I thank my colleague, Mr. Speaker.
Basically, the finance minister keeps saying that the world has changed. In his view, the world is always changing, so the situation is serious. Here is what has changed recently.
A little over two weeks ago, the U.S. president signed a new executive order changing the way tariffs are calculated on goods exported by Quebec and Canada. Previously, about 85% of our exports were protected under CUSMA. Today, a large number of goods are subject to 25% tariffs, even though they are covered by that agreement.
As a result, nearly 50% of exports from Quebec and Ontario are now subject to tariffs, according to a recent study by the University of Calgary. Business closures have already begun. We saw a critical situation from day one at BRP. There is the case of Meubles South Shore, and there are others. It is starting to look like a house of cards. We asked the government whether measures would be taken. Our job, as an opposition party, is to ask questions.
Two weeks ago in question period, we asked the Prime Minister what he planned to do about this new way of calculating tariffs, which means that we are no longer protected under CUSMA. Two weeks ago, the Prime Minister had absolutely no idea what we were talking about in question period. He was honest and upfront about it. He told us that he would get back to us with an answer. We gave him a week.
Last week, in question period, we asked the Prime Minister what he was going to do since businesses had started to close. My Liberal, Conservative and Bloc Québécois colleagues whose ridings are home to an industrial base are getting messages from businesses that have been struggling over the past two or three weeks and that are concerned. Many of them are SMEs that have exhausted their line of credit. The Prime Minister's response was to wait for the economic update because it would provide solutions. I have not slept for a week. I have never experienced such suspense in my life. I thought that he was going to sort this problem out.
I read the economic update, and then I read it again. I told myself that the Prime Minister could not have forgotten our businesses, but he has forgotten them. Even though they are covered by CUSMA, they are currently facing 25% tariffs. In light of this, we are calling for a very short-term wage subsidy.
The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance have announced measures related to workforce training. While it is true that this measure could be beneficial in other provinces, workforce training was fully devolved to the Quebec government several decades ago. The workforce training strategy is managed in Quebec City. Vocational training is managed in Quebec City. Sector-specific internships for the job market are administered there.
To quickly train workers in fields that are in high demand today, we need to send money to Quebec. Ottawa, however, is averse to sending money to Quebec, since it likes to meddle in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction. I see the Minister of Health, who knows I like her. Her department really likes to do that. At the Standing Committee on Finance, we are conducting a study on spending authority, and the other side does not even know what they are talking about. It is disconcerting. So there are no measures for businesses.
The reality is that the United States is going to remain our biggest trading partner for a long time. This is especially true for the SMEs that are affected by these new tariffs. Large companies, particularly those in the aluminum sector, have the industrial capacity to redirect their exports to other markets, sometimes quite quickly, even if that is not ideal. However, SMEs, like the ones back home on Curé‑Labelle Boulevard in Mirabel and elsewhere, do not have the capacity to do that. Their entire bureaucratic and technical infrastructure is designed to export their products to the United States, and they do not have the resources to protect themselves.
These companies are not oil companies. My colleague spoke earlier about subsidies for oil companies. They are not big banks. They cannot afford to hire lobbyists to convince the government to give them tax credits. They have been forgotten.
The government is bragging about a strong economic record in this update. We are being told that exports to the United States have fallen by 10%, which is significant, given that this partner accounts for 80% of our exports. Canada is a small, very open economy. We are being told, quite rightly, that exports to countries other than the United States have increased by nearly 30% or 40%.
That is good news, especially considering that the Prime Minister has not signed a new trade agreement with a single one of those countries. The government is looking for new export opportunities. The Prime Minister has travelled, he has burned fuel, he has played king all over the world. One might therefore think he has signed agreements. However, we have not increased our export opportunities in a single country because the Prime Minister has not signed any trade agreements. What has increased are oil and gas exports to Europe and Asia.
Does anyone know what good came from this strong economic record? Aluminum exports to Europe increased. Our aluminum producers sent their aluminum to Europe because the Prime Minister was unable to solve the problem with the United States. That is what he is covering up.
The government says that the deficit is lower than expected. That is the other good news from the Minister of Finance and National Revenue. It is true. The deficit was $11.5 billion less than anticipated for last year. Let me remind the House that the big banks have lowered their economic growth forecasts for next year and for the year after that. That is last year's deficit. It is true that there was more growth. We acknowledge that. There was also more inflation. Across-the-board price increases generate revenue for the government. However, tax credits for batteries and tax credits for investments in clean energy account for two-thirds of the amount mentioned by the Minister of Finance. These tax credits went unclaimed because of insufficient investments, yet the Minister of Finance portrays himself as Mr. Investment.
The natural disaster fund accounts for the rest. Maybe the Minister of Finance did not do enough rain dancing, but it seems that there were not enough floods and forest fires this year to use up the $7.5 billion that was allocated.
This means we need to focus on the real issues. There is not really anything new in this document. I can show the document, since it has been tabled, so I will take the opportunity to do so. There is not much that is new, just some promising measures that have already been announced. The government deserves some credit when it develops strategies and takes the initiative, so we commend it for doing so.
There is the national defence strategy, the national auto strategy and the national infrastructure strategy. There is the national critical minerals strategy, to which we got phosphate added as part of Bill C-15. The government had overlooked this, but it had the good sense to accept our budget amendment. There is also a national strategy for nature. What is missing? There is still no national aerospace strategy.
The industry as a whole has been calling for such a strategy for two or three decades. People who truly know what is happening, those who manufacture airplanes, helicopters and parts, those who are in my riding within walking distance of my office, on the south shore and in Dorval, are calling for a national strategy. Why? The answer is so that they can develop the products that the Department of Defence and the government need, because it is a long-cycle industry. We need a strategy so that, when the time comes to order products, we can do so.
Giving press conferences like the Prime Minister and other Liberal members are doing is not enough. Right now, they are giving press conferences. Unions come to us after meeting with Liberal members. They bring up the issue with the Liberals, who then tell them that it would be unfair to the aerospace industry in Winnipeg and Manitoba if there were a Quebec-based strategy. That is what Liberal members have told our unions in Quebec. That would be useful.
I listened carefully to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue. It is not always easy, but I listened to him. He said that he wants the Bloc Québécois to side with the government for once, that it would be good if the Bloc Québécois were on the government's side. He said that Bloc MPs are very partisan, that they are very difficult and very narrow-minded. It takes two to play that game. It takes two to come up with proposals that will shape our industry. Why should we be cozying up to the Liberals when they turn a deaf ear to our proposals?
I will explain why there is no aerospace strategy. We know what is happening in Ontario's auto sector. A lot of the manufacturing workforce is experiencing major structural problems. We also know the government would prefer to move a segment of the industry, possibly to Ontario. I do not know if that is true, but I do know that people are worried about it and that there is no strategy.
That is what is lacking in the economic update. Ottawa bureaucracy is out of touch with on-the-ground realities. There are plenty of examples like that. The Minister of Finance says we need to get on board. Every time there is a budget or an economic update, we make demands. Those demands are costed. They are self-funded, five-year proposals. We make those demands even though we know we will never govern. I can assure everyone that I always renew my driver's licence. I know I will never have a car service. I will keep driving my own car. That is fine. I sit down. The entire Bloc Québécois caucus sits down, and sometimes we come up with what everyone acknowledges are the best campaign platform budgets. That is what happened last time.
The first thing we are asking for is that subsidies to oil and gas companies be eliminated. That is step one. That amounts to $10 billion a year. Imagine how many school food programs could be funded with that money instead of propping up oil companies, which have no problem surviving these days. We never received a response to our request, which is entirely reasonable, rational and in the public interest. Another thing we are asking for is that the digital services tax be reinstated. That is worth $7.5 billion over five years. I see some folks over there nodding or frowning. The Liberals said they did it for the good of Canada. I will quote the government, which said recently that it would not pay an entry fee to negotiate with the Trump administration. The Liberals said that. They said they are proud and they are building Canada strong.
We know that they are building Canada strong. We are a little tired of hearing it. In fact, we do not know when this Canada strong is going to get here. They keep telling us that they are not up for paying any entry fees and will not make any concessions ahead of the negotiations. However, the first thing that the Prime Minister did when he came to power was to make concessions and bow down before the Trump administration. The government wants to build Canada strong. It wants to take a stand and show that it does not pay entry fees to negotiate. In that case, it needs to reverse course on its bad decision and reinstate the digital services tax. If Liberal members want to be proud Canadians, they should behave like it. It seems they do not, however. Meanwhile, our media is losing its fight for survival.
Let us talk about the media. There is a crisis in the media sector. It is not me saying this, it is the Minister of Finance, on page 107 of his economic update. It is a good page. I really liked it. The minister says: “Broadcast journalism in particular is a key part of our community fabric.” Let me stress the word “key”. I like the Minister of Finance. He is a revolutionary. He told us about “the government's intention to seek the views of Canadians and stakeholders on extending the Canadian Journalism Labour Tax Credit”. Now that is a revolution. If the Minister of Finance had been around during the French Revolution, he would have set up a booth across from the Bastille and conducted a survey on the price of brioche, and France would now be under King Louis XLIX. That is what it means to do nothing for Quebec. If members want concrete examples, that is exactly what we have.
We are calling for some kind of emergency wage subsidy for businesses. We have been meeting with business leaders who are telling us they need to keep their employees on the payroll. Some companies are productive and can export if there is a free trade deal. The Prime Minister keeps saying that he will sign an agreement eventually. For these people, the solution is not to send them back to school. The solution is to lower production costs for these businesses through wage subsidies and to cushion the productivity hit caused by the tariffs until the situation improves, so that our regions do not shut down. The Liberals are refusing. I wondered why, because it is a good proposal. We are reaching out to the Minister of Finance.
I thought that the government might be waiting for Cúram to be ready, so it could distribute the wage subsidies through Cúram. Apparently, it has money for Cúram, but not for wage subsidies.
Let us talk about employment insurance, which is designed to help people get through a crisis. We are currently in a crisis. The minister tells us that the world has changed and that we are in a crisis. The unemployment rate has held up a little better than expected. We were expecting worse. We need an EI system that covers more than half of all workers. A little over half of Canadian workers are covered by EI. No one here in the House would be able to renew their mortgage if they told their lender that they have fire insurance that has a 50:50 chance of covering them. That does not happen, yet we are willing to subject workers to that.
We asked for temporary measures, and they were put in place. Those temporary measures were so necessary that they were renewed. There are pilot projects in the regions that have been going on for so many years now that they have become almost permanent. If anyone wants proof of why EI reform is needed, there it is.
I want to talk about the $814 million that was stolen from Quebec. I would think this is of interest to the minister. I have read the Prime Minister’s book; it occupies a place of pride on my bookshelf. It is called Values. Before entering politics, the Prime Minister used to travel around, talking about his values. He spoke about the fact that values are more important than the market. He spoke about the fact that having a market economy and capitalism without values leaves us, as a society, without a compass. Then, he entered politics and bought votes. What happened to values?
The Prime Minister decided to refund a carbon tax. We know how it worked. To ensure it was socially acceptable, it was refunded before people had even paid it. He decided to send refunds to seven provinces for money that had never been paid, all in order to buy votes.
Quebeckers paid for that. As the Parliamentary Budget Officer said, and as officials from the Department of Finance told us in committee, Quebec is owed $814 million. Where is that $814 million? It is everywhere except in Quebec at the moment. It seems to me that would be a good step to take.
Let us talk about health transfers. There is no increase in health transfers. The minister is happy because he was prepared to run an $80-billion deficit. However, we are calling for increases in health transfers. We see the need in our hospitals. We know that system costs are rising by 6% or 7% per year as the population ages. We know that no government ever introduced or implemented as many programs based on the federal spending power as the Trudeau government. That was the Trudeau government's choice. Meanwhile, people are languishing in hospital hallways and unable to get surgery. Is federal funding the only problem? It may not be the only problem, but it is definitely a substantial factor, and it is part of the solution. We also know there will be cuts starting in the next fiscal year. There is no mention of that.
There is also the issue of the guaranteed income supplement. The Liberals talk about affordability, but there is nothing in there to address affordability. The Liberals increased the grocery cheque, which is great. We welcomed that. They based it on the GST rebate, which takes into account the family structure, the family benefits that people receive, and so on.
However, as far as the government is concerned, there are still good seniors and bad seniors. The legal retirement age in Canada is 65. If that has changed, no one has told me. As far as the government is concerned, there are good retirees and bad retirees. There are people aged 75 and older whose pension increased by 10%, and there are people aged 65 to 74, who are told to go away and wait another 10 years before becoming eligible for their old age security benefits. This is discrimination between two classes of seniors. The Liberals say they want to help people with the cost of living. Seniors aged 65 to 74 are the missing group, but there is nothing about them. The Minister of Finance and National Revenue tells us that we are just too partisan and that we should support the government, which wants to take care of seniors.
There is also the increase in the Canada public transit fund. There are problems with public transit, and infrastructure investment is needed. This will promote green and sustainable growth. Half the funds went to Ontario. First, the Liberals cut the fund, reducing it from $30 billion to $25 billion over 10 years. Then they gave half the funds to Ontario. Furthermore, since this falls under Quebec's jurisdiction, there is yet another standoff and everything is taking forever. Rather than being paid out for public transit projects, the money that Quebec is owed is being held up here. Perhaps the Liberals will put it into their sovereign wealth fund. I do not know what they are going to do with that money, but it is taking forever.
Let us talk about loan guarantees for the forestry sector. We have a forestry sector that pays countervailing duties in advance. Often, years later, forestry companies will win in court. They will get reimbursed for those countervailing duties, but in the meantime, they are unable to get credit because they cannot use the money they paid the Americans, those same Americans that the Prime Minister calls our friends in his public communications. Forestry companies cannot go and get that money. We need help for the forestry industry. Where is the help for the forestry industry? The minister seems to think that the world has changed, but nothing has changed for the forestry sector. That is what is happening.
Quebec also wants to be reimbursed for the money that it spent on asylum seekers. I am talking about the $733 million that the Quebec National Assembly is unanimously calling for. Is that partisan or do the 125 people who sit in the blue room in Quebec mean nothing? It is the red room these days, but it will be blue again eventually.
The Liberals are telling us that productivity and innovation are important, but they are closing agricultural research centres in Quebec, in the Minister of Government Transformation's own riding. I do not know what he wants to transform in the agricultural industry, but things are not going well. What is more, the salaries of these researchers amount to about $28 million over five years. For an organization the size of the federal government, that is peanuts. There is nothing in this budget to address that.
I do not know who is being partisan about any of that. I do not know what we are supposed to expect from an economic update like the one today. We need to help people, we need to be working on the ground, we need to be listening and we need to propose measures. The government's answer to all that is a sovereign wealth fund. Yesterday, the Liberals announced that they are going to create a sovereign wealth fund. They went to HEC Montréal for the announcement and put on a show. The audience was clapping like penguins. We asked questions. They would not give us any details, because they said we would get the details today when the economic update was tabled. We opened the economic update document and went to the section on the sovereign wealth fund. We could not contain our excitement. However, what we read was that we are going to get more news in a few months' time. There were no details, apart from one new detail about the sovereign wealth fund: The projects that it will fund are the ones that have been approved by the Major Projects Office, which the Prime Minister already basically controls. They are saying that the fund will be independent, but only just independent enough to say yes to the Prime Minister.
Eariler, we asked officials if there would be an independent investment committee. They answered that they did not know, that the board would no doubt be independent, but that the rest remained to be seen. They have no idea how much it will cost to finance this fund. They do not know what type of bond they will fund it with. They do not know what the governance rules will be. They do not even know how much private investment will be mobilized. They are putting in $25 billion, and we want to know how much private investment that will pull in. They do not know, because they only thought of it yesterday. We are supposed to not be partisan and to just clap for this, but these are valid questions. By all accounts, this fund will not be independent from the Prime Minister's Office, because he is the one selecting the major projects. They wind up on his desk, and he is the one who signs off on them. We are being told that the capital of the people who put money into the sovereign wealth fund will be guaranteed and that they will not be taking on any risk, but the projects we are talking about are so risky that nobody is willing to invest in them unless the government gets involved. Who will end up paying for these projects?
Sovereign wealth funds exist all over the world, and there are all kinds of them. Norway has one. It invests in foreign currencies, something Canada should have done long ago to avoid Dutch disease. The Netherlands' oil exports are killing its manufacturing sector. In Canada, we have never really had one, apart from a similar example in Alberta. Some sovereign wealth funds are used to influence geopolitics, like in China, where the Chinese are buying up infrastructure. Some sovereign wealth funds are used to trade on the foreign exchange market. Quebec's generations fund was a type of sovereign wealth fund. In every case, there was always a clear reason for establishing the fund.
The Minister of Finance and National Revenue has set up a fund to make an announcement. At some point, we will need to know why he is establishing this sovereign wealth fund. I am curious, and we have questions. We are an opposition party, and our job is to ask questions. The minister's job is to answer them. Eventually, he will have to answer this.
If anybody is wondering whether we are happy with this economic update, the answer is no, because it does not update anything. We knew it would not be a big document because we had had discussions with the department. We were not expecting a budget, but we were expecting something, at least. If the minister just wanted to upset everyone by announcing the deficit number, we could have waited for the official numbers in October. We will get them in our inbox.
We cannot be faced with such huge changes in tariffs and in the geopolitical landscape of global trade and then be told that the only solution is to encroach on Quebec's jurisdictions. The Liberals have a majority, as everyone knows. We want to contribute, and we always have. We want to make proposals. However, when someone make a suggestion, someone else has to listen. Someone needs to take action. Someone on the other side of the House needs to be sensitive enough to recognize that every member on this side of the House was elected by folks who deserve to be represented and whose views deserve to be heard. I think the government needs to work on its ability to listen, and I think that may well be the most pressing challenge facing this new majority government.