Debates of April 25th, 2023

Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Madam Speaker, briefly, there are a number of exciting investments in budget 2023 to encourage numerous private, public utility and indigenous investments in critical minerals. I look forward to their implementation over the year and the years to come.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Madam Speaker, I rise in the House today to speak to a subject that could have been a source of hope for Canadians who are struggling to make ends meet, but that is not the case.

Sadly, this discussion is just a formality, since the costly and socialist NDP-Liberal coalition has control over the government for the next few years. In fact, that is how things will stay until the Conservatives are in power and give Canadians hope of regaining control over their wallets.

Until then, we can rise in the House, as I am doing, to criticize the mismanagement of public funds and oppose things that make no sense, such as budget 2023 tabled by the Government of Canada on March 28.

This discussion is important because it allows us to highlight the concerns of my Conservative colleagues, as well as the proposals being made on our side of the House to provide real help to people who are struggling because the Liberals do not understand the stress Canadians are under. If they really understood, they would have proposed a budget that made sense.

I am speaking here in a rather sombre economic context, namely Bill C‑47, the budget for 2023. It is hard to overlook the record rates of inflation we have been enduring in the past few months. I have been talking about this here in the House of Commons for three years now. The Minister of Finance told me that this was just a temporary situation, but, unlike her, I have always believed that we are dealing with structural inflation.

Structural inflation is caused solely by an abnormally rapid increase in the quantity of currency in relation to the country's volume of production. Since 2015, Canadians have been subjected to reckless Liberal tax policies which have led to a significant increase in government spending, at a time when that was not what the economy needed at all. The Liberals injected money into sectors that were doing well. Indeed, in my riding, entrepreneurs were telling me that they were taking the money because it was being offered to them, even though they did not need it. No one understood why the government was spending so much. Today, the result is clear. Inflation always catches up with the culprits.

I thought that the budget would include some fiscal restraint and a target year to achieve a balanced budget, but no. There was talk of 2027, but not anymore. The Liberals have completely eliminated “balanced budget” from their vocabulary. A return to balance seems all but impossible now. They think that money grows on trees. They open the tap and money flows out by the bucketful. Except that, in reality, in the real world, that is not how things work. The Liberals should review the principle of cause and effect. The cause is printing money to excess. The effect is inflation being where it is, the worst in 40 years.

The Liberals have plunged Canadians into an inflationary abyss. The Prime Minister has caused the highest rate of inflation in 40 years by doubling the national debt and increasing our debt more than any other prime minister in the history of Canada. What are the consequences? The cost of living for ordinary Canadians is rising. The cost of groceries is skyrocketing, as is the cost of gas. According to a recent poll, 74% of Quebeckers say that they are struggling to pay for their daily expenses such as groceries, gas and necessities. We are talking about workers who get up every morning to go to work so they can put food on the table for their families. We are talking about hard-working people who did everything they were told to do. They are no longer able to make ends meet because the Liberals have been totally irresponsible with the public purse for the past eight years. Furthermore, these workers' paycheques are shrinking because all the money goes to taxes, and now they are being told that this budget will represent $4,200 in additional costs for every household in Canada. Honestly.

I know that the Liberals are going to tell me about their grocery rebate, so let us talk about it. It is only a marketing ploy, because the grocery rebate is nothing more that the doubling of the GST. They should stop presenting it as a revolutionary idea. There is nothing new about it.

As we can see, there are numerous problems with this budget. The important thing to take away from this budget is that workers have been left behind, and they are not being compensated for their work. The Conservatives want to make work pay again by cutting taxes.

As for workers being left behind, I do not have to go very far to see a concrete example. I need only think of the workers at the Olymel plant in the riding of my colleague and friend from Beauce. These workers will be out of a job in the next few months, since the company has announced that it is closing the largest hog slaughterhouse and meat processing plant in Quebec. We are talking about 1,000 jobs lost in a municipality of 2,000 people. Once again, the government is in no hurry to act. Worse still, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food cannot be bothered to even mention it. It just goes to show that the Liberals are not there when Canadians need them.

In addition to the Liberal war on labour, there is also the issue of critical minerals. This issue is important in my riding. I am thinking particularly of the need to add phosphate to the list of critical minerals as soon as possible. I have been asking for this for a number of years in the House, as well as at the Standing Committee on International Trade, of which I am a member.

That is why I was anxious to see what the government was proposing in this budget for critical minerals. A passage on page 92 states, “In the past year, the federal government has taken action to fast-track the assessment of mining, energy, and other major projects”.

I would like to clarify that I hope the government does not really believe what it is saying there. Let us think about GNL. The government did not send a strong signal on this project. Hundreds of billions of dollars in investment projects were lost under the Liberal government because of its lack of leadership and because of Canadian taxation and Canadian regulations, which are not conducive to a good investment climate.

In the section of the budget that deals with major projects, there is $1.3 billion in funding over six years starting in 2022-23 for major project assessments and $10.6 million in funding to help critical minerals companies get permits and approvals. Sometimes the Liberals take us for fools. How can we trust the Liberals when it comes to meeting a deadline? This six-year time frame is far too long, and we know it will take longer than six years. The possibility of mining critical minerals like phosphate and the feasibility of using them in batteries will end long before that.

We need to give a helping hand to projects that are already well under way and that have already received authorization, such as Arianne Phosphate in Saguenay. We are a long way from that because, as I said before, the budget makes no mention at all of phosphate. We know how much it is needed for lithium iron phosphate batteries, which have many advantages, such as their longer life span, better charge efficiency and lightweight nature. Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean is home to the Arianne Phosphate mining company, which has one of the largest deposits of phosphate in Canada. The phosphate is also very high quality.

As I said, I am a member of the Standing Committee on International Trade, where I have often had the opportunity to talk about the usefulness of critical minerals in the economy. The findings of studies on batteries, particularly for electric vehicles, are always the same. In Canada, there is a real problem with regard to the cost and the time between discovery, extraction and production. Canada is currently extracting critical minerals for the new battery economy, but it is exporting them abroad for the manufacturing of finished products. How is it that Canada has still not developed a battery manufacturing chain, given all of Quebec's electrical expertise? I think that a big part of the answer lies in Canada's tax competitiveness and the government's top-down regulations.

In sum, this budget fails workers in every sector. Canadians are sick of being bribed with one-off cheques. We need to address the source of the problem instead of handing out cheques here and there. This waste of public money needs to stop. Canadians have had it with watching their money being thrown out the window by the Liberals. Week after week, we keep learning more about scandals involving taxpayers' money. Just look at the huge contract awarded to McKinsey. The government gave $120 million to consulting firms, representing $1,500 an hour in fees.

Time is running out, so let me say that a Conservative government will put Canadians first by stopping unnecessary spending and waste and by lowering taxes. Let us bring back common sense—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member is out of time. He can finish his remarks during questions and comments.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I heard the member talk, towards the end of his speech, specifically about the battery supply chain, questioning why we do not seem to be able to accomplish that in Canada. Meanwhile, I am wondering if he is aware that his own colleague, the member for Hastings—Lennox and Addington, which is the neighbouring riding to mine in Ontario, has the largest investment coming into her riding, in terms of battery manufacturing for electric vehicles. It will be the largest plant in North America, expanded on by the company Umicore, from Europe.

I am wondering if he is even aware of that, and how he thinks that will impact the supply chain.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Madam Speaker, these are investments in North America, but the question is, when will it actually happen? First of all, there are always delays and huge costs. It costs far too much. Taxation also needs to be reviewed, because all the delays and paperwork do not help us persuade foreign investors to come here. Everything is complicated. Projects that people think can be done quickly sometimes take two or three times as long as expected. There is also a question of timing. It is never the right place at the right time when projects need to be done.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from my neck of the woods for his remarks. I am also glad to see that the Minister of Health is here with us, because my question for my colleague is about health funding.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. parliamentary secretary on a point of order.

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

Madam Speaker, the member just referenced the presence in the House of a minister, a member of the House, and the member should not be making those references. Perhaps she can rethink the way to say that.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member is signalling to me that she understands that she should not refer to the presence of other members in the House, so I will let her continue with her intervention.

The hon. member for Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I apologize for my absent-mindedness. That caught my attention, and I forgot the rules of the House.

The government has been underfunding the health care systems of Quebec and the provinces for many years now. That has had a negative impact on the public finances of every province, Quebec's in particular. Because Quebec and the provinces have had to compensate for the federal government's underfunding of health care, they do not have enough money to invest in other important developments. I would like to know whether my colleague agrees that the federal government needs to contribute more to the health care systems so that Quebec and the provinces have more funds available for other things.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Madam Speaker, obviously, health transfers have been pretty minimal. They did not live up to the provinces' expectations. There comes a point when it is hard to understand why a lot more funding is not being transferred to the provinces for health care.

Basically, we have seen the current government waste a lot of money. We are talking about $120 million in contracts given to McKinsey, when many public servants could have done the work. We know that there was $500 billion in inflationary spending in two years. We are completely in the dark about how $200 billion of that $500 billion was spent. When a government cannot control its spending, it is extremely difficult to have a reasonable budget. This is creating significant scarcity in some very important areas.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, last week, when I was in the chamber, we spoke at great length about the position the Conservatives had for fixing the economy. Many of the brilliant solutions they advocated for were cutting taxes and cutting some of the most important revenue-generating aspects of the federal government, while not simultaneously talking about the services they would cut.

What services would the member cut if he and his party were to form government?

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Madam Speaker, I do not know why we are talking about cutting services. We just have to pay attention to the wasteful spending of the Liberals over there. If the government would control its spending and stop the waste, everything would be fine. I always have a problem with saying that services need to be cut. It is more a matter of putting the money in the right place.

[Rechie Valdez, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak about budget 2023 and, in particular, the recent announcements and significant initiatives taken by the federal government to improve the lives of millions of Canadians across the country. Budget 2023 has been designed to address some of the most pressing issues affecting Canadians, including affordability, education, health care and mental health. What I would like to highlight is how our government is supporting Canadians at many different life stages.

The most critical issue of affordability, which affects a vast number of Canadians, is an issue our government does not take lightly. In the riding of Mississauga—Streestville, I continue to hear about the rising cost of groceries, for example. The federal government has announced the grocery rebate, which will provide eligible couples with two children with up to an extra $467, single Canadians without children up to an extra $234 and seniors an extra $225, on average. This will be delivered through the goods and services tax credit mechanism and will help up to 11 million low- and modest-income Canadians and families, which is a significant step toward making daily essentials more affordable for those who need it the most.

I would like to thank all my colleagues from all parties in the House for voting to support the grocery rebate. Let us take a moment and think about the impact. That is 11 million low- and modest-income Canadians and families who will experience financial relief.

Affordability is important, and, as part of our government’s national housing strategy, I am excited to share that, with the help of our financial institutions, we started offering the tax-free first home savings account to Canadians as of April 1. I reflect on the time when my husband and I were married, 15 years ago. I remember how excited we were to start our life together, to buy our first home and start a family. Home ownership is a very important milestone for so many.

In last year’s budget, the government committed to introducing a tax-free first home savings account. This new registered plan will give prospective first-time homebuyers the ability to save up to $40,000 on a tax-free basis. As with a registered retirement savings plan, contributions will be tax-deductible and withdrawals to purchase a first home, including from investment income, will be non-taxable as well, like a tax-free savings account. It will be tax-free in, tax-free out. With this new tax-free first home savings account, 3.5 million families across Canada will be able to start saving for a new home.

In support of families, budget 2023 would assist Canadians as their families grow. After my husband and I settled into our first home, we started to grow our family. After our son Kyle was born and after maternity leave, I needed to get back to work. I relied on our local day care to ensure Kyle would be taken care of. When I was working in downtown Toronto, child care was very expensive. At that time, it cost an average family $1,500 to $1,700 per month or more, depending on the location one chose.

Since 2015, the government has been investing in the middle class, growing the economy and strengthening Canada’s social safety net. We continue to support 3.5 million families through the tax-free child care benefit. This year, families will be receiving up to $6,997 per child under the age of six and up to $5,903 per child aged six through 17.

Our government’s child care program is already seeing fees being cut by 50%, on average, which is delivering regulated child care that will cost an average of just $10 a day by 2026. This is incredible. We have already had six provinces and territories reduce child care fees to $10 a day or less as of April 2, while we are strengthening the child care system in Quebec with more child care spaces. This support will help parents and young families start their lives without worrying about any additional expenses. I wish I had had this when I had just gotten off maternity leave many years ago.

I also have more good news. The proportion of core-age women employed was 82% in March. This translates to close to seven million women aged 15 years and older being employed on a full-time basis. This is a huge win. In addition to child care, we have also enhanced the Canada workers benefit for our lowest-paid and often most essential workers, with up to $1,428 for a single worker without children and up to $2,461 for a family, as well as an additional $737 for workers with disabilities.

My son Kyle is entering high school soon, and, naturally, what is on my mind is his education. My parents, Norma and Zosimo, worked very hard when they immigrated to Canada so that my brother and I would be able to seek higher education in a post-secondary academic institution. I am truly grateful for all of their sacrifices.

We wanted to ensure that we are here to support families and young adults with their education. This is an important part of budget 2023 and a key priority. The federal government has announced several initiatives to help students across Canada. These include permanently eliminating interest on Canada student loans and ensuring that borrowers do not need to make payments on their loans until they earn at least $40,000 per year.

Our government would also increase Canada student grants by 40%, providing up to $4,200 for full-time students, and raise the interest-free Canada student loan limit from $210 to $300 per week of study. Additionally, the requirement for mature students, aged 22 years or older, to undergo credit screening in order to qualify for federal student grants and loans for the first time would be waived. This would support individuals looking to switch their career or get additional education to improve their existing knowledge and skills. This change would allow up to 1,000 additional students to benefit from federal aid in the coming year.

The next area I would like to speak about is health care. I would like to first take a moment to thank our frontline workers and health care workers for their continued care for us and for taking care of all our families.

As we look at budget 2023, we need to take into consideration the challenges that we faced during COVID-19 and the impact it had on our economy and health care system. We will work to ensure that we can recover as quickly and as effectively as possible. Health care is at the top of the minds of constituents in my riding, as well as all Canadians. This is why the government has laid out an ambitious plan to provide an additional $195.8 billion over 10 years in health transfers to provinces and territories, including $46.2 billion in new funding through the new Canada health transfer measures.

This funding would be used to improve and enhance the health care Canadians receive and is not intended to replace the planned health care spending of provinces and territories. Furthermore, the government would provide $2 billion in 2022-23 to address urgent pressures in emergency rooms, operating rooms and pediatric hospitals, building on $6.5 billion in top-ups provided throughout the pandemic.

On top of that, the government has also announced $25 billion over 10 years through a new set of bilateral agreements to address individual provincial and territorial health care needs. This includes expanding access to family health services, supporting health workers, reducing backlogs, increasing mental health and substance use support, and modernizing health systems.

A few months ago, I met with the Service Employees International Union and spoke directly with several personal support workers. I listened to their heartbreaking stories about what they endured during the pandemic. They spoke about how underpaid they are, considering how much they were required to work at the time. Considering their sacrifices, they deserve more. The government has listened to our health care workers and, as a result, will provide $1.7 billion over five years to support hourly wage increases for personal support workers and related professions. This funding aims to improve the health care Canadians receive. These additional investments are contingent on continued health care investments by provinces and territories.

I would like to highlight the importance of mental health supports, which have been a critical issue for Canadians during the pandemic. The government has proposed to provide up to $50 million over five years, starting in 2023-24, to Employment and Social Development Canada, to develop and test innovative solutions to strengthen the retirement savings of personal support workers without workplace retirement security coverage. This funding would go a long way toward helping those who work in this critical field. Furthermore, the government would also invest in expanding mental health and substance use support services for Canadians.

In conclusion, I would like to say that the initiatives announced in budget 2023 would be a significant step forward toward improving the lives of millions of Canadians across the country from many different walks of life. From making daily essentials more affordable to enhancing health care, education, and mental health supports, the government is committed to making Canada a better place for all its citizens and tackling the most pressing issues we face.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, since we began debating the budget bill, I have asked government members many questions about the housing crisis.

There is absolutely nothing in the budget to address the housing crisis. They themselves admit it and say that they invested in housing last year. Yes, but there is still a crisis this year. The National Housing Council released a study last week showing that, between 2011 and 2021, Canada lost 550,000 affordable housing units, meaning housing that rents for about $750. That is Canada-wide. Not only does the national strategy, which was launched five years ago, not create housing that people can afford, but we are also losing housing.

The National Housing Council believes that there should be a fund to purchase private housing and turn it into non-market housing in order to maintain affordability. Does my colleague think this would be a good measure?

[Rechie Valdez, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Madam Speaker, housing is certainly a priority for us as well. I know that the Minister of Housing is committed to ensuring that initiatives, like the rapid housing initiative, which is part of our overall Canada housing strategy, will continue to help Canadians be supported across this country.

In my riding, there are many different housing initiatives that we have continued to support. That will help ensure that even the lowest-income constituents get the help they need.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Madam Speaker, in her comments the member opposite spoke a bit about health care and the importance of strengthening the health care system.

I would like her comments on a recent announcement by the Leader of the Opposition. It is a proposal to have a national accreditation, a blue seal, for health care workers, whether they are new Canadians coming into the country or those looking to work in other provinces.

We should be investigating this and looking at the many ways we can be breaking down the barriers to ensure that health care workers can work in their field anywhere in this country. To my knowledge, the Liberals have not made any comments regarding that proposal.

Can the member share any comments on that?

[Rechie Valdez, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I indicated in my speech, our focus is definitely on health care. I want to give a shout-out to my mom, who is a registered nurse. She worked really hard to get her credentials recognized in this country.

I am going to continue to work with my colleagues across the way to continue supporting our Canadians in health care.

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

Madam Speaker, I think it is important that we work across party lines to put forward real solutions for people. One thing I was happy to see in the budget was the red dress alert that is being put in place. It is something similar to an Amber Alert which is being put in place regarding missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people so we have a platform to alert when something has happened. It is a very good resource.

Despite this particular piece in the budget, we are not seeing the level of investment and resources needed to address the crisis being experienced with ongoing murdered and missing indigenous women. Why are we not seeing that prioritized and when will we see that done?

[Rechie Valdez, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her advocacy for indigenous peoples across Canada.

I agree the effort that we put into our budget with the red dress initiative is definitely one step; however, there is so much more work that can be done. I hope we will continue to work together to address those concerns for those who need it most, particularly indigenous peoples.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-47, the budget implementation act.

Before I begin my speech, I hope my colleagues will humour me while I take a brief moment to wish my daughter, Maddie, a very happy 16th birthday.

There is a lot in this bill, of course, and I want to start by providing a few words about dental care, which is the most significant, optimistic and powerful policies contained within this legislation. I hear all the time from seniors, young families and people who do not have dental insurance and cannot afford to get their teeth fixed. They are so excited to see dental care finally coming in this bill, and it cannot come soon enough. It is the most significant expansion of public health care in a generation. It is going to make a difference for some nine million Canadians, including folks in Skeena—Bulkley Valley in the beautiful northwest of British Columbia, which is the area I am so proud to represent.

Today I want to focus on the portions of Bill C-47 that deal with air passenger rights. As the NDP's transport critic, this has been my preoccupation over the past year or so. It is something we studied at the transport committee and it is something the Minister of Transport has chosen to slip into this budget implementation act in order to, what he claims, finally fix air passenger rights in this country.

The Liberals brought in their air passenger protection legislation back in 2019. The former minister of transport brought it in to great fanfare. He claimed that it was going to be a world-leading approach and that air passengers were finally going to have a government that would have their backs, yet what we have seen over the past four years has been anything but world-leading.

We have seen thousands of Canadians put in extraordinarily difficult situations by the big airlines. We have seen passengers sleeping on airport floors. We have seen families having to miss much-awaited vacations and trips. We have seen people out thousands of dollars. This system the Liberals claimed was going to be world-leading and was going to have air passengers' backs has really left people in a lurch.

What we see before us in Bill C-47 is the government's third attempt at fixing this problem. Of course, this problem exists because the big airlines make commercial decisions that delay and cancel flights and leave passengers picking up the slack. What we have seen in other parts of the world, particularly in the European Union, are effective approaches that get passengers compensation when that happens, and yet the approach we have seen here in Canada has not succeeded in protecting air passenger rights.

In fact, right now there are over 44,000 complaints before the Canadian Transportation Agency. Who are these folks? These are the most determined air travellers. I say “determined” because they have the fortitude to navigate not one but two complaint processes. Under the Liberals' current system, not only does a passenger need to complain to the airline and wait 30 days for a response, but when the airline almost inevitably declines their claim for compensation, they need to file a complaint with the Canadian Transportation Agency and then wait in line while this very complex bureaucratic and expensive process runs its course. Right now the wait time to proceed through that complaint process is over a year and a half.

As I said, the transport committee has been studying this issue. We heard from the leading consumer advocates working on air passenger rights in this country. We heard from all sorts of witnesses and put together a report with a whole host of recommendations aimed at finally bringing Canada's air passenger protection regime up to the standards set by the European Union.

I also had a chance, about a month ago, to table in this place a private member's bill, Bill C-327, the strengthening air passenger protection act, which aims to lay out in legislation precisely which changes are required to create a robust regime of air passenger protections in this country. Then the Minister of Transport brought forward his proposed changes, this third attempt at fixing air passenger protections.

I want to start by giving credit where credit is due. There are a couple of things in this new approach that have been called for fairly consistently by advocates and by me through my private member's bill. One is increases to the fines within the legislation that can be levied against airlines that continue to break the rules and not award compensation as they should. There are other pieces in the legislation, particularly around delayed baggage, that have also been called for, so there are a couple of things the minister got right.

One of the key concerns with Canada's current system is a loophole that exists in the Canadian Transportation Act. Unlike the European system which sets out a very simple two-category classification system for flight disruptions, our system has three categories. In Europe, disruptions, which are cancellations or delays, are considered either ordinary disruptions, such as things that fall within the reasonable influence of the carrier, or extraordinary disruptions, things like major weather events, acts of terrorism or recalls by the airplane manufacturer. Nobody is suggesting that airlines should be held accountable for factors entirely outside of their influence, but we have been seeing airlines deny compensation for factors within their influence that cause delays and cancellations, such as making sure they have enough crew to fly the flights, ensuring the aircraft are properly maintained, and ensuring their computer system is working properly.

This bill was intended to fix that. Everyone knows this loophole exists. It has been a matter of much conversation and debate. The minister claims to have fixed this loophole in the legislation that is before us. I do not see it. When I look at the section of the Canadian Transportation Act where this loophole exists, I see those same three categories.

The category that is particularly problematic here in Canada is the category of disruptions that are within an airline's control but are required for safety reasons. When we are talking about companies that fly passengers around in aluminum tubes at 30,000 feet, I think pretty much everything related to that industry is related to safety. The issue here is that airlines are making decisions within their sphere of influence that are causing real hardships for air passengers. In those cases, passengers should be compensated and treated well.

There are other things in Bill C-47 around air passenger rights that are very concerning. I had a chance to speak to this earlier today. One aspect is essentially a gag order on passengers who pursue complaints through the Canadian Transportation Agency. It states:

All matters related to the process of dealing with a complaint shall be kept confidential, unless the complainant and the carrier otherwise agree”.

If Canadian air passengers file a complaint with the CTA , go through its resolution process and are not happy with how they are treated or the outcome, this legislation is going to prevent them from talking about it. If the minister is truly proud of this system he has put forward, why is he silencing the people who will be using it? It is incredible.

We are at a point now where the minister has claimed to have closed the loophole. He and I have had this conversation. He said that a lot of it will be forthcoming in regulations, which we have not yet seen, sort of like the answer to my questions will be self-evident over the next rise. He is empowering the CTA with a tremendous amount of discretion over this process instead of making the changes in the legislation itself. That is the process we wanted to see, yet what we see falls well short of that mark.

Another issue we see is with respect to transparency and the amount of information the CTA provides. We think the amount of compensation paid through this complaint process should be part of the disclosure. That is something we will be working on when it comes to amending this bill.

I will end with this. Canadians deserve real protections that are easy to navigate and get them their compensation. That is what we will keep fighting for.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport]

Madam Speaker, I prepared a question about the budget. My colleague's speech was about a lot of things as he acknowledged that the budget is about a lot of things. There are a lot of Canadians and a lot of concerns out there. It does cover a lot of bases.

Two of the things that I am the most proud to bring to my constituents are two programs that are going to help them a lot: the dental care program and the grocery rebate. I have been out there talking to them, knocking on their doors and answering their phone calls. In my constituency just over 1,000 young people have been supported by the dental care program. That means 1,000 smiles will be brighter and cleaner, thanks to our dental care benefit. The grocery benefit is going to support 11 million households across the country with up to $467.

These are really phenomenal measures that are going to support our neighbours. I was wondering if my colleague had any reflections on dental care or the grocery rebate.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, one of the things I think we can be proudest of as Canadians is that starting in the 1960s, we said that every Canadian, regardless of their income, deserved the dignity of access to adequate health care. We have known right from the very beginning that health care does not just include going to the doctor. It includes being able to afford the medications that doctor prescribes. It includes eye care. It includes mental health care and it includes dental care.

We know that oral health is so integral to our overall health and yet there are millions of Canadians who cannot afford to visit a dentist. Frankly, it is shameful that it has taken this long for us to get to this point. We in the NDP have been pushing for it from the very beginning. I am so proud that we have been able to get to a place where we have leveraged our position in this minority Parliament to finally get dental care for millions of Canadians.

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

Madam Speaker, my colleague did talk a little about the dental program and I would like to just ask him this. Former premier John Horgan, when he was the head of the Council of the Federation, encouraged the federal government to not seek new national programs when important programs such as health care need reinforcement.

I am sure the member knows of the drastic needs of rural communities for health care funding. Former Premier Horgan had said to not add any new social programs; reinforce the current ones like health care. What does he think of this when someone who led his own party provincially said that this is not a priority and now he says this is? How does he square that?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member's question was whether I agree with remarks by a former premier. I think that former premier would agree that the health of our teeth, oral health, is integral to our overall health. Dental care is going to help millions of Canadians.

We also need to be investing heavily in our overall health care system and ensuring that coming out of the pandemic, our health care workers and our hospitals have the resources that they need to function effectively.

However, this is going to help millions of Canadians and I know that my party and many people right across the country support it, moving forward.