank rate was 7.31% and Canada was in a full-blown debt crisis. In justifying these massive cuts, Mr. Martin said:

There are times in the progress of a people when fundamental challenges must be faced, when fundamental choices made, and new course charted. For Canada, this is one of those times. Our resolve, our values, our very way of life as Canadians are being tested. The choice is clear.

Those are prophetic words. I fear that with the magnitude of new spending in the budget, the government will likely lead us down a path into a new debt crisis. For my colleagues across the way, if they really think this cannot happen again, they have their heads in the sand.

Governments around the world, including Canada, have engaged in trillions in quantitative easing. This printing of money has diluted the money supply across the globe.

Historically, as economies recover from crises like these, inflation takes hold and interest rates rise. With a debt approaching $1.2 trillion, an interest rate of 7.31% today would cost roughly $80 billion a year. That amount represents nearly two full years of health care transfers to every single province.

The budget is a let down for Canadians. It represents misguided and risky spending from a government that does not seem to understand we cannot keep running the printing press and ratcheting up the credit card bill.

Since 2015, I have heard countless concerns about the government's blatant disregard for fiscal prudence, and this budget is just more evidence of it. When I talk to small business owners in my community, they do not just go and borrow money without having an eye on the future. They take into account the impact of what an increase in interest rates would actually mean.

The government likes to say that it took on debt so Canadians did not have to. That is a good one, but it is simply not true. In reality, this debt has to be paid for by Canadian taxpayers and the future ones to come.

What the government has really done is use the credit card of future generations to put them deeper into debt, which can only be repaid at the end of the day by higher taxes or program cuts, as the example Mr. Martin put forward clearly substantiates.

Every man, woman and child in Canada each now owes over $33,000 in debt. There are 82,574 people in my riding. Thanks to the government’s cavalier spending, my community now owes $2,724,942,000 in federal debt. Workers in my community who are struggling to get back to work needed a real plan to get them back on their feet, and I have already heard from many who are deeply disappointed. Stripped of their wages and their hours slashed, they were absolutely desperate to see a plan and leadership to help them find their way back.

For example, I cannot help but think of aviation workers at the Winnipeg airport who have been pleading for support and are continually let down.

Our party’s leader has put forward a bold plan, Canada’s recovery plan. This plan is what real leadership looks like. It will create financial security and certainty, secure our future and deliver a Canada where those who have been hurt financially by this pandemic can get back to work.

This is all about securing good jobs for Canadians, securing the manufacturing industry in Canada, securing our economy and leading people out of the darkness and back into the light. Highly respected Canadian economist Jack Mintz said,

“[The] Minister of Finance...argues higher debt loads will be easily manageable over the next five years. But they put Canada at risk. Large primary deficits in the next several years and rising interest rates will destroy the fiscal firepower we would need should another recession come our way.”

I ask the Minister of Finance to heed these warnings and learn from our history so it does not repeat itself. However, mostly I ask, for the sake of all Canadians, that she take the tide that leads on to fortune.

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

Madam Speaker, I just went on the Conservative Party's website, because the member talked about the plan, the bold vision his leader had put forward, since I thought maybe something had been released today. The plan is literally five topics and then three bullet points for each one, grandiose statements that do not really mean anything. I am confused as to how he can possibly call that a plan.

Nonetheless, let me go back to his speech. He talked about the amount of debt that had been taken on to get to where we are, as though he was not part of the whole process. The reality is that the Conservatives voted in favour of that debt every step of the way. Up until this point, the Conservatives, including that member, through his consent in unanimous consent motions quite often, voted in favour of the debt.

If the member were so concerned about the debt, could he please explain why he voted in favour of the unanimous consent motions when we passed these measures for Canadians?

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Madam Speaker, as I said in my speech, the Conservatives did vote for emergency measures and we would have done it again; we just would have done it better.

What I am referring to in my speech is the prospective spending, the massive amount of spending without any regard for fiscal anchors at all. We can make all the assumptions in the world, as the member's colleague from Scarborough—Guildwood said, but if we do not have a plan to get back to balance or at least a fiscal anchor, those assumptions are meaningless. If interest rates go up, I really fear for what the country is in for.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

The one topic that the Conservative Party and the Bloc Québécois absolutely agree on is that health transfers must be increased. My Conservative colleague spoke about this in his speech.

Earlier, my colleague from Saint-Jean asked our colleague from Calgary Nose Hill a question. She asked why the Conservative Party voted against the Bloc Québécois' amendment to the amendment, which called for an increase to health transfers. The member responded that some other components of the motion prevented her from supporting it.

The thing is, the only other component in the motion besides health transfers was support for seniors as of age 65.

Does this mean that the Conservative Party is against support for seniors as of age 65?

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for asking about health transfers because it is a concern.

One of the key aspects of this budget is the child care plan, if we can call it a plan. It is really a proposal, saying that we need to enter into agreements with 10 provinces and three territories and that the provinces will have to pay 50% of the cost. If we listen to the finance minister, it sounds like it will be a slam dunk, but I can assure everyone it will not be.

For example, we can read what Tom Brodbeck had to say in today's Winnipeg Free Press. He said that it would be almost impossible to get that deal done because provinces would not trust the fact that the federal government would not reduce funding in the future.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member and I have worked together on a number of things throughout this Parliament, and it has been very interesting to hear his intervention.

The member spoke about the emergency strategies and programs that have been put in place to support businesses. I agree with him that how they were designed and developed was deeply flawed. The NDP proposed many things, like the rent subsidy program, that would have been much better, so I certainly agree with him on that.

However, one of the things the member talked about was the debt. If we do not continue to invest in small businesses and workers, we will have only won three-quarters of the race; we will not be over the finish line. In fact, we could actually lose all the ground that we have been able to hold on small businesses and workers if we pull back that support too soon.

Could the member comment on that?

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Madam Speaker, if I had been asked that question last fall, I might have been more in agreement. However, the reality is that we see the economy doing far better than it was doing at the time of the financial statement last fall by the finance minister. The economy is growing, and many economists are saying that this amount of stimulus is a solution looking for a problem and that if the government continues down this path, the economy could overheat, which will cause inflation and a rise in interest rates. I am very concerned—

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

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Madam Speaker, it is a great privilege to be part of this debate and discussion around the fiscal future, and the economic and social future of our country as we talk about budget 2021. I will be sharing my time with the esteemed member for Vancouver Centre.

A budget is far more than a fiscal plan. It is far more than a set of programs. It is a signature. It is an imprint that this government is making and it is the ability of a government to show what is in its heart, mind and soul. As such, I want to thank the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance for her tremendous work and for the signature that she has put on this budget; a working mother, a journalist, an economic's writer, a thinker and a careful politician. She is someone who is rooted in her riding, but brings both a Canadian spirit and a world vision to her job, and she has made a difference with the budget. I want to thank her and her whole team for their work.

This budget's imprint is clear. It is about compassion for people, it is about bringing businesses forward after a very difficult time with COVID-19, and it is about doing that with responsibility and with great care.

The people of Don Valley West would benefit from this as would all Canadians, and I speak on their behalf today as we engage in this conversation. Obviously, we are still gripped by a pandemic, by COVID-19, and we are fighting this third wave. The first priority of budget 2021 is to win the fight against the virus, and we need to do that together.

In addition to the significant assistance that our federal government is currently providing all the provinces, including my province of Ontario, in the form of health care, testing, vaccine development and contract tracing and through the buying of vaccines and supporting provincial and territorial health care systems, budget 2021 would enable provinces, territories, municipalities, families and businesses to come out of this very difficult time healthier and stronger.

Proposed funding of up to a billion dollars for Canada's COVID immunization plan will result in continued success of our government's effort to bring more vaccines into Canada and bring them sooner. A one-time top up of $4 billion to the Canada health transfer will crucially help health systems and ensure that Canadians get the procedures and treatments they need to stay healthy as well as clear through the backlog of delayed procedure. Up to $5 billion in health care funding to provinces and territories will ensure the sustainability of our health systems about which we care.

Obviously, we have been gripped by a health crisis that has also been an economic crisis. Through all-party support, in many ways, we have extended an economic hand to businesses, individuals and communities through a variety of programs over these last two years. These programs include the Canada emergency wage subsidy, the emergency rent subsidy, lockdown support, CERB, changes to the EI program and the Canada recovery care benefit. A host of issues and problems addressed through government programs have been successful. They are the reasons that Canadians are doing as well as they are through this very difficult time.

We have also recognized that this pandemic has revealed certain cracks in our society. We have recognized that some populations and groups have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Even as we have an enviable position when it comes to our economic recovery and we are in a good fiscal state to take further steps, we still have more to do. We want to find ways to ensure that Canadians, all across the country, from coast to coast to coast, of every economic, social and gender background, are taken care of in a way that looks into the future in a new and promising way.

In my riding of Don Valley West, like across the country, child care costs are extremely high. Toronto has the highest average child care cost of any city in the country and where it can be equivalent to, for some people, making a mortgage payment. It is no wonder that paying for child care represents a significant barrier for families to equally engage in the workplace.

It is a burden on women, but it is also a burden on men, and together we are attempting to make a new program, a new plan for child care, that will change Canada. It is one of the signature items of this budget that we can all rally around regardless of our political stripe. A universal system of child care will be boon to women in the workforce and a boon to men who take their part in child care and child raising.

By achieving a 50% cost reduction in child care by 2022 and $10-a-day child care by 2026 through this budget, we will remove significant barriers to women seeking employment now and even more so by 2026, and it is good economics. It is the only way for Canada to continue to build its economy, to ensure that newcomers are fully engaged in the workforce and that we are able to compete in the world. Given the disproportionate effect of COVID on women, our economic recovery needs to be a feminist recovery. With substantial measures for women's employment along with affordable child care, we will not only recover the employment that we have lost over the last two years, but we will also see further and continued success by women in the workforce.

As I said, this is an opportunity to build back better. Cracks have been revealed in our social safety net and our various systems. We will continue to work on environmental programs, on building the base for small business to recover and ensuring that large businesses are able to compete in the global marketplace.

Housing is core to that as well. People in Don Valley West, especially in neighbourhoods like Thorncliffe Park, depend on affordable housing, and COVID has made it even harder to get. It has widened the gap between Canadians who have housing and those who cannot afford it. Budget 2021 will quickly address creating new housing while at the same creating jobs, alleviating cost pressures on the housing market overall in a variety of methods that have already been mentioned in today's debate, and will grow the middle class. Part of the underscoring of the care for families is to ensure that they not only have jobs but are able to participate in the workforce equally and also that they have a roof over their head.

Many people in Don Valley West did lose their jobs during the COVID pandemic. Some have recovered, but many have not. This is not a time for austerity; it is a time for bold imagination, creativity and ensuring that all Canadians can participate in the workforce. It is not a time to draw back; it is a time to push forward. It is a time to ensure that we are spending appropriately and carefully, doing so with imagination and compassion, and with partners in our cities, provinces and territories, labour unions and businesses. Canada and Canadians have what it takes to make an economy that is competitive in the world. Government needs to be there to undergird it, support it, encourage it and, at times, invest in it.

Most people in the House will know me as a United Church minister and will understand that I try to bring people first in the work I do, but I am also accountant, which was my first career. I come at this budget with an accountant's eye as well as a clergy's eye, and the accountant's eye is very pleased with this budget.

I was very glad that the member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley brought up Paul Martin as finance minister in the 1990s. He had to have the budget for his time, which was to undo the fiscal recklessness of the previous prime minister, Mr. Mulroney. He had to find a way to take care of the debt that Mr. Chrétien, as prime minister, had inherited. He had a budget for his time. This is a budget that the Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister has brought for this time; a different budget.

We are not ideologically driven. We are driven by doing the right thing at the right time to invest in the right way. We are taking advantage of our tremendously good banking system; the bones of our economy, which are strong; and the imagination and entrepreneurship of Canadians, which need to be harnessed and brought forward into new and creative ways following this pandemic. We need to do that in a fiscally responsible way. I am glad that we are not afraid of investing, encouraging, enabling, supporting and making sure that our economy is built for the years ahead.

We have looked back, and we are taking care of the present. We have learned from the past and we are taking care of the present, and we are building a country and an economy for the future.