Discussion · Government Orders
Kody Blois Liberal
“I do not support this Conservative motion. Government spending is not what is making life more expensive. Global issues, like wars and trade disruptions, are driving up prices everywhere. Canada actually has the lowest net debt to our economy in the G7, and the second-lowest deficit. We are also cutting $80 billion in government spending over five years, while helping families with programs like child care and school food. The Conservatives ignore these facts, and their own platform called for $130 billion in new spending.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure, as always, to rise in the House on behalf of my constituents in Kings—Hants, but also in my role as Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, to take part in the debate on the Conservative opposition day motion moved today concerning Canada’s fiscal situation. I would like to raise a few important points for the benefit of Canadians who may be watching at home today and following the debates in the House of Commons in order to better understand the overall situation. In my view and in the government’s view, the wording of the motion moved today by the Conservatives is problematic because it fails to take some crucial context into account, including Canada’s fiscal position in general. I am going to start by going to the first point in the text of the motion. The Conservatives assert that “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living.” I would reject the premise of that. The text of the motion fails to take into consideration the fact that the government has a comprehensive expenditure review, and the government will be reducing government expenditures by $80 billion over the next five years. Part of that includes downsizing the number of staff of the Government of Canada, the federal government, and targets have already been met in that domain. The motion fails to recognize that global events are having an impact on the cost of living for all countries, not just Canada. There is a blockade at the Strait of Hormuz, which is impacting global energy prices, and that is being felt globally. That is, of course, being felt by Canadians because it is a domestic challenge we are facing, but it is being felt by countries around the world. There is also a war in eastern Europe, in Ukraine, and while we have been a steadfast ally in supporting Ukraine, the implications on food security and energy security are felt globally. We are in a global trading environment, but our government has focused on controlling what we can here at home. The Conservative text of the motion today fails to understand the work that the government is doing to reduce operational costs. The text of the motion does not take into consideration the government’s promise to balance the operating spending of the government by fiscal year 2028-29. That is important. I am a proud Nova Scotian. I get to see the work of rebuilding the Royal Canadian Navy in Halifax, in my home province, where we are making generational investments that started under a previous government but have continued. We have also reinvested in the River-class destroyer. Those are long-term investments that I hope all members of this House understand are important for protecting our sovereignty and providing for the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces. Our goal as a government is to make sure that the expenditures the government takes on are part of the long-term industrial capacity and long-term economic growth of the country, and that we have a true balance in the types of operational spending the government is going to be taking on. The Conservatives ran on a platform in the last election that included approximately $130 billion of new spending. My hon. colleagues across the way can appreciate that it feels somewhat facetious to raise this type of measure when the platform promises of the Conservatives, had they been in government, would have led them to spend $130 billion above and beyond expenditures at the time. That is an important piece. Let us talk about Canada’s fiscal position. Governments are different from household finances, but let us think about the average Canadian. My wife and I, when we were able to buy a home, did not have the money to outright buy a home. We had to get a mortgage from a bank. We had to take on debt to build a future, raise a family and live in our community. Governments are no different. Governments have to look at the borrowing costs of making longer-term investments versus the sustainability of taking on the debt obligation to drive longer-term outcomes. Nowhere in the Conservative motion today does it highlight that Canada has the best fiscal position and net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. Canadians need to understand that Canada’s overall debt, as a relative size, is proportionate to the economy. We are four times the factor in the better than Germany. On the net debt-to-GDP ratio, our fiscal position is nine times better than the United States’s. We also have the second-lowest deficit in the G7. This is at a time when the government is cutting in certain areas and making tough choices, while at the same time making massive investments in energy, critical minerals, defence and the things that we believe are important long-term for the Canadian economy and our sovereignty. Nowhere in the opposition day motion does it highlight that to Canadians. It is the prerogative of His Majesty’s loyal opposition to choose how these texts are developed, but nowhere does it recognize that that is the case. The one area where I would agree with the Conservative position is that we have to remain vigilant. Bond rate increases are happening around the world. If we look at what is happening in France right now, its government bond yields are continuing to go up, which means the cost for the government to borrow is going higher and higher. That is now starting to be priced into the market. Our Prime Minister and this government understand that we need to maintain Canada’s fiscal position. That is exactly what we are doing in the face of global market uncertainty, particularly around financing. Today’s motion is also about affordability. The wording of the motion moved by the Conservatives links government spending with affordability and the cost of living in general. It is unfortunate that the Conservatives fail to mention the affordability measures that our government has introduced. For example, the national child care program is a concrete measure that is intended to help educate our young people, but it is also intended to make life more affordable for parents. We are working with the provinces and territories. As my hon. colleague from Cumberland—Colchester mentioned earlier, there are school programs in place across the country. Through Canada’s national school food program, we are ensuring that 400,000 students across the country have the opportunity to eat breakfast or lunch made with food from local farms. There is also the Canada child benefit. In my riding, that benefit offers families nearly $17 million to help them provide for their children. The amount is calculated based on household income. Those are concrete measures that the government gas put forward. I also mentioned the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. That is why the government proposed eliminating the federal excise tax on gasoline and diesel. This is important. This measure is not there to guarantee that everything goes smoothly, but the government is using this concrete measure to give farmers, businesses and the general public a helping hand. I really look forward to the debate. I did not have the opportunity to be on my feet this morning. I look forward to hearing from my colleagues about how the Conservative position seems to not reconcile the fact that Canada is in a strong fiscal position. I have no problem with His Majesty’s loyal opposition highlighting that the government needs to remain diligent and needs to be thoughtful about its approach in the days ahead, but the text of the motion was presented to the House today without presenting any of the key statistics that actually outline Canada’s fiscal position. It is difficult, certainly, for a government, and, I would say, many members of Parliament, to be able to vote without those key statistics that provide Canadians a better overall picture of where we are at. The ability to talk about the fact that the debt servicing costs of governments across the world are rising because of bond rates and that governments need to be fiscally responsible and thoughtful, balancing operations and balancing budgets, while at the same time making long-term investments, is all fair game, but that level of nuance is something that I have rarely seen from the Conservative Party in my seven years, even though I have great friends across the way and there are some thoughtful colleagues, for sure. I would like to see the party in general try to find the types of texts that we could vote on and that, I think, are a little bit more balanced in terms of how they move forward.”
-
A repeated line
“Is it the Canada child benefit?”
Said 7 times by 3 members since April 23.
Every time it was said
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure, as always, to rise in the House on behalf of my constituents in Kings—Hants, but also in my role as Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, to take part in the debate on the Conservative opposition day motion moved today concerning Canada’s fiscal situation. I would like to raise a few important points for the benefit of Canadians who may be watching at home today and following the debates in the House of Commons in order to better understand the overall situation. In my view and in the government’s view, the wording of the motion moved today by the Conservatives is problematic because it fails to take some crucial context into account, including Canada’s fiscal position in general. I am going to start by going to the first point in the text of the motion. The Conservatives assert that “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living.” I would reject the premise of that. The text of the motion fails to take into consideration the fact that the government has a comprehensive expenditure review, and the government will be reducing government expenditures by $80 billion over the next five years. Part of that includes downsizing the number of staff of the Government of Canada, the federal government, and targets have already been met in that domain. The motion fails to recognize that global events are having an impact on the cost of living for all countries, not just Canada. There is a blockade at the Strait of Hormuz, which is impacting global energy prices, and that is being felt globally. That is, of course, being felt by Canadians because it is a domestic challenge we are facing, but it is being felt by countries around the world. There is also a war in eastern Europe, in Ukraine, and while we have been a steadfast ally in supporting Ukraine, the implications on food security and energy security are felt globally. We are in a global trading environment, but our government has focused on controlling what we can here at home. The Conservative text of the motion today fails to understand the work that the government is doing to reduce operational costs. The text of the motion does not take into consideration the government’s promise to balance the operating spending of the government by fiscal year 2028-29. That is important. I am a proud Nova Scotian. I get to see the work of rebuilding the Royal Canadian Navy in Halifax, in my home province, where we are making generational investments that started under a previous government but have continued. We have also reinvested in the River-class destroyer. Those are long-term investments that I hope all members of this House understand are important for protecting our sovereignty and providing for the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces. Our goal as a government is to make sure that the expenditures the government takes on are part of the long-term industrial capacity and long-term economic growth of the country, and that we have a true balance in the types of operational spending the government is going to be taking on. The Conservatives ran on a platform in the last election that included approximately $130 billion of new spending. My hon. colleagues across the way can appreciate that it feels somewhat facetious to raise this type of measure when the platform promises of the Conservatives, had they been in government, would have led them to spend $130 billion above and beyond expenditures at the time. That is an important piece. Let us talk about Canada’s fiscal position. Governments are different from household finances, but let us think about the average Canadian. My wife and I, when we were able to buy a home, did not have the money to outright buy a home. We had to get a mortgage from a bank. We had to take on debt to build a future, raise a family and live in our community. Governments are no different. Governments have to look at the borrowing costs of making longer-term investments versus the sustainability of taking on the debt obligation to drive longer-term outcomes. Nowhere in the Conservative motion today does it highlight that Canada has the best fiscal position and net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. Canadians need to understand that Canada’s overall debt, as a relative size, is proportionate to the economy. We are four times the factor in the better than Germany. On the net debt-to-GDP ratio, our fiscal position is nine times better than the United States’s. We also have the second-lowest deficit in the G7. This is at a time when the government is cutting in certain areas and making tough choices, while at the same time making massive investments in energy, critical minerals, defence and the things that we believe are important long-term for the Canadian economy and our sovereignty. Nowhere in the opposition day motion does it highlight that to Canadians. It is the prerogative of His Majesty’s loyal opposition to choose how these texts are developed, but nowhere does it recognize that that is the case. The one area where I would agree with the Conservative position is that we have to remain vigilant. Bond rate increases are happening around the world. If we look at what is happening in France right now, its government bond yields are continuing to go up, which means the cost for the government to borrow is going higher and higher. That is now starting to be priced into the market. Our Prime Minister and this government understand that we need to maintain Canada’s fiscal position. That is exactly what we are doing in the face of global market uncertainty, particularly around financing. Today’s motion is also about affordability. The wording of the motion moved by the Conservatives links government spending with affordability and the cost of living in general. It is unfortunate that the Conservatives fail to mention the affordability measures that our government has introduced. For example, the national child care program is a concrete measure that is intended to help educate our young people, but it is also intended to make life more affordable for parents. We are working with the provinces and territories. As my hon. colleague from Cumberland—Colchester mentioned earlier, there are school programs in place across the country. Through Canada’s national school food program, we are ensuring that 400,000 students across the country have the opportunity to eat breakfast or lunch made with food from local farms. There is also the Canada child benefit. In my riding, that benefit offers families nearly $17 million to help them provide for their children. The amount is calculated based on household income. Those are concrete measures that the government gas put forward. I also mentioned the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. That is why the government proposed eliminating the federal excise tax on gasoline and diesel. This is important. This measure is not there to guarantee that everything goes smoothly, but the government is using this concrete measure to give farmers, businesses and the general public a helping hand. I really look forward to the debate. I did not have the opportunity to be on my feet this morning. I look forward to hearing from my colleagues about how the Conservative position seems to not reconcile the fact that Canada is in a strong fiscal position. I have no problem with His Majesty’s loyal opposition highlighting that the government needs to remain diligent and needs to be thoughtful about its approach in the days ahead, but the text of the motion was presented to the House today without presenting any of the key statistics that actually outline Canada’s fiscal position. It is difficult, certainly, for a government, and, I would say, many members of Parliament, to be able to vote without those key statistics that provide Canadians a better overall picture of where we are at. The ability to talk about the fact that the debt servicing costs of governments across the world are rising because of bond rates and that governments need to be fiscally responsible and thoughtful, balancing operations and balancing budgets, while at the same time making long-term investments, is all fair game, but that level of nuance is something that I have rarely seen from the Conservative Party in my seven years, even though I have great friends across the way and there are some thoughtful colleagues, for sure. I would like to see the party in general try to find the types of texts that we could vote on and that, I think, are a little bit more balanced in terms of how they move forward.