Finance  Mr. Speaker, it is very true that our economic approach is the complete opposite of that of the Conservatives. They had a hard time generating economic growth. Why? They were giving tax breaks and benefits to the wealthiest, whereas we are investing in the middle class. We have

Finance  Mr. Speaker, the member opposite contrasts their approach to family benefits and the Canada child benefit. Well, let us look at that. The Conservatives' approach was to continue to send child benefit cheques to millionaire families. We stopped sending them to the wealthiest

Finance  Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Canadians had a choice. There were two parties that believed in cuts, while we promoted investments in the middle class and in people working hard to join it. We lowered taxes for the middle class and raised them on the wealthiest 1%. We delivered a more

Finance  Mr. Speaker, I do not blame her for it, but the member opposite seems to be forgetting the last years of the Harper government, when it nickel-and-dimed its veterans, shut down veterans services offices, and demonstrated tax breaks for the wealthiest and boutique tax cuts while

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, we got elected on a commitment to invest in the middle class and those working hard to join it, and that is exactly what we have done. The first thing we did was lower taxes for the middle class and raise them on the wealthiest 1%, which the Conservatives voted

Government Spending   Canadians. That is why we lowered taxes on the middle class and raised them on the wealthiest 1%. The Conservatives voted against that. That is why we are delivering a Canada child benefit that delivers more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and is lifting hundreds of thousands

Carbon Pricing   on the wealthiest 1%. On top of that, we delivered a Canada child benefit that delivered more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families, with tax-free money every month to help with the cost of groceries and school supplies. Unfortunately, both of those initiatives are things the Conservatives

Carbon Pricing   their trust in the Liberal government that lowered taxes for the middle class, raised them on the wealthiest 1%, is delivering a Canada child benefit that helps nine out of 10 Canadian families, and stopped sending the child benefit cheques to millionaires the Conservatives were so

Carbon Pricing  Mr. Speaker, let me begin by reminding the member opposite that not only was the first thing we did lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them for the wealthiest 1%, but that member actually voted against those measures to lower taxes on the middle class. In regard

The Economy  Mr. Speaker, like the Fraser Institute, the Conservatives do not want to talk about the Canada child benefit. I think that it is important. What we did is give more money to nine out of 10 families across the country. To do that, we stopped sending benefits to the wealthiest

International Trade   taxes for the middle class, and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, these are the things that—

Carbon Pricing   forward with lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, they voted against it. Then we moved forward on a Canada child benefit to give more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and did not send child benefit cheques to millionaires, while lifting

Taxation  Mr. Speaker, on January 1st, every single one of our small businesses will see their taxes cut. This is good news for the middle class and for those who are working hard to join it. However, we have made changes to ensure that the wealthiest Canadians cannot find ways to bring

Taxation   and raised them on the wealthiest one per cent. The study they are talking about actually did not even count the Canada child benefit. What I think Canadians would want to hear is whether they will then change back the Canada child benefit to benefit millionaires and take money out

Taxation  Mr. Speaker, the member opposite likes to talk about taxes, but you notice he does not explain why he voted against raising taxes on the wealthiest one per cent and lowering them on the middle class. That is the first thing we did. Then he wanted to continue to send child