Debates of Nov. 28th, 2024

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

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Madam Speaker, this is the House of Commons. As members of Parliament, we represent our constituents, so I am going to allow one of my constituents to answer that question. They wrote, “Ridiculous. No break on groceries, fuels or utilities. I was just reading the PM's plan to take a tax break, and I am not impressed. First off, we all know the government will want to recover this lost revenue later, and that will hit our wallets again. The GST holiday is crazy.”

I could not agree more. My constituents understand, as I just illustrated, that this is a trick that is incredibly complex for our small businesses. We have been talking about this for a long time. Only Conservatives are committed to real tax relief for hard-working Canadian families.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I saw that my colleague had the bill in front of him and was reading out the various products covered by the bill. The government keeps saying that these are essential products, truly essential. They keep repeating the word “essential”. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on the list he read.

When champagne is included in the list of tax-free products, are we really talking about essential needs?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Madam Speaker, that is what is so perplexing about this. The essentials Canadians are really struggling to pay for right now, based on what I hear from my constituents, are fuel for their vehicle to get themselves to work and get their kids to school, food to put on their table, heating their home and paying their mortgage or rent. Canadians are suffering as they try to pay for these essentials. Those are the exact expenses we on this side of the House are addressing with our commitment to axe the carbon tax that has increased the cost of all those things.

What I listed off, from what this government is doing, is a confusing list where they purport to cut maybe the cost of a leotard, but then not the cost of skates or ski boots. They purport to cut the cost of a magazine, but only if it has less than 5% advertising. They have created a monster. They know it. It was rushed out, and Canadians deserve so much better.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member mentioned in his speech that it would be fantastic if we had no GST on utilities. Well, he had the chance. The member and every Conservative had the chance to remove GST from all home heating. New Democrats fought for that in the last term. The two major parties, the Liberals and the Conservatives, joined up and voted against GST removal from utilities. How disingenuous that the member says now, “What if we had an opportunity to get GST off home heating?” Shame on him that he would vote against that measure and then come to this place and try to say the opposite.

Does he have anything to say to explain why he voted against it?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Madam Speaker, where do I begin? This is a government that has increased the cost on Canadians exceptionally, beyond anything we have ever seen before, doubling the cost of a mortgage, doubling the cost of rent and increasing the cost of home heat. It is all due to its carbon tax, its inflationary measures. How is it possible the Liberal government has been able to do that? It is with the support of that member and the NDP when they voted 24 times to increase the carbon tax. We will take no lessons on supporting Canadians from that bunch.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity]

Madam Speaker, it is nice to be here late into the evening talking about an important measure to support affordability for Canadians.

Before I start, I would like to say that I will be sharing my time with the member for Beauport—Limoilou.

I would like to just say that I think this is a good measure to support affordability at the right time. Measures like this are all about timing, and if we go back a couple of years, just three years in fact, to when Erin O'Toole was the prime minister, he suggested that we do a GST holiday back in 2021. That was at a time when our inflation was over 4%, and it was going up.

Indeed, over the course of the ensuing months, it went up to 8%, so that idea probably would have had a negative impact on rising inflation rates at the time—

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Mr Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. I am wondering if the member can correct the record, because he just referred to somebody as the prime minister who had not been prime minister.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I apologize to the member. It has been a long day in the House of Commons. Yes, I know Erin O'Toole was never the prime minister, but he was the leader of the Conservative Party. When Erin O'Toole was the leader of the Conservative Party back in the fall of 2021, when inflation was over 4%, he recommended a GST holiday in Canada to provide some tax relief to Canadians. That was bad timing. It was terrible timing, in fact, because inflation was going like this. It was 4.1% in the summer of 2022 and It went up to 8%. When inflation is on the rise, it is not a good time to do these types of measures. However, right now, inflation is on its way down.

This is good news for Canadians. We need to find ways to stimulate our economy and provide relief and affordability measures. That is why, over the last couple of years, through our economic measures and the hard work of Canadians, our policies have all reversed and reduced inflation in Canada faster than other countries have achieved that.

I had a meeting recently with somebody from Australia, and they were talking about how they have not seen an interest rate cut, and inflation is still quite high. Inflation is persistent in some places around the world, but our economy is recovering from the COVID economic downturn here in Canada. I want to credit Canadians with that. I want to acknowledge that a lot of our economic policies have created the terrain for that change, but this is really good. The inflation situation has abated a bit and that means it is a good time for this. This is a timely measure, supporting our economic recovery with a responsible affordability measure for everyone.

Our economy is actually recovering better than anticipated. Canada is in really good shape economically and fiscally. The Conservatives want to suggest everything is broken in Canada, but I will not tolerate that. Canada is the best country in the world to live in. It is a great country. We are strong. We are economically durable through these challenges. We endured the economic downturn of 2009 quite effectively, and we did this one too, and that is because of the hard work of Canadians, because we have a good regulated banking system and because we are used to challenges in Canada. When the snow falls, we get outside with our shovels and we shovel our neighbours' driveways. We do not sit around and complain and say everything is broken, because it is not.

All that work, the perseverance of Canadians, has paid off and we can afford nice things. We can afford to do nice things for Canadians right now because of the expediency with which our economic recovery has taken place. We have been through a lot over the last couple of years. I know the Conservatives want to heckle me and they want to suggest Canada is not in great shape, but I will not tolerate that. Canada is the best country in the world and Canada is in great shape because of the hard work of Canadians, not because of complainers, not because of people sitting in the back rows complaining, providing no solutions to anybody's problems but just barking, yelling and screaming about how everything is broken, because it is not. Canada is not broken. As well, we have the solutions.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that member should get on the list to speak tonight. He has probably already done three speeches about the previous thing on the agenda. If he wants to speak, he can ask me a question. I hope he would learn to wait for his time. If he wants to speak, he has to get a tie. He is going to sit in the back row and complain.

There are things we can do to help Canadians. The Conservatives have been talking about lowering taxes since the member for Carleton has been the leader. He has said it every single day. We have introduced a measure to lower taxes for Canadians and they are all going to vote against it. The irony and the hypocrisy are not lost on me, but it is also ironic that the Conservatives like to consider themselves the economic stewards, the stewards of the economic purse. That is absolute horse crap. It is not true. That is clear because at a time when inflation was going up, they wanted to do a GST cut, and now that inflation has abated and is on its way down, they do not. That is just basic Economics 101.

The Conservatives have demonstrated time and time again that they do not know how to manage an economy. It was clear when Harper was the prime minister. It was clear when the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle was their failed leader. They always put forward economic policies that will not help Canadians, but this will. A two-month break on GST and HST between the Christmas holidays and Valentine's Day is going to help Canadians. We are going to give them a little bit of a break because they deserve it, because they have worked really hard.

A lot of Canadians right now do not feel like their hard work is paying off. It is a really challenging thing to go into work every day, similar to going to the gym, and not see that work paying off. We want to see the hard work that Canadians are putting forward pay off. We want to make sure they have a great holiday. If that means they want to go out to dinner with their family and their friends, 13% off of that bill is going to help. Restaurants Canada has come out and said this is great and we will see more people in restaurants. They are going to see a bit of a bump. That is something our economy could use right now.

As the holiday season approaches, a time when people spend a little more on quality time, with some time off from school or work, whether they are sharing meals with loved ones, buying gifts for the kids or just ordering some takeout and chilling out, they deserve a break and our government is there for them.

Canadians deserve this quality time, after the tough years they have been through. Our goal with this bill is to ensure that as many people as possible can benefit from it. As the holiday season draws near, people need a helping hand. We want to give them that help. In fact, we are giving them two helping hands.

First, there is the tax holiday for all Canadians. In concrete terms, what we are proposing is a nationwide exemption from the GST and HST on certain products. It would start on December 14 and last two months. That would mean not paying tax on the purchase of clothing, shoes, children's toys, diapers, prepared foods and snacks. There would also be no tax on restaurant meals, beer, wine and Christmas trees.

The purpose of this tax break is to make the holiday season more affordable, especially for families who find this time of year difficult because of the extra expenses that come with it. The GST and HST holiday will make the holiday season more enjoyable for these families. That is the first helping hand, which is included in this bill.

The second helping hand we are proposing is a $250 rebate for millions of Canadians. We will have time to debate that rebate in due course. The tax holiday is what is more pressing right now.

We know that the holiday season is the most expensive time of year for Canadians and that the new year does not always get off to a good start once people have paid off all the holiday spending.

I would also like to point out that we, as a country, can afford to offer this help to Canadians. Canada's net debt-to-GDP ratio is well below that of our G7 peers. The Conservatives suggest Canada has a balance sheet they would like to change. We all want to make sure that we are paying down our debt, that our debt-to-GDP ratio is going down and that our deficit is reduced, but the Conservatives did not do that when they were in power. Mr. Harper saw inflationary deficits and added to our debt without experiencing a global pandemic.

Liberals are good stewards of the Canadian economy, and our recovery is evidence of that. We are one of only two G7 nations with a AAA rating by at least two of the three major global credit rating agencies. That is good news for Canadians. This has been achieved through a responsible economic plan that has put Canada in a really strong fiscal position.

It is also time to put that to work for Canadians. Removing the GST from these qualifying goods for two months will provide an estimated $1.6 billion in federal tax relief. That means $1.6 billion is going to stay in the pockets of the people who earned that money, Canadians, hard-working Canadian families. When they earn that money, it is their money. They will not be spending that money on taxes on goods, and we should debate in the House whether these are things that should ever be taxed, like prepared food in grocery stores or diapers, whether for babies or for adults. That is a debatable topic. We should talk about whether or not those are essential items and perhaps this bill will provide us the opportunity to talk about some of those things.

Budget 2024 removed the GST on psychotherapy and mental health counselling. That was a good move. We should have done that, and we did it. It is a breath of fresh air to talk about a bill like this in the House of Commons. It is a good opportunity to discuss those and more issues.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member who just spoke is definitely feeling the Liberal vibe. He is drinking the Liberal Kool-Aid. He talked about how great things are.

I would ask the member, what about the over two million people a month who are going to a food bank? What about the record number of people who are living in homeless encampments? What about the record increases in chronic homelessness across the country? What about the seniors who have to go back to work because they cannot afford food and medicine? What about acknowledging all of the people who are facing a real, serious challenge in paying for even basic necessities in Canada? Why does the member not acknowledge them?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are acknowledging that, not by using them as props, and standing in front of people who are facing challenges in Canada and suggesting some group of people is not doing anything, but by actually doing something.

The Conservatives cannot claim to have helped Canadians once in the last nine years. Other parties have put forward private members' bills, ideas, amendments and changes to various pieces of legislation. Other parties have done that work. Even small ones, like the Green Party, have managed to help Canadians. The Conservatives have literally done nothing to help Canadians at all. Unfortunately, that is a stain on their record, because all of us have an opportunity and an obligation to help Canadians.

I do not use people who are struggling, whether through homelessness, addiction or the affordability challenges, as a prop. I show up at events, like yesterday when Food Banks Canada came to the House of Commons. I met with them and we discussed affordability challenges. We discussed solutions, not slogans.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether my colleague has heard about the survey by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business that was released early this afternoon. It says that most Canadian businesses do not support the GST holiday and that only 4% of them believe that it will increase their sales.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question. Restaurants Canada supports this measure. In my opinion, and according to Restaurants Canada, this measure encourages people to go out to eat and gives Canadians an opportunity to spend their hard-earned money.

I would say that measures like this will help every single Canadian. That is why it is unique. It is an opportunity for us all to get behind something for the holidays before we go on break, a measure that is going to support every single Canadian who is going to spend a little money this holiday season.

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

Mr. Speaker, as we know, the NDP had called for the GST to be removed from all essential and basic goods. The Liberals came up with a list that may at times seem far-fetched or over-the-top. What we are seeing, however, is that the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives are joining forces to keep the GST on in-store prepared foods like sandwiches or roast chicken, as well as on diapers, child car seats, and children's clothing and footwear.

Why do the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives want to keep the GST on these products?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for his great question. It is an important question because, as I said earlier, it allows us to examine which products should or should not be taxed.

It is a good opportunity to discuss some of the items out there in the market that have tax on them. They are not the same across jurisdictions. We have all been looking into this recently and we are all surprised to note that some provinces tax certain products differently, but we could harmonize that. We could look into which essential items are taxed so that, over the coming months and year, we look at which items we could provide permanent tax relief on. It is a good question.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the parliamentary secretary, I believe, knows, Greens are intending to support this measure. However, we do have some concerns, one of them being that it is not focused only on essentials. It is a pretty broad-based measure that includes video game consoles, for example, like a PS5.

The hon. member mentioned food banks specifically. He knows food banks have been calling for the government to fix the Canada disability benefit. A far more targeted measure would be one that is focused on those living disproportionately in poverty, like folks with disabilities. Can he speak to what would be needed after tonight to continue to advocate for folks with disabilities to be lifted out of poverty?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I agree that this is a broad spectrum. It is meant to help Canadians buy presents. I remember, when I was a kid, there was a Nintendo under the tree one year. It really surprised my brother and me because we came from a modest household. If this will help bring joy to young kids, then I support it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Milton for sharing his time with me.

Quebeckers and Canadians have been asking for tax relief for many years, and we recognize that. However, people want permanent relief, not this temporary relief for just two months. If it is not permanent, it should at least be long-term. This measure offers only a two-month break.

The measure proposed by the government and supported by the NDP does not meet public expectations in many respects. To illustrate that, I want to go over the bill briefly, even though all my colleagues have already done so and pointed out certain inconsistencies. I will explain why this measure is aimed at the wrong people. This measure will also be very costly for business owners. In the end, it may be much less beneficial than some people think, not only for the poor, but also for the economy.

The bill provides for a GST exemption or holiday. In Quebec, by the way, the GST amounts to 5%. In other words, there would be a $5 discount on every $100 in taxable purchases. At the grocery store, clients who limit their purchases to staples like bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, fruit, flour, sugar and meat would not have picked up any taxable items. That means they would have saved no money on any of their purchases. As the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie pointed out earlier, when someone buys ready-made sandwiches or roast chicken instead of preparing their food at home, they will save a few pennies, because these items are taxable. However, unless they buy $200 worth of roast chicken or $200 worth of sandwiches, they will save only pennies. Since people rarely buy $200 worth of sandwiches, this person will save just a few cents on their groceries.

The bill includes alcohol, candy and video game cartridges. Physical video games are included, but, I assume, not video games bought online. We have to read between the lines. There is no mention of sports equipment, aside from balls. Books are covered, which is good. However, there are a number of restrictions when it comes to books. There cannot be too many maps or too much advertising. There cannot be this or that. It will be a nightmare for retailers. Parents will find it hard to know which books they can buy without paying the GST.

Then there is the list of toys. In fact, it is more like a description of eligible toys. It is like the government asked all of its employees to go to a department store that sells toys and describe each and every one of them without actually naming them. Those are the descriptions. Retailers and parents will probably be wondering whether a toy is taxed or not. They will wonder if they will save $1 on a $50 toy. Actually, let me recalculate: They will save $2.50 on a $50 toy.

We are also talking about clothing for children under the age of 14. That is something that I mentioned in one of my questions. I am five foot four, which is fairly normal. My husband is five foot nine, even though he claims to be five foot ten. That is fairly normal too. We are very normal, or so we hope. However, our youngest son is 14 years old and wears a size 9 shoe. He wears pants with a 32-inch waist and 32-inch inseam, so he does not fit into the category of children under 14, according to the definition. I will not even talk about the oldest of my three sons. When he was 14, he was nearly six feet tall and wore a size 14 shoe. For him, it is very clear. If he were 14 right now, he would definitely not meet that definition. There may be a bit of an issue with the definitions.

As I was saying earlier, we need to think about the fact that we are talking about essential products. During the holiday season, I can understand wanting to buy a bag of chips, especially since they are often two for $9.50. I would not buy them a few years ago because they were too expensive. A few years ago, I would not buy them because they were too expensive, at two for $5. Now they are two for $9.50. It is nice to be able to afford a little treat when you cannot usually afford it. It is nice when a bag of chips or a bag of candy, whatever it is, becomes the treat of the month. That is great. However, 5% off $9.50 is about 25¢ off the big treat of the month.

Furthermore, when people are struggling financially, they do not think about dining out. As I explained earlier, instead of spending $100 at a restaurant, plus $5 GST, plus $10 Quebec sales tax, plus $15 tip, which is a minimum, a family of four in financial difficulty will go to the grocery store with that $130. They will not go to a restaurant. As long as they only get $5 off $130, they will head to the grocery store and have a nice meal.

I invite folks to look at their grocery receipt to see how much tax they pay. If they have bought household goods and, yes, diapers, it will bee a few dollars. Actually, I do not understand why diapers and feminine hygiene products are taxed. Those things should never be taxed. In Quebec, total sales tax is 15%. Divide that by three to see what the GST savings will be. It is not very much. People will save a few cents on groceries a week.

Getting back to the bill, it would allow people to save the GST on catering. To be honest, ordinary people do not hire caterers, especially not if they are struggling financially. For the most part, this measure will help people with money. It will help people who already have money save even more money. They will save $50 in GST on a $1,000 catering bill. That means someone who can afford something that costs $1,000 will be able to save much more than someone who saves 25¢ on their grocery bill or a bag of candy, yet the person saving 25¢ is the one who needs it most. This measure is not targeting the right people.

There has been a lot of talk about business owners. Earlier, there was one member who mocked people, saying that 30 years ago, prices used to change every week. Yes, prices used to change every week 30 years ago because all we had to do was turn the dial on a little machine and re-label the products. Then computers came along, but they were often the 1980-88 models with the spinach-green screens. That was not the same level of programming at all. I used to work at grocery stores back then. I know how much time it could take. Then there are the extra costs. There is the cost of the time it will take to check the inventory, to determine what is taxable and what is not. Reprogramming will also cost thousands of dollars. In Quebec, there is the cost of administering the collection of the GST. This is going to be complicated, and there is nothing in the bill to support Quebec and the provinces, which will have to deal with the chaos that will be unleashed for two months.

To close, when I look at this, I see some things that are good, like books and diapers. I agree, but it should target the people in greatest need, the poorest, and this bill does not do that. It really seems like a purely vote-seeking strategy thought out by people who tried to predict who is going to vote. Will it be those with the most money or those with less? Will it be people who live day-by-day, or those who can see beyond the end of their noses?

I cannot vote for this bill because it does not target the right people, not to mention that it is only effective for two months. If this measure were permanent, then maybe, but that is not the case. People are not stupid. They will catch on.

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

Mr. Speaker, the concern I have is that, as we enter the holiday season, the constituents of members of all political parties in the House are concerned about affordability. I truly believe that by passing this legislation, we are sending a positive message to the constituents we all represent during the holiday season. I do not see, even given the concerns the member has raised, why we would not, at the very least, support our constituents in this way. I personally think it is a very strong, powerful, positive message. It shows that we all care, that we can sympathize and that we want to give our constituents that little extra.

Why would the member not support that idea in principle?

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

Mr. Speaker, I just spent the last 10 minutes giving a rather exhaustive list of reasons why I could not support this bill. There is, for example, the fact that the measure is not permanent or even long term, at the very least. Another reason is that it will enable the least fortunate to save roughly 25¢ to 50¢ per week, while the wealthy, who can afford to pay for catered meals, will be able save $50. Let us look at children's clothing. Things are simple enough for parents who have a young child, but if they have a teenager or someone under the age of 14 who does not fit into children's clothes, that slips through the cracks.

This bill ends up being too discriminatory and is not targeting the right people. That is why I will be voting against it. That is why I am getting dozens of emails from my constituents telling me that they are not stupid and that saving 10¢ or 25¢ is not going to make them vote Liberal.

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague gave a nuanced, thoughtful speech that raised some good points.

We in the NDP said that we wanted a permanent tax break on essential items, including heating and cellphone packages. Naturally, the Liberals presented a temporary half measure accompanied by a very haphazard list.

However, I have to disagree with my colleague when she says that this will help the rich more than the poor. I think that is a fundamental error, because the GST is a regressive tax, meaning that the proportional impact hurts the middle class and the poor more than the rich. When someone earns $200,000, a 5% tax on consumer products does not really affect them. If they earn $20,000, a 5% tax represents a considerable proportion of their available income.

Therefore, the measure helps the poor more than the rich because the GST is a regressive tax.

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

Mr. Speaker, I agree in principle with what my colleague just said. I know that a 5% tax does not make as much difference to people making $200,000 than to those making $20,000. That is what I made for years, so I understand perfectly well. However, saving $1 per week over two months amounts to $8. That buys four extra litres of milk for two months. It is not enough.

I agree with my colleague. If they are going to do this, it should be on very targeted products and on a permanent basis. This, however, is a sop that, in the end, will not help those who really need it.

There are questions about removing the 5% for two months. Will that also be deducted from the GST rebate at the end of the year?

The government will definitely want to get its money back.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, when I read the bill, there is a whole host of problems, some of which have been articulated this evening. However, specifically, it treats different regions of the country, different provinces, very unfairly. I would suggest, it is in violation of the agreements that the federal government has signed with provinces in regard to HST and other shared taxation.

I am wondering if my colleague from the Bloc could expand on that.

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

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague. That does not happen very often, but on this I agree. Once again, it shows the government's lack of planning, lack of vision and lack of consistency.