Mr. Speaker, Conservatives again are yelling. The member for Yorkton—Melville is suggesting that she supported it. No, she did not. I am happy to go on the record to say that they voted against that policy. Is it a failed policy? I think not. The Canada child benefit is one of the best policies the government has put forward.
There is the old age security and the guaranteed income supplement. There are a lot of seniors in Kings—Hants. Those seniors matter. I try to be an advocate. We have to be a lot of different things to a lot of different people as members of Parliament, but I have tried to be an advocate for our seniors. I ask my Conservative colleagues, is that a failed policy of the government, the increase of 10% to OAS for seniors and the augmentation of the guaranteed income supplement? They voted against it. I guess they can explain why they did not think it was important.
There has been generational infrastructure investment in Kings—Hants, whether in waste water or infrastructure to support housing. There has been a housing boom in our communities. I would ask the Conservatives this: Is the investment under the Canada infrastructure program a failed policy? I would suggest it is not.
Income with respect to heating is important. In Atlantic Canada, the government has put forward programs that would actually help everyone below the provincial median income with up to $20,000 to help move towards a heat pump and give people above the median income access to borrowing and to making investments to improve energy efficiency. This is most important for affordability, but it also reduces emissions at the same time.
Conservatives voted against the heat pump programs every single time. I guess that is another failed policy, yet I have seen the results in my own riding with respect to what it has meant for individuals who have been able to transition off a heating source that was costing $7,000 or $8,000 a year to heat their home, and it brought their energy bills lower. I guess the Conservatives suggest that it is failed policy.
I believe, and I would hope members of the House agree, that fiscal discipline is an important public policy measure. It matters. On that, I would extend an olive branch to MPs who want to talk reasonably and rationally about it, but to suggest that any deficit does not or cannot lead to economic success is a complete fallacy.
Let me give an example Canadians at home would appreciate. I cannot speak for every member in the House, but I can talk about the time when my wife and I bought our first house, and we did not have the money to pay for it. We ran a deficit. We took a mortgage. We borrowed to try to create a better future. I know that we have work to do on housing across the country, but many Canadians would be able to relate to a similar situation when they borrowed to try to build a better future. Governments are no different. Governments have to make choices about whether they want to make investments to create a better economic outcome.
As opposed to looking at this through a binary choice suggesting that any deficit is a bad thing, as opposed to looking at the investments to grow the economy, a better measure is the debt-to-GDP ratio. If we are running a deficit, is the economic growth outpacing the debt that is being taken on?
I am happy to tell my Conservative colleagues that Canada has the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. What does that mean? The economic growth is in proportion to the size of the economy. This is important, because I do not hear a whole lot of intellectual stuff coming from you guys in terms of the economic basis, I am sorry to say. I have to be able to suggest that the size of the economy—