House of Commons Hansard #378 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was businesses.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I know that the vote coming up on the legislation is of significance to all members. As we are using the hybrid system, I would like to get some clarity from you with regard to the voting.
For example, if individuals are appearing virtually, are they in fact obligated to have their jacket and tie on if they are male? I think it would be valuable to know.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
As always, we will allow members to vote even if they do not have their tie on. We just want a quick yay or nay, and that is it.
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by addressing some of the people in my riding.
I want to acknowledge the people who are still fighting for employment insurance reform, because they are already in the spring gap. They will not make it to Christmas. Never mind Christmas trees and all that; they will not even be able to put food on the table, not until April. They know all about vulnerability. Earlier, members were talking about sloppy, temporary half measures and so on, but these people have been waiting for more than 20 years, probably since the Axworthy reform, for a way to make it to the end of the year. That is why I want to acknowledge them and thank them for keeping up the fight, because this is another battle the entire Bloc Québécois is fighting.
I also want to acknowledge the people in my riding who live in remote communities. The government is talking about a 5% tax holiday for two months. However, there are people in my northern riding who live in isolated areas where there are no roads. There are sometimes boats and planes in the winter. Otherwise, people have to use snowmobiles to get around. These people are already struggling to afford groceries and the cost of living. They do not just need a 5% tax break so that they can buy a lavish amount of food or a case of champagne. I want to recognize the Canada Post employees who are on strike, but also the residents of the Lower North Shore, who are having a hard time right now because Canada Post is the only carrier in their area and one of the things it delivers is food.
That said, these are really tough times for everyone. It is not necessary to broaden our perspective to know that this bill is a bad piece of legislation. My colleague from Beauport—Limoilou explained that earlier, perhaps more calmly than I am now. I know she is very passionate and outspoken. She said that the bill is very flawed and that we cannot afford to support it.
First of all, people are going on and on about the idea of essentials. I have been hearing about all kinds of lists throughout the day. For example, a puzzle and a pair of dice are now essentials. This bill seeks to remove the 5% tax on dice, which will apparently bring great relief to part of the population for two months.
I know that is a ridiculous example. Not everyone is in a position to read bills, but I am, and I really have to wonder why the list contains toys and other items that will save people maybe a few pennies off the purchase price.
Of course, members have talked about food. My colleague talked a lot about that. This measure will not really help anyone. It will cover candy, catering services, alcohol, prepared foods, which are more expensive because they are prepared, and restaurant meals. I heard the party opposite say over and over again that, now, people will be able to go out to restaurants. For a family, dinner at a restaurant costs $100, $150 or sometimes even $200. For a family of four, five or six, going to a restaurant does not just cost $20. I have a family of six, and it is a lot more expensive than that. This measure does not cut it. This is not the kind of help that people need.
People here in Ottawa are living in a bubble. Perhaps the government should get out into the real world sometimes, rather than hastily cobbling a bill together without really thinking about how that bill will actually affect people. Then it might understand that this bill is not a real solution for ordinary folks.
My colleague opposite talked about heating, and I agree with him. Perhaps heating is an essential when compared to some of the items listed in the bill.
The Bloc Québécois has a problem with a second aspect of the bill. We tried as hard as we could to find a way to improve it, but we cannot amend the bill. We are in the House and things are moving very quickly. I saw it. Members were practically trying to keep me from speaking by saying that there was not really time for one last speech. Meanwhile, we had time for quite a few bells today. That is exactly why we need to take the time.
It is a technical issue. We are here as legislators to reflect and propose new ideas. We are not here simply to oppose in a foolish and stubborn way, but to oppose in order to improve things. Even if we are not voting in favour of the bill, the government still needs to listen the legislators. The Bloc Québécois proposed an amendment. I know that there are other parties that agree with this amendment proposed by my colleague from Shefford, who is calling for the bill to be studied in committee and for the Minister of Finance to come testify.
Legislation cannot simply be introduced like that. All of this was clearly improvised. Earlier, one of my colleagues from the Conservative Party said that December 14 was too late to buy a Christmas tree, even if it will supposedly be cheaper then. When a measure arrives this late, it is obvious that it was thrown together quickly in the hope that it will not be so bad and no one will notice the glaring flaws. That is truly what is happening. The Bloc Québécois would have liked to simply discuss it, but that is not going to happen. I can say that I had a taste of that medicine earlier.
I would also like to talk about other aspects, like business owners, for instance. This subject has come up a number of times, here and there. It is true that, as a society, Quebeckers are strong supporters of small businesses. My constituents on the north shore are no exception, and I cannot help but think about these businesses.
The government is proposing a measure, but it is not thinking about how things work in the real world. In a bar, it is not that easy to know what percentage of alcohol is going into a cocktail. Will it be exempt from the GST or not? Should bartenders start measuring everything proportionally to make sure they are really following the rules? Again, it may sound far-fetched and absurd, but we need to think of every possibility when drafting bills in order to see where the blind spots are.
It sounds like a great idea. Then again, I do not know if alcohol counts as an essential, although I do want to encourage our business owners. I thought of a joke there, but I am not going to share it. I was going to say that maybe alcohol is an essential for those who have to think about this bill. There, I said it. Still, we have to think about the blind spots and try to identify what is not working in the bills to help businesses. Walmart and Costco are not the only ones that will be selling discounted products. Sometimes I get the impression that the government is only thinking about them.
Where I live, we have a Walmart, but no Costco. We have some very small businesses too. These small businesses are going to have to change their programming, and that does not happen with a snap of the fingers. Changing programming takes technicians. Where are people supposed to find technicians when there is already a shortage of technicians? On top of that, this all needs to be done right across the country. That requires technicians, and they do not work for free. Then they have to come back again mid-February to do exactly the same thing. Small businesses have fewer staff and will be forced to take on an extra burden at their busiest time of the year. People may be getting a 5% tax break to go to a restaurant, which amounts to a $5 discount, but businesses are having to spend $3,000 out of pocket to implement this measure.
I would like to remind the government that businesses are owned by people. These are people who put their heart and soul into their business all the time, who work seven days a week, who are trying to improve their companies, who also have to hire people and who also have families. They are also going to be affected.
In light of all that, I am wondering whether this is really going to be worth it. The government has not considered all these consequences. They did not think it all through, so they assumed it would be easy. My colleague gave a detailed list of all the difficulties that businesses could face. They will have to identify which products are be tax-free. It could be tough.
I heard a government member say earlier that adult diapers would be exempt from the GST. I would have liked to ask him about that again. I checked the bill. I could not find it in there. I do not know where he saw that.
If it is hard for a government member to keep straight the contents of the bill he is defending, and if the government does not want us to study it in committee because it wants to move really quickly, why should we pass something like that? The member does not even know what is in his own bill. I do not have the bill in front of me. Let us say I have it here.
How are the businesses back home going to sort this out? How are the parents or the people buying the products going to sort this out? Are they going to walk around with a copy of the bill in their hands and look at the shelves and ponder whether the item is truly a soft toy with accessories? That is how it is worded in the bill. Are they going to check whether an item matches what is written in the bill? Is a parent really going to do that? In the bill, books are GST-exempt, but cut-out books are not. The parent will have to check the books to see if there are any cut-outs or stickers.
It will get complicated. I think it is too daunting. Consumers might not want to bother doing all that for the sake of 30¢. Maybe people will decide to take the item anyway because it is what they want, so who cares if it is not GST-exempt. I do not know if this measure is going to be as effective as the government thinks.
Members have been talking a lot about families. That makes sense. As my colleague from Beauport—Limoilou said, it is the holiday season. Of course, not everyone celebrates Christmas, but it is the holiday season. Yes, there will be celebrations and family gatherings, so we want to help people. At the same time, the date is arbitrary. The list of goods that will be exempt from the GST and the timing are both very arbitrary.
I am the mother of three children, two of whom are over the age of 14. Parents are well aware that there are certain times of year that are more difficult, and I want to stress the word “times”. Ideally, there should be a GST exemption on children's clothing year-round. That is a huge burden on families. Let us not forget that, every year, in August and September, we hear about how expensive back-to-school time is. Lunch boxes, school bags, school supplies, clothing: all of those things are expensive. Then, of course, parents have to pay to register their children in this or that activity. In short, yes, back to school is a very expensive time of year, and Christmas is too, so we need to ask ourselves another question. Is this measure needed only at Christmastime?
I saw costumes included on the list of products in the bill. Maybe people need costumes. In any case, there is a big difference between costumes and clothing. What do people really need? What is the government really trying to give people?
Once again, it all boils down to the same thing. I apologize for repeating myself, but there is no thinking behind this. I have not talked about it yet, and I myself do not understand why. It is probably because the idea behind the bill was not properly thought out.
It was not about making a perfect bill. The goal was probably just to grab some media attention by telling people that the government was going to hand out a goody, a big treat. People were led to believe that it was a treat. Anyone with any sense at all quickly realized that this makes no sense. It is really just electioneering, but they are trying to pass it off as a treat. I almost said they are giving people a trick instead of a treat. It is too easy to make puns with this bill.
I am about to wrap up. Maybe we need to think about other things. This measure tells people to spend money on things that are not necessarily useful. I am not saying people do not want to go to a buffet every now and then for a festive occasion, or that they do not feel like cooking some nights because they are exhausted. Sometimes I pick up a rotisserie chicken at the grocery store, and that is on the list of GST-exempt products. It happens to us, too.
That said, is spending really saving? They say they want to help people. Are people really saving when they are spending money or when the government is trying to make them spend more? As I said before, these are not essential things. The Liberal-NDP government is so proud of itself, but this is not actually saving.
Besides saving money, the other thing we are interested in this evening is not the GST part, it is the part that has been set aside for the time being, the $250 cheque. I hope we can get back to that, because I have just as much or more to say about it. It is a measure that excludes people. The GST measure excludes things that people might appreciate having a discount on. It excludes some products that could really help people. The $250 cheque excludes some people outright.
It excludes people who do not have a lot of money, like seniors and students. Students may decide not to work during the year so that they can focus on their studies. It also excludes people with disabilities. It excludes people and actually penalizes them, if members can believe it, for not currently being in the labour market.
When people need housing, when they need food, when they need clothing—we cannot forget Maslow's advice to always go back to basics—a bill like this one, or a one-time cheque for $250 that goes to a select number of people, is not what they need.
I would like to talk about the amount. The Bloc Québécois introduced a bill for seniors, Bill C-319, presented by my colleague from Shefford. It seeks to end discrimination. I just talked about discrimination when I spoke about the people who may be excluded from receiving the $250 cheque, but the same holds for seniors. We want to restore fairness and fix the situation, but the government refuses.
It says this would make the measure way too expensive. However, between the $250 cheques and the $1.7 billion, at a minimum, for the GST break, that is already double what the Bloc Québécois was asking for. This may be a clue that what the government is really trying to do with its tax break and its $250 cheque—which should of course be coming soon, although we might not get it until April—is simply buy votes.
As I read the bill, something occurred to me. It is important to have a sense of humour. People are going through a tough time. Our constituents are struggling. When a bill like this comes along and we get the impression that what will be exempt from GST is what people might need to celebrate Christmas and New Year's Day, or perhaps even the Epiphany, since the measures will be in effect until February, it occurred to me that it is a good thing this was not introduced at Easter.
Imagine if the bill had been introduced at Easter. What goodies would they have given out? We would have had tax-free chocolate eggs, little pet bunnies and maybe yellow, purple and pink clothing. I am being sarcastic, but when a bill like this comes along, it is not hard to believe that this was the degree of thought that went into it. It is all about buying votes.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
It being 8:18 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of Motion No. 43 under Government Business, which is now before the House.
The question is on the amendment.
May I dispense?
Government Business No. 43—Proceedings on Bill C-78Government Orders
Some hon. members
No.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
[Chair read text of amendment to House]
If a member participating in person wishes that the amendment be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
Mr. Speaker, I would like to request a recorded division.
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
I declare the amendment defeated.
The next question is on the main motion.
If a member participating in person wishes the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
moved that Bill C-78, An Act respecting temporary cost of living relief (affordability), be read the second time and referred to a committee of the whole.
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleagues on all sides of the House, and it is great to be here this evening to make life more affordable for Canadians while we continue to grow the economy. It is great to stand up when we are going through legislation that is going to provide tax relief during the Christmas season and into Valentine's Day for the benefit of all Canadians.
As the father of a three-year-old, like many parents, when I go to the Walmart, Costco or any store to buy diapers, children's diapers will be HST-free in Ontario. As an individual who grew up in a very humble household, every dollar counts, every little bit helps and I am so proud of that.
Also, as an economist and someone who had the chance to work on Wall Street and Bay Street for a number of years, it is great to see what a number of my former colleagues and people I have known for many years are commenting on exactly what Bill C-78 is. It is wonderful to see some of the remarks. I will just read one or two and then I will get into some other comments.
Benjamin Reitzes from BMO Economics said, “We're assuming a good chunk of the stimulus cheques will be saved, but the GST/HST rebate will drive additional spending. BMO Economics is boosting Q1 GDP growth from 1.7% to 2.5%, with 2024Q4 and 2025Q2” being even bigger and having a larger impact.
Derek Holt at Scotiabank said, “That, in turn, would lift GDP growth by about two percentage points above our baseline forecast.”
The Retail Council of Canada came out with some comments about its members and what they see: “Retail Council of Canada (RCC) welcomes today’s sales tax relief announcement from the federal government. The removal of GST and HST on a sizeable list of goods will create major tax savings for Canadians, along with economic stimulus for our industry”. Both—
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
Order. There are some people talking above the hon. member. I also notice a number of people behind the curtains, speaking as well. They are just curtains, and we can actually hear through the curtains.
I would ask everybody to keep the volume down a bit so the hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge can get his speech done.
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, I know that was not done intentionally by the hon. members.
Going back to my conversations about restaurants and the restaurant industry, the city of Vaughan is home to literally over 1,000 restaurants and food establishment services. As an individual of Canadian and Italian heritage, I am very proud of our cuisine, like all individuals in Canada, of whichever heritage we may be.
I know all the restaurants in Vaughan, especially in the January period when it is slower, are going to be benefiting from this. I think about Ciao Ragazzi, Tubbies, Perla, Osteria Gente, Via Mercanti, Giro D'Italia, Spizzico, Zafferano and all the wonderful restaurants. Their customers are not only going to benefit from the GST removal, a tax cut on the GST; they are also going to benefit on the equivalent side and get the full HST removed.
That, like I said earlier this evening, is a billion dollars just from the province side and another $600 million or $700 million, a $1.7-billion tax cut for the residents of the province of Ontario. I like tax cuts. I like reducing taxes for hard-working Canadians. I really encourage this.
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am always respectful when I am speaking. I will let the others chirp over there.
This is about making life more affordable for Canadians, which we are doing.
Anna Roberts Conservative King—Vaughan, ON
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, we heard this speech two hours ago and I think I questioned the member across the way—
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
That is debate, but it gives me the opportunity to say to keep the volume down so the member can finish.
The hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, making life more affordable for all Canadians and putting out social programs is what our government has been about. It is the Christmas season, so buon Natale, Feliz Navidad and merry Christmas. It is a beautiful time of year, and Canadians are going to have more money in their pockets. That is what this government is about.
We brought in a middle-income tax cut; the Conservatives voted against it. We brought in the Canada child benefit; the Conservatives voted against it. We brought in the Canada workers benefit; the Conservatives voted against it. We brought in a national early learning and day care program; the Conservatives voted against it.
We brought in a Canadian dental care plan, and over 21,000 individuals in my riding are already benefiting from it. We have not even offered it yet to 18- to 65-year-old Canadians, which will happen in 2025. Almost three million Canadians from coast to coast to coast are using this program, and over a million Canadians who have visited an oral health care provider have been provided $710 on average. There are seniors in my riding, across the city of Vaughan, who have not gone to the dentist in over 10 years because they could not afford it and now they are going. That is progress.
Let us be straight. Every Canadian needs to know that the party opposite will cut those programs. Every senior needs to know that the Conservatives will attempt to cut those programs. The Conservatives have indicated it. This is not a personal comment; this is a policy comment. The Liberals reduced income taxes for some, and we raised them for the wealthiest in this country. The Conservatives voted against that.
We must continue to help Canadians. Christmastime is coming, and in a few weeks, Canadians will gather with their families and their loved ones. They will go to church, like me, and do other things. Our Jewish community will celebrate Hanukkah. They are all going to be talking about how our government is saving them money.
The Liberals also want to introduce the working Canadians rebate for hard-working Canadians, and we will do it in the coming months. It is tax-free help because we know Canadians have been through a lot: the global pandemic, global inflation, a war in Ukraine, the events in the Middle East and a changing of administrations south of the border. There is a lot of uncertainty.
The one certainty Canadians can count on is a government that always has their backs, every day and every hour, and, with no pun intended, a government they can trust and have faith in and that keeps its word in what it will do and implement. For our hard-working seniors, that means a 10% increase in old age security for almost four million seniors. The retirement age was raised in Davos, Switzerland, when it was announced many years ago by a former Conservative government, from 65 to 67—
The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont
I know we have been here for a long time today and I know we have a lot of craziness going on tonight. Let us just bring debate on the bill back to the issue at hand.
The hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge.
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, I was saying that the former leader of the opposite party, who was in Switzerland, raised the retirement age from 65 to 67. There are bricklayers, electricians and labourers who work a very long time. Those extra two years of work are laborious. That is not fair to them. That is not fair to Canadians. It was not fair.
When we got elected, we promised we would return it, and we did. That is approximately $17,000 more in the pockets of retirees today than there was nine years ago. The opposition party, which was in government at the time, raised the retirement age without consultation, without doing it in this country, while it was overseas, just like that. We returned it. That is leadership.
On the middle-class income tax cut, literally billions of dollars will be returning to Canadians because we cut that middle tax bracket from 22% to about 20.5% in year one. We did that. On the Canada child care plan, $10-a-day day care is saving parents in my riding, including myself, and I am blessed, over $10,000 of after-tax income. We can do the math of what that means for before-tax income. We have continued to invest, and we will continue to invest.
There was a chart out the other day showing that rental construction in this country is booming right now. It is outpacing population growth because of the policies we have implemented. Going into Christmastime, in a few weeks, when we all get to spend time in our communities with our residents and our families, we should go to our local restaurants.
There are over 5,000 hard-working Canadians in Vaughan—Woodbridge right now who work for restaurants. They and their employers are going to see an uptick in business. Restaurants Canada has applauded this. It was there the day of the announcement because it is a great thing to do, and it is going to carry them over into January, which is a tough period for many businesses because of their seasonality. That is great news.
The Province of Ontario has signed with us for the national school food program, much like it did for the early learning and national day care plan. Again, they have joined us to provide tax relief to the residents of Ontario and to the wonderful citizens I am blessed to represent in the riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge. This is something we should applaud. This is progress we should applaud. Hard-working Canadians go to work every day, and they deserve a break.
We need to meet Canadians where they are today. As a son of very humble immigrants who came to this country and worked very hard at a pulp mill and a fish plant, I can say that every little bit helps. Every little bit helps all the time, and that is where we are at. The residents in my riding can put their trust in me. They have, and they will because we keep our word.
There is an old hockey adage from a few years ago where Patrick Roy was getting murmured out by another hockey player, and Patrick Roy said he puts his two rings in his ears, so he does not listen to the noise. I will not listen to the noise.
