Debates of May 12th, 2021

Émilie Sansfaçon Act

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

Madam Speaker, my speech will wrap up the debate on the Émilie Sansfaçon bill.

I remind the House that the purpose of Bill C-265 is to extend EI sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 50 weeks. It is a short bill that could really benefit all the most vulnerable workers, who are left with no income while sick, often while fighting for their lives. It is a bill that would allow workers to recover with dignity.

Canada is a rich country, but all it has to offer to sick workers is instability, stress and financial insecurity. That is embarrassing and unacceptable. Workers get 15 weeks to fight an illness, recover and return to work. However, all the studies show that people need an average of 41 weeks to fully recover.

In the last budget, we were disappointed to see that the Liberals were taking action, but only to extend the benefit period to 26 weeks. We know the Liberals' intentions. The fact remains that this half measure is hard to justify.

During the first hour of debate, I ended my speech in the House by stating this about the benefits: “If the government increases these benefits to 26 weeks, then it is simply providing false comfort hiding the terrible reality that the Liberals are letting down approximately 68% of workers who need those benefits.”

I share the disappointment of the 68% of sick workers. These thousands of workers paid premiums every payday but have been abandoned because they are sick. These thousands of Quebec and Canadian workers would be entitled to a much more ambitious and responsive social safety net if they worked in France, Germany, Sweden, Norway or even California.

A briefing note on the budget helps us better understand the Liberal government's arguments justifying this 26-week period. It states:

The data suggest that a worker is not likely to return to work, could be away from work much longer [and] could leave the labour force altogether after taking more than 26 weeks of leave. Although some stakeholders support extending the duration of sickness benefits to 50 weeks, this would not be in keeping with the main objective of employment insurance sickness benefits, which is to provide income support to workers on short-term sick leave.

That argument is unacceptable.

Honestly, that analysis made me mad. It essentially says that being sick for too long has various consequences, including financial insecurity and increased vulnerability, since the government is severing our employment relationship. It means that the insurance we paid into with every paycheque does not cover us. It means that we are on are own. All these consequences are discriminatory and neglectful.

As we speak, there are workers who are sick. There are workers who are getting better. There are workers who just want to recover and go back to work. There are workers whose 15 weeks will soon be up, which is making them anxious, because they do not know how they are going to pay their bills or even pay for medical transportation.

These workers, who receive little compassion, are being offered a maximum of 26 weeks. To add insult to injury, no one knows exactly when in 2022 this improvement will be made by order. However, we have the means right now to offer 50 weeks. Cabinet knows that, I am sure of it.

When I was drafting my bill, I had some terrific meetings that left a big impression on me. In particular, I met Émilie Sansfaçon's father, Louis Sansfaçon, who took up the political fight of his daughter, a young mother we lost much too soon. There is nothing purer than a father's love for his daughter, for his child. This was evident in all the meetings I had with Mr. Sansfaçon.

If any of my Liberal colleagues are still not convinced that 50 weeks are necessary, I invite them to have a short meeting with Louis Sansfaçon and Marie-Hélène Dubé, who is also a fighter for this cause. It is impossible to remain indifferent to their life stories, and it is insensitive to offer them a half measure in response.

Now is our chance to vote to make the point once again that workers need 50 weeks, not 26 weeks, and that the Liberals are making a mistake by insisting on abandoning vulnerable workers. I encourage them to move in the right direction and do the right thing by voting in favour of my bill.

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

The question is on the motion.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request either a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate so to the Chair.

The hon. member for Salaberry—Suroît.

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

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

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

Pursuant to an order made on Monday, January 25, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, May 26, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Taxation

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to follow up on my questions regarding the extension of the tax deadline. I realize the tax deadline has come and gone this year, but my frustration and the frustration of tax preparers and many Canadians in all parts of the country have not gone away.

We are going to hear tonight in the government's response, as we have several times, that the government is there for Canadians every step of the way. If we ask somebody who has been trying to get a hold of CRA these days, I certainly think that is not as applicable.

I know that not only our side of the House but members from every party in this House have been hearing the same thing. Our constituency office has been inundated with calls from people who cannot get through to CRA, who are on hold for three or four hours and are being hung up on.

I want to give credit to my constituency staff of Nicole, Sue, Annette, Adrian and the volunteers in our income tax program for trying to work through the best of a bad situation. Even we cannot get regular service through our problem resolution desk.

There is chaos happening at CRA, and I believe the fact that we were not able to and the government did not extend the tax deadline has actually made the situation worse.

I was speaking with Josée Sauvé from Sauve Tax Services in Cornwall. She alone, on top of all the challenges going on right now, is dealing with 50 cases of fraud of her clients.

We are being told by Service Canada that amended T4Es are only being sent out to people on May 28. People are told to file their taxes; they are getting reassessments and there is confusion. There are more backlogs and delays happening from this.

I go back to my comments and my numerous questions. A lot of this backlog, a lot of this stress that many Canadians are feeling could have been alleviated. The workers at CRA are overwhelmed with call volumes and cases, which could have been decreased with a simple extension of the tax deadline to June 30.

The government says not to worry as there is interest and penalty relief available. That speaks to the irony of what I have been trying to advocate for. What does that mean? It means more paperwork, more forms, more calls to CRA and more backlog. I always say here, in a non-partisan way, that I believe we all mean well in this House, but I believe the CRA minister and the government are making the situation worse by adding to the backlog, to the paperwork, to the calls people have to make and the forms they have to send in. I use a line in municipal politics, and I will say the same thing here in Ottawa: We need to work smarter, not harder.

Last year, we had a pandemic and we were told to stay at home. The government listened to suggestions. I remember standing in the House speaking to members of the government. It was the Deputy Prime Minister who answered my questions and said that we needed to extend the tax deadline. The government did that, to September. The government also extended the transition of benefits that would normally be renewed in July and moved it to September. That made a bad situation bearable last year.

This year, if we think about it, we are in a pandemic. We are still being told to stay home in many parts of this country, and there was no extension of the tax deadline.

We want a detailed answer, not of all the extra paperwork and that there is an extra form to apply for relief and that this can be corrected. Why did the government not just extend the tax deadline to June 30 to take the pressure valve off filers and CRA workers? Why does it take two years for the government to do a budget but it cannot give Canadians an extra two months to get their taxes done?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Madam Speaker, I would like to take the time to thank my colleague for requesting further information about the CRA's decision to not extend the filing deadline for the 2021 tax year.

Times have been tough for all Canadians this past year. I applaud the Government of Canada, which provided financial support to millions of Canadians who have urgently needed it since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, thus helping them to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads during the crisis. What is more, our government is very aware of the fact that Canadians are still feeling the financial impact of this pandemic.

It is important to point out that our government has taken important steps to support Canadians during the 2020 tax-filing period. In particular, we have strongly encouraged all Canadians to file their income tax return on time so that payments of the benefits and credits to which they are entitled are not delayed. I am referring to the Canada child benefit, the GST/HST credit and provincial and territorial benefits and credits depending on where they live. Extending tax-filing deadlines this year was not possible, as it would have disrupted these essential credit and benefit payments for millions of Canadians.

To serve Canadians well this 2020 tax year, I should also mention that the agency increased the number of agents available in its call centres, extended its hours of operation and enlisted the assistance of a third party service provider to answer general questions about emergency benefits related to COVID-19, in addition to implementing a new automated callback service.

In short, a series of support measures and services have been made available to Canadians to help people file their income tax returns on time and to help ease their financial burden during the challenging times of COVID-19.

I can tell the member that the agency's employees have been hard at work to help all Canadians. CRA has a dedicated and highly skilled workforce committed to serving Canadians according to its people-first philosophy, which places the needs and expectations of Canadians at the centre of everything it does.

Lastly, it should be noted that the statistics have been very positive for the 2021 filing year. Nearly as many Canadians filed on time this year as they did in 2019, our last normal tax-filing year. Despite the assertions of my colleague across the way, Canadians proved that they were, by and large, able to work within the normal filing period.

I invite my colleague opposite to join me in celebrating the CRA's hard work and the hard work accomplished by the millions of Canadians who filed on time during difficult circumstances.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, in my one minute left, I would encourage the member to come and visit my constituency office and see the hundreds of appointments we had to cancel through our volunteer income tax program. People could not come, because we were in a lockdown. We shut down our office, rightfully so, as we were told to do. However, there are many Canadians who do not go out, who do not have access to the Internet or the ability to do their taxes themselves. My staff and I have seen Canadians who have had these challenges.

I will quickly address the comment about benefit extensions, and that the tax deadline could not be extended because it would disrupt the July renewal.

To go back to what happened last year, the CRA and the government were able to extend the tax deadline and move the renewal benefit from July to September. That type of leadership is missing this year, and it was the government's decision. If it could do it last year, it could have done this year but chose not to.

We are going to see a lot of frustration and chaos continue in the coming months. I applaud and thank the people who are working at CRA, but we need to do—

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

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Government of Canada encouraged all Canadians to file their taxes on time so that they would not experience any delays in receiving the benefits or credits to which they are entitled. The services offered to Canadians do not end there.

For example, if a person is unable to fully pay an existing debt, there are payment options available to them. If a person is unable to meet their tax obligations due to circumstances beyond their control, they can request the cancellation of penalties and interest charged to their account. In addition, the Government of Canada has introduced targeted relief measures for Canadians who have received financial assistance and benefits related to COVID-19.

The Canadian government has continued to support Canadians by amending its payment expectations in order to give Canadians more time and latitude to pay their tax debt in accordance with their ability to pay.

Government Programs

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, the Canada emergency wage subsidy was intended to help both employers and workers, allowing businesses to retain workers on their payroll when they lost revenue due to COVID-19 and allowing workers to maintain employment during the public health crisis. As members know, my colleagues and I from the NDP were, and continue to be, ardent supporters of the wage subsidy. We advocated for the 75% wage subsidy early on in the pandemic and continued to push for it until the emergency wage subsidy program was announced.

That does not mean the program is perfect. In fact, I have discovered a flaw in this program and have asked the government repeatedly to fix it. At least one business in my riding of Edmonton Strathcona has used the emergency wage subsidy as a weapon against its workers, using the funds provided by the federal government to hire scabs in order to break its workers.

When the 75% wage subsidy came into effect last spring, CESSCO Fabrication and Engineering Ltd., a steel fabrication company that manufactures pressure vessels for the oil and gas industry, was at the bargaining table. It was negotiating a new contract with its workers and members of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers. The labour dispute between the union and CESSCO was focused on the company's latest offer, which included wage cuts and pension reductions of 50%.

By June 2020, the offer had been rejected by the workers. Rather than continue to negotiate in good faith, CESSCO saw an opportunity. That opportunity was the Canadian emergency wage subsidy program. CESSCO was able to use federal COVID-19 emergency funds, Canadian taxpayer dollars, to subsidize scab labour.

The timing here is quite shocking. In June 2020, CESSCO applied for funding under the Canada emergency wage subsidy program. The company would likely have been notified of its approval for the wage subsidy by late June. On June 28, CESSCO locked out its workers and began to pay scab workers in their place. Those boilermakers are still locked out. CESSCO is still receiving the emergency wage subsidy funds from the government and is still paying those scabs with those dollars.

I have stood on that picket line with the CESSCO workers, men who have given their entire lives to this company. They have been out there every day walking that line since June 28. They have been there day in and day out through thunderstorms and ice storms, and on days when it was -40°C out, picketing for their rights as workers and for the rights of all Canadians. I ask members to imagine how those workers felt when they found out their federal government was providing their wages to CESSCO, so it could hire scabs to replace them. I know how they felt because I asked them. They felt betrayed. Who could blame them?

In Alberta, the rights of workers are under attack. Within days of CESSCO locking out their workers, Jason Kenney's United Conservative government passed Bill 32, which restricts the power of unions, undermined collective bargaining and removed protections for vulnerable workers. We have seen more layoffs in Alberta under the current government than anywhere else in the world. Workers in Alberta have placed their hopes, especially now during a global pandemic, on the federal government—

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

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Madam Speaker, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is helping employers of all sizes and in all industries affected by the pandemic. It is protecting jobs, encouraging employers to rehire workers previously laid off as a result of COVID-19, and helping position Canadian businesses for a strong recovery when the virus is under control.

Well over five million Canadian employees have had their jobs supported through the wage subsidy, with well over $76 billion paid out in wage subsidies as of April 25. At the outset, the government was clear that the intention of this program was to support employees, whether they worked for a small or large employer, as long as employers could demonstrate that they had been affected by the pandemic. It is important to bear in mind that the wage subsidy is paid retroactively on the amount of wages actually paid by employers during a given period, ensuring that employees are retained and supported.

Our goal at the outset of the crisis was to encourage employers impacted by the pandemic to retain and rehire employees by delivering assistance as quickly as practical, recognizing the urgency of the situation created by the pandemic and the limited life of the program. To achieve this, our government initially kept conditions to a minimum, but notably required a decrease in revenue to ensure that the subsidy would be targeted to those in need.

With budget 2021, we have taken action to ensure that the wage subsidy supports workers as intended. It is proposed that any publicly listed corporation receiving the wage subsidy and found to be paying its top executives more in 2021 than in 2019 will need to repay the equivalent wage subsidy amounts received for any qualifying period starting after June 5, and until the end of the wage subsidy program.

When COVID-19 struck, our government needed to step up quickly and decisively to prevent Canadian families and Canadian businesses from falling off an economic cliff. Along with programs like the CERB, the wage subsidy is a prime example of how we prevented this from happening. It is also a prime example of how our government will continue to do whatever it takes, for as long as it takes to help Canadians through this bleak time.

To bridge Canadians through the third wave of this crisis and into the recovery and to give workers and employers certainty and stability over the coming months, budget 2021 proposes to extend the wage subsidy until September 25.

Until we are through this, we will continue to do what we must do to prevent permanent economic damage to Canadians and our economy, and to invest in ways that will allow us to come back strong after COVID-19. I am thankful for the opportunity to make this clear.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, that response was absolutely outrageous. How am I supposed to go back to the guys on the picket line at CESSCO and tell them that this was the response when I said that there was a problem with the program, and I have raised it time and time again. I guess the government is not going to fix this issue.

CESSCO is not the only company that is taking money from the Canadian emergency wage subsidy and using these funds to avoid collective bargaining. According to its own financial statements, Foremost Income Fund, an industrial manufacturing company, took $8.9 million in the federal COVID fund and another million so far in 2021. It is not using those funds to pay the workers; it is demanding that the workers take a 10% pay cut. Things must be rough for the company. No, they are not. In fact, at the same time it took that, it paid $7.1 million in dividends to shareholders and increased executive pay—

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

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, our government needed to step up quickly and decisively to prevent Canadians, families and Canadian businesses from falling off an economic cliff when COVID-19 struck. We needed to encourage employers impacted by the pandemic to retain and rehire employees by delivering assistance as quickly as practical and as possible.

To achieve this and ensure that the wage subsidy would be targeted to those in need, we required that employers experience a decrease in revenue to qualify, but otherwise kept conditions to a minimum. As a result, well over five million Canadian employees have had their jobs supported through the wage subsidy, with well over $76 billion paid out in wage subsidies as of April 25.

Airline Industry

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, for months I have been begging the government for a plan for the airline sector on behalf of the tens of thousands of workers who have found themselves without employment during this critical time of the pandemic. Unfortunately, my pleas have fallen upon deaf ears, as we see a piecemeal approach from the government, with little bits at a time and nothing sector-specific. There are bits and pieces here and there and, very insulting to the entire sector, reannouncements, one after the other.

The third wave has been heavy on Canadians from coast to coast to coast, and the thought of a one-dose summer does not instill jubilation in the citizens of this nation. Unfortunately, it is the government of the day that has put Canadians in this place, with a lack of rapid testing and the lack of use of therapeutics. Worst of all is the government's procurement strategy, which has been shown to be horrible time and time again.

The Conservatives pushed, in our March 18 opposition day motion, for a restart plan and for us to use public health tools, such as rapid tests, shared data on how COVID-19 spreads and vaccines. However, we have not been positioned with permanent solutions to replace the COVID-19 restrictions put in place by the federal government, including in areas of federal competency such as air travel and border restrictions.

The President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom have both released public plans for economic reopening, while Canadian officials have not yet given clarity on their public plans for economic reopening. It is unfortunate that this has not happened in Canada, but the world can see the light at the end of the tunnel and is opening up again.

Other governments, such as the Government of Saskatchewan, have laid out clear restart plans, but for the airline sector this has not happened. However, we have seen this in the U.S. Forbes announced that the U.S. has seen an incredible increase in air travel as a result of government stimulus. Also well known is the May 10 announcement of the United Kingdom that starting on May 17, U.K. citizens will once again have access to the world. This leaves Canada behind.

Perrin Beatty and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce have spoken about this. With regard to travel, the chamber said:

The federal government should publish clear health metrics...that will be the milestones for rolling back border restrictions under a risk-based framework rather than sweeping measures. The government should allow arriving higher-risk inbound international travelers to quarantine for a shorter period if two negative COVID test results can be confirmed.

Restart is on the horizon for many other nations, but not for Canada. The federal government should therefore use positive incentives, such as the elimination or reduction of quarantine and/or a test-release approach, as a means to encourage vaccine uptake.

The rest of the world is opening up and has a restart plan for the aviation sector. Canada does not and, as such, lags behind.

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

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for her question regarding the Canadian air sector, a very important economic sector.

As is well known by now, our historic announcement regarding financial assistance for Air Canada is only one part of the support measures we have pursued for the Canadian air sector. The air sector has also been able to benefit from broad economic support measures, including $2.1 billion in wage subsidy payments.

In addition, on May 11, the government announced the details of two new funding programs for airports. These are the airport critical infrastructure program and the airport relief fund, which were originally introduced in the fall economic statement last November. The government also announced increased funding to the existing airport capital assistance program. Together we are providing over $740 million in new funding to Canadian airports.

As noted during our Air Canada announcement, we also remain engaged with other carriers, such as WestJet, regarding financial assistance that would be subject to similar conditions as those imposed on Air Canada. In fact, on April 29, the government announced it would provide loan financing to Transat in the amount of $700 million. This agreement includes a commitment to refund vouchers and also retain existing employees and their benefits.

Through our efforts, we are securing important benefits for Canadians that include protecting jobs, providing refunds for flights cancelled due to COVID-19, restoring original routes and maintaining Canadian aerospace businesses. In addition, budget 2021 included important investments to support safe air travel that will help limit transmission of COVID-19 and protect travellers, thereby building confidence as Canadians prepare to safely travel again.

These measures will position the air sector for recovery and growth, which will be good for employment and have a positive impact on other sectors of the economy. Although challenges remain, recent weeks have seen good news for the air sector. We will remain engaged to support rebuilding the sector to provide good jobs and serve all Canadian travellers.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary talks about supports that were needed a year ago. They are a year too late. Canada has moved on. The rest of the world has moved on. The airline sector wants to move on to a restart plan.

I will close with a quote from Mike McNaney, the president and CEO of the National Airlines Council of Canada, regarding the airports announcement this week:

Today’s announcement provides further details on programs that were announced last year...

It is a reannouncement, as I mentioned.

...and provides support that is required as the sector continues to reel from the impact of the pandemic. Further action will be required. Following the example of other countries such as the United Kingdom, and as vaccination rates increase rapidly in Canada, the most effective step the government must now take is to work with the sector to develop and launch a clear recovery plan for aviation and travel.

A restart plan is what is needed now. The financial plan is too late.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Madam Speaker, on top of broad economic support measures that have benefited air transport, our government has undertaken a series of measures to specifically support the air sector and facilitate its recovery and growth.

The launch of our new air program, combined with our existing deals with Air Canada and Transat, is part of a series of actions undertaken over the past year that demonstrate our continued commitment to Canada's air sector.

We remain engaged with other carriers regarding financial assistance, and I believe the benchmark agreement with Air Canada will be an important watershed moment for reinvigorating our air sector, and will help operators begin to overcome challenges and get back to employing and serving Canadians.

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

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:50 p.m.)