- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- NDP
- South Okanagan—West Kootenay
- British Columbia
- Voting Attendance: 61%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $128,729.57
- Government Page
- May/22/24 5:15:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister about concerns that we share with him about all the blockages the Conservatives have been putting up on bills like dental care that would help Canadians across the country. They seem to think that they deserve dental care here as MPs, yet needy families in the rest of Canada should not have dental care. They believe that we should not have single-payer pharmacare that would save us billions of dollars a year.
Canadians seem to think the Conservatives are good on the economy, but the Conservatives have no concept that this measure to create a single-payer pharmacare plan that would include coverage for contraceptives, as well as the dental care plan and all the other things that we talked about, would save us money.
I am just wondering if the minister could comment on that.
146 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am happy to rise this evening to debate Bill C-47, the budget implementation act.
I would like to start by wishing my daughter, Julia, a very happy birthday yesterday. She brings us much joy.
The budget was tabled about a month ago. We have already voted in principle on these measures, but this bill is a chance to debate in more detail about the legislative changes needed to carry out the initiatives outlined in the budget.
The most impactful part of this budget is the full funding for dental coverage for all Canadians making less than $90,000 who do not already have coverage through an existing plan. This would change the lives of millions of Canadians.
I keep hearing stories from friends and constituents who grew up without dental care because their families simply could not afford to go to the dentist. One friend phoned me soon after she heard about the new dental care plan. She is retired now, but grew up painfully shy after having many of her teeth pulled out as a child because of the lack of regular dental care. That shyness changed her life and personality so much that she still avoids social gatherings. She was very emotional when she told me how much the new dental plan would really make a difference to the lives of Canadians of all ages, but particularly to those of young Canadians. Her example is a clear case of how the lack of dental care is the single visible mark of poverty for Canadians. This dental care program will change all of that forever.
This is an addition to our public health care system that New Democrats have been calling for ever since Tommy Douglas brought universal health care to our country in the 1960s. It would not have happened without the NDP using its power in the current minority government to force the Liberals to act. Both the Liberals and Conservatives voted against dental care in the last Parliament when former MP Jack Harris introduced dental care legislation in this very chamber.
The other missing piece in our national public health care system is pharmacare. Right now, Canadians can go to a doctor for free, but if they are prescribed medication for their condition, they have to pay for that themselves. Millions of Canadians cannot afford their prescriptions and end up in emergency rooms, putting pressure on the critical care part of our health care system, which is already overloaded. A public pharmacare program would provide free prescription medications to all Canadians, while saving us a minimum of $4 billion a year. It is a no-brainer. The Liberals have promised to bring in framework legislation for pharmacare by the end of this year, so it is really concerning there is no mention of it at all in this budget, not a peep.
There is good news in this budget about investments in the clean-energy economy. Significant tax credits will spur development in growth in this critical area. Thanks to the NDP, those tax credits will be tied to good jobs with good union-scale wages. Too often governments give out millions of dollars to big companies only to find that the funds went to executive bonuses and a boost in shareholder dividends. The strings attached to these incentives will ensure that workers are at the centre of the shift to a new clean-energy economy.
I used to work at the University of British Columbia, so I know first-hand how valuable investments in higher education can be. They are essential in this new knowledge economy. This budget has some help for post-secondary students. It will increase the Canada student grants by 40%, up to a maximum of $4,200.
However, the government totally missed the mark by not including anything to help graduate students who are living in poverty. Grad students work full time in their studies. It is their job. Many grad students across Canada are funded by scholarships from the federal government. These students are our best and our brightest, and these scholarships have remained at the same dollar figure and same level since 2003, for 20 years. Masters students are now trying to live on $17,500 per year. It is below the minimum wage. It is below the poverty line.
Students and researchers have been campaigning for over a year to change this. They had big demonstrations here in Ottawa last summer. They appeared before House of Commons committees. The science and research committee recommended that the government not only increase the amounts of individual scholarships, but also increase the number of scholarships. This would help us compete in the information economy and help us stop the brain drain of these young researchers moving to other countries that properly value their talents.
The students were profoundly disappointed when this budget had nothing in it for them. Students and researchers across the country will be staging a big walkout on May 1 to highlight this lack of recognition from the government and this lack of respect. They will not give up until the government agrees to pay them enough so they can live above the poverty line while they generate the innovations that Canadian companies need.
Canadians pay some of the highest interchange fees on credit card payments in the world. This is a real hardship for small businesses that increasingly rely on credit card transactions. New Democrats have been calling for reduced fees for years, for decades. Jack Layton was big on this point. We want to put us on the same level as other countries.
In my role as small business critic, I have talked to Visa, Mastercard, Moneris, the banks, Aeroplan and other players. I know it is a complicated issue, so I was very happily surprised to see that the budget announced real action on this. The lowered fees will save small businesses an average of 27%, which is over $1 billion over five years.
We have been hearing a lot about labour issues in recent days with the job action by the federal civil service. The ability to withhold labour in the face of unfair pay and work conditions is the only power organized labour has. Unfortunately, companies have often chosen to bring in replacement workers when faced with striking workforces. This flies in the face of the right of workers to strike and creates divisions within communities and between neighbours.
The NDP has been trying to get anti-scab legislation passed in this place for years. I remember one of the first private members' bills in 2016, when I was a rookie here, was anti-scab legislation brought forward by one of my NDP colleagues. Unfortunately, the Liberals and Conservatives voted against that bill, as they have for every other piece of anti-scab legislation. Again, I am happy to see that the NDP has used its power here to force the Liberals to bring forward federal anti-scab legislation.
The big disappointment on the labour front in this budget is the lack of any real employment insurance reform. One thing the COVID epidemic quickly taught us was that most Canadian workers are not covered by El. Only 40% are covered. We desperately need a new El system to protect workers for future job losses. If the predictions of some economists for a recession in the near future are correct, those job losses may be just around the corner. We must be ready to protect Canadian workers if that happens.
As I said earlier, while the NDP supports this budget, it is not a budget that an NDP government would table. That is clearly shown on the revenue side of the ledger. Every year Canada forgoes billions of dollars in taxes through legal tax avoidance by Canadian corporations and wealthy individuals. Every year the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The government has made baby steps to reverse the trend that has been going on for decades.
In this budget, the government changed the alternate minimum rate from 15% to 20.5%. That will raise the amount that wealthy Canadians must pay no matter what tax deductions they declare. It will recoup about $3 billion over five years, and 99% of that increase will come from people making more than $300,000 per year.
What we need is a wealth tax that will force super-wealthy Canadians to pay their fair share. What we need is legislation that eliminates the option for Canadian companies to hide their money in offshore tax havens. What we need is an NDP government and a real NDP budget.
1446 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, as for the dental care provisions that received royal assent yesterday, this is a temporary interim measure. Since the government did not act quickly enough, we could not bring in the real dental care program that we would have liked to see. People in Quebec can apply for that funding if their children are not eligible for the funding under the provincial program, and we have heard a lot—
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is an honour, as always, to rise in this place, and especially so when it comes to important decisions around helping Canadians get through these times of inflationary pressure, with a housing crisis and a health care system in chaos. Today we are debating the implementation of items included in the fall economic statement, which the Minister of Finance produced a couple of weeks ago.
The NDP is always focused on helping Canadians. That is why we were happy to see NDP initiatives that are clearly designed to do just that, help Canadians who need the support the most, included in that fall economic statement. There are initiatives like providing dental care for kids who do not have access to a dental plan now, like doubling the GST rebate for low-income Canadians to help them deal with the rising costs of food and gas, and like providing a $500 boost for low-income renters so they can afford to keep a roof over their heads. I would like to point out that the dental care provisions in the fall statement are not in Bill C-32, which we are discussing today, but were in Bill C-31, which received royal assent yesterday, so that was a great day for Canadians.
I am also happy to find a couple of paragraphs in the statement about credit card transaction fees, an issue that the NDP has been raising for decades. Jack Layton brought this up time and again. Canadian small business owners pay some of the highest credit card transaction fees in the world, and in this world of online shopping, the fees make it even more difficult for them to compete for Canadians' shopping dollars.
As the NDP critic for small business, I have talked with executives from Visa, Mastercard, Moneris and other companies involved in these transactions. I know it is a complex issue and that these fees vary with the business volume and the credit card type, but the fact remains that small business owners pay the highest rates, and these are the highest rates in the world. These are the business owners who can least afford those high fees. Now consumers are concerned because business owners have been given the okay to pass these fees on to consumers.
I was happy to see a pledge in the fall economic statement that the government will move forward on regulating credit card transaction fees if negotiations with the industry do not bear fruit. The NDP will be watching this issue with great interest because we want to make sure this actually happens. We want to make sure that real, concrete action is taken to ease the pressure on Canadian businesses and consumers.
I want to spend the rest of my time discussing some items that were not included in the fall economic statement and therefore are not in Bill C-32. They are items that I was hoping would be there as they would have helped Canadians this winter before we get another update in the spring budget.
There was something in the fall economic statement about eliminating the interest on federal student loans, which is something again that the NDP has been calling for. However, there was nothing for one of the most blatant aspects of student underfunding in Canada. That is the scholarships given to graduate students who are working full time on their research. These federal scholarship amounts provided by the three funding councils have remained unchanged since 2003. That is almost 20 years ago, when housing costs were a fraction of what they are now. Master's students now work full time on their research for the princely annual salary of $17,500. Ph.D. students work full time for $21,000. Regular Canadians would have a very difficult time surviving on those wages, but these students have to pay thousands of dollars in tuition on top of that as well. This is below minimum wage. We are forcing our best and brightest to live in poverty.
The House of Commons Standing Committee on Science and Research recommended in a recent report that the government increase these scholarship levels to rectify the situation. I also sponsored an e-petition, e-4098, organized by scientists across the country and signed by thousands of Canadians, that asked for a 48% increase in the value of those scholarships to match inflation over the past 20 years. The petition also asked that the number of scholarships be increased by 50% to match the demand for graduate students across the country.
Once students get their Ph.D.s, they must compete to get post-doctoral fellowships. It is an essential part of the career track of young scientists. Last year, 840 master's students received scholarships, and 750 received Ph.D. scholarships, but only 150 post-doctoral fellowships were provided. The petition mentioned above asked that the number of post-doctoral fellowships be doubled so that we can keep these students in Canada.
We are forcing young researchers to leave the country to continue their education. These are students we have educated here in Canada since they were in kindergarten. The numbers tell the story: 38% of graduates leave Canada to do their postgraduate work. They go to the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom and Australia. They go to a host of other countries that know the future of their economies relies on innovation and well-educated workers.
The negative impact of this neglect of young researchers on the Canadian economy is incalculable, but even the lost cost of that training is estimated to be about $640 million every year. I was disappointed that this issue was not dealt with in the fall economic statement, but I can assure the House that I will keep up the pressure on the government to ensure that it is fixed in next year's budget.
Another issue that was not dealt with in the statement was the automatically escalating alcohol excise tax. This tax will increase by over 6% in the coming months because of the high inflation rate. Distilleries, breweries and wineries, which are already facing the rising costs of packaging and production, will have to swallow that increase in their costs to consumers. These are costs that are not faced by their foreign competition.
My riding makes the best wine in the country. My hometown is the epicentre of craft brewing in Canada, and there are more craft distilleries in my riding every year. However, these small businesses, which are an important and growing part of the economy in my riding, now face this increase of costs that was never part of their business plans.
I have talked to representatives from these distilleries, breweries and wineries, and they have practical solutions for this problem. They have no objection to paying the excise tax, but they want to make sure it is fair compared to what their international competitors pay.
The United States has a system whereby smaller producers pay a smaller rate of tax for distillers and breweries. Other wine-producing countries support their industries in ways that are trade legal. Canada came up with a similar support for our wine industry, but it is set to expire next year after only 18 months. This program needs to be extended to 2030, at least, to make sure our industry, especially the smaller producers, can continue to thrive.
Most Canadians are struggling to get by these days, but wealthy Canadians and many big corporations are making record amounts of money. Oil and gas companies are making record profits based on the windfall of world oil prices caused by international events. Big grocery stores are making record profits, even as many Canadians are forced to cut back on their food purchases.
The Liberal government could have instituted a windfall tax on these excess profits, which could have generated billions of dollars in revenue to really support the Canadians who need it most. Even the Conservative government in the United Kingdom is taxing these windfall profits. In fact, it just raised that windfall tax from 25% to 35% yesterday. The CEO of Shell Canada literally told the federal government that their company should be taxed more.
Why is the CEO of Shell more progressive than the Liberal government, to say nothing of the Conservatives?
The fall economic statement included a modest increase in the tax rate for banks and other financial institutions, but totally ignored the big corporations that made the biggest profits in this difficult time for Canadians. I hope that, by the time the spring budget rolls around, the Liberal government will have found the courage to bring in windfall taxes to make sure that companies that are making record profits on the backs of Canadians pay their fair share.
In conclusion, I will be voting in favour of this bill. It brings several supports to Canadians that will truly help those who need it most, and it takes some hesitant steps toward a more sustainable future.
1509 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, as usual, it is an honour to rise to speak. Tonight it is especially an honour because rarely do we actually debate life-changing bills here in this Parliament. We talk about a lot of important things, but we do not often talk about bills that will literally change the lives of not a few Canadians but million of Canadians.
Bill C-31 is one of them because the main part of the bill is an interim measure to provide dental care to millions of Canadian children. It is a down payment on the full dental care program that the NDP has put forward to provide dental coverage, like two-thirds of Canadians have and one-third do not. Those people making under $90,000 a year, by the end of the three-year program, will have dental coverage just like most Canadians. This is a down payment on that. It is truly life changing.
I want to tell the story of my friend, Joan. I talk to Joan every month or so. She heard about the agreement between the NDP and the Liberals. Part of that agreement was that the Liberal government agreed to implement the NDP's dental care plan. When I phoned her just to catch up, she just said, “I have to talk about dental care.” I was a bit taken aback. Usually we do not talk about political stuff. She said, “I grew up in rural Alberta. We were a poor family when I was a kid. We couldn't afford to go to a dentist.”
Like most kids in those days, especially, she got cavities. Her friends who had parents who were more well off got to go to the dentist and have those cavities filled. Joan's parents could not afford that so they did not go to the dentist. Eventually, her teeth were in such bad shape that she had to have many of them taken out and replaced with ill-fitting dentures. She was a kid getting dentures. As a result, she was painfully shy about how her mouth looked and how her teeth looked. That shyness has followed her the rest of her life. She is still very uncomfortable in social situations.
She was very emotional when she was telling me this story. She said, “Not having dental care when I was a kid changed my life for the worse. It made me shy. I wish I wasn't, and if only I could have had that dental care when I was a kid it would have changed my life.”
This is life-changing legislation. Every child in this country should have access to dental care. Many of us here just take dental care for granted. We all, as MPs, have a dental plan. Many of us had jobs before we went into politics that had dental plans. We have had dental coverage for some time. However, a third of Canadians, 35% actually, do not have access to dental care.
There are seven million Canadians who avoid going to the dentist every year because they cannot afford to. We are not talking about one or two people here and there. This is thousands and thousands of people in the ridings of every one of the people here in this chamber. That proportion rises to 50% of low-income Canadians who do not have dental coverage and a majority of seniors. This not only changes people's lives but it costs our health care system a lot of money.
In British Columbia, alone, it is estimated that visits to emergency rooms by people needing emergency dental care who cannot afford to go to a dentist costs the province about $155 million per year. That is in British Columbia, so we could multiply that by 10, or $1.5 billion, a year across Canada, as a rough estimate.
The NDP are very proud of the fact that Tommy Douglas brought in our universal health care system in Canada. When he did, he fully imagined that it would cover all forms of health care, including dental care and pharmacare for that matter, but that did not happen.
When the NDP proposed to fix that in the previous Parliament, we brought in this dental care bill, and both the Liberals and Conservatives voted against it. However, now in this minority Parliament, the NDP has used its power here to make this happen. We will finally have dental coverage for all Canadians.
This dental care plan will not be a universal plan. Not every Canadian would get it. It would be only for those who need it, for those who do not have dental care now and who make less than $90,000 per year, but it would give everybody who cannot afford to go to the dentist the ability to go to the dentist and have their teeth cared for like most of us do.
Why is this important? As I said, dental care is essential to overall health. I am going to go through some of the details of it. It is estimated that 500,000 Canadian children would benefit from this bill. It would provide payments of up to $650 per child per year for families with a net income under $90,000. That will be pro-rated. If someone makes under $70,000, they would get the full amount, and someone would get something else up to $90,000.
I would like to give some quotes from experts in the field as to how they see this plan and what they think about it.
The first is from Lynn Tomkins who is the president of the Canadian Dental Association. I talked to Dr. Tomkins back in August. She says:
[The Canadian Dental Association] welcomed the federal government’s commitment...of a multi-billion-dollar, ongoing investment in enhancing Canadians’ access to oral health. It comes after years of CDA encouraging federal investments in dental care. All those who have advocated on this issue in the past, whether on behalf of CDA, provincial or territorial dental associations...should be proud that their hard work has led to this once-in-a-generation opportunity.
This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. We cannot miss it and cannot let it go by us.
The Canadian Dental Hygienists Association said:
After months of hard work, meetings with parliamentarians...the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association (CDHA), representing the sixth-largest regulated health profession in Canada, was excited at yesterday’s announcement about the Government of Canada’s proposed new legislation (Bill C-31) to deliver targeted supports to Canadians as part of its affordability plan.
Brandon Doucet, who is the founder of the Coalition for Dentalcare, is a dentist from Nova Scotia. He said, “by the end of this year, we could have one of the most important additions to public health care since medicare’s founding if the federal government delivers on its promise to create a public dental program for low-income Canadians.”
I do not want to sound too much like K-tel, but there is more. This is just one part of Bill C-31. The other part is another important pillar in affordability and that is the rental benefit. That would be a $500 top-up, a one-time payment, that would go to individuals with net incomes of up to $20,000, so these are low-income Canadians, or household net incomes of up to $35,000. This would help 1.8 million families across Canada.
There are two parts to this bill. The dental care, I think, is the most important, but also, people are struggling with their rents. People are struggling to find places to live. This would help them as well.
1309 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
