44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 29, 2022 10:00AM
- Sep/29/22 12:33:15 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, since my Conservative friends have no qualms about moving essentially the same motion today that they moved on Tuesday, I am not going to worry too much about asking essentially the same question that I asked a Conservative member on Tuesday, especially since I did not get an answer to it anyway.
In this intense period of fighting climate change, the federal government continues to invest $14 billion in direct and indirect support for fossil fuels. In Quebec, an entire infrastructure is being created to support renewable energy. A company in my riding is working on developing electric engines for aircraft. This is key. We need more of this. The aviation industry emits 3.5% of all greenhouse gases on the planet. We will have to address that eventually. The $14 billion that the government is investing in oil could be invested in new technologies. This would create wealth and jobs and would combat greenhouse gases.
Would my colleague not agree?
165 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:34:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, our fossil fuels have come a long way thanks to new technologies. We must never forget that.
As I have already said, I am not opposed to other energy sources. We are simply not there yet. Let us stop burying our heads in the sand. The demand for energy continues to rise. As I said, back home we had a great energy transition project planned involving liquefied natural gas, which would have reduced the number of coal-fired power plants in the world and eliminated Europe's dependence on the Russians.
I think we need to take another look at this, all of us together. We need to sit down and work together to develop the resources we have here in Canada.
124 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:35:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am rather shocked by the inanity of the comments I have been hearing from the Conservative benches since this morning.
The former leader of the Conservative Party said that taxation is theft. He said Canadians were being robbed. He used the rather odd analogy of dumping a bottle of beer out on the ground, saying that it served absolutely no purpose.
Does my colleague from the Conservative Party not think that, if taxes are well thought out and progressive and take care of the less fortunate, they pay for public services, a social safety net, roads, schools, universities and hospitals for the people in his riding?
An American doctor once said that taxes are the price we pay for civilization. Has the Conservative Party forgotten that when we pay taxes, we get services in return?
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:35:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, if the government had properly managed the budget from the beginning, we likely never would have gotten to this point.
I recall that in 2015, stimulus measures meant that there was no need to inject money into infrastructure or the economy, because the stimulus drove economic growth.
This government is unable to predict anything. Everyone knows that what goes up must come down. The economy goes through highs and lows. The economy was on a high and the government was just throwing money around. Now, we are struggling. People are struggling. Interest rates are skyrocketing. People are struggling to put food on the table. People no longer know what to do. They are very worried about debt.
The government has been irresponsible.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my dear friend and colleague, the hon. member for Winnipeg North, which is in the beautiful city of Winnipeg in the beautiful province of Manitoba. I know it will be riveting for everyone to hear the member's remarks, after I give mine of course.
I am pleased to respond to this motion today, brought forward by the official opposition. The government’s timely and targeted measures played an important role in helping Canadian businesses weather the pandemic and now respond to the global inflation that has taken a hold of Canada and the world for reasons we know quite well. It has helped Canadian businesses and workers deal with the economic uncertainty and financial challenges brought on by COVID-19, by supply chain issues and now by the subsequent and very unfortunate barbaric invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
Our government enacted its plan while also exercising fiscal responsibility and prudence. It is a serious plan with serious leadership. Our actions have built a resilient foundation as the world economy continues to face strong headwinds.
I remind my hon. colleagues that if they have read the news in the past couple days about what is going on in Europe regarding movements in bonds and stock prices, and Nord Stream, there continues to be greater uncertainty in the world economy that we too will face and that is coming to the shores of North America. That is why we need serious leadership for these very uncertain times.
Canada is faring better than other G7 countries in these difficult times. The OECD continues to project that Canada will have the strongest economic growth in the G7, both this year and in 2023. The OECD just revised this week its projections for economic growth.
In addition, Canada has the lowest total government deficit in the G7 this year, and by far the lowest net debt burden among these countries. This is due to our government's overriding commitment to fiscal prudence, to maintain a fiscal framework and to always maintain our AAA credit rating to ensure a good, strong fiscal position, not only today, but going into the future for all our children, including my three kids.
However, Canada is not immune to adverse global developments. Global supply challenges and elevated energy prices resulting from the illegal, barbaric Russian invasion of Ukraine are adding upward pressure on global prices, including in our country. We also know that inflation is a global phenomenon that is a lingering result of the pandemic. It is exacerbated by worldwide events, and it is making life harder for many Canadians, including those back in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge.
Canada’s job market is strong, though, and businesses are doing well. Corporate profit margins and corporate balance sheets are actually very robust, and companies are investing in this country. We have seen this in the automotive sector here in Ontario. We have seen this with our steelmakers here in Ontario. We have seen this with our artificial intelligence in organizations like in the city of Montreal.
That is why our government support programs continue to be so important for the Canadians who continue to face challenges today because they are exposed to high inflation, including seniors, folks with fixed incomes, and working Canadians.
We have an affordability plan that includes many important measures. This is to support the most vulnerable people in our communities, to help them at a time when the cost of living is a real challenge for many Canadians. Our affordability plan is a suite of targeted measures totalling $12.1 billion in new support in 2022 to help make life more affordable for millions of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, including those in my wonderful riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge.
Simply put, we are helping Canadians cope with inflation, and I am very surprised that the Leader of the Opposition did not mention our measures in his motion.
Therefore, allow me to outline some of the key measures in this plan that will help Canadians manage inflation, including the GST credit. We will double it with Bill C-30 for six months to help 11 million Canadians, with $2.5 billion in relief going to the Canadians who need it the most, like our most vulnerable: single mothers, seniors and folks on fixed incomes.
It is something that is concrete and tangible. We can get it out the door before the year ends. I am glad to see, if I understood correctly, that the official opposition party will be joining us in moving this bill quickly through Parliament and having it receive royal assent, so we can get this help to Canadian families.
In Bill C-31, we have a one-time top-up for the Canada housing benefit to assist nearly two million renters with $500. Again, it would be timely relief that would provide help to Canadians who need it the most.
I will say one thing on the Canada pension plan, because it has been mentioned by various individuals. The CPP was enhanced in June 2016 by our government, after coming to an agreement with all provinces in Canada, to ensure that Canadians have a secure and dignified retirement in their golden years. It is something we worked on with all provinces and we came to an agreement. It demonstrates, again, what I call serious leadership. It is leadership that recognized that Canadians who were retiring needed their Canada pension plan to be enhanced from the level it was at. It was called the replacement rate on their wages and salaries. This is so important because many Canadians do not enjoy a defined benefit pension plan provided under unions or provided to public sector employees.
When Canadians retire, they depend on the Canada pension plan. It is indexed. It is monthly. It is an annuity stream. It is one of the best examples of how Canada is leading the world in ensuring a secure and dignified retirement for its citizens. It was applauded by all corners of our country and somewhat supported by different political parties at the provincial level. These are contributions by our citizens so they can have a great, secure and dignified retirement. This is something we need to continue working on with the types of measures that assist Canadians. Again, this is what I call serious leadership, prudent leadership and reasonable leadership.
On the question of employment insurance, employment insurance is about contributions. They are contributions by employees and employers for when someone is laid off or when there are changes in the economy.
Earlier this week, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, otherwise known as OSFI, released its actuarial report on the employment insurance system. It is in the Employment Insurance Act, something that has been in existence under Conservative governments and Liberal governments. It talks about the seven-year break-even rate. The funds do not go into general government revenues. There is an operating fund for EI; it is there. I was actually reading the report this morning, again from OSFI's chief actuarial officer, and it talks about the EI system.
We know we need to continue to alter and change the EI system to respond to changing workplace requirements and job requirements given the sectoral and geographic changes that happen in our economy and our country. It is very important that when we speak about EI and speak about CPP, we note that these are bedrock programs for our social safety net. They are there to assist Canadians.
Thus, I say again that we need serious leadership at times when there is economic uncertainty and when there are global events happening. To use sound bites and cliches, I think, is a disservice.
On the question of dental coverage in Canada, I said in the prior opposition day that as members of Parliament, we meet a lot of different constituents. I have met constituents who are dealing with dental coverage, especially seniors, and who do not have dental coverage. They did not belong to a public sector union or are not covered under benefits when they retire. They have no coverage. When they go see a dentist, they are paying out-of-pocket.
We need to cover for those seniors. They deserve it. They deserve our support; they deserve our help. That is exactly what our government is going to do. We are going to start off, this year, helping those under 12 with income-tested and means-tested programs. I greatly support means-tested programs. Then we are going to help seniors as well. We are going to make sure that this is in place because it is the right thing to do.
That is, again, dealing with serious leadership in these times and identifying issues that we can all work on as parliamentarians. We can work together to make sure we are taking care of individuals who need assistance.
Seeing a dentist is important for our health, but it can be expensive. A third of Canadians currently do not have dental insurance, and in 2018, more than one in five Canadians reported avoiding dental care because of the cost. That is unacceptable in our country. For these reasons, the government has previously committed to providing dental care for uninsured Canadians with a family income of less than $90,000 annually.
As I know my time is quickly running out, I wish to say happy Thursday to all of my dear colleagues and to all of their constituents at home.
1604 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:46:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I like to look at both sides of the coin to see the positive and the negative aspects of a situation. The government has invested and continues to invest a lot of money in many areas. We cannot be against a good thing. However, the other side of the coin is that the positive impact of some measures is temporary, while other measures are just making up for the lack of investment in previous years, not just by this Liberal Party, but also by the Conservatives. We have made up most of the lost ground in certain areas but we are just getting started in others. Let us stay positive.
The current motion seems like a good idea, because everyone would like to pay less taxes.
Let us now look at the other side of the coin.
Could my colleague explain the impact of a recession on services and debt if government coffers were emptied by a combination of more money going out to taxpayers and less revenue coming in because of the reduction, elimination or suspension of a tax?
182 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:47:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in terms of where our economy is, as we saw in the GDP report that came out this morning, the Canadian economy continues to grow. We are seeing the impact of uncertainties in global dynamics and of higher interest rates brought on by the Bank of Canada, but I will say this. We have continued to strengthen our social safety net, whether through the Canada child benefit, the third improvement to the Canada workers benefit, a program I really love, the 10% increase to the GIS, the 10% increase to old age security or creating the environment to grow our economy. That is why I ran as a Liberal MP in 2015 for the economy. I saw the anemic growth that was happening under the prior government.
It is important to take all those things into consideration. We are moving the economy forward and have a strong fiscal framework. We can respond when we need to.
158 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:48:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are many reasons why we have inflation happening right now in Canada. Some things we do not have control over and some the government very much does. One of those things is corporate greed. We have heard from economists at Canadians for Tax Fairness, who say there is a very simple reason for this inflation and for the affordability crisis. It is because corporations are taking the opportunity to raise prices. They also say the people who have the least are being asked to sacrifice the most.
As a member of the government, would this member support a corporate tax that would look at the massive profits that corporations are gouging consumers with? Does he look at a tax as a potential opportunity?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:49:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first, on any sort of consumer gouging that is happening, we introduced in prior legislation, which I think was in the BIA, changes to the Competition Act to give the Competition Bureau more power when that occurs. We never want to see that occur. I hate crony capitalism; I very much dislike it. The Competition Bureau needs to be strengthened and we are doing that.
With regard to taxation, very frankly, every Canadian and every organization needs to pay their fair share of taxes. We have a progressive tax system. We have actually made it more progressive over the last six years. We cut the middle-class tax rate when we first came in. We are raising the basic personal expenditure amount to $15,000 and not providing it to those in the upper incomes. It is a great policy. We are taking people off tax rolls, including seniors and hard-working Canadians, and we will continue to do that. Recently, we increased the corporate tax rate on banks and financial institutions, again asking those organizations that can pay extra to do so.
We will continue to do what is right for our economy. We will continue to ensure that everyone pays their fair share so we can deliver the services that Canadians depend on day in and day out.
222 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:51:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, if we talk about what companies need right now, it is jobs. We are short 1.03 million jobs in this country, and we have a government right now that is looking to increase taxes on the workers who are trying to work and who are not getting by. Inflation is caused by more money chasing fewer goods, and one of the ways to produce more goods is to have more workers.
Companies are looking for employees who make the food and truck the food across our nation. To ensure that we produce more of the innovation we need for Canada, they need workers. If companies had more workers, it would mean more payroll taxes, which would go to the government. It does not make any sense that we are taxing Canadians more to produce more money when we just need more workers.
What is the government doing to create more workers for Canadian companies?
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 12:51:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in my riding I have the training facility for LiUNA Local 183, one of the largest private sector construction unions in the country, and the carpenters' union. Through the union training and innovation program, or UTIP, and through the labour mobility tax deduction for workers to move into different areas, our government is right there working with unions. We are right there with the skilled trades, making sure that, like my father, who was a labourer, carpenter and roofer, the next generation of workers is there to build our communities, maintain our infrastructure and continue to move this country forward. We will be there today and we will be there tomorrow.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I like to think of what is being proposed by the Conservative Party as another opportunity for us to really express the contrast. What a difference there is between the Conservative Party and the governing party, the Liberal Party of Canada. We have a Prime Minister, ministers and in fact an entire Liberal caucus who are very much focused on ensuring that we have an economy that works for all Canadians. That is our priority.
It should be no surprise that back in 2015 when we formed government, we made a commitment to Canada's middle class and those aspiring to be a part of it. If we take a look at the policies, whether they are budgetary measures or legislative measures, members will find that we have been consistent virtually from day one.
When we had the worldwide pandemic, and I emphasize “worldwide”, we responded by supporting Canadians. We supported them in a big way. For millions of Canadians, small businesses and individuals, we were there. We spent billions of dollars in support, and the Conservatives actually voted in favour of many of those billions of dollars. However, today, they criticize us for spending that money. There is a word in the dictionary that would best describe this but it is unparliamentary so I will not say it. However, I can tell members that the Conservative Party of Canada is all over the map on all sorts of economic and environmental issues. The Conservatives are not consistent.
Last Tuesday, in an emergency debate, they talked about taxes, and they used the example of the price on pollution. Members will remember that Stephen Harper was supportive of a price on pollution, but the Conservatives back then said, “No, we don't support a price on pollution.” They were jumping up and down in opposition saying that it was not a price on pollution but a tax. Then the former Conservative leader, the one before the interim leader, indicated very clearly that he supported the principle of having a price on pollution. That leader was the one who led the entire group, and every Conservative candidate in Canada campaigned on a price on pollution. However, again, we see members of the Conservative Party taking a massive flip. They have changed their policy, even though they campaigned on it, and now they do not support a price on pollution. Now they are talking about other taxes.
We can think of the leadership of the Conservative Party and the need to be consistent. What did the Conservative leader talk about? My colleague from Kingston and the Islands has raised this on a couple of occasions and the Minister of Finance has raised it. Many of us in the Liberal caucus do not understand why the leader of the official opposition today, as a leadership candidate, said to all those who wanted to listen to invest in cryptocurrency. He said that was the way to fight inflation. He encouraged Canadians and his followers to invest in it.
We have to feel for the individuals who followed the advice of the Conservative leader. Who knows? Maybe it was not his personal idea; maybe it was from another Conservative. I do not know. The bottom line is that it was a stupid idea. At the end of the day, how many Canadians lost thousands of dollars because they listened to today's leader of the Conservative Party just a few months back?
We can think of the Bank of Canada, an institution recognized around the world for its independence and good stewardship on the issue of Canada's money supply and the impact it has on our economy. Well, the leader of the Conservative Party had an idea: He would fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada. How bizarre is that?
There were even Conservatives who did not support that. I can recall at least one who was somewhat displaced from the front bench and the role he was playing because he was vocal that this was a dumb idea. He spoke truth to power, many would ultimately argue.
The Conservatives talk about wanting tax relief and wanting to give relief to Canadians because of inflation. There are two things that come to mind. Number one is that they need to take their collective heads out of the sand and recognize that inflation is taking place around the world. In the U.S.A., the inflation rate is higher. In Europe and in England, the inflation rate is higher. It does not mean that Canada should not be doing anything.
We have a progressive government that has consistently, from 2015, been there for Canadians in a very real and tangible way. In fact, we have brought forward two pieces of legislation that would provide virtually immediate relief for Canadians. We all know, in regard to the GST rebate, that Bill C-30 has passed into committee. That was to give 11 million Canadians money in their pockets to assist them in dealing with inflation. Originally, the Conservatives opposed it. That is hard to believe. How do they oppose something when they are saying they want tax breaks and that is what we would be providing? We would be providing cash in people's pockets, and originally the Conservatives opposed it.
I am grateful. I do not want to come across as being ungrateful all the time. I am grateful the Conservatives actually changed their minds again. This time, 11 million Canadians are going to benefit, because of the Conservatives changing their minds and supporting sending the legislation to committee. I am an optimist, with my fingers crossed and all. I am hoping it will go through the committee and get through third reading, and hopefully we will be able to do that in a relatively quick fashion. We have to do it before they change their minds again, but that was an encouraging sight.
We have Bill C-31, which would do two things. One is that it would establish, for the first time in history, here in Canada, an opportunity for parents to collect support for dental care for children under the age of 12. Who would oppose that? At a time when we are experiencing inflation and have children who are going into hospital for emergency services in order to get dental work done because they cannot afford to get it done, and we have a government that is bringing forward legislation that would assist them in doing that, it is hard to believe the Conservatives would oppose that.
Tied into that legislation is additional support for people who are having a difficult time making rent payments. It is hundreds of dollars, and millions across the country, and the Conservatives, again, are indicating they are not going to be supporting Bill C-31. It is unfortunate.
On the one hand, they say to support Canadians. On the other hand, if they are ashamed, we can convince them to make a flip-flop, as with Bill C-30, but we still have a little more work to do to get them convinced that providing a service to our children under the age of 12 to get dental work is a good thing and they should support it, and that the support for rental payments is worthy of support. Hopefully we will see Bill C-31 pass.
There are so many things the Government of Canada is doing to support our economy and the people of Canada. The emphasis is on ensuring that we have an economy that is working for all Canadians. At the same time, we understand the importance of health care, whether it is long-term care, mental health, dental or working with the provinces, and it does not mean being an ATM. What it means is ensuring there is a higher sense of accountability.
Canadians deserve the best quality health care, and this is a government and a minister who are committed to delivering that.
1340 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:02:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we see the motion before us today and we hear the Conservatives talk about the CPP as a payroll tax, when we know that in fact the CPP is retirement security. It is deferred wages, but the Conservatives are manipulating workers to believe that they are paying a tax when their CPP goes up so they will have more retirement security. Their employer has to match it. Therefore, who benefits from the Conservative motion? It is big corporations, because they pay less money to match their employees. This is something that was asked for by premiers across Canada, including many Conservative premiers, but the Conservatives forget to mention that to their own premiers.
I think the Liberals have also dropped the ball on the OAS. They are only giving the 10% increase to those who are over age 75. Does my colleague agree that the CPP is deferred wages and security? Also, does he agree that people who are 65 and older should get the OAS increase of 10%?
171 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:04:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I believe that Stephen Harper was never a big fan of the CPP and that is the reason why for a decade there were never any discussions at all with respect to looking at the increase. Shortly after forming government in 2015, the Prime Minister indicated that we wanted to be able to enhance the CPP. We had a minister at the time who went out and negotiated, and we were able to bring everyone to the table so that we could actually increase the CPP. Increasing the CPP means the workers of today will have more money when it comes to retirement. To try to say that it is a tax is just wrong. It is so misleading. This is an investment in their futures. It is an investment by workers today for their future retirements. I am very proud that we have a government that recognizes the value of the CPP and got the provinces together to make it happen, which is something the Conservative Party failed at doing.
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:05:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I see the member's passion and I respect that. I have a question for him.
Canadians are spending 43% of their income on taxes and 35.7% on basic necessities. Could the member help me understand something, because I guess I am a bit of a numbers person? Are we giving them all of these benefits to pay for the increase in taxes? Is that how we are helping the individuals who really need our help today?
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:05:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let me quote the Minister of Finance from yesterday, who stated:
...actually, for middle-class Canadians we have cut taxes and made them better off. Today, a single parent in Ontario with two kids under six and earning $60,000 a year pays nearly $5,600 less in taxes than she did under the Conservatives. She will receive nearly $8,900 more from reduced child care fees and the dental benefit. She will be more than $14,400 better off than she was under the Conservatives.
Facts speak volumes. The fact is that, when it really came down to it and the Conservative Party had an opportunity to vote for a tax break for Canada's middle class, they voted no. That was a tangible piece of legislation. They could have voted yes, but they said no to tax breaks for Canada's middle class. To make matters even worse, when we wanted to tax the 1% wealthiest in Canada with an extra tax and we put it in as a government, again the Conservative Party voted no.
This is a government that is committed to working for Canadians, with Canadians, to ensure we have a healthy economy and society.
202 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:07:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague on the fact that the motion being studied today is a bit ideological and populist with respect to inflation.
However, we cannot deny that inflation is having a tangible and devastating impact on housing.
I want to talk about housing construction projects in Quebec and Canada. These projects were approved by the government under various programs that were launched. At the time that they were approved two or three years ago, the rate of inflation was not what it is today. Now that it is time to start building these housing units, the rate of inflation has exploded and we can no longer move forward because of the labour shortage, even though the government had approved these important projects.
In some cases, the government does not want to pay the extra money to open these doors. It is a real problem—
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:07:59 p.m.
- Watch
I am sorry to interrupt the member, but his time is up.
The hon. parliamentary secretary has 15 seconds to answer the question.
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:08:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there has been no government in Canadian history, I believe, that has invested more in housing. It is going to take more than just one level of government to resolve the issue. We need to incorporate the municipalities and provinces in order to be able to deal with the housing crisis, and that is something we—
59 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 1:08:25 p.m.
- Watch
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake.
10 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
