House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
45th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • No. 003
CONTENTS
Wednesday, May 28, 2025
House of Commons Debates
Volume 152
No. 003
1st SESSION
45th PARLIAMENT
OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)
Wednesday, May 28, 2025
Speaker: The Honourable Francis Scarpaleggia
The House met at 2 p.m.
Prayer
[Translation]
It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem led by the hon. member for Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation.
[Members sang the national anthem]
Statements by Members
[Statements by Members]
[English]
Community Resilience
Mr. Speaker, five years ago, Portapique, Nova Scotia, faced an unimaginable tragedy, but what happened next in my riding is an important lesson in what resilience looks like. The people of Portapique did not just survive; they organized. Working with the Rotary Club of Truro, they said they would not be defined by their darkest hours. Through the generosity of donors from across Canada and support from all levels of government, they transformed tragedy into community.
On June 1, we celebrate the first anniversary of the opening of the Portapique Community Centre, proof that when communities unite, they can create spaces that honour our past while building toward a happier, healthier future. I thank them for their example, and I thank the House for the time.
Alberta Oil and Gas
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal plan for Canada to become the world's leading energy superpower is just an empty promise. Where is the investment in infrastructure? Where is the commitment to repeal the job-killing Liberal anti-energy laws from the last Parliament?
Albertans want to know if the government understands how important our clean, ethical fossil fuels are to the Canadian economy and to the world. Is the throne speech just rhetoric or are the Liberals finally willing to face reality? The demand for Alberta products is there, but the delivery method is lacking.
The previous prime minister told those who were looking to buy Canadian oil and gas that they really did not want to buy it. Will the new Prime Minister commit to a west-east pipeline to move Alberta oil and gas to Canadian and European markets? Albertans want to know.
Whitby
Mr. Speaker, I rise today for the first time in the 45th Parliament with a deep sense of gratitude and humility. I thank the people of Whitby for placing their trust in me for a third time. It has been the honour of my life to serve since 2019, and I remain committed more than ever to delivering results that improve the lives of people in our community.
I thank so very much the incredible volunteers and supporters who powered our campaign for their time, their energy and their heart, which made the difference in our success. I thank my incredible family, my wife Suze, my daughters Alexis and Brooke, my mother-in-law Verna and my nephew Ryan, for their unwavering support and all their sacrifice. I could not do this without them.
There are many challenges ahead, but our priorities are clear: protect Canada's sovereignty, address affordability challenges, keep communities safe and build the strongest economy in the G7. I look forward to contributing to the hard-working team that will deliver results for Canadians.
Parry Sound—Muskoka
Mr. Speaker, I am humbled to rise today to thank the incredible people of Parry Sound—Muskoka, who placed their trust in me to represent them here in this House for the third time.
This seat, of course, does not belong to me; it belongs to the people I serve. From the majestic French River in the north to the historic Trent-Severn Waterway in the south, from the rugged shores of Georgian Bay to the heights of Algonquin Park, it is an honour to serve the people who call our magnificent region home.
Throughout the election, I heard from countless people about the issues that are important to them: the cost of living, safety in our streets, protecting hunters' rights and, of course, the outrageous price of homes. Today, I want to reassure all the people of Parry Sound—Muskoka that I am here to advocate for them and to ensure their voice is heard in this House, their House of Commons. They have placed their trust in me, and I promise to earn that trust every single day.
[Translation]
Young Tradespeople in Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation
Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to recognize three exceptionally talented young people from my riding for their outstanding performance at the Olympiades québécoises des métiers et des technologies, a competition for up-and-comers in skilled trades and technology. The event took place in Quebec City from May 7 to 10, 2025.
Théolie Lajoie's culinary prowess earned her a gold medal. Mathis Rozon's gold in industrial mechanics was a testament to his ingenuity and rigour. Geneviève De Melo was awarded a bronze medal in baking for her promising talent in this demanding trade.
All three medallists are students at CFP Innovation Outaouais, a top-notch institution in my riding that is passionate about training the next generation of tradespeople. I heartily congratulate them on their hard work, their perseverance and their success. They are an inspiration to an entire community, and we are extremely proud of them.
Congratulations to Théolie, Mathis and Geneviève.
[English]
National Livestock Brand
Mr. Speaker, in the last Parliament, I introduced a private member's bill, which will be reintroduced soon. This bill, an act to recognize a national livestock brand as a symbol of Canada, aims to acknowledge and promote the role of farmers, ranchers and the whole agriculture and animal husbandry sector, plus so many in our history, such as pioneers, indigenous peoples, those in resource industries like mining and the oil patch, hunters, trappers and anyone else who played a role in building our country from coast to coast to coast.
As I plan to step down as soon as possible, I hope to see the conversation on this important issue continue. This livestock brand, a heraldic symbol added to the national inventory of Canadian symbols, would be a fitting way to recognize a huge part of our country's history. At a time when national unity is at stake, this bill would be important to show that western and frontier culture played and still plays a prominent role in the building of Canada. The Conservatives get this. I hope the whole House will join in supporting this bill.
Civic Education in Schools
Mr. Speaker, today I share the story of the grade 4 and grade 5 classes at Glen Williams Public School in Georgetown, Ontario, and that of their dedicated teachers and parents, who are visiting Ottawa today.
These teachers asked their students to craft a letter sharing their vision for the future of Canada. The final product was so inspirational that it garnered national attention and a visit from the Prime Minister.
I thank teachers across Canada who bring this type of civic education to their schools. I am sure we can all agree that education is the foundation of a strong, united and compassionate country.
Canada's youth should be able to look to their leaders to set a guiding example. It is certainly a reminder for me, and I hope to my colleagues, to always lead with respect, integrity and purpose, because the children are watching.
[Translation]
World Milk Day
Mr. Speaker, World Milk Day is coming up in a few days.
Let us raise a glass to this simple yet essential food. Milk has endured through the ages and across cultures. It is more than just a drink; it is a powerhouse of benefits. It fuels our bodies, strengthens our bones and rounds out our bowl of cereal in the morning and our dessert at night. World Milk Day also provides an opportunity to celebrate the commitment of the farmers who work hard every day, with passion and perseverance, to supply us with this nutritious beverage. World Milk Day is a day to reflect on how milk gets to our table, through essential work that is invisible to most of us.
Today, let us spare a thought for that glass of milk and the supply management system that is behind both it and our farmers, who get up every morning and keep our regions strong.
I wish everyone good health and a happy World Milk Day.
[English]
Centennial Congratulations
Mr. Speaker, 100 years ago today, Albert Christian was born in Waterloo, Ontario. At age 17, he was in the local barbershop and overheard two older guys talking about heading to London, where they were going to enlist in the Canadian Army. Bert asked if he could tag along, which he did.
Bert passed all the tests, exams and interviews and was enlisted, despite having lied about his age. He served in France, Belgium, Holland and Germany with the Essex Scottish Regiment. It was in Germany that he fought on the front lines in the Hochwald Forest against the Nazis.
Bert had three brothers who served in the war as well. All four brothers returned home from the war alive and well. He met another four brothers in Europe, who were from Manitoulin Island and who also returned home safe and sound. They invited Bert to join them when they returned to Canada, and he did. That is where he met his future wife, Maurine.
At the age of 63, Bert retired to Owen Sound to be close to family. He had two children, David and Rick, and has two grandchildren, Candice and Cory. One saying Bert always says is “Old soldiers never die, they just fade away”, and he still says that he would do it all again.
I wish a happy 100th birthday to Bert. Pro patria.
Mental Health
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to be re-elected, and I am very grateful to the residents of Richmond East—Steveston for placing their trust in me once again to serve as their voice in the House.
I dedicate this statement to the memory of a childhood friend, Sukhi Bahia, who sadly passed during the election.
One election issue raised in our community was the urgent need for mental wellness and wraparound supports. May is Mental Health Awareness Month in Canada, and policy-makers ought to be aware of the challenges Canadians face. According to the Canadian Mental Health Association, the rate of suicide for Canadian men is three times higher than for women. However, women are hospitalized for self-harm twice as often as men.
As the 45th Parliament begins its work, I call on all levels of government to come together and invest in mental health as a cornerstone of building healthy, resilient and thriving communities for all Canadians.
Anti-Semitism
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House of Commons for the first time. I am honoured to serve the beautiful riding of York Centre, located in the great city of Toronto. It is home to one of Canada's largest Jewish communities, to which I belong.
An unprecedented wave of hate crimes is terrorising Canada's Jewish community. Under the Liberal government, hate crimes have gone up 250%, and anti-Semitic hate crimes have gone up over 400%. A Jewish school located a mile away from my North York home has been shot at three times. Enough is enough. Conservatives stand with Canada's Jewish community for its right to exist, to worship and to live free from violence and intimidation.
Last Sunday, over 50,000 Jewish Canadians proudly marched through York Centre on the Walk with Israel. We are grateful to the Toronto police for keeping us safe, but we demand of the Liberal government to end the incitement to violence on Canada's streets and to take all necessary measures to protect the Jewish community.
I know that my Conservative colleagues will fight for the safety of Jews all across Canada.
Government Priorities
Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your election, and through you I welcome all members of Parliament to the House. I look forward to working together as Canadians serving Canadians. I also want to thank the people of Mississauga—Erin Mills and my phenomenal team and volunteers for once again placing their trust in me. It is an honour to continue representing our beautiful community.
Canadians have chosen a government, led by our Prime Minister, that is ready to meet the challenges ahead, such as global instability, threats to sovereignty and urgent pressures on housing and affordability. Our government has laid out a clear path: building a strong and inclusive economy, strengthening Canada's global role and deepening ties with our allies. We are focused on delivering real results, creating opportunity and removing interprovincial trade barriers to build one strong Canadian economy. Let us get to work.
Opioids
Mr. Speaker, I wish my first intervention in the House on behalf of the people of Nanaimo—Ladysmith were under better circumstances, but our community is in crisis.
In 2024, Nanaimo lost 94 people to overdoses, more than three times the number in 2016, when the B.C. government declared the opioid crisis a public health emergency. Families are grieving. Neighbourhoods feel the weight of this tragedy. The safe-supply experiment has failed. People are suffering. Crime is up. It has truly been a lost decade.
Conservatives know that it is time to invest in treatment, to recriminalize hard drugs like fentanyl and to provide real mental health supports, not taxpayer-funded drugs that fuel addiction. It is time for common-sense solutions that restore hope and bring our loved ones home drug-free.
[Translation]
Halifax
Mr. Speaker, I rise today, one month after being elected, to thank the people of Halifax for placing their trust in me. I am here in the House of Commons today because of my community's support.
[English]
Halifax is a special place. Known to the Mi'kmaw, who cared for the land for millennia, as Kjipuktuk, The Great Harbour, it is one of Canada's oldest cities. It is home to Black communities predating Confederation, and it is the birthplace of responsible government.
Today, Halifax is a hub of research, innovation and technology. It is home to Canada's Ocean Supercluster, and it leads in climate action, ship building and global trade. It is a vibrant and fast-growing Maritime city, and its greatest strength has always been its people. Haligonians are resilient, caring and driven. As I take my seat in the chamber, I am honoured to be their champion in Ottawa, and I am ready to get to work.
Labour
Mr. Speaker, as I rise today, I want to thank my family, friends, volunteers and the hard-working people of Elmwood—Transcona, who placed their trust in me and the Conservative Party. These are the Canadians who get up early, put on their boots and build the country we love. I have been in their boots for 18 years as a construction electrician, proud union member and vice-president of IBEW Local 2085.
The NDP and Liberals have abandoned unions. They have driven up inflation, housing costs and taxes while supporting union-busting tactics. That is why more rank-and-file union members are turning to the Conservatives, many for the first time. Just weeks ago, we received support from local unions, including the ILA, the UBC, IBEW, the UA, Boilermakers, LIUNA and many more.
Conservatives are the party of blue-collar workers. We will keep working to earn the trust of Canadian workers and keep delivering the strong and prosperous future they deserve.
Carleton
Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the people of Carleton for the confidence they have placed in me. I will never take the honour of representing them for granted. I also wish to thank the hundreds of volunteers who believed that together we could. From Stittsville to Constance Bay, Riverside South to Metcalfe, Greely to Richmond, Manotick to Osgoode, and all points in between, together we did.
Now it is time to embrace every moment in the House and in all ridings to build a future in which all Canadians can thrive in the true north strong and free.
Oral Questions
[Oral Questions]
[English]
Finance
Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome the Prime Minister to his first official question period. This is where democracy lives, and this is where we provide rigorous scrutiny of every word he says and every dollar he spends on behalf of Canadians.
Let us talk about those words and dollars. During the election campaign, it was “elbows up”, as he put retaliatory tariffs on the U.S. Secretly, he then dropped those tariffs to, effectively, zero. He did not stop there; he told Canadians that the government would collect $20 billion in revenue from those tariffs and use it to cost his platform. Now that those tariffs are going to bring in zero dollars, I have two quick questions.
Why was the Prime Minister not honest with Canadians during the election, and how is he going to make up the shortfall? Is he going to borrow it, print it or tax it?
Mr. Speaker, may I first thank my constituents from Nepean for giving me the honour of being here? Could the Speaker also indulge me in saying how great it is to see him in the Speaker's chair? I trust that he is operating under the period of grace that will later not be accorded to me, appropriately, as the Leader of the Opposition just said.
Our tariffs have maximum impact on the United States and minimum impact on Canada, and we are dedicating all the revenues from those tariffs to supporting the workers and businesses affected by the unjustified American actions.
Mr. Speaker, he did not take long to pick up old Liberal habits of not being able to answer questions.
Since the election, Canadians have been inundated with grand rhetoric and pretty speeches from the Liberal Party, but they are still suffering under all those policies. Household debt is up to record levels. The number of people who cannot pay their mortgage is increasing. Food bank use is continuing to rise. TD Bank is now forecasting a recession, with hundreds of thousands of lost jobs. The PM said that undoing the damage of the last 10 years would require great speed, but he is not going to table a budget for six months.
If the Prime Minister is the man with the plan and the guy we hire in a crisis, why will he not table a budget before he goes on summer vacation?
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the member from the opposition is very busy and did not have a chance to study closely the 100-day plan of the former member for Carleton, which did not include a budget. Our plan includes legislating for one Canadian economy and for nation-building projects immediately, to grow the economy, and we expect the support from all members of the House.
Oil and Gas Industry
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals must be really afraid to come clean with Canadians if they are going to punt it off into the fall.
With the throne speech yesterday, Liberals have effectively admitted that it was their policies that caused the suffering for Canadians. Their reckless borrowing and massive deficits caused the inflation. The carbon tax drove up prices and drove away investment. Their anti-development bills chased jobs out of Canada. The Prime Minister is claiming that somehow the Liberals have changed. He has a chance to prove it to Canadians.
If the Prime Minister is serious, will he tell Canadians that pipelines are part of his values, by repealing Bill C-69, the no more pipelines bill?
[Translation]
Finance
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister campaigned as the man with a plan. The problem is, he refuses point-blank to tell Canadians what that plan is. A budget is a plan. The Liberals will have gone more than a year without presenting a budget, which has not happened since the 1960s. What we do know is that he is determined to spend even more money than Justin Trudeau, but he refuses to tell Canadians how he plans to spend it.
What is the Prime Minister trying to hide about the state of the Liberal government's finances?
Mr. Speaker, Canada's new government has a bold, ambitious plan to create one Canadian economy out of 13 and to implement nation-building projects.
Mr. Speaker, what I see before me are the same ministers and the same government we have had for 10 years. We know what came of 10 years of Liberal government.
What we have right now is a new Prime Minister, but it is a Prime Minister without a plan. He said he had a plan during the election campaign, but he does not want to table a budget, because he knows full well that his plan is a disaster and that there is a monumental hole in the public finances.
Can the Prime Minister commit to tabling a budget by the summer?
Mr. Speaker, the government will take immediate action to cut taxes for the middle class. That means $840 in savings for a family of four. We are also going to lower the GST on new homes.
We have a plan, and we are implementing it.
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, we were in the middle of an election campaign. The main purpose of the election campaign was to scare Canadians about Donald Trump's threats.
The new Prime Minister's government put Canadian tariffs in place as a retaliatory measure, but it quietly got rid of them during the election. It deliberately kept that from Canadians, because Canadians were afraid and it wanted them to stay that way.
Now we have a $20‑billion budget shortfall. The fiscal platform that was presented projected a huge deficit, but now there is a deficit of another $20 billion. Can we have a budget before the summer to find out the state of Canada's public finances?
Speech from the Throne
Mr. Speaker, what led the election to be called and formed the basis of the entire Liberal strategy was a trade crisis, a tariff crisis and an annexation crisis, even, featuring Donald Trump. However, in yesterday's Speech from the Throne, which was read by a foreign sovereign, there was no reference to trade or tariffs.
That leads me to wonder what happened to make people forget the terrible crisis that got the Prime Minister elected.
Intergovernmental Relations
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the Prime Minister will agree that some things are clearer when we read them than when we hear them.
We have time, but the speech given by the King was centralizing. It was so centralizing that even Justin Trudeau must have been embarrassed to be there. The government is talking about one economy without asking anyone's opinion, when the National Assembly has unanimously denounced such a notion.
Should we be worried that the Prime Minister sees Canada as a country whose provinces are like branches of a bank with a head office in Toronto?
Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, that would feel like a military staff meeting where a general gives his orders and expects them to get done.
On another topic, we believe that the climate crisis is real too. The climate crisis is causing damage, human and economic damage. We believe that action must be taken to fight the climate crisis. However, yesterday's Speech from the Throne suggests doing the exact opposite. It would ignore the climate and introduce measures that would worsen climate change and harm the environment.
Does the Prime Minister acknowledge that climate change is real?
[English]
Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister said that Canadians should not focus on pipelines. He should tell that straight to the hundreds of thousands of workers who lost their jobs when the Liberals killed pipelines, killed LNG exports to allies and capped Canadian oil and gas. Last year, 98% of Canadian crude went to the U.S., Canada's biggest customer and competitor, because of the Liberals. However, in April he said he would not repeal the Liberals' no-new-pipelines, never-build-anything, unlawful Bill C-69, and he ignores premiers and businesses.
When will the Prime Minister repeal Bill C-69?
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House for the first time. I wish to thank the people of Markham—Thornhill for their trust. I am also thinking of my family, who have supported me from day one, and my parents, who I wish were still with us.
It is time to get many projects built in Canada. We will cut red tape, fast-track projects and approve projects within two years. We will create jobs for Canadians and build the strongest economy in the G7.
Mr. Speaker, the truth is that in five years, the Liberals killed 16 major energy projects and $176 billion in options to make Canada affordable, safe, self-reliant and united. Half the ministers are the same.
The Liberals must kill Bill C-69, but they cannot get their story straight. Two weeks ago, the culture minister said that Canada does not need more pipelines. Last week, the energy minister talked a good game, but just like right now, he will not commit to concrete action. How can Canadians believe anything they say?
Will they repeal Bill C-69, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been clear. Yes, we will support new pipelines if there is consensus in Canada for them.
With American tariffs threatening our economy and our sovereignty, we must protect our energy security. There is no question that energy is Canada's power. It will help us build the strongest economy in the G7, guide the world in the right direction and be strong at the negotiating table. We will win this trade war. We will make Canada an energy superpower.
Mr. Speaker, over nine years, the Liberals' anti-energy laws have weakened our country, to the benefit of the United States. Canadian oil and gas piped to the United States provides jobs and revenue for Americans, not Canadians, and get this: It is at a discount.
Canada's energy potential has been stalled by anti-energy laws from the Liberal government for close to a decade. Will the Prime Minister scrap the job-killing and economy-killing energy production cap?
Mr. Speaker, while my Conservative colleagues are interested in playing politics, I am interested in getting things built, including pipelines where there is consensus.
We will make Canada an energy superpower in both conventional and clean energy by cutting red tape, fast-tracking projects and approving projects within two years. This means creating new jobs and growing the economy. We can make Canada strong and protect ourselves from American tariffs if we work together with indigenous partners, industry and workers, but also—
Mr. Speaker, even the B.C. NDP has removed its decarbonization policies for LNG export facilities. This is not politics. Even Canada's Parliamentary Budget Officer forecast a $20.5-billion reduction in GDP and potential job loss of 54,000 full-time jobs under this energy production cap. Canada's loss is America's gain.
Again, will the Prime Minister scrap the Canadian job-killing and Canadian economy-killing energy production cap, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the constituents of Toronto—Danforth for giving me this opportunity to stand up for Canada and build a strong Canada.
With respect to the member opposite's question, I want to be clear: If Canada wants to be an energy superpower, the Prime Minister has stated that energy is going to be low-cost, low-risk and low-carbon. We are going to get projects built right across our country while making sure that we protect the environment.
Carbon Pricing
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise here, representing the hard-working people of Newfoundland and Labrador, for the very first time.
While my province of Newfoundland and Labrador has the highest unemployment rate in the country, at nearly 10%, the industrial carbon tax is compromising our competitive edge and shifting our jobs abroad. Canada's energy, mining and forestry workers are pleading to have the industrial carbon tax removed.
Will the Prime Minister fully repeal the industrial carbon tax to create jobs at a time when we need that the most?
Mr. Speaker, making sure that polluters pay is a central part of moving forward and being competitive as an energy superpower. When we look at other countries around the world, they have border carbon adjustments in place; they are looking to Canada to make sure that the energy we provide is low-risk, low-cost and low-carbon.
Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals claim that they want to make Canada an energy superpower, but they forget that it is their record over the last decade that has decimated our energy sector and kept our resources in the ground.
The Liberals' oil and gas production cap will kill tens of thousands of jobs and cost our economy $20 billion. Their industrial carbon tax will cost Canadian businesses and consumers and make Canada less affordable and less competitive. Their legislation, Bill C-69, is blocking energy infrastructure and making us more dependent on the United States.
The solution is easy. Will the Prime Minister repeal the Liberals' costly anti-energy laws?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank, first and foremost, the constituents of Ahuntsic-Cartierville.
First and foremost, we know that we are in a trade war that has been launched by the U.S., and we know that hard-working Canadians are feeling the brunt of this trade war, particularly in the manufacturing sector and particularly in the auto, steel and aluminum sectors. We continue to fight for them.
That is why we will make sure that we invest in them and that we work on attracting investments across the world while making sure that we have the fastest economic growth of the G7.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, throughout the campaign, the Prime Minister tried to convince everyone that he was open to new energy projects, but he never clearly said that he plans to repeal the law stemming from Bill C-69, a Liberal anti-development law that would scrap the GNL Québec project. The majority of Quebeckers want pipelines. The people of Saguenay want GNL Québec. We need it to reduce our dependence on the United States.
Will the Prime Minister listen to the people in the Quebec regions and repeal Bill C-69?
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleague as we face a tariff war started by the United States. We will work to protect jobs across Quebec and Canada. In the aluminum sector, which is important to my colleague's riding, we are going to attract investments. We will ensure that jobs are created here, right across the country. We are going to have the strongest economy in the G7.
Democratic Institutions
Mr. Speaker, a Léger poll shows that 87% of Quebeckers feel zero attachment to the monarchy. That is why Quebec's National Assembly unanimously passed a motion demanding that all ties between Quebec and the monarchy be severed. Quebeckers are democrats, not monarchists.
However, the Liberals' first act after the election was invite the King of England to parade around at Quebeckers' expense, which will cost millions of dollars.
Do they realize that their very first act proves that they are completely out of touch with Quebeckers?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the people of Laurier—Sainte‑Marie for allowing me to serve here for a third consecutive term.
I would also like to remind my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois that the British Crown always reads the Speech from the Throne. There is nothing new there. This time, of course, the King came to read it, which is a great honour for many Canadians, including Quebeckers. I have met some of them.
I would also like to remind my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois that Canada is a sovereign country. Sovereignty is a concept that the Bloc Québécois should understand well.
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers did not vote for that. Quebeckers were hoping for a serious government that would table a budget to help Quebec's economy face up to Donald Trump. Today they are seeing that the Liberals' priority was not the budget, because there is no budget. It was not support for the economy, because there is no support. Their priority was pomp and circumstance with the King of England.
How strange it is that when the Bloc Québécois brings up the monarchy, it is always accused of avoiding serious matters. However, the Liberals are the ones not prioritizing serious matters, like the budget. They decided to waste millions of dollars on a royal parade instead.
Can they explain that to us?
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking the people of Saint‑Maurice—Champlain for electing me for a fourth mandate, which I will fulfill with conviction, humility and passion.
We certainly are taking care of serious matters. They were asleep at the switch. The first thing we announced is a tax cut for 22 million Canadians. We should all be celebrating that here today. There are 22 million Canadians who are going to benefit from a middle-class tax cut. Promise made, promise kept. We are going to build Canada strong together.
[English]
Housing
Mr. Speaker, we are seeing two very different narratives on housing: one from the campaign and a very different one from the minister.
The new housing minister, the former mayor of Vancouver who let housing prices go up 179% in just eight years, is saying something very different. The minister answered a resounding “no” when he was asked if home prices should come down from their record highs.
If he is adamant that prices should not go down, how much does the minister think they should go up?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to be here.
[English]
I want to, first of all, thank the people of Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby for giving me the opportunity to represent them here.
On the issue of affordability and affordable housing, first, I am very proud to be part of a government that is committed to cutting taxes from day one here in the House. I am also looking forward to pursuing the most ambitious affordable housing plan in the history of Canada, delivering a GST cut to first-time homebuyers and ensuring we bring the development costs down in—
Mr. Speaker, the minister ought to know that the housing market is already in chaos. Sellers cannot sell and buyers cannot buy. It is proving out: Only 310 houses were sold across the entire GTA. That is a staggering 89% below the 10-year average. Lower supply and higher prices spell more trouble for Canadians. Instead of building homes and bringing the costs down, the minister is actually building more bureaucracy.
We know that housing prices went up 179% when the minister was in charge of housing in Vancouver. How much higher are they going to get when he is in charge of housing for the entire country?
Mr. Speaker, it is not about reducing the value of an individual's home or a senior's home. The member may wish to force seniors to sell their homes for less, but we are going to focus on building more affordable housing and delivering a cut to the GST for first-time homebuyers.
Mr. Speaker, the sale of new homes in the GTA just hit a seventh straight month of record-setting lows. Only 310 new homes were sold in the GTA in April, which is a 72% drop over last year and an 89% drop in the 10-year average, with condo sales plummeting 94%. The report warns that there will be a massive housing shortage in two years.
Prices are too high for buyers, and they are too low for sellers. Can the Prime Minister tell us what he plans to do to help the buyers who cannot afford to buy and the sellers who cannot afford to sell?
Mr. Speaker, it is good to be back.
In fact, the Conservatives have not changed; they should listen more. My colleague was very clear about what we are doing. We are eliminating the GST for first-time homebuyers in the country for houses up to $1 million. We should all celebrate.
We expect the Conservatives to support the ways and means motion we have put forward, because this is how we can help Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, tax relief is certainly welcome, and it is, frankly, long overdue from the government, but the bigger tax cuts that its members are talking about will save families $70 a month. We are dealing with families that are looking at $5,000-a-month mortgages or more.
Equifax is reporting that the mortgage delinquencies in Ontario are at the highest level ever recorded; they are up 70%. This is not a coincidence. It is certainly not a surprise.
Instead of building a third federal housing bureaucracy, why do we not just get more homes built?
Mr. Speaker, on the one hand, it is encouraging to hear that the Conservatives will support our motion, but it is concerning to hear a member talk down a measure that will help 22 million Canadians in this country; it is shocking. This is up to $840 for a family with two incomes.
The people in my riding and in the member's riding are welcoming this measure, and we hope that the Conservatives will support us. This is how we support Canadians.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, on the campaign trail, I met hundreds of young people from Montmorency—Charlevoix who are completely discouraged by housing prices. After more than a decade of this Liberal government, the costs of mortgage payments and a down payment on a home have doubled.
According to the Canadian Real Estate Association, housing prices in Quebec increased by 10% last year alone. However, on his first day in office, the Minister of Housing said that housing prices were fine. That statement is completely out of touch with reality.
How can the minister look our young people in the eye and tell them that housing prices are fine the way they are?
Mr. Speaker, had my colleague listened carefully today, he would have heard that there is good news for Canadians.
We are going to eliminate the GST on homes at or under $1 million for first-time homebuyers. That will deliver savings of $50,000. It is an amazing measure. It is a measure that helps young families. It is a measure that is going to help Canadians.
That promise was made, and it is the first promise kept by the Prime Minister's government.
[English]
The Economy
Mr. Speaker, last month, voters in my riding of beautiful South Shore—St. Margarets voted for change, a change to address the cost of living, which has eroded Canada's quality of life. They voted for a change that puts more money in their pockets, and they voted for change that builds a more affordable Canada. As we build the strongest economy in the G7, we need to ensure that we leave no Canadians behind.
Could the Minister of Finance and National Revenue please share with this House how the government is—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Speaker, what a great question. I think the Conservatives should follow this lead.
I want to congratulate my colleague for her election and for the hard work that she is putting in on behalf of the people of South Shore—St. Margarets.
As the member mentioned, last month Canadians voted for a government that has a plan to build the best economy in the G7, and that is what we are delivering. We are going to address the cost of living in this country, which is why one of the very first announcements of this government was to cut taxes for 22 million Canadians. We should all celebrate.
Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, Liberal policies like Bill C-5 have led to a crime wave across Canada. Violent crime is up 50%, and gun violence is up 116%. Just yesterday, a drive-by shooting shook our small rural community of Cayuga. This crime wave is no accident. It is a direct result of Liberal policies like Bill C-5, which has ended mandatory jail time for serious gun offences and drug crimes.
Will the Prime Minister end this crime wave by repealing Trudeau's Bill C-5?
Mr. Speaker, I will just take a moment to thank the people of Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park for my fourth consecutive mandate.
To my friend opposite, my heart goes out to those who were impacted by the violence in her community just yesterday. I want to assure her, and I want to assure all Canadians, that we will address issues of serious violent offenders seriously. We will make sure that we tighten up bail reform, and we will ensure that our government will always be there to protect Canadians from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, a serious issue is the will of Canadians to live in peace, which they once did. Now they live in fear because of Liberal soft-on-crime policies. Liberal policies like Bill C-5 and Bill C-75 put repeat violent offenders back on the streets, contributing to the suffering of communities across Canada. Premiers, police, legal experts and civil liberties advocates all demand change.
I ask the question one more time: Will the Prime Minister restore safe streets and repeal Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, on April 28, Canadians gave us a mandate to ensure that our streets are safe. Since that time, we have been working together with law enforcement to work towards safer communities across Canada.
I want to just outline some of the highlights from the chief of police for the City of Toronto, who indicated that auto thefts, for example, have decreased by 39%, home invasions are down by 42%, homicides are down by 67% and shootings are down by 46%.
We have a lot more work to do, and we will work together with law enforcement to ensure the safety and security of all Canadians. Our government will always be there to protect Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, families across Canada feel helpless because the Liberals have done nothing to stop violent crime rising across the country. They are sticking to their ideological soft-on-crime policies. That is why extortion gangs are targeting Canadian businesses and their families. In fact, just this month, we have seen more shootings, arson and even a murder potentially linked to extortion, yet Canada still has no mandatory minimum penalty for extortion.
Will the Prime Minister work with Conservatives to bring in the same legislation that I brought forward in the last Parliament to bring in tougher penalties for extortion?
Mr. Speaker, you heard it in the throne speech yesterday: It is a top priority of this new government. We are partnering with police services across this country to fight organized crime. We will make it tougher for violent criminals to get bail. We will impose stricter sentences for repeat offenders.
We are serious. We are going to get to work, and we are going to fight crime.
Mental Health and Addictions
Mr. Speaker, since 2016, nearly 50,000 Canadians have died from the opioid crisis. Over 80% of accidental opioid deaths involve fentanyl. It takes just two milligrams of fentanyl to kill someone. Mass fentanyl production is mass murder, but Liberal laws let the monsters who kill our people walk free. Conservatives are proposing to give mandatory life sentences for anyone involved in the trafficking, production and distribution of over 40 milligrams of fentanyl.
Will the Prime Minister crack down on fentanyl production and give life sentences for drug kingpins committing mass murder?
Mr. Speaker, let me first welcome my friend opposite to the House.
Fentanyl has torn every community across Canada and North America. It is something that everyone in the House has been impacted by. Liberals are accelerating our work to crack down and dismantle the fentanyl trade and the organized crime that profits from it. That is why we listed seven cartels as terrorist entities under the Criminal Code.
I am working closely with Kevin Brosseau, Canada's fentanyl czar, at home and abroad to put laser-sharp focus on dismantling fentanyl rings. We will work together to address this issue. Our government will always be there—
Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, soft-on-crime Liberal bills, such as Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, have unleashed crime waves in Brampton and across our country. Violent crime is up 50%. Auto theft is up 50%, and extortion is up 400%. The out-of-touch public safety minister said, during his campaign, that there was nothing wrong with the bail system. Repeat offenders should be in jail, not out on bail.
Does the Prime Minister agree with the minister, or does he stand with frontline officers, like Peel police officers, to bring in bail reforms?
Mr. Speaker, Liberals stand with all of our frontline officers within Peel Regional Police and all police agencies across the country. We are partnering with their services, and we are going to fight organized crime. We will make it tougher for violent criminals to get bail, and we will impose stricter sentences for repeat violent offenders.
The chief of police for Toronto has reported that auto thefts have decreased by nearly 39%, home invasions are down 42%, homicides are down 67% and shootings are down 46%. We will continue to be tough on crime.
Ethics
Mr. Speaker, before taking office, the Prime Minister helped establish multi-billion dollar investment funds that were placed in offshore tax havens. He is shielding those investments from public scrutiny with a blind trust that hides but does not remove potential conflicts of interest.
Canadians are lined up at food banks in record numbers. They cannot pay their rent, but they are paying their taxes. They want to know if the Prime Minister paid taxes on his investments.
Can the Prime Minister, who I welcome here today, confirm that none of the investments he placed in the blind trust were previously held in offshore tax havens?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister followed all the rules even before they were required. He will continue complying with all the rules. Opposition members like to distract Canadians with these hypotheticals and conjured scenarios.
The fact is that we have a Prime Minister and a new government that are hard at work creating opportunity for Canadians, creating the strongest economy in the G7 and reducing taxes. The opposition does not like that, so they dig dirt on day one. Shame on them. We are going to continue our work.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians do not want an explanation on how to bend over backwards to fit through ethical loopholes. They want to be reassured that, after a decade of serial ethical law-breaking, they can have confidence that the Prime Minister is going above the basic minimum standard.
Can the Prime Minister, who I again welcome to the chamber, stand up and just assure Canadians that none of the funds he had previously were held in offshore tax havens? Can he tell Canadians what those investments were in when he sat at his first cabinet meeting?
Mr. Speaker, Canada has among the most stringent ethics guidelines in the world. The Prime Minister has complied with those ethics guidelines and surpassed the requirements contained in those ethics guidelines.
What the Prime Minister is busy doing is not what the member is busy doing. The Prime Minister is busy creating opportunity for Canada, standing up in a trade war against the United States, reducing our taxes, building new homes and creating the strongest economy in the G7. That is what we are up to.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, how can we be sure the Prime Minister is not busy creating opportunity for himself? Why is the Liberal Prime Minister so loath to reveal the full extent of his personal fortune to Canadians? Why is so much being kept under wraps?
We know that, just before becoming Prime Minister, he set up two multi-billion dollar funds for his company, Brookfield, in well-known tax havens to avoid paying taxes in Canada.
Will the Prime Minister confirm, right now, that he does not hold any assets or financial interests in offshore tax havens?
Mr. Speaker, it did not take long for the Conservative Party's question-generating machine to run out of steam. The Conservatives keep saying the same thing over and over. What we are doing here is creating jobs, building a strong economy and standing up to the United States.
Naturally, the Prime Minister is meeting and exceeding all the requirements in the ethics code, the most stringent such code in the entire world.
The Conservatives are intent on digging up dirt. Members on this side of the House are busy creating opportunity for Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, it did not take the Liberal government long to slip into the previous government's old habits.
The reality is that the Liberal Prime Minister seems to be taking his sweet time covering up his conflicts of interest before he opens his books to Canadians. One of his first decisions was to move his assets into a blind trust. He claims that, overnight, we will magically forget everything he owned and owns. The only people who do not know are Canadians, only Canadians.
Will the Prime Minister come clean and disclose all of his financial holdings and the conflicts of interest contained in his trust, yes or no?
We want an answer right now.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians should rest easy knowing that Parliament and our institutions are governed by one of the most, if not the most, stringent ethics codes in the world. The Prime Minister did everything he could to meet and even exceed his obligations.
If the Conservative Party wants to keep trying to dig up dirt, I think voters are going to be disgusted. Our constituents expect us to work here for Canadians, not sling mud across the House.
The Economy
Mr. Speaker, trade barriers have been stifling the development of one Canadian economy for far too long.
Given the threats to our economic sovereignty, it is more important than ever to promote free trade within our borders.
Will the Minister responsible for Intergovernmental Affairs and One Canadian Economy tell the House about the steps our government is taking to protect our economic sovereignty and build one Canadian economy?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Terrebonne for her excellent question.
During the election campaign, our government promised to build one Canadian economy out of 13. By Canada Day, we will introduce a bill to eliminate all federal barriers to interprovincial trade and work with the provinces and territories to catalyze projects in the national interest.
That is how we will build the strongest economy in the G7.
[English]
Finance
Mr. Speaker, Canada is in an economic crisis, without a plan, because the Liberals shut this place down for half the year to avoid accountability. Now the Prime Minister is saying that there will be no budget before the fall. With record high food bank usage, a rise in the number of those using food banks who are fully employed, and a rise in mortgage delinquencies, TD Bank now also predicts that over 100,000 Canadian jobs will be lost due to a looming recession.
Given all of this information, how is it even possible that the Liberals will not table a budget this spring?
Mr. Speaker, we are being very clear that there will be a budget in the early fall of this year. In the meantime, we should celebrate, as we have now seen that the Conservatives will support our motion. This is a good thing. Now Canadians will see that, in the House of Commons, we need to do things for them.
The first thing we presented, which we had promised and are delivering, is a tax cut for the middle class. There are 22 million Canadians who will have a tax cut. This is what we have been elected for. We are going to fight for Canadians. Every day is a good day to fight for Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister sloganeered on a plan, yet he refuses to tell anyone what that plan is. He is overseeing the longest period without a budget since the 1960s outside of COVID. Uncertainty about spending and the debt the Liberals will accumulate scares away investors, small businesses and Canadians during a cost of living crisis.
We know that the Prime Minister is going to spend more than Justin Trudeau did. Why will the Liberals not be clear with Canadians to let them know how much more inflation and interest rates will go up because of all their spending?
Mr. Speaker, we already know that unjustified tariffs by the U.S. against Canadians are making Canadians' lives much more unaffordable. That is why we are cutting taxes. As the Minister of Finance just mentioned, this new government is cutting taxes on the middle class. We are also making sure we are cutting the carbon tax and the GST on first-time homebuyers.
We will create the strongest and fastest-growing economy of the G7. This is the utmost priority of our government, and we will deliver.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister claimed to be the man with a plan. That is very well, but where is it?
After 14 years in finance, I have learned that, if someone does not know the numbers, that person is out. We know the Prime Minister is committed to spending more than Justin Trudeau, but he will not even tell Canadians how much. TD reported that Canada is nearing a two-quarter recession, with up to 100,000 job losses this fall.
I have one simple question: With the economic storm clouds moving in, how is it possible not to have a budget this spring?
Mr. Speaker, I have one simple answer: We have a plan, and it is a plan in action.
I welcome the member to the House of Commons, but the plan is simple. We are going to cut taxes for 22 million Canadians. In fact, the leader of the Conservatives just said outside the House that he is going to support our plan. That is a step forward. That is not the only thing we are going to do. We are also going to remove GST for first-time homebuyers of a house up to $1 million, and we are going to remove the consumer carbon price from law.
This is the plan. This is delivering for Canadians. This is building a better economy for all.
Northern Affairs
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to rise in the House as the representative of a region that forms part of Canada's north: beautiful Labrador. We must never take our sovereignty and security in the Arctic for granted. As foreign threats to the region increase and the impacts of climate change intensify, it is imperative that Canada work in close partnership with indigenous and northern communities.
Would the Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs inform the House on the government's strategy for the region?
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a deep sense of responsibility, gratitude and humility. I stand here as a proud Anishinabe, Ininew and Métis woman representing the Churchill—Keewatinook Aski riding.
Ensuring a Canada that is strong and free in defending the Arctic and the people living there is a top priority for the new government. We will strengthen the presence of the Canadian Armed Forces, detect and deter early warnings with radar coverage, and invest in the necessary housing and infrastructure. We will do this all by working with indigenous and northern partners every step of the way.
Fisheries and Oceans
Mr. Speaker, in yesterday's throne speech, the Prime Minister reaffirmed his commitment to persecute the fishing and aquaculture industries through Liberal policy to close down 30% of fishing grounds by 2030.
The 30 by 30 marine protected areas agenda was developed by the United Nations in conjunction with foreign activists, and the government signed it, so how can the Minister of Fisheries support shutting down the productivity of the fishing industry and the aquaculture industry, which means so much to coastal communities throughout Canada, given the impact that it will have on our very own province?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the people of St. John's East for continuing to put their trust in me. I also want to congratulate my colleague from across the aisle.
This government continues to understand the cultural and economic importance of the fisheries. I can tell members that I am very humbled and proud to be responsible for this file. I can assure the people of Canada, and certainly my colleague across the aisle, that Fisheries and Oceans remains an important ministry in the government. I will do all that I can to ensure that harvesters, the industry and communities are protected.
Employment
Mr. Speaker, Canada's unemployment rate has surged to 6.9%, the highest in eight years outside of the pandemic. Alarmingly, youth unemployment is more than double that. Now The OECD is warning that Trump's trade war will cost Canada even more jobs this year.
Canadians are worried about their futures. What immediate steps will the government take to bring the jobless rate down and protect Canadian workers who will be hurt by Donald Trump's tariffs?
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise and represent Thunder Bay—Superior North for a fourth term in the House of Commons.
This government is very focused on protecting workers and on making sure that youth and, indeed, workers of all ages have the skills and abilities to thrive as our economy transitions. I will work closely with my partners and members across the House to make sure that all Canadians have an opportunity to thrive as we see economic change.
Presence in Gallery
Routine Proceedings
[Routine Proceedings]
[Translation]
Canadian Human Rights Commission
I have the honour to lay upon the table, pursuant to subsection 61(4) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the 2024 report of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(e), this report is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.
Chief Electoral Officer
[English]
Petitions
Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your election as Speaker.
I rise to table a petition that is very important and timely. It is from the residents of Union Bay on Vancouver Island, who are deeply frustrated. They cite that there is significant risk to workers and the environment associated with ship-breaking due to the presence of a wide variety of hazardous materials and end-of-life marine vessels.
The petitioners also highlight that unlike other jurisdictions, Canada lacks standards on ship-breaking and unregulated ship-breaking activities, which are putting our oceans, coastal communities and workers at risk on Vancouver Island and around Canada. The lack of domestic oversight of ship-breaking and the disposal of end-of-life marine vessels frustrates Canada's ability to ensure compliance with its international obligations under the Basel Convention. The petitioners highlight that this could be a job creator.
The petitioners want to see the Government of Canada develop enforceable federal standards to reduce the negative impact of environmental and social impacts of ship-breaking that meet or exceed those set out in the EU ship recycling regulation; provide assistance through loans or grants to long-term, reputable ship-breaking companies to facilitate the implementation of new federal standards in their operations; and develop a strategy for recycling end-of-life, federally owned marine vessels.
This is the fourth year I have tabled this petition with no action.
Mr. Speaker, if you will indulge me, as this is my first time rising in this place, I want to congratulate you on your election and thank the people of my community for their trust.
I am limiting myself to one petition today, which is on behalf of Canada's strong Cypriot community. The community has brought this petition to the attention of the House noting that the Turkish military invasion of Cyprus in 1974 was illegal and brutal, resulting in the ongoing occupation of 37% of the island and 57% of its coastline. This occupation has led to significant human rights violations, including a loss of life, the displacement of thousands of Cypriots and the ongoing presence of Turkish military forces at illegal settlements.
This community, throughout the world and in Canada, marked the 50th anniversary of this tragic invasion last year and is calling for justice, freedom and human rights for the Cypriot people. There are various other aspects mentioned, including UN Security Council resolutions calling for an end to the occupation of Cyprus.
The petitioners call on the House to uphold all UN Security Council resolutions on Cyprus and condemn Turkey's ongoing illegal occupation of northern Cyprus; to advocate for the complete and immediate withdrawal of Turkish troops; to ensure no Canadian arms, military equipment or technology is sold to Turkey or used against Cyprus or other oppressed groups; to continue rejecting the recognition of the illegal occupation; and to advocate for a free, united Cyprus based on relevant UN Security Council resolutions and the European Union's statements.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the good people of Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford for re-electing me to the House.
Today, I present a petition on behalf of constituents in my riding who are concerned about the transition from military to civilian life. The petitioners are calling upon the Government of Canada to drastically reduce red tape for our veterans and to improve the process of going from military life to civilian life.
Mr. Speaker, as it is my first time taking the floor in the House in this session of Parliament, I want to begin by thanking the voters of Saanich—Gulf Islands for the trust they have placed in me to continue to serve them. It is the honour of my life to do so. I am extremely grateful to the 350 volunteers who helped so diligently, some of them working seven days a week and around the clock. I will never be able to thank them enough.
On behalf of many constituents, I am rising to present a petition, and not for the first time, from petitioners who point out that there is a strong desire across the country for electoral reform. They point out that an Angus Reid poll conducted recently, this last September, found that 85% of respondents want to see a citizens' assembly choose a form of electoral reform to replace the perverse first-past-the-post system.
To summarize, they are petitioning for the government of the day to put in place a mechanism to find a consensus among Canadian citizens who want to see fair voting that reflects the will of the voting public to make sure that the Parliament voters get is the Parliament voters voted for. They are calling for a citizens' assembly on electoral reform to be completed within 12 months and for recommended changes to be put in place before the next election.
Request for Emergency Debate
Welfare of Indigenous Children in Canada
[S. O. 52]
I wish to inform the House that I have received a request for an emergency debate. I invite the hon. member for Nunavut to rise and make a brief intervention.
Uqaqtittiji, I first thank my constituents from Nunavut for placing their trust in me so that I can rejoin members in my second term in Parliament.
I thank the member for Winnipeg Centre for submitting a joint letter requesting this emergency debate as well.
I rise today to seek leave for an emergency debate regarding the health and well-being of indigenous children in Canada. The Canadian government has failed first nations, Métis and Inuit children and youth by imposing sweeping new changes to Jordan's principle and Inuit child first initiative applications.
Jordan's principle is a legal obligation directed by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to address gaps in health care for indigenous children. The principle is named after Jordan River Anderson, who died in hospital at the age of five because the federal and provincial governments avoided responsibility for his care. His legacy must be properly honoured.
How indigenous children and youth are treated has become a national crisis. The federal government unilaterally made changes without considering the impacts on first nations and Inuit children, youth and families. Changes to the requirements to access Jordan's principle and the Inuit child first initiative result in keeping first nations and Inuit children in poverty and less healthy than non-indigenous children. The months-long backlog of cases is 140,000 applications under Jordan's principle, with no clear plan on how to address this matter.
Nunavummiut worked hard to get the ICFI extended, but, during the federal election campaign, the Liberals cancelled the hamlet food voucher program for Inuit children and families. This was a very successful program that served over 15,000 Inuit children. No reason was given for cancelling it. This political decision led Inuit children and families back into situations of poverty.
Nunavut has the highest rate of child poverty in Canada, at 42%; the national rate is 18.1%. Nunavut also has the highest rate of food insecurity of any province or territory. Although the population of Nunavut is small, food insecurity in the territories is of concern to all Canadians, given the scale and severity of the problem.
The NDP and I are seeking an emergency debate so that parliamentarians can discuss the sweeping changes made to Jordan's principle and the Inuit child first initiative and address the failure of the current government to implement the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's order on Jordan's principle.
I call on you, Uqaqtittiji, to ensure that the country takes seriously the systemic racism and discrimination toward indigenous children and families that is happening and to do your part to demand accountability for indigenous children.
[Speaker's Ruling]
Speech from the Throne
[The Address]
[English]
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply
The House resumed from May 27 consideration of the motion for an address to His Majesty the King in reply to his speech at the opening of the session.
Mr. Speaker, now that Their Majesties have left the national capital region, we can really pick apart the throne speech the government wrote yesterday.
Yesterday Canadians heard a throne speech that was not bad on slogans and rhetoric but terrible on any kind of detail and a plan. A lot of times, government members will defend that by saying that the details come out in the legislation. While there may be some truth to that, in a throne speech, we usually at least get a clear indication of what that legislation would do. In other words, we get an indication of the way the government is going to accomplish the goals it has set out for itself. We received precisely none of that yesterday.
We were told that the government wants to build more homes, yet all the government did was talk about increasing the number of bureaucrats who run programs in Ottawa. There was nothing about incentivizing municipalities to speed up development processes and lower development charges. The government copied and pasted many aspects of the Conservative platform; one specific aspect was eliminating the GST on new home construction. Some might call it plagiarism, which is something the Prime Minister has some familiarity with.
The Liberals must have dropped something when they were cutting and pasting that from the Conservative platform, because they accidentally restricted it. I say “accidentally” sarcastically. They made this policy much narrower in its application. Our plan would have reduced the GST on new homes, period, but the Liberals have restricted that to only some new home purchases. They did not talk at all about the way they were going to reduce that red tape and lower those taxes.
We have a Prime Minister who wrote a book called Value(s), in which he defined himself as a human being. In that book, not only did he profess his love for the carbon tax, but he also bragged about the experience he has imposing higher costs, not just on Canadians but on the people of the world.
That is where the Prime Minister comes from: a global investment scheme in which fancy bankers and powerful elites put together a grift. The Prime Minister actually explained how he benefited from this. He gave an interview when he was on a panel and described how this grift unfolds. First, he and people like him have access to important decision-makers and policy-makers around the world. He actually said this. He uses that access to lobby for regulatory changes.
In other words, the Prime Minister gets to have a glass of wine or a canapé with a government official in a country. In those conversations or meetings, he convinces them to make regulatory changes, and then he invests in the companies that benefit from those changes.
In the example the Prime Minister used, he spoke about lobbying the government of the United Kingdom to bring in a new requirement for jet fuel. There was no market for the new requirement. If there was a natural market for it, then aviation companies would make those changes to jet fuel. The Prime Minister specifically required that a certain percentage of that aviation fuel had to be sourced from nonconventional energy. If there was a market for that, if that nonconventional product was more efficient or cheaper, then the companies would do it themselves. They would not need a regulatory agency to tell them to do it. There was no market for it. Why is that? It would increase costs. Those costs would get passed on to consumers, and fewer people would be able to afford to fly.
Therefore, the Prime Minister convinces the policy-maker to bring in a rule that cannot be ignored. In the absence of a market demanding it or necessitating it, the awesome power of the government comes in and forces aviation companies to blend in a certain percentage of nonconventional energy to use in their fuel. Those extra costs get passed on to passengers, and fewer people are able to afford those tickets.
The Prime Minister convinces the policy-maker that every plane flying in and out of a U.K. airport must have a certain percentage of fuel. Then he looks around and sees a company producing a nonconventional energy product. It was not making any money before the regulatory change; now it has a huge market for what it produces, that nonconventional energy product. All of a sudden, with a massive market, that company will be able to sell what it makes to all kinds of airlines flying in and out of the United Kingdom. What does the Prime Minister do? He invests in that company.
Not only does the Prime Minister lobby for the regulatory change, but he then also invests in the company and makes millions. Members do not have to take my word for it. The Prime Minister himself admitted this before he ran to be the leader of the Liberal Party.
Mr. Speaker, imagine doing that with any other aspect of government. Imagine having a buddy who owns an asphalt company, and for one reason or another, it was not making much money. Maybe the company was selling an additive for the asphalt, but there was not really a market for it; cities and rural municipalities did not think they needed to buy it, and the company did not produce anything of value for motorists or taxpayers in that area.
Mr. Speaker, imagine using special access to get time with ministers or government officials and, not because there was a market for it, convincing them to pass a rule that the company's product had to be included in all the asphalt being laid down in an area and then going out and investing in that company. If someone were an elected official and they did that, they would likely be up on criminal charges. They would likely be investigated for corruption. That is exactly what the Prime Minister did in his private sector career: He used his access with government officials to lobby for changes to allow him to make investments and make millions. That is who the Prime Minister is.
In the throne speech, there was no mention of how to get big projects built. We can remember it was the Liberal government that cancelled big energy projects like northern gateway and energy east. Northern gateway would have opened up Asian markets; it is the shortest route between where the oil and gas is found in the ground and where there is a deep water port to be able to ship it to countries like India, China and Japan, with booming populations and an ever-increasing middle class. Right now, many of those countries are buying their energy from countries that do not share our values. These are countries with dictators and regimes that abuse the rights of women and religious minorities and that engage in fomenting wars and terrorist activities not just throughout the region but throughout the world. Canadians are no longer able to fill those markets, because the Liberals cancelled those pipelines. There was nothing in the throne speech about repealing those terrible pieces of legislation or supporting those projects.
The Prime Minister says that he is the man with the plan. Slogans are not as efficient as plans, yet there is no plan. Then he goes around and tells Canadians that there will not even be a budget for six months. We can look at all the economic calamities that Canadians have had to suffer through: an inflation crisis, a cost of living crisis, a housing crisis, massive debt and deficits racked up by Liberal governments. The Liberal government is spending more on servicing the debt than it is on health care. In other words, it is paying more in interest payments to bankers and bondholders.
After all of this, with the Prime Minister himself saying that speed was of the essence and that, as a country, we have to start addressing this as quickly as possible, he is telling Canadians they are going to have to wait for six months before we get this plan. I do not know of a single boardroom around the country that would keep a CEO in his position if, in the middle of a crisis, the CEO came in and said, “I know we are in a crisis. Do not worry; I have a plan. I will come back to you in six months.” I do not think any board of directors would keep a CEO who asked for a six-month grace period to start to address a problem.
The Prime Minister says he wants to build, but he refuses to repeal the very laws that stop us from building. He will not commit to repealing Bill C-69, the anti-pipeline bill. He refuses to repeal Bill C-48, the shipping ban that blocks western Canadian oil from reaching global markets. He is keeping in the energy and production caps and the industrial carbon tax. Here we have a situation in which our steelworkers, aluminum workers and manufacturers in Canada have to worry about their companies competing against American manufacturers when there is no carbon tax on the U.S. side of the border. My colleague from Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore made a great point yesterday when she pointed out that saying we are going to fight with the Americans while keeping an industrial carbon tax on Canadian workers is like tying one elbow behind our back. It is not going to put Canada in a position of strength if the government keeps the industrial carbon tax.
The Prime Minister flippantly said, “When was the last time you bought a whole bunch of steel?” Does he not realize that there is steel in a lot of things that Canadians buy on a pretty regular basis?
Last time I opened my fridge, the fridge had steel; the car I drive has steel; lots of household components have steel; and lots of framing materials for new homes require steel. There are many things that Canadians have to buy on a regular basis that contain steel. That steel could be made in Canada, and we could export some of that steel to the U.S. and around the world if Canadian manufacturers had an advantage and did not have to pay that carbon tax. The irrational devotion to the carbon tax that the Prime Minister has in keeping the industrial side of it is a direct repudiation of anything he has said on helping Canada fight back from a position of strength. He is going to saddle us with higher taxes and higher regulatory regimes.
There is no mention of repealing the soft-on-crime laws, Bill C-75 and Bill C-5, which unleashed a wave of crime across the country. Those two bills drastically lowered penalties for dangerous and repeat offenders, which caused the crime wave. Crime is not like the weather; it is not like one day there might be a bit of humidity and the next day there might be a few extra car thefts. Crime is a direct result of justice policies. When the Liberal Party came in and started repealing mandatory minimum sentences and forcing judges to grant bail instead of jail for some of the country's most notorious and dangerous offenders, we saw a direct correlation in the rise in crime.
The same thing happened with the drug crisis. We had a government that decided to take taxpayers' money. We can think of the taxpayer working so hard, picking up extra shifts, working long hours, missing out on time with their children and their families, because they were hustling and striving to eke out a better quality of life, knowing that when those tax dollars came straight off their paycheque, a portion of those tax dollars was going to buy dangerous opioids to give out to people to use in communities and those drugs ended up in the hands of drug dealers. Imagine the insult to injury for those Canadians who are barely getting by, to find out that their tax dollars went to subsidize drug distribution in our communities.
These are simply the same old talking points dressed up in new packaging. The Liberals are trying to pull off a massive trick on Canadians. They are pretending that, if they just change their rhetoric a little bit and change the leader and the name, but keep the same ministers and keep the same policies, somehow Canadians will believe that things are actually different. However, changing superficial things is easy. The Liberals can swap out the talking points, and they can suddenly mimic some of the language they hear from other political parties, as they did when they lifted Conservative ideas. It is easy to wear black shoes and normal socks and pretend everything is going to be different. However, the things that actually affect Canadians' lives are not the superficial things. They are not words on pieces of paper. They are not the grand prose that comes from a monarch on a visit to the Senate to read a throne speech. Canadians' lives are changed by the laws, the tax rates and the regulations that governments set. So far, we have absolutely zero indication that there will be anything meaningfully changed under this Prime Minister.
There was absolutely nothing in the throne speech to talk about unleashing our businesses and our resources, but that is what Conservatives will do. The best way to fight back against a threat to our country is to fight back from a position of strength.
[Translation]
It is easy to use pretty words and make big speeches, but the reality is that Canadians' quality of life is changed only by the government's policies, not by speeches in either chamber. It is the bills and the decisions made by ministers that will truly change Canadians' quality of life. For now, there is no sign that the government is going to offer Canadians real change.
[English]
Our plan, which the Conservatives put forward to the Canadian people during the last election, will be what we fight for in this Parliament. We will build on the success our leader Pierre Poilievre had in achieving 42% of the vote, with millions of new Canadians voting for the Conservative Party.
I know my Conservative colleagues will agree with me on this. I guarantee that every single one of us, when we were knocking on doors in the last election, met people who told us that they had never voted Conservative before, any many of them said that they had never even voted before. They saw in our leader Pierre Poilievre's vision for this country something that they had not seen for a generation from the Liberals: hope that the promise of Canada could be restored, where hard work pays off, where we can earn a powerful paycheque that affords not just the basic necessities of life, but some of the nice extras as well, and the belief that every generation that comes after will be better off than the previous because our country continues to grow and improve upon itself.
That hope has been lost over the past 10 years because of Liberal government policies. While we have more work to do, as the Conservative Party, to win the next election, I can assure members that our leader Pierre Poilievre will continue to espouse that vision of hope and that promise to Canadians that life will get better.
In the meantime, we will hold the government to rigorous account. It is our job to go through, line by line, every dollar spent, every tax dollar taken out of the pockets of Canadians and every infringement on their liberty. With regard to any decision that comes from the government, we will do our job, not for ourselves, not because we are the blue team and they are the red team, but for Canadians who have to go to work every day and shoulder that government spending, pay off that government debt and put up with the terrible outcomes of disastrous policies that have hurt our country for so long.
More and more Canadians want a government that puts Canadian workers, Canadian energy and Canadian families first. That is what the Conservative opposition will be fighting for every single day, for as long as this Parliament lasts.
I will close with this thought. It was very disappointing, not just for parliamentarians but for Canadians themselves. There are a lot of economic headwinds that are not just on the horizon but are absolutely blowing through communities all across the country. TD Bank is predicting a recession just around the corner, with thousands of jobs lost. We heard from our housing shadow minister today about a phenomenon that only the Liberal Party of Canada could possibly create, where prices are so high that new buyers cannot afford to buy houses, but they are now lower than the inflated prices that the existing owners bought them at. We have a situation where sellers cannot afford to sell, because if they drop their prices any more, they will not be able to cover the mortgage that they owe, but prices are still far too high for buyers. Buyers cannot buy, and sellers cannot sell. Only a Liberal government could achieve such monumental failure.
We have a situation where the debt required to finance what the government has campaigned on will put enormous pressure on bond markets. We do not know where that will lead, but it has never, ever led to a good place when governments start borrowing so much money that lenders start to doubt whether the government will ever be able to fully pay it off and start demanding a higher premium for that.
We think of the man with the plan, the guy we hire in a crisis, the guy who claims that he can walk into a boardroom and solve these issues, but who still has not gotten results from his visit to the United States. Other countries have gotten deals. The Prime Minister has not gotten one.
There is still no plan to get new energy projects built. Worst of all, there is no budget to show Canadians just how bad the situation is and what they might be facing in the future. That lack of a budget is probably the most concerning thing that we have had heard from the government over the last few weeks. This is the number one job. The reason why the House of Commons exists is to approve taxation and spending. That is the origin story of our parliamentary system.
It is not just a matter of disrespect; it is a matter of hiding from Canadians the true consequences of government policies. The fact that the government will not commit to tabling a budget before it goes on vacation for the summer is telling. What it is telling me is that the Liberals are really afraid to share the bad news. They are afraid of coming clean with Canadians because the numbers are so bad.
The best thing we can do with tough medicine is to take it early, and then all of us can get together to try to fix the problem. We urge the government to table the budget.
In that light, I move:
That the motion be amended by adding the following: “and we urge Your Majesty's advisors to include a firm commitment to present to Parliament an economic update or budget this spring before the House adjourns for the summer that incorporates measures aimed at unleashing Canada's economic potential including full accountability of Canada's finances.”
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the leader of the official opposition. That was a little shorter than what we are used to hearing from the Leader of the Opposition, and I appreciate that.
I do have a question that is related to how important it is coming out of the election, where we saw a very clear mandate, as Canadians throughout the country want to see parties working together, in the best interests of Canadians, to deal with the Donald Trump tariffs, trade and so forth.
We will all recall Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives, for years, going around the country saying that Canada is, in fact, broken. Would the member opposite not agree that the consensus in Canada today is that we all need to work together in order to pass the necessary legislation, to show unity and to be together in representing the interests of Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, of course, there is always a desire to have people work together, but there is working together for the sake of working together, and there is working together to achieve an end to the disastrous policies that caused the suffering in the first place. If the government is sincere, and if its actions and legislation match its rhetoric, then it can expect that we will work together to pass the ideas and the policies that it lifted from our platform, admitting that it was the government's policies that caused the problem.
The member talked about standing up to Donald Trump, and this is the part that I have a big problem with, because what the government did was say “elbows up” at the beginning of the campaign, as it was going to keep the industrial carbon tax or keep locking energy projects, and the government was going to go down and deal with Donald Trump from a position of strength. Then, secretly during the campaign, it was “elbows down”, as the government quietly lowered those retaliatory tariffs down to 0%. Then, it was “elbows back up” at the end of the campaign, in the final days, but the government did not tell Canadians what it had done. It was “elbows back down” when the Prime Minister met with Donald Trump.
The elbows were up; the elbows were down; it was like the government was doing the chicken dance over there.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, today, the third day since our return to Parliament, I am rising for the first time this session. I want to sincerely thank the voters of Saint‑Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton for giving me a third mandate. The riding's name has changed, but it still has the same borders and the same extraordinary constituents. I love them from the bottom of my heart. I will live up to the mandate they have given me once again.
This is my question for my colleague. I just want to ask him whether he thinks that Donald Trump started shaking when he read the Speech from the Throne. Someone must have summed it up for him. I am curious to know what my colleague thinks. Imagine being the White House strategist who has to sum up this Speech from the Throne and write up some notes about recommendations and suggestions. We might have expected a particularly assertive document after such a fearmongering campaign, after everything we were told during the election campaign. We were told that we needed the Liberals to save Canadian sovereignty.
I am curious. Just for fun, could my colleague tell us how he thinks the speech might have been summed up in a few lines for President Trump and how the President might have reacted?
Mr. Speaker, I think the President watched the throne speech and was probably glad that the government said it was not going to change much.
The Canadian economy will continue to be weak, thanks to the government's disastrous policies. Taxes will go up. The red tape threatening our businesses will stay in place, because there is nothing in the throne speech that addresses these issues.
[English]
I do not think there is anything in the Speech from the Throne that would have signalled to the U.S. administration that the Canadian government was going to do the things that would make our country stronger, the things that would put pressure on the U.S. administration. The thing that will put the most amount of pressure on the U.S. administration to drop tariffs is American investors asking the president to make it easier to invest in Canada. When those investors are looking, never mind at tariffs but at Canadian policies, they will wonder what the point of investing in Canada is if they are paying higher taxes and cannot get their projects built. They will not be going to Washington to lobby for easier access to the Canadian market, because the policies of the government have sent the signal to them that they will not get that return on investment here in Canada.
What will actually make Canada deal with the U.S. from a position of strength is when we lower taxes, speed up our approvals process and get big projects built again so American investors go to Washington and demand an end, from their own president, to the tariffs that are blocking them from the Canadian market. That is the recipe for success.
Mr. Speaker, maybe lost in all the noise emanating from down south during the election campaign was a real movement for change, a change back to a common-sense fiscal conservatism that we had in this country from 2006 to 2015, with two million more Canadians voting in our direction and voting for that type of change.
In 2015, we had the strongest middle class in the world and a balanced budget. One of the constants during that time, from 2006 to 2015, was a regular budget every single year in the spring. I remember that the Leader of the Opposition and I were both re-elected in 2011, he for the fourth time. The election day was May 2, 2011, and on June 6, Jim Flaherty put forward a budget. We voted on that budget on June 13.
As we moved out of not only a global economic recession but an absolute, global economic meltdown during that time, how important was that regular spring budget to keeping us on track as a country?
Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right. In 2011, the government did not miss a beat. It had the budget ready to go after the election. The budget drives departments. A federal budget sets the plan, sets the stage, for every single government department. It sends the signal to businesses, to job creators and to investors as to what they can expect the rules of the game to be for the next 12 months or so. It also sends a signal to the bond markets about how the government is going to manage its finances.
It is as if someone were to go into a bank and ask for a loan but could not show pay stubs or expense accounting. A bank would charge a higher interest rate if they were not sure where the person would get the money to pay off the loan. The same is true for governments. Governments have to go out and ask people who have money whether they can borrow that money. When the people who buy government debt and, in effect, lend money to the Government of Canada do not see a fiscal plan, they are going to charge a premium for lending that money to the government.
I believe that, without that plan, we are going to see higher interest rates, and that means more tax dollars going to pay bankers and bondholders than going into tax relief or improving services for Canadians.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your election.
I would like to ask our hon. colleague a question. With everything that is happening down south in the United States, with the tariffs and the trade war, I would like to know how he plans to work with all of our colleagues in the House and how we should work together to safeguard our country's interests together, while always keeping the national interest in mind.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my new colleague for her question. I can reply with a message of goodwill. If the government genuinely wants to bring real change for Canadians, we will work with it, and we can find common ground.
However, we have already seen that there are few signs of change. These are the same ministers that were in place under Justin Trudeau. These are the same policies and the same carbon tax on steel and aluminum producers.
We will look at the bills that are introduced. If the government really wants to change the former Trudeau government's policies, we can find solutions and give bills our support. However, if this government does the same thing as all the other Liberal governments, such as increasing taxes and red tape and violating Canadians' freedoms, it will be hard to—
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I rise today for the first time in the current Parliament with immense gratitude and humility, honoured to again represent the people of the Yukon in the chamber. I will be sharing my time with the member for Mississauga—Erin Mills.
I want to sincerely thank the citizens of the Yukon for their trust and confidence in me. I was gratified to receive the support of so many constituents, but regardless of whether and where someone placed their vote, I remain committed to representing all Yukoners and to maintaining a strong voice for the Yukon as a commitment to a stronger and united Canada that firmly embraces and includes the north.
I also want to congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, on your election to this esteemed role. I have full confidence that you will guide the members in the House to honour the Athenian spirit that you referred to, a House where we can participate in vigorous and informed debate while maintaining the highest regard for each other as elected representatives of all Canadians.
With respect to my colleagues across the House, both those who are returning and those who are newly elected, I look forward to working with each of them in the spirit of collaboration and respect. I want to give special recognition to the new members of Parliament from generation Z, whose presence in the House is both refreshing and inspiring. They bring a fresh energy that resonates deeply, not only with young Canadians but especially with young Yukoners, who hear their future reflected in those members' voices.
It is a privilege to be back in Parliament representing a territory as unique and vital as the Yukon, a place where the true north is indeed strong and free.
I listened carefully to the Speech from the Throne delivered by His Majesty King Charles. His words carried a powerful message of unity, respect and hope, a reminder of the values that bind us as a nation.
I appreciate the recognition of the land on which we gather. I would like to acknowledge, also with deep gratitude, that we are gathered on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. Let us remember, whenever we speak in this great House, on whose territory we have the privilege to reside. This acknowledgement reminds us that reconciliation is a shared responsibility that we must carry out with sincerity and resolve.
In the Yukon, reconciliation is a commitment we strive to live up to every day. True reconciliation means indigenous peoples must have a real voice and real power over the decisions that shape their lands, their communities and their futures. We will continue to uphold the principle of free, prior and informed consent, not just as policy but as a promise.
Mr. Speaker, you will note that my few minutes on this stage begin and end with the north. As Canada faces unprecedented challenges in this world, these challenges are experienced even more in the north. However, as reflected in the throne speech, this moment also provides us with incredible opportunities for renewal and for thinking big and acting bigger. So, too, do opportunities lie in the north.
We in the north are on the front lines of the climate crisis. Melting permafrost, wildfires, and ecosystem shifts are not tomorrow’s headlines; they are today’s reality in Yukon. However, we are not just experiencing these changes; we are also leading the way with solutions. From renewable energy projects to indigenous-led conservation, Yukon is showing that environmental leadership and economic growth can and must go hand in hand.
We must continue and strengthen our government’s investments in clean energy infrastructure, climate adaptation and indigenous environmental stewardship in the north. Our responsibility is clear: to protect this land for future generations while building a sustainable economy rooted in respect for nature.
Health care is another urgent priority. Too many Yukoners and Canadians across the country, especially those living in rural and remote areas, face long waits, long travel and limited access to the care they need. Canadians need and deserve prompt access to primary care. Mental health and addiction services are stretched too thin, and our prevention efforts are not yet meeting the need. In collaboration with provinces and territories, our government will continue work on these serious gaps in health care access.
A strong Yukon also depends on a just and inclusive economy, one where everyone has a chance to thrive. Economic progress means better education, housing and job opportunities for the Yukoners' youth and for families in the Yukon and across the country.
[Translation]
As highlighted in the Speech from the Throne, the French language is at the heart of the Canadian identity. That said, many people are unaware of the vitality and strength of the Yukon's francophone community. As a proud francophile, I have been privileged to live alongside and work with this dynamic community.
It is striking that the Yukon boasts the third-largest bilingual population per capita in Canada. As the MP for the Yukon, I remain deeply committed to advocating for its needs and ensuring that the community continues to thrive.
[English]
Canada indeed respects and celebrates its two official languages and also its multiple indigenous languages. The Yukon, in fact, is home to eight distinct indigenous languages, each a vital expression of culture. Today, all 14 Yukon first nations are actively engaged in efforts to restore and revitalize these languages. As our government continues its commitment to indigenous languages and reconciliation, I remain dedicated to advocating for the resources and support needed to ensure the ongoing renewal and flourishing of Yukon’s original languages.
Our government is driven by a fundamental belief: A strong economy must work for everyone. Today, too many Canadians are struggling to get ahead, and we are taking action. We are cutting taxes for the middle class, saving two-income families up to $840 a year. We are making home ownership more attainable by cutting the GST on home prices at or below $1 million for first-time homebuyers, delivering savings of up to $50,000 and reducing the GST on homes between $1 million and $1.5 million.
Nationally, we are focused on building a strong, inclusive economy that leaves no one behind. This means lowering the cost of living, making housing more affordable and unlocking opportunities in the skilled trades. We will remove interprovincial and interterritorial trade barriers, invest in nation-building infrastructure and strengthen Canada’s position on the global stage, while safeguarding our sovereignty, borders and values.
Amidst unsettling and increasing global conflicts and insecurity, all eyes are on the Arctic. Thus, I am pleased that the throne speech confirms that Canada will invest to strengthen its presence in the north as this region faces new threats.
In the Yukon, no less than anywhere else in the country, building a strong Canada means working in deep partnership with indigenous partners. That is why I am pleased to see that our government will double the indigenous loan guarantee program from $5 billion to $10 billion, enabling more indigenous communities to become owners of major projects. Together, these are not just government goals; they are our shared priorities, a blueprint for a stronger Yukon and a stronger Canada. As we move forward, I am confident that by working collaboratively within government, with indigenous partners and with communities across Canada, we can meet these challenges head-on.
This moment demands bold action and clear vision. I am proud to be part of a government that shares a commitment to building a secure, prosperous and inclusive Canada, a Canada where Yukon’s voice is heard and where all Canadians can thrive.
As His Majesty stated yesterday, Canada’s national anthem celebrates the true north strong and free. My home, and the home of the 47,000 Yukoners I represent, is the very heart of Canada’s true north. As we build a Canada that is strong, secure, safe and free, I will ensure on behalf of my constituents that the Yukon, with all its rich resources, its pristine environment and its people imbued with the spirit of innovation, community and adventure, this great territory, will be with Canada all the way.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, we witnessed an electioneering ploy that one journalist actually described as crass. It is important to note that the consumer carbon price was scrapped by the former Liberal government. During this election campaign, even though the carbon tax had been scrapped, the government sent $3.7 billion in cheques to Canadians to offset a tax that had been scrapped.
What is worse, those cheques were paid for by all Canadians, including, of course, Quebeckers. However, Quebeckers are the only ones who did not receive these rebate cheques. We are talking about nearly $800 million that came out of Quebeckers' pockets but was sent outside Quebec as a financial rebate for a tax that no longer exists.
Will the Liberal government repay the $800 million that Quebeckers unfairly paid?
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his recent election and welcome him to the House.
The carbon tax and affordability are two major challenges for our country. I cannot give a specific answer to his question, but he can ask the government for a response.
Fighting unaffordability and fighting climate change are two of our government's priorities for the months and years ahead.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the many comments by my colleague, who has been a true advocate for northern Canada and, in fact, all regions of the country in many different ways.
The question I have for him is very similar to what I asked the leader of the official opposition. Canadians were very clear. There is a very strong minority mandate, and that requires the government to work with the opposition, where it can, to try to build a consensus, which is so critically important, especially at a time when Canadians are genuinely concerned about issues such as the tariffs, trade and so forth.
I wonder if the member could give insights, from his perspective, into how he would like to see the House move forward with that sense of co-operation.
Mr. Speaker, that is a really important question. Certainly, what I heard over and over again during the recent electoral campaign was concern, anger and even fear about the threats posed by the tariffs and the instability of the current U.S. administration, which poses an ongoing threat to Canada's economic and, indeed, national sovereignty.
This is a special moment in Canada's history. I think that was noted during the historic throne speech yesterday. There is a call for members on all sides of the House to respond to Canadians' request for unity, determination and courage to protect Canada's sovereignty and economic well-being in this time of enormous challenge.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Yukon did not answer the question from my colleague from Repentigny, but it is not that complicated.
A tax was scrapped, and then a rebate cheque was sent out to offset payments that had not been made. So much for sound fiscal management. This measure is going to cost Canadian taxpayers $3.7 billion. The worst part is that Quebeckers did not get that cheque, but they are going to have to pay $800 million to reimburse Canadians who did not pay the tax.
Can someone explain to me what goes through the Liberals' minds when it comes to managing public finances?
Mr. Speaker, I will mention again that this government is committed to addressing both the affordability crisis and the climate crisis at the same time. We will tackle these priorities with strength and determination.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In accordance with Standing Order 43(2)(a), I would like to split all remaining Conservative Party of Canada slots.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share my thoughts and the thoughts of my constituents in support of the Speech from the Throne. I welcome you in that chair, and I look forward to working with all members of the House on the really important work we have to do.
When I first ran back in 2014-15 to become a candidate for the Liberal Party, and then went on to become a member of Parliament for the best riding in Canada, Mississauga—Erin Mills, the main objective I had as a 28-year-old first-generation immigrant, young racialized woman and lawyer was to make sure that every single Canadian had equality of opportunity and the ability to utilize what we build here in Parliament and as government as a foundation to make sure they succeed and that all Canadians succeed, because when one Canadian is successful, all of us are successful. I was really happy to hear the Speech from the Throne and am happy to talk about what it means to be Canadian, to talk about not only Canadian sovereignty and identity, but also the uniqueness of how we support one another and build community together.
When I first moved to Canada as a young, impressionable 12-year-old girl coming from England, I was really surprised at how respectful our Canadian communities were. My front neighbours did not look like my side neighbours or my back neighbours, yet we continue to be one of the most peaceful and respectful communities in the world, as noted by leading organizations and the United Nations as well. I always wondered why that was, and I spent a lot of time working with volunteer organizations as a kid, whether it was my local library, food banks or art galleries, trying to understand what makes Canadians who we are. How are we so peaceful? How are we able to bring our differences together and utilize them for the betterment of each and every one of us? The reality of this over the past 25-year journey has been that it is not a flip of a switch, but a consistent, constant, determinative effort among all levels of government, civil society, grassroots organizations and indeed individual Canadians to make sure that we continue to build bridges among one another.
Right now, Canada stands at a precipice. We are standing in a very insecure time. That is not because of who we are. A lot of it has to do with external factors. What the King's speech really highlighted for me is what the action plan is going to look like going forward to make sure that we maintain our sovereignty and decrease instability and make sure not only that each and every Canadian has equality of opportunity to do everything and succeed in everything they want to succeed in, but also that those who are less fortunate and need that extra foundation also have that support.
In my 10 years in Parliament, I have served as a member of the justice committee and the chair of the justice committee. I have served on the access to information, privacy and ethics committee and the public accounts committee. I have served on the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, as a former chair of the all-party women's caucus, as the vice-chair for the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and most recently as the parliamentary secretary for national revenue. I have a solid understanding of what it takes for Parliament to come together and find the concrete solutions that each and every single member here in our chamber has heard about from our constituents.
I can talk about the dire need for housing and affordability to make sure that equality of opportunity exists for a single mom who is having a difficult time putting food on the table because she is a single earner. As to precarious housing, there are those who really need housing and cannot afford it. There are young people who need jobs in order to get a leg up within our communities and grow our economy.
We must make sure that Canada represents itself in a strong way on the international front as well, not only in how we deal with our neighbours to the south, but also in how we deal with significant challenges across the world, whether they are about Gaza, Ukraine, China, Russia, Sudan or Yemen. Ultimately, Canada needs to stand by the rule of law internationally and make sure that we are doing right by our partners and allies. That comes from having a consistent, solid and significant approach to how we do business here in this House.
My colleague from Winnipeg North mentioned that we have a strong minority, but I disagree with that, because I do not think we have a strong minority. If each and every one of us in this Parliament puts aside partisan differences, comes together to build a strong, united Canada and talks about the interests of each and every one of our constituents first and foremost, then we are not a minority. We are the representatives of who we are as Canadians, what our identity is and where we need to go to protect Canada's sovereignty, to protect Canada strong and free.
It is going to be a very interesting Parliament, I am sure. It is going to be a challenge to bring everyone together. I think this Speech from the Throne sets out key priorities to help us find common ground so we can put aside our partisan differences and actually talk about and find concrete solutions for the people who elected us and put us here in this chamber. I am willing to do that work, and I hope that all of my colleagues across all aisles here are willing to do that work also.
In conclusion, the priorities that have been outlined in the Speech from the Throne represent the voices I heard in my constituency when I knocked on doors. They represent the conversations I had with my local mayor in Mississauga. They represent the conversations I had with our provincial parliamentarians in Ontario. They represent each and every person whose ideologies and fears were validated and heard through the Speech from the Throne.
Going forward over this term, this is an excellent plan for making sure that each and every Canadian has the equality of opportunity to thrive and has the foundation needed to succeed, grow a family and be able to live a happy, united and strong Canadian life.
I look forward to the questions that my colleagues have for me.
Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated the member's comments and suggestions on the throne speech and working together.
I have a very simple question. A lot of people in Canada are trying to figure out who this Liberal Party is. With this throne speech, it really is confusing, because there are things that were talked about during the campaign that are so different from what was talked about in the previous Liberal government. Of course, a lot things that were talked about in the campaign were actually things that we brought forward, so the question I have for the member is this: Which Conservative policy does she think is the best policy the Liberals took away from the Conservative Party?
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his re-election.
The people of Canada spoke, and they elected a Liberal government. They also rejected Pierre Poilievre and his Conservative policies.
When I talk about making sure that we work together collaboratively, I am talking on behalf of what I heard from constituents in my riding, who are saying, “Hey folks, we want you to get your stuff together. We want you to work together. We want you to represent all Canadian voices and one Canadian identity and make sure that you get things done in this Parliament.” I challenge the member: Can we do it or not?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech given by my colleague, whom I hold in high regard.
She talked about the precarious situation facing Canada and the external threats coming from the United States. I find it quite amusing to see the Liberal Party discovering the benefits of sovereignty. It is really quite interesting.
I have a very simple question for my colleague. There is a francophone nation in North America surrounded by anglophones, and its future is constantly under threat. I wonder if she is aware of the challenges facing Quebec today and whether that might make her a little more sympathetic to Quebec's quest for national independence.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his remarks. It gives me an opportunity to practise my French.
[English]
Quebec identity and francophone identity are part of Canadian identity, and we are going to continue to make sure that every single Canadian is well represented. I have francophones in my riding, just as New Brunswick does, just as the Atlantic provinces do, just as Alberta does and just as the rest of Canada does. French and the francophonie are very much part of Canadian identity, and I want to make sure that we are collective here in Canada as we deal with our external threats.
Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the member's comments in regard to one Canada. It is estimated that we could save somewhere in the neighbourhood of $200 billion if in fact we were successful at continuing to work with indigenous leaders, but in particular our provinces and territories, to look at ways in which we can take down those internal barriers. We have actually made the commitment that by July 1 those federal barriers are going to be taken down.
I am wondering if the member can just amplify or provide her perspective on the importance of promoting and encouraging that one Canadian economy.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Winnipeg North, who, I believe, still holds the record for the most words spoken in this chamber.
It is about one Canadian identity. It is about one Canadian economy. When we talk about removing barriers, we are also talking about indirectly impacting other issues that arise from these barriers. It is not just about the economy; it is about labour and it is about movement of people and how we can provide services. For example, a lawyer in Ontario should be able to practise all across the country. A business that is functioning out of Saskatchewan should be able to provide business all over the country. It is not only about leveraging our resources for the better; it is about uniting Canadians, connecting Canadians and building a stronger Canada for everybody.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, when we left the House in December 2024, a number of people were printing out resumés.
In January 2025, a crisis escalated with the United States on three fronts. It was a tariff crisis, which seemed likely but obviously temporary, since tariffs are an intimidation tactic, or a response to an intimidation tactic in the case of retaliatory tariffs. It was a trade crisis in anticipation of a new trade agreement, a free trade agreement that will be less free but will still be a trade agreement. It was also a crisis of fabrications, which we can now say was a joke from the start without being accused of not taking things seriously. It will never be anything more than a joke that was picked up and exploited to sow uncertainty for the benefit of the Liberal election campaign.
All the stops were pulled out during what I call the three big red weekends. I am referring to the Liberal leadership debate, the selection of the Liberal Party leader the following weekend, and the appointment of the Liberal ministers the weekend after that, followed by the election call. The next day, in the midst of a crisis, the Prime Minister himself told Radio-Canada, “No crisis, no Mark Carney”. I know I am not allowed to name him, but since it is a quote, I do not really have a choice.
Yesterday, we laughed so hard it would have made Rock et Belles Oreilles look like undertakers. There was not a word in the throne speech about the tariff crisis, not a word about the trade crisis. Furthermore, some posh foreign sovereign came over making claims about Canadian sovereignty when he is actually the king of another people. What happened to the crisis? There was a crisis going on. The widespread panic it caused was carefully stoked. It served a purpose, but then where did the crisis go?
Was it resolved, as we were led to believe, by he who was already Prime Minister and who is now confirmed in the role? The whole reason he was seeking a mandate is absent from his own throne speech. What we find instead is an unprecedented degree of centralization, both in reality and in intent.
In reality, when it comes to health care, the government is still trying to interfere in pharmacare and dental care, a jurisdiction that belongs to Quebec and the provinces. It seems that, in the thought process of a great economist, efficiency is achieved when a task is assigned to people who know nothing about it, which makes it take longer and cost more. The same reasoning applies to child care. Obviously, there is no increase in health transfers, because a province that is being strangled financially is a province that can be brought low and subjugated.
The government is centralizing environmental issues because it wants to create a giant steamroller that will run a pipeline through Quebec based on Canadian environmental standards. It is ignoring the fact that Quebec has the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement, or BAPE, which was created under a provincial law. A law cannot be circumvented. No one can decide to circumvent a law to please a friend.
There is also this idea about one economy, one Canadian economy, naturally. Every Canadian province has its own economic tools that work differently, have different effects and generate different amounts of money from different economic bases. The idea of one economy was unanimously rejected by all elected members of the Quebec National Assembly. Either the government has decided that it could not care less about what elected officials said, or it did not hear those elected officials say no.
Earlier today, during question period, I heard questions that seemingly came from western Canada. I am not sure that they really agree either. I am not convinced that people in the west believe that there should only be one Canadian economy and that they should submit to it.
The same centralizing approach to Canadian multiculturalism is not particularly popular with Quebeckers. Why? It is simply because it denies the distinctiveness of Quebec's language and values, as well as the immigration issues that are unique to Quebec. Our integration challenges are not the same. Obviously, this is true in terms of language, but it is becoming clearer every day that it is also true in terms of values.
The great virtue of the Speech from the Throne is that it is unapologetic. We are told right from the start that, no matter what we say or do, this is the vision that will apply. That stems from ignorance—in the sense of a lack of knowledge, not an unwillingness to learn—about how the parliamentary system works, about the constraints of a legislative process that must ultimately yield power to elected officials and parliamentarians.
That is why I used the following image earlier: It is as though Canada were a bank with branches in Quebec City, Toronto, Edmonton and so on. It is as though Canada were a central bank with branches that take their orders from the head banker. I do not mean any offence by that, but this way of looking at things is upsetting to Quebeckers and Quebec MNAs.
The federal government will say that it is the one with the money. Thanks to the good old fiscal imbalance, the federal government gets more money than it needs to fulfill its responsibilities, and the provinces get less than they need to fulfill theirs, not to mention the fact that the provinces are afraid to raise taxes. The federal government will say that it has the money to force the provinces to surrender their areas of jurisdiction so that everything can be centralized under the federal government, which thinks it knows better than everyone else.
On another note, climate change is real for the 22 Bloc Québécois members of Parliament. Yes, there is such a thing as climate change, which is destroying the environment at a highly accelerated rate, destroying lives and—we will repeat it time and again—costing every family thousands of dollars a year in insurance costs, higher grocery bills, and taxes to repair the damage. Trying to fight climate change costs much more than we could have ever imagined.
It seems logical to assume that the Prime Minister also believed in climate change when he was running Brookfield, because it was a green investment fund on paper. We eventually discovered that the green investment fund was actually a black investment fund, because it invests in oil and gas. There must be an explanation that we do not yet know and that we will find out as soon as we find out about the Prime Minister's personal assets. Did he think that way when he was running Brookfield, or was it a way to attract investors?
Again, the Speech from the Throne does not have a lot to say about the climate and the environment. Our party tends to talk about it a lot. What is more, Repentigny just sent us the Wayne Gretzky of the environment. He is certainly going to stickhandle this issue and force some people in this Parliament to see whether they still have an environmental conscience, especially the former environment and climate change minister.
We have an oil and gas government that was elected on an oil and gas agenda because it told people that now was not the time to talk about the environment, the French language, immigration, values, seniors or anything else. It said that there was no time to talk about anything because we were in a crisis. The crisis seems to be over, judging from the Speech from the Throne. Now we will surely be able to talk about those things.
In any case, our party is going to talk about them, because a model that strikes a balance between the economy and the environment has more wealth-generating potential in the long run than a model that costs more to repair than it makes in profits. Even the profits that are generated are concentrated in the hands of a few individuals and spent on fancy yachts sailing the Mediterranean. This does nothing for taxpayers who constantly pay more for less.
Still, we must find a way to co-operate. Canadians and Quebeckers wanted a Prime Minister with a background in banking to negotiate with the United States.
As the process begins, questions have emerged. A tax that was not paid has cost $4 billion to reimburse. That is a new one. How a sum that was not paid out can be reimbursed is hard for me to fathom, yet it put $4 billion in the pockets of Canadians. As I see it, Canada excluded Quebec. Quebeckers did not receive a cent because they have their own carbon pricing system. The rebate had nothing to do with the carbon tax, however. The ruse was not particularly honest.
I would therefore remind Parliament that Canada owes the people of Quebec $800 million. That is a fact. Until it is paid, we will continue to speak out. The government had the nerve to tell Quebeckers that they made up that figure, that it had been proven to be false, and the government handed out cheques to buy votes, but not to them, because they are just Quebeckers.
Then there are the $6 billion in tax cuts. A bill will be introduced to that effect, but it is useless. The Minister of Finance said there would be an economic update in the fall and a budget next spring. The Prime Minister said there would be a budget this fall instead. Since the tax cuts cannot take effect until January 1, 2026, the fall budget will include the tax cuts. That makes the bill unnecessary, unless the government is trying to create more smoke and mirrors, a bit like it did with the King and annexation, for example.
The $20 billion in revenue from retaliatory tariffs is also being dropped. No one knows much about the details. The $20-billion ballpark figure is fairly well known. That means another $30 billion will be added to Canada's deficit this year. That is quite significant. Justin Trudeau must be kicking himself for holding back; he could have done a lot worse. There is no economic update or budget, and yet we are supposed to go on believing that we have not been taken for a ride.
Recognition of Quebec's distinct character is another issue. I would remind the House that we spent the election campaign talking about eight sectors which, although not exclusive to the Quebec economy, are specific to it. These are aluminum, critical minerals, supply management, aerospace, forestry, clean energy and culture. Quebec's culture is very different, and it is not being swallowed up by another culture. In any case, we are better at resisting, and the other is not the same other. There are also the fisheries.
We discussed a range of solutions. It is unbelievable. The word “solutions” is not mentioned in the Speech from the Throne, except in very broad and vague principles. There is the wage subsidy, which is loosely based on the COVID‑19 model, research and technology transfers for businesses to make them more competitive, and market diversification. I went to Europe and talked about market diversification with representatives of European countries. There is purchasing power, especially for retirees, productivity, reserving of public contracts, which could have been done many years ago, support for small and medium-sized businesses, the military sector, public contracts and maintaining purchasing power. I cannot believe that I know more about economics than the new high priest does. I am an anthropologist.
However, we presented a number of solutions. I was very involved in creating these solutions so that they could be discussed and debated. There is no mention of this, aside from the words “supply management”. We will come back to that. The principle of supply management was never at stake, but parts of it were eliminated. It is like telling someone that they are not going to take their house away, but that they are taking their garage, and tomorrow they will come and take their bedroom, and then the kitchen. It will still be their house, but all they will have left is the foundation and basement. That is more or less what is happening.
That is what needs to be protected in full, but I think we need a test to prove that we can work this out together. That is why I asked earlier about what happened to the crisis.
Nevertheless, we listened to Quebeckers, and we promised to try very hard to collaborate, to find a way forward and as much common ground as possible. We promised to start from how Canada sees itself and how Quebec sees itself, but we do not have a monopoly on how Quebec sees itself. We are going to argue over which group is bigger, but the Quebec National Assembly has made it very clear that its members are all Quebeckers. It is the only assembly that speaks only for Quebec. That matters, and we need to listen to them.
There are differences because other people will come at things from Canada's perspective and we will come at things from Quebec's perspective. There will always be issues around language, values, the immigration model, small and medium-sized businesses, and the environment. We will do everything we can to get along, because Quebeckers will be watching and we will speak on their behalf.
We will agree or we will use what Quebeckers gave us, for now, namely the balance of power in the committees. Here, given the makeup of Parliament, we have a certain weight. In every committee chaired by the Liberals, if the Liberals do not agree with the Conservatives, the Bloc Québécois will have the votes that make the difference. Generally speaking, if they agree, that is not good news for Quebec. We will have to negotiate.
I want to repeat in good faith that we are prepared to negotiate and find common ground. Either we will agree before being compelled to use the balance of power, or we will agree afterward, because things might get heated in committee.
As a test of good faith, I propose an amendment to the Conservative amendment to the Speech from the Throne:
That the amendment be amended by adding the following:
“, with respect for the areas of jurisdiction and the institutions of Quebec and the provinces”
[English]
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, the temporary foreign worker program is essential for the regions and incredibly important for the Beauce region.
The Liberals were short on details in the throne speech. A number of cuts have already been made to the program in the past.
What is the Bloc's position on the temporary foreign worker program?
Mr. Speaker, the whole issue of temporary immigration is quite complex. In my mind, the intention is always virtuous, or could be. However, it can sometimes be exploited for very questionable purposes.
In the case of asylum seekers, for example, it is a humanitarian issue. We have a responsibility there. However, Quebec is overburdened for the time being. When it comes to foreign students, it is essential for them and often for their countries, but it is also essential for Quebec's university network, for example. In the case of temporary foreign workers, temporary immigration is essential for several economic sectors, particularly in the regions.
Now, there is no denying that there are problems with each of these three types of temporary immigration. I mentioned the intake of asylum seekers, even though I think that we have a duty in this regard. Every province should take a number proportional to its population. When it comes to foreign students, claiming refugee protection has become a way of getting around the rules, so we need to find a solution to that problem. There are also issues in the case of temporary foreign workers. There are temporary foreign workers who end up being not so temporary, whose permits are renewed again and again and who end up settling here, which creates problems with integration and breaks down the social fabric. I am not blaming anyone for that because we are responsible for our own system. The responsibility does not lie with those who want to benefit from it. I do not in any way want us to give up something that is good for them and that is presumably good for Canada and definitely good for Quebec. Even if the end goal is laudable, before we make any dogmatic or electioneering statements about cuts in that regard, we need to have discussions about how to go about that without hurting these people, their savings—to a certain extent—and the economic needs of Quebec and Canadian businesses.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent the people of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. I listened carefully to my colleague's speech. I would like to know how he and his team intend to work with the government on the common interests of Quebec and Canada, which are both strong and free, on the more specific issues of tariffs and the trade war with our neighbours to the south.
Mr. Speaker, although the member claims to have been listening carefully, I get the impression that she was not paying attention. I already miss the former member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles.
The answer can basically be found in the last sentence. It refers to the Canadian government doing what it wants to do while respecting Quebec's jurisdictions and institutions. We will not have much of an issue with that. I realize that that nullifies 80% of the throne speech. If it is done in accordance with their Constitution—mine would have only the word “Quebec” written on it—if it is done while respecting Quebec's jurisdictions and institutions, such as the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement, the BAPE, for example, we will not have any issues. We can settle this through serious conversations amongst people who listen to one another.
Mr. Speaker, this is the first time that I have asked my leader a question, but since we did not confer together earlier, I do not expect any kudos for the quality of my question or my hard work.
In fact, what I have to say is quite simple. We heard this question and we know that Ottawa has a long history of using crises to further centralize power. We have also heard multiple times about different Trojan horses, like not having 13 economies but only one, even though Quebec has been trying since the 1960s to build an economy, a separate model for its institutions, its own approach to the community sector, its own approach to the social sector, and its own approach to SMEs.
What is my colleague's response to hearing the Prime Minister, time and again, speak of nothing but unity when he was asked this question today? Although the Quebec National Assembly unanimously passed a motion expressing its concerns, they seem to have no effect on him at all.
Mr. Speaker, I will take the part of the question that speaks to me the most.
Quebec's economy is vastly different from the Canadian economy. Just over 60 years ago, we were French Canadians on English Canada's payroll. A bit more than 60 years have gone by since René Lévesque's defining act, the nationalization of electricity. This was the first powerful economic tool belonging to Quebeckers, and it became an ecological model. Today, thanks to geography—we are not inherently more virtuous—in Quebec we are able to reconcile economic development with clean energy.
Canada is stuck on the environmental lie that the future of Canada is an east-west oil economy. Not a single serious economist thinks that. Trade in North America is done between the north and the south and there are attempts to export to other places. An SME economy based on regional resources that are processed as much as possible is inherently different. I really made a point of saying all that during the campaign. Now, instead of having five weeks with relatively little space, I have four years with a larger space, which I will fully occupy.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, my constituents expressed deep concern about the rising crime in our community.
Did the Bloc Québécois see anything in the throne speech that would address this serious issue facing our country and our communities?
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure we will always agree with the Conservatives on how to go about this.
We still believe that someone should be removed from society for preventive purposes when necessary. Preventive action is a must, but there seems to be a certain amount of negligence with regard to crime and the root causes of crime. Our weak response to crime is concerning.
I am approaching this issue from the perspective of young families. I am thinking of people who have children and fear that their children, once they start school, will be bullied or become bullies. It is worse in high school. There is a fear of bullying, violence, and a culture of violence that takes up far too much space. That is where we need to start taking action. When it is clear that something different needs to happen with certain individuals, strong measures need to be taken. We need to ensure that one fundamental right of citizens acting in good faith is fully respected, and that is the right to feel safe and to actually be safe in our streets and in our schools.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I do believe that the leader of the Bloc party was factually incorrect. He makes statements regarding the problems of Quebec and Quebec's interests not being reflected inside the throne speech, when in fact issues like supply management are in the throne speech. Issues like Radio-Canada and CBC are inside the throne speech.
I am wondering if he would want to retract that particular comment.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, people do not change. I did not miss that.
Simply writing a word down does not make it a policy. Imagine someone trying to read a book. There would be a lot of policies in there. The throne speech includes the words “protect supply management”. I spent a lot of time explaining how that is clearly incomplete. The word “Radio‑Canada” alone does not constitute a policy. We cannot simply level criticisms at the government. However, I would appeal to those who are in a better position to make decisions. Not everything we say should be seen as a criticism, but the fact that the government has included a word in a document does not mean that it has made a fundamental commitment to the future of the nation. That is not how it works.
Committees of the Whole
In anticipation of the adoption of this motion, the leaders of the recognized parties consulted with me following my election. I am now prepared to propose for the ratification of the House a candidate for the position of Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole.
Pursuant to Standing Order 7, I propose Mr. Kmiec for the position of Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole. The motion is deemed moved and seconded.
It is the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
(Motion agreed to)
[English]
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply
The House resumed consideration of the motion for an address to His Majesty the King in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, of the amendment and of the amendment to the amendment.
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and address the first throne speech of a new government here in Canada. I think Canadians spoke, and they spoke well, in identifying the leader best suited to deal with the situation Canada is in today.
Before I get started, I want to provide a comment on the leader of the Bloc's thoughts. In his speech, he made reference to the fact that the throne speech did not incorporate the interests of Quebec. I found that unfortunate. I asked him a question specifically on it, and I just used two items. One was on supply management, because I know supply management means a great deal to the province of Quebec, as it does to my home province of Manitoba. Equally, CBC/Radio-Canada is an important institution. This is a government that, through the throne speech, reinforces those two policy issues.
His response to my question was that it is only writing. Writing does matter. The throne speech does matter, even though I understand that the Bloc was not interested in participating in a very significant way when the throne speech came out. I find it unfortunate. However, for the people of Quebec and the people of all of Canada, there is a great deal within the throne speech that talks about building a stronger, healthier Canada. That is what it is about.
My colleagues and I, for weeks, knocked on doors. Some of my colleagues have been knocking on doors for the last year or a year and a half, getting a true understanding of what the Canadian expectations are. Prior to the election being called, I did not know the Prime Minister. I think I met him maybe five times, at most, prior to the last election. At the end of the day, I believe Canadians got to know the Prime Minister, as I also got a better sense of the Prime Minister during the election, and they did a comparison. They looked at Pierre Poilievre and they looked at other leadership candidates, and what they saw in the Prime Minister was an individual they could actually trust and have confidence in to ensure that Canadian interests would be served first and foremost.
Whether it was Stephen Harper when he appointed the Prime Minister as the Governor of the Bank of Canada, or whether it was in England, where he was appointed to the Bank of England during a very difficult time, Canadians understood that we needed a leader who genuinely understood how to make an economy better, healthier and able to grow. Contrast that to the career politician. I am not one to criticize career politicians, as I am somewhat one myself, but Canadians did look, and I believe they made the right decision.
What we see in today's throne speech is a true reflection of what Canadians have been telling us for a long time now, over the last number of weeks. We have heard it very clearly.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, my friends across the way want to talk about the carbon tax. Yes, the Prime Minister got rid of the carbon tax. Much like when Erin O'Toole—
Excuse me, but I must interrupt. I know the member for Winnipeg North has really thick skin when it comes to this kind of thing, but this is distracting from my ability to follow the debate.
I will go back to the member for Winnipeg North.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have the right person leading at the right time, the Prime Minister we elected on April 28. When we look at the throne speech, we will see a reflection of what Canadians want to see in government.
I think of the presentation of the throne speech, and I reflect on what I heard at doors. Canadians are genuinely concerned. There is even a bit of a fear factor, and it does stem from President Trump and his comments. Trump, tariffs and trade are the three Ts, as I often refer to them.
We want to build a Canadian economy that is the strongest in the G7. I believe that we have the leadership that is going to make that happen. I believe that when we read through the throne speech, we will see we need to be patient and wait for the budget. We can look at how long it took Stephen Harper to present his budget. We need to give the Prime Minister and cabinet the opportunity to make the changes necessary in order to deal with the crisis we find ourselves in.
The budget will come in time. In the interim, we look for a sense of co-operation on the number one issue that was being brought up at doors. Members on all sides of the House recognize, I am sure, because we all knocked on doors, that people were genuinely concerned about U.S. tariffs, trade and the place that Canada was in. At the end of the day, there are initiatives that we can take that will in fact make a difference.
When the Prime Minister met with me and some members of Canada's Filipino heritage community, we talked a bit about trade. We talked about, in particular, the Philippines. In December, I was in the Philippines, where we talked about the importance of trade between Canada and the Philippines.
At the time, Mary Ng, who was the minister, indicated, working with the Philippine government, that we were interested in having some sort of formal discussions in regard to establishing some form of a trade agreement. I bring that up because, as a government, we do have a responsibility to look beyond the United States' borders and look at how we can enhance international trade.
Canada is unique in the world. We have more trade agreements than any other country on earth, with all continents. We have a golden opportunity when we look at the makeup of our country. We should be embracing our diversity and using that diversity to further advance the economic interests of Canada worldwide. The United States will always be our primary trading partner; it is just south of us, so obviously that is going to be the case. Hundreds of millions of dollars cross the border both ways every day. There is no denying the importance of the United States and getting a trade agreement where both sides can come to an agreement.
However, let us be very clear with the current administration, as our Prime Minister has been. Canada is not for sale. Canada is a unique nation in modern times that has so much to offer the world in many different ways. We see that every day by the correspondence and the world events we witness.
Canadian values are in high demand throughout the world. We are very different. I could talk about our health care system. I could talk about how we value diversity, as opposed to what takes place in the United States. The bottom line is that we have an incredible group of individuals who will work with the United States, and we will get the best deal we can for Canadians.
I referred earlier to some very difficult issues that come up when sitting at the trade table, such as supply management. The province of Quebec, the province of Manitoba and other provinces have a vested interest in supply management. I bring that up because the Prime Minister is not ignoring the provinces, territories or indigenous communities. The Prime Minister has been in consultation and working with provinces and other stakeholders since he won the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada earlier this year. We understand the true value of working with provinces. We might not necessarily be able to get unanimous support on all issues, but we at least need to try, because the dividends are very real.
Fortunately for Canadians, we have provinces, territories and indigenous communities that recognize how important it is to have one economy working in Canada. We see the value in that. It has been estimated that, if we were to be successful and all provinces got on board, and it looks as though they will, in wanting to develop that economy, we would be talking somewhere in the neighbourhood of $200 billion. That is an incredible amount of money to be found from within. I would argue that it is worth the fight.
At the end of the day, we should be working with provinces. I am very impressed by my province's premier, Wab Kinew. He has gone out of his way to ensure, in many ways, that Canadian interests are being put ahead of local interests yet protecting local interests, too. I like to see myself as Canadian first. I love Winnipeg, and I then go to the province. Those are my personal priorities, but I can say that I will fight to protect the aerospace industry in the province of Manitoba, an aerospace industry that I know is just as important in the province of Quebec. Many provinces have issues in common that we want to ensure get to those export markets.
What does trade really mean? I always like to talk about Manitoba's pork industry, because it is a great example. In Manitoba, we can go to Brandon, Neepawa or the city of Winnipeg, and we will find factories that employ thousands of Manitobans. They are processing millions of pigs every year for export markets around the world, in particular Asia and the United States.
If we were to visit the plant in Brandon, we would find a gigantic parking lot for all the people who work there. Those workers buy cars, have homes, buy furniture and go to the Tim Hortons. The direct jobs in Manitoba alone, in the factories, are estimated to be just over 10,000. That is not to mention the indirect jobs that are created. That is why tariffs matter. Manitobans understand that. If we were to put a tariff on our product going into the United States, it would mean that it would be more expensive and could cut back on the number of sales.
That is why the Prime Minister said we will focus on protecting our industries. I suggest that there are a number of industries that need to be protected. We can protect them in different ways. If we collect a tariff and put the tariff on the industries that are in danger, we can provide an incentive for them to look for other exporting markets, as an example. All provinces have some form of industry that generates jobs and opportunities and improves the lifestyles of the citizens living in that province.
However, someone needs to lead that, and I believe our Prime Minister, with the background he brings to the table, is second to no other. He has demonstrated his willingness to work with all the different stakeholders, in particular our provinces, territories and indigenous communities. That will make a difference.
I love that we had the King of Canada present the throne speech, because for me it does two things. One is that it shows that Canada is a sovereign nation. It was very symbolic. There are a number of people who are not necessarily big monarchy fans, but they saw and understood why it was important to have the King of Canada come to Canada and present the throne speech. I thought it was a wonderful thing to see the King of Canada do that. The other thing is the content itself. The throne speech provides focus for the House of Commons.
Let there be absolutely no doubt about the degree to which this government is focused on the issue of trade. In fact, we can look at the mandate letters that were sent out to our ministers. I had the opportunity to do that, as I am sure most members did. If I may, I just want to highlight some of the priorities.
First and foremost is “Establishing a new economic and security relationship with the United States and strengthening our collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world.” We will work with the United States in whatever way we can to enhance and ensure that we are protecting Canadian interests.
The second is “Building one Canadian economy by removing barriers to interprovincial trade and identifying and expediting nation-building projects that will connect and transform our country.” Through the issue that we have witnessed since January in particular, there is an opportunity. That opportunity is real and tangible. It is one economy in Canada. Hopefully, we will see what Manitoba and Ontario just recently did. There are other provinces looking to do likewise. The more we can do that, the better it is for all of us.
The other point I want to emphasize is “Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe by strengthening the Canadian Armed Forces, securing our borders, and reinforcing law enforcement.” Maybe it is because I had the opportunity to serve in the Canadian Forces, but I am glad to hear what this Prime Minister and this new government want to do: invest more in the Canadian Forces. I believe there is an obligation there. We have heard it from not only Donald Trump but many others, and Canada is not alone. There are other countries that also need to step up. However, for the first time in the last 30 years, we have a Prime Minister who is committed to doing just that, and that is something that I ultimately believe is in all of our best interests.
I love the seventh point: “Spending less on government operations so that Canadians can invest more in the people and businesses that will build the strongest economy in the G7.” Let there be no doubt that Canada, with its people and resources, is well positioned to have the healthiest and strongest economy in the G7, but it is going to take an effort that goes beyond even the Liberal Party. We need the support of opposition members, because while there is a very clear and very strong minority government mandate, it is important for us to recognize that opposition parties have a responsibility to look at ideas and thoughts and maybe even propose some ideas and thoughts. We have been known to adopt one or two of them.
I think that we have demonstrated through the Prime Minister that no one owns a good idea. Let us bring it forward. Let us demonstrate that it is in Canadians' best interest. We are looking for that type of support. I have been asked at a local restaurant how long a minority government lasts. I say that it has a lot more to do with the opposition than it does with the government.
The throne speech also talks about some things I am very passionate about: child care, pharmacare and dental care. It also talks about immigration. Immigration is my bread and butter. I love to talk about immigration.
There are so many things within the throne speech. I would hope that every member of the House of Commons makes a strong statement by getting behind this throne speech and that all of us vote yes, because it is the right thing to do.
Mr. Speaker, throughout the election the Liberals took many of our good ideas, and I am excited to see that. I am excited to see the GST coming off for new homebuyers. I am just wondering when they are going to announce all the pipeline projects to make us an energy superpower.
Mr. Speaker, there is the removal of the GST for first-time homebuyers, and I would like to make reference to “Build Canada Homes”, from the throne speech. I am very inspired by that aspect of the throne speech, because we are talking about Canadian technology, Canadian workers and Canadian labour, and we will be providing affordable homes. All this stuff is going to begin to be rolled out. We will see more details of it in the coming weeks and months.
Housing is a very important priority for the government. The Prime Minister has made that very clear, and as a caucus, we are all looking forward to delivering the many positive things within the throne speech that Canadians would benefit from.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your appointment. I look forward to working with you.
I am also pleased to see the member for Winnipeg North being his usual animated self. Even though we rarely agree, I look forward to working with him as well.
Earlier, in his remarks, he emphasized the phrase that the Prime Minister has repeated many times: “Canada is not for sale”. From the perspective of a Quebecker, I feel like telling him that by the same token, Quebec will not be a bargaining chip. Let me quickly explain what I mean by that.
Quebec's forestry industry has been paying tariffs since 2017. These tariffs are unfair. Currently, $2 billion from Quebec's forestry industry is sitting in the United States' coffers, yet the Liberal government has never lifted a finger to change that. Earlier, when my leader was talking about the throne speech, he said that Quebec was nowhere to be found. That is the kind of situation we are referring to.
During the election campaign, when the issue of the auto industry came up, the Prime Minister was quick to put his campaign on hold to defend Ontario's auto industry.
I have a very simple question for the member for Winnipeg North: Has he ever seen anyone in the Liberal government stand up for the forestry industry?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, the short answer is yes. Whether it is the forest industry in the province of Quebec, the province of B.C. or, to a much smaller degree, the province of Manitoba, these are industries that are important. I just finished talking about using Canadian lumber or pulp. There are many different aspects of industries throughout Canada that we need to recognize.
The province of Quebec would be no more used as a pawn than the province of Manitoba or any other province would be. We are there. In Manitoba and Quebec, our aerospace industries are important. Supply management is important. In B.C. and Quebec, for the forestry industry, we are building support so that we can have an economy that works for all Canadians, and I think that is the expectation that Canadians have in every region. They want the partisanship to be put to the side and for us to focus on bringing down barriers so life can become a bit more affordable and we can all feel a bit better in regard to our future and hopefully achieving that goal of being the strongest of the G7 countries.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate you once again on being elected to the chair. I have full confidence in your abilities.
I listened with great interest and enthusiasm to the speech by my colleague from Winnipeg North. He did not have enough time to finish his thought about immigration in the Speech from the Throne. I would like to give him the opportunity to share his thoughts on the issue of immigration with the House.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I wish I had leave for enough time to talk about this issue. Suffice to say that in thinking of immigration, there are opportunities for us to look for ways to improve the system. A number of years ago, international students were students who came to Canada and would then leave. Realistically, now we have universities and provinces that have all sorts of recruitment drives that drive up the number of international students.
I have always argued that we have to look for ways to make it possible for international students and international workers to have an opportunity to become residents of Canada. I think the immigration standing committee will have a wonderful opportunity to really make a difference. We have to make sure that we get balance in the system. Right now I believe it is a little out of balance as a direct result of maybe not enough coordination between post-secondary institutions, provincial governments and Ottawa.
We are ultimately responsible. That is why I am glad that the Prime Minister has made this initiative an important one.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, as a region that borders Maine, Beauce's economy is closely linked to the United States. Many businesses in my riding say more than 80% of their business comes from the United States. The U.S. tariffs on steel are hitting us hard.
What help is the Liberal government offering to affected businesses in Beauce and Canada?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, it is best to take this from an overall industry perspective. I understand and appreciate concerns about steel, much like forestry. They are two industries that come up far too often in regard to what I would argue are unfair trade practices. We can talk about the forest barons down south and what their intentions are. We always prevail but at a great cost.
At the end of the day, when we are talking about these renegotiated trade agreements, we need to see if we can somehow enhance protections that are not there right now. That is why I say we have opportunities. I do not like a lot of the things that President Trump has talked about, obviously, but there could be an opportunity created that would not only protect some of our industries, but ultimately see further growth. I am genuinely concerned, for example, about the auto pact industry, as well as many other industries in Canada.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to go back to the throne speech, which mentions the issue of climate change and how it is causing global disruption.
The government's proposed solution is to streamline environmental assessments and fast track projects. It talks about so-called “conventional” projects and becoming a superpower in so-called “conventional” energy. Everyone knows by now that that means oil and gas. Canada is already the world's fourth-largest oil producer and the world's fourth- or fifth-largest gas producer.
My question is very simple. At what point will the current government see itself as a global superpower? Does Canada want to become the biggest oil and gas producer in the universe before it takes the fight against climate change seriously? When will it finally get the country's dirtiest industry under control and realize that it needs to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, as Quebec has done and continues to do, even though Quebec is paying for the climate change impacts caused by the country's main source of pollution, namely oil and oil sands production?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, in short, yes, the Prime Minister has talked about being an energy superpower. What the member did not say is that it would be clean and conventional energy, “clean” meaning it would be environmentally enhancing.
That is a very important aspect that is included in the throne speech itself.
Mr. Speaker, it is great to hear the member for Winnipeg North again. I have not been able to hear him for a solid five and a half months. It is great to hear his voice again in the House.
My question for him is quite simple. Over the last number of years, both he and I have been in this House and we have seen the government bring in countless numbers of free trade agreements. In fact, there have been more free trade agreements than all governments combined prior to ours. How important are those free trade agreements now, given the fact that we are under economic threat from our neighbours to the south?
Mr. Speaker, in less than five minutes, I can guarantee.
At the end of the day, I can say that my friend is quite correct. No other government in the history of Canada has signed off on more trade agreements than we have—
Mr. Speaker, I thank the people of Newmarket—Aurora for entrusting me to be their voice in Ottawa. I thank my campaign team, who gave this mission 18 months of relentless effort. We knocked on 100,000 doors to earn our neighbours' trust. I thank my family, especially my husband Matthijs, for standing beside me with his wise counsel, and my three beautiful children, Matthijs, Martina and Isabella, for their endless cheering on of mami.
As I entered the chamber for the first time as a member of Parliament, I felt a deep sense of humility. I never knew that this would be possible for someone like me. My family came to Canada with nothing but the clothes in our suitcases, but those suitcases were stolen, and so we carried our belongings in garbage bags. It did not matter, because we had arrived in Canada, and being Canadian was and always will be a privilege. My parents worked two and sometimes three jobs. I cared for my younger brothers while my parents worked. We all watched the sun come down day after day while we waited for mom and dad to come home. We saved every penny we could. We budgeted and budgeted some more, because if people want to change their circumstances, they budget. One day, we had just enough to buy our first home in beautiful Aurora, Ontario.
What breaks my heart is knowing that today, that path, the one my parents walked, is almost gone. Last fall, I met a grandmother in Aurora. Her story sounded like ours, with long days, night shifts, sacrifice and budgeting. When she told me her story, she looked at her grandchildren beside her and said that they will not have the same opportunities that she had, and they were born in Canada. That should stop us; it should move us.
For that grandmother, looking at her grandchildren with fear, I ask this: Where is the budget? Where is the urgency to meet this moment? Everywhere I go in Newmarket and Aurora, I hear it. On front porches, in parking lots, in elevators and checkout lines, people are tired of waiting for a home they can afford, for a permit that never seems to come, for a safe street, for a family doctor or for a government that understands one simple truth: that their time is not a limitless resource. Young people are growing older while giving up on their dreams. Our seniors have already given so much and they are running out of time, yet Parliament has been shut down since December, so for almost six months. Just as we return, we prepare to adjourn again until September. For our young people and our seniors, I ask this: Where is the urgency to meet this moment?
During the campaign, I met an individual in Newmarket who refused to believe that there was a crime crisis in our community. In fact, as he walked out of his home, looking up and down at the street, he asked where the crime was and said that he did not see any crime on his street, yet, a couple of doors down, a woman who was working in her front lawn had had her car stolen that morning. She was at risk of losing her job because she could not get to it. Crime will not wait until Parliament reconvenes in the fall; it demands action now.
For the victims of all forms of crime, and for our police, I ask this: Where is the legislation to repeal catch-and-release bail laws? Where is the legislation to end human trafficking? Where is the legislation to crack down on intimate partner violence? Where is the urgency to meet this moment?
I met a Canadian entrepreneur in Aurora who is bright, driven and successful. He built three businesses in the U.S. but only one here at home in Canada. He told me something that stopped me. He said that in the U.S., he gets his permits, his financing and his approvals in days. In Canada, it takes months or sometimes years. This is unacceptable, because he is a man who wants to build here and who believes in this country, but we are making it harder for him to do it.
Government members say they want investment, jobs and economic independence from the United States, but their actions do not meet their ambition, and the Liberal legacy continues to sabotage our economic self-reliance. Somewhere along the way, bureaucracy took the place of common sense. Our GDP is struggling, our productivity is down, our purchasing power is crumbling and the unemployment rate is rising as a result of Liberal policies.
Let me be clear, and the Prime Minister knows this well: In investment banking, if a person does not know their numbers, they get fired. In commercial banking, if a person does not have a budget, they do not get the loan. In private equity, if a person does not have a plan, they do not get the investment. If a business owner has money to invest in Canada today, they will not wait until the fall; the investment will go elsewhere, and once it is gone, it is gone for good. For the entrepreneurs and risk-takers, I ask this: Where is the plan to unleash the Canadian economy? Where is the urgency to meet this moment?
If I could deliver one message from the people of Newmarket—Aurora, it is this: We want a government that moves with the urgency of a parent trying to provide a future for her children, with the urgency of a Canadian entrepreneur trying to keep the lights on, or with the urgency of a paramedic trying to provide a lifeline to a patient.
My neighbours in Newmarket—Aurora elected me to work the long days to restore the promise that working hard will grant a person a great life in a beautiful home on a safe street. Canadians feel the urgency. I feel the urgency. We feel the urgency. We cannot ask Canadians to wait while we rest. Let us meet this moment with the urgency it deserves, not someday, not afer the break, but now.
Mr. Speaker, it was inspiring to hear the story from the member opposite about her experience immigrating to Canada. It is a story that is so familiar to so many families throughout this great country.
I congratulate the member on her election to Parliament. I have had the pleasure of serving with her husband in my capacity as a board member for the Art Gallery of Hamilton.
My question is about what I heard when I was campaigning at doors, which is a renewed passion and pride in Canada and in being Canadian. I heard it most clearly from new immigrants and immigrant families, newcomers to Canada who are so proud to be part of our great country. My question is this: If the member's parents are still with us, what do they think about her election to Parliament and the amazing contributions she is making?
Mr. Speaker, when I was running to be a member of Parliament, I was recalling my early days here in Canada and called my mom to ask her a question. I said, “Mom, did you rely on any government programs when we came to Canada? What did you need, because you came with three young children?” She said to me, “All we needed was opportunity. All we needed was a job so that we could work hard, work long days and provide a future for our children.”
Today, that opportunity is gone. It is no longer possible to just work hard, earn a decent living and build a beautiful home and a beautiful future for our children. This is what Canadians bring up at the doors today.
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the new member's speech, and I congratulate her on her election to the House of Commons and welcome her to this chamber. She represents a suburban riding that I imagine has much in common with my own.
I wonder if she could talk a bit about some of the things she heard at the door during the campaign. She knocked on 100,000 doors during her campaign, I understand, and she probably heard a lot of stories from many Canadians who are frustrated over what has become of this country in the last nine and a half years and over the erosion of the promise of Canada that has taken place in that time period.
Mr. Speaker, as I was door knocking in Newmarket, Doug, a sweet senior in my riding, opened the door and invited me in to share some of his concerns. As we were talking, he said to me that when he was a little boy, his father taught him to work hard: that if he wanted something, he needed to work hard and give it his all and he would have it. Doug was sitting in his living room and said, “I gave it my all. I worked hard my entire life, and I am sitting here in my living room struggling to make ends meet.” That is unacceptable. Canadians, including seniors, are looking for opportunity. They want an affordable life.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, with more than $8 billion in damage reported by the Insurance Bureau of Canada, last year was, I believe, a record year in terms of catastrophic climate change impacts in Canada. Despite that, I still do not hear my colleagues in the official opposition asking any questions about what must be done to address climate change. On the contrary, I hear more about pipelines and oil and gas. I must admit that this worries me, but I will try to see if there are any points on which we might agree.
I talked about the $800 million that Quebeckers paid for the Liberals to send cheques to Canadians during the election campaign. That is $800 million from which they have not received one single penny back.
I would like to know whether—
[English]
Mr. Speaker, my team and I knocked on 100,000 doors, and the priorities at the doors were very clear: affordability, crime and unleashing our economy. When a young mother is choosing between rent and groceries, she does not need a promise to consider her needs in the fall; she needs action today. We have just returned and are about to adjourn. This is unacceptable.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the people of Montmorency—Charlevoix. I did so yesterday in my first question in the House, but I want to take the time to do it again today. They elected a Conservative Party that has their interests at heart, and I will represent their interests with great honour and respect. I want them to know that I care a lot about this work.
I am proud to rise in the House to speak to the Speech from the Throne in this 45th Parliament and to defend the interests of Montmorency—Charlevoix here in Ottawa. My riding is one of the founding ridings of Quebec and Canada. It is made up of 29 municipalities and certain parts of the greater Quebec City area, including the Beauport and Charlesbourg regions. There is much at stake. Every region has its own realities, as important and as different as they may be. I am committed to being a voice for the workers in my region. I am also committed to working hard to represent them to the best of my abilities.
One of the primary issues I raised is access to home ownership, which we have talked about today. I think being able to buy a first home is a major issue, especially for young people. The prices keep going up. For last year alone, in Quebec, the purchase price of homes increased by 10%, 9.2% to be exact. The Speech from the Throne, which is ultimately the Liberal plan for the next few years, proposes eliminating taxes on the purchase of a first home. Although the Conservatives fully agree with cutting taxes, this is still not enough in my opinion. If a young couple that bought a first condo now wants to buy a first home, that tax credit will not help them very much.
Here is another situation that is very common in my riding. Companies find that they have to buy houses or housing units to house the workers who come to help them operate their businesses. This measure will be of no use to such businesses in Île d'Orléans, Baie-Saint-Paul or La Malbaie, which are trying to attract workers and families. Unfortunately, these families cannot find a place to live at a reasonable price. Today, I would like to talk about organizations like Maison Mère Baie-Saint-Paul, which turned a former religious convent into a public space and a place for local businesses to set up shop. The organization also turned a significant portion of the convent into housing to attract foreign workers to support local businesses. The Coopérative de développement immobilier de Charlevoix was created to build affordable rental housing to help employers attract workers. We see the same thing in Côte-de-Beaupré, which has a special development program to build affordable housing in partnership with the Côte-de-Beaupré municipal housing and development offices. This kind of innovation helps attract workers and supports our businesses.
The topic of worker housing brings me to another debate, the debate around immigration. Canada is a welcoming, inspiring country and it is definitely respected around the world. It is a great place to live. We have a great quality of life and we are happy to be here. We are an inspiration, the envy of the world. This reality attracts people from all over the world for different reasons. However, we know that we can no longer take in everyone. We need to set priorities and hold on to the foreign workers who come to support our economy. In Charlevoix—Montmorency, this is vital. The Conservatives were clear throughout the campaign: In many regions, foreign workers are essential. For many businesses, their survival depends on it. The Conservatives will always stand up in the House to protect foreign workers and ensure that their businesses receive the support they need for solid economic development.
Supply management was also briefly mentioned. I look forward to seeing whether the government will walk the talk in the years ahead. It has to move beyond words and on to action. For the Conservatives and for me, supply management is non-negotiable.
There is another glaring problem, especially at the tip of Montmorency and throughout Charlevoix, and that is cell coverage. It is unacceptable that, in 2025, people are unable to have a conversation with someone without constantly being cut off for lack of cell coverage.
Let us be clear: Cell coverage helps local economies grow and helps businesses. However, it is also a matter of public safety. I am therefore committed to working actively on this file and supporting the development of the cell network in Montmorency—Charlevoix. I will represent that interest, because it is an extremely important one.
Yesterday, I asked the Prime Minister a question about the French language, because in the throne speech, there is a vague mention, a brief and rather hollow sentence. I think it is extremely important that we go beyond simply recognizing that the French language needs to be protected. It also needs to be promoted. Château-Richer, in my riding, is where the first French colony was founded. That led to the development of Quebec and Canada as we know them today. Our French language is the founding language of Canada. It is important that we not only protect it, but that we promote it so that it can thrive and be spoken across the country.
Health is another issue that I believe was the elephant in the room when the Speech from the Throne was read. Physical health, mental health, and the health of a society require concrete action. That means working to improve the health of Canadians, promoting physical activity and taking action to promote health. We need to make sure that people understand that they can take charge of their health and take action to prevent illness.
We are experiencing the biggest crisis of inactivity in human history. It seems to me that today very little importance is given to this truly crucial issue. There is growing scientific evidence demonstrating the importance of physical activity. I do not understand why no concrete action has been taken and why massive investments are not being made to reduce the incidence of chronic diseases. I do not understand why the government does not invest in prevention instead of always waiting for disease to strike, which ultimately costs more.
Recent studies show that 50% of cancer cases are directly linked to obesity. As we know, one in three Canadians will be obese by 2030. It is the leading cause of death in this country. Studies also show that we could reduce that number by nearly half. However, no action is being taken to promote sport and physical activity in our beautiful country.
Heart disease is the second leading cause of death in Canada. Once again, all the foundations tell us that physical activity is the best way to prevent this type of disease, which, in recent years, has been the second leading cause of death among Canadians.
When we look at the top 10 causes of death in this country, it is pretty straightforward. When we consult medical associations and associations that deal with diseases, they always say that physical activity is the first or second solution to solve most problems. However, muscle strength exercises, VO2 training and healthy lifestyle habits are rarely promoted.
In a world where sedentary lifestyles are increasingly common and our hospitals are buckling under the strain, I would have expected the throne speech to include at least a brief mention of this issue. It is not complicated: Things are getting worse. Sports are consistently underfunded, and this year the department was scrapped. Sports are now represented by a secretary of state. If we want to help the provinces support their hospitals, giving them money is fine. However, I think it is high time we take the adage “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” to heart and find other ways to promote healthy lifestyles.
I could spend all day talking about Montmorency—Charlevoix and my intentions and interests, especially those that affect my constituents and are important to them. However, I think I will end my speech by inviting everyone to come and experience Montmorency—Charlevoix, to come and experience it and, most importantly, to come and see our region's bounty and the great potential it holds.
I will end my speech today by inviting Canadians to come visit me and share in the rich experiences that tourism has to offer, including cultural tourism, sport tourism and our incredible festivals. I invite my colleagues to come and enjoy the legendary festival Le Festif!, an international music festival, and stay at Club Med or Manoir Richelieu. I invite them to come enjoy the beautiful colours of our region. I promise they will want to pick up a paintbrush. For an outstanding rodeo experience, they can check out the Rodéo Mont-Sainte-Anne, or the Rallye de Charlevoix, the world's only green, zero-emission rally. If they want to explore local products, Île d'Orléans is the place to go. Ste-Brigitte-de-Laval has the youngest population in Quebec.
I invite everyone to come experience history, and I want all of my colleagues to join me in being part of it.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments made by the member.
Having said that, there is a great deal of expectation amongst parliamentarians, given what we have witnessed with President Trump and the whole tariffs and trade issue. There is concern for industries throughout Canada, and the feeling is that we need to have parliamentarians not only working together to develop that one Canadian economy, as one solution, but also taking on other initiatives.
To what degree would the member opposite agree that, at times, we need to put partisanship aside so we can work on the collective interests of Canadians? This was clearly demonstrated in the last election. They want us to protect our economic trade relationships so that Canada can ultimately get the best deal we can as a sovereign nation.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Winnipeg North asked a very good question.
The Conservative Party has been very clear since the beginning of this 45th Parliament that we will support common-sense, logical ideas. We want to see facts and plans. We are not just going to give the nod to ideas and empty words. We will support concrete action. If concrete actions are on the table, the Conservative Party of Canada and I will support them.
All we have heard so far is ideas and slogans. There is still no clear plan, because there is still no budget, and there is not going to be one until September or October.
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague.
I really love his region. He spoke about some of the tourist attractions in his riding. I would invite him to visit Isle‑aux‑Coudres, which is home to the Hôtel du Capitaine, a fantastic hotel in his region. It is really lovely.
Our colleague talked about French earlier. I have a rather simple question for him. Does he agree that judges should have to be bilingual in order to be appointed to the Supreme Court? Does he agree with us on that?
Mr. Speaker, indeed, there is a wonderful hotel on Isle‑aux‑Coudres. I will get there one day. I hope I get a warm welcome.
French certainly is extremely important. We must defend and promote it. That being said, at no time during my election campaign did anyone tell me that they think judges should be bilingual. What people told me is that they want us to promote French across Canada and, above all, to speak French here in Parliament in Ottawa, to ask questions in French, to answer questions in French and to perfectly represent our beautiful language.
That is what I pledge to do for the next few years.
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague from Montmorency—Charlevoix on his excellent first speech in the House of Commons.
He represents a new generation. He is obviously younger than me. My colleague lived through the last 10 years of the Trudeau government. He has experienced its repercussions, as have his friends, the 30- to 40-year-old generation.
I would like him to comment on how he feels about home ownership these days and what impact the Trudeau government's decisions have had on his generation.
What can we do for the future?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my mentor, the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, for that excellent question.
This is a very striking reality that I am hearing about at every door I knock on. Young families are telling me how difficult it is to get into the housing market and how saving up for a down payment, which has doubled in recent years, is a major obstacle to buying their first home. They talk to me about access to housing. They also talk to me about how house prices are skyrocketing, particularly in Baie‑Saint‑Paul and La Malbaie.
This is because people are starting to go to those places to buy second homes, which tend to be fairly luxurious cottages. This is driving up property prices in the region. Ultimately, locals are unable to buy property in their region or to settle there because houses are too expensive. It has even become a problem for companies trying to attract talent, because the new hires end up struggling to find affordable housing.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, there was more applause from the other side than my own, but it is early on. That was some Jeb Bush-level begging for applause, and I apologise to my colleagues, but it is good to be back.
I should say that I am splitting my time.
I am hoping the Speaker will indulge me while I offer a few thank yous. First, I would like to thank the residents of St. Catharines, who have entrusted me for a fourth time to represent them in this place. It has been an honour of a lifetime to be in this place, to represent their views and to try to make our little corner of Niagara a little better. Though I may not see eye to eye with my constituents all the time, I will hear them, I will bring their voices and I will do my very best every single day.
I would like to thank the members of my core campaign team, and I wrote their names down because I am bound to forget someone. I give Alice, Yasmine, Sarah, Garrett, Sam, Ramy, Luca and Sadie my thanks for all their work during the campaign.
I want to say a special thank you to Cassandra Almeida, who has been with me for seven years, by my side, typically at my Hill office here in Ottawa. She has been an incredible adviser and is never afraid to tell me I am wrong, like many members of the opposition. She is usually right, and she has been there all this time. As has happened to so many of us who have advisers who have become friends, I have been very lucky to have her over these past seven years, so my thanks go to Cassandra.
I thank all the volunteers and supporters. It was an incredible five weeks through the election, and we saw so many new faces helping us go door to door in St. Catharines.
I also want to say a quick thank you to our former colleague Vance Badawey. Though I congratulate his opponent in Niagara Centre on a win, Vance has been a public servant in Niagara for over a quarter century and has worked incredibly hard on big files like protecting the Great Lakes and building infrastructure in Niagara. I know he will continue to be a champion for our region.
Most importantly, I want to say my thanks to Hannah and Ethan, my daughter and son. Though they are happy Dad won, they are the ones who sacrifice. They are the ones who deal with Dad's being away during these times and during the campaign. They are the ones who do not get to see Dad. I know that so many in this place have a similar experience, but it is always important to say thank you to family.
It is on the subject of my son that I will start my speech. Sometimes kids come to us with a question we are really not prepared for. My son asked, “Dad, is Donald Trump a threat to Canada?” I was not ready for that from an eight-year-old kid, who would probably want me to tell my colleagues that he is almost nine.
I think it shows the level of anxiety for Canadians, including residents of St. Catharines, that these are the conversations happening around dinner tables at family gatherings, which kids hear. The anxiety that Canadians feel, that Niagara residents feel, is something that was repeated back to me by my own son. I told him that it should not be for kids his age to worry about these things, but it is something we are hearing. It is something that I heard at the doors, from door to door: concern from residents.
From our riding, it is about a ten-minute drive to the border. I have family in the United States; so many members do. It is not unusual for Niagara residents to head over the border to grab a bite to eat or to see friends and family, and there is a threat to our very sovereignty.
I was happy to hear in the throne speech that the continuation of our relationship, which we must continue to work on, needs to be rooted in respect and the common interests between sovereign nations. We hear statements from the President of the United States that concern Canadians, but I think Canadians know that the Prime Minister and members of the House are going to stand up for Canada's interests and sovereignty. It is something worth fighting for and it is something that will continue.
However, it is not just us in this place. I want to thank Canadians, both my constituents and those across the country. It is truly incredible to witness what we have seen, these little acts of dissent, like putting an item back on a shelf and not buying something that is made in the U.S. I sometimes go to the grocery store and see an item turned around, and see people looking at where it is from and putting it back. I will walk past produce, and the American version is virtually untouched, as people are buying Canadian. They are looking for a Canadian flag, and though it may be a few dollars here and there, those acts of dissent are costing the American economy hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars.
It is being felt in the United States. We are hearing governors and senators tell Canadians not to worry and to come to the United States, that they are not as bad as we think they are, but Canadians will continue to fight and stand up for the country that they believe in. It has been the silver lining of this dark cloud to see Canadians come together to celebrate the flag, celebrate the country and celebrate who we are.
It has also been good to see the Prime Minister, cabinet and the government getting to work right away. First off will be a middle-class tax cut that will benefit 22 million Canadians and that will see a dual-income family save $840 per year. We know things are tough. We have been hearing that door to door, and this is something reliable, a quick action, that Canadians will see on July 1.
The item I am looking forward to, and I know the Prime Minister has promised this, is legislation with respect to one Canadian economy. We have seen the premiers working hard on the renewed interest in taking down provincial trade barriers, but the federal government needs to lead by example. I am happy to see the federal government removing whatever remaining federal trade barriers exist.
We have heard that it is costing the Canadian economy $200 billion. The classic example we see in Niagara is that it is easier to get a bottle of wine from Argentina than it is to get a bottle of wine from a different part of the country. We see the same thing in British Columbia. British Columbians cannot find a Niagara bottle of wine, but can much more easily buy a bottle of wine from Chile. That is not something we should be engaging in, and I look forward to seeing the premiers work together with the federal government to break down these trade barriers.
It is not just a matter of one piece of legislation. There are hundreds if not thousands of pieces of regulation that lead to these barriers across the country. We need to get to work, and the government is getting to work right away to ensure that we have a strong economy and that we fulfill the commitments that we made to Canadians.
I do not believe I have much time left, but I would like to briefly discuss the housing crisis and the importance of building more affordable homes. I know the Prime Minister has made the commitment, and I look forward to it, to seeing more homes get built and to using ideas that we learned after the Second World War. Let us get factory and modular homes built and get more affordable houses built so we can see young people get into the houses they deserve and worked hard for.
I believe my time is up. I have enjoyed this opportunity and look forward to many other days of debate in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the member for St. Catharines talked a bit in his speech about the removal of interprovincial trade barriers, the federal ones, to be specific. There has not been any degree of specificity as to which of them will be there. Will they be the ones that remain, such as the exemptions remaining in the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, or will the government be removing additional ones beyond the Canadian Free Trade Agreement?
Mr. Speaker, the member for Northumberland—Clarke and I have been working together off and on for 20 years, since we first started as articling students at a law firm in St. Catharines many years ago.
I look forward to the legislation. I look forward to seeing what the government will be doing to get those provisions to come down and, most importantly, to seeing cabinet work with premiers to take down trade barriers across the country. We need to see them come down. Something I was surprised to hear a lot at the doors is that Canadians are worried about this. It is something we need to take action on, and I am glad action is being taken on it as quickly as it is.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I want to come back to the matter of creating one economy out of 13.
The House has recognized on two occasions that Quebec is a distinct nation. The first was when the symbolic motion was adopted in 2006. The second was during the 2019-21 Parliament. The government officially and constitutionally recognized that we are a distinct nation. It voted for that. However, the government seems to think that that distinction should not apply when it comes to Quebec having its own economic model. Being a distinct nation does not mean anything if, in the end, we have to extinguish, stifle and eliminate what makes us economically distinct.
Are our new colleagues opposite reneging on their past vote for recognizing Quebec as a distinct nation?
[English]
Mr. Speaker, this is all the Bloc has. I will be honest in that I have not spoken to a Quebec business person recently, but they want Ontario businesses buying their products, and they want Alberta residents buying their products. I want to see Quebec aluminum used in Canadian products. I want to see Niagara wine purchased in Quebec. These are things that the Bloc is apparently against.
The Bloc wants to see as many barriers as possible to prevent the growth of Quebec business. It is absolutely shocking, but this is all the Bloc Québécois has in this place. It does not want to see economic growth. It just wants to see more barriers and more problems for Quebec businesses, which is unsurprising, but here we are.
Mr. Speaker, one of the very first initiatives that the Prime Minister took was to decrease the tax bracket, which is literally putting hundreds of millions of dollars into the pockets of Canadians as a direct result. I am wondering if my colleague could provide his thoughts on just how important that was to do. I think it really sets the stage of a new government, and a government that wants to be there to make sure that affordability is being addressed.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member for Winnipeg North's words in this place, which are bountiful.
This is a commitment that we made to Canadians. It is a strong commitment to show Canadians that we understand what they are going through and to provide some relief to them. Things have gotten more expensive. Global inflation still remains a problem, but Canada can step up. We have made this commitment. Canada's new government and the Prime Minister acted quickly, and we will see that relief on July 1.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating all the members in the House on their successful election. It is an honour to rise here today and deliver my first speech in the House as the first Conservative member for Hamilton East—Stoney Creek. An unprecedented 32,000 people in Hamilton East—Stoney Creek believed in me, our Conservative Party and our leader, Pierre Poilievre. I would like to thank all the people of Hamilton East—Stoney Creek for putting their trust in me. It is an honour and a privilege to bring their voice to Ottawa.
Most importantly, I would like to thank my wife for simply everything, for standing by my side during every step of this journey and for her never-ending support and belief in me. She has helped shape me into who I am today. I am incredibly thankful for her love and support. I would also like to thank my children, Vonn, Ilija and my princess, Ivanna. They were my biggest motivation and inspiration to take on this journey, to do my part to make sure that they and everyone else's children had the same opportunities that generations before them had. Daddy loves them.
I would like to thank my first campaign managers and friends, Ken Audziss and Ian Thompson, and my current campaign manager and friend, Jonathan Stathakos, who joined my team in 2021 as a young kid by clicking a Facebook ad. Together, we made history.
To Grant MacLean and Jennifer Devolin, their experience is the steady hand we needed during turbulent times. To Connor Fraser, Drashko Zdero, Jora Purwall, Akal Purwall, my brother Rob Kuruc, the core team and the hundreds of volunteers, I thank them for all they have done. To Vince Valleri, Paul Russamano, Vesel Sobot, Nicica Miskovic and Novica Miskovic, I thank them for believing in freedom. To Bob Bratina, the former Liberal MP from Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, I thank him for always putting the people of our community first, especially when he recognized that the Liberal government was wrong. I thank him for his support and his endorsement.
To my colleagues from Niagara West and Flamborough—Glanbrook—Brant North, I thank them for their guidance and for being my political big brothers. I want to thank the Conservative campus clubs from U of T, TMU and Redeemer, as well as all the youth who helped me on this journey. They made all the difference because they had the most to fight for: their future. I give special thanks to Mariuz, Joanna, Juliet and Hanna Kurjanowiz. Their hard work and dedication was unmatched.
I am proud to call Hamilton East—Stoney Creek and Winona my home. It is where I was born and raised by two loving parents, who had come to Canada from the former Yugoslavia in 1967, seeking a better life. It is where I was christened at the St. Nicholas Serbian Orthodox Cathedral on Nash Road, attended Memorial Elementary School and graduated from Orchard Park Secondary School.
Today, my wife and I are raising our children in the very same home where I grew up, surrounded by the same community that shaped who I am today. I am proud to have made history as the first member of Parliament of Serbian heritage. It is an honour and a privilege to represent my Serbian community in the House of Commons.
To the people of Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, often referred to as Steeltown, my door will always be open regardless of who they voted for. I am here for them.
The Prime Minister recently asked during an interview, how much steel do we use anyway? I am proud to share that Hamilton steel is used far and wide across this great country and around the world. In fact, it is actually used in this building. The girders above us were manufactured right outside my riding by the Walters Group. Hamilton helped build the House of Commons.
After the government's throne speech, I must say I am deeply disappointed. The Liberals campaigned on how Canada was in a crisis and the Prime Minister's resume would fix it. The reality is that we came back to Parliament with the same ministers, no budget and the Liberals ready to go on summer break just after they prorogued for six months. If the Liberals do not have a plan, they could just keep using our Conservative one.
Conservatives are ready to roll up our sleeves and get to work for Canadians. On this side of the House, Conservatives have a plan to make Canada affordable, safe, self-reliant and united. We must get the cost of living down, and we will continue to demand a budget that reveals the true deficit and lowers spending, taxes and inflation.
We must unleash our construction sector to get homes built by cutting taxes and red tape for buyers and builders. We must restore the dream of home ownership that the Liberals destroyed. We want homes where kids can play outside, seniors can walk in safety and our cars do not disappear overnight.
We must restore economic independence by unleashing our businesses and our resources. We all want a permanent end to tariffs with the U.S., and we will work with the government to make that happen. We also need to focus on making our own economy more independent and self-reliant. The government must remove the laws, taxes and rules blocking mines, pipelines, LNG plants and hydro dams to reduce our dependence on the U.S.
We must bring safety to our streets by locking up dangerous offenders and securing our borders. We will fight to end catch-and-release bail and to push for treatment to combat addiction. We must get immigration under control after a decade of Liberal mismanagement. Canadians are very welcoming, but our health care, housing and job markets are now overflowing because population growth has been too fast.
These priorities represent our goals, and Conservatives will fight to deliver them.
By the end, the poll aggregators gave Conservatives a 1% chance of winning in Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, but we knew that people wanted change, and that is why I am standing here today. Over the last few weeks, I have been asked what the secret was to winning. My response has always been that it was hard work, but today I have a secret to share with the House. It is the Serbian word inat, which Google defines as a stubborn defiance fuelled by pride and passion. Simply put, my team and I would not take no or not winning as an answer.
It is that same mentality that brought my parents to a country that offered freedom and opportunity for them and their future children. My father Ilija Kuruc, who herded sheep as a child in a Serbian village called Strmica, and my late mother lvanka Kuruc, who grew up in a house with a straw roof in a tiny Croatian village called Ledenik, left their humble beginnings for Canada, the land of opportunity. This is where they were able to achieve their dreams and allow me to achieve mine. It is because of Canada and hard work that my family's story was able to go from the village to Parliament in one generation.
Pierre Poilievre instilled in me that we are the servants and not the masters. I stand here ready to serve. I love this country. God bless Canada.
Publication Explorer
Publication Explorer