SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 179 - Apr/18/23

Apr/18/23 3:36:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the budget document and the tax-free savings account, Canadian financial institutions, including the five major banks, are empowered to make that available as a product to their customers as of April 1, about 20 days ago. The second point begs the question of their economic growth. What I would point to is the economic growth under our government. We have recovered about 120% of the jobs that we had prior to the pandemic. That is a pretty incredible record of economic growth. What Canadians are doing is leveraging the benefits of that economic growth, including record low levels of unemployment, to assist with their savings. Savings will also benefit from some of the affordability measures that I outlined at the start of my speech, including, for low-income families, things such as the grocery rebate.

140 words

Mr. Denis Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ)

Apr/18/23 3:37:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. Unfortunately, one of the top issues right now is the housing crisis. He used about 22 seconds of his 10-minute speech to talk about it. That is more or less the equivalent of what is in the budget. Some 3.5 million homes need to be built in Canada over the next 10 years. The budget, which is 250 pages long, talks about it for a page and a half. That basically reflects how much of a priority this is for the government. Here is an interesting statistic. Yesterday, the National Housing Council, the body set up by the government to oversee the great national housing strategy, released a report with some very interesting information. Between 2011 and 2021, Canada lost over 550,000 units of housing that rented for $750 or less. Not only are we not building housing—according to this same organization, 35,000 units were built and 65,000 renovated, totalling 100,000—but 550,000 affordable units were lost in the last 10 years. How does my colleague explain the budget's near silence on this issue?

205 words

Mr. Arif Virani

Apr/18/23 3:38:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to point out that it is completely incorrect to say that nothing is being done about housing and affordable housing. First, we launched a national strategy. We have committed $80 billion to date. Second, there is also a policy that allocates more than $4 billion for housing for indigenous peoples in budget 2023. It is important to point that out. As for the creation of housing, the most popular program in my riding, and probably in Trois‑Rivières as well, is the rapid housing initiative. With that program, we are creating new housing units in eight to 10 months' time in a given calendar year, which is quite remarkable.

118 words

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

Apr/18/23 3:39:20 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, since 2015, I have become well aware of the importance of social determinants of health, and also how important preventative measures are. In this country, we have a hunger problem. Across this country, millions of Canadians go to school hungry every day. Canada is one of the few countries in the world that does not have a national nutrition school food program. The Liberals and the NDP campaigned, in 2021, on allocating $1 billion, in our case over four years and in the Liberals' case over five years, to address school hunger, which is particularly acute right now with the price of food. Can my hon. colleague explain to the people I represent why the Liberals did not put any money in this budget to fulfill their promise to start developing a national nutrition school food program, such as what the NDP has been pursuing?

147 words

Mr. Arif Virani

Apr/18/23 3:40:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question, as it is an important one. Food security, particularly for low-income children, is incredibly important, as is the school program mentioned. I will highlight, just for people who are watching, that we are supportive of food security, not only in the supply chains, but also in the support of food banks in this country. A national food program at schools is something that is important, and I will prioritize that in my advocacy.

80 words

Mrs. Dominique Vien (Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC)

Apr/18/23 3:40:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I stand today in the House to speak about the budget tabled by the government on March 28, 2023. Just because the government is bragging about it does not make it an excellent budget, quite the contrary. In the political arena, the opposition is expected to find flaws in the budget. That is healthy, and it is part of the game. However, upon closer inspection and careful reading of the budget, it becomes apparent that it has some major shortcomings, indeed. Unfortunately, whoever looks at the broad lines of the budget tabled by the government can see that it is another unbalanced budget. This is really on trend for the government. How can it be that we can still not manage to have a balanced budget? We have not had a balanced budget since 2015. The government clearly stated last November in its economic statement that it intended to have a balanced budget by 2027-28. What they are announcing now is that there will be a $14-billion deficit in 2027-28. We are therefore nowhere near the forecasted balanced budget that would allow us as a country to compete and have a bit of credibility on this planet. The budget also includes $43 billion in new spending. I think that, here as well, in this inflationary environment, we are dealing with a government that has the wind in its sails but not much of a rudder. There is $43 billion in additional spending. I do not think that that is what Canadians expected. They were expecting a balanced budget. Unfortunately, that is not what we are talking about today. As a result, we have an enormous debt, and it is growing at a rapid pace. It is approximately $1.2 trillion. I do not know what everyone else thinks, but I am not even sure how many zeroes that is. The debt is enormous. What that means for Canadians is that they will have to continue to tighten their belts and pay up. We are right in the middle of income tax season, and I am convinced that there are Canadians out there today who are wondering how they are going to manage. In my view, and that of my party, this is a downright irresponsible, unfair and visionless budget. I think we need to consider where this country is today. Need I remind my colleagues that we are going through an inflationary crisis? Inflation is at a 40-year high. I will give members a quick overview, although I could spend a lot of time on the subject. A family of four will spend $1,065 more on groceries in 2023 than in 2022. That is a lot of money. It is more than what the government is promising to give families to lower the bill. House prices have gone up 21% in the Quebec City region alone. The average mortgage payment has doubled since 2015. I will point out that 2015 is the year the Liberals came to power. The average mortgage payment is now $3,000 a month. Food bank use has reached record highs, with around 1.5 million people seeking help each month. Some parents are now skipping meals so their children can eat. This is Canada. We never would have imagined we would get to this point. Also, nine out of 10 Canadians say they do not even dream of owning a house. Becoming a homeowner gives us freedom. Canadians should be able to hope to one day buy a house. Instead, young people are now sleeping in their parents’ basement or, worse yet, moving into shelters because they cannot afford housing. One in five people are skipping meals and, based on what we unfortunately learned today, some 60% of Canadians are considering not taking a vacation this summer. We also learned in a release today that food inflation was still hurting Canadians in February and that, for a seventh consecutive month, the price of groceries rose by 10% or more over the same period last year. This is where we are today. Need I also remind my colleagues that we have a government that spends recklessly? This government alone has increased the debt more than all other previous governments combined. That is something. It now costs $44 billion to service the debt. It is counterintuitive and counterproductive to go on this way. We are spending money on interest rather than on services to the public. We should be outraged about that. However, on the other side of the House, the government keeps spending recklessly and has added $43 billion in new spending in this year’s budget. Another factor we must consider is the collaboration, or coalition, between the Liberal government and the NDP. To remain in power and ensure its stability until 2025, the Liberal Party has agreed to implement the NDP's agenda with great speed and at great cost. I would like to remind the House that Canadians did not vote for that. Only 17% of Canadians voted for the NDP. That is certainly not enough to justify endorsing and implementing the NDP's agenda. One key item on the NDP's agenda is dental care. Dental care was announced only a few months ago, but already its cost has more than doubled. I think that Canadians are entitled to ask questions and to feel outraged, especially since even the Parliamentary Budget Officer, a credible and independent man who plays an important role on Parliament Hill, has questions about this program. First, he said that it is incredibly expensive. Then he said that people only have to say they have an appointment with the dentist to receive a reimbursement. That is a slippery slope. People will want to be reimbursed even before they get to their appointment and before getting the bill, especially since, as we know, many Canadians already have provincial or private dental insurance. This measure is costing almost $13 billion when it should cost only $5 billion, and Canadians are footing the bill. Since my time is almost up, I will wrap up by saying that, on this side of the House, we are hoping for a much more responsible government, a government that, like Canadians and parents, knows how to count. These people know that when they spend five dollars, it is five dollars well spent. If someone earns $10, they should not spend $12.

1086 words

Ms. Rachel Bendayan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Tourism and Associate Minister of Finance, Lib.)

Apr/18/23 3:50:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I listened very carefully to the speech made by my colleague, for whom I have a lot of respect. I appreciate her insistence on a balanced budget. She undoubtedly knows that Canada still has the lowest debt and the lowest deficit among the G7 countries. I wonder if, as a former Radio-Canada journalist, she would like to see budget cuts to both Radio-Canada and the CBC, or just one of them, to achieve the balanced budget she wants. I expect that, as a former journalist, she has tremendous respect and admiration for her colleagues who are still working to provide Canadians with reliable news.

108 words

Mrs. Dominique Vien

Apr/18/23 3:51:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her question. I will answer with another question that she could ask the Minister of Finance, who announced in November's economic statement that we would return to a balanced budget in 2027-28. Now we have learned that that will not be the case. Rather, there will be a $14‑billion deficit, and there is nothing in any of the budget documentation about a return to a balanced budget. I think that that is the real question today, the only one that matters to Canadians.

97 words

Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ)

Apr/18/23 3:52:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to pick up on the point raised by my colleague from Outremont. I thought her question was very interesting, but we did not get an answer. We are talking about responsible government, yet we have heard the leader of the Conservative Party say that he would cut $1 billion from CBC/Radio-Canada's $1.2‑billion budget. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about that, since she herself was a journalist. Is it responsible for a government to cut $1 billion from a $1.2‑billion budget for an institution like CBC/Radio-Canada, which exists to report the news and has broadcasting stations and newsrooms all over Quebec and the rest of Canada? I think that it is important that Canadians and Quebeckers know exactly what the Conservative Party wants to do with CBC/Radio-Canada's funding, and I would like an answer.

158 words

Mrs. Dominique Vien

Apr/18/23 3:53:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am honoured by my colleagues' interest in my speech today. What I am most interested in today is reminding my colleagues how hard Canadians work every day and how they are facing major costs every day for food, housing and other essentials. Our commitment is that, when we form the government, we will table a balanced budget.

60 words

Mr. Taylor Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP)

Apr/18/23 3:54:12 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, two years ago, the Conservatives voted against dental care. Now that we have a proposal in this most recent budget for a national dental care plan, they plan to vote against the budget and indicate their non-support for that policy, and that is fine. That is a difference of opinion when it comes to the oral health of Canadians and whether low- and moderate-income Canadians should have access to the kind of dental care that the member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis has access to as a member of Parliament. My question, though, is as follows: Should we see a Conservative government in the future, would it cancel that program? Would it take away a national dental care program that is established under the budget we have before us?

137 words

Mrs. Dominique Vien

Apr/18/23 3:54:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we will have the opportunity to present an election platform in due course. One thing is clear. We will not compromise on that. We will present a balanced budget.

31 words

Mr. Dan Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC)

Apr/18/23 3:55:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, during my time in this place, I served as parliamentary secretary to the President of the Treasury Board when I sat on the government side of the House. During my time on this side of the House, I have served in various roles, such as the finance shadow minister. Certainly, I have spent my time on the finance committee and have had the opportunity to grill both former and current Liberal finance ministers. I mention that because, as we all know, a comment by the former finance minister, before he became known as just another random Liberal, was reported in the media. It was about how budgets are really put together in the current Liberal government, or, I should say, within the Prime Minister's Office. I say the PMO, because it is within the PMO that these things really occur. Bill Morneau stated, “calculations and recommendations from the Ministry of Finance were basically disregarded in favour of winning a popularity contest”. Government by polling is, and has always been, what the always-be-spending Liberal government does. Let us recap the pattern for a moment. It all began with the Liberals, in 2015, promising small deficits of $9.9 billion in 2016, $9.5 billion in 2017, $5.7 billion in 2018, and a return to a $1-billion surplus in 2019. That Liberal promise to return to a balanced budget in 2019 was cast in stone, as the Prime Minister said at the time. For those in the PMO who may be watching, “cast in stone” means something that cannot be changed, something that is permanent, something that is absolute. Of course, we all know that was a lie, a fabrication. No doubt some polling was probably done at the time, and focus groups said that some small deficits would be supported, provided there was a firm commitment to return to a balanced budge afterwards, and, voila, there is the Prime Minister avowing a cast-in-stone commitment to return to a balanced budget in 2019. We all know how the Liberal government did not even try to honour the cast-in-stone promise it made to Canadians. I know that some of my colleagues will say that this is ancient history. They will ask why we are talking about the past instead of the budget that is before the House today. This is why. Not so long ago, in November, the Liberal government tabled a fiscal update. That was five months ago. In that economic update, the Liberal government told us that Canada would have a balanced budget by 2027. Only five months later, another Liberal budget has revealed that this was just another lie, something they made up. Seriously, why does the Liberal government keep trying to mislead Canadians and convince them that it intends to balance the budget? Why does it not simply tell the truth and admit that it will never balance the budget and that it does not really think it is necessary? Budgets balance themselves, do they not? Consider spending for a moment. In 2015, total federal spending for the last year of the previous government was just over $248 billion. In 2019-20, the last year of the Liberal majority government, spending was just over $338 billion. This is a significant increase, with $80 billion in new spending. That is not taking into account the period of the COVID-19 pandemic, when total federal expenditures reached a record high of $608 billion in the 2020-21 fiscal year. The Liberals said that last year's budget was a fiscal return to reality. In last year's fiscal return to reality budget, the Liberals proposed total spending of $434.3 billion. To recap, in the final year of the Liberal majority, the reality was $338 billion. Last year, the Liberals' new normal was $434 billion. That is an increase of $96 billion. Now, in this year's budget, the Liberals are proposing $496.9 billion, but wait; there is more. The budget projects that spending will reach $555.7 billion in 2027-28. This is why I call it the “speNDP-Liberal partnership”, because the outcome of this partnership is an out-of-control, always-be-spending Liberal government. I know there are members of the government and the fourth party's side of the House who will say, “Who cares? We can afford it.” Here is the thing: This level of spending will soon exceed 16% of Canada's GDP, the highest it has been in three decades. Debt charges rose by 52% in the last five months of the fiscal year, in tandem with interest rate hikes. Last year, the government spent $24.5 billion servicing the debt. Desjardins forecasts that debt charges of $49.8 billion are coming. We are getting to the point where we will spend almost as much servicing debt as we spend on the Canada health transfer. Think long-term about what $50 billion could do every year if it were not spent servicing debt. That is obviously, and ultimately, the problem with the Liberal government. Much as random Liberal Bill Morneau told us, “calculations and recommendations from the Ministry of Finance were basically disregarded in favour of winning a popularity contest.” Many economists are now warning that the Prime Minister's “plan to add billions of dollars in new annual spending has some economists worried that Canada is at risk of racking up unsustainable debt—especially if economic growth comes in worse than expected”. Other economists have warned that this ongoing Liberal spending “works against the Bank of Canada’s tightening of monetary policy to combat inflation and risks keeping interest rates higher for longer”. There is another elephant in the room: our lack of productivity and competitiveness. Consider a Canadian lumber company: “West Fraser’s U.S. lumber production rose 13 per cent last year, while its Canadian output fell 17 per cent.” Other Canadian lumber companies, like Tolko, closed Canadian lumber mills and instead opened up new mills. Where did they do that? They opened them in the United States. Recently, The Ottawa Citizen reported that “Canadian steel producers are actively trying to reduce climate emissions as well as facing a carbon tax as part of government efforts to fight climate change, but offshore steel producers don’t face the same rules and surcharges. As a result, domestic firms are losing market share to high carbon, offshore steel at an unprecedented rate”. For those who do not know, there is a name for this. This is called “carbon leakage”, which is what happens when industries compete with industries and countries that may have low or no carbon prices. If an industry loses market share to the more polluting competitors, this negatively affects our economy, lowers GDP and does nothing to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. This is the path that the Liberal government and the budget put us on. It is a very dangerous path. As a former Liberal finance minister recently stated, “If Liberals don’t want to face that kind of calamity, then it’s way better to manage the growth of your expenditures and manage your revenue carefully.” Before I close—

1239 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Apr/18/23 4:05:26 p.m.
Watch

Unfortunately, the hon. member's time is up. Questions and comments, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Tourism.

20 words

Ms. Rachel Bendayan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Tourism and Associate Minister of Finance, Lib.)

Apr/18/23 4:05:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I always enjoy my colleague's speeches. Today, he spoke to us about the importance of fiscal responsibility. I agree with him that this is a priority. However, I would like to understand one thing. I was under the impression that the Conservative leader had confirmed that he supported our $2-billion investment in the health care system and that the Conservatives would support that investment. Is that still the case? Could my colleague confirm that in the House?

81 words

Mr. Dan Albas

Apr/18/23 4:06:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member opposite's raising this issue allows me to finish my speech. I was quoting John Manley, who said, “Otherwise, there's a reckoning coming, and someone is going to have to face it.” There is all sorts of spending in this budget. There are things we might agree on and lots of things we will disagree on, but I do not think anyone on that side of the House will say that this is a fiscally responsible budget. At some point, as Mr. Manley says, someone has “to manage the growth of...expenditures and manage...revenue carefully”, or, guess what, it is going to be the young people of this country who are going to be saddled with it. That is the problem we have. We need to start focusing on the priorities of Canadians and only on those things, because we will not have the fiscal room if the economy shifts. We need to remember that this budget actually shows a recession in Q3 and Q4. Let us talk about those issues.

181 words

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

Apr/18/23 4:07:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his presentation and his excellent French. It is always a pleasure to hear anglophones speak French in the House. I congratulate him. My question is twofold. First, according to the budget, investments are still being made in the oil sands and offshore drilling. What does my colleague have to say about that? Along the same lines, what does he have to say about the two oil sands industrial wastewater spills in Alberta that have caused, and are still causing, an environmental disaster?

89 words

Mr. Dan Albas

Apr/18/23 4:08:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, when it comes to Alberta, I would speak to Alberta members, but my understanding is that there is agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of Alberta for a harmonization agreement that allows for an equal program where there is a set of procedures in place so there is an equal level with what the federal government considers acceptable. I imagine that, as a member from Quebec, the member would say that is probably the best, because the people closest to the problem should have the most input. I am sure he would argue, from a Quebec standpoint, that Quebec can manage its own house better than Ottawa can. The second thing is that we had, earlier, a parliamentary secretary come and say that the tax-free savings account for first-time homebuyers is available now. I just checked the Desjardins website. The tax-free first home savings account does not currently exist. Perhaps there is at Questrade or whatnot, but I went to RBC and could not see one. It was the same thing with CIBC. The government says it is doing all these things to help people, but it is not doing that. I hope this member can check with Desjardins to confirm, because people are told something is coming, and when it is not there, they lose trust.

225 words

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

Apr/18/23 4:09:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I wanted to ask about the budget in terms of adaptation to climate disasters. Earlier today, the hon. member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon put forward a petition. Of course, petitions are not our own opinions, but the petition talked about the loss in Lytton and how Lytton has not been rebuilt. We know that the regions of central Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola experienced, as did Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, losses due to floods, fires and the heat dome. The budget speaks, in terms of adaptation and funding, under the title “Supporting Natural Disaster Resilience”, only to floods and flood zones. There is nothing about fires. I wonder if he has any comments on that.

125 words

Mr. Dan Albas

Apr/18/23 4:10:25 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is close to my heart. Mayor Mike Goetz originally placed the question to the minister responsible for this particular program, because it does not appear that communities hit hardest will be able to access that. They will be on a level playing field with other communities that will be applying for the adaptation funds, and Mayor Goetz has said that is not appropriate. Every time I speak to citizens in Merritt or Princeton, I hear they do not feel that either senior-level government, the provincial or federal government, has had their backs. It really takes away from the trust in government, and I have to say that if that is the goal of the government, it is succeeding.

122 words