Debates of Oct. 4th, 2022

Cost of Living Relief Act, No. 1

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my energetic colleague what she thinks about this. The Bloc Québécois proposes to do two things to control the cost of living. First, to help seniors in particular, we want to see no reductions in the guaranteed income supplement for those who received the Canada emergency response benefit or the Canada recovery benefit during the pandemic.

Next, the Bloc Québécois would like to increase old age security to preserve seniors' purchasing power.

What does my colleague think about these two proposals?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I think the Bloc Québécois and we Conservatives care about seniors. It is very clear that the government does not care about seniors.

I think the member has some good ideas, and I am sure we can talk more about how we can work together for seniors, because it is abundantly clear that the government has not done anything for them.

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

Madam Speaker, I was interested to hear the member opposite's speech. She talked about comparing Canada to other countries. She read off a number of news articles, and it sparked me to think about articles I have seen recently. One was about how Liz Truss came into power with the Conservative Party in the U.K. with promises of tax cuts, and then miraculously there was this huge U-turn because it crashed the economy into a horrible descent. The next article was about how they were desperately trying to figure out how to save the U.K. economy, and the next one was about how the Labour Party was about 12 points up in the polls because of this disaster with the Conservative Party of the U.K.

In comparison, Conservatives in this country are doing the exact same thing, so I would love to hear her comparison of their plan with that of the U.K. Conservatives.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am not concerned because, frankly, we are leading the polls. We are rocking the polls, so I think we are doing the right things that Canadians want to see. We are going to continue doing them alongside our new leader, the member for Carleton.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Hamilton Centre.

It is a true pleasure for me to speak to Bill C-30 on behalf of the residents of my riding of Davenport. For those who need a reminder, Bill C-30 is the legislation that, if passed, would double the goods and services tax credit amounts by 50% for the 2022-23 benefit year and would deliver targeted relief directly to Canadians who need it. It would make life affordable for many Canadians who need this additional support.

We are here for the third reading of this bill in the House of Commons after having considered this legislation at the finance committee yesterday. I am pleased to say that Bill C-30 was passed in record time at the finance committee by all parties. It was good see that there was unanimous approval and support for this bill, and I hope that the opposition parties will consider also supporting our other affordability measures, such as providing a targeted dental benefit and a one-time housing benefit top-up.

As members may know, our federal government has made it very clear that our first order of business for this parliamentary session is to make life more affordable for the Canadians who need it the most. We know that Canadians are feeling the rising cost of living through things like higher food prices and rent, so while inflation is a global challenge caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, Bill C-30 would help families weather its impacts by putting more money back in the pockets of the middle class and those working hard to join it.

By doubling the GST credit for six months, this key piece of legislation would deliver $2.5 billion in additional targeted support to roughly 11 million individuals and families who already receive the tax credit, including about half of Canadian families with children and more than half of Canadian seniors. With Bill C-30, single Canadians without children would receive up to an extra $234, and couples with two children would receive an extra $467 this year. Seniors would receive an extra $225 on average.

Let us take a minute to delve more deeply into some examples of what it would mean for Canadians in real terms for the 2022-23 benefit year. I like giving clear examples because it allows people, not only those in my riding of Davenport, but also Canadians right across the country, to see themselves in some of these profiles.

Under the current GST credit, a single mother with one child and a net income of $30,000 would receive $386.50 for the July through December 2022 period and another $386.50 for the January through June 2023 period. However, with Bill C-30, she would receive an additional $386.50. Therefore, in total, she would be receiving about $1,160 this benefit year through the GST credit, and that would be super helpful for a single mother.

Another example is that under the status quo GST credit, a single senior with $20,000 in net income would be receiving $233.50 for the July through December 2022 period and another $233.50 for the January through June 2023 period. However, with Bill C-30, if it is passed, this senior would receive an additional $233.50. In total, he or she would be receiving about $701 this benefit year through the GST credit.

I will give one more example. Under the present system, a couple with two children and $35,000 in net income would be receiving $467 for the July through December 2022 period and another $467 for the January through June 2023 period. With the temporary doubling of the GST credit amount for six months, this family would receive an additional $467, so in total they would be receiving about $1,401 this benefit year through the GST credit.

What is more, with this change the money would be coming to them through a straightforward process. That is because the extra GST credit amounts would be paid to all current recipients through the existing GST credit system as a one-time lump sum payment before the end of the year. Recipients would not need to apply for the additional payment. They only need to have filed their 2021 tax returns, if they have not already done so, to be able to receive both the current GST credit and the additional payment.

Moreover, Bill C-30 is just one out of two pieces of legislation that we have introduced already in this parliamentary session to make life more affordable for Canadians. The Minister of Health has also introduced Bill C-31, which would provide a Canada dental benefit starting this year. I was very privileged to speak on this bill in the House of Commons last week, because a national dental care benefit is so important to Davenport residents. I want to formally indicate the importance of this legislation passing in the House.

Just to remind everyone, Bill C-31, if passed, would allow families with children under 12 who do not have access to private dental insurance and who have an adjusted net income of less than $90,000 to access direct payments totalling up to $1,300 per child over the next two years, up to $650 per year, to cover dental expenses for the children under 12 years old.

Bill C-31 would also provide a one-time top-up to the Canada housing benefit. This would be available to applicants with an adjusted net income below $35,000 for families or below $20,000 for individuals who pay at least 30% of their income on rent. This means a one-time payment of $500 to 1.8 million Canadian renters who are struggling with the cost of housing.

The bills that we are discussing today, both Bill C-30, very specifically, and, as an aside, Bill C-31, will not solve everything. While they will not solve everything, as our Minister of Finance said yesterday at finance committee, they would provide real support for 11 million Canadian households, for people who really need the help.

It is important to remind the House that there are many other measures that would build on Bill C-30 and Bill C-31, which we have been speaking about today. These include measures like enhancing the Canada workers benefit. This would deliver $1.7 billion in new support to an estimated three million low-income workers this year, with a couple receiving up to $2,400 more and single workers receiving up to $1,200 more. Most recipients have already received this additional support through their 2021 tax refund.

Second, as a result of agreements reached with all 13 provinces and territories, we are also effectively cutting regulated child care fees in half, on average, for families in Canada by the end of this year. This Canada-wide plan means savings for families from $2,610 in Manitoba to $6,000 in British Columbia in 2022, and an average child care fee of just $10 a day for all regulated child care spaces across Canada by 2025-26.

We have also introduced a 10% increase to the old age security pension for seniors 75 years and older, which began in July 2022 and which would provide more than $800 in new support to full pensioners over the first year and increase benefits for more than three million seniors.

We are also providing support for students by doubling the Canada student grant amount until July 2023 and by waiving interest on Canada student loans through to March 2023.

Taken together, our federal government's affordability plan is delivering targeted and fiscally responsible financial support to Canadians who need it the most with particular emphasis on addressing the needs of low-income Canadians who are most exposed to inflation.

We will continue to strike a balance between delivering support, where and when it is needed the most, and maintaining the discipline that has given Canada the strongest fiscal position in the G7.

In conclusion, I know that Canadians are counting on parliamentarians to make the support of Bill C-30 a reality, and I would encourage my colleagues on all sides to support the immediate adoption of Bill C-30, the cost of living relief act, no. 1, so that we could continue to make life more affordable for Canadians who need it the most.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives support the tax relief found in Bill C-30 and have been doing our part to be helpful to those Canadians. Our leader has gone throughout this great country and has heard the personal stories from so many people who are suffering right now under incredible taxation and inflation under the current government. I would hope the member would recognize that the same family of four might get $467 from this bill, but they are facing $1,200 in extra food costs alone.

The member's government plans on tripling the carbon tax next year. Does she support the tripling of the carbon tax, which will increase the cost of groceries, gas and home heating, yes or no?

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to repeat something that a colleague of mine, the hon. member for Burnaby North—Seymour, said in the House of Commons with respect to taxes. When our government lowered the taxes for the middle class twice, the Conservatives voted against it. When we tried to lower the taxes for small businesses, they also voted against it.

He also indicated, and I believe this to be true, that the Conservatives are not friends of the Canadian taxpayer because, when they were in government, they raised taxes on Canadians more than 50 times.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Davenport for her speech on this bill, which seeks to help people.

The government likes to boast about things like helping seniors. I will come back to this, because I was talking about it just this morning with a food bank representative who reminded me how difficult the situation is for seniors. Do we really want to force seniors to line up at food banks?

This bill is only partially helpful at this point. The government boasts about providing help, but it is only helping seniors aged 75 and over. This means that half of seniors are being left behind by this government. Those aged 65 to 74 are being forced to line up at food banks. Is that fair?

This is just the tip of the iceberg, since we know that many seniors are too proud to ask for help. They are at home and suffering. What does the government have to offer people aged 65 to 74?

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question and I truly believe that her concern is genuine.

We very much care about seniors. I believe the doubling of the GST credit will continue to support many seniors. I think if we manage to pass Bill C-31 it will also support seniors through the Canada housing benefit one-time top-up. I think that will be very beneficial for them.

The seniors in my riding of Davenport have already told me that they are excited about a national dental care plan. They know it will not go into effect for them until the end of next year, but they are already excited and very much looking forward to its implementation.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

There is good news in this bill: the GST credit, the housing benefit and dental care for children this year and for seniors next year. The good thing is that this all came about because the government listened to the NDP's good ideas.

The work of the NDP caucus is what got us to this point. Why stop now when we could go even further and tax the excessive profits that big grocery chains, big oil companies and banks are raking in and use that money to make social programs even better? We could improve health care by creating real universal pharmacare.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Madam Speaker, I agree with the hon. member. I think we work best in this House when we take the best ideas and work together to implement them.

We are absolutely raising corporate income tax by 1.5% on Canada's largest, most profitable banks and insurance companies. We have also introduced a recovery dividend of 15% on the excess profits of those institutions during the COVID pandemic. There are a number of other measures that we are putting in place as well.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, while I rise in the House as a New Democrat in support of Bill C-30, I should state from the outset that, even with the emergency cost of living economic supports for Canadians made vulnerable in this economy, what people need most is stable social and economic supports that meaningfully improve their material living conditions, funded by a fair taxation that does not place the burden on a consumer tax that disproportionately impacts low-income and working-class people most. What Canada needs is a fair taxation system that would close corporate loopholes in order to recover the reported $30 billion lost due to corporate tax avoidance.

I should begin, in fairness, by highlighting, for those who are watching this debate tonight, that this bill would double the GST credit and provide $2.5 billion in additional targeted support to roughly 11 million individuals and families who already received the tax credit, including about half of Canadian families with children and more than half of seniors.

I believe this debate on Bill C-30 has made clear that most members, despite their partisan rhetoric, agree this bill offers a temporary reprieve from this greed-filled inflation and its inevitable recession, which will likely be associated with further unemployment. That is what keeps me up at night. It is the insecurity of the precarious workers that is built into this cyclical system and reproduced through these cycles to suppress wages and to force people back into exploitative low-paying jobs.

These attacks on workers are simply explained as profit-maximizing measures by shrewd corporate managers. This is why I believe that while contemplating this bill I should spend some time expanding on the preconditions of the economic system that drove us here.

People in Hamilton Centre are suffering. The vast majority of everyday people are unable to keep up with their monthly bills. Soaring inflation has pushed housing, food and energy costs way out of reach for people, and the feeling of insecurity is setting in across the country. Precarious employment is further punishing workers by threatening their ability to survive through this devastating economy, and wages simply are not keeping pace by being kept at and pushed down to devastatingly low rates. In short, workers' wages are being stolen by the record profits of big corporations and the payouts to their CEOs and shareholders.

Every aspect of our lives has been commodified by big banks and Bay Street. Our very existence is valued down to the decimal to be bought and sold by hedge funds and real estate income trusts so that those who have never lifted a finger in hard work in the creation of the means of production are grossly rewarded by the spoils of these dividends and payouts.

There is a class war happening in this country. There has always been a class war happening in this country, and it is being waged by the ultrarich in this country versus everybody else. Over the past 40 years the Canadian economy, both under Liberal and Conservative governments, has generated obscene amounts of concentrated wealth for the rich, while everybody else has been left behind. How can anyone in the House justify the enormous concentration of wealth by so few, while so many continue to suffer?

These everyday Canadian workers are facing down the barrel of another devastating recession, one that we know will be felt most by the rise of unemployment and the overnight hikes of interest rates, making people's payments on mortgages and personal lines of credit explode overnight. The adage of “the rich get richer, while the workers continue to get exploited” is happening now more than ever.

The people of Hamilton Centre are struggling, left to survive the misery of the daily grind of low wages and legislated poverty, should they be living with disabilities, while also facing greed-driven rocket-high costs of living.

The Liberals, with their constant talk about the middle class and those working hard to join it, which is so insulting, would have Canadian workers believe that it is their own fault if they are not getting well-paying jobs or, more accurately, if they are not born into wealth to begin with and that they should blame themselves.

The leader of the official opposition will continue to put big corporations and billionaires first. The Conservatives will blame government for any meagre supports delivered to people living with disabilities, low-wage workers, migrant workers and anybody else left out of this economy. They speak of inflation and the money that was directed to working-class people, yet they never have a critique on the $750-billion bailout of big banks and Bay Street. The Conservatives attack Canada's social safety net of the copay contributions of employment insurance and the Canada pension plan, and not because they care about the contribution of the workers, but because they are fighting to save the contribution copayments by big business corporate employers.

This is at a time when Canadians need this economic support and stability the most. We should be delivering more support to Canadians and not less, particularly those who are left unemployed and our seniors, who are struggling to get by on their meagre CPP. They should be getting more and not less. We should not be attacking their pensions in this House. We should be ensuring that CPP and EI dollars are protected in separate accounts so that successive Liberal and Conservative governments will not have the tendency to raid these funds to balance their books.

While the Conservatives have callously attacked this bill throughout the debate on one hand, we already know that they are going to be supporting it. They are forced to ultimately support it because it is literally the least the government can do in the face of the astronomical costs of living. In their so-called free market fantasy, they never admit that corporations make off like bandits, pilfering government support by exploiting loopholes that have allowed them to take taxpayer dollars while paying out record dividends to their shareholders.

I am often in this House, and when I hear Conservative Party members clapping about the record profits of oil and gas, I ask myself how many MPs are receiving dividends on the profits of the same corporations that took wage subsidies and supports. These companies were not reinvesting in the economy. They were not improving the material working conditions of their employees by raising their wages to keep pace with the basic levels of economic survival. They were lining their own pockets and those of their shareholders.

This capitalist system creates enormous wealth, but it also creates great misery for the majority of people. This entire system is predicated on corporations spending as little as they can while getting the most out of every dollar they spend. It is not that they do not want to pay low wages; they are also pressuring people to get the most output from their workers at this low wage. When we hear about job creation, long gone is the day when a family can have one or two income earners who work nine to five and have enough to pay their bills. Families and workers across the country are forced to participate in two, three or four low-wage exploitative jobs. The rewards in this economy when this wealth is generated always go to the employers while workers continue to be punished.

In this regard and in many other ways, it is the capitalism of the system that generates the inequality. If we can, in a very small tokenistic way, return some money back to the pockets of Canadians, we support that. However, we call on the government to do more by workers, do more by seniors and do more by people who are living with a disability and precarious people who have been exploited by this economy.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, the government, over the last number of years, has been working in different communities and has done a great deal to support people from all different spectrums. We can talk about the hundreds of thousands of children lifted out of poverty and the hundreds of thousands of seniors lifted out of poverty by this government. We can talk about one-time payments during the pandemic for people with disabilities and, again, for our seniors.

I do not know if the member is being accurate in his portrayal that this government is not sensitive to the individuals who are in need. In our policy, whether that is legislation from the Minister of Disability Inclusion or other financial matters such as budgets, we have been there. I wonder if the member might want to reflect on some of the commitments that have actually materialized.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will reflect on it. While I am doing that, I ask the hon. member to reflect on the fact that we have a system right now where we have people living in deep, legislated poverty, people living with disabilities and seniors living in absolute squalor conditions in long-term care facilities who are actually contemplating medical assistance in dying because the government refused to provide, without delay, supports to people with disabilities. It refused our motion to provide a guaranteed basic livable income to people living with disabilities and to seniors. That is what it should be reflecting on, and it is to this country's shame.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would like to correct the record a bit. The Conservative Party has been opposed to the corporate welfare that the Liberal government has been handing out for a very long time.

Why does the member's party continue to support the government when the member is obviously very opposed to what the government is up to?

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, when I took on this job, I did it with the commitment to improve the material conditions of low-income and working-class people and of everyday Canadians in my constituency. When the Conservative Party talks about inflation and talks about the dumpster fire that is this economy, it never talks about the arsonist. It never talks about going after big banks and Bay Street. We are the only party in this House, quite frankly, that has the stomach to take on big business interests. The truth is that both the Liberals and the Conservatives are at the table dining with them.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, one thing we know for sure about my colleague from Hamilton Centre is that he is passionate about advocating for social rights and representing his constituents.

I think my colleague would be sympathetic to the Bloc Québécois proposal to build more social and community housing. The Bloc Québécois wants the federal government to transfer 1% of its revenue to Quebec and the provinces to build new social and community housing units. This funding should be stable and permanent.

I would like to hear what my colleague from Hamilton Centre thinks about that. Does he support this idea, and does he think it is enough?

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I enjoy opportunities where I can find common ground with members of other parties. In particular, the Bloc brings some progressive policies to this House, including the statement we just heard about the need to decommodify the real estate market. We need to wrest control of the housing market from big banks, Bay Street and real estate income trusts, and do what the government did with the creation of CMHC, which is to be bold with a federal intervention and the creation of millions of decommodified houses.

On this talk about affordability and the Liberal government, I would say affordable for whom. It talks about affordability that is at 125% of market value, but what we know to be true is that affordability must be tied to people's ability to pay, not left up to the so-called free market of both the Liberals and the Conservatives.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Pickering—Uxbridge.

I rise today in support of Bill C-30, the cost of living relief act, no. 1, which would double the goods and services tax, or GST, credit for six months. It is one of the new measures we are proposing to provide targeted support to Canadians who need it the most so we can help them adapt to the rising cost of living without, however, exacerbating inflation.

Our government is fully aware that Canadians are feeling the effects of inflation, especially when they fill up at the pumps or buy groceries, for example. Inflation is a worldwide phenomenon largely driven by the effects of the pandemic, amplified by the zero-COVID policy in China and Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine.

Although inflation is not as high here as in several other countries and it has come down from its peak in June, we know that Canadians are worried. No single country alone can solve the problem of high global inflation. However, what we can do is help Canadians by taking tangible action to make life more affordable here at home. This brings me to Bill C‑30, which seeks to double the GST credit for six months.

Our proposal to double the GST credit for a six-month period would provide an additional $2.5 billion in targeted support for about nine million people living alone and nearly two million couples. In total, 11 million individuals and families who are already entitled to the tax credit would receive it, including roughly half of Canadian families with children and more than half of all seniors in Canada.

The GST credit is a tax-free benefit paid out every three months. It helps low- and modest-income individuals and families recoup the GST they pay. Canadians are automatically considered for this credit when they file their income tax returns and are eligible for it if their income is below a certain threshold. The measure we are proposing would benefit those who already qualify for the credit, and the help would be tangible.

In practical terms, single Canadians without children and single seniors, for example, would receive up to $234 more than they do now. Couples with two children, for example, would receive up to $467 more. A single parent with one child would receive up to $397 more than expected.

These additional amounts would be paid before the end of the year as one-time lump sum payments to current recipients through the system already in place. Recipients would not have to apply for the additional payments. All they have to do is file their 2021 tax return.

Bill C‑30 is part of the new suite of measures we are proposing to help Canadians. Another part is found in Bill C‑31, which I hope we will soon have the opportunity to debate.

This other bill proposes, for example, to create a Canadian dental benefit. This temporary measure would be offered as early as this year to children under 12 who are not covered by private dental insurance. Families could receive direct payments of up to $1,300 per child over the next two years, or $650 a year, to cover the cost of dental care. This benefit is the first step in the government's plan to offer dental care to families with an adjusted net income of less than $90,000 a year.

Bill C‑31 also proposes a one-time top-up to the Canada housing benefit. This would allow 1.8 million renters who are struggling to pay their rent to receive $500. It is another measure that I hope we will soon have the opportunity to approve.

Our government supports Canadians who are most vulnerable to an increase in the cost of living in a way that does not needlessly fan the flames of inflation. That is the danger in an inflationary crisis.

The incremental cost of new measures included in Bills C‑30 and C‑31 is $3.1 billion. That is only 0.1% of our gross domestic product. Therefore, we are proposing to strike a balance between fiscal and financial responsibility and compassion for those who truly need help.

In conclusion, what Bill C‑30 proposes is in addition to measures we have already announced as part of our plan to make life more affordable for Canadians.

First, the enhanced Canada worker benefit will provide three million Canadians with more support. For example, a couple could receive up to $2,400 more this year, while a single person could receive up to $1,200 more.

Second, agreements have been signed with the ten provinces and three territories. This will cut in half the cost of day care for Canadian families by the end of the year. This pan-Canadian initiative will result, for example, in savings ranging from $2,610 in Manitoba to $6,000 in British Columbia. For 2022, in the province of Quebec, which already has its own day care system, the government's plan will help create approximately 37,000 new day care spaces.

Third, we increased old age security for seniors aged 75 and over by 10%. This measure benefits more than three million Canadians and provides additional benefits of $766 for full pensioners in the first year.

Fourth, all major government benefits are indexed to inflation, including old age security, the guaranteed income supplement, the Canada pension plan, the Canada child benefit and the GST/HST credit. This means they are adjusted for increases in the cost of living.

Fifth and sixth, providing dental care to Canadians and making a one-time payment to renters who are struggling to pay for housing are two of the measures included in Bill C‑31, which we will be debating soon; I hope all members of the House will support it.

This is all in addition to other investments our government has made since 2015. I strongly believe in making life more affordable for Canadians, and especially in helping those who are most in need. That is exactly what Bill C‑30 does, and I urge all members to vote in favour.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is good to see that the government is moving forward with certain measures, including the GST credit. We know that when the Liberals send out a cheque, it is usually because an election is on the horizon. I hope that is not the case here.

My colleague talked about increasing old age security by 10% for people aged 75 and over. The Bloc Québécois has long been a voice for Quebec seniors, who are saying that they do not want two classes of seniors and that they want this benefit to be similarly increased for people aged 65 to 74.

I have the following question for my colleague. When it comes to the rising cost of living, what is the difference between someone who is 74 and someone who is 75? Why would the Liberals deprive a 74-year-old of the old age security increase?

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. The difference is that there have always been age limits in Canada in every segment of society. For example, one must be 16 to get a driver's licence.

This measure is for people 75 and up. The increase was set out clearly in our election platform.

What we would like to help people understand is that, statistically, the cost of care is much higher for people over 75 than for those under 75. Many more people live alone at 75, twice as many. At 80, there are three times more widows and widowers. That is the rationale behind the age limit.

However, the measures we are now considering in Bill C‑30 and Bill C‑31 target the hardest-hit Canadians and will help them deal with inflation rates.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives will always support lower taxes and putting more money back into the pockets of Canadians, but I wonder why the government brought forward the idea in Bill C-30 that with one hand it is going to give some money back to Canadians, but with other hand it is going increase payroll taxes and the carbon tax and take that money back. Would the member please explain why the government is doing that?

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her interesting question. I think countries are asking themselves very important questions about the climate crisis.

The official opposition keeps harping on about the carbon tax. Our goal here, in the midst of the global inflationary crisis, is to focus on helping those hardest hit.

With respect to the carbon tax, the provinces have the power to give it back to people, and we hope they will work together to do that. Nevertheless, Bill C‑30 and Bill C‑31 are a balanced approach to helping people in a way that does not exacerbate inflation. I hope all members will support this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, but I just want to point out that dental care for children, the higher GST tax credit and the housing benefit top-up all came about because the NDP forced the Liberals to introduce them. This is a minority government, and we used our position of strength to get results for people.

The rising cost of living is hurting people, so why stop there? Oil companies and big grocery chains are making record profits, so why not tax those excessive profits, take that money back and create a real universal pharmacare program, for example?

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

All good ideas and good debates that aim to help our society are welcome in the House. I must give credit to all the members who support this bill, whether it is that or dental care, as he explained.

The problem we have on a global scale right now is an inflationary crisis, and the basic rules of macroeconomics dictate that we target as much as possible the people we want to help, so as not to exacerbate the crisis. That is what the bill does. We need to focus on that, specifically, helping Canadians and targeting those who need it the most and who are struggling the most. Those are the people Bill C-30 will help.

I am counting on all members to support this bill.