44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 25, 2022 10:00AM
- Mar/25/22 10:15:16 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, we agree with Bill C‑8 in general. We find it kind of anemic, but we are okay with it.
The part that gives us pause is of course health transfers. Yes, the government transferred huge amounts of money during the pandemic, but that was a one-time thing. Quebec and all the Canadian provinces want a permanent transfer that covers 35%. That transfer is not in here, even though it could be fully or partially funded by anti-tax haven measures, which are also not in here.
When will we see these things in the budget?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 10:20:26 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government has shown its true colours. It is about to come into conflict with Quebec and the provinces, since this means that it categorically refuses to increase federal funding for health care with no strings attached. Whether the Minister of Canadian Heritage likes it or not, this sets the stage for a real fight.
My speech will focus on three issues: the lack of health measures, the lack of measures for housing, and support for our businesses, especially those that will continue to be affected by the repercussions of COVID-19 for a long time to come, particularly the tourism and cultural industries.
First, on health, the federal government should mind its own business and look after what falls under its jurisdiction, such as procuring COVID-19 tests.
The government, however, is maintaining the Canada health transfer escalator at 3% until 2027. This is the legal minimum and below the annual increase in health care costs. We can never say this enough, but Quebec and the provinces are unanimously calling for an immediate payment of $28 billion to cover 35% of health care costs, followed by a 6% escalator.
The message from the Liberal government is crystal clear: It believes it spent enough money last year on the pandemic, so it is refusing to provide its share of health care funding. That reasoning is flawed. COVID‑19 spending is one-time and temporary spending, while the federal underfunding of health is a chronic problem that is choking the finances of Quebec and the provinces. Ottawa is therefore perpetuating the fiscal imbalance, but, most importantly, it is ignoring the lessons it could have learned from the pandemic.
As the critic for seniors, I have to say that we owe it to the victims to try to prevent these tragedies from ever happening again. As the critic for the status of women, I think it is sad that a government that calls itself feminist did not answer the call for help from caregivers and health care workers, most of whom are women who have been on the front lines since March 2020 because of this pandemic.
The Bloc Québécois will not give up its fight alongside Quebec and the provinces for a sustainable, unconditional increase in federal health care funding.
Second, we must tackle the supply of housing, as this is still another serious problem in Quebec. Today, to deal with this crisis, Quebec would need approximately 50,000 new social, community and truly affordable housing units, and that is a lot. I can speak to that because Granby has one of the lowest vacancy rates in Quebec. I am a member of a committee where the city and community organizations are working hard to try to find solutions. However, there is no magic wand, and the federal government must follow suit and take action.
Between 2011 and 2016, under the Conservatives, the number of affordable rental units in the private market for households with the greatest needs declined by 322,600, and this seems to be a continuing trend.
At this time, the Liberals are focusing on a suite of programs and initiatives that address all variables of the housing market except for the most important one, which is more available supply and more housing units. Putting more money in the hands of first-time home buyers, mainly by doubling the first-time homebuyers' tax credit, will do nothing to increase the supply of social or truly affordable housing.
Scotiabank estimates that 1.8 million additional units would have to be built in order for Canada to match the inventory of G7 countries. That shows how much of a gap we have to fill. It is no coincidence that the Parliamentary Budget Officer's most recent report of August 2021 estimates that in the absence of additional funding to address this problem, the number of Canadian households in need of affordable housing will also rise to 1.8 million in five years.
It is important to understand that, if housing supply is the crux of the problem, then social and community housing must be the priority, not the English-Canadian vision of so-called affordable housing, which is growing more and more outdated, particularly in an overheated market.
Despite the incredible rise in housing prices, the housing problem in Quebec and Canada is having a much greater impact on the rental market than on the real estate market. That is why the most important indicator to focus on is housing supply, particularly housing for the most vulnerable, who are growing in number. Social and community housing must be the priority.
Right now, the Liberals' strategy is all over the place. Many of their initiatives have failed. We are already halfway through the time frame set out for the national housing strategy, and yet, according to a recent report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the programs specifically dedicated to the construction of housing have spent less than 25% of their budget.
Now is the time to build. Housing will not materialize with a snap of the fingers. If we want to get out of this mess, then we need to exponentially increase our housing supply, particularly our supply of social and community housing.
The national housing strategy, which was launched in November 2017, shows that the government has a good understanding of the impact of housing outside Quebec but it does not take into account Quebec's way of doing things and the AccèsLogis Québec program.
Rather than relying on and promoting what works, the federal government wants to impose its vision, even though its programs do not meet our needs and realities, and focus on affordable housing to the detriment of social and community housing.
There is not enough funding, and that money is not being used effectively. Quebec and the provinces have exclusive jurisdiction over housing. Since housing needs vary quite a bit based on socio-demographic factors, and since provincial and municipal governments are more familiar with local issues, these governments are better able to assess and identify what people need.
Third, I want to talk about assistance for businesses. The Canada emergency business account, or CEBA, was designed to provide zero interest, partially forgivable loans to small and medium-sized businesses to help finance expenses that could not be avoided or deferred as they took steps to safely navigate the shutdowns resulting from public health measures to mitigate the spread of COVID‑19.
Since this program was first launched, the Bloc Québécois has called for amendments to the assistance programs to better meet the needs of businesses. For example, we called for more flexibility in the eligibility criteria. We brought up the issue of business debt early on. A survey done by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, or CFIB, in December noted that more than one-quarter of businesses in Quebec might not make it through 2022. More than half of small businesses have not returned to normal sales, and the average debt of a small business in Quebec was almost $100,000, going even as high as $206,944 for a dine-in restaurant.
According to the CFIB, as of October 31, 1,454 insolvency cases had been filed in Quebec alone, which accounts for 60% of all cases filed in Canada. I should note that small businesses contribute 30% of Quebec's GDP. We are proud of our SME models.
Clearly, measures that only increase businesses' debt levels are inadequate. We therefore support this measure to extend the repayment deadline to qualify for loan forgiveness.
It would also be important for the programs to include businesses that opened after the beginning of the pandemic, like companies in the start-up phase. The Bloc Québécois has already shared other ideas for improving the situation for SMEs, including support for online commerce and for card payment processing fees. We are calling on the government to negotiate with the card issuers to secure lower fees for online transactions.
In closing, the Bloc Québécois will continue to be there for the businesses and people of Quebec, because the future holds many challenges, from inflation to labour shortages. The Bloc Québécois will be in problem-solving mode, laser-focused on the needs and demands of Quebec.
I have one final point to make about Quebec's demands. We had concerns about Ottawa respecting Quebec's jurisdictions, which appear to be infringed upon by several of the bill's measures. That is why we voted in favour of the bill in principle, in order to better understand the scope of certain parts of Bill C-8.
Based on the testimony we heard and the government's responses in committee, we came to the conclusion that Quebec's areas of jurisdiction were indeed being encroached upon. This is the first time the federal government has dared to interfere in the area of property taxes by seeking to penalize non-resident, non-Canadian second home owners.
The intrusion could not be any clearer. It was illustrated and explained very well by constitutional expert Patrick Taillon, who testified before the Standing Committee on Finance in February 2021.
We introduced a single amendment that would correct the problem. We tried to find a compromise by proposing measures for property taxes, to make this acceptable to provinces that did not want it. Unfortunately, the Liberal committee chair ruled the Bloc Québécois amendment inadmissible before it could even be debated.
Once again, this government is trying to stick its nose in where it does not belong. It needs to mind its own business.
1634 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 10:30:48 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, I agree with almost all of the member's speech and I would especially like to bring up some more issues on the tourism and hospitality sectors that she briefly mentioned.
I have been working a lot on that file lately. The tourism and hospitality recovery program was brought in before omicron, when it was assumed that the pandemic was over, yet it is not. Businesses are still struggling. She mentioned some of the companies that do not qualify, such as start-ups.
Another group of businesses that do not qualify for the program are businesses that are seasonal. Many tourism operators in Canada are seasonal, and yet these companies are basically prohibited from qualifying for this program. I wonder if she could comment on that.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 10:31:53 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. It gives me an opportunity to come back to something that I was only able to talk about briefly, and that is help for sectors that will continue to be affected for quite some time because of the pandemic.
My colleague is right that this program dates back to December, before the arrival of the omicron variant. That seems like a lifetime ago because a lot has happened since then. Since we are talking about tourism, I would say that we are coming to the realization that we still have a long road to travel.
That is why I talked about the importance of having more flexible, more tailored programs for sectors like tourism and cultre that are still going to be affected for quite some time.
In committee, we asked the following question: Can we get resources to provide more support to self-employed workers in the cultural industry?
We were told that it was too complicated technically speaking. In 2022, can we find solutions, provide support and show some flexibility in order to help them?
Yesterday, members of the Bloc Québécois talked a lot about the importance of predictability. While attending meetings of the Haute‑Yamaska RCM's strategic business intelligence committee, I noted that this is what tourism operators are calling for.
The Government of Quebec and the provincial governments have a plan for lifting restrictions, but the federal government does not. It is important for businesses to be able to plan ahead. These are measures that Ottawa could do something about in order to help these sectors, which will continue to be affected by the pandemic for quite some time.
288 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 11:25:47 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member is absolutely right.
Not only are we listening, but we have been working together for several months now. My colleague, the former health minister, did just that for several months, from the beginning of the pandemic. We talk almost every week. We are working together. That is why we now have a Canada health transfer that is going to increase from $43 billion to $45 billion and why we have also allocated an additional $70 billion during the pandemic, on top of the $3 billion for long-term care, the $3 billion for mental health care and another $3 billion to support people who want to stay in their homes and receive the appropriate care.
Unfortunately, I see the Chair is rising a little sooner than I would have liked.
140 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 11:27:15 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this allows me to highlight the role, importance and benefits of a federation that has been working together for more than two years.
The reason why Canada was able to emerge from the pandemic earlier and in better shape than many other countries is that we had the benefit of a federation where governments worked together to deliver 81 million doses of vaccines, 400 million rapid tests and several billion pieces of PPE. We were able to provide assistance to those who needed it. Fully $8 out of very $10 was provided for people to buy groceries, even if they were unemployed because of the pandemic.
All of that was possible because of the strength of our federation.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 11:42:36 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we understand that while inflation in Canada is concerning at 5.7%, we are taking actions to increase affordability. We know that we are under the U.S. average of 7.9% and the OECD average of 7.2%, but we are also doing what it takes to be there for businesses. I am proud that Canadians, through their resilience during the pandemic, have actually created more businesses today than there were before the pandemic, but I will keep working with members like the member for Langley—Aldergrove to find solutions for businesses, for farmers and for all Canadians.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 11:46:18 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, since the release of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls in 2019, the Liberals still have not released a national action plan with targets, timelines and funding to address this ongoing genocide. Rates of violence have dramatically increased during the pandemic, and the Liberal government keeps stalling.
Our lives are valuable. We are not disposable. When will the government implement a national action plan with timelines and resources to address this crisis and save lives?
82 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/25/22 12:33:44 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Mr. Speaker, I want to come back to the point of jurisdiction and remark that, coming out of 2004, Canada had a model for health funding predicated upon health accords where the federal government played not only an important funding role, but also a convening role. We had provinces that were not told what to do by Ottawa, but they came together with Ottawa to determine common priorities and then a funding structure. We moved away from that under the Harper government and this current government, despite having committed to it, has chosen to not renew that model. That means that we do not have those tables for collaboration on something as important as health funding.
Could the member speak to that model and the role that engaging in that model on an ongoing basis can play when we face emergencies such as the pandemic?
145 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
