Debates of June 13th, 2024

Opposition Motion—Government's Economic Analysis on Carbon Pricing

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am going to try to show restraint.

This is astounding. I hope my colleague has put his earpiece in to understand what I am about to say. The Bank of Canada has analyzed the impact of the carbon tax, and it is 0.02%. The carbon tax has a very minimal impact on Quebec. It is very minor.

I would like to inform my colleague that Quebec has its own system, known as the carbon exchange, which also has a certain economic impact. However, this system reduces gas emissions and saves money in the long term on climate disasters.

What I find disappointing is hearing other people say they are disappointed in the Bloc Québécois when, as I explained earlier, we were very reasonable when we agreed to an exemption for grain drying, even though it does not apply in Quebec. Those folks refuse to support it. My colleague certainly did not mention that. I find that disappointing.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, please excuse my French, but I am practising.

I like what my colleague said about transparency. I too think the government needs to be more open.

What steps does he think Parliament should take to achieve that?

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for making an effort to speak French.

I would say that every elected member could make the effort to properly read the documents they are given. The Bloc Québécois is the third-largest political party, and we have a whole research department. Our researchers are brilliant and work very hard. They carry out analyses and give us a really detailed background document before each debate. That is why we sound so smart in the House of Commons.

I find it hard to believe that the government and official opposition do not have their own research departments that are just as big, if not bigger. This is one of those times when we doubt their integrity.

I would advise my colleagues to read the documents and to try to find arguments that align with their political views, but to please not make them up.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, before I get started, I would like to inform you that I will be splitting my time with the member for Haldimand—Norfolk.

The carbon tax cover-up continues. Canadians already know that the carbon tax is driving up the cost of living. It is increasing the cost of gas. It is increasing the cost of groceries. It is increasing the cost of home heating. Everything Canadians buy is more expensive because of the carbon tax. No matter how the Liberals try to spin it, we know that most Canadians pay more in carbon tax than they get back in these phony rebates.

The Liberals do not like talking about the carbon tax anymore, because they know it does not work. That is because the carbon tax is not an environmental plan; it is a tax plan. In fact, the Liberal environment minister actually admitted that the government does not measure the emissions reduction results of the carbon tax. In other words, the Liberals do not measure for results. We know why the Liberals do not measure the results of the carbon tax. It is because there is nothing to show for it.

Since the last carbon tax hike, Canada dropped four rankings in climate change performance, falling to 62 out of 67 countries. Canadians also learned that emissions went up in 2022, despite the Prime Minister's plan to quadruple the carbon tax. Even Canada's environment commissioner revealed that the Liberals are not on track to meet their own emissions reductions target. Despite their damning record, the Liberals are plowing ahead with their plan to quadruple the carbon tax.

The NDP-Liberal government is plowing ahead with its plan to quadruple the carbon tax on Canadians. In fact, the Prime Minister's radical environment minister refuses to tell Canadians if his government will raise the carbon tax further than their current plan to quadruple it.

I asked the environment minister at committee, “Has your government decided whether it will increase the carbon tax over $170 a tonne past 2030? Give me a yes or no.” The environment minister had the audacity to respond with, “I'm not obliged to answer yes or no to those questions.” That is unbelievable.

If the government is re-elected, I have no doubt it will go beyond the plan to quadruple the carbon tax. After all, the former Liberal minister, Catherine McKenna, lied to Canadians in the 2019 election when she promised the carbon tax would not go up. During the 2019 election, she said, “The price will not go up.” That was when the carbon tax was at $20 a tonne. Now the Prime Minister is increasing the carbon tax to $170 a tonne.

Canadians will not be fooled by the Liberals in the next election. That is because the next election will be a carbon tax election where Canadians will choose between common-sense Conservatives who will axe the tax or the costly coalition that will quadruple the tax.

Do members remember when the Liberals promised Canadians their government would be “open by default”? The Prime Minister promised Canadians his government would be the most open and transparent government in history. “Sunny ways”, he said. Today, we find the government caught in another carbon tax cover-up.

Canada's watchdog, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, revealed that the Liberals were hiding a secret report from Canadians. Not only did we learn that the Liberals were keeping the internal carbon tax report a secret from Canadians, but we also learned that they placed a gag order on Canada's budget watchdog. Yes, the Liberals silenced the Parliamentary Budget Officer with a gag order, preventing him from speaking about the damning piece of evidence.

We must also ask ourselves why a government would hide its own economic analysis of the carbon tax. Well, now we know. After Conservatives were about to force the Liberals to release the report, the Liberals panicked and shared some information with the taxpayer-funded CBC. The CBC revealed that the government's carbon tax analysis proves that the carbon tax will lower GDP, gross domestic product, and harm Canada's national economy. According to the article, the carbon tax “is expected to reduce national GDP.”

That is what the government's very own carbon tax analysis says. Now we know why the Liberals placed the Parliamentary Budget Officer under a gag order. The carbon tax will cost Canadians $30.5 billion by 2030, but Canadians already knew that the carbon tax was damaging the economy. Canada already had the worst GDP growth of any G7 country in 2015. Canada's economic growth is projected to be the worst in nearly 40 advanced economies for this decade and for 30 more years to come. It is astounding.

Canada has lost $460 billion in investment to the United States, and now we are seeing the consequences. Canadians cannot afford groceries. Canadians cannot afford gas. Canadians cannot afford to heat their homes. Things were not like this nine years ago. Things were not like this before the Prime Minister took office, that is for sure.

This is not the first time the Liberals have been caught in a carbon tax cover-up. My Conservative colleagues and I on the environment committee demanded that the Liberals release the emissions reduction data to prove that the carbon tax reduces emissions. The environment committee ordered the production of the government's emissions reduction data to see if the Liberals had any proof the carbon tax actually reduces emissions. It makes sense.

The first time we did this, the Liberals insulted the committee and sent us a screenshot of the government website. The second time we ordered this information, the Liberals sent us an 18-page draft paper that was not even written by the government. It was so bad that the environment committee passed a third motion ordering the government's carbon tax emissions reduction data. We demanded that the government prove its carbon tax reduces emissions. Every single time we ordered this information, the government defied the committee and did not provide it. It could not prove whether its own carbon tax reduces emissions.

Even the Liberal's hand-picked chair of the environment committee stated, “My understanding—and maybe I'm wrong—is that there is no data specifically stating that the price on carbon resulted in X amount of reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. I don't even think that's possible, quite frankly.” The Liberals and the NDP continue to hike the carbon tax, increasing the cost on gas, groceries and home heating on Canadians. Never has it become clearer that the carbon tax is not an environmental plan. It is a tax plan.

The Liberals are also hiding the truth about another so-called environmental policy. A few years ago, the Liberals quietly announced an $8-billion program called the net-zero accelerator fund. They told Canadians that this $8-billion net-zero accelerator fund was needed to reduce emissions. The Liberals claimed that they could reduce emissions by giving away tax dollars to Canada's largest emitters in exchange for a commitment to reduce emissions, but now we know the $8-billion net-zero accelerator fund is also a complete scam.

In fact, Canada's environment commissioner revealed that 70% of the companies received money without any commitment to reduce emissions. What a farce. I asked the environment minister's top official what the emissions reduction target was for this $8-billion net-zero accelerator fund. He did not know. The environment minister's top official would not say how many emissions an $8-billion emissions reduction program was supposed to reduce. According to the government, the emissions reduction target of the net-zero accelerator slush fund is protected under cabinet confidence. How convenient. While the government gives away free cash to Canada's largest emitters, it hikes its costly carbon tax on Canadians.

On November 4, 2015, Canadians received a letter. It was addressed to “My dear friends”. The letter read, “Canadians need to have faith in their government’s honesty and willingness to listen. That is why we committed to set a higher bar for openness and transparency in Ottawa. Government and its information must be open by default. Simply put, it is time to shine more light on government to make sure it remains focused on the people it was created to serve—you.” That letter was signed by the Prime Minister.

It is time for the Prime Minister to heed his own words.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Madam Speaker, I take umbrage at my colleagues' characterization of what I said about calculating emissions from the price on carbon. The Conservatives clipped what I said in committee and put it on Twitter, and I got some attention in my riding for that, which I appreciate because people pay attention when something is on Twitter. However, what I was saying is that the reductions in emissions from the price on carbon are calculated as part of a modelling exercise, which is analogous to the unemployment rate. When we come out with an unemployment rate every month, it is not as though we have asked all 40 million Canadians, “Did you get a job this month or did you not get a job?” The number is arrived at through modelling, sampling and statistical methods. I would ask the member to be clear about that.

However, my question is the following: The other side says that the price on carbon is damaging the economy, but today there was a headline in The Globe and Mail saying, “Household wealth jumps to record” high. It rose by nearly $550 billion during the first quarter of 2024. I know the opposite side likes correlations, but—

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

The hon. member for Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the chair of the environment committee, for coming out and having this debate today.

I am glad the member brought up the environment committee because the other thing is that we are always trying to get to the bottom of this. The Liberals say that they are reducing emissions, so we are simply asking them to prove it.

We had asked a very direct question in environment committee. We asked if the government measures the annual amount of emissions that are directly reduced from carbon pricing. Can members guess what the answer was? It was that the government does not measure the annual amount of emissions that are directly reduced by federal carbon pricing. If we do not measure, there is no result. It is pretty simple math.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am going to repeat my colleague's last sentence. He said that if we do not measure, there is no result. He is right. We have to measure.

If there is one thing the Conservatives are right about today, it is that we need information. We voiced our agreement right from the start. Parliamentarians need information to make sound decisions.

Does my colleague agree with me that just knowing information on the economic impact of the carbon tax or other measures is not enough? Does he agree that we also need information on the cost of climate change and natural disasters? Should we not know how much more money ordinary people have to pay for their insurance, which is getting a lot more expensive? Should we not also consider the fact that our farmers are stuck in a shocking state of uncertainty, without any appropriate programs?

Does he agree that we need to reflect on all these measures, be consistent and try to reduce pollution and mitigate economic impacts? Does he agree with that? Is he interested in the impact of global warming or not?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am totally interested. I farmed up until 2019. I am a lifelong farmer. I lived every day with climate change. I called it “weather” at the time.

The problem is that I do not have this long timeline and bottomless taxpayer pocket to make a living like the government does. It keeps on insulting Canadians and taxing them until they cannot make a living. What is going on, and how this government is continuing to drive farmers out of business because of its carbon tax and make everything unaffordable to even make a living in this country, is ridiculous, and this member should be more aware of that.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, my colleague talks about the costs to the Canadian economy, but surely he knows that research has shown that there could be up to a $38-trillion cost to the global economy from climate change. The cost of climate change is wildly larger, and the impact on farmers, families and individuals in our country is going to be very severe.

What is the Conservative plan on dealing with the extraordinary cost of climate change? What will it cost our economy, our farmers and our families?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, Conservatives will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime.

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Madam Speaker, in Canada, we have been blessed with generations of abundance and prosperity. Nine years ago, the average Canadian could be confident that, if they worked hard, saved their money and invested, they would be able to afford a home, start a family and leave more for their children than they inherited, and more than they had achieved. That is not the case anymore.

Under the Prime Minister, Canada has seen the worst growth in income per person since the 1930s and is on track for its worst decline in the standard of living in 40 years. The Liberal government has managed to squander the inheritance of generations through irresponsible and wasteful spending. These policies have not made Canada better off, but have impoverished Canadians. The Liberals have also misled Canadians about the true cost of the carbon tax and have failed to prove that their environmental plan is anything more than just a tax plan.

It is clear that Canadians across the country, whether they are farmers, carpenters, business owners or single parents, are just struggling to get by. Canadians are paying the price for this punitive carbon tax and see their grocery bills skyrocketing. It is so sad that the government not only failed to put forward policies in the best interests of Canadians, but also seeks to hide the truth from from them and gaslights them by telling them that they are better off for paying more carbon tax every single year.

The government tried so hard to hide the truth about the carbon tax. It even tried to do it with its own report because it did not want Canadians to find out that the carbon tax is responsible for driving up the cost of almost everything in Canada. The Parliamentary Budget Officer had to call out the Liberal government for blocking the release of its own economic impact report.

Let us be clear. If Conservatives had not applied pressure on the government and shamed it into releasing even just part of the report, we would have never learned of the $1,800 that each Canadian family is paying as a result of the carbon tax. I must say that the motion we have proposed today has already succeeded, in some respects, in holding the government to account. However, the government has not yet offered up all of the data, and Canadians deserve nothing less. They deserve nothing less than the full report and all the data the government has. That is why this motion remains of vital importance.

The Liberals have broken their promise of transparency time and again. It is not too late for them to release the full data on how the carbon tax hurts Canadians. To be fair, we see why the government did not want the numbers out. Its own report shows that the carbon tax has cost Canada $30.5 billion in economic activity, in lost GDP, every single year. That $30.5 billion amounts to the cost of $1,800 per Canadian family every single year, which they do not get a rebate for. The trickle-down economic impact of this carbon tax is too high for a rebate to even begin to address it. This is terrible at a time when, on top of this outrageous cost to our economy and the cost to every single Canadian family across the country, the government knew there was a cost and that Canadians were suffering all along.

Even though the Liberals knew the true cost of their carbon tax, they had the temerity to tell Canadians that this tax was making their lives better. They knew two million Canadians per month were going to the food bank. They knew one in five Canadians is skipping meals just to get by. They heard the stories of mothers diluting their baby's formula, even though it could lead to malnutrition, because they had to stretch the food for their baby due to a lack of money. They knew families were paying hundreds of dollars more for food for every year that the government was in power. Even members of the armed forces, people who fought in the war for our freedom, could not afford the price of groceries and have turned to food banks for help.

In the community of Haldimand—Norfolk, where I reside, the health unit came out with a report earlier this year that warned there was a growing number of residents who do not have enough to buy food that is healthy for their diets. The report said that for many, incomes are not enough to cover even the basic expenses.

Knowing all of this, the Liberal government refused to listen to the cries of Canadians, and it has not responded to the suffering. Even as the evidence mounts of the negative impact of these policies on everyday Canadians, the government has chosen year after year to raise the carbon tax on Canadians. In the middle of this historic cost of living crisis, the Liberal-NDP government decided earlier this year to hike the carbon tax yet again another 23%.

In fact, under the Prime Minister, fuel prices have surged by more than 50%. Then the Liberals refused to give families a summer break from the carbon tax so they could afford just a simple road trip. The Liberals are not done taxing Canadians. They plan to quadruple the carbon tax over the next six years, which would make everything even more expensive.

What the government has repeatedly failed to understand is that, when one taxes the farmer who grows the food, taxes the trucker who transports the food and taxes the store that houses the food, one taxes the Canadian who buys the food.

Why are Liberals putting Canadians through this financial pain at the worst time in our nation's history? The Liberals have always defended their ideological tax on the basis that carbon emissions will continue to go up, global temperatures will continue to rise and Canada will burn if there is no carbon tax, yet they fail to mention that Canadians and our industries already lead the world in sustainable practices. They also do not want to talk about the fact that there is no evidence to show the carbon tax works.

In closing, the Liberal government clearly does not believe in the efficacy of its own carbon tax regime. If it did, why would it not have measures to measure the impact?

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

It being 6:30 p.m. and this being the final supply day in the period ending June 23, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the opposition motion.

The question is on the motion.

If a member present in the House wishes that the amendment be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, we request a recorded division.

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

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(18), the division stands deferred until later today.

Main Estimates 2024-25

[Anita Anand, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

moved:

That the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025, less the amounts voted in the interim supply, be concurred in.

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Pickering—Uxbridge.

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that the lands on which we are gathered are part of the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples.

Today I rise to speak to the 2024-25 main estimates and supplementary estimates (A). The estimates help to ensure that parliamentarians and Canadians are informed of the government's expenditures and their resource plans so that we can be held to account for the allocation and management of public funds. The estimates, in conjunction with the budget and the economic and fiscal updates, reflect the government's annual resource planning and allocation priorities.

I will now talk about the 2024-25 main estimates. The document is divided into two parts.

Part I presents a summary of three main elements: the federal-government-wide projected expenditures for the 2024-25 fiscal year, a historical comparison from one year to another, and a breakdown of planned spending on transfer payments, operating and capital expenditures and public debt charges.

Part II presents the estimates by organization. It also provides more detailed information on the planned expenditures.

Of the 129 organizations presenting funding requirements in the main estimates, 11 are seeking more than $5 billion in voted budgetary expenditures. I want to outline these because they are so very important to the functioning of our country.

Let us think about the $28.8 billion for national defence, including support for Ukraine, and training and equipment for the Canadian Armed Forces. Let us think about $20 billion for Indigenous Services Canada for programs for indigenous communities and legal settlements, $11.4 billion for ESDC to build a stronger and more inclusive Canada to help Canadians live productive and rewarding lives, and $8.4 billion for Global Affairs Canada to advance Canada's place in our international relations.

Let us not forget the $8.4 billion for Health Canada, including funding to expand the Canadian dental care plan. By 2025, the fully rolled-out dental plan will cover nine million Canadians who currently do not have dental insurance.

I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to mention that budget 2024 lays out a bold strategy to unlock 3.87 million new homes by 2031. This includes a minimum of 2 million net new homes, on top of 1.87 million homes already expected by 2031. Federal actions will support at least 1.2 million new homes, and the federal government is calling on all orders of government to build at least 800,000 more homes by 2031.

I urge all parties to support these measures. They are necessary for—

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

I have to interrupt the President of the Treasury Board. The member for Montcalm is rising on a point of order.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Madam Speaker, there is no interpretation.

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

Can we please check to see if the interpretation is working?

The interpretation is working now.

The hon. President of the Treasury Board.

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was saying that I really urge all parties to vote in favour of supports for new housing, supports for the Canadian Armed Forces and supports for Canadians via ESDC. These are measures that are important for the functioning of our country and for the protection and defence of our country. I am sure that all members of this House will recognize that importance.

In terms of the supplementary estimates (A), the estimates present a total of $12.7 billion in incremental budgetary spending, which reflects $11.2 billion to be voted on and a $1.5-billion increase in forecast statutory expenditures.

The primary objectives for that new voted spending on the organizations responsible for that spending are settlements to address past grievances and historic harms committed against indigenous peoples. For example, $1.8 billion is for agricultural benefits and claims and $1.5 billion is for federal Indian day schools and Indian residential schools day scholar settlements.

Funds are also requested by Citizenship and Immigration Canada for support and services for migrants, such as $411 million for the interim federal health program.

Finally, $604.9 million is requested by Transport Canada for purchase incentives for zero-emission vehicles.

The main estimates also include additional information about an important priority for our government: refocusing government spending, as first announced in budget 2023. At the beginning of this exercise, I asked ministers to find savings in their organizations. We have already announced some results. I also want to say that, with this initiative, we will refocus our government's spending on Canadians' current priorities while ensuring that we do not reduce the direct supports and services Canadians need.

As indicated in the main estimates, the government is on track to refocus $15.8 billion over five years and $4.8 billion annually thereafter. This is a very important exercise. It is our government's first initiative to address government spending. The goal of the exercise is to refocus spending, in other words, to spend smarter. The goal is not to reduce the programs and services Canadians rely on.

The fact of the matter is that the government is doing what Canadians across our country are doing, which is examining their own pocketbooks. By refocusing funds to Canadians' most important priorities in this way, the government is ensuring that it can continue to invest in Canadians and in the Canadian economy for years to come.

I want to assure members that this process is and will continue to be fully transparent, as it has been from the start. The government will continue to provide details on the initiative through departmental plans and departmental results reports. To that end, the estimates support Parliament's review of proposed new government spending and the bills ensuring appropriation that will occur thereafter.

Every year, the main estimates and related documents provide clear insight into how the government proposes to allocate taxpayer dollars and help to ensure that our spending is transparent and accountable. I cannot overstate the importance of this information to the functioning of our system of government and our parliamentary democracy.

In safeguarding our democracy, exercising oversight of government spending is one of the most important roles that parliamentarians can play on behalf of our citizens.

To conclude, I would like to say that funding in the main estimates and supplementary estimates (A) is important to delivering on the government's commitment to the health and well-being of Canadians as well as other key priorities: affordable housing, health care, dental care and supports for Canadian families, the elderly included.

That is what we will continue to put on the table. That is what we urge all members of this House to vote in favour of, and to that end, I will encourage us all to support the motion before us.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board talked about providing clear insight into spending in the departmental plans and the estimates process, as well as transparency on all government spending, yet the departmental plans and the departmental results show that almost one-quarter of departments had zero targets set and zero dates set to achieve such targets.

How is Parliament supposed to be providing oversight and proper vetting of spending when the government itself is not even providing targets for the spending or what it plans to achieve in the spending on fully one-quarter of its programs?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Madam Speaker, as always, I enjoy receiving the hon. member's astute questions, including at committee, but if we look across the departmental results reports and the departmental plans, oversight is being done through those plans and through the results reports that we publish every year.

In certain cases, the targets, if they have been recently set, need sufficient time to be filled in, but let us make no mistake: They will be filled in by the departments' deputy ministers, and we certainly put the message out to deputy ministers to make sure that their departmental results reports are as complete as possible.

We believe strongly in transparency. That is why I recently published our trust and transparency overall strategy for the Government of Canada. That includes not only departmental results reports but also a strategy to engage the Canadian public in ensuring a more transparent government and in ensuring that we have time limits relating to the release of information that is requested through ATIP.

Members can see that we do have a commitment to transparency across the board.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister a question on a topic she is quite familiar with because of her former role.

What does she think about the budget being allocated to defence across the country? As a member of NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Canada should theoretically be investing 2% of its GDP in defence, but that is not happening. It is not clear that the plan that has been presented will help Canada meet that target.

Could she elaborate on that? I think it is a bit surreal that a Bloc MP is asking that question, but I think it is important.

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague's question very much.

We continue to support the Canadian Armed Forces, for example by providing $28.8 billion in our budget. We continue to support them with other measures as well.

We recently released an update to our defence policy. It increases our spending for the Canadian Armed Forces, and we continue to increase our spending to achieve the 2% target, but there is still a lot of work to be done on that score, and that includes our procurement and our work with our NATO allies, as well as with the United States.

I would like to mention that when I was minister of national defence, I announced $40 million for NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command, for our continental defences, especially in the Arctic. It is a priority for our government and for me too.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, one of the things we have found most disappointing in the recent budget has been the failure to support people living with disabilities. The amount that has been allocated is about six dollars a day. It will not scratch the surface. We know that every community and every country must be judged by how we treat those who are most vulnerable within our community. The failure to support those who need the most support from the government is really shocking.

I am wondering what the minister has to say about the fact that her government has by and large abandoned people living with disabilities in this country after promising them and giving them hope that there would be something for them in the budget.