The Budget  Less than 50% meant that it would no longer choose management and would not get to pass the business as a family heirloom from one person to another. What did Canadian taxpayers get for this corporate welfare? It was not very much. It turns out the company moved its jobs to South Carolina and sold the IP to Europe, but left the bill with Canadian taxpayers. The only winners were the billionaires.

The Budget  They do not want a more generous government cheque in their mailbox. They do not want corporate welfare for the companies that employ them. They want the government to get out of the way and let them build pipelines. When the Conservative government takes office, it will clear the way for pipelines.

Business of Supply  By the way, we could build them without tax dollars here if we got the government out of the way. I think we should cancel some of the corporate welfare that has poured into the coffers of businesses that have used the money just to beef up the bonuses of their executives while laying people off, which is exactly what happened at Bombardier when the government gave money to the billionaire Bombardier-Beaudoin family.

Finance committee  It is definitely a wealth transfer from working-class people to the super-wealthy. That doesn't even take into consideration all the corporate welfare programs that are typically funded under the guise of green handouts to business, all of which also take from the working class and give to the privileged few. As you just pointed out through your answer, there isn't a single jurisdiction in all of Canada that has returned the revenues from the carbon tax to income taxpayers and business taxpayers.

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1  We saw it impose massive new taxes on small businesses, or at least attempt to, in the fall, before we stopped it. Simultaneously, it is saying that we need billions of dollars of corporate welfare to save businesses from collapse. Why not just get out of the way in the first place, so that enterprise can rely on investment and sales to generate its revenues and pay its bills, rather than constantly forcing businesses to hire lobbyists, suck up to politicians, and turn to government?

The Budget  Politicians give it to bureaucrats and bureaucrats to interest groups, or, in the form of corporate welfare, to companies. The hope is that some of this money will trickle back down through the system to the very people who earned it in the first place. Let us assume that there is a problem with social inequality in this country.

Canada Elections Act  Some tech companies have invested in lobbyists, and they have been able to secure a brand new billion-dollar corporate welfare fund that will create so-called superclusters. Money, of course, will go to the best lobbied-for firms. Big government leads to more lobbying elsewhere as well. Strategas Research Partners produced a graph showing the correlation between U.S. government spending as a share of GDP and the amount corporations have spent on lobbying in Washington.

Business of Supply  Those are called entrepreneurs, but what are entrepreneurs known for? They are known for taking risks. This is not entrepreneurship. This is corporate welfare. This is an attempt to take the risk off the balance sheet of the wealthy interests who have control over the Liberal government and put that risk on the shoulders of Canadian taxpayers.

Business of Supply  How many bus drivers and teachers were invited to the Shangri-La Hotel to talk with the Prime Minister about this 35-billion-tax-dollar corporate welfare bank that the Liberals want to set up? Were there any bus drivers there or were there simply those trying to harvest the biggest return with no risk to themselves whatsoever by offloading that risk onto taxpayers?

The Budget  If the government had required that the executives only make $200,000 a year, which the is the Liberal definition of “rich” out of its platform, then there would have been enough money to hire hundreds of additional employees at the median income rate that is defined by the budget to which I am speaking right now. If this corporate welfare were really about jobs and not about lining the pockets of well organized, well lobbied for, well lawyered, and well connected insiders, then there would have been guarantees for that public money to translate into real jobs for middle-class workers.

Business of Supply  Second, the carbon tax will generate billions of dollars in new revenue for the government, but who will get that money? It is those who can afford to lobby for grants, rebates, and corporate welfare under the guise, of course, of saving the environment. I turn to the rebate that people can now receive if they can afford to buy a $150,000 Tesla car. I guess Rick Russell has now had to give up his truck, but if he wants to get back any of the money he is paying in the carbon tax, he will have to find $150,000 to buy one of these fancy Teslas or Mercedes-Benz electric vehicles, and then he can get $15,000 back.

Human Resources committee  My first question is for Aaron Lee Wudrick. We see these examples of wealth redistribution to the wealthy in corporate welfare, in green energy programming, and in so many other areas. Can you comment on this phenomenon, please?

Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1.  About 200 companies, or 0.1% of Ontario businesses, got 30% of government subsidies, the report calculated. Why? Because the wheels of corporate welfare are greased with money, money for consultants to help navigate Ontario's 65 corporate aid programs in nine ministries, money for lobbyists to push an application along, and money for donations to the politicians who will make the final decision.

Taxation  Mr. Speaker, the Liberal budget offers hundreds of millions of dollars in new corporate welfare programs to the wealthy and well connected. The same budget brings back a tax on charitable donations. A policy that gives handouts to the wealthy and taxes the very groups that feed the hungry and house the homeless is the very opposite of social justice.