moved:
Motion No. 78
That Bill C-15 be amended by deleting Clause 373.
Motion No. 79
That Bill C-15 be amended by deleting Clause 374.
Motion No. 80
That Bill C-15 be amended by deleting Clause 375.
Motion No. 81
That Bill C-15 be amended by deleting Clause 597.
Motion No. 82
That Bill C-15 be amended by deleting Clause 598.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are facing multiple overlapping crises, from difficulties finding affordable housing and buying groceries to feed their families, to a climate emergency that threatens our very planet. The budget was an opportunity to meet this moment. Unfortunately, in New Democrats' view, it has failed. In fact, it would actually reverse many measures the Liberals themselves told Canadians were essential just months ago.
New Democrats believe much more can and should be done to build a stronger, more prosperous and independent Canada that works for all Canadians. Accordingly, we proposed a number of amendments and changes to the budget to meet this objective. Today I will highlight those at report stage that relate to sections of the budget that we argue should be deleted.
First, the Liberals' decision to repeal the digital services tax would hand a major victory to U.S. tech giants at the direct expense of Canadian taxpayers and an even greater victory to Donald Trump. When the Liberals announced this measure in budget 2021, they described it as essential “to ensure that corporations in all sectors, including digital corporations, pay their fair share of tax on that money they earn by doing business in Canada.” Those are not my words. They are the words of the Liberal government. When the Trump administration objected, the Liberals pledged to abandon this measure immediately.
The digital services tax was specifically designed to ensure that the largest U.S. tech giants, companies like those led by Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, contribute fairly to the Canadian economy with the profits they make here from Canadians. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated it would raise $7.2 billion over five years, revenue that could have supported public services, infrastructure and programs Canadians need and rely on. Instead, the Liberals caved to Donald Trump, walked away from billions in revenue and gave up a tool meant to level the playing field for Canadian businesses, all without negotiating a single benefit for Canada in return.
The result is that the Liberals are rewarding the biggest foreign tech corporations while eliminating tens of thousands of family-sustaining jobs and slashing services that Canadians rely on. New Democrats say that is the wrong way to go.
Second, the budget would repeal the underused housing tax during a housing crisis, which is a truly baffling decision. When this measure was first introduced, the Liberals described it as “a national, tax-based measure targeting the unproductive use of domestic housing that is owned by non-resident, non-Canadians”, arguing that it would ensure foreign owners who use Canada as a place to passively store wealth in housing “pay their fair share”. Again, it was the Liberals who said that, yet in this budget, the Liberals today wish to eliminate this measure entirely. I guess the development industry has gotten to them.
The PBO estimates the underused housing tax would raise $693 million over five years. Repealing it means we would be walking away from hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue that could be used to support truly affordable non-market housing, municipal infrastructure or other public priorities. It would also remove an important policy lever designed to discourage vacant foreign-investor-held properties at a time when Canadians are struggling with some of the worst housing affordability challenges in our country's history. This would encourage premises to stay vacant when renters are desperately in need of spaces to call home.
Third, while working-class Canadians are told by the government to make sacrifices, the government is proposing to repeal the luxury tax on private jets and yachts. The contrast could not be more glaring: austerity for working people, and tax breaks for those at the very top. It is also another total liberal backflip. In budget 2021, the Liberals argued that “Those who can afford to buy luxury goods can afford to pay a bit more”, especially at a time when ordinary Canadians were making sacrifices to keep our economy afloat post-COVID.
To New Democrats, that logic still holds, yet the Liberals are now abandoning the luxury tax on private jets and yachts entirely. Their justification is that the luxury tax costs more to administer than it brings in, but their own 2025 budget contradicts this claim. Eliminating the tax would cost $135 million over five years in lost revenue. Walking away from this revenue is a political choice, one that benefits the wealthiest in Canada, while the Liberal government eliminates tens of thousands of family-sustaining jobs and slashes services Canadians rely on because it claims to have a revenue problem.
What makes this decision even more troubling is that unions in the aviation and boating sectors have proposed practical solutions to address the potential industry impacts of this measure, not a full repeal of the luxury tax. Instead of listening to workers and refining the policy, though, the Liberals are listening to the ultrawealthy in this country and seeking to scrap it altogether. The result is a policy retreat that gives up hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, abandons an important tax fairness measure aimed at the ultrawealthy and ignores the constructive proposals put forward by workers and their unions who were ready to help improve the system rather than dismantle it.
Fourth, Bill C-15 contains a serious threat to Canada's democratic foundations. Division 5 of part 5 contains clauses that would grant federal ministers sweeping Henry VIII-style powers to temporarily exempt any individual corporation, individual, partnership, association or organization from the application of almost every federal law and regulation. Although the Liberals made a deal to accept Conservative amendments at committee to add some limited guardrails to these provisions, the core issue remains. This legislation would give ministers the extraordinary power to exempt specific people and corporations from federal laws and regulations. These exemptions could override labour standards, health and safety rules, environmental protections, indigenous rights and more. Even with the limited guardrails, the scope of potential exemptions remains incredibly expansive.
This undermines the separation of powers by allowing the executive to override laws passed by this Parliament without full transparency or accountability. These clauses do not streamline regulation, as has been claimed. Rather, they erode the rule of law and create a two-tier system where laws passed by Parliament can be suspended arbitrarily. Legal experts and civil liberties advocates maintain that this is not true regulatory sandboxing, as is claimed. They argue that even with the deal cut with the Conservatives, this approach is too broad and is less transparent than existing sandbox frameworks in other jurisdictions.
The NDP maintains that these clauses cannot be fixed through backroom deals between the Liberals and Conservatives. Indeed, the government still has not publicly justified why such extraordinary powers are necessary. Measures of this magnitude should not be buried in a 600-page omnibus budget bill, which Liberals themselves, in opposition, said they would not bring in. Once in government, it is a different story. If the Liberals believe these powers are essential, they should introduce stand-alone legislation that can be fully studied and debated transparently. To protect democratic governance, the rule of law and Canada's constitutional order, division 5 of part 5 should be removed from Bill C-15 entirely.
Fifth, clauses 373 to 375 of Bill C-15 would retroactively redefine “province” to exclude the territories in the veterans health care regulations as it relates to accommodation and meals payment by veterans in long-term care. In short, this would allow Veterans Affairs Canada to legitimize its past overcharges to veterans and nullify ongoing litigation aimed at securing reimbursement for affected veterans. Canada's Veterans Ombud, retired Colonel Nishika Jardine, has written to the Minister of Veteran Affairs asking that these provisions be removed from the bill. In her words, “using retroactive legislation to correct administrative errors is both inappropriate and unfair and undermines confidence in government decision-making”.
She continues:
Ultimately, it is clear to the Veteran community that Bill C-15 [changes] are meant solely to correct an error made by the Department and to deny [veterans] compensation for the overcharge. VAC already faces growing reputational backlash over the manner in which it communicates with Canada’s Veterans, their families and Survivors. I fear this retroactivity measure, if enacted, will only increase the deep distrust....