Debates of May 22nd, 2024

Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2023

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

It is agreed.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we should think of the progressive programs that the government has put in place over the years, including in the current budget, to support Canadians, as well as why the Conservative Party continuously and consistently votes against those programs.

I referred to health care and $10-a-day child care. In Tyndall Park, the Prime Minister talked with child care workers about the benefits of that particular program. All provinces are on board, working with the federal government.

We can talk about housing. The Prime Minister, again not that long ago, was in Manitoba with not only the premier but also the mayor of Winnipeg. They talked about investing hundreds of millions of dollars, recognizing the important role that the government plays in providing housing. The leader of the Conservative Party was minister of housing; we barely need two hands to count the number of houses that were built when he was in that role. He built six units.

At the end of the day, as a government, we are working on building a substantial number of houses. Over the next number of years, it is going to total close to four million homes. The Conservatives will laugh at the premiers, the mayors and the other municipalities that are working with the government, but at the end of the day—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order.

I know it seems at times that we are having a conversation here, but the hon. member for Winnipeg North has the floor, so I will ask the chamber to listen attentively to the hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, time goes by really quickly here. I am trying to demonstrate to my friends across the way that, whether it is with health care, child care, housing, a national food program, pharmacare, a dental program or the first-ever disability benefit, the government is taking progressive measures to support Canadians and to support constituents across the country in all regions.

However, the Conservative Party consistently votes against these.

Its members do not quite understand that, to build a strong, healthy economy, we need to support Canadians. Over the years, including in the budget, we have brought forward programs to do just that. We brought in programs to support individuals, whether they are seniors, people with disabilities or many others. At the end of the day, what do we hear from the Conservatives? They constantly vote “no”. They go around the country saying how Canada is broken.

It was not that long ago that there was an extreme right group the leader of the Conservative Party actually met with. It was the Diagolon group. These are the individuals the Conservative Party is actually listening to—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo is rising on a point of order.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that sometimes the rhetoric and hyperbole can go a little bit awry here, but at the end of the day, the parliamentary secretary is suggesting something very serious when he says that the member for Carleton met with people from an organization that has espoused hateful language and—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I appreciate the conversation tonight, but that is descending into debate, so the hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I suspect that a number of Conservative members might be a little upset with the fact that their leader actually met with that group. He actually went into the trailer and met with members here on Parliament Hill. This is not a disputable issue. At the end of the day, that is fine for the MAGA right Conservatives, that far-right element.

I would suggest that the Conservative Party is more like the former Reform Party than it is conservative. Members do not need to believe me. Listen to what former prime ministers have said. Joe Clark said that he never left the Conservative Party; the Conservative party left him. Kim Campbell has said all sorts of unparliamentary words about today's Conservative Party, especially with respect to the leader. Even Brian Mulroney was very critical of the Conservative Party. He said it is not a progressive party any longer. That aspect was amputated. Do not just listen to me. This is what people within the progressive conservative movement have been saying about the Conservative Party today. It is not a conservative party; it is a far right party like the Reform Party.

I talked about the social programs. There are many different progressive social programs that we have brought forward, but I want to emphasize them from an economic point of view. To have a healthy country, we need a healthy economy. We can take a look at the economy and what we have been able to accomplish by working with Canadians, by working with other entities. I would suggest to members that it goes so much further than what Stephen Harper ever did. We can take a look at the job numbers as an example. In 10 years, almost a million jobs were created under Stephen Harper. When it comes to our government, we are talking about over two million jobs after eight and a half years.

When I think of jobs and opportunities, at the end of the day, one of the most powerful messages that was in the budget document was the fact that Canada, on a per capita basis, has more foreign direct investment than any other country in the G7 or the G20. If we want to look at it from a worldwide perspective, we are number three.

Why do people around the world look at Canada as a place to invest their money? I would suggest that it is due to a number of factors. In Canada, the government has actually signed off on more free trade agreements than any other government has. That is a fact. As a result of such things, by recognizing the value of trade and the value of receiving foreign investment, we have actually hit significant records, unlike the Conservatives, who oppose government involvement in investments.

I would tell my Conservative friends to look at the battery industry. We can talk about Stellantis, Honda and Volkswagen. The current government, working with Doug Ford in this particular case, has actually had substantial investment in an industry that was virtually non-existent in the past. It will be providing tens of thousands of direct and indirect jobs into the future. These will be good, middle-class jobs. They will be green jobs. This is having an impact. From being absolutely nowhere in the world in regard to EV battery production, Canada is now in the top two or three in the world, in terms of that sort of production. This is something that is making a difference.

Even on economic matters, the Conservatives are offside. They do not support the Volkswagen investment. Even though Doug Ford recognizes its value, today's Conservative reformers do not support that. It was the same thing with Stellantis, and now the Conservatives are out there criticizing the Honda investment. I understand that it will be Honda's largest investment in North America. When we talk about the Volkswagen battery plant, in terms of size, it will be somewhere in the neighbourhood of 200 football fields. It will be the largest manufacturing plant in Canada, possibly even in North America.

When Stephen Harper was prime minister, we literally lost tens of thousands, going into over 100,000, manufacturing jobs. This is a government that is bringing back manufacturing jobs. These are the types of things that, as a government, we have been proactive in dealing with.

We recognize that there are issues that Canadians are facing. When we look at things such as inflation, inflation is something that is happening around the world. Even though Canada, in comparison to other countries, is doing relatively well, as a government we were focused on inflation. Back in June 2022, the inflation rate was over 8%. Today, it is at 2.7% and it has been at a far better rate over the last few months, to give us reason to believe and have hope that we will actually see the interest rates go down. We understand the affordability issue. We understand why it is so important that we make sure that Canada continues to have that AAA credit rating, unlike what the Conservatives try to say to Canadians.

Consistently, they try to give the false impression that Canada is broken. If they genuinely believe that Canada is broken, by God, that would mean the world is broken, because, at the end of the day, when one contrasts Canada's overall performance over the last nine years, I would challenge them to show what G7 country has done better, what G20 country has done better. It is because we support Canadians in a tangible way, lifting Canadians out of poverty, providing investments in apprenticeship programs, ensuring that there is a healthy economy and building infrastructure.

No government in Canada's history has spent more real dollars in infrastructure builds than this government has. We understand the importance of a healthy infrastructure, a healthy economy, investing in people. That is the way in which we will be able to grow Canada, and Canada has been growing as a direct result. It is a country that we believe in. Not only do we say it, but we also invest in it, in many different ways, not just through social programming, by having the backs of Canadians and supporting them, but also by developing a stronger, healthier economy, while at the same time recognizing that, yes, the economy matters but so does the environment. That is why it is so important that we keep having the price on pollution and that we do not buy into the misinformation that the Conservatives put out on the price on pollution.

Quite frankly, more constituents of mine actually receive more money through their rebates than they pay in the carbon tax. That is a fact that has been highlighted on many occasions. There is still much more to do, and we will continue to work day in and day out in the different regions of the country to improve and have a fairer and healthier country.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, I typically say, but on this occasion I rise with the difficult task of pointing out just what this member has done. He has spoken about a far-right group, and I am reading from a Global News story that talked about sexually assaulting the spouse of a member of the House. The member across the way just compared the leader of His Majesty's opposition to that group, when the leader of His Majesty's opposition himself called them “odious” and “losers”.

Made aware of disgusting comments made, I am not even going to use this man's name. This person, who continually carries water for a Prime Minister who invited a Nazi into this House, who said that a woman experienced it differently, who has done all sorts of things, who pressured the first indigenous attorney general in this country's history into obstructing justice, has the audacity to do that. He should be ashamed. He should apologize and withdraw right now.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to get a copy so the member can actually respond to one of the news articles on it. It seems that the Conservative Party is a little sensitive to the fact that I made reference to Diagolon and the fact that the leader of the Conservative Party actually went out to a trailer to meet with them and have discussions.

I am saying the leader of the Conservative Party did it. If he did not do it, then maybe the member should be a little more clear on that particular point. Did the leader not go out to the rally? If the member is offended, he should not be offended at me, he should be offended at the leader of the Conservative Party, who chooses the company he keeps. If the leader is consulting with the far right, if he is starting to adopt policies from the far right, do not blame me, blame the leader of the Conservative Party. Obviously the member is very upset about it. I will see if I can find the information and provide it to him directly.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see the Liberal government letting the member for Winnipeg North speak. It is not often that we get a chance to hear him in the House.

I simply wanted to remind everyone that, at the height of the pandemic, when a major social crisis was happening, the member for Carleton went to visit the protesters who were illegally occupying downtown Ottawa, threatening our democracy and threatening this Parliament. He even went to hand out coffee and donuts to them.

Two weeks ago, members of his party, the Conservative Party, met with protesters who are questioning women's right to control their own bodies and the right to abortion here in Canada. Then we learned that, a few weeks ago, the leader of the official opposition stopped by to meet with members of a far-right group, taking the time to chat with them and shake their hands. I would like him to remind us, just for clarity, what the group's name is.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the short answer is Diagolon, but I warn the member that the Conservatives are very sensitive on this issue because they do not want to be called out on it. However, the leader of the Conservatives has met with them, talked with them and gone to their trailer. Look at the protests out here during the pandemic and who was out there shaking hands, having a dinner and so forth.

I am just reminding members across the way of the degree in which the Conservative Party has gone so far to the right. It is not just me saying this. That is the reason I made reference to Progressive Conservative prime ministers. It is not just me and it is not Liberals. It is other individuals who have noticed the Conservative Party is a reform party. It is a very far-right party. Take a look at their voting pattern. Take a look the types of posts they put on their social media. Take a look at the behaviours and what we witness day in, day out inside the House. It all amplifies the fact that the Conservatives have taken a far-right turn.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, on the speech given by my colleague and juxtaposing that with what I learned in a previous role when I sat on the Emergencies Act committee for this Parliament, what we learned about that far-right extremist group is that a weapons cache was found at the Coutts border crossing and the logo for the Diagolon group was found at that weapons cache. In fact, members of that group were charged with conspiracy to commit murder against RCMP officers.

What I find most troubling about this lack of judgment on the part of the Leader of the Opposition is he purports to stand for law and order and law enforcement officials and yet is meeting with, quite intentionally, people who have now been charged with conspiring to kill law enforcement officials. I wonder if the member could comment on that juxtaposition.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the minister's contribution. It highlights something I have said.

I would like to remind my colleagues of these quotes, and if they do not have the actual quotes, I am more than happy to provide them. I would like to refer to individuals like former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, who, in essence, said that the Conservative Party today has “amputated” progressiveness out of the Conservative Party. There is no progressive nature to the Conservative Party. We have individuals like Joe Clark, a former Conservative prime minister, who said that he never left the Conservative Party; the Conservative Party left him. We have Kim Campbell. Some of the words she used I cannot repeat, but she was referring to the leader of the Conservative Party.

Members do not have to believe me. They can listen to what Progressive Conservatives have been saying. Look at the behaviour. Listen to what the leader of the Conservative Party is saying. Look at the people he is actually meeting with, and the role that they are playing inside the chamber.

It draws me to the conclusion that it is and has become a far-right, extreme party in the House of Commons. There is enough out there to clearly demonstrate that this is, in fact, the case.

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this is supposed to be a debate on the budget. We can see the Liberal Party is dragging us into its goofy debate about far-right extremists and everything else. It is very disappointing. I am going to allow the member for Winnipeg North to refocus. I am going to talk about how upside-down things are in my riding.

The member spoke about the carbon tax, and we know the carbon tax disproportionately affects rural Canadians. My riding of York—Simcoe, of all things, has been classified as Toronto. We have a first nation in the middle of Lake Simcoe, 70 miles from Toronto, where we cannot even see the CN Tower, that does not get the rural top-up.

The member talked about announcements. It was funny that government members were in my riding to announce money for Lake Simcoe, but the only thing they came for was to let people know that they can possibly apply for money. The government is all talk, no action. People in York—Simcoe have had enough of this.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to recognize all sorts of wonderful things that have been happening. Last week, the Prime Minister announced a $1.6-billion investment in Port Colborne, Niagara, that will strengthen Honda's EV supply chain. We are a government that understands where future green jobs are going to be and how we can contribute to creating better opportunities and good-quality jobs.

I would say 85% of my speech was talking about the progressive aspects of our budget, whether it is health care or housing, and the list goes on. I also mentioned the many economic strengths we have been putting into the budget to build upon Canada, create more jobs and make a healthier country overall.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be sharing my time with the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, who, I am sure, will happily rise and comment about how proud he is to represent people from his riding.

Now, after 20 minutes of absolute fiction from the member for Winnipeg North, I thought I would continue with a bit of fiction that describes, so well, Bill C-59 and Liberal financing. It is by Hemingway, from The Sun Also Rises. It goes like this. “How did you go bankrupt?” Bill asked. “Two ways,” Mike said. “Gradually and then suddenly.”

That is exactly the Liberal government.

There is another great line, which is not fiction. I wish it were fiction, but it is not. It is actually from the Prime Minister himself. It is a great line: “The budget will balance itself.” Does everyone remember that? What do we get with the Liberal Prime Minister saying that the budget will balance itself? We end up with $1.4 trillion in debt. That is $93,000 for every single household in Canada; $3,400 per year, per household, just for interest on the Liberal debt.

We think about it like the GST. It is 5% on everything purchased. People go out to a restaurant, have a beer or go to a Blue Jays game. Perhaps they would go to the Edmonton Oilers game, but not the Vancouver Canucks game because they are gone. They pay 5% tax on the ticket. This year, we expect the GST is going to raise about $52 billion. The equivalent of every single penny of the GST collected is going to go solely to the interest on the debt. It will not go toward health care or toward any of the fantasy things the member for Winnipeg North brings up; it is just for interest.

The interest on the debt next year is going to be so bad that the GST will actually have to rise to almost 6% just to cover the interest. That is more than we give for health care to the provinces and more than we give to defence. Over the next five years of the budget, it is going to be $338 billion of interest payments.

Do members remember the Prime Minister, when questioned about interest costs, condescendingly saying to Glen McGregor, “Interest rates are at historic lows Glen”? Guess what? Interest rates are not at historic lows, and the Liberals, when they actually had a chance to lock in those interest rates that supposedly were at the historic low, did not. The Liberals actually borrowed vast sums, almost a half a trillion dollars, on a short-term basis. This debt is coming due, and the government is going to have to refinance, so instead of paying 0.25% on that $454 billion, it is going to be a lot more. Billions of dollars are added every year, just in interest.

Let us imagine that someone who is buying a house is at the bank, and they are negotiating a mortgage. A bank officer tells them that he has an all-time low for interest rates and that they can lock it in for a long time at 1%, and the customer says that they are going to roll the dice because they do not think the rates are going to go up. Then, boom, all of a sudden, they would end up with 5% to 8% when they renew. People would not do that. No one would be foolish enough to do that, but that is what the Liberal government has done. It has just basically said that it does not want a long-term, locked-in rate and it is going to roll the dice. Then what happens? We end up with massive increases.

What could we actually buy with that $338 billion that the government is going to pay just in interest costs alone for the next five years? The government could buy 5,600 ArriveCAN apps, not at the $80,000 it was originally going to be, but at the $60 million that the government paid for it. It could buy 17,000 contracts with GC Strategies to develop apps and to not actually do any work on them. The government could do a half a million studies from contractors such as KPMG to advise the government on how to cut back on contracts from the government. The government famously paid KPMG $670,000 to provide advice on how to cut back on contracts to people like those at KPMG. It could buy 42,000 luxury barns, like the $8-million barn it put up at the Governor General's property.

Do members remember the Liberal cabinet spending $1.3 million on three luxury getaways to talk about the affordability crisis? The Liberals could actually afford 260,000 of their luxury getaways to discuss the affordability crisis. They could buy 37 million nights at the $9,000-a-night luxury plaza where the Prime Minister took his Christmas vacation, but was just staying with friends like every other Canadian.

Now, I say some of these things just to show how ridiculous this spending is, but in real terms, we could actually build, with that $338 billion, just on interest, a new hospital for the 100 largest cities in Canada. So, basically, for every city with more than 35,000 people, we could actually build a brand new $3.5-billion hospital. We could increase health care transfers to the provinces by about 700%. We could buy 482,000 houses across the country at the current average house price of $700,000. Instead, it is going to interest, but that is okay, the budget will balance itself and “interest rates are at historic lows, Glen”. We do not have to worry about it. We could actually afford 800% of the current outlay that all Canadians are paying on pharmaceuticals, not a fake pharmacare plan of the Liberal government, for contraceptive and diabetic medication. That is not pharmacare; that is two items. The government could actually pay for everything with just 12% of what it is paying on interest right now.

Now, I want to get to Bill C-59 itself, the fall economic statement, with just a couple quick items from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. This is from his highlights. He says, “Revisions to the...economic outlook and fiscal developments...lower the outlook for the budgetary balance by [$19] billion.” So, the PBO is saying that things are getting worse by $19 billion.

He goes on to say, “Government announced [$23] billion in new spending that was partially offset by [$3] billion in 'refocusing”. So, lots of added spending.

The fall economic statement claims to expand the budget commitment to “refocus government spending, with the goal to identify an additional $2.4 billion in savings” over a four-year period. Now, that is out of $465 billion a year in revenues, about half a trillion a year, and costs about a $2.5-trillion spending budget over the five years. The Liberals are going to save $2 billion, including half a billion this year, even though it is money that they are saying now is not needed, but it went through the Treasury Board process as needed.

He continues, “There is currently little information available on the status of the $15.4 billion in Budget 2023 spending reviews” and savings announced by the government. “Further, there is currently no publicly available information related to the $3.6 billion spending to be reallocated in 2023-24.”

Now, one of the things the government has promised to cut back on in this $3 billion is outside consulting. Of course, if members remember, in 2015, as the member for Winnipeg North, I am sure, will tell us, the Liberals promised to cut back on outside contracting, consulting. What has happened instead is that it has ballooned to $21 billion, including, as I mentioned, $670,000 to KPMG to advise the government on how to stop spending so much money on companies like KPMG.

I have a couple other favourites that the Liberals spent money on through outside contracting. They gave Deloitte a quarter of a million dollars to give a four-page report saying not to buy sophisticated IT security equipment from despotic regimes. They paid a quarter of a million dollars also to Deloitte for a fairness study on an RFP for a security contract for something that they sole-sourced under government policy. There are 50,000 people in the public service whose job is to make sure that the contracts are fair, but they decided they had to give money to Deloitte.

It is clear the government has no clue what it is doing with the economy. It is clear it has no clue what it is doing with the budget. The budgets will not balance themselves. A Conservative government, however, will balance them.

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

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that Canada does have a AAA credit rating from more than one credit agency, which is better than other G7 countries. When we take a look at our debt-to-GDP ratio, it is the lowest of the G7 countries. We continue to recognize how important it is to invest in Canadians, something which the Conservatives do not invest in.

The Conservative Party actually voted in favour of our spending billions of dollars in supports during the pandemic for small businesses. Does the Conservative Party regret that support?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague. I will not say “my friend” because after his disgraceful speech earlier, I do not know if I will ever be able to call him that again.

I will say a couple of things. First, we do not have the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio. We have the lowest net, but that includes if the government were planning on raiding the CPP. The truth is that we do not have the lowest; Germany actually does. The government should stop misinforming Canadians.

Second, regarding spending, at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Revenue Canada told us it begged the government to leave fencing for all of the money being given out. We heard from Bill Morneau. Instead, the government made a political decision to override the finance minister and CRA on protecting Canadians.

What happened was that we ended up with the Auditor General's saying that about $27 billion, at the bare minimum, of taxpayers' money went to companies and individuals that did not qualify for the money. That is the result of the government's playing politics instead of following the advice of the then finance minister or the Canada Revenue Agency, for political reasons.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. I always enjoy listening to my colleague speak. I have learned a lot from him. He is actually the person who went through every line of the budget one year, did some addition and realized that the government had gotten its own numbers wrong. If only the government were as scrupulous as its critics with its army of workers. I commend the member for being somebody who really cares about the numbers and is prepared to get into the minutiae.

If the member could distill one point that he wishes the NDP-Liberal government would just figure out as far as missing the mark when it comes to the budget and the fall economic statement, what would it be?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if I could distill one thing for the government, it would be for it to understand that the budget does not balance itself, and that Canadians will have to pay for its errors and overspending.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there is something in the bill we were debating tonight about tax evasion, but there is nothing in here about the tax avoidance that goes on legally every year and that costs us billions of dollars. I could go on about Vancouver mining companies that do not pay any taxes in Canada. They should pay hundreds of millions of dollars of taxes, but they have a post office box in Luxembourg.

Can the member comment on why we need to cut down on tax avoidance measures, make them illegal and bring the money back to the people of Canada, where it belongs?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member and I have a bit of a philosophical difference, and maybe it is just the wording. If I invest in an RRSP, like many Canadians do, or a TFSA, it is a form of tax avoidance. Companies will do what they can to reduce their taxes. If the member is suggesting that we need to close loopholes to avoid taxes not being paid legally, I agree with that a hundred per cent.

I also agree with my colleague that we need to make our tax code a lot simpler and more straightforward. We need to reform the tax system. We have to have a very fair but competitive tax program in Canada. Capital is very fluid. We do not want to have a system like we see right now where, despite what the members opposite are saying, we actually have a net outflow of investment capital from Canada. We do need a simpler, fairer tax code.