Senator Plett: We know that the most vulnerable will not receive anything under this bill. So who will receive a payment? Well, that is also a bit of a mess, but let me try and break it down for you.

The so-called grocery rebate is going to send payments to about 11 million people, 44% of whom make less than $20,000 a year. They are the ones who need the help the most and yet those 44% will only receive 32% of the money. Compare that with the 40% of recipients who have a net income of between $20,000 and $40,000 a year. This cohort will receive 48% of the money.

So rather than sending more money to those who are earning less, this bill does the exact opposite. Here are the numbers: On average, those who earn between $30,000 to $35,000 will receive $263. Some will receive more and some less, but on average, the government is claiming to bring them cost of living relief with a cheque of $263.

Those in the next lower bracket who earn between $25,000 and $30,000 a year will receive an average of only $258. Although they earn less, this program will provide them with less relief.

That trend continues. Those in the $20,000 to $25,000 bracket will receive an average of $245. For the $15,000 to $20,000 bracket, the average is $244. The $10,000 to $15,000 bracket will receive an average of $206. For those recipients who earn between $5,000 and $10,000 a year will receive $174 from this initiative.

Colleagues, this is Liberal math: The less money you make, the less money you need.

But there’s more. While this government is going to provide an average of only $174 to people making between $5,000 and $10,000 a year, they will still manage to send 70,000 cheques to people whose net income is $60,000 or more a year. They will also send another 8,000 cheques to people who do not even live in Canada.

Any way you slice this payment, the distribution is inequitable. Consider, for example, what the benefit will buy. If you live in Nunavut and you receive a $400 payment, that will buy about one quarter of the groceries that the same payment would buy in the South. Groceries in Nunavut are almost four times higher than what the rest of the country pays, but there is no recognition of that fact — the benefit is exactly the same.

In the past, the government has tried to give the impression that this money is largely going to help single moms with small children. But in reality, out of the approximately 11 million cheques that will be sent out, only about 1 million will go to households with children and less than half of those will go to single-parent homes. The other 10 million cheques will go to households with no children.

Using the GST credit program as a cost-of-living relief benefit is an extremely inefficient, inequitable way to distribute assistance. It’s a bit like fixing a watch with a hammer: It is the wrong tool for the job. But today, it is once again the only option that we have in front of us.

Colleagues, there are nights when I cannot sleep and I trust there are nights when you cannot sleep. Instead, I find myself lying awake because I am troubled by the never-ending stream of bad legislation that this government forces through Parliament.

While many Canadians are facing real challenges just to put food on the table and pay the rent, the best this government can do is recycle old programs that did not provide relief from the cost of living the first time and will not provide it this time.

It’s shameful, colleagues.

We will be supporting this bill today because it appears to be the best that this government is capable of. However, as I have said before, the day is coming, and we look forward to that day when Canadians will be given the opportunity to elect a common sense, Pierre Poilievre-led Conservative government that can begin implementing real solutions to make the lives of Canadians better instead of simply papering over the problems.

Thank you.

Senator Plett: At the National Finance Committee on Tuesday, the Honourable Randy Boissonnault, Associate Minister of Finance, spoke disparagingly of these individuals, saying that non-filers were people who were “hiding from the tax system.”

Senator Plett: Shame is right. This is so far from the truth it would be laughable if it were not so condescending and belittling —

Senator Batters: Elitist.

Senator Plett: In fact, leader, yesterday, you said these questions were for our purposes. We can check Hansard on that, leader.

Last month, the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff, Katie Telford, told a committee of the other place, “. . . nothing is ever kept from the Prime Minister, certainly not by me.”

Yet no one in the Trudeau government can admit they saw an intelligence assessment from CSIS two years ago regarding Beijing’s threat against a member of Parliament and his family.

Again, I have a written question on the Senate Order Paper asking how the Trudeau government handles classified or protected documents. It has remained on the Order Paper, unanswered, since September of 2020 — well over two and a half years.

I would suggest, leader, you have a large enough budget that you could have somebody get us these answers. The reason I haven’t received an answer to my question seems pretty obvious. Does the Trudeau government have a management system for sensitive documents? If so, why can’t it figure out who saw this CSIS report in July of 2021?

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I also rise today to pay tribute to our colleague, my friend from my wonderful province, the province of Manitoba, Senator Patricia Bovey.

Senator Bovey, as has already been mentioned, was the first art historian and museologist appointed to the Senate of Canada. I embarrassingly had to look up what a museologist is, but now I know. Her lens for art and culture made her a natural fit to become the chair of the Senate Artwork and Heritage Advisory Working Group. Senator Bovey had a personal goal of ensuring that the voices of art and culture be heard, and she has worked diligently towards that goal.

Senator Bovey, I believe everyone in this chamber will agree to at least one thing: The Senate has certainly become a more enjoyable and visual experience since your presence here. Your passion for art has not only made its way to the walls of our buildings or been featured on a Senate website but has also succeeded in creating an impact in our hearts and collective culture. Your passion and the many initiatives you have taken on to showcase Canadian galleries and museums, such as the museums at the Senate, will forever stay with us.

Senator Bovey — Pat — I will miss our discussions that we had at the Winnipeg airport and other places about a mutual passion that we have, and that is our grandchildren. So many times you have shared your experiences with your grandchildren overseas and I with my grandchildren here. Senator Bovey, I will miss having those chats. I will miss being on the airplane because many times we were on the same side of the aisle, and that was a pleasure.

On behalf of the Conservative caucus, I wish you a happy and fruitful retirement. I hope it is your greatest creation. Knowing you, I know it will be a beautiful work of art.

God bless you. Enjoy your retirement, and enjoy your grandchildren.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Liberal Government Leader in the Senate, and it again concerns Beijing’s interference in our country.

Senator Gold, I want to return to your answers yesterday to Senator Batters. You seemed to indicate that the questions we were asking were on our behalf. I will remind you, Senator Gold, once again, that the official opposition is doing their job by raising these matters. These questions are not for us. They are for Canadians — all Canadians — who send hard-earned tax dollars to Ottawa and expect each one of us and this government to do our and their jobs. Twice yesterday, you seemed to cast doubt on the July 2021 intelligence assessment leak to The Globe and Mail because it wasn’t “nuanced,” as you claimed.

Leader, last Tuesday, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS, told Michael Chong that a People’s Republic of China diplomat in Toronto targeted him and his family. Your government kicked this diplomat out eventually. Last Thursday, the national security adviser told Mr. Chong this assessment went to multiple departments, including the Privy Council Office. What more confirmation do you need, leader?

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise today to speak as the critic of Bill C-46.

In my second reading speech, I noted the following about this bill:

One: This is the government’s third attempt to provide Canadians with some relief from the cost of living.

Two: On their third try, the best they could do was a cookie-cutter approach with this bill, using a simple cut-and-paste from Bill C-30 and Bill C-19.

Three: The two previous attempts failed to reduce Canadians’ cost of living, and this one will fail as well.

Four: This government repeatedly slaps legislation together with no clearly articulated plan and no discernable strategy.

Five: This government demonstrates no understanding of how they have contributed to the cost-of-living crisis Canadians find themselves in today.

Six: This government repeatedly exhibits incompetence on a level which should alarm us all.

Colleagues, I would note that Finance Committee made no amendments to this bill and therefore all of my concerns stand. Despite the government’s enthusiastic announcements and self-congratulatory messaging, the measures taken in this bill continue to be far less effective than what the government portrays them to be.

I am not going to revisit in detail all of the points I have previously made. However, I would like to drill down further on at least one of them, and that is the absurdity of using the GST rebate system to provide a cost-of-living relief payment.

In my second reading speech, I noted that while this payment makes sense as a GST rebate, it is the wrong tool for getting money into the hands of those who need it most. The government loves to brag that they can get money out the door quickly by using this method, but what they do not bother to explain is who the money is actually going to.

This is where the problems begin: We don’t have a detailed breakdown of where this money is going. That’s why the government always says that the cheques are going to benefit “. . . approximately 11 million low- and modest-income Canadians and families across the country.” Even they don’t have an actual number.

The latest source of detailed information we have available is found in the 2020-21 Canada Revenue Agency statistics on the GST/HST credit benefit. These tables are available online and break down the benefit for that year by gender, by family income, by marital status, by the number of dependent children and by province. Based on this information, we can see roughly where the money for the so-called grocery rebate is going to go.

Colleagues, you would think that if the government is going to push $2.5 billion out the door to provide cost-of-living relief it would be directed to end up with those who need it most. It is not. Let me give you a few examples.

As has been mentioned a number of times both in this chamber and in the National Finance Committee, this money will only be disbursed to Canadians who file an income tax return. If you do not file a tax return, you are not eligible to be considered for the benefit at all.