44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 1, 2024 10:00AM
- Feb/1/24 10:53:26 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Lac-Saint-Louis.
Here we are once again, talking about the same motion based on the same red herrings we have seen time and time again coming from the Conservatives. I listened to the question from the member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon just moments ago, where he tried to imply that the federal funding toward the reduction of emissions and toward clean technology was only one particular program. It is clear the member has no concept whatsoever of what the federal government is doing for farmers, in that there are so many programs.
When I said $6.8 million, I was giving the total number over a whole vast array of various different programs. It is not a single program, but it is not new and not unique to me to hear Conservatives talking like this. It is what they want to do repeatedly. They want to take an issue like global inflation and try to apply it to Canada and say that it is a problem only in Canada. They say that this is a problem that has been created by the price on pollution, which is ludicrous.
We know, according to the Governor of the Bank of Canada, that the price on pollution contributes to 0.15% as it relates to inflation. It is literally negligible and could be chalked up to a rounding error, yet Conservatives jump on it as though this is what is making life unaffordable for many Canadians right now. They do not want to talk about the realities. They do not want to talk about what is actually going on throughout the world and how Canada is positioning itself to be at the forefront when it comes to these new technologies.
I heard the Leader of the Opposition talk about building car batteries in Canada. Is he not aware that the member for Hastings—Lennox and Addington, one of his Conservative members, had the largest investment, not in Canada but in North America, for building batteries to go into vehicles? That is all happening a 20-kilometre drive from where I live, in Hastings—Lennox and Addington. This is setting the course for the future in terms of the industry being at the forefront, so that we will not be importing technology and so that we will be the ones actually creating the technology and developing those products right here in Canada. That particular facility, Umicore, will produce 800,000 batteries to go into vehicles each and every year. It is a multi-billion dollar investment from Umicore, not just into Canada but into Ontario, into Hastings—Lennox and Addington, into the Kingston region.
This is huge, but it is only one example. We are well aware of Stellantis and the other various different players emerging in Canada as it relates to environmental technologies and the green technologies of tomorrow. People look toward Canada. Companies and businesses look toward Canada because they know we have the resources and the political will to push toward this new and emerging technology. This is why we are seeing people come and invest here.
While I am on the topic, do members know why Umicore even picked Ontario? The president of Umicore said, in his press conference, and the member for Hastings—Lennox and Addington was there with a big smile on her face when it happened at Queen's University two summers ago, that Umicore chose Ontario because it is producing environmentally sustainable products and it wants to know that what goes into those products is environmentally sustainable. A vast majority of the resources that go into building those batteries comes from electricity, and he recognized that Ontario does not burn coal to produce electricity. That is thanks to a previous provincial Liberal government, by the way. He recognized that Ontario has taken great strides toward ensuring that we have renewable, sustainable electricity produced in a responsible way. That is why companies are choosing to invest in Canada. That is why they are choosing Ontario. That is why they are choosing Hastings—Lennox and Addington.
The mayors in the surrounding area, including in Kingston, are thrilled about this. The city councils are thrilled about this. The economic opportunities that are being produced as a result of investments like this, because of the initiatives of the Liberal government, will last for generations, quite frankly.
I get real kick out of it when I see Conservative members being super excited about these things when they are back in there ridings, but when they come to the House of Commons, they toe the line of the Leader of the Opposition, that the only solution forward is to go back to burning as much fossil fuel as we possibly can.
When we talk about the price on pollution and what Conservatives are proposing today, it is really important that we actually talk about what they are proposing. They talk about axing a lot of stuff. What they are going to be axing are rebates to families. It might not be the families that they are interested in, because lower-income families receive more through the climate action incentive rebate than higher-income families. However, the reality is that what Conservatives would be axing, is a family of four, in the spring of this year, will receive $244 for one quarter; in Manitoba, $264; in Saskatchewan, $340. The same family living in Alberta, for one quarter, would receive, and currently receives, $386.
We hear the Conservatives routinely say that we are going to double it or triple the tax, but of course they do not tell us the timeline, because some of the timelines are a decade out. However, what they forget to say is that the rebate doubles and triples as well. We recognize that in order to transition away from fossil fuels, which I want to do, and I know many members of the House of Commons, the Canadian population and a majority of our constituents want to do, we have to incentivize people to make change.
In an economic model that is built on capitalism, that is built on supply and demand, the way to incentivize people is by putting a price on things on which we want to change behaviour. We would think that the Conservatives before anybody else would know this. The same thing happens with taxes on tobacco. The same thing happens with taxes on other products where we are looking to change behaviour. However, the key difference to any other tax, and what the Conservatives never want to mention, is that in order to accomplish this, but still be reasonable for families to absorb those prices, is to return all the money to them.
The natural question is, “Why do it in the first place?” I just assumed that Conservatives could understand how market mechanisms work to incentivize and change behaviour in the market. Apparently they do not.
The good news is that we know that it is working, and we are starting to see it. The projections are showing that by 2030 over a third of the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will be attributed specifically to pricing pollution.
We are not the only ones that price pollution. Countless jurisdictions throughout the world price pollution. Ukraine prices pollution. Ukraine, a country that is literally at war right now, prices pollution, and it has since 2011. It was the only way that the European economy was going to let it participate in the economy. Most, if not all, European economies have a price on pollution in one form or another, whether that is a direct price, or cap and trade or one of the various different models.
The Conservatives never miss an opportunity to try to conflate and confuse Canadians as to what the realities are when it comes to the price on pollution and how it works, generally speaking.
Once again, we find ourselves in a position where the Conservatives have brought forward motion after motion on the same issue, not just the issue of pricing pollution and the fact that they are against it but on an issue that they ran on in the last election. All Conservative members in here, whether they say they agree with it or not, ran under a policy that included pricing pollution. Now they have such buyers' remorse over their last leader that they have used just about every opposition day in this session of Parliament on this issue.
I am looking forward to answering questions that my colleagues might have. I am quite certain that this is not the last time the Conservatives will bring forward this motion, but it is certainly a policy that will be to the benefit of our environment in the future.
1483 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/24 11:06:41 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, eight out of 10 Canadians get back more than they put in. Yes, some Canadians who have very large homes and multiple vehicles probably end up spending more than they get back. In particular, individuals who are on the lower end of the economic spectrum are certainly getting much more back than they are paying.
I find it really interesting that he accuses me of all this rhetoric. Conservatives continually miss the point of explaining to Canadians that they are going to get back more than they are paying. They would rather seek an opportunity to capitalize from a political narrative that suits them right now because it will benefit them politically. However, it will do nothing for the environment and nothing for our country.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/24 11:24:52 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the incomparable member for Mirabel.
Today I would like to address a serious problem. Canadians are being legally robbed of their savings as they struggle to make ends meet, pay all their bills and find housing. This legalized robbery in the context of the soaring cost of living and the affordability crisis involves the price of energy, the main cause of inflation.
We have to face the fact that carbon use is expensive. While exhausted and financially strapped Canadians are paying high prices, an elite group out of touch with the people is reaping the benefits and enjoying a privileged life. As citizens struggle to make ends meet, the oil and gas sector is making record profits. In 2020, 2021 and 2022, they raked in several billion dollars in profits, half of it in 2022 alone. Profits for 2022 are estimated at $270 billion. We should think about what this figure means.
These $270 billion went into the pockets of major companies, 70% of whose shareholders are foreign. Of course, these companies need the oil monarchy in Ottawa to provide them with lavish guarantees and hefty direct and indirect subsidies, which they could easily do without.
Of course, the Conservatives do not talk about this, since they have an incestuous relationship with the oil companies, which are awash in profits. Despite their rhetoric of common sense, the Conservatives, who have no plan to end our dependence on fossil fuels, prefer to blather on for the umpteenth time about the carbon tax, which does not apply in Quebec.
Let us be serious for a moment. If we want to talk about the real problem, we can talk about the six tax credits, worth a total of $83 billion by 2025, granted in the last two Liberal-NDP government budgets. In particular, two of these tax credits stand out. First, there is the clean technology investment tax credit, which, despite its name, will encourage increased bitumen extraction and gas exports. Then there is the carbon capture, utilization and storage investment tax credit, which helps oil companies pump out every last drop of oil by supporting an experimental technique that shows all the signs of being a greenwashing scheme.
This is not to mention the fact that the federal government nationalized the Trans Mountain pipeline, whose expansion will cost $30.9 billion, most of which will be paid for by taxpayers. This is nothing new. According to a report by Equiterre, in April 2019, Finance Canada and Environment Canada failed to keep their promise to cancel subsidies for fossil energies. According to Equiterre, they gave the oil companies $1.6 billion. In November 2018, the same group estimated that, between 2012 and 2017, Export Development Canada gave 12 times more money to fossil fuels than to clean energies.
Some people believe that Equiterre is an environmental group. Let us see what the International Monetary Fund has to say. In 2019, the IMF estimated that direct subsidies and indirect support to fossil fuels in Canada amounted to $54 billion in 2017. The problem is clear. It should jump out at anyone who has eyes to see.
While our fellow citizens are suffering from rampant inflation, wealthy oil and gas companies are benefiting, with the aid of the Liberals and Conservatives. All this is happening while scientists are saying that, if we want to be serious about it, if we want to be responsible, we should be leaving 80% of our oil underground. Moreover, more than 95% of Canadian oil comes from the tar sands, one of the most polluting oils on earth.
Climate change, which the Conservatives never speak of, is costing everyone. In 2025, it could cost Canada's and Quebec's economies $25 billion. In addition to being unfair and ecocidal, Canada's “everything for oil” religion is not even a good economic choice. It hampers the diversification of the Canadian economy. The exploitation of natural resources is closely linked to the decline in the manufacturing sector. Members might remember that there were hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in Quebec, jobs related to the increase in the value of the Canadian dollar, which was itself linked to the increase in bitumen exports.
The question that arises is, how can we ease the financial burden on our fellow citizens?
Of course, we can listen to the Conservatives propose eliminating the so-called carbon tax in a motion that does not even define what that means. Let us not forget that the carbon tax does not apply to Quebec, which has its own carbon exchange system. In 2013, Quebec partnered with California, with which it shares a greenhouse gas cap-and-trade system, and there has been no negative impact so far. The measure was adopted under Jean Charest, aspiring leader of the Conservative Party. Because of this system, Quebec is not affected by the tax.
The other carbon policy, which some on that side of the House call a second tax on carbon, is not a tax at all because none of it goes to the government. Not a penny from the clean fuel regulations finds its way into government coffers. These regulations are nothing more than an update of the regulations adopted in 2010 by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, under whom the current Conservative leader served as a parliamentary secretary.
There is only one difference between the two versions of the regulations. Instead of imposing an average, namely, the 5% ethanol content of the gasoline prescribed in the former Conservative version, the government is imposing an outcome. In practical terms, the new regulations require that each litre of gasoline produced in 2030 must generate 15% fewer greenhouse gas emissions than in 2019. That is all.
Unlike the previous version adopted under the Conservatives, the government is not telling the oil companies how to reduce their emissions. They can reduce the emissions they generate during their crude oil extraction or refining activities, use a cleaner type of oil that generates less pollution than oil sands during the refinery process, or mix more biofuels, like ethanol, in with the gasoline to reduce its oil content. All options are on the table. The choice is up to them.
The regulations have minimal, if any effect in Quebec. The Quebec government has already passed its Regulation respecting the integration of low-carbon-intensity fuel content into gasoline and diesel fuel, which already stipulates that fuel sold in Quebec must contain 15% biofuels. Just as they seem to do every single day, the Conservatives are once again proposing a measure that will increase pollution. This measure offers a bonus to those who heat with dirty fuels and offers nothing to those who do not pollute, such as people who heat with electricity or renewable sources.
That is unfair, because, on some level, it is primarily lower-income households that benefit from the carbon tax. The government has committed to returning fuel charge proceeds directly to individuals and families through climate action incentive payments. This fuel charge therefore benefits low-income households, since they get back more than they pay. In other words, suspending the carbon tax does not serve the most vulnerable.
Making up problems is not going to solve anything. Quebeckers have been relatively spared from the high cost of heating not because the federal carbon tax does not apply in Quebec, but because they chose renewable energy, including for heating, a long time ago.
Canadian taxes are not the problem. It is the billions of dollars of taxpayer money that Ottawa is giving in direct or indirect subsidies to the oil and gas companies in western Canada that is the problem. Let us put an end to that. Let us come up with a serious energy transition plan. The economy and our planet will benefit from that. We will all come out ahead. That is what real common sense looks like.
1332 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise in this most esteemed House and to see many of my colleagues here this afternoon.
On this opposition day, and in reference to the opposition motion, I have much to say. First off, as I stated yesterday in the House, the IMF has put out its economic forecasts for the year, for 2024-25. With our economic policies in 2024, we will be the top quartile for economic growth in the G7 and, for 2025, we will actually lead the G7 in the economic growth rate, in real GDP.
As a very competitive person, whether it is through sports, working on Bay Street or Wall Street, or in all my experiences, I like to win. When we compete globally, with our economy, we need to win. Canada is winning.
Through the many economic policies and pillars that we have put forward, we will continue to win. We will continue to grow a strong economy from the middle out and from the bottom up, not from the top down. We will grow an economy that works for all Canadians, with inclusive economic growth.
It is February 1. February is my favourite month in many ways, although I prefer summer over winter. We know that, as of today, the Canadian dental program is going to be hitting another milestone. Seniors aged 72 to 76 in this country will be able to enrol in the Canadian dental program. Amazingly, 400,000 seniors had already signed up. Now we will get several hundred thousand more signing up.
This will deliver real savings to seniors, both in the riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge and across this country. It is a very exciting thing that we are implementing, the way that it is being implemented, with the provider, Sun Life, working with the Canadian Dental Association. Day in and day out, Canadians expect us to do this: to work for them, strengthen our economy, make sure life is affordable and deal with the issues at hand.
Another issue I would like to raise is that I was really happy to see that the European Union has reached a unanimous agreement to provide Ukraine, the brave Ukrainian people fighting for freedom and democracy, with a €50-billion package as they fight against the tyranny of Russia, the unjustified invasion by Russia into Ukraine's sovereignty.
I would hope that, when this House again addresses the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement, the opposition party stands with the brave Ukrainian soldiers and the brave Ukrainian people, who are fighting for their freedom and democracy. This would be much like what our allies, our friends and our NATO partners in the European Union are doing. It would be a real shame if the Conservative Party of Canada voted against the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement.
Another measure that we have introduced is the first home savings account. Over 500,000 Canadians have opened an account. This combines the great features of a TFSA and an RRSP. Making a contribution is tax deductible. It grows tax-free. When one pulls it out to buy one's first home in the years down the road, the withdrawals are tax-free. Again, this is another major measure that we have put in place.
I could talk about the Canada child benefit, which has lifted hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. I could talk about two middle-class income tax cuts that are literally providing nearly $10 billion of annual tax savings to Canadians.
I could talk about a national early learning and child care plan. By September 2025, here in the province of Ontario, on average, day care fees will be $10 per day. My family is quite blessed in many ways, and our little one, Leia, goes to day care. The annual amount a family was paying at Leia's day care went from nearly $1,600 to $1,700 a month to, now, just a couple hundred bucks. This is in after-tax funds, so we can think about the before-tax calculation. Those are real savings.
This is in collaboration with the Province of Ontario. Ontario's minister of education, who is my neighbour and a good friend, touts this plan and how great it is probably every other day. That is what Canadians expect.
When I turn to pure economic policy, we have a AAA credit rating, of course. We have the lowest deficit-to-GDP ratio. We will have the strongest economic growth. What does that translate into for Canadians? It means strong and real wage growth, strong incomes and strong job growth. This is where we are going. We are going to the economy of tomorrow, and it is happening today. This is what we need to embrace.
This is what climate change is pushing countries to do. It is leading countries to do this, not only here in Canada but also in the United States. Countries like China, Australia and the European Union are all going in that direction. When one thinks about climate change, one thinks about artificial intelligence. Canada is a leader. We are leading and will continue to do so.
We have a great country filled with over 40 million wonderful people; every morning, whether in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge or across the country, these folks get up and want the best for their families and their kids. They want to make sure we keep this country on a track where inclusivity and economic growth are paramount, where every child has an opportunity to succeed and put the best foot forward in life.
The following is with regard to the motion and so forth.
Yes, I am pleased to take part in today's debate. My opposition colleagues want us to once again make it free to pollute in Canada. I wonder, though, how allowing people to pollute without cost would really make life more affordable for Canadians.
How are we helping Canadians? With the carbon rebate, we know that eight out of 10 Canadians are better off. We know that businesses continue to grow and 84% of the electricity generated in Canada is carbon-free. We know we are putting forward investment tax credits that will boost economic growth and generate clean electricity.
I see some of my colleagues here from the east coast on the opposite side. There is Bill C-49 for such measures, which the Premier of Nova Scotia and the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador want to see put into law, that would generate economic activity. As I have said many times in this place, I love capitalism, growth and wealth creation. That is how one lifts all boats. I love free trade. Canada is a signatory to so many trade agreements.
Up to a point in time, members opposite were in favour of free trade agreements, such as CETA, CUSMA and CPTPP. Now the world is dealing with climate change. In reality, I am not sure most of the members opposite believe in climate change or even in science anymore, unfortunately. Vaccines for polio and measles—
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
1198 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/24 1:22:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member from Vancouver Island for their question.
As we know in this world that we live in, and from economic history and world history, capitalism works. It has lifted billions of people out of poverty and raised standards of living for people across this world on any measure. We know it is a system we are blessed to have. Communism, socialism and all the other forms people want to think and talk about have failed; look at other countries. I do not need to say more.
On the greener homes grant, it is imperative, as a government, that we continue to support Canadians, particularly low- and middle-income Canadians and folks who are on heating sources such as oil. I remember growing up in Prince Rupert, British Columbia. My grandmother's house had an oil tank in the back. We got rid of it in the 1970s and 1980s, but we need to get rid of them all and put heat pumps in and—
170 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/24 2:38:05 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would just say that the Conservative Party needs to stop misleading people.
The carbon price is an appropriate and thoughtful way to address climate change in a manner that actually addresses affordability. Eight out of 10 Canadian families get more money back. The Leader of the Conservative Party's plan to address climate change is to take rebates away from Canadian families. It is to let the planet burn. It is to actually ensure that Canada's economic competitiveness will be eroded going forward. He should be ashamed of his thoughtless policy on climate change and the Canadian economy.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/24 4:54:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for giving us this pseudolesson on economics.
It is confusing to me that he does not understand basic economic terminology such as “taxation”, since the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the carbon pricing system is not a concept of taxation and is understood in a constitutional context. What Conservatives really want us to do is axe the facts.
I understand that “axing a regulatory charge and the climate action incentive payment” is not a good bumper sticker slogan. What Conservatives want to do is distract Canadians from what is really happening, ignore the facts and ignore science while our country burns. I would like to hear a comment about that.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/24 7:14:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let me begin by thanking my good friend, the member for Bay of Quinte, for bringing this private member's bill forward that is going to help Canadians.
The fast and furious finance minister speeds through the streets of Alberta but is as slow as a snail when it comes to legislation that actually matters. I thank my good friend from the Bay of Quinte for waking up the Liberals and hopefully waking up the finance minister to pass this legislation to help many Canadians and hopefully get our economy back on track.
Canada has a problem. Our country is getting poorer and so are our people. Since September 2022, the GDP per person has been declining. In fact, the real GDP per person was lower in the third quarter of 2023 than it was in the second quarter of 2018. That means five years of Canadians' wealth has been completely wiped out and the economy is less productive. Why is this important to the debate this evening? Because, fundamentally, getting GDP per person back on track relies on getting Liberal red tape and regulations out of the way and making the economy more competitive.
Philip Cross, the former chief economic analyst of Statistics Canada, has raised concerns about Canada's lagging productivity growth, pointing out that Canada's GDP per person growth rate is the worst since the Great Depression. In the past decade, productivity has only grown 4.3%, as opposed to the U.S., which saw a 47.4% growth rate. In fact, according to the OECD, Canada is last among developed countries for GDP per person growth, a statistic that the Liberal government even included in budget 2022.
William Robson, CEO of the C.D. Howe Institute said just this past December that business investment in Canada has not been this bad since the Great Depression. He pointed out that since 2015, capital per worker has been dropping while our population continues to climb, a situation that will lead to an even less productive and less wealthy economy.
Compared to the U.S., from 2014 to 2021, the Fraser Institute found that business investment per worker in Canada declined by 20%, while in the same period, U.S. investment per worker increased almost 15%. This context is important to this debate because it once again highlights the desperate need Canada has for more competition in all sectors of the economy.
According to the competition commissioner, Canada's already concentrated industries, such as banking, airlines, railways, telecommunications and groceries are only getting more concentrated. He noted that the barriers to entry are too high and too expensive. The red tape, the gatekeepers and Liberal anti-competition, anti-innovation, anti-modernization policies have shut down companies from around the world coming to Canada and from the private sector restarting growth in the economy.
Ninety-three per cent of all banking assets in Canada are controlled by the six biggest banks: RBC, TD, BMO, Scotiabank, CIBC and National Bank, as well as HSBC, which is being bought out by RBC. This has resulted in cookie-cutter services being offered at virtually the same price at all major financial institutions. Businesses and people want financial services that are tailor-made to their needs and that are accessible, easy to use and affordable.
The Canadian Federation of Independent Business recently published a study that shows that overall satisfaction by businesses in banks varies by size. Smaller businesses tend to trust credit unions and smaller financial institutions more as there is better customer services and more connection to their own communities, while medium and bigger businesses rely on larger financial institutions for access to larger amounts of financing. The options that these businesses have in finding the right institutions with the best services are shrinking.
Compared to the U.S., Canada has 34 domestic banks versus roughly 4,844 domestic American banks. That means there are roughly 121,000 Canadians for every bank, compared to just 66,000 Americans for every bank in the U.S.. In the U.S., there are almost 4,800 credit unions, while in Canada there are only 200.
Competition in any sector is vital to lowering the cost of the goods we buy and the services we use as consumers. More importantly, it also leads to innovation and modernization that will allow Canada's industries to compete globally. That is why consumer-led banking is key to the success of innovation in Canada's financial sector and for bringing home affordable banking solutions for all Canadians.
There are examples globally of this modernization actually working to bring home lower bank fees, better services and more economic growth. The prime example is the model of the U.K., where since 2017, the growth of consumer-led banking has been exceptional and, in fact, has saved businesses and individuals over 18 billion pounds, thanks to lower or no banking fees whatsoever.
The British government brought in consumer-led banking as a market-based fix for an overly uncompetitive financial sector, and between 2018 and 2023, the number of fintechs in the consumer-led banking space jumped from four to 295. There are more than seven million users of consumer-led banking in the U.K. and, as of 2022, they had made 68.2 million payments using this technology. For those users, banking and transaction fees are zero. This modernization has added billions of pounds to the U.K. economy, created thousands of jobs and created real competition in the financial sector.
Globally, the consumer-led banking market has grown to $128 billion as the U.K., most of the EU, Norway, India, Australia, South Korea, the Philippines, Brazil and Mexico bring consumer-led banking online. The U.S., Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, New Zealand, Japan and Taiwan are joining Canada in reviewing or setting up a consumer-led banking system. The success that the U.K. has had with this modernization, and the fact that major economies and trading partners with Canada are bringing consumer-led banking online, should be an indication that Canada needs to get the ball rolling.
However, more importantly than that, we see the benefits that consumer-led banking can have for people and businesses: the savings, the access to financial services and the freedom of choice. Fintechs in Canada are already building up the customer base, the technology and the services that will be important to making a modern banking system work. Questrade, Wealthsimple, Neo Financial, EQ Bank, Borrowell, Intuit and others are already building the components to offer competition, choice, and low-fee, tailor-made banking options to all Canadians.
In fact, credit unions are wanting to partner with fintechs to offer better services and products to their customers, but fintechs and credit unions need the government to get out of the way and let consumer-led banking go ahead. There are more companies that want to come to Canada, like KOHO, which just applied to the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy to be considered a schedule 1 domestic bank and have access to the Canadian market.
After the Liberal-NDP government rammed through the RBC-HSBC merger without actually thinking of the Canadians who would be impacted by the decision, it is good to see that there are still fintechs and financial companies out there that want to do business in Canada. As common-sense Conservatives look to the future without the Liberal government and the fast and furious finance minister, our side is working with Canadians and businesses to develop real solutions that will bring home competition and productivity growth.
We need to focus on these common-sense solutions for Canadians and all newcomers. It benefits not only the people living here but also the many who will come here looking for a better future. When they come here, they get hit with Liberal-NDP high inflation, high taxes and a high cost of living. At least we can do this for them so they will have the freedom to move around their data and have more competition, which would lead to better products in the future.
It is clear; the common-sense Conservative team is going to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Let us bring it home.
1393 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/24 7:35:11 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is really a pleasure to take part in the debate here tonight.
Late last fall, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance presented the 2023 fall economic statement. With the fall economic statement, we are taking further action to support the middle class and to build more homes faster. I am proud to say that our economic plan to build a stronger economy is working for everyone, with more great jobs for Canadians that they can count on, and the plan is working. I will give a few facts.
Inflation is 3.4%, down from its peak of 8.1%, and wage growth has outpaced inflation for 11 months in a row. Also, the private sector economists now expect Canada to avoid the recession that many had predicted, and both the IMF and the OECD predict that Canada will have the strongest growth in the G7 in 2025. As well, Canada maintains both the lowest deficit-to-GDP and net debt-to-GDP rations in the G7. These are some facts.
Nevertheless, rapidly rising interest rates are having an impact everywhere in Canada, including here. Canadians are having a hard time making ends meet.
That is why our government is adopting better targeted measures to stabilize prices, make life more affordable and protect people with mortgages to pay.
Let me give a few examples. We are moving forward with the new Canadian mortgage charter, which details the relief that Canadians can expect from banks in these difficult times. Also, we see our government is moving forward with meaningful actions to make life in Canada more affordable.
With respect to the environment, we understand that climate change is a threat not only to Canadians' health and safety, but also to financial security and economic well-being. That is why we have to stay the course with the price on pollution, which experts say is one of the best ways to fight climate change.
However, we understand that it continues to be difficult for some low-income families to make ends meet, and that is why we made the decision to temporarily pause the application of the federal fuel charge on deliveries of heating oil. We do this, not because it is a source of home heating, but because heating oil is the most expensive form of home heating, and because home heating oil is more expensive, it means lower-income Canadians face particular hardship incurring these costs.
It is important to understand that many low-income earners and rural residents are currently trapped in a vicious cycle where they have to pay for the most expensive form of home heating, the cost of which actually prevents them from investing in cleaner, more affordable forms of home heating.
As we confirmed in this fall's economic statement, we are now looking to provide financial assistance to help Canadians switch from heating oil to better heating systems. Heat pumps are a cleaner heating option that offers long-term savings on energy bills. Reducing the use of highly polluting heating sources will help combat climate change, which will particularly benefit women, indigenous peoples and those living in targeted communities.
529 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
