Debates of May 9th, 2022

Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

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 Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Natural Resources; the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, Natural Resources; the hon. member for Brantford—Brant, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Mississauga—Erin Mills.

It is always an honour to stand in the House and speak to a number of measures, in this case it is one of the most important measures that a government could introduce, the budget implementation act, or the BIA. I remember when I was on the finance committee for a number of years, this was a very important time of year, when the BIA was sent to the committee for deep analysis and study. I know this year will be no different at the finance committee.

I want to take an opportunity to address Bill C-19 in the House, and to speak to it from, I suppose, a different point of view. I want to speak on economic matters but economic matters that are proposed in the bill that would impact Canada's foreign relations. I think it would be appropriate to begin, arguably at least, with one of Canada's most important voices on the international scene, and that is former prime minister Lester Pearson.

Long before he was a prime minister, in 1957, while accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, Lester Pearson said:

Of all our dreams today there is none more important — or so hard to realise — than that of peace in the world. May we never lose our faith in it or our resolve to do everything that can be done to convert it one day into reality.

This is a tremendous insight, obviously, one that Pearson believed in very strongly when he was speaking in 1957, and one that has occupied the attention of statesmen and even members of Parliament in democracies throughout the world. Canada is no different.

The question, the challenge, is how to best achieve this, particularly from the vantage point of a middle power such as Canada, a middle power that has tried to find its way, particularly in the post-World War Two order, surrounded as we are by superpowers, such as the United States, China and Russia. How exactly is it possible for a middle power to exert influence on the international scene so this goal of world peace could be possible?

The dilemma is a real one and one that could be achieved by looking at what Canada has done. I speak here not only in terms of the Pearsonian legacy of foreign policy, which is a strong and very proud tradition in the Liberal Party, but also of the real important voices from the Conservative Party through Canada's history who have sought to find a place for Canada in middle power terms.

One possible path forward that has worked is diplomacy. I think of Pearson, and I think of diplomats such as George Ignatieff and Saul Rae, and there are others I could point to as well. They, in their work as diplomats, found a way. They carved a way for Canada so we could exert influence on the international scene. That would involve, of course, peacekeeping. That is a great example of what Canada has done in the past to pursue this goal of international peace.

Another example would be working with international development organizations, specifically those non-governmental organizations that are on the ground, carrying out vital work in lesser developed countries, in countries where poverty is the experience of so many, or is the experience of the vast majority.

When we look at governments of the past, when we look at the government, we see governments that have funded, have helped to fund and worked with NGOs, which are pursuing those very laudable aims of economic growth and development, encouraging entrepreneurship, encouraging peace and bringing people together at the same time.

Since 2015, I have had the opportunity to visit a number of countries in my tenure as a member of Parliament, including Ukraine, and I wonder if there will be an opportunity later in questions where I could speak to that. Ukraine was one example, and there is also Colombia, Nicaragua, Kazakhstan, Poland and Latvia. I have had the opportunity to see NGOs, supported by the Canadian government, carry out that vital work. Through that, the goals of a middle power could be achieved, with that goal of ultimately coming back to peace.

Contributing to multilateral institutions is another key way that a middle power such as Canada could make a contribution to this outcome. Especially now, how relevant it is that we see Canada highly engaged in NATO.

I know there are voices out there that want us to do more, and yes, of course, we can do more. I think if we were to canvass the opinion of NATO allies and NATO leaders, we would find that Canada's contributions, specifically with respect to what is happening now, vis-à-vis Russia and Ukraine, is not just applauded, it is admired. We need to continue that work, and of course there are policy innovations that can help us move toward the path of peace and human rights, which ultimately underpin peace.

That brings me to the budget implementation act, or the BIA, Bill C-19. I am thinking of the Special Economic Measures Act, the SEMA, and the Magnitsky law, which takes its name from the great champion of human rights, Sergei Magnitsky, who lost his life for his advocacy at the hands of Vladimir Putin and his regime. Under those existing laws, property held in Canada by individuals involved in the undermining of international peace and security, or the gross and systematic violation of international human rights norms, can be seized. That property can, in fact, be seized by the Canadian government. There is a challenge, though, which is where the BIA comes in. What is exactly meant in the SEMA and in the Magnitsky act by the term “property”? How is that defined conceptually?

Under SEMA, for example, property is defined as any real or personal property. That is one way forward. Again, I go back to criticisms that have been raised before that this needs greater clarity and greater precision in the legislative language. Bill C-19 rectifies that and would add an extended definition if it is agreed to by the House, which I think and hope it will be. Should Bill C-19 pass, property would be defined as any type of property immovable or movable, tangible or intangible.

What does that mean in concrete terms? It means that property includes not just physical assets, such as a building, for example, or planes, homes, helicopters or jets, all the things that certain individuals, such as tycoons around the Russian regime, for example, are known to keep, but also money and, very importantly, virtual currency. Cryptocurrency would fall under this new definition and something called non-fungible tokens, which are, for example, digital art or audio recordings that can be found and purchased online. This is important because it is crucial that legislation along these lines keeps up with modern developments. I am glad to see the government recognizing that and moving in the right direction.

Most importantly, though, is the change that allows for seized assets to be sold by the Canadian government. Those assets that would be seized from individuals who have been found to be going against or somehow undermining international peace and diplomacy, or who are involved in the violation of international human rights, could be not only seized under this proposed change but also redistributed as compensation. They could be sold, to be simple about it, with the proceeds going to victims to advance goals of international peace and security in some way, or to assist the rebuilding of a foreign state after war. The post-war rebuilding process always proves to be very important. It is complex, to be sure, but very important.

Should this pass, I know that the government has said that certainly the aim would be to assist the Ukrainian people, the victims of Putin's war and, after the carnage that it has brought about for Ukraine, to assist the government in a massive rebuilding. Canada needs to be there and must be there as part of what some have called a “Marshall Plan”, envisioning what Ukraine could look like in terms of a project for the future. I say “project” in the sense that allies would come together and assist another vital ally, which is obviously going through a very difficult time.

Others have raised a point of checks and balances, so I am heartened to see that only a superior court justice would be able to give the order allowing for seized assets to be sold. I think that is quite crucial when it comes to ensuring that there are checks and balances on the decision to seize and sell an asset in the way I have described, the way the bill proposes.

Finally, I will conclude on this point: There has been a lot of commentary in the media and other circles that points to the fact that this amendment to the SEMA and the Magnitsky act comes in the context of the crisis in Ukraine. I would say that it sends an example for the world, and I am glad to see that Canada is the first G7 country to lead the effort. Hopefully, the other democracies pick it up and employ it as well.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Madam Speaker, I want to say to my colleague that I appreciated his speech. I serve with him on the public accounts committee.

One thing that I would like him to address is the cost of living crisis that is going on. Right now in my riding we see farmers seeding and planting their crops in the ground. Obviously, the price of gas is extremely high, and although there are some exemptions there, it makes it very expensive not only for farmers to buy fuel, but also for the supporting services out there for farmers. I wonder if the member could comment on the lack of mention of that in the BIA.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member and I have the opportunity to work together on the public accounts committee, and I have enjoyed the experience with him so far.

I take it that he agrees with everything I said with respect to the amendments that have been proposed to the SEMA and the Magnitsky act, so we can at least agree on that point.

On the cost of living, I certainly sympathize. I hear it in my community. I think all members in this House recognize that inflation is a real phenomenon, but we ought to recognize that it is driven completely by events that have transpired at the international level, beginning with the pandemic and the way it has upended supply chains, as well as the irregular weather patterns and the way they have impacted supply chains. The way we can respond is to do what government is able to do. For example, the national child care program that has been proposed will help. The continued impact of the Canada child benefit will help.

There are other examples of areas in which we can work together collaboratively to make life more affordable for Canadians, and I look forward to working with the member to that end on the public accounts committee.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, listening to my colleague's speech, which was essentially on foreign affairs, led me to ask myself a personal question that my colleague across the way may be able to answer.

Currently, when we talk about foreign affairs, we talk about ties to other countries, but also about travel. In our offices, we are completely overwhelmed with calls from tearful constituents saying they submitted their passport applications weeks ago. Some applied months ago and still have not received their passport. They are at a loss as to what to do and say they will cancel their trip and lose their reservations.

Since my colleague is passionate about foreign affairs, what does he think about the way the government is handling this situation? Personally, I find it really deplorable.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is true. I hear it in my own community. Certainly, the staff at the constituency office are helping individuals as best they can with respect to passports. That is something that has been raised in this House, and I expect it will continue to be raised. We are seeing across the country a huge increase in the demand for travel. I believe there has been a 40% increase, to be specific. Naturally, when we have that kind of an increase, we will have quite a lot of people pushing for a passport renewal. I think the government needs to continue to ensure that individuals have timely access to that, as much as possible, through Service Canada. The minister responsible has been very clear that extra hours have been made available. More staff have been brought in on weekends, for instance, and are working overtime. I know it is a difficult thing for people to go through, but it really does reflect the fact that we are seeing an increase in demand all at once, and this is the outcome, unfortunately.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the member's speech with interest as he connected Bill C-19 to international events.

I want to ask him something that relates to his role as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue. There were some moves against banks to tax their excess profits. Why is the government so reluctant to extend that tax on excess profits to the big box stores and gas companies that are profiteering while other Canadians are struggling to make ends meet?

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would be very happy to speak to the member and then have a lengthier conversation and get his thoughts, but certainly, tax fairness is at the very heart of this government's agenda. We have seen taxes go down for the middle class. We have seen taxes rise for the wealthiest 1% in recent years. We have seen the government make sure that corporations are paying their fair share, and that will continue. The NDP will have ideas on this, but I think the government's record speaks for itself, and it is a strong record.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-19, the budget implementation act. This bill proposes to officially implement many of the important measures contained in budget 2022, tabled just a few weeks ago, measures that would impact people from all walks of life in my riding of Mississauga—Erin Mills.

Budget 2022 contains targeted and responsible investments to create jobs and prosperity today and build a stronger economic future for all Canadians tomorrow. Its proposed measures set out to make investments in Canadians and to make life more affordable for them, in economic growth and innovation and in promoting a clean economy. In particular, budget 2022 takes significant steps to help build more homes and make housing more affordable across the country, and it is housing that I would like to talk about today.

As we know, everyone should have a safe and affordable home, but this goal, which was taken for granted by previous generations, is no longer within the reach of a growing number of Canadians, including young people in my riding of Mississauga—Erin Mills. Increasing the supply of housing would make housing more affordable, but it is not the only solution; there have to be more measures taken.

For example, in budget 2022 there is an issue that is addressed, and that is the concern that foreign investment and speculation will increase the cost of housing in Canada. The government has an important role to play in addressing these issues. The 2022 budget proposes new measures that would prohibit foreign investment in residential real estate and ensure that speculators and homeowners who quickly sell their properties pay their fair share of taxes. I know that Vancouver and Toronto have received most of the attention in this regard, but those impacts can also be felt in other parts of the country, including in Mississauga—Erin Mills.

Bill C-19 would enact the prohibition on the purchase of residential property by non-Canadians act. It is a new statute that implements a ban on foreign investment in Canadian housing. The ban on foreign investment in Canadian housing is aimed at curtailing foreign demand in light of concerns that foreign buyers may be contributing to pricing some Canadians out of the housing market. The proposed legislation would prohibit people who are neither Canadian citizens nor permanent residents from acquiring residential property in Canada, whether directly or indirectly, for a period of two years.

The government's intention in this regard is that refugees and persons who have been authorized to come to Canada on emergency travel to flee international crises would be exempt. Foreign students who are in the process of obtaining permanent residence would also be exempt in certain circumstances, as would work permit holders who are residents of Canada.

As well, speculative trading in the Canadian housing market contributes to higher prices for Canadians. These transactions can include the resale of homes before they are built or before they are lived in, such as the assignment of a contract of sale. This creates an opportunity for speculators to be dishonest about their original intentions and creates uncertainty for everyone involved in an assignment sale as to whether GST or HST apply. The current rules also result in the uneven application of GST or HST to the full and final prices of these new homes that have not been lived in before.

Therefore, as proposed in budget 2022, Bill C-19 would amend the Excise Tax Act to make assignment sales in respect of newly constructed or substantially renovated residential housing taxable for GST or HST purposes. The amendment also excludes from taxable consideration the amount of deposit paid under an original agreement of purchase and sale that the original purchaser is recovering through that assignment of sale.

This amendment would eliminate the ambiguity that can arise under the existing rules regarding the GST or HST treatment of assignment sales by making all assignment sales by individuals taxable. It would also ensure that the GST or HST applies to the full amount paid for a new home, including any amount paid as a result of an assignment sale, resulting in greater consistency in the tax treatment of new homes.

The government also wants to make housing more affordable for the homes people already live in. For example, seniors and persons with disabilities deserve the opportunity to live and age at home, but renovations and upgrades that make their homes safe and accessible can be costly. In my riding of Mississauga—Erin Mills, we see a lot of multi-generational homes, where grandparents live with their children and grandkids in a single dwelling. The opportunity for them to live comfortably is significantly reduced because of the inability of homeowners to provide for important renovations to have that accessibility available to parents as they age.

The home accessibility tax credit already provides supports to offset some of the costs that I am talking about. However, with the rising cost of home renovations, many seniors and people with disabilities feel that they cannot afford the modifications that would allow them to continue to live safely in their homes.

As proposed in budget 2022, to better support independent living and to better support these multi-generational homes, Bill C-19 would amend the Income Tax Act to increase the annual expense limit for the home accessibility tax credit from $10,000 to $20,000. This enhancement would apply to the 2022 and subsequent taxation years. It would provide up to an additional $1,500 in tax support for renovations and alterations that are already eligible under the home accessibility tax credit, for such expenses as the purchase or installation of wheelchair ramps, walk-in bathtubs, wheel-in showers, building a bedroom or bathroom to permit first-floor occupancy, and installing non-slip flooring to help avoid falls.

Our government was elected in 2015 with a promise to deliver a national housing strategy, because even seven years ago it was already hard for Canadians to own a home. We have delivered that strategy and continue to build upon it. We are taking further action to make housing more affordable and to give Canadians that same chance to own a home, as our parents did.

We all know that no one level of government can solve this problem. Our Liberal government is leading the way, and we need every level of government to recognize this issue and work with us to take action. When we talk about building homes, we have to work with the provincial, regional and municipal governments to ensure that developers are operating in a fair and equitable way that is promoting affordable housing and promoting the swift and quality construction of homes that people in my riding of Mississauga—Erin Mills, for example, can take advantage of.

The measures I just mentioned today in Bill C-19 and from budget 2022 would help make the housing market fairer for Canadians and support more affordable home living for seniors and people with disabilities. If we are serious about taking action on the housing market, I hope that all members in this House can support Bill C-19.

In conclusion, each and every member in this House has a story of a constituent in their community who has struggled with housing and who cannot see a future with a comfortable living space that they can rely on. Housing is a basic right that we should be able to afford to Canadians, and I am proud of the measures being taken in Bill C-19 to ensure that we are continuing to build upon all of the important work we have done with respect to affordable housing over the past seven years.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, as the government continues to increase reliance on temporary foreign workers without the protections that come with permanent resident status, we know that temporary foreign workers are increasingly vulnerable to exploitation. Recently, the Auditor General found, through federal inspections, that the health and safety for temporary foreign workers has gotten worse, and that is after the government promised to fix it in 2020.

Could the member please clarify: Instead of increasing our reliance on exploiting workers to drive down wages, does she agree that the time to negotiate better wages and work conditions for migrant workers, permanent residents and Canadians is now?

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Madam Speaker, one of the things I hear very regularly within my community, especially from small business owners, is their inability to find workers and skilled tradespeople who can fill those gaps that are being created. We, as a government, over the past number of years have been finding those pathways to permanent residence for those workers who are highly skilled and want to come and live in Canada on a permanent-residence basis. We need to continue to build and provide those supports.

A number of years ago, I did a study in the justice committee about trafficking in persons and trying to ensure that migrant workers, for example, were very well represented. There is a lot of work that has been done on this, and we are going to continue to do that work with the advocacy of all members in the House.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the hon. member about the budget generally. We have seen her government bring forward about $60 billion of deficits this year. In the past couple of years, it said that it needed it because of COVID. It needed all this program spending. We know that the $60-billion deficit this year has no COVID spending. I think it is quite reckless.

I am not sure if she would agree. I would like to know her thoughts. Their government is burdening our generation with a tremendous amount of debt and deficits. That means higher taxes and, frankly, higher inflation that families in her riding and my riding are being impacted by. I would like to know her thoughts. Does she think that it is responsible, now that COVID is over, that the government maintains massive deficits?

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Madam Speaker, while I appreciate the question from the member opposite, I think it is ill-informed. We did spend the past two years making sure that Canadians had roofs over their heads, had food on their tables and were able to safely isolate themselves if they had COVID.

Bill C-19 and budget 2022 are really about providing that economic recovery. The child care plan that we had installed across the country is addressing these very issues. The housing affordability piece in budget 2022 and Bill C-19 is addressing these very issues. The makeup and the buildup toward a greener economy are addressing these issues.

I will remind members in the House that inflation and COVID are not specifically Canadian things. They are worldwide phenomena. Right now is the proper time to invest in Canadians and ensure that they have that foundation to lift up the economy in Canada and globally.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague across the way talked a lot about the impact of inflation on people and what needs to be done to limit that impact. People have been hit hard by this.

She and I are roughly the same age and therefore probably from the same generation. I am concerned about the people who came before us, those who built our country and Quebec, including seniors who have been hit hard. Year after year, they complain about not getting an adequate increase to their pension.

This time it is even worse because, in addition to the fact that the government is doing nothing, inflation continues to rise. I wonder whether my colleague is proud of her government's record, given how badly it has failed seniors.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Madam Speaker, absolutely, I am proud that it was this government that enhanced the CPP so that future seniors will have more pension to live on.

I am proud of this government for increasing old age security. I am proud of this government for investing in affordable housing and investing in long-term care for our seniors.

Bill C-19 shows us the empathy and the care that we have to really build upon in Canada to ensure that seniors in my riding of Mississauga—Erin Mills and that member's riding, as well, are able to thrive and sustain themselves.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is a huge privilege and honour to rise today on the budget implementation act, Bill C-19. I am also very grateful to serve the federal NDP as the critic for mental health and harm reduction.

There are many things in this budget that are a movement toward progress. There are many areas of this budget where there are huge shortfalls. I really want to follow up on what my colleague for Mississauga—Erin Mills spoke about recently, which is housing, because housing has such an impact not just on the economy for small businesses, workers and volunteers in our communities but also on people's mental health, especially when we are seeing the skyrocketing rates of real estate and rents that are out of touch for Canadians. The people who are the most impacted are workers, seniors and those who are the most marginalized. People who were not homeless before are becoming homeless because they are being pushed out onto the streets.

In my home riding and the community I live in, Port Alberni, we saw real estate go up in the last year by 46%. In Oceanside, it went up 34%. The average price of a home is over $1 million, yet we have seen wages remain fairly stagnant. I am probably the only member of Parliament in the House who, after being elected, moved away from his home community to better serve his riding and cannot actually move home. This is because the price of real estate in my home community of Tofino has gone up 400% since I was elected. This not only has an impact on me, but we can imagine the workers in Tofino and how impossible it is for them, or for the small businesses that require workers.

I know this is a huge challenge. We heard solutions come from the Liberals and questions from the Conservatives about housing, but they are fairly consistent in that they have centred their efforts around the free market. The free market will not solve these problems.

I grew up in the seventies and eighties in Victoria, British Columbia. I am really proud of where I grew up and the community I lived in. It took leadership and worked with the federal government to develop some co-ops. As we know, Canada went on a robust co-op housing program that was actually developed through a minority government of the Liberals and the federal NDP working together in the early seventies under our leader David Lewis. It was that agreement that got the national housing program going. They started to develop about 25,000 units on average throughout the 1970s and 1980s.

I was really fortunate to grow up in a co-op housing development. My dad was a transmission mechanic. He still is, actually, and is in his early seventies. He has been working on transmissions for over 50 years. I am so proud of my dad. My mom worked at HRDC as a clerk. They were middle class, if we want to call it that. I am proud of my mom, and it was Mother's Day yesterday. To my mom I say that I know I was not home, but happy Mother's Day. I love my mom and thank her so much. To all the moms in our community, I give thanks.

My parents worked really hard. The co-op was unique in that it provided safe, secure and affordable housing for my mom and dad and my brother Rob and I, but it also provided safe and secure housing for seniors, single parents, people of lower incomes and people on income assistance. I can go back to that co-op in Victoria to this day and some of the friends I grew up with are grandparents and live in that co-op. Their kids and their grandkids live in that co-op.

The problem is that there are not enough co-ops anymore. When the government pulled out of building co-ops and pulled out of the national housing strategy in the early 1990s, we lost 25,000 units a year. We are talking about over 750,000 units to this day in the shortfall of co-op housing.

I was visiting my friends John and Beth last night, who live in co-op housing here in Ottawa. They received safe and secure housing. They were on a wait-list for four years, terrified, which impacted their mental health. They were working two or three jobs and trying to figure out how they were going to make ends meet. They wanted to make sure their daughter Kira could live in a co-op, but they are not even taking names now in the co-op where they live because the wait-list is so long.

In fact, my daughter, who just graduated from the University of Ottawa, dropped me off today and she said, “Dad, I can't talk about ever owning a home, because I don't want to be disappointed.” It is just terrible that this is what we are leaving our children and the people in our communities.

We can look to Europe. First, I will go back to where we are at. We were at 10% of our housing being non-market housing in the 1970s and 1980s. Now we are at about 3%. We can look to Europe, which is at 30%, and Vienna, which is at 60%, because they understand how important it is to have safe, secure and affordable housing. The free market is not going to give us that. It has not. We are developing very rapidly on Vancouver Island.

I sat in local government in Tofino. I remember how frustrated we were when the federal government downloaded to provinces, which then further downloaded to local governments. I was part of the initial Tofino housing corporation. I am proud that today we are finally building a development that we talked about 20 years ago. Here we were, this small local government: this small municipality was trying to figure out how we were going to develop non-market housing to meet the needs of our community.

What a task for small communities to take on. They do not have the expertise or aptitude, and often do not have the leadership. They do not know how to do it. I can assure the House that if the federal government puts money on the table, local governments will access it. They will find the land.

Our province of British Columbia is building half of the non-market housing in the country right now. It needs a federal partner to go to the lengths it is going to. The province just had applications for over 12,500 shovel-ready units by local governments: local non-profit housing. They had funding for 2,500. It would have been great to see the federal government pick up the other 2,500. We are halfway there on shovel-ready developments that could help make sure people have affordable housing.

I get frustrated. I look to my community. We have a non-profit housing group in Ucluelet. Randy Oliwa called me the other day and said, “Gord, we can't even get an answer on a $5,000 planning grant to get things off the ground.” The Beaufort Hotel was being purchased. It is a hotel that already has low-barrier housing and private sector housing. The group made an application through the rapid housing initiative. The applicants were told that it looked very positive, but they got denied because they were oversubscribed. They had $5 billion in applications and they only had $1 billion on the table.

They were told to reapply, so they reapplied and got denied again. They decided to apply through the women and children shelter and transitional housing fund, and then got denied again. They brought in Lookout, a great partner from Vancouver, to develop non-market housing and ensure that the people living in this building were not going to get punted and thrown out on the streets. Again, they got denied. Now they are using the co-investment fund. The steps and hurdles these groups have to go through to make sure people have affordable housing are just ridiculous.

I want to speak a little about how important housing is, not just for small businesses, workers and people in our communities, but also to ensure that people are not suffering: those who are on the streets and who may be living with a substance use disorder. I was at a low-barrier housing unit in Duncan, B.C., where they built these sleeper cottages. I met a man who had his first home. It was basic needs. It was not low barrier; it was no barrier. For the first time in his adult life, he told me, he was not homeless or living in prison. He was on opioid therapy as a result, which he could never access living as a homeless person. He was treated like a criminal: He was moved from park to park, living in fear and not sleeping.

Another woman I met at the same low-barrier housing was moving to low-barrier from no-barrier housing. As a result of having that, she had been sober for eight months. For the first time in her adult life, she has a chance. Without housing, how can people have mental health? When people are homeless, they do not sleep.

The Prime Minister's goal to house 50% of the homeless people in the next 10 years is not good enough. It is not good enough. We need to move rapidly. We need to build non-market housing, and the government needs to step up its game. We need all parties to work collectively on this, because the free market simply will not solve the problems of our needs right now. Housing is a basic human need. It is a human rights issue. It is an economic issue. It is a social issue.

I have not even tapped into indigenous housing, because I am being told I am running out of time. I could speak another 10 minutes on that alone. I hope we can work together in the House to scale things up rapidly.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member across the way for his passion around housing, as well as mental health and harm reduction.

I was waiting for the member to talk about the budget allocations for co-op housing. He talked about the need for co-op housing, and I 100% agree with him on that. I am quoting the executive director of the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada, Tim Ross, who said, “Starting with 6,000 new homes over the next five years, we are optimistic that the new co-operative housing development program will kick-start the development of the next generation of co-op housing at scale in Canada.”

There is $1.5 billion there. He ended with indigenous and northern housing. I am looking at the $300 million going towards indigenous and northern housing. Could the member comment on how we are finally getting a start where we need to see it?

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would say we are getting a start and we are talking about thousands now when it comes to co-op housing, but it falls far short of the 25,000 units we were building per year in the 1970s and 1980s. That is still 19,000 short of what we were doing then. How are we going to make up the gap?

Right now, the federal government's plan in terms of filling the workforce labour market shortage is to bring in new immigrants, but it does not tie housing to immigration. There are huge problems when it comes to the lack of cohesive planning, when it comes to housing and ensuring that we have a strong workforce.

In terms of indigenous housing, there is some money in the budget, which New Democrats helped negotiate, to get this agreement going. We talked about the agreement as the floor. We have much work to do. I have lots more to say on this, and I will.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciated the member's personal journey and story with co-op housing. I thought he did an excellent job, but I would like to ask him about the issues facing those who need government housing, particularly with inflation.

There are a lot of seniors in my riding who could use the housing described by the member. They live on very fixed incomes, so when inflation goes up 6% or 7%, that may not sound like a lot to folks in this room, but when people have only $100 a month for groceries, it is a lot and it really impacts their ability to eat well and feed themselves. We are seeing this impact families as well.

I would like the member to comment on the impact inflation is having on his constituents and whether he is at all concerned that the Liberal government is not addressing this.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, we have skyrocketing inflation, but we also have a skyrocketing concentration of wealth and skyrocketing inequality. We have seen grocery store prices and fuel prices go up. We see bank fees go up, and yet banks are having record profits. Grocery stores have record profits. Oil companies have record profits. How is that flowing down to seniors? How is that flowing down to Canadians? It is flowing down in increased costs to them and increased profits to the richest Canadians and shareholders.

What we need is some balance. Corporate taxes have gone from 28% to 15%, and yet people cannot find a place to live in our country. We need to bring a median to this situation and it needs to happen rapidly. Fairness is not happening right now. Inequality is skyrocketing, and we need to address that. It is part of the solution when it comes to taking on inflation and ensuring that people get the best support they can, and there is money. We can make sure that the wealthiest people can pay their fair share. That is a beginning in taking on this crisis, and we absolutely need to do more.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to support a point raised earlier in the House by the hon. member for North Island—Powell River and ask her colleague from Courtenay—Alberni if he is also concerned for seniors who served in our military and former judges, but particularly those who were in the military and the RCMP. Right now, if they remarry after age 65, they do not get to convey any survivor benefits to their surviving spouses. It is called the gold-digger clause, going back to former finance minister Bill Morneau. The Liberals promised to get rid of it, but they have not.

I wonder if the hon. member has any comments on that.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, it seems there is commonality in that not just veterans, but seniors are being targeted, and there needs to be more work. The gold-digger clause absolutely needs to be revoked. It is discriminatory to Canada's veterans, the people who put their lives on the line so that we have a fair and free society. We are indebted to them, and we owe them the benefits that every Canadian deserves. This is an unfair penalty on the very people we should be supporting the most.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, two weeks ago, I had the privilege of rising in the House to speak to the many ways that budget 2022 will improve the lives of Canadians. Today, I have the privilege to speak to how the rubber would hit the road with the budget implementation act.

There are so many topics I would like to cover, but in the short time I have, I am just going to choose one because we are finally setting in motion the changes that are outlined in this bill, and this is a topic that deserves debate in the chamber. These changes are increasing the transparency and accountability in our financial system and in land ownership through legislative changes that would result in the creation of a registry for beneficial ownership.

Canada has developed a reputation as a haven for money laundering, tax evasion and other financial crimes due to the relative sophistication of our banking sector and the opacity, which is a defining characteristic of our corporate and land ownership. This reputation has led Canada to have an internationally recognized term for money laundering, which is “snow washing”. It refers to the fact that anonymously owned corporations in Canada are presumed by banks and other financial institutions as being legitimate without the transparency that should underpin such a determination.

An expert panel on money laundering in B.C. real estate estimated that, in 2018, some $46 billion in list funds were laundered in Canada, much of it moving through real estate. The 2017 analysis by Transparency International found that Canada had the weakest corporate transparency rules in the G20, tied only with South Korea.

Why does this matter? Few realize that white-collar crime such as this has very real impacts, even if it may not be obvious from the beginning. The fact is that these vulnerabilities feed directly into the largest challenges we face in the present day. Consider the example of the Vancouver model of money laundering. In this model, opioids are shipped in large quantities from China to Canada as a way of Chinese residents moving capital out of China to the safe haven of Canada by evading the country's currency export controls of $50,000 U.S. per year. The proceeds from the drug trade are laundered through casinos or invested in, among other things, Canadian real estate, where it is purchased through blind trusts or numbered companies with the real owners obscured.

Money laundering not only supports criminals. It is also estimated to have contributed to a 5% increase in the price of housing in B.C. as of 2018. When studies show that we do not know the true owners of over half of the 100 most expensive properties in B.C., we know that it is not just causing more housing unaffordability, it may also be linked to tax evasion of our treatment of principal residences. Importantly, it is also fuelling the deadly health emergency we have in the province of B.C., which is the opioid epidemic. Dirty and dark money comes from both domestic and foreign sources.

In the House, it has been a source of great pride to see how members of all parties have come together to support our Ukrainian friends who have been victimized by the brutal invasion of Vladimir Putin. One of the main tools we have relied on has been the use of targeted sanctions on Putin's inner circle. This budget implementation act indeed contains measures that will create the conditions for the seizing and disposal of assets from sanctioned individuals. However, when the ownership of assets is undertaken through complex, international schemes of shell companies in countries that have similar opaque corporate registries, then we currently have very little ability to determine who the real owners of assets are in Canada, which are held in Canadian banks, and our sanctions, therefore, have limited effect.

It is abundantly clear that we need to act, and through measures in this budget, we are doing just that. We are reviewing and strengthening our anti-money laundering and terrorist financing regime by extending the current system to monitor payment service providers and crowd-funding platforms for money laundering and terrorist financing. About $90 million is provided to FINTRAC to significantly expand and modernize its ability to detect and prevent financial crime.

We are also taking the first steps to establish a new Canada financial crimes agency, which will become Canada's lead enforcement agency for financial crimes. This is important because we need to have financial and accounting experts in law enforcement and the public prosecution services to effectively tackle complex, white-collar crime cases.

Most importantly, we are amending the Canada Business Corporations Act to implement a public and searchable beneficial ownership registry, which would be available by the end of 2023. This will require that corporations report the identities of those who own and control significant portions of any corporation. It will allow law enforcement, the CRA, banks, journalists and the public at large to see exactly who owns any given company and ensure that criminals can no longer hide behind anonymous numbered corporations. Beneficial ownership registries are the gold standard when it comes to combatting corporate financial crime, and this has been recognized throughout the world.

In fact, this is not even going to be the first beneficial ownership registry in Canada, as B.C. has had a land registry since May 2019. However, unfortunately, what was supposed to be a world-leading system has been plagued by delays, unclear and poorly defined rules and heretofore a lack of compliance. The system should be in place by the end of this year, but that already puts it a year behind schedule. The registry currently has information on only 46,000 owners with a total of 73,000 properties, which is just a tiny fraction of the 2.2 million titles in British Columbia. Therefore, it is crucial that when we develop our federal beneficial ownership registry, we learn through some of the challenges that British Columbia has had and adopt some of the best practices that we can find from around the world.

The U.K., as one of the first countries to create a publicly accessible beneficial ownership registry, has one of the best systems in the world so far. U.K. companies are required to keep an up-to-date register of people with significant control over it, meaning anyone who holds more than 25% of the shares or voting rights of a company, either directly or indirectly, through another company or trust. Failure to comply with this is a criminal offence, not only for the company but also for the officers of the company. In the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the U.K. has expanded its register to apply to land ownership to give the government the ability to require identity verification for people who manage, control or just set up companies.

There are uniquely Canadian challenges that we will need to face as we build our own beneficial ownership registry. Unlike the U.K., Canada is a federal system where provinces and territories have jurisdiction over real property and for federally incorporated entities. This covers an enormous number of the entities that we need to have transparency on, so we will need to work with such partners to ensure that we have a national system that works. We have a national registry for money services businesses, regardless of where in Canada they are registered. This system was also created to combat money laundering and is centrally administered by FINTRAC.

There are many forms that this system could take, but what is most important is that the data is standardized to make it easier for law enforcement to analyze, for simplifying regulatory compliance and to minimize the regulatory burden on companies that operate in multiple jurisdictions in Canada. What is most important is that this registry be publicly accessible and free to access. This is important because we know that law enforcement has a limited capacity to monitor the millions of corporate structures in Canada. The public, particularly the press, has the ability to play a role to connect the dots and uncover wrongdoing that can assist in uncovering illegal actions as well.

To give an example of why this is important, I note that B.C.'s land ownership registry was not able to find any property owned by a sanctioned individual. It was only due to leaks that were involved in the Paradise papers that we were able to find a single piece of land in British Columbia, in the riding of the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, connected to a sanctioned individual. That really shows the value of investigative reporting.

I would like to end by saying the following. We know the impact of financial crime is deep and far-reaching. It is clear that we need to act decisively and think big to mitigate the negative effects of money laundering and tax evasion, and to catch those who are using Canadian property and corporations to transfer, hide and launder their money in Canada. Now is the time to take lessons learned from jurisdictions around the world, calibrate them to the Canadian context and develop a system that will make Canada a leader in preventing financial crime.

Budget 2022 contains the building blocks for a financial system that has more integrity, and I look forward to working with my colleagues from all parties in the House to pass this bill as a first step in getting dirty money out of Canada.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives have been talking for a very long time about the need for action on money laundering. It is a regular concern I hear from Canadians. It is a particular concern I hear from Canadians from diaspora communities, actually. They raise the fact that money in other countries is taken by corrupt dictatorial regimes and then brought to and used in Canada.

In that vein, I want to ask a question that has been specifically brought to me regularly by people in the Iranian community in Canada. They are concerned about this issue. They are also concerned about the IRGC, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The House of Commons voted to sanction the IRGC to list it as a terrorist entity, yet the government has not acted, despite the Liberals voting in favour of that listing motion three years ago. If we are not willing to identify terrorist organizations like the IRGC and list them under the Anti-terrorism Act, then we are missing out on a critical tool for combatting the kind of activities in which they might engage in Canada.

I wonder if the member has a comment specifically on the listing of the IRGC and whether that is something the government plans to do as part of a broader suite of measures. Also, why is there a delay?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, I think my hon. colleague's question speaks directly to the reasons why we need to move ahead on some of these measures. It is one thing to have a list of sanctions and individuals we are going to be sanctioning, but if we do not actually have the tools in place to ensure that we are able to go after the assets in Canada, those sanctions are not going to have significant effect.

In this budget implementation act, we have a number of measures that are going to allow us to do just that on beneficial ownership of companies. We have actions that are happening right across the country, in British Columbia and Manitoba and now Ontario as well. I would encourage the member opposite to talk to some of his colleagues in the provincial government in Alberta to see if they can start moving ahead with some of the measures that we need to have so we can move ahead with the measures that we need to bring in for sanctioned individuals.