Debates of Nov. 28th, 2024

Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent to see the clock as 6:30 p.m. so we can get back to Government Orders.

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

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion and of the amendment.

Government Business No. 43—Proceedings on Bill C-78

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, what we have before us tonight, as I mentioned before, is part of a broader, desperate gimmick that the Liberals cobbled together on a napkin somewhere with the hope that the NDP, the Bloc and their backbench would sustain the government a little longer. They cannot, so we are down to this GST bill. I will vote against it. I oppose the government's agenda.

We need a serious government that will tackle serious problems in a meaningful and comprehensive way. We have a national security crisis, a public safety crisis and an out-of-control budget crisis. We need to axe the carbon tax that makes life more expensive for all Canadians and fix the budget.

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

Madam Speaker, the member said he is going to be voting against a tax break, the GST holiday. I will quote from the Conservative election platform from when he knocked on doors. Under the heading “GST Holiday” it says, “To help families and help our hard-hit retail stores recover, Canada’s Conservatives will implement a month-long GST holiday”. Ours is two months. The leader at the time, Erin O'Toole, tweeted that it was going to be in December, a GST holiday tax break. The current leader of the Conservative Party retweeted that tweet.

I am wondering why the Conservatives have had this road to Damascus turnaround, a huge flip-flop. It was a good idea when the Conservatives made it a part of their election platform, but it is a bad idea now because they do not want to help Canadians.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, it was a heck of a lot easier to administer an across-the-board cut on all products for one month than this bizarre, cobbled-together laundry list the Liberals have created, but that is beside the point.

The point is that I have no confidence in the government. I will not vote in favour of a budgetary tax measure, a money bill. I am not going to vote for it and I am proud to oppose the government.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I asked the government members some questions earlier, but I did not really get any answers, so here is my question.

Does my hon. colleague think that the most vulnerable people, such as single mothers, low-income seniors and low-income families, are the people covered by this bill and those who can afford to spend money on catering and champagne?

I would also like my colleague to explain how he would define clothing for 14-year-olds. When my son was 14, he wore size 14 shoes and was over six feet tall. Would his clothes qualify? He was certainly the right age.

Perhaps my colleague could provide some details that the government could not.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member is absolutely right. It was an excellent but leading question. She suggested that this whole system is arbitrary and strange and will benefit wealthier Canadians. People who perhaps buy large quantities of things in January, such as a year's supply of beer or wine, and warehouse it, can do so, but these are the better capitalized Canadians who have more money, not the people who need it the most. The member is absolutely right about that.

I have no confidence in the government and I am not going to vote for its bill.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have a question related to my hon. colleague's response to the last member on what is fair for Canadians.

I do not think it was necessarily fair for Canadians when Stephen Harper, the last Conservative prime minister, gave billionaires $60 billion in tax breaks. The Liberals continued that, unfortunately. The tradition in Canada seems to be that when one of the major parties does a great deal for billionaires, the next party that comes in keeps it and it goes back and forth like that. Liberals and Conservatives are always going to bat for billionaires.

Would the member comment directly on the fact that the Conservatives gave billionaires $60 billion? Will he actually address that question? Will he have the courage to address why Conservatives did that?

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, the previous government did no such thing. I reject the premise of the member's question.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, I can see the member opposite is uncomfortable answering a reality and a truth, which is that when Conservatives are in power, they are always giving their rich friends a bunch of money, taxpayer dollars. Why?

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I answered his question. It contains a ridiculous premise that I reject, and so there is no answer for that question. It is a non-question.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is really wonderful to see you again. I thought the last time I would see you before the holidays was my last speech a couple of days ago, but it is a delight to see you in the chair again this evening.

It is a pleasure to rise on behalf of the constituents and residents of Simcoe North to talk about a very important issue. We are talking about tax relief for Canadians. If government members wanted to provide relief to Canadians, they would have done it in an easy way. They would have taken the GST off of everything. They would have made it administratively simple.

The Liberals want to talk about how in the previous election campaign, the Conservative leader at the time and the Conservative Party campaigned on a cut. They are trying to say this is the exact same cut the Conservatives ran on in the 2021 campaign. That is false. The Conservatives ran on a one-month GST holiday on everything: on fuel, on food, on every single item GST is charged on. That is not the same plan the government is proposing here today.

We should also talk about control. This is yet another example of the Prime Minister wanting to control our lives. He wants to give us a tax break, but only on the things he agrees we should get that tax break on. Let us go through the list. If I want to buy a hard copy of the Toronto Star, that counts for the tax break, but if I want to buy the renowned magazine The Walrus, I still have to pay GST. Christmas trees are on the list, thank God, but not decorations. I cannot buy that star to put on the top of the tree to get that tax break. I cannot buy that wreath to hang on the door to get that tax break.

Jigsaw puzzles are on the list. I can spend three weeks hiding out, putting that 1,000-piece puzzle together, but if I want to build something in my garage and use a jigsaw, I do not get the tax break on that. If I want to put my feet up and have a Coors Light, it is under 7% so there is no GST, but if I want to have a Boneshaker, at 7.1%, from Amsterdam Brewery, it is not going to be on the list. Maybe someone wants to go and talk to the Kingston brewery that makes Oats & Cream IPA, which has over 7% alcohol. It is not on the list.

Let us talk about some other things: candy and snacks. Why on earth would a government specifically single out sugar for a tax break, when many stakeholders, like Diabetes Canada, the Heart and Stroke Foundation, and the Canadian Cancer Society, have been promoting a special sugar tax? I do not think they are too happy with this tax break. Also, the Canadian Cancer Society came out publicly and said the government should not be taking tax off of alcohol.

Why are the Liberals picking and choosing these special things we might put in our grocery carts? Some are in and some are out. It is absurd. It is a list that only pointy heads in some government agency or department could put together.

I was at a local restaurant last night, a wonderfully run restaurant, and the proprietor said, “I do not even know how these rules are supposed to work. I called the GST line at CRA, and they did not even know how they are supposed to work. What if I am selling tickets to a party that has food and beverages, but some of the spirits do not have the the tax break and some do, and I am selling food, and I am selling those tickets today for a party that happens on New Year's? Do I charge the HST on those tickets today?” It is unclear. It is completely absurd.

The government should have either taken the tax off of everything or left it on everything. That is not to mention that we are in a deficit position. If the government had said it was going to spend $2 billion on this, and this is where it found the savings to pay for it, maybe that would have been a different conversation.

Let us talk about the NDP. A previous principled NDP stood in this place and decried, absolutely criticized, reducing the GST. Why is that? NDP members criticized reducing the GST because, as I will quote from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, which the NDP likes to quote very often in the House, imagine a tax cut that you only get when you buy stuff. In relation to GST cuts in a previous government, it said that this was a tax cut that disproportionately favoured high-income families. For every dollar of this tax cut received by low-income families, $3 went to families who were not low income.

What could the government have done? The government could have just doubled the GST credit, which, by the way, had the support of all major parties in the House just two years ago. Every party in the House agreed to increase the GST rebate cheque that goes to low-income households. Eleven million people would have doubled up on the payment that they got.

We believe that we should help the lowest-income people possible, but this is not a measure targeted to low-income people. This measure goes to every single Canadian, whether they need it or not. It is costly to administer and it is also costly to the treasury. The government is already in a deficit position. It could have come up with a dollar-for-dollar rule, to say that this is how it is going to pay for it.

Let us also remember, just two weeks ago, that the Governor of the Bank of Canada said, “The fight against inflation is not over”. When a government runs deficits, that is fiscal stimulus. The Governor of the Bank of Canada also said, almost two years ago, that if you want to help people with the effects of inflation, or those that have a problem with affordability, those measures should be very targeted.

It would have been very targeted to give an additional doubling of the GST/HST credit that low-income individuals have. It would have only gone to 11 million people. It would have reduced the overall cost. It would have been administratively very easy to deliver. We would have just doubled the payment.

By the way, when we talk about the cheques that will be going out, guess what? The people in this chamber get the cheques. Why on earth would they design a program to give cheques to members of Parliament when there are low-income people who do not work, like seniors who do not work or people with disabilities who do not work, who get nothing?

It makes absolutely no sense. Not only that, economists said, just two weeks ago, before this announcement, that the Bank of Canada was on track to reduce the interest rates by 50 basis points. Those same economists now say that the Bank of Canada cannot reduce as much. It might only reduce by 25 basis points or hold interest rates steady.

That means that when politicians spend, Canadians pay more for their mortgages. Conservatives are for permanent tax reductions, shrinking the size of the deficit and making sure that Canadians have more money in their pockets long term.

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

Madam Speaker, wow, that is unbelievable. I have been sitting here, for 10 minutes, listening to a Conservative member talk about taking care of the most vulnerable people in our community like he somehow cares. Are we kidding? He is trying to lecture us on giving supports for the most vulnerable in our communities. He has voted against every single measure. His former government, the Conservative government of Stephen Harper, told seniors that they had to work two more years before they could retire. On every measure we brought along, lowering the tax on the middle class, increasing OAS, increasing GIS, he voted against and his party voted against.

Is he now going to stand up in here and lecture us on taking care of the most vulnerable in our community?

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Madam Speaker, this is the member whose party created two tiers of seniors in this country, those who are below 75 and those who are above 75.

For the record, maybe that member needs to get some facts straight. Conservatives on this side of the House decided to vote in favour of doubling the GST credit that went to the poorest households in this country. I have no idea what that member has been thinking about or who he is talking to or where he is getting his facts, but he should double-check them before he stands up in this House.

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

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to my Conservative colleague's speech, and there is something I do not understand. The Conservative Party tells us that we need to reduce taxes and, for once, the Liberals are doing just that. They have taken up the NDP's proposal to help people out with basics and essentials like groceries, food, children's clothing and diapers. The Conservative Party keeps repeating the slogan about needing to destroy taxes, lower people's taxes and ease financial pressure. This time, the Conservatives are singing a different tune with a monumental reversal that contradicts their 2021 promise by refusing to give a break to people who need one.

How does the member explain this change of position by the Conservatives?

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Madam Speaker, why do they not just take the GST off everything and reduce government expenditures to pay for it? There is a problem. We do not have enough money. I have been around this town for three years, and I still cannot find the money tree that these parties think exists in this town. Why do they think we have to keep spending with deficits?

Not only that, the NDP asked for taxes off heating bills and cellphone bills. The government is not even doing that. By the way, as we talk about staples, what about fuel? Why not take the GST off fuel? Maybe that would have been a little more palatable for people as they travel over the Christmas holidays, the winter holidays or whatever religious holidays they observe.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Madam Speaker, I know the member for Simcoe North speaks a lot with the constituents in his riding. I want him to comment on whether his constituents agree that our tax system is far too complicated, and whether it might be smarter to have a simpler, fairer, lower tax system for Canadians.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Madam Speaker, what an excellent question and astute observation from my friend from Perth—Wellington. He absolutely nailed it.

People are going to spend so much time trying to figure out what is in and what is out, and retooling their machines, when the government could have easily just said that for the whole month or the whole two months, it is going to take the GST off everything. It would have been far simpler for people to manage. There is no question about it.

That is why after the next election, there will be a special tax task force to bring production home, to simplify the tax code and to grow our economy.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have a little time for him. The member just admitted something.

The Conservative plan back in 2021 would have taken the tax off everything. I would appreciate the member's reaction to this scenario. Somebody goes out and they buy a present for their little one for $25, and taking the tax off saves them $1.25. Somebody goes out and treats themselves to a $25,000 watch, and they are saving $1,250.

It seems that once again the Conservatives are tilting the playing field toward those who can spend the most. Can he comment on that?

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is an interesting question, but if the member just swapped what he was talking about for food, the exact same thing applies to what the government is doing.

If someone was to take their friends out for a nice dinner and spends $10,000 on food, which a number of well-meaning people might actually be deciding to do after this, they would get a huge tax break. However, as I said before, if people want to buy decorations for their Christmas tree, they are not on the list. It actually does not make any sense, and—

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

We are way over time.

Resuming debate, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for London North Centre.

I am thankful for the opportunity today to debate Bill C-78.

The past few years have been challenging. It feels like the price of everything has gone up, thanks to global inflation and the need for central banks all over the world to raise interest rates in response to the after-effects of a once-in-a-generation global pandemic. While inflation has cooled and interest rates are dropping, we know that Canadians are not feeling that in their household budgets quite yet. Our government obviously cannot set prices at the checkout, but we can leave Canadians with more money in their pocket to help them afford the things they need and save for the things they want, which is where the measures in Bill C-78 come into effect.

Starting December 14, we are proposing to give a tax break to all Canadians. With a GST/HST exemption across the country, Canadians would be able to buy things like prepared foods, snacks, kids' clothing, Christmas trees, books, puzzles and other children's toys, all tax-free. Lasting until February 15, 2025, this tax break would essentially make all food GST/HST-free and would deliver meaningful savings for Canadians with real relief at the cash register. This relief is about saying to Canadians: “Yes, things have been hard, but they are going to get better.”

Inflation was at 2% in October, which means that inflation has been within the Bank of Canada's target range all year long. The bank has cut interest rates four times now this year. Our economy looks like it is having a soft landing from a COVID recession. We are providing this new support for Canadians who have really gotten our country through a tough time. We are counting on powering a very strong recovery at the end of this year and the beginning of next year.

This new support is about making life a little bit easier at this time of year when costs are highest, because we have the space now to do it. With good economic news, and I just mentioned inflation cooling and interest rates dropping, we are able to do so in a way that is not going to stimulate inflation, but rather is going to help make ends meet and continue our economic growth.

Canada has one of the strongest balance sheets in the world, and the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. We have a strong fiscal position, and we are putting it to work to support Canadians with our temporary GST/HST relief. This can also help sustain the pace of our economic recovery. For example, consumer spending per capita has remained somewhat subdued, reflecting a lowering of household purchasing power due to higher inflation, elevated shelter costs and the impact of high interest rates over the past two years. Thankfully, inflation has cooled, interest rates are coming down and our government is delivering a plan to make housing more affordable. However, with some heightened global economic uncertainty, we have witnessed consumers and businesses adopting a more cautious approach when it comes to spending. We all know that the effects of lower interest rates can take time to be felt throughout the economy and make their way to impacting the pocketbooks of everyday Canadians.

Really, the Canadian economy has been operating below its potential capacity for over a year. This has largely been by design, as excess supply has put downward pressure on inflation, and as the monetary policy decisions from the Bank of Canada and other central banks around the world have done their job to stabilize inflation. Rather than reignite inflation, this time the GST relief would simply help Canadians to bridge that gap. It would build on actions that are already saving families and individuals thousands of dollars a year, like the Canada-wide $10-a-day child care system, which has already cut fees for regulated child care to an average of $10 a day or less in over half of all provinces and territories and by 50% or more in all the others. The Canadian dental care plan and the national school food program are saving Canadians hundreds of dollars a year, especially for those Canadians who are least able to carry the costs associated with those expenses. The Canada child benefit continues to lift children out of poverty, and then the Canada workers benefit provides a meaningful boost to our lowest-paid and often most essential workers. These are just a few of the ways that our government is already supporting Canadians, making everyday items cost less and putting more money back into middle-class pockets.

With Bill C-78, we want to deliver new tax relief on groceries and seasonal expenses. This is about helping Canadians celebrate with family and friends and starting 2025 with a little extra money in their pockets. With Bill C-78, we can make life a bit easier, so Canadians have more money for the things they want.

Please join me in calling for all parties to quickly and unanimously pass this legislation.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Madam Speaker, how is it that the member sees this as putting more money in people's pockets, or, to be more accurate, more of their own money back in their pockets, when the funds to help them out will come in April when the government is raising the carbon tax, quadrupling it, and totally nullifying anything that they would be doing with those funds?