House of Commons Hansard #50 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was inflation.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

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

Could we have the hon. member's question, please?

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I remember one of the comments from the member previously, and it was about the path to balancing a budget. I would say to the member for Calgary Centre that the most important thing is to be aligning ourselves in a favourable position as it relates to our debt-to-GDP ratio, because that is what is important. That is what signals the ability we have to repay that debt, and that is so much more important, as previous Conservative governments themselves signalled through their budgets.

On the member's question specifically about how we deal with the challenge as it relates to lack of employment, yes, it is a big challenge that we have. My understanding is that in 2021 alone, half a million new immigrants who came to Canada became permanent residents. I think that is one of the ways, quite frankly, that we are going to deal with this.

My parents came to Canada in the 1950s, post World War II, in search of new opportunity. Their parents looked at Canada as a shining light in the world; as a place to become prosperous and a place to set up new roots. I think we can do the same thing now to make sure that we keep growing our economy so that we can take care of baby boomers.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

NDP

Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON

Madam Speaker, I want to put something on the record to clarify it, because I know that my hon. colleague for Kingston and the Islands would appreciate this point of clarification.

The member was talking about Conservatives and balanced budgets and the myths that go along with it. I would like to remind the House that in the time of the Conservative government when the Conservatives did try to balance the budget, it was because they raided the EI fund; those deferred wages from taxpayers and from those workers. Of course, when they raided that EI fund, they learned from the best, the Liberals, who had done it three times before them to the tune of over $50 billion.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I would certainly agree with the first part of what the member said.

The reality is that I do not think that running deficits is coming from a place of not properly managing a budget. Conservatives, as the member rightly said, did it, and in 16 budgets between Brian Mulroney and Stephen Harper, only two were either balanced or ran a surplus. I talked about those in my speech earlier.

The important thing here is that people understand, and governments know, that the most important thing is growing our economy faster than we are taking on debt. That is how we end up paying for it. That is how developed countries throughout the world are doing it. Conservatives know that. It is a great talking point for them, because they know it resonates well with people out there. I do not blame them for doing it, but the reality is that they should know better than to speak like this, especially the member for Calgary Centre who—

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

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

The hon. member for Peace River—Westlock.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Madam Speaker, does the hon. member think that the inflation we currently have is a problem?

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, 100% I think it is a problem.

According to the Conservatives, a year ago the Prime Minister was incapable of doing anything right, and now they are suddenly giving him credit for being able to affect global inflation.

Inflation is a global problem. For this Conservative member and for many other Conservative members to stand up and try to suggest that inflation is only a Canadian-made problem means they do not get out and look around or read a newspaper to see what is going in the world. This is a global problem. This is not a uniquely Canadian problem.

Do I think it is an issue? Absolutely. Do we need the proper tools and policies in place to deal with it? One hundred per cent we do, and I am very confident that this finance minister will come forward with those.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Toronto—Danforth Ontario

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Madam Speaker, we have talked a bit about the price on carbon pollution. What I am curious about is if the member would like to share with me his thoughts about the price of pollution. There is an actual price on our economy and on individuals.

I know I have heard about it from people in my community. The price of insurance is going up, and there are other issues like that. Perhaps the member might want to comment on that aspect.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, absolutely, there are those prices that people are seeing right now, today, as the parliamentary secretary mentioned. Insurance costs are rising as a result of more flooding and various other issues.

There is also the price that future generations will pay. The less we do now to fight climate change and to put the right policies in place, the more we will make our children deal with later on. I know that Conservatives are very concerned about what our children will have to deal with later on. They bring it up all the time, but they only bring it up in a monetary perspective, in a dollar value. There is also the value of the quality of life, the quality of the environment and the planet that we are leaving children decades from now.

I want to make sure that my children, the parliamentary secretary's children, all members' children and all Canadian children have the best possible shot at having the best possible lives when they get older.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

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

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Health; the hon. member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, Foreign Affairs; the hon. member for Port Moody—Coquitlam, Persons with Disabilities.

Message from the SenateGovernment Orders

March 31st, 2022 / 4:50 p.m.

Liberal

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

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bills: Bill C-15, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022; and Bill C-16, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Souris—Moose Mountain, who I know has a dynamic speech members are going to want to hear right after mine.

The member opposite made a comment just now. He said that the more we do now in climate change, the less our kids will have to do when they get older. It is a good comment and a true comment, but it also applies to many other things we do here in government, and that includes fiscal and financial responsibility. It means saying we are going to take responsibility for how we spend our money now so that our kids do not need to make difficult choices of the kind we had to make in the nineties.

I thought I would take a trip down memory lane on what happened in the nineties, because some of these members need to understand exactly what that was like. Even going back into the eighties, I can remember coming out of high school looking for a job, and I and 30 other kids were applying at McDonald's. I remember thinking that would have been a great job, because that was all that was available.

I remember high inflation rates. I remember buying my first house in the nineties and being excited about getting an interest rate of 14%. I was excited at 14%. Now if I cannot lock it in for 3%, I am really upset. How things can change, and how things can change back.

In the nineties we had former finance ministers Ralph Goodale and Paul Martin under Chrétien, who were faced with a situation that was very, very dire. There had been 27 years of unbalanced budgets, 27 years of mismanagement and overspending. All of a sudden we had foreign bankers and bondholders telling this country what we could and could not do. They were basically putting the thumbs to us and saying that we needed to balance our budget or the IMF was going to come in. I know former prime minister Chrétien said that this was not going to happen and took responsibility, and I credit him for doing that.

Those were tough times, and I do not want to see our kids having to make the same decisions. Let us look at the cuts they had to make. When we look back to 1993-94, we see that basically the transfers to the provinces were just stifled. In fact, it took about 15 years to get the amount of money that was cut to health care back to where it was.

I remember times when I had grandparents who were looking for surgery, and all of a sudden there was no surgery. I remember people screaming that we needed more health care funding, but there was no money for it. I can remember people saying that we needed to have more social services, but there was no money for those social services. We did not have it. We had wasted it.

In 1995 The Wall Street Journal called Canada a third world country. That is where we were in 1995. According to Edward Greenspon and Anthony Wilson-Smith's 1996 Double Vision, Jean Chrétien's three priorities in 1993 kept the IMF out of here. That is because he made some really tough decisions. He had to take extreme measures and cut government spending in real terms. He cut as much as we had ever seen since before World War II.

Chrétien got rid of a lot of the grants. He got rid of a lot of the things people took as staples. In fact, he cut the CBC so badly that the president of CBC resigned the next day. That is what can happen when we let spending get out of control. That is what can happen when we do not have a balance in place, and that is what is really concerning about the government at this point in time.

As we go into new spending, there are things I would love to see. I would love to see a dental care program. I think it would be wonderful, if we can afford it. I would love to see a pharmacare program, if we can afford it. You bet I would love to see a national day care program, if we can afford it. What bugs me in this situation is that we possibly could afford it if we did not keep shooting ourselves in the foot.

If we would allow our resource sector to actually do what it does best in the world, we would actually make a difference and be able to pay for a lot of these things. If we let the oil actually get to market, we would have the royalties at the provincial level and the federal level so that we could transition our economy in a way that would not be burdensome to our kids. We would not have to borrow money to do it. We could actually pay cash for it. What an amazing idea: paying cash for something. There is nothing wrong with that.

I was listening to members across the aisle talking about every country being in deficit and having inflation. Who cares? This is Canada. This is what Canada needs to do. Canada has inflation so Canada needs to worry about its inflation. Canada needs to worry about its own spending.

I do not worry about U.S. spending; the U.S. can worry about its spending. I do not worry about European spending; they can worry about their spending. They can let their kids figure out how they are going to pay for it. I would rather to take care of things in my own house here in Canada so I know my kids have a great standard of living, so I know my kids can get surgery when they need it, so I know my kids can get EI and CPP when they need it.

That means we need to be responsible. It means we need to show respect for taxpayer dollars here and now, not 10 years from now, because what I am seeing right now is that fact. We just spend it.

When we see a bank making huge profits of $6 billion or $7 billion, what do we see the coalition government here say? They say that is bad. Where does that money go when they make revenues of $6 billion or $7 billion? It goes to Canadian shareholders. It goes to pension funds. It goes to groups that distribute it back into the economy. What do those people do? They pay taxes. Let us look at what the banks are also doing. They are lending to small businesses, to farmers and to medium-sized enterprises and big companies. They are actually providing the capital for them to operate so they can hire people. That is how capitalism works.

If they want to go to communism, let them ask Venezuela how that works or ask Russia or USSR how that works. It does not work. Let them ask Cuba how it works. It does not work. Big government does not work. The more we can get our fiscal house in order and the more we can take responsibility, make responsible decisions and be proactive in deciding what we are going to do moving forward, the better this country is going to be.

We have a few examples of what happens when the government is not proactive. I will just take the war in Ukraine right now and how ill prepared Canada would be if Russia had decided to come to Canada instead of Ukraine. We are naive. We think that will never happen and that the U.S. would protect us. Really? Ukrainians might have thought the same thing until 2012 when it happened. Then they thought it would never happen again. Well it happened again. People in Poland are certainly second-guessing that right now.

Are we prepared? We are going to buy 88 jets, it sounds like. That is a good thing. We could have bought them eight years ago, though. We would have been prepared then.

They have a habit in the current government of actually waiting to dig a well until we are thirsty. Then it is too late. Can we not be proactive? Can we not do things ahead of time? Can we not anticipate things? Can we not look at things and say, “This is what we need to do”? Can we get beyond just one focus, which is the environment? The environment is important. I am not criticizing that, but what I am saying is that we can do that and do three, four or five or six other things at the same time. They can link together and they can actually work in harmony and, again, leave a better country for our kids.

There are some serious structural problems happening here in Canada. I hear it every day in my meetings with different groups and organizations. There are the vineyards, for example. The wine association people were talking this week about the excise tax escalating. They have repeatedly told the government it is a problem that is driving them out of business and that, if the government drives them out of business, all those small grape producers do not have a home for their grapes in Ontario. The winemakers actually gave notice to the grape producers this week that they will not have a home for those grapes. Therefore, that sector is going to die.

I go to the manufacturing sector and talk to Canadian manufacturers and exporters. They say their costs of production are too high and they cannot compete anymore. They say, “We have all these free trade agreements and all this market access. It is wonderful and I am glad we have it, but if I cannot produce it in Canada what good are they?” Why do we not look at how we get those costs of production down and get the manufacturing to cost?

If we want electric vehicles to be in Canada, then make it an attractive place to build them in Canada and do not chase the manufacturers to the U.S. and other jurisdictions. They should look at Canada and say it will be great building here because we have a good labour force, a good cost of production and market access right around the world. We have a stage that is set to be successful. However, we are missing pieces of that equation, and the current government is not addressing any of those items.

When companies do come here and invest, members might notice a certain characteristic: government subsidization in order to get them to come here. We have to give them money to get them to locate here. Why not give them a good environment to do business in? Why not give them a good educational force? Why not give them the benefits that Canada historically has had all along? We have given up those historical advantages because we have overspent. We do not have anything left to give.

There is a D-Day coming. There is a day when all of a sudden somebody is going to come in and a bondholder is going to drop our rating and we are going to say, “Oh my god, we have to correct things.” Probably our kids will have to make some very difficult choices like the Liberal government in 1993, 1994 and 1995 had to make. We will see health care cuts. We will lose our social benefits programs. That is coming.

We can stop that if we show some responsibility and show some awareness of what our strengths are and take advantage of those strengths and help transition our country into being the next country in the next generation that can be number one throughout the world. Let us quit worrying about everybody else in the world. Let us worry about Canada.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Toronto—Danforth Ontario

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Madam Speaker, I was very interested in listening to this speech. One of the things I kept hearing the member say is that we are not getting the votes of confidence from business here in Canada, but we see time and again that is not true. I believe only a couple of weeks ago we saw a $5-billion investment from LG and Stellantis, creating jobs in Windsor in our auto sector. That is a very significant investment based on the new future economy, a low-emissions economy. The other piece, thinking from Alberta's perspective, is that I believe Amazon chose to build a plant out in Alberta near a solar farm so it could make sure it had clean, renewable energy.

I wonder if the member could speak to the economic opportunities of making sure we have the economy people want for the things they are are going to need to build for the future.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. Why does the government have to subsidize them to come here in the first place?

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON

We didn't.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Yes, we did, Madam Speaker. The Ontario government subsidized it. The federal government subsidized it. What was also promised into the future to get them to locate it here in Canada? Why did we have to do that? Why did we not just say that we have the critical resources and all the things we need to make a great battery here in Canada, plus the labour force, the tax base and infrastructure to do that? We do not have that because it is not developed.

I find it really interesting that the trade minister was in the U.S. talking about electric vehicles when build back better is coming on and her selling point was that we have the critical minerals in Canada. We do, but they are in the ground and the regulations the Liberals have in place will keep them in the ground.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Bloc

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to see that my colleague and the entire Conservative Party care about Canada's economic balance.

I believe that we can find solutions, but if we were to stop spending and invest in oil, we would be digging ourselves an even deeper hole.

Does my colleague agree that we must first help the least fortunate, those who are most in need and who have been most affected by the pandemic? I am talking about seniors and low-income families who need social housing. There is a housing shortage. It never ends. It is getting worse and worse every week. Should we not do more to help these people?

If we want to permanently fix this problem, we need to decrease our dependence on oil and petroleum and develop new green energies, such as wind and solar energy.

Does my colleague agree that we need a permanent, stable and sustainable recovery?

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for a great question, and I agree with him 100%. Coming out of a crisis, we need that physical capacity to take the decisions we have to make. We had that fiscal capacity because we balanced our budgets in 1993, 1994 and 1995 and we maintained budgets, so that in 2008 when the great recession hit Stephen Harper had a buffer zone so he could spend money, keep the economy going and then balance the budget again in 2015.

The current government needs a plan to balance its budget now so that, if we need to help people out as they come out of the crisis, we can help them. If we want to get to a green environment I am saying let us move there if that is where the world is going to go, but let us not take and throw away all the benefits we have right now that could pay for that changeover. Why not embrace them, take the royalties from oil and critical minerals, and use them to plan accordingly and build up our green energy infrastructure?

I find it interesting that we would subsidize a car but not tell people how they are going to plug it in. We do not tell them where they are going to have to plug it in. We do not tell them that if they have a condo built in the 1970s there is no power grid that they can plug in to. Those are the things we need to solve and we need the resources—

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

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

We have time for one last question.

The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, the first line of the Conservative motion today cites, “excessive government spending has increased the deficit, the national debt, and fuelled inflation to its highest level in 31 years,” but does not mention that corporate tax cuts have gone from 28% to 15%. It is like the Conservatives have become the no-revenue party. The big banks, big oil and grocery stores have had record profits that have paid out record dividends. How is that playing out for everyday Canadians? We are seeing cuts in services. We have seen an absence of the national housing strategy. Over 25 years there were cuts to Veterans Affairs and cuts to services for Canadians. The corporate welfare is out of control and I think this motion fails to address that.

Does my colleague agree that those big corporations that have profited throughout the pandemic should pay their fair share so that they are not leaving the burden and shouldering of all tax debt on everyday Canadians?

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK

Madam Speaker, I have a few points. First of all, I do not believe in picking winners and losers, so as far as the corporations getting subsidized by the federal government goes, we should be getting out of that. I agree with him on that. As for their paying dividends, that is a good thing. Their making profit, that is a good thing. To have a low tax rate so they are located here, that is a good thing.

I will say that the NDP joined this coalition, like lots of provincial NDP parties when they form government, but they now have to show responsibility. What they say and what they do means something because they are now a part of government. When they are in opposition—

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

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

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Souris—Moose Mountain.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Prince Albert for his fantastic and riveting speech, which not only brought us back in history but also focused on Canada and not what the rest of the world is doing.

Today’s debate is an extremely important one, not just because of the upcoming federal budget but due to the fact that this issue has been a major concern for my constituents for a number of years now. I would like to thank my Conservative colleagues for their tireless advocacy on behalf of the Canadians who are being negatively impacted by the government’s financial mismanagement, both now and in future generations.

The government continues to fail to recognize that it has doubled the national debt from $612 billion in 2015 to over $1.2 trillion today, and who knows what that magic number might be, if announced at all, next Thursday. It seems that we, on this side of the House, are the only ones who truly understand the long-term impacts of a federal government that racks up debt and deficit without a second thought. On top of that, inflation, which we know is at 5.7%, is the highest it has been in 31 years, so it is impossible to stay silent, especially knowing that next week’s budget will likely contain even more reckless government spending that will only push our country further into debt.

The last two years have been extremely difficult for Canadians across the country, with many still trying to get back to some sense of normalcy. With that said, the government continues to forget that any money produced comes from the people of this great country. It comes from the taxpayer. It comes from them now and it will always come from them. We need to respect that.

Small businesses were hit particularly hard, especially those in the service industry. Some who did not have the luxury of working from home had to be laid off or lost their jobs completely. The last thing they need to be concerned about right now is a government that will impose even more taxes on them than they are already pay, which is the equivalent to kicking them when they are down. Canadians deserve, and quite frankly, need, a break from the skyrocketing cost of living that we have been experiencing lately.

In my riding, one of the biggest and most pressing issues is the carbon tax. As members know, the carbon tax will increase from $40 per tonne to $50 per tonne on April 1, which happens to be tomorrow. I wish I could say this is a poor attempt at an April Fool’s joke, but it is unfortunately a reality we must face. Life has already been made significantly more expensive because of the carbon tax, and instead of helping Canadians who need it, the Liberals are only making things worse.

While I do not expect the Prime Minister to know everything about my riding, my constituents and I would certainly hope that he knows what rural means. In rural Canada, we do not have access to public transportation through things like bus systems or light-rail transit. If we cannot reach a place by foot, by bicycle or horse, taking a car is the only option. The increased carbon tax, increased food costs and escalator taxes, combined with the astronomical gas prices, have put a heavy additional burden on Canadians who have already struggled through the pandemic.

Small businesses will continue to suffer under these increases, especially those who work in transportation. One small trucking company in my riding is now paying tens of thousands of dollars more to fuel its fleet of vehicles than it was paying before the carbon tax came into effect. This is not including the increase happening tomorrow or the increase in gas prices due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Furthermore, this business employs a number of people in the community it is based in, and if it has to shut its doors because it can no longer afford fuel, jobs will be lost and the trickle-down effect will certainly have negative ramifications for the community as a whole. If we add inflation into this equation, the outcome is even worse. How are small business owners supposed to stay afloat when they are constantly being taxed left, right and centre?

These inflationary prices are throughout the economy. In fact, I just read today that Dollarama, which sells its stock for one dollar a piece, will be increasing up to five dollars for the sale of its wares. That is a huge inflationary increase.

I received a letter in February 2022 from a constituent who owns a small Home Hardware business with his wife. He states, “I have an item in my store that in July last year sold for $52.99. That same valve this week now retails for $144.99. It is nearly three times that retail in six months. This is by no means the only item. We have been advised that over 7,500 items are facing this increase in just the next couple of months.”

Those figures are absolutely outrageous. To think that any small business could weather a financial storm of that magnitude is unconscionable. The government needs to find some way to provide relief for Canadians when it comes to inflation and taxes or local economies will suffer: not just the businesses, but consumers as well.

He goes on to say, “The concern is that I am a fairly new corporation: under six years old. I live paycheque to paycheque as it is. I cannot and do not have the funds to invest more money into the business to even maintain the inventory level I have now. I have just over $1 million in inventory. I am now looking at needing $3 million in inventory just to stay where I was. I just can’t do it. We don’t have any more money to give. Our mortgages are maxed. So in addition to mass shortages and massive delays in getting inventory, I am having to greatly reduce my inventory quantities just to stay in budget. This cannot continue, or I will be out of stock and business in months, possibly before summer.”

The closure of a business is a scary thing.

He continues, “The current policies and mandates are destroying the businesses of our country. I am unsure as to how much longer any of us with moderate to high debt loads can continue. I have spoken to many business owners, and even those that are 30-, 40-, and 50-year-old businesses are considering selling off and closing their doors forever. I have been in this business for almost 34 years and absolutely love it, but I can’t afford to stay in business like this.”

This is a real tragedy. These businesses have been institutions in their local communities, some for generations, and the government’s inability to take control of inflation, on top of its incessant and relentless taxation, will be the death knell for these businesses.

Canadians want to see real, practical solutions and a meaningful plan from the government, but instead they are being left behind. They are scared of a new hidden or escalating tax to further eat away at them from a government that does not understand how to work a business.

Canadians have had enough of this parasitic approach of the Liberal government that puts up a front while eating away at them internally.

I think the ending of the letter will resonate with many small business owners, not just in southeast Saskatchewan but all across the country.

He says, “More and more mom-and-pop shops have started working six days a week up from five, just to try and make enough to make ends meet. I am looking at downsizing staff and closing Sundays as it isn’t feasible and I have to cut costs somewhere. We have already gone from 25 staff a year ago to 18, and may have to go to 14 or even 12 to maybe survive. I don’t even know if I could make the current business work with 12 to 14 staff. I would have a lot of land not making any money to help pay bills. I would have also about $400,000 dollars of equipment to try and sell in a downhill market. I would have a loss here as well. I am unsure how to get this across to the Liberals and their buddies, but it is getting real ugly, real fast financially, for most of us.”

Unfortunately, whether it be from a lack of understanding or a lack of care, this issue is clearly not getting across to the Liberals. Canadians want to see a plan for growth, with targeted investments in the places that need them the most. We need a concrete plan to fight these inflationary pressures. Taxing Canadians even more is not the solution.

We all know most seniors also live on a fixed income and many have no additional source of revenue outside of their CPP and OAS. I regularly receive correspondence in my office from seniors who express just how tight their budgets are, as well as their concerns about future government decisions that will negatively impact them going forward. One constituent of mine who is now retired stated, “I’d like to bring to the attention of our Prime Minister and the governing members of our country what it is like to live in rural Canada. We are so tired of hearing how easy it should be to use public transportation and not rely on natural gas. All these things are available to large city dwellers, but not in my community.”

This senior also brought up the fact that he has no choice but to travel long distances to attend medical appointments. These have a huge impact on his family.

My constituents have completely lost faith in the government’s ability to fiscally manage our country. Excessive government spending, increased taxes and record high levels of inflation are symptoms of poor fiscal management and a lack of responsibility. As I see my time is quickly ending, I call upon the government to ensure that next week’s budget contains no new taxes and outlines a much-needed plan to balance the budget. Canadians need, and certainly deserve, a break.

Opposition Motion—Federal BudgetBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Toronto—Danforth Ontario

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Madam Speaker, I really appreciate hearing comments about what is happening in the member's local community. One of the things I have been struck by is that we talk about concerns about the price of food, for example, and things like that, yet we are seeing right now, with floods, wildfires and increasing droughts because of climate change, that it is only going to get worse, based on the IPCC reports and what we see.

Will that not impact these businesses that need to order food to sell to people, and impact his constituents who want to have affordable food? All of those pieces are together. Are they not feeling the costs of climate change, and do they not want to see us take action to make sure they are more climate resilient and also to stop, where we can, right now, further degradation of our climate?