Freeland appeals to Tories to hurry passing of relief bill
OTTAWA — Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland is appealing to the official Opposition Conservatives to hasten passage of a COVID-19 relief bill through the House of Commons.
The appeal is in a letter from Freeland to Conservative Leader Erin
O’Toole sent Tuesday, as members of Parliament return from a weeklong break and prepared to resume debate on Bill C-14.
In the letter, a copy of which was provided to The Canadian Press, Freeland accuses the Tories of having dragged their feet on the proposed legislation for no good reason — and to the detriment of Canadians.
“If you oppose the bill, as you have every right to do, end the delay, let the bill come to a vote, and vote against it,” Freeland wrote. “Mr. O’Toole, this is delay for the sake of delay — at the expense of the country.”
O’Toole fired back during a news conference on Tuesday morning, suggesting part of the impetus for Bill C-14 was the Liberal government’s need to fix errors in previous, hastily passed COVID-19 relief bills.
“Minister Freeland knows that this legislation is intended to fix problems from their last rush exercise,” he said.
“We’re having some modest debate. She and her government are in charge of the legislative calendar. If it’s a priority, we should be debating that bill today and every day until it gets passed.”
The Liberal government introduced the proposed legislation at the beginning of December, to enact spending measures proposed in its fall economic statement.
That includes billions of dollars in new pandemic-related aid to top up and expand existing programs as well as new, targeted support for hard-hit industries.
The Liberals have also promised $1,200 per child under six for families earning up to $120,000, and $600 for families earning over that amount.
More than two months later, however, partly thanks to a six-week Christmas break in Parliament, the bill has made little progress through the legislative process.
In her letter, Freeland says the bill should not be “a political football,” and asks O’Toole to support its passage to help Canadians struggling during the pandemic.
“Bill C-14 provides for support to Canadians who urgently need our help, in an unprecedented and difficult time,” Freeland writes.
“I urge you and your Conservative caucus to match deeds to words, and support the speedy and complete passage of the essential COVID-19 measures within Bill C-14.”
The economic statement included $25 billion in new spending while noting the deficit was on track to hit $381.6 billion this fiscal year.
However, it also warned the figure could close in on $400 billion if public health restrictions were extended or expanded.
The federal debt is set to push past $1.2 trillion, with more on the way in the coming years before accounting for the government’s proposed three-year stimulus fund the Liberals say will be between $70 billion and $100 billion.
The International Monetary Fund, in a report Tuesday about Canada’s fiscal response to the pandemic, noted that the added spending
“needs further justification” as well as details about the guardrails the government intends to apply to keep spending focused, to avoid uncertainty.
The House of Commons finance committee’s budget recommendations included calls for more money to rapidly build or buy affordable units to help house people and stimulate the economy.
The report released Tuesday also recommends the government look at the merits of a universal basic income, boost spending on health and long-term care, and start with $2 billion in the 2021 budget as a down payment of sorts on a national child-care system.
The committee report also called on the government to keep federal finances sustainable for the long run.
Attached to the report were dissenting opinions from opposition parties.
The Opposition Conservatives called for, among other things, a plan to balance the budget in 10 years, no new permanent spending programs, eliminating so-called corporate welfare programs, and giving an employment-insurance premium break for any new hires small businesses make.
The Bloc Quebecois asked for Quebec to be able to opt out of proposals for national programs for mental health and long-term care, but allow it to be fully compensated for any equivalent provincial program.
The party also called for a boost to federal health transfers to provinces, and increasing the value of old age security payments by $110 per month, among other recommendations.
Federal New Democrats called for an immediate increase in long-term care funding, as well as “clear and enforceable” national standards.
While many families struggle with job losses or lost income, there are signs Canada’s economy could face even more challenges.
A recent Canadian Federation of Independent Business survey suggests one in six small businesses are now “seriously contemplating” shutting down for good.
One solution to help struggling businesses and families would be to cut property taxes. To do that, City Halls will need to make tough decisions and cut spending.
A business may see their revenue evaporate before their eyes due to lockdowns, but they could still face a hefty property tax bill. For a gym or restaurant barely hanging on, a property tax hike, or even a freeze, could serve as the nail in the coffin.
Fortunately for municipal governments, there are plenty of opportunities to reduce expenses without cutting essential services like policing and fixing potholes. In the new report, “Cost-cutting options for municipalities,” SecondStreet.org and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation highlighted 10 initiatives municipal governments could pursue to reduce expenditures and lower property taxes.
The most impactful decision would be to address the largest spending envelope at City Hall: salaries and benefits.
Outside of government, stories of pay reductions and lost income were common in 2020. Everyone from Cineplex and CFL teams to media outlets and the energy sector reported pay reductions publicly.
Yet, 2020 research by Second Street couldn’t locate a single example of any major Canadian city reducing pay for unionized staff.
Even a small reduction of 5% could help municipal governments save small fortunes. Municipal governments could pair such decisions by grandfathering-in even larger wage reductions for future hires.
Government employee unions will likely reject the idea of opening contracts to find savings; however, many working outside government had contracts renegotiated during the downturn. It’s a far better outcome for government employees than the alternative — layoffs.
Another area worth examining is one of the fastest growing cost pressures for municipal governments in Canada — employee pensions.
Consider that from 2009 to 2019, the Toronto increased spending by 29%. Yet, at the same time, the city increased spending by 83% on the city’s main pension (the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System, or OMERS).
Municipalities could address this problem in a fair manner for existing employees — simply provide new hires with far less costly retirement benefits, similar to reforms made by Saskatchewan in the 1970s.
A third example would be for governments to stop gambling taxpayer money on subsidies for businesses. It’s not uncommon for mayors to cross their fingers and write cheques to hand-picked businesses, hoping they will create jobs.
A better approach to create jobs (and maintain existing ones) would be for governments to simply leave those dollars in existing, proven businesses’ hands in the first place.
If they refuse to do what the rest of society has done — tighten their belts — then we can expect a longer recovery period than necessary.