So V ote

Mr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC)

Apr/27/23 9:42:08 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour and a privilege to be able to rise in the House of Commons on behalf of the great people from southwest Saskatchewan. I would be remiss if I did not start off by congratulating all the ranchers who have just made it through another calving season, or are at the very end of the season. I also mention our farmers, who are about to begin their spring plant, with the spring thaw that is going on. We have a bit more moisture this year than we have had in years past. I know a lot of folks are really excited about that and are also more than happy to wait a couple of days to start. I know everyone is anxious to get in the fields back home, so I want to wish everybody a safe and happy spring planting season. Here we are talking about budget 2023. The budget is a great opportunity for the government to take a step back, have a little self-reflection and really hone in on the needs of Canadians. That is something that has been lacking for the last number of years. Instead, we are seeing a continued coalition with the NDP, who are keeping the Liberals in power and helping them repeat scandal after scandal. We have seen the NDP bring up some of these scandals from time to time, but at the end of the day, it is still voting for them. We know the NDP will vote for this budget because it has to. We have heard some great comments from NDP members criticizing the government. At the end of the day, it is kind of useless and meaningless because they are just going to prop the Liberals up and vote for it anyway. The Liberals are running a government that is quick to announce massive amounts of spending without figuring out where the money is going to come from to pay for it. Most recently, we saw the government massively subsidize Volkswagen in Canada. We still do not know the upper reaches of the total compensation of the package, but we do know that it is going to be in excess of $13 billion. We still do not have a lot of information, but that is a ton of money, and it is appropriate for us to be asking a lot of questions about it. It gets even worse. Volkswagen is the only automaking company in Canada to be charged under CEPA for violations against the environment. There were 60 counts against it. What was its reward for that? It was $13 billion of taxpayers' money. This is from a government that says it prioritizes the environment. However, the only company to actually violate the Canadian Environmental Protection Act gets massive subsidization as a reward for its behaviour. The Liberals will go out of their way to defend all this spending. They will say they have to spend a lot of money so that we can get a bit out of it. Let us be real. There is no plan to get a complete battery industry here in Canada. We have heard many times in this place, in committee or in meetings with stakeholders, that Canada has all the resources and minerals required to have a very robust battery supply chain. However, we simply do not have the extraction and refining capacity to do what is required. To make matters worse, there is way too much red tape and over-regulation of the sector, preventing private sector investment into our country. Again, we have the raw materials to work with, but they are literally stuck in the ground. We would think that with all the abundance of natural resources that we have, private companies would be lining up at the door to invest their money in Canada. As it stands right now, if someone does not have massive government subsidies, there is nothing being built or done in this country. The investments of these companies would bring jobs, service companies and spinoff industries, such as restaurants and service-and-repair shops, not to mention the royalty revenue that builds our communities and invests in our rural communities. It still makes rural Canada a viable place to live. If it were not for rural Canada, urban Canada would not have all the luxuries it enjoys. If we think of the food that is eaten, it is all grown, harvested and produced in rural Canada. There is all the lumber and building materials required to build the housing that we talk about so much in this country. Where does it come from? It comes from rural Canada. We have to prioritize the rural areas. We are not seeing that from the government. We should also mention the opportunities that exist for the first nations people of Canada to be able to partner with these private companies, make investments and sign these partnerships. This will bring about opportunities for jobs and education for their people as well. That is missing because of government inaction. Natural Law Energy is a company from my riding. It tried to partner with TC Energy to invest in Keystone XL, and the government chased that off. That was an opportunity for six or seven partnering first nations to have jobs and opportunities, and the government said no. That is the terrible direction that we have been heading in. However, it is always possible to change course and direction. Budget 2023 presented the government with such an opportunity, but the government has a shocking level of disrespect for how it is handling Canadians' money. Here is a straightforward example: On page 223 of the budget book, the Liberals have a graph showing that we will not be on track to balance the budget until 2060. How can they possibly pretend that it is a responsible plan for the national finances to be left like this if it is going to be a few decades before they even have a plan to get it back into fiscal balance? It is a complete mockery of all the people who work hard and pay taxes in this country. How are they choosing to spend this money, the millions or billions of dollars at a time? The Liberals continue to give massive subsidies, as I mentioned earlier, to such things as a battery plant for giant companies that, quite frankly, could afford to pay for and do this on their own. However, as I said, the Liberals will also decide to spend millions and billions of dollars without worrying where that money is coming from, which is from the taxpayers and ratepayers of this country. The Liberals' policies are preventing us from developing our natural resources across the board, but they save their worst treatment for demonizing the oil and gas sector here in Canada. In the budget, it says that the government is forecasting the price of oil to be around $82 a barrel. That is actually not too bad. At that price, if the government could choose to support the idea, Canada could balance its budget within a couple of years and not a couple of decades. The Liberals would still be able to invest in all the social programs that Canadians have grown to like, enjoy and appreciate and be able to afford to do so by supporting natural resources development in this country. We have even had a few countries come to Canada looking for LNG, but the Prime Minister said no, that there is no business case for it. However, other countries around the world continue to beg for our resources. Instead, we are driving them off to other countries, such as Qatar. Therefore, we miss out on those opportunities to grow as a country while making the world a better place because of the high standards that we have here in Canada for human rights and for environmental protection. I proudly represent a rural riding where we have our own way of life, and the government does not understand it. Rural Canada is far from having the majority of our population, but as I was saying earlier, we produce all the things that people in urban Canada need to have the luxuries that people enjoy there. In return, too often, the Liberal government leaves us behind and forgets about us. Sometimes, the Liberals impose things on rural areas. They will make it harder, if not impossible, to continue to live there. Has anyone heard of the carbon tax? That is one of the biggest issues that people talk about that is driving up the cost of living in urban Canada, but predominantly in rural Canada, the place hardest hit by the carbon tax. For right now, the Liberals have been busy talking about a so-called just transition for oil and gas and for coal, even though they are still failing to make a just transition happen, whether they are located in the Prairies or the Maritimes. That is something that we also learned from a recent audit done by the Environment Commissioner. Since then, not much has been moving. We do not even see a budget item yet for the just transition for these communities. We are only seven years away from the end date for some of these coal mines and some of these coal power plants that the government is going to force off coal, and yet the government does not even have a plan or an allocation for how to deal with that. It is shameful. For the Liberals, it is not on their radar. I asked the minister what he planned to do with the people from coal-producing communities like Coronach and Rockglen in my riding, as well as in the Souris—Moose Mountain riding. As much as the minister tried to sound as if he would support rural areas, his answer and his examples actually suggest that rather than staying in the communities and working where they are, people are going to end up moving to other places, such as Regina, northern Saskatchewan, Calgary, Edmonton or the east coast. The Liberal minister might think that Regina is part of the rural area, even though it is the capital city of Saskatchewan. Regina is a great place. It is a fantastic place, but that is not where the people from Rockglen, Coronach, Willow Bunch or Assiniboia want to be. They want to stay in the places where they currently are, in their communities. The government is doing absolutely nothing to make sure that happens after it has mandated away the number one industry in their communities. I will just quickly mention that there is one thing I definitely appreciate in this budget, and that is the tax credit for tradespeople when they purchase their tools. Again, we are talking about a housing crisis in this country. How are we going to get there? We have to build houses. We need more workers. We need to incentivize people to be able to go to trade school and to want to work in these industries. That tax credit is going to help a lot of people as they enter into the trades. The Liberals also could have supported a Conservative private member's bill, Bill C-241. It has passed this place, but the government could have been proactive and provided that in the budget. However, it did not do that. The Liberals missed an opportunity there.

1923 words

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Apr/27/23 9:10:21 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-47 Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, I think that Bill C-241 would have fit very neatly in Bill C-47, the budget implementation act. There are many sections in the over 429 pages of Bill C-47, but there is one that goes directly to the issue that the hon. member has put forward in his private member's bill, which is a tax discount on tradespeople's tools. I wonder if the member saw that section and if he sees it as encouragement that perhaps the Senate, like the House, will pass Bill C-241.

93 words

Mr. Chris Lewis

Apr/27/23 9:08:04 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, it has honestly been really good to work with the New Democratic Party on trades. Of course, NDP members did support Bill C-241, so they understand it, unlike all but one member of the Liberal Party. I have been across Canada, from the east coast to the west coast and everywhere in between, and do I ever know that there is a major deficit of labour. I do not think that there is any one of the 338 members in the House who would disagree with me on that front. However, it is really unfortunate that when we have major hangups in the immigration system, all these skilled trades that are coming through are being backlogged, put into a file and not being dealt with to support our industries and businesses. It goes back to the government. My question for the member would be this: If it is that detrimental, and if NDP members have all the answers, why do they continue to prop up the Liberals?

170 words

Context: House Hansard - 171 - Mar/22/23

Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC)

Apr/27/23 8:55:41 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-47 Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, as always, it is an honour to stand in this place to represent the great folks of Essex. We are here this evening to speak to Bill C-47, the budget implementation act. We have heard a lot of discussion, and I have been listening keenly to both sides of the aisle, as to what truly is the direction for Canada and the path forward to sustainability and success. While I was drafting out my talking points today, I got thinking about local examples. The first one I am going to start with is a young woman from Essex County who goes to school at St. Clair College. She has a part-time job and lives at home with her parents. She drives back and forth about 30 minutes to school. Her part-time job is at a veterinary clinic, and she wants to be a veterinarian. Her parents have paid into RESPs along the way. I found out this morning from this young lady that she has to pay $942 this year in income tax. She makes under $15,000 in her part-time job to pay for some of her schooling. I guess the question is this: How is that even possible in Canada? We talk about affordable housing. We continue to talk about making things easier for Canadian families. How can a young woman who is 20 years old, who goes to school full time and has a part-time job, have to pay $942 in taxes and be expected to save any money at all for a home going forward? Saturday morning I had breakfast with the mayor of Kingsville in a local greasy spoon that serves one of the greatest breakfasts in Essex County. We met the owners of the restaurant. The amazing woman told me that they have lost about 85% of their senior customers because they can no longer afford to eat out. Then she went on to cry as she told me that she was in a local Zehrs, which is a grocery store, and ran into a senior who was trying to figure out what she was going to eat that night because she was looking at Kraft Dinner. Then we look at this budget, and we are supposed to celebrate a $234 one-time payment per person. Last night I went to the local grocery store here in Ottawa and bought half a bag of groceries for $36, that was just for myself, so this one-time payment might be great for one month, yet the government wants to celebrate it. I want to speak about the 2023 federal budget submission of the Windsor-Essex Chamber of Commerce. I will go through it quickly. The first point it makes is with respect to the employment insurance rate freeze. It stated: the bill for these emergency programs is being unfairly placed on businesses. Businesses have for years been concerned with the fact that employers pay an additional 40% on-top of matching the employee contributions. The $0.05 increase per $100 of earned income means that employers are paying even more. The additional $0.05 increase to take effect in 2024 and 2025 means that employers are going to be bearing the burden over years for programs not beneficiary to them. It speaks about the capital cost allowance for vehicles, stating: The current amount of $30,000 is well short of the current average vehicle price in Canada, which is approximately $54,000 for a new vehicle and $36,000 for a used vehicle. This low limit prevents businesses from properly being able to account for the depreciation of the asset, which is the primary goal of the CCA. They talk about allowing international students to participate in the Canada summer jobs program. In my riding of Essex, we got about $720,000 less this year for the Canada summer jobs program. There are a lot of folks have benefited from that program who are not too sure if they are going to be able to keep their doors open, such as those at the Kiwanis camp down in my area. They talk about the delay of the CEBA loan repayment over one year. They talk about bringing in a new workforce and increasing the pace of immigration, which is something that Conservatives have been calling for and talking about for a very long time. There are the non-Canadian housing purchasing ban, immigration with accreditation and covering transition costs. We hear an awful lot about housing in this House, ironically. For that young woman I was talking about, or perhaps a young man who is working full-time who cannot find a home, and if he can find a home, he cannot afford it, the government loves to pound the drum that it is doing so much for housing. The problem is that the government cannot even plant a tree, so maybe the problem is the lumber to not build the homes. Nine in 10 young people do not believe they will be able to afford a home, and that is unacceptable. When I ran for this place in 2019, I said that I would do my darndest to ensure that I leave the world a better place than I found it. I am the eternal optimist, and today I stand here to say that I am a bit of a pessimist. Because of the failures of the government, it is certainly not in a better place in 2023 than it was in 2019. With respect to skilled labour, the government has been, again, pounding the drum. With respect to the Volkswagen plant, it is fantastic. In housing, this is excellent and, quite frankly, a great investment. It is wonderful, as are the five and a half billion-dollar battery plant in Windsor and the Gordie Howe International Bridge. However, there is something really interesting about this when we talk about all these investments. By the way, regarding the Volkswagen plant, they talk about 3,000 workers. The truth of the matter is, that it is probably closer to 1,000, but in the event that it is 3,000, that would be great. Here is what is really ironic. Where are the skilled trades people going to come from? If the government truly cared about skilled trades, why did it not take my private member's bill, Bill C-241, and put it into this budget? It would have been done overnight, and then we would have people who are mobilized across Canada. I want to talk really quickly about the doctor in Michigan. Dr. Amster lives in Michigan, and he has 1,200 patients at his family practice in Amherstburg, which is in my riding. His current C10 work permit expired on March 28, and nobody will give him a renewed work permit. Tomorrow morning, I am very excited to host grade 11 and grade 12 students of Cardinal Carter, where I went to high school. What do I tell them? How do I explain to them that what we are doing here is fighting for their future when the budget, quite frankly, falls so short for them?

1202 words

Context: House Hansard - 171 - Mar/22/23

Mar/22/23 4:25:26 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

I declare the motion carried.

5 words

All Topics

Mar/22/23 4:14:02 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at third reading stage of Bill C-241 under Private Members' Business.

37 words

Mar/21/23 6:49:39 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, March 22, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

27 words

Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC)

Mar/21/23 6:44:00 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, they say it is a marathon, not a race. Tonight, I think we got halfway through the marathon. Tomorrow could be a really monumental day for skilled trades across Canada. If the bill is passed in the House, it will go to the Senate. People will be one step closer to building Canada, the economy, and quite frankly, their own careers. First and foremost, Bill C-241 is a common bill for the common people. It makes common sense, something that does not happen a lot in this House. I want to thank God because without him, this opportunity would never have existed. I thank him so much for this opportunity. I want to give my thanks to the Bloc Québécois for their amazing remarks this evening and to the member for Windsor West for really understanding this bill and what it can do for skilled trades across Canada. My thanks to those members. I want to thank Tommy Helgun from the carpenters union, who was down from Windsor. Truthfully, he is one of the curators of this bill. He was here this evening. I got a chance to speak to him before this. I really want to say thanks to him and Karl Lovett from the IBEW, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; really, really awesome. Nancy Yan helped me get to this spot as well; she knows who she is. I thank all the various trades across Canada that I have spoken to over the last year or so while scripting and tweaking this bill, ensuring that it is actually doing the work that it is designed to do. To each and every one of them, I send my thanks. I am not one who says anything other than let us get the darn job done and fast forward this as much as we possibly can. This afternoon, I had a chance to speak with our leader. I filled him in. I really want to give my thanks to the leader of the official opposition for being very influential on this bill. I know that back when he was the shadow minister for finance, I went to him for his thoughts. He said to make darn sure that it is a tax deduction and there is no limit on this, so that folks, workers and skilled trades across Canada do not have a limit on how many hours they should be working per year. I guess the question in the House now is: Why does the Liberal Party not support skilled trades? I do not understand, to save my soul, why it would not support them, but apparently it does not. Tomorrow is a fresh, new day. It has only ever been and will only ever be about the people. One can have the greatest widget in the world, but one will not build or sell it unless one is surrounded by the greatest people. Our skilled trades are exactly who will build this amazing country called Canada. Equally, however, they need our support. I truly do not care who gets the credit. If the government wants to take my bill, Bill C-241, and put in the legislation tomorrow, I am good with that as long as our skilled trades get the support they deserve and need. Again, it is a marathon; it is not a race. My phone is on, and my door is open. If the government will reach out to me and have a conversation about how to enhance this, perhaps in the Senate when it goes there tomorrow thanks to the amazing Bloc and NDP support, I am all ears. Let us just support our skilled trades. In closing, I will say this one more time: It has only ever been about the people. Unless we support the ones who fix our bridges, build our roads and keep our electrical system going, we have nothing.

657 words

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

Mar/21/23 6:35:17 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, we are here this evening to debate Bill C‑241, an act to amend the Income Tax Act with regard to deduction of travel expenses for tradespersons. Bill C‑241, which is sponsored by the member from the Ontario riding of Essex, is at third reading stage. It seeks to amend “the Income Tax Act to allow tradespersons and indentured apprentices to deduct from their income amounts expended for travelling where they were employed in a construction activity at a job site that is located at least 120 km away from their ordinary place of residence.” From the outset, I want to say that the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this small but extremely worthwhile initiative. In my opinion, most members agree on this bill. We could settle this this evening by taking a vote by a show of hands. Honestly, I find this a bit tough from a procedural perspective. We know that everyone will vote in favour of the bill, but there is a process to follow, even though we know the outcome will be the same at the end of it. The tax benefit being introduced by Bill C‑241 responds to a request made by Canada's Building Trades Unions, which represent more than half a million construction workers across the country. These people work in more than 60 trades and professions and generate 6% of Canada's GDP. That is significant. As we know, in Quebec, the construction industry is an extremely important sector of activity. We are talking about investments of nearly $53 million in 2019. We are also talking about 264,600 direct jobs generated per month, on average, or one out of every 20 jobs in Quebec. In Canada, salespeople, professionals and various other workers in different sectors can already claim a tax deduction for the cost of their travel, meals and accommodation. I believe and the Bloc believes that it stands to reason that these expenses could be claimed by skilled workers whose job sites are far from their primary residence. It is simply a question of fairness. The scope of Bill C-241 is essentially fiscal, but it is also economic, because it addresses labour shortages and, by extension, inflation. When expenses are not covered by the employer, workers must cover them themselves. With a family to support, additional expenses for travel can obviously become quite burdensome and undermine a worker's incentive to accept certain contracts from time to time. Inflation was 6.8% in 2022, the highest since 1982. In 1982 it was 10.9%. We need only think of the extreme volatility of gas prices. The price of a litre of gas in Quebec last June was $2.20, enough to bankrupt any family that has to travel a lot for work. As I was saying, the tax deduction introduced by Bill C-241 is a concrete and effective measure to encourage the mobility of workers in the construction sector. It is an incentive to return to work. We believe that. According to a recent poll by Canada's Building Trades Unions, 75% of skilled trades workers say that a tax deduction will give them access to more job opportunities. Given the current inflation, this is the right time to bring in this tax deduction that will help alleviate the financial burden for tradespeople. This tax incentive promises to provide a solution to the labour shortage, and therefore reduce Quebeckers' and Canadians' dependence on government programs such as employment insurance. Calculations have shown that Bill C-241 could save the federal government approximately $347 million. I want to make it clear that we are not reinventing the wheel with Bill C‑241. Other countries, such as the United States, have had a similar tax deduction for quite some time. In short, it is a targeted, relevant and timely measure that has been proven to work on the other side of the border. It would be difficult for all parties here in the House to oppose this bill. I made a correlation earlier between the tax deduction proposed in Bill C‑241, the job shortage and inflation. The Bloc Québécois members believe that addressing the labour shortage will help ease the inflation that is increasingly affecting and worrying our constituents. The pandemic forced many people out of the workforce for health reasons and exacerbated the labour shortage in some sectors, including the construction trades. This shortage is hindering the economic recovery, because it results in forced closures, lost contracts, significantly reduced investment in our businesses and overworked employees. Today's inflation stems in part from an imbalance between supply and demand: Supply is limited because of the labour shortage, but demand is stable and growing. Reducing the labour shortage in a specific sector, as Bill C‑241 seeks to do, could potentially fix the imbalance between supply and demand, in addition to reducing inflation as I was saying earlier. Consequently, in my opinion, it was ill-advised and counterproductive of the Liberal government to try to create one million jobs in budget 2021 without including effective mechanisms to deal with the labour shortage. The Bloc Québécois has been taking the labour shortage seriously for a long time now. During the last election campaign, we proposed plenty of solutions: recognizing experienced workers; transferring the temporary foreign workers program to Quebec; investing in research and development; investing in the digital transformation; and creating tax credits for new graduates who move to the regions for work. In summary, the Bloc Québécois has always been an ally of tradespersons who make an essential and invaluable contribution to Quebec's economic prosperity. Bill C‑241 introduces a targeted and appropriate tax measure that will ease the financial burden of tradespersons while addressing the labour shortage and inflation. For all of these reasons, once again, the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C‑241.

1018 words

All Topics

Hon. Andrew Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle, CPC)

Mar/21/23 6:25:13 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure for me to rise in support of this excellent piece of legislation from my colleague from Essex, which is a great part of Canada. The good people of southwestern Ontario have gotten behind this hon. member, and our leader, the new leader of the Conservative Party, visited that part of the world. There are lots of skilled trades workers in southwestern Ontario, and a massive rally came together for our leader's visit there. Over 1,500 people came out to hear the positive Conservative message about making sure that work always pays. There are so many people in this country right now working so hard, juggling different jobs, often more than one job, trying to pick up extra shifts and always looking for new ways to earn a little more. People will always want to do better for their families. People will always want to leave more for their children and give their children the types of things they never had when they were growing up. That is a pretty standard, constant human emotion, especially here in Canada, but with the inflation crisis that the Liberals have created, the need to pick up extra shifts and to have a little more money at the end of every day is even more pronounced, because the dollars people are earning are not going far enough anymore. As the Prime Minister devalues the value of the paycheques people bring home, more and more Canadians are forced to work more, for longer and longer hours, and work harder and harder at their jobs. Construction workers and skilled tradespersons often have extra costs that office workers do not. We all know that people in the skilled trades have to spend a lot of money on tools, for example, and various governments understand that. The previous Conservative government wanted to recognize that cost for skilled trades workers and brought in special tax measures for tools that skilled trades workers have to spend their money on. This bill, though, would not be a tax credit. This bill would be a great way to recognize the costs that are often associated with travelling to work by allowing those workers to deduct those costs from their income altogether. If someone goes to a restaurant and pays for a burger, maybe it costs five dollars. We know that the restaurant owner does not have to pay tax on the full five dollars, because that five dollars of revenue first has to go to pay the cost. It has to pay the cost of the meat that is in the burger, the bun and the worker who cooked it and put it together, so the business owner has to pay tax only on the profit from that five-dollar cheeseburger. We are kind of applying the same logic to the skilled trades here. When workers have to travel a long distance, the payment for that work should not ignore the reality that the workers had to pay money out of their own pocket to get where they had to go. A great example is in the province of Saskatchewan, which I am so proud to represent. We have lots of large-scale infrastructure projects, mining projects and natural resource projects that take place far away from large urban centres. We have potash mines where big companies are investing big dollars. They are desperate for workers to fill those jobs, and there are workers who would love to go and work there, but they cannot relocate their families for a short period of time. They do not want to pull their kids out of school, sell their house and move to, in come cases, a very small town that may not even have housing available to them, so what do they do? They commute. They might rent a place nearby or they might literally drive there and back every day, and they are doing that to work. They are doing that to fill a need in our economy, like a project or a job that needs to get done, and they are doing it for themselves, but their paycheque and the taxes that are charged on that should reflect the cost they had to spend to do the very job they are qualified to do. This, by the way, happens in the corporate world. Companies that have to spend money on transportation to fly their staff to various parts of the country or to transport materials are allowed to deduct those costs against their revenues and pay tax only on the difference. I view this measure as tax fairness for skilled trades workers. One point of differentiation between the Liberals and the Conservatives is that every time we hear the Liberals talk about tax fairness, we can be sure of one thing: They are raising taxes. That is literally the only way the Liberals know how to even think about tax fairness. When the Conservatives think about tax fairness, we think about lowering taxes and getting government out of the way. One thing that has been so inspiring to watch is how the leader of our party is showing Canadians how many barriers and obstacles to growth and prosperity exist all around the country. We just had a fantastic announcement. The Leader of the Conservative Party announced that a Conservative government would bring in what is called a blue seal program. It would allow highly skilled, trained medical professionals to travel from one province to another, or move from one province to another, to fill a need. For people who have credentials from outside of Canada, credentials would be recognized so they could fill badly needed positions in our health care sector all across the country. This type of initiative builds on that. This type of initiative to encourage workers to go to where the work is, removing the impediment, the obstacle to prosperity, is an incredible method to get people working and to get big projects built again. This initiative is needed, because the investments that go into a lot of these large-scale construction projects are cyclical. If we build a bridge, we do not need to build another bridge for many years, but another municipality might need a bridge. Our skilled workforce has had to become very mobile and very flexible. Workers need to be able to go to where the work is. Let us take mining companies, for example. They can only do so much exploration every year. They can only do so much drilling. They can only do so much infrastructure building because of their equipment barriers. They tend to rotate and move around where they focus their investment. One year it might be in Saskatchewan and the next year it might be in British Columbia. We need to ensure that our workforce can be flexible too and that we remove this barrier. If we do not, there may be a job that goes unfilled. There may be a worker who could do it, but with the salary offered for it, they think that by the time they fly in and out several times a year or drive the long hours, their costs will become more and more significant, as the Liberal carbon tax makes the cost of fuel go up. The worker might say they are not that much better off if they take the job. At the end of the day, by the time they pay for all those out-of-pocket expenses and pay their taxes on the money they have earned, they are not even further ahead, even though they have done all this work and spent all this time away from their family. This bill removes that barrier, that obstacle, and makes it that much easier for a worker to say, yes, they will take the job and take the skills they have learned over the years and apply them to the job that needs to be done. Everybody wins. The worker wins, our overall economy wins and Canadian pension holders win as Canadian companies do better and better. My colleague from Essex has found a win-win-win solution to help all aspects of our economy with this great initiative. I cannot say how shocked I am that the Liberals are going to vote against it. I say that and then I realize that I should not be shocked at the hypocrisy. When the Liberals say one thing and do another, it is more disappointing than shocking because we see it all the time. They talk a good game. They like to make announcements. They like to go to conventions full of workers whose votes they are trying to win over. They like to have fancy meetings with the heads of some of the unions. However, when it comes time to actually do something and deliver, the Liberals say no. The Liberal excuse for saying no is so flimsy. They claim they have another type of solution, but it is not going to benefit workers in the same way this bill would. Because of how my colleague from Essex has designed this bill, it would allow workers to deduct expenses right off the top and would be a massive tax savings for them. However, overall, it would not be that much of a cost to the economy. Instead of looking at it as a reduction of revenue for the government, we should be looking at this as an expansion of the work that is going to be done all over the country. That economic activity is going to lead to even more economic activity. Once again, I am disappointed but not shocked that the Liberals have said one thing during an election and done another thing after the votes were counted. That has been the story of the Prime Minister and the government. However, the Conservatives have shown the way again. We are showing how we are going to bring home better jobs and better paycheques, and the money left over in Canadians' pockets will go farther when the Leader of the Opposition becomes Prime Minister of Canada.

1695 words

All Topics

Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP)

Mar/21/23 6:15:39 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to join the debate here this evening. Bill C-241, sponsored by the member for Essex, is an excellent bill that the NDP will be supporting. I am also pleased to be in the same area as the member, and I think it is a good example of how we can bring forth responsible and solid legislation that not only reflects on our area, but also impacts the rest of the country. Unfortunately, I cannot get the last 10 minutes back from the previous speaker, but I can say that the member sponsoring the bill has been open to meeting with the government and ministers on an open basis. He has approached the Liberals very responsibly, trying to get them to come on board. Quite frankly, I think the only reason the Liberals do not support it is because it is not their idea. It is as simple as that. I am going to go through the specifics of why the bill is important, but a lot of people would see this as a housekeeping bill in many respects. I want to point out that this is a modest tax credit and a piece of legislation with an approach that should be, in a minority Parliament, a bipartisan way to get some stuff done for Canada. I commend the member for coming forth with the bill right away. He was selected high in the order, and we only get a certain amount of opportunities and time. It is like winning the lottery. This is not a going-through-the-motions type of bill; it is going to provide a tax credit. We know there are many tax credits out there for other individuals and corporations. It is unfortunate that we do not have this one, which is to allow for travel-related expenses for work done at least 120 kilometres away from a skilled trades member's place of residence. In Windsor and Essex County, which includes LaSalle, Tecumseh and Kingsville, even the Chatham-Kent area in southern Ontario, there are often different times where we might have a flux of employment in the auto industry, or other types of trades that go up and down. We also have many workers who will fly out to Alberta, to the oil sands, or fly out to other places to do skilled trades work. This is a modest tax credit to help them in that process. These individuals are self-employed in many respects, although they often belong to unions, like LiUNA, which is a very good union, and Unifor, which is another good union. At times, they are individually contracted to go out to different places, and the cost can be quite significant. The previous speaker from the Bloc mentioned a really good point on the inflationary costs that have gone up for travel, and other things of that nature. I think that is an excellent point. This keeps people working all the time and stops them from having to go on unemployment. It also encourages young people to have more stability. It is a challenge to work abroad. There is a lot of stress when it comes to family and raising young children. These measures are controllable. The person has to provide receipts. There is full accountability for the expenses taking place. I looked at some of the other tax havens, the types of taxes and tax credits we have for people. I will focus on a couple of them to show how unfair it is for these workers to not be able to write off a few business-related expenses for their travel when it is helpful for our country. We have a corporate dividend tax credit, a tax credit for the oil and gas industry, and a stock option deduction for taxes. We have a number of different businesses taxes that businesses can write off, which even include private boxes for sports tickets, concerts, vacations, office parties, and deductions for executive pay. If members can believe it, all those things are a tax deduction, but they are not for skilled trades workers. We are also trying to get more women and diversity into our skilled trades, but they cannot get the same deductions we can for an office party. It is outrageous. For the government to complicate this, or make it more difficult than it seems, is irresponsible. I do not know why the Liberals cannot just get behind the bill. It is unfortunate. The bill has a history in this House. Former New Democrats for Hamilton Centre have brought this forth, including past members Chris Charlton, David Christopherson and Wayne Marsden. Now our current member for Hamilton Centre, who is doing an excellent job on this, and the member for Essex have pulled this together, and I think it is worthy of being brought forth on its merit alone. We have done this before. In the last Parliament, I worked with the member from Saskatoon when I had a private member's bill on single-event sports betting, and because he got selected higher, I took it off the Order Paper and gave it to him. He took it and did a wonderful job, and the legislation got passed. It affected the reduction of organized crime, and now we have an accountable process. It is a good example of making Parliament work. I think the bill before us should be seen with the same type of lens. I do not know why government members would want to oppose this legislation. Some of them argue it is redundant. Some of them argue it is not good enough. It is ridiculous. Those arguments are shallow and vain, quite frankly, because if there is still a problem, it can go to the Senate for some amendments. Members can be creative and suggest something or show something that is wrong with it in a concrete way, rather than just trying to wind the clock down on the process. When we get an opportunity in the House of Commons, it is like winning the lottery. For people who do not know, we are like ping-pong balls in many respects. The process is that we get drawn randomly, and if a member gets selected in the top 40, they at least have some hope of actually getting their bill through the entire process in a regular Parliament. However, in a minority Parliament, it is even more shallow, because if we do not have a five-year term, if it is a shorter term, a member would not be able to get their bill through. Even the last bill I did, again with the member from Saskatoon, who did an excellent job of working on the bill with me and others, came into effect within only a couple of days of the election, because the Prime Minister refused to do it. It took outside lobbying efforts to get him to finally officially authorize it and bring the legislation into force, a couple of days before the last election. It is hard enough, and my point is that we all have a collective responsibility to use these opportunities as best we can. The member did not choose something like “happy groundhog month” or something very shallow like that. This legislation is well thought out. It is legislation that has been in the House before. It is not going to break the Bank of Canada. In fact, it passed the test of mettle in being proper and with due diligence, by the Speaker's ruling. This is one of the things that should be noted. We actually have unions behind the bill as well. Canada's Building Trade Unions has been supporting this tax deduction for a long time. Operably, it is really good. I mentioned LiUNA and Unifor as well. Again, what we are talking about here is for a long period of travel, 120 kilometres, where a worker would be able to deduct a little bit of that cost. We have all seen, in the last number of months, and the last couple of years really, the rate of inflation going up. I could not think of anything that had more appropriate timing than this. In fact, it merits the government stealing the legislation if it wants to actually impress upon getting something done for workers at this particular time. If the government is saying that we cannot afford this for skilled trade workers, then why would we not stop letting people write off private boxes, and stop corporations from deducting office parties and other nonsense like that? This is something that could go right to the worker. Again, it would go through our accounting process, which is already established, and so the legislation would not create another bureaucratic arm or process. It would actually be an amendment to our current tax code, which is commendable in the approach it is taking. It is responsible and could actually be triggered right away. I feel passionately about this. There are two things that are behind the bill. First and foremost is that a member has sincerely brought forth legislation, which has had a number of versions in the House in the past and is very much amenable to a bipartisan approach and working together. Second, it is very effective for tradespeople. It has a direct correlation to the economy and how we can actually protect workers and enhance opportunities for them and their families, and it has a social justice element as well. To conclude, there are a lot of other tax things out there that are a bunch of nonsense and that really should be reviewed, eliminated or at least discussed, whereas this is extremely responsible. I hope the bill before us receives the proper weight or at least the government looking at what it can do, and that we can move it to the Senate and go from there.

1665 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Mar/21/23 6:05:31 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, in the statements the member has made, there are some aspects I agree with, and others I disagree with. When we talk about Bill C-241 itself, there are issues with tax fairness within the legislation. There is a lack of safeguards within the legislation that the member talks about supporting. There are some technical deficiencies within the legislation. I think that, if we take a look, if I may, at Bill C-19, which was the federal legislation that was brought forward, we would see that, in moving forward with the labour mobility tax credit, it does allow for workers in the building and construction trades to deduct up to $4,000 in eligible travel and temporary relocation expenses, giving them a tax credit of up to $600 a year. The labour mobility tax credit goes a long way in being supportive of an industry. The member made reference to the construction industry in the province of Quebec, and the construction industry in the province of Quebec is, in fact, very important to the government. We recognize that there are many ways and many areas in which, throughout the country, we can look at how we can further enhance and support the construction industry. There is a labour shortage. The member made reference to the kind of actions, and the number of jobs the government created. I think it is worthy of note. Do members know that over 800,000 jobs have been created if we look at the number of jobs in Canada prepandemic? We can take a look at the number from before the pandemic started, and we can add about 825,000 or 830,000 new jobs since that time. I would ultimately argue that the government has been very successful at ensuring that Canada is in a great position to come back in a better and healthier way when it comes to the whole issue of jobs. Yes, there is a huge demand for employees in the different regions of the country. There are certain sectors, and the construction area is one of the them. That is one of the reasons why we look at other mechanisms we could put into place to support. Whether it is forgiving the interest for apprentices on federal loans, the enhancement of the labour mobility tax credit, or other initiatives, I believe that it is contributing and making a difference. We also recognize that immigration can play a critical role in meeting our labour demands, not only for today but also into the future. Further to that, I have always argued that, if we look outside Canada to supply workers, we should also, at the same time, look at ways we can enable those workers to become landed immigrants to Canada. That is something that has been very important to the government. We have been looking at ways in which we can add to the workforce by bringing in international students. This has had a positive impact in Canada, in many different ways, not only filling literally tens of thousands of jobs, but also adding to the social fabric in which we all live in and have grown to appreciate. The numbers of, and I use this as an example, international students today, compared to what it was seven, eight years ago, have multiplied significantly, from the 35,000 or 40,000 to closer to 350,000. There are significant numbers of international students who are studying a wide spectrum of issues. The member spoke prior talked about construction jobs, and many of students are taking those types of construction jobs. They are getting an education at our colleges and, in some cases, universities, to work either directly or indirectly in the construction industry. We are looking at ways to further enhance opportunities for those who want to enter the occupation. There are many examples of low-income families working in the industry. I am very pleased with the fact that we have the federal refund tax credit for the Canada workers benefit program. Tens of thousands of Canadians are directly benefiting from that credit. It is significant. An individual receives just over $1,400 and a family unit receives up to $2,400 to assist workers with a lower income. We can look at the basic tax exemption. I talk about this because taxation policy does matter and does make a difference. The government has looked at the labour mobility tax credit within Bill C-19 and has addressed many of the shortcomings I pointed out in regard to Bill C-241. I had the opportunity to look into what Bill C-241 is proposing, and I would suggest there are too many technical deficiencies. There is an issue of taxation fairness in some of the areas. There is, in fact, a lack of safeguards, as I pointed out. The sponsor of the legislation can maybe sit down with ministers or others and expand on some of those points. When it comes to apprenticeship programs and ways we can support labour enhancement, the government has been very progressive in trying to deal with that and enhance it. I have been with the Prime Minister in Manitoba on one or two occasions to look at how we can contribute to enhancing trade and labour in the province of Manitoba. We have wonderful organizations out there that are developing programs. Earlier today we heard the Conservatives finally get on board with the idea of national opportunities for individuals to be recognized in health care professions and have mobility rights across Canada. They refer to it as a “blue seal”. I suspect they are taking that idea in part from the Red Seal program, which is for tradespeople. Whether it is someone international or someone who takes culinary arts to achieve the Red Seal, it has a profoundly positive impact for that individual. When we look at the construction industry, there is potential growth in that area with regard to getting recognition from a national perspective. The government, through taxation policies, has been there and continues to be there for the construction industry in particular, but also, as I pointed out, for those who are on the low-income scale. Not all construction workers are able to collect the annual money necessary to provide for a full family or even themselves. That is why we have provided the enhancement of the Canada workers benefit program. I believe it is important that we use our taxation policy as a mechanism to support families and individuals in different situations. One of those situations is looking at ways we can enhance our labour market and support the people who are working so hard to get ahead in life, particularly by upgrading their skills. Apprenticeship programs are an excellent example of that.

1141 words

All Topics

Ms. Andréanne Larouche (Shefford, BQ)

Mar/21/23 5:55:39 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-241

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C‑241, which seeks to amend the Income Tax Act to allow tradespersons and indentured apprentices to deduct from their income amounts expended for travelling where they were employed in a construction activity at a job site that is located at least 120 kilometres away from their ordinary place of residence. As the granddaughter of a mason and niece, sister and sister-in-law of carpenters, this is a sector of our economy that I am rather familiar with. From the outset I would like to say that the Bloc Québécois is voting in favour of Bill C‑241 and I will be talking about it today first from the perspective of the construction industry, then from the perspective of the current economic context and finally in the context of the labour shortage. First, let us not forget that this is about one of the recommendations from Canada's trade unions that represent more than half a million construction workers in Canada who are members of 14 international unions. These people work in more than 60 trades and professions and generate 6% of the country's gross domestic product. Salespeople, professionals and various other workers in different sectors can already claim a tax deduction for the cost of their travel, meals and accommodation. It stands to reason that these expenses could be claimed by skilled workers whose job sites are located in a different region or province from their primary residence. It is a question of fairness. Growth rates and infrastructure investment often vary from one region to the next, and this results in labour shortages. The labour shortage is one of the main impediments to economic recovery. One way to address rising prices is to tackle this shortage. When expenses are not covered by the employer, workers must pay out of pocket. For workers with a family, additional expenses for travel can be very high and can impede the worker's mobility. This tax deduction is a concrete and effective means of enhancing the mobility of construction workers. In addition, according to calculations, this would save the federal government approximately $347 million. Other countries, such as the United States, allow a similar tax deduction for skilled labour under the Internal Revenue Code. These employees can deduct the cost of meals, travel and lodging for temporary work away from their place of residence. This type of measure would promote return to work and address labour shortages at the same time. It would also reduce reliance on government programs, such as employment insurance. As mentioned earlier, the costs associated with travelling to a job site far from home can impact a worker's decision to accept that contract. Coming back to inflation, it reached 6.8% in 2022, the highest it has been since 1982, when it hit 10.9%. It bears mentioning, however, that the inflationary surge appears to be coming to an end. After peaking in June at 8.1%, it stabilized for a few months and then fell 0.6% to 6.3% on an annualized basis in December. Price increases have been uneven. In 12 months, food prices rose 9.8%, gas prices rose 28% and the consumer price index, excluding gas and food, rose 5.3%. Since essentials like housing, food and gas have increased the most, low-income earners have suffered the most. Two weeks ago, the Bank of Canada announced its eighth rate hike, increasing it to 4.5% from 0.5% a year earlier. Higher interest rates benefit those with savings, but cost those with debt. Young homeowners who bought their first home in the midst of the real estate price boom are likely to have some challenges. Since they are usually the ones who take out variable rate mortgages, they will quickly see rising rates on their mortgage payments. Inflation is a major concern for consumers and cannot be ignored. A Scotiabank survey conducted in December shows that the rising cost of living tops the list of financial concerns for 50% of Quebeckers. That is why the Bloc Québécois introduced a bill, in May 2021, to help attract new graduates to the regions and encourage them to stay there. With that in mind, it is important to implement measures that protect the population in general, particularly the most vulnerable, such as seniors. When it comes to seniors, the Bloc Québécois is still calling for the government to increase old age security by $110 a month for all seniors aged 65 and over. Like all other workers, skilled workers are facing higher costs on everything. I will come back to that. According to a recent poll by Canada's Building Trades Unions, 75% of skilled trades workers agree that a tax deduction will give them access to more job opportunities. With inflation the way it is, the time is right to implement a tax deduction to help ease the pressure on some workers' wallets. At the top of the list of costs that might stop workers from agreeing to travel far for work is the cost of gas. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has pushed the price of oil to levels not seen in eight years. Even though the price of gas is coming back down, its current volatility and unpredictability are enough to dissuade workers from going too far from home to work. It becomes unfair. What is more, this tax deduction can certainly help deal with the labour shortage in one sector in particular. The pandemic forced many people out of the labour market for health reasons and it exacerbated the labour shortage in certain sectors. It is important to act quickly to support the sectors that have been hard hit by this labour shortage. This shortage is a significant impediment to economic recovery. It results in forced closures, the loss of contracts, the cancellation of investments in our businesses and overworked employees. It can even limit opportunities to improve the working conditions of current employees. The pressures related to the shortage of workers will be felt until at least 2030 in Quebec especially because of the aging population. The Bloc Québécois is proposing a suite of measures to alleviate labour shortages across Quebec. In its 2021 spring budget, the government promised to create at least one million jobs. Creating jobs when there is a shortage of workers really makes sense. The Bloc Québécois was already concerned about the labour shortage. It made some good proposals during the 2021 election campaign. We proposed seven concrete measures to help fix the problem. First we must value experienced workers and increase, from $5,000 to $6,500, the amount of employment or self-employment income that is exempt when calculating the guaranteed income supplement, or GIS. That is in the bill that I introduced last week. I look forward to debating it here in the House with the other parties. The GIS is intended for people aged 65 and over with relatively low incomes. It complements old age security, but the GIS decreases rapidly as income increases. The first $5,000 earned, however, does not affect GIS amounts. We propose to increase this exemption by $1,500. The temporary foreign worker program must also be handed over to Quebec. The Bloc Québécois is calling for the program to be repatriated to Quebec, which is in a better position than anyone else to identify the specific labour needs of businesses within its borders. Another trend that is emerging in Quebec is the digital shift. Businesses are increasing their efforts to accelerate the digital shift. This is one way to increase productivity and get around the problem of the labour shortage. This is another area that needs to be addressed. We need to support and assist SMEs in that shift. It is about competitiveness. Tax credits for research and development also need to be improved to stimulate innovation. We are also suggesting creating a new tax credit of up to $3,000 per year for recent graduates in the regions, to a maximum cumulative amount of $8,000 for recent graduates working in designated regions. In closing, I want to present some figures on Quebec's construction industry, which is very lucrative but has labour shortage issues. That is why the Bloc was quick to propose several solutions, because there is no magic bullet for solving the labour shortage. We need to approach the problem from various angles. The importance of Quebec's construction industry cannot be understated. This is as true from an economic point of view as it is from a job creation point of view. We are talking about investments of nearly $53 billion in 2019. We are also talking about 264,600 direct jobs generated per month, on average, or one out of every 20 jobs in Quebec. It also generates thousands of other jobs in other sectors. To conclude, the Bloc made an intervention through my colleague from Joliette at the Standing Committee on Finance during debate on this bill. My colleague pointed out to the government that, since this is a private member's bill, the government tends not to propose any amendments, particularly in terms of including safeguards for certain provisions and thus reassuring the parties on the interpretation or application of a given bill. In the end, no amendments were proposed, and the bill passed without amendment on division in only about 15 minutes. I want to say one last thing in closing. As members can see, this bill reflects the current context in which the construction industry is facing many challenges. Given how important this industry is to the economy, we need to look into this problem and help the industry find solutions to the labour shortage. This bill is one of those solutions.

1669 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 159 - Feb/13/23