SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 105 - Sep/29/22

Sep/29/22 10:34:07 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would agree with my hon. colleague that the government's programs on housing have not been working. Day in and day out, we have been asking the government about affordable housing and their solution has always been to say, “We have spent so much money on it. We spent millions of dollars on this program, millions and millions of dollars on this program,” but the results have not been there. It is not working. What we have said is that we need to increase supply. If there is a demand problem, we need to be able to figure out solutions to increase supply, something they are not doing. If we increase supply, that would actually fix the system. If we were to work with municipalities, work with the provinces and encourage municipalities, especially those gatekeepers who are very slow and not allowing building permits to go through, and if we could increase that supply and use more of the abundant land that we have in Canada to provide housing for Canadians, that would actually create more affordable housing.

183 words

Context: House Hansard - 105 - Sep/29/22

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

Sep/29/22 11:48:21 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for Durham for his kind words. Those are very much appreciated. I think there is a tension in the Conservative position that manifests even in his question. He is asking about how we can try to reduce input costs, recognizing that part of what has been going on in the economy and with inflation right now has much to do with supply-side pressures, not demand-side pressures. However, what we hear most often from the Conservatives is that this is demand-driven and is about spending. It is all about the government spending too much money, and that is what is driving up prices. There are many factors driving inflation, so I am very glad to hear an acknowledgement of some of the other pressures that are creating inflation outside of government spending. As the member knows, I think the best way to deal with those is targeted relief with income support for people who really need it, because simply cutting taxes for everyone will allow those who are wealthier to drive inflationary costs with increased demand at a time when we do not need that extra pressure.

197 words

Context: House Hansard - 105 - Sep/29/22

Mr. Mark Strahl (Chilliwack—Hope, CPC)

Sep/29/22 1:21:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak in the House today on behalf of my constituents in Chilliwack—Hope. I will remind everyone that today we are discussing a motion that states: That, given that the cost of government is driving up inflation, making the price of goods Canadians buy and the interest they pay unaffordable, this House call on the government to commit to no new taxes on gas, groceries, home heating and pay cheques. It is a pretty simple motion. Basically, we are asking the government not to make things worse. It has already gotten us to where we are today. The price of gas in my hometown in British Columbia is $2.25 a litre today. That means a student driving a Honda Civic has to pay over $100 to fill the tank to get to school. The cost for a mother to fill up her SUV is over $135, and a contractor filling up their pickup has to pay over $250 just for the fuel to get to work to conduct the duties they perform in our communities. In my community, that is often agricultural work. It is work done in the construction industry, work that cannot be done with a Prius, work that needs to be done with a truck. My community is rural. It is a community where there are not a lot of rapid transit options. There are long distances between places people need to go to. However, the Liberals want to make the cost of gas, which is $2.25, a record high, worse. They propose tripling the carbon tax next April. B.C. has its own carbon tax. It has been a failure on every level. It has not reduced emissions; it has increased the cost of everything in British Columbia and, unlike in some of the other provinces in the country, there is no federal rebate. The money goes to Victoria to spend as it sees fit. It gives some of it back in rebates, but the rest of it goes into government coffers. This is just what the independent Parliamentary Budget Officer indicated, that 60% of Canadians pay more in the tax than they get back in rebates. I would anticipate that in British Columbia it is at least that bad, but this is what the government wants. It pays lip service every once in a while and pretends that it cares about these high gas prices, but that is actually what it wants. It wants the prices for Canadians to go up. It wants people who are driving their aged parents or grandparents to doctor's appointments to pay more for gas. It wants moms and dads who are taking their kids to after-school activities to pay more. We heard it in the House earlier this week. It is a market incentive somehow. It is trying to incent people to drive less. In my community, people have to drive to get from place to place to place. The government disrespects rural Canadians. It disrespects people who need to drive to get from A to B. It also disrespects, quite frankly, people who need to heat their homes. It tells seniors that it is going to drive up the price of their home heating fuel, whatever that may be, natural gas or furnace oil, etc., and that it is going to triple the price of the carbon tax, further driving up the fuel price. It suggests that maybe they can do without, perhaps turn the heat off. Seniors can shiver so that the Liberals can put more money in government coffers. It is unacceptable, and Conservatives are calling on them to stop making it worse. There are articles that we should all be aware of and be seized by: “B.C. soup kitchens, food banks struggling with increased demand, decreased donations”. We heard this yesterday in question period. The member for Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte indicated that former donors to a food bank have become clients, and, according to Food Banks BC, “the number of new clients accessing its 105-member hunger relief agencies has increased 50 per cent between December 2021 and March.” We are also seeing that the majority of Canadians are making changes to their grocery store habits amid higher prices. According to Bloomberg, almost a quarter of Canadians are cutting back on how much food they buy, because of higher inflation. This is more prevalent among female shoppers, such as single moms in many cases, with 29.6% of them buying less food, compared to 18% of men who are making that choice. It is not a choice, though; they are forced into it. What do we see? We know that when the price of fuel goes up, which the government wants, as that was its policy change and the effect it desires, the price of transportation goes up, which means the price of the goods that need to get to a grocery store go up as well. We are already at a 40-year high in grocery inflation. It is up over 10% year over year, and growing at a rate that is at a 40-year high. We have not seen these numbers since the eighties. The response of the government should simply be to stop making matters worse, stop raising the carbon tax and stop taking more money out of the pockets of workers through increasing taxes on their paycheques, which is what it is planning to do on January 1. I have heard the Liberals now say that it is not a tax and that these are not taxes. Their website says they are taxes. The Government of Canada's website lists these as taxes because they result in lower take-home pay for Canadians. Paul Martin thought they were taxes when he made it a priority to make the country more efficient and more competitive. He said payroll taxes kill jobs and drive down competitiveness. He got it, but he would not recognize the Liberal government today because it has abandoned all of its fiscal anchors. It has completely— Mr. Mark Gerretsen: I wonder what Brian Mulroney thinks of that. Mr. Mark Strahl: Madam Speaker, the member does not seem to care that the price of food has gone up for Canadians. He laughs when I bring up things about food banks. He simply cannot stand to hear the truth, and he wants to make it worse. The member for Kingston and the Islands wants to vote to make gas prices higher. He wants to vote for less money in the pockets of Canadians. He can defend that, and I will defend cutting taxes and holding the line for Canadians. If the member is not hearing from his constituents about affordability, that means he is not listening, which would put him in good company with the Liberal government. All of us on this side of the House are getting messages. A message I received said the following: Budgets were tight and money was short before, and now with rental prices almost doubling, gas higher than we've ever seen, and grocery prices increasing, it is getting impossible to afford the bare necessities. Having a child, I'm not left with many options. I already have a second job, living in my car is not an option and moving back with parents also would not work so I'm not sure what else I can do. Will there be any solutions? I know I'm not the only one struggling. For this constituent, the solution is not to have more money taken off her paycheque. The solution is not to have more money taken away from her when she has to fill up her car to take her son to school. She said she had to drop out of university because the affordability is so bad under the government. Another constituent wrote: My husband and I work full time [at] great paying jobs and we are still struggling. [We] can hardly afford groceries because the costs are rising in B.C. The fact that families cannot even purchase groceries without repercussions is astonishing to me. We are dual income...and we struggle. We don't spend on anything but the bare minimum necessities and even then sometimes we try to do without. People are struggling and the government is threatening to make things worse. It is set to raise taxes on paycheques on January 1. This motion calls for it to stop that. It is set to raise prices on gas, groceries and home heating in April. We are calling on the government to stop those tax hikes. We will be voting to protect the interests of Canadian workers and Canadian families, and to leave more money in their pockets, because they know how to spend it better than the wasteful Liberal government.

1492 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 105 - Sep/29/22

Mr. Mark Strahl

Sep/29/22 1:32:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would suggest that the member from British Columbia is not listening to his constituents. They are struggling, just as my constituents are struggling. However, he says that we have never had is so good, that at $2.25 a litre, what is the big deal? To them it does not matter, and they are going to raise the price, which is what the Liberals are promising to do. They will triple the carbon tax, which will turn $2.25 a litre into three dollars a litre under that member's plan. The member can go back to Fleetwood—Port Kells and try to sell that. I will stand up for the people of Chilliwack—Hope to demand that these taxes not be raised.

128 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 105 - Sep/29/22

Mr. Warren Steinley

Sep/29/22 3:50:12 p.m.
Watch

Demand the workers' unions.

4 words

Context: House Hansard - 105 - Sep/29/22

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

Sep/29/22 4:16:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Lethbridge. I am happy to be here today supporting our opposition motion, which states: That, given that the cost of government is driving up inflation, making the price of goods Canadians buy and the interest they pay unaffordable, this House call on the government to commit to no new taxes on gas, groceries, home heating and pay cheques. I want to bring the voices of my constituents from Kelowna—Lake Country to Ottawa, not the other way around. Over many months this year, I have sent out several surveys to hear how people are struggling with the government's 40-year-high inflation. I had thousands of responses. Robyn in Lake Country said, “People can't afford to eat, to get to work, to take care of the basics for their families in this economy.” Rollie in Kelowna wrote that the government must “slow down on their spending. They're putting people in the poor house. It's a real shame.” Tax relief is what my constituents are asking for, and the vast majority agree. With the record gas prices we are seeing today in British Columbia, that relief is more desperately needed than ever. Recently, as a member of the industry committee, I questioned Aaron Wudrick, director of domestic policy at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. In response to my questioning about Canada's regulatory burden, high taxes and expensive housing affecting young adults, Mr. Wudrick said, “In short, they're discouraging.” I agree with his assessment, especially after speaking with many young people in Kelowna—Lake Country and across B.C. over the summer. They feel hopeless. They feel hopeless when seeing the value of their paycheques decline, hopeless in finding the money they need to start a business and hopeless in finding an affordable apartment, let alone ever dreaming of owning a home of their own. International students often pursue education in high-demand fields. They have lost hope in being able to afford to live in Canada. We have a labour crisis in everything from health care to farming to tourism. The government's high-spend, high-cost agenda will see us lose their ingenuity and entrepreneurship. A recent Leger poll showed that 46% of young immigrants say they are now less likely to stay in Canada. When asked why they would not recommend Canada to future immigrants, the top two reasons given were the cost of living and the current government. Higher taxes are not the solution either. How do we know? It is because under the last Conservative government, we oversaw the lowest federal tax burden in over half a century, nobody needed to wait month after month for passport renewals past deadlines and homes were half the price. Furthermore, it should come as no surprise that new taxes, as well as presently automatic tax increases, would have a significant impact on small business owners. As the shadow minister for small business recovery and growth, I have had the opportunity to speak with numerous workers and owners of small businesses in Kelowna—Lake Country and across the country to hear their perspectives, the challenges facing them and what needs to be done, or not done, by the federal government to allow them not just to survive but to succeed. We have a 40-year-high inflation rate, labour shortages, supply chain issues, increasing business debt and federal tax increases on businesses, and they are already increasing costs at an unmanageable level for small businesses. Small businesses have been hit particularly hard as a result of the volatile open-and-shut cycle over the last two and a half years, with 54% of businesses still reporting below-normal revenues. About 62% of small businesses are still carrying debt from the pandemic, according to the CFIB. It also notes that small business insolvencies are on the rise, with a reported one in six businesses considering closing their doors. Downtowns and business districts have been hollowed out, with small businesses in those areas struggling to even keep their doors open given limited customers. I spoke to a BIA organization this week, a business improvement area organization, that often represents main streets. It is saying that now the heart of some of its issues deal with mental health and addiction crises. It also said its members are burdened with debt. They are having a very challenging time. Many are barely hanging on. It is nothing short of cold-hearted to increase multiple taxes that would further hit their bottom lines. I know what a small business owner is going through, as I have been one myself. Small business owners have not forgotten the 2017 Liberal-proposed tax changes that party attempted to ram through on small businesses, which would have been devastating to entrepreneurship in our country. These tax changes would have had “significant, unintended effects on all SMEs, particularly middle-class, family businesses.” Those are the words that came from the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade back in 2018. Thanks to the advocacy of small businesses, chambers of commerce, BIAs, boards of trades and Conservatives pressing the issue day in and day out, the government finally backed down. This just shows the government's mindset. What are the main taxes that are going up soon? We have the payroll tax, the excise tax and the carbon tax, which affects the cost of everything. Dan Kelly at the CFIB put it well recently in explaining why a payroll tax is, in fact, a tax. As he put it, “1. They are mandatory, with penalties for not paying. 2. While there are benefits that come back to some of those paying premiums, they are not proportionate to the amount paid. 3. For the business that pays 60% of EI & 50% of CPP costs, they are unquestionably payroll taxes as the benefits are for workers, not employers.” Regardless of what the government says and tries to obfuscate, even the Prime Minister has called these payroll taxes, and many other Liberals have as well. These taxes are going up every year, hitting the paycheques of workers and the bottom lines of small businesses, and should not be increasing during a time of 40-year-high inflation. The excise tax is an escalator tax, which is a fancy bureaucratic word for “automatic”. It is a tax that does not have to come to Parliament to increase. It automatically goes up. The excise tax is on beer, wine, ciders and spirits. These industries raise concerns about this every year while the government ignores them, and 95% are small businesses. Every year these taxes go up automatically, hitting our local producers with more taxes, as well as the retailers and restauranteurs who buy these products and who then have to pass on the price to people who buy them. This ultimately adds further to inflation. As Restaurants Canada said, the government introducing the automatic escalator in 2017 “made an already bad situation worse” for restaurants. Recently at the industry committee, we heard from Beer Canada, which called excise tax increases “counterproductive and harmful” to their sector, and “simply not sustainable over the long term.” Let us not forget this escalator is tied to the CPI and, therefore, inflation, meaning it will go even higher next year, adding more to inflation. It is set to increase again on April 1. On the carbon tax, after the government said it would cap it at $50 a tonne, it is now planning to bring it up to $150 a tonne, more than three times what was initially promised and at a rate that small businesses are still disproportionately paying into without the appropriate rebates to offset it. Carbon tax increases make the cost of fuel, food and goods shipped anywhere more expensive. It is time for the government to recognize that adding taxes only increases costs and inflation. The government has provided no solutions to address inflation itself, and now, on top of 40-year-high inflation and interest rate hikes, small businesses' bottom lines are being further squeezed with higher costs for imported goods due to the Canadian dollar falling to the lowest point in almost two years. Stop the pain. Stop the tax increases.

1402 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 105 - Sep/29/22

M. Gabriel Ste-Marie

Sep/29/22 4:48:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, thank you for keeping decorum in the House. As I was saying, we cannot take these huge price increases and the hardship they cause lightly, especially when it comes to the price of food, electricity and housing. My thoughts are with the millions of seniors who were already struggling to make ends meet before prices started going up. They are now facing an impossible task, making choices or making cuts to their budgets. The inflation crisis is one of the most worrisome issues in the world, and I acknowledge that people are trying to address it and find solutions. I am going to put on my CEGEP economics teacher cap and give an overview of inflation and the economy. The aggregate demand and aggregate supply model is a useful tool for understanding the phenomenon of inflation. This model tells us that inflation is caused by an increase in aggregate demand, a decrease in total supply or a combination of the two. Analysts generally agree that the increase in prices we are experiencing is essentially a global phenomenon primarily attributed to a decrease in aggregate supply. The supply chain problem led to a significant drop in supply. It is the same thing with the war in Ukraine. Crop failures due to droughts or floods are also reducing supply in the food sector. Labour shortages, which existed before the pandemic but have gotten worse since, are limiting business activity, leading to a decrease in total supply, and so on. On the demand side, we have seen more of a change than a significant increase in demand. During the pandemic, people shifted their usual consumer choices to new sectors. Supply was unable to adapt quickly enough, so we saw new price increases and often shortages, resulting from the imbalance. We are seeing the same type of imbalance in the real estate market, where the construction of new housing is insufficient to meet demand. Inflation in that sector is also driven by the increase in the price of building materials, which is itself explained by the current inflationary situation and the change in consumer habits during the pandemic, not to mention the impact of the war. Even though the central bank's injection of money into the economy and the government's support to keep consumption going during lockdown were more generous than necessary, because they were not always well targeted, the effect of those interventions on the increase in global demand and on prices is generally secondary. The government's actions are not the main reason for the global inflationary crisis. Unfortunately for us, and especially for those impacted the most by the current rate of inflation, there is no simple solution to a decrease in aggregate supply. The best solution is to support businesses as they adapt to the new reality. It is a long and complicated process, but as I said, even if the effect is not felt immediately, it is the best solution. For example, let us look at the labour shortage. The government could provide support for the automation of some economic activities. The government could also change the tax system to entice young retirees who want to remain in the labour market, perhaps with part-time work. The government could provide support for companies that invest in resilience, for example by making decisions that cut their energy consumption. The government could also do this for households, of course. That is the primary solution for addressing the supply side of the issue. Unfortunately, this government is doing very little about it. I am also disappointed that the official opposition, which says it is concerned about this issue, is not putting this solution forward. Both major Canadian parties seem to be short-sighted on this issue. It is often said that the central bank is well positioned to use monetary policy to counter inflation. The Bank of Canada must ensure that the overall economy is in good shape. To that end, its main policy objective for the past 30 years has been to keep the average annual increase in prices within a range of 1% to 3%. Obviously, we are well past the upper limit now. Although the central bank is extremely well equipped to control inflation when the economy is overheating because of an increase in aggregate demand, the situation is very different in the event of a supply crisis. That is because successively raising its key interest rate does not allow the central bank to influence supply. It simply reduces demand. In other words, since production is insufficient to meet the demand, equilibrium prices rise, and all the Bank of Canada can do is lower demand to reduce the price increase. However, at the end of the day, there are not more goods and services on the market, only less room to manoeuvre and borrow to make consumption or investment choices. Such a monetary policy could pose a risk. If, at the time of implementation, the economy is not in an overheated situation where overall supply is basically inelastic, the central bank's action could also slow down the economy or even plunge it into recession. Considering how much the labour market is changing, this could almost be described as a quantum leap. The signals of the economic context are difficult to pick up, and there is a real risk that the monetary policy will be too restrictive and therefore impede growth. Again, there is not much that either monetary or fiscal policy can do to respond to a supply crisis. These policies aim to reduce demand in order to lower prices, but they do not allow for increased production in the short term. I want to reiterate that the best government policy is to support businesses and help them adapt and become more resilient in order to push supply back up, even though that does not happen automatically. If there is one lesson we can learn from the global supply-and-demand model, it is that we need to avoid falling into the very tempting trap of responding to a decrease in supply by giving everyone money. That kind of policy may appear to meet people's needs, but it will quickly fuel inflation. It is therefore a futile, ineffective policy, especially if it drives society as a whole into debt. It is a good solution, but not for a supply-side crisis. Tax cuts would have exactly the same effect. It is tempting, but it is a short-sighted solution that would make the problem worse, not better. Indeed, such an expansionist policy would actually thwart the central bank's restrictive policy. That would be the worst possible situation. England is currently experiencing major difficulties that illustrate what happens when policies clash like that. What can we do? As I said, there are no simple or easy solutions. We can help companies pivot. We also have a moral obligation to help the most vulnerable people and the hardest-hit sectors cope. I am thinking of low-income families and single people, especially seniors who live on modest pensions that are not indexed. I am also thinking of sectors that are particularly affected by inflation, such as agriculture. We also need to reinvest in social housing to respond to the housing crisis. For goodness' sake, though, we should not send cheques to everyone, lower taxes for everyone or, above all, abandon our climate efforts.

1239 words

All Topics