SoVote

Ms. Andréanne Larouche (Shefford, BQ)

Mar/31/22 3:52:07 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. Today, we are talking about inflation. One aspect of the Conservatives' motion is about inflation. I am sick and tired of hearing the Liberals say that they are listening and that they are helping seniors when they are leaving out an entire huge segment of seniors, those between 65 and 74 years of age, who make up more than half of the senior demographic. Those hardest hit by inflation are those on fixed incomes. The government talks about the guaranteed income supplement and says it wants to increase it by 10% to help seniors 75 and up, but that is not enough. It is not just us saying this. Community organizations in Quebec need more help. What are my colleague's thoughts on that?

133 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

Mar/31/22 3:52:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. We have taken care of the seniors in Canada, like my parents, from day one, since we reversed the increase in the eligibility for old age security and GIS from age 67 to 65. That was one of the first things we did. We increased the GIS top-up. During the pandemic, we instituted a number of measures to assist seniors, and we sent them funds during that time. Yes, inflation is obviously on everyone's top of mind, as well as affordability. Much like all over the world, it has been caused by many factors. The heart of the matter is that for Canada's seniors rest assured we have their backs. We will continue to have their backs. I look forward again to seeing more measures in the upcoming federal budget that will assist those hard-working seniors that I call the greatest generation that is currently alive.

159 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Mar/31/22 3:53:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, here we are listening to Liberals, and today Conservatives actually want to go after seniors' retirement income. Together, they helped reduce corporate taxes from 28% to 15%. Meanwhile, people cannot even afford a place to live. We have seen how these tax breaks have worked out. I appreciate being heckled by the— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

60 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Mar/31/22 3:54:04 p.m.
Watch

Can we allow the hon. member to ask the question without interruption? The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

19 words

Mr. Gord Johns

Mar/31/22 3:54:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, BMO made a net profit of $7.7 billion. It paid out $2.74 billion in dividends to shareholders. Loblaws made a net profit of $1.9 billion and paid out $484 million in dividends. Suncor made a net profit of $4.1 billion and paid $3.9 billion to its shareholders. In the meantime, gas prices went up. Food prices went up. Bank fees went up. The corporate welfare needs to end. Motions like today's need to be defeated and instead the government needs to support our call to action, which is to charge 3% on the profits of those big corporations that have earned over $1 billion so that we can actually get people the help they need now and make life more affordable.

129 words

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

Mar/31/22 3:55:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am in favour of all measures that encourage business investment and job creation. I am not for measures where we see increased regulatory burden or increased taxes on job creators, on companies. That is where I stand. I am in favour of job creation and business investment. That is what we must encourage. We must drive productivity in this country and improve the standard of living—

70 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Mar/31/22 3:55:29 p.m.
Watch

We have to resume debate. The hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil.

12 words

Mr. John Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil, CPC)

Mar/31/22 3:55:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Calgary Centre. Far too often, it is easy for us to sit in this symbol of democracy and lose perspective on what is happening within our constituencies. The affordability factor is real right now. What many people were saying was a transitory inflation period has actually become a state of permanent inflation, and it is affecting everything from gasoline to home heating. The impact it is having on Canadians is very real, specifically in my constituency of Barrie—Innisfil. A little later I am going to be talking about some of the impacts that were told to me directly from people so that not only this place but Canadians can understand the real impacts inflation and the affordability crisis Canadians are facing today are having on my constituency. Canadians have been resilient for the past two years dealing with COVID. There have been many government programs that have been implemented. As a result of that, we have seen increases in debt and deficit. The latest figures I heard were $400 billion in deficit and $1.3 trillion in debt. What we are saying, through this motion, is that there needs to be some semblance of getting back to a fiscal framework where we are not seeing those levels of increase in debt and deficit through unsustainable government programs. There is no question some of these measures that were implemented needed to be implemented. They needed to be targeted. In many ways, Conservatives supported some of those measures, especially at the beginning of the pandemic. We are getting to a point right now where many Canadians, young Canadians, seniors and families, are losing hope that there is a prosperous future for them because of the fiscal situation they are in. This is a fiscal situation that has been exacerbated by government debt and deficit, which is leaving us vulnerable. We are starting to see increases in interest rates and the service level of that debt is going to have a profound effect on families with mortgages, lines of credit and credit cards. However, it is even going to have a more profound effect on government as this debt piles up and the cost of servicing that debt increases. I would argue there is an attack on many aspects of revenue in this country. We have seen certain sectors of our economy, like the natural resource sector, the fisheries over the last several weeks and other sectors, attacked through legislative and regulatory burdens. Traditional sectors that normally create revenue for the government have been attacked, and that is increasing the vulnerability of not just government revenues but the ability to pay for those increases in servicing costs. Canadians are struggling more than ever as a result of inflation, which is now at 5.7% and is the highest inflation in a generation. It is the highest inflation rate in over 30 years. Canadians are being burdened not just by the inflation but by the level of debt. We saw just recently a Statistics Canada report that showed $1.86 of every household income coming in is going toward servicing debt. Think about that. Just a year ago or two years ago we were at $1.70. That number is steadily increasing and it is causing a problem. The amount that households have added to their debt burden has amounted to $50 billion just over the last quarter. These are staggering numbers that really put at risk those working-class, middle-class and lower-class households in this country that have been struggling and will continue to struggle under this burden of debt. What we are talking about today is at least attempting to get this fiscal house in order. History in this country has shown that previous Liberal governments like the Martin and Chrétien governments were very good at fiscal responsibility and social Liberal tendencies. This is where I would classify my politics. I believe we need to be responsible in our finances, but we also need to look after the most vulnerable. It is the most vulnerable who are at the greatest risk as a result of this debt increase, this debt burden and this out-of-control government spending, debt and deficits. The social safety net programs that many Canadians rely on are at risk as a result of the servicing costs of debt. We really need to get to a point where we are focused on this fiscal framework and getting things aligned. It does not have to come from austerity and it does not have to come from cuts. I will speak about that in a couple of minutes. We know that the government's spending is certainly out of control. Two-thirds of Canadians say that inflation and an affordability crisis are their top economic concerns. Canadians are requiring real solutions to skyrocketing inflation and the cost of living. This is not just hitting households; it is hitting businesses. I just had a meeting with the Barrie Chamber of Commerce, and the increase of costs is a very a real and serious threat and concern to the economic recovery of businesses. A friend of mine who owns a local business just got his carbon tax bill, for example, and that bill alone was $1,384. Businesses with tight margins of, say, 10%, have to come up with 13,800 dollars' worth of sales just to pay for the carbon tax. Again, businesses are getting to a point right now where they are becoming uncompetitive. Gas price is another significant concern. It is up 30% since last year. The price of gas in Barrie today is 167.9¢. Tomorrow the carbon tax is going to see a 25% increase, which means that the price of fuel is going to go up by 11¢. This may not be a problem in downtown Toronto, downtown Montreal or downtown Vancouver, but it is a problem in Barrie—Innisfil, where there are a lot of people who drive to the GTA. They drive for an hour and are filling up their tanks for over $120. I have heard stories that it is costing $120, whereas a year ago it might have cost $65 or $70. This is how much of an impact it is having on affordability for families, and it is taking away from other things. There are seniors who are no longer driving to places for fear that they will have to put gas in their cars, so they are limiting their social interaction at a time when they should be increasing it after the COVID crisis. It is becoming a real problem. There is a story about the Innisfil Food Bank. It is seeing an increase in demand, but it is also seeing an increase in the costs of servicing that demand because of grocery prices. Here is what happens. When the prices increase and the carbon tax increases, the manufacturers and wholesalers pass that on and we end up paying a price for it at the grocery store. We are already seeing that day in and day out every time people go to the grocery store. The Innisfil Food Bank says that more donations will not be enough because as prices skyrocket, more people can no longer afford to buy groceries. Just a month ago, I took advantage of the resources available to me through the House. I sent out a householder to my residents and asked this question: “How concerned are you about the rising cost of groceries, gas and heating your home?” I will give a sample of some of the responses that I heard from Barrie—Innisfil. “I fear my children in their 20's will never be able to afford a home of their own. It's quite heartbreaking”, says Christine of Barrie. “The price of living makes things extremely hard to live. The amount of taxes we pay is ridiculous. If you don't save while you're young, by the time you retire how will you survive? You work for 30 years in a job and just have a Canada pension”, says John of Innisfil. In another one from Innisfil, Garry says, “$6.00 increases in OAS. It's time to get something for seniors. We are staving.” Robert from Barrie says it is “$1.50 per a litre of gas”. That was last month. It is $1.67 this morning. He says it is “$255.00 for 1 month's heating bill. Housing prices + rent [are] out of control.” Monica from Innisfil says she is “finding it difficult to advance and afford an adult life (kids) and keep up with bills even on a teacher's salary”. She is worried about inflation and says, “a recession will happen”. Those are examples of what I am hearing. How do we recover from this? We do not attack those sectors that produce. We make sure that it is about the power of businesses, the people who they employ and the products and services they produce in every sector and region of this country, and that Canada becomes competitive, not just domestically but internationally, so we have the confidence for domestic investment and foreign investment. Let us make sure that we are firing on all cylinders. We have focused on the expense side of the ledger for the last two years. It is time we focus on the revenue side of the ledger, have a budget that Canadians expect, with no wild, out-of-control spending, and make sure that we do things right in this country.

1629 words

All Topics

Mr. Chris Bittle (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.)

Mar/31/22 4:05:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have been hearing speeches from Conservative members, and there is some convenient amnesia across the way. A short six months ago, they all ran on a carbon tax. Every single one of them ran on a carbon tax. Theirs was “the more you burn, the more you earn”. It benefited the wealthiest Canadians, whereas this government's price on pollution gives money back to Canadians. It benefits lower-income Canadians. Why are they forgetting that fact and why do they not mention the rebates when they talk about a price on pollution?

97 words

Mr. John Brassard

Mar/31/22 4:06:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a great question and the answer lies in the report of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. While the Liberals say that 60% of Canadians will get more back in the carbon tax, the Parliamentary Budget Officer says that 80% will receive less than what they pay in carbon tax. This is a fallacy that is spread by members of the Liberal government. They stand up here in the House and tell people things that are not exact. The Parliamentary Budget Officer answered that question, and the people of Barrie—Innisfil are not getting back what they are paying in carbon tax. In fact, it is costing them more.

112 words

Mr. Luc Desilets (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, BQ)

Mar/31/22 4:07:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I would like him to comment on the fact that the Liberal government plans to increase oil production by 200,000 barrels in the very near term and gas production by 100,000 barrels. Given that we all think that is incompatible with our desire to move away from fossil fuel production, what are his thoughts on increasing fossil fuel production like this?

74 words

Mr. John Brassard

Mar/31/22 4:07:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is not going to be a surprise to the hon. member that an attack on our natural resource sector is not what I believe in. I think the natural resource sector has clean, Canadian, ethical oil that has the best environmental standards. Natural gas, as well, has the best environmental standards in the world, the best labour standards in the world and the best human rights standards in the world. I think we should be supplying the world with clean, Canadian, ethical oil and gas. We have the fifth-largest reserves in the world. At a time when we are dealing with geopolitical crises around the world, like the one happening in Ukraine and Europe, we have the ability to meet that supply and demand with clean, Canadian, ethical energy.

133 words

Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP)

Mar/31/22 4:08:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. We agree to some extent on the analysis of the cost-of-living situation and the fact that things are tough for people, but unfortunately, we get yet another unsuitable Conservative response. We in the NDP have a crazy idea: We think we should go look for the money where it is. This year, the big Canadian banks made record profits of $77.7 billion. That is a 39% increase over last year. It is indecent, when people are suffering and are having a hard time paying for groceries and rent. Does my colleague not think it would be a good idea if we increased taxes on companies that make billions in profits on our backs and used that money to invest in people?

134 words

Mr. John Brassard

Mar/31/22 4:09:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I do not happen to believe that earning a profit is a bad thing. I also do not happen to believe nor share the view of the NDP regarding businesses earning a profit. Whether it is a small-town business in Barrie—Innisfil or a large corporation, they pay their fair share of taxes. The NDP talks a lot about a 1% tax on the rich. That is going to generate about $7 billion a year in revenue, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. We have a debt right now— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. John Brassard: Do not clap right now, because we have a deficit of $400 billion, and $400 billion minus $7 billion is $393 billion. Where are they going to get the rest of that money back? Where are they going to get the rest of the money to pay for that deficit? They are going to get it with an economy that is firing on all cylinders, not by picking and choosing winners, and by making sure that every sector in every region of this country is economically firing on all cylinders.

192 words

Mr. Greg McLean (Calgary Centre, CPC)

Mar/31/22 4:10:25 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House today to debate the motion. There is a lot in here that is economically needed, and I think members on the other side of the House will appreciate some of the metrics we need to put on the page about what we do going forward. I am going to start with a story. Eleven days ago, I hosted a town hall meeting in the community of Killarney-Glengarry in the riding of Calgary Centre. I host these to hear directly from constituents about what their concerns are. Let me summarize what I heard: cost of living and paying bills or, in other words, inflation. I also heard about spiralling government debt and no indication that this is a problem for the government. Here is a real touchpoint. A young woman with her first job was shopping for a home in her neighbourhood to buy with her mother. She recognized that house prices were beyond her reach. She wanted answers as to why and how house prices rose so high, so quickly. New homebuyers cannot afford homes. In case it is not glaringly obvious yet to the government, Houston, we have a problem. Housing costs have doubled under the government's seven-year economy-destroying tenure. The best investment in Canada is a passive investment in housing, if people can afford it. It says a lot about the growth sectors that do not exist in the Canadian economy, for good reason. The government has penalized economic growth in Canada. Foreign investment has left Canada. Canadian investors have fewer choices. Canadian companies pursue growth opportunities elsewhere, and I will come back to that later. Canadian pension funds invest elsewhere. I said that housing prices have doubled in Canada in the government's seven-year tenure. What else has doubled? It is the amount of federal government debt, now at $1.3 billion and growing. How about that now-sacred debt-to-GDP ratio? From less than 30% and declining seven years ago, it is more than 50% now, and that supposed fiscal anchor is flexible. I do not think members of the government even understand that metric, let alone how to calculate it. There is one GDP, or gross domestic product, in Canada. There are layers of mounting debt: federal debt, provincial debt, corporate debt and personal debt. Which of these did not increase significantly over the past few years? All of these increased significantly, putting Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio among the highest in the world. How does the government facilitate this massive infusion of cash into Canada's financial system? It is by monetary measures, which the Prime Minister told Canadians he pays no attention to. First, it dropped interest rates to a level close to zero, as in 0.25%, encouraging borrowing and spending. However, at 0.25%, inflation was recently at 5.7% according to Statistics Canada, which always understates this measure. We are, by Canadians' experience, at a higher rate than the 7.1% inflation rate calculated in the U.S. Second, there was quantitative easing. When market forces will not buy the bonds the government issues to print cash, well, we just buy them back and put them on the balance sheet of the Bank of Canada. Canadians own the debt more than once. The mispriced assets on the balance sheet of the Bank of Canada will increase the debt going forward. It is as if the government does not know that all these economic indicators are connected. Deficits lead to higher debt, and higher debt leads to higher debt service and the need to increase taxes to pay just the interest on the debt. Lower interest rates lead to asset price inflation by definition. The government has therefore intentionally raised housing prices and priced new homebuyers out of the market. There is another possibility, though: The government does not really know what it is doing. It is either intentional inflation and the trickle effect destroying the savings of Canadians or incompetence. I am going to talk about the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. This year, the deductions for the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board went up 10% both for employees and employers, yet the CPPIB reported that it had enough assets on its balance sheet to cover its liabilities for at least the next 75 years. Some would ask why there was an increase. When members say in the House that the CPPIB is postpaid compensation, they need to ask the government why it includes the Canada pension plan in its debt-to-GDP ratio as a government asset, if it belongs to the people. It also includes the Quebec pension plan as a government asset against the government's debt, yet it is supposedly postpaid compensation. Was this why deductions were raised 10% this year? Was it to make its balance sheets look a little better, even though it is supposed to go to Canadians going forward? By the way, employment taxes are the most regressive form of taxes. They destroy jobs because they are applied both to the employee and to the employer, so they again increase the cost of doing business in Canada. Perhaps this is what the government is trying to give Canadians as an indication of what to expect with respect to inflation going forward. An illusory 5.7% is marginal compared with the 10% the government has indicated in its CPP deduction increases. Is this what we need to expect from inflation as Canadians? Canadians have their first taste of the effects of the current government's economic mismanagement. The government's dismissive narrative is starting to unravel, with reality hitting really hard. There are many ways in which the government has marginalized business in Canada so that it can no longer pursue the projects that have to be done in order to increase the capital stock of Canada. We no longer invest in Canada. We no longer provide the environment to invest in Canada. How many of my colleagues across the way have touted all these investments that have come into Canada? They are predicated upon a government-run subsidy program that continues to drain Canadians of their savings and puts it into all kinds of programs that are somewhat chosen, yet we do not know the actual effects of that, going down the road. We continue to destroy actual tax-producing sectors while we continue to give money to sectors we do not yet know the effect of, going forward. This is economic micromanagement at the government level, and we do not know the outcome yet. The government is choosing winners and losers here. It is not necessarily going to be any good for the Canadian economy, and it is a bad taste we are getting across the entire Canadian economy. Canadians are finally getting their first taste of the inflation they should have expected when the government started running up over half a trillion dollars in debt over the last few years. Half a trillion dollars in debt means our dollar is going to be worth less at the end of the day, so our houses will be worth more but we will not be making any more money. If we did not have houses beforehand, we are not going to be able to buy one. We are not going to be able to save for our RRSPs, and we are not going to be able to put away enough money so that our kids can go to university. I am sure there will be some kind of program going forward to take care of that. At the end of the day, we are just draining the piggy bank of every future generation of Canadians. It is something we need to keep our eyes on here very closely. I am asking the government to start pursuing measures that look at these metrics, and to bring some forward-looking perspectives to the future of Canadians because they are dealing with the present. The government is spending and spending. We have to get this under control and make sure we balance our opportunities with our future. It is time to get Canada's economic fiscal house in order.

1382 words

All Topics

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)

Mar/31/22 4:19:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I reject the notion that CPP and EI are taxes. They are not. They are called “source deductions”, as related to the manner in which businesses collect them. This member's concept or notion, that somehow just because it is on a balance sheet means it is a tax, is inaccurate. If I have a business and I contribute and collect a benefit for an employee, that will show up on my business in the asset column and my obligation to that employee to pay it out later on will show up as a liability. Therefore, it is entirely correct from an accounting perspective to list the CPP as an asset, especially if there are billions of dollars in there that the government is essentially managing for the people who that money is owed to, later on. It will show up as an asset and it will show up as a liability.

156 words

Mr. Greg McLean

Mar/31/22 4:20:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I did hear what my colleague said, and I want to tell the member very clearly that he is in over his head with his comments. That is not the way it works in business. Businesses do not keep those on their balance sheets. They actually remit them to the government right away and the government puts them over to another organization called the CPPIB, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, which invests that on behalf of Canadians for their retirement. That is the way it works in Canada. To continue to have these on the balance sheet of the Government of Canada when it does the calculation on what it calls its debt-to-GDP ratio is completely facetious, and I will maintain that. The member also talked about this being a source deduction versus a tax, with respect to one versus the other. If source deductions are going to be postpaid compensation, they should be taken off of the balance sheet of the Government of Canada. That is all we are saying here.

177 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

Mar/31/22 4:21:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague from Calgary Centre, this motion has me thinking. Are we not quietly forgetting to reach out directly to the oil companies and ask them how they might also contribute to further funding the treasury and to balancing Canada's budget? Is there no way to get more money from them instead of giving them a free pass?

66 words

Mr. Greg McLean

Mar/31/22 4:22:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the oil sector contributes nearly $25 billion annually to the federal, provincial and municipal governments. It is one of the sectors that contributes the most in Canada, and I think that it is the largest sector in Canada to pay taxes. Some other sectors do not pay any taxes, like those that receive government subsidies.

58 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Mar/31/22 4:22:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member was talking about government interference, and the government picking winners and losers. Without true government leadership, in terms of closing tax loopholes and in terms of strengthening and expanding social programs to create the equality and equity that we seek in our society, they are picking winners and losers. The winners are Scotiabank, with net profits of $10 billion; BMO, with net profits of $7.7 billion; and Loblaws, with net profits of $1.9 billion. That is the creation of winners and losers. The losers are taxpayers. They are everyday Canadians. What I cannot understand is why the member across the way continues to believe that the status quo that is hurting everyday Canadians must continue.

121 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 50